Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutUNDERGROUND TANK FILE #1 HAZ~OUS MATERIALS ~!~0~ TIME CHARGED BUSINESS/DEAPRTMENT NAME: ADDRESS: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: PROJECT NUMBER: DATE: NAME: 'TIME .CHGD: COMMENTS: PROJECT COMPLETION: DATE: TIME CHARGED BUSINESS/DEAPRTMENT NAME: ADDRESS: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: PROJECT NUMBER: DATE: NAME:. TIME CHGD: COMMENTS: PROJECT COMPLETION: DATE: Winston H. Hickox Secretary for Envtronmental Protectton State ater ResourCes Contel Board Division of Clean Water Programs 1001 1 Street, Sacramento, California 95814 P.O. Box 944212, Sacramento, California 94244 (916) 341-5855 * FAX (916) 341-5808 * www.swrcb.ca.gov The energy challenge facing California is real. Every Californian needs to take immediate action to reduce energy consumption. For a list of simple ways you can reduce demand and cut your energy costs, see our website at www. swrcb, ca.gov CERTIFIED MAIL NO. 7001 2510 0001 1882 9900 Mr. David Bird Retail Manager Sullivan Petroleum Co., I.I.C 1508 18th Street, Suite 222 Bakersfield, CS 93_3_01 Dear Mr. Bird: APPROVAL OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ENHANCED LEAK DETECTION (ELD) TESTING, DOWNTOWN CHEVRON, 2317 L STREET, BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301 This letter is in response to your March 15, 2002 request for reconsideration of the requirement to perform ELD testing. We have reviewed your request and the supporting documents you provided 'an'dhave.cOnsulted With the local permitting agency. As a result, we have determined that your. Undeigfoi~nd Storage T~/rik~:(UST) facility is not subject to the ELD testing requirement.- Based On the encl6sed infOrmation, your request has been approved for the reason(s) indicated below.' [~ UST system(s) does not have a single-walled component. If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Ahmad Kashkoli at (916) 341-5855. Sincerely, Elizabeth L. Haven, Manager Underground Storage Tank Program Enclosures (basis for the decision) cC: Mr. Howard Wines ..: -' ' City of Bakersfield fire Department ...... '..':" '~.1715 CheSter Avenue, Thii'd~Flo0r!_i~ ~.:'.' ". : "~ .:- .': ' ' '." :.~.: ': . '- · ' ' ~ ' ' .".:'~' i'*~ ~ " California Environmental Protection Agency Recycled Paper Gray Davis Governor mad Kashko ~ Requests fo[ Recons derat~on ~ From: "Howard Wines" <Hwines@ci,bakersfield.ca.us> To: <kashkola @ cwp.swrcb.ca.gov> 'Date: 3/25/02 9:49AM Subject: Requests for Reconsideration All 3 of those requests from Bakersfield facilities should bb-gr~int6d.~ Downtown Chevron 2317 L St. was installed new in '98 with everything double walled. They had a release, though, something (like a concrete stake) pinched a hole in the double wall flex line as they were finishing the canopy or driveway after the UST installation was finalled, we later find out. The line's been repaired but groundwater is impacted under the station. The water well hasn't shown any impact yet. Cai Water is testing their well on a quarterly basis. 'California Regional Water Quality Central Valley Region Robert Schneider, Chair inston H. Hickox Secretary for Sacramento Main Office Environmental Internet Address: http://www.swrcb.ca, gov/rwqcb5 Protection C [ trol Board Gray Davis 3443 Routier Road, Suite A, Sacramento, California 95827-3003 Phone (916) 255-3000 · FAX (916) 255-3015 9 November 2001 Underground Storage Tank Owners and Operators '-- Other Interested Parties -~ REQUIRED ELECTRONIC DELIVERABLE FORMAT FOR LABORATORy AND SITE DATA SUBMITTALS TO REGULATING AGENCIES Effective 1 January 2001, Assembly Bill 2886 added Sections 13195 - 13198 to the California Water Code requiring~ that the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Bodrd) develop emergency regulations for,underground storage tanks (UST). These new regulations (California Code of Regu!ations, Title 23, Chapter 16, Article 12; Sections 2729 and 2729.1) specify that Underground Tank Owners and/or'Operatgrs (individually or collectively the Responsible Party) or their agent submit analytical data'electronically via the Internet to the Regulating Agencies, using formats designated by the State Water Board that are both non-proprietary and available as public domain. To meet these objectives the State Water Board designated the Electronic Deliverable Format (EDF) developed for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. EDF enables laboratories and consultants to produce data in a standardized format that can' be transmitted electronically to the Responsible Party and Regulating Agencies. For more information about the EDF' process you may log-on to the State Water' Board Web site at http://geotracker.swrcb.ca.gov and then click on the information link to AB 2886. All EDF data must be submitted over the Internet to the State Water Board Geographic Environmental Information Management System database (GeoTracker). Developed under the direction of State Water Board staff, GeoTracker is a robust database that allows for storage of interrelated site data including the above'electronic data submittals. Regulating Agencies review the data submitted for final acceptance into OeoTracker. Since 1 September'2001, analytical laboratories have been requi~/ed to submit electronic data using EDF for their analyses of soil and/or groundwater samples, These submittals, in addition to the customary paper format, are for all 'UST sites (including both the preventive and investigative/cleanup components of the UST program).' After 1 January 2002, in addition to the laboratory data, site specific information is required to be submitted electronically for the following: !) the latitude and longitude of. ground water monitoring wells (including any other Well or permanent Sampling point designated as part of the site monitoring ' program) accurate to within one meter; 2) the surveyed elevation~ relative to mean sea level, for any. ground water sampled, accurate to within a tenth of a foot; 3) groundwater information, including depth California Environmental Protection Agency ~ 'Recycled PaPer The energy challenge facing California is real. Every Californian needs to take immediate action to reduce ~nergy c(~nsumption. For a list of simple ways you can reduce demand and cut your energy costs, see our Web-site at http://www.swrcb.ca, gov/rwqcb5 EDF Reporting -2- 9 November 2001 to 4zater, free product presence/thickness and Well status; and,'4) a site map in electronic format showing property boundaries, buildings, and soil and water sampling locations. PASSWORD: To initiate the EDF in GeoTracker, the Responsible Party is required to obtain a password by logging-on to the State Water Board Web site at http://geotracker.swrcb.ca.~ov and then clicking on the information link to AB 2886. The password is Used by the Responsible Party (or their agent) to upload the required analytical data into the GeoTracker database. ASSISTANCE: If you, as a ResponSible Party, require assistance to obtain or use a password (or to submit data and maps electronically), you maY have an agent assist yo~ (e.g. an environmental consultant, engineer, attorney, etc.), or. 9all the GeoTracker help-deski(1-800-506-9118). Also, for detailed information regarding the regulatory requirements or to fih--d'~a State Water Board staff contact, the Responsible Earty (or designated,agent) may log, on to the AB 2886 irtfo ..r.rnation link on the ~ GeoTracker Web site listed above. For eligible sites, the California Leaking Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund will cover tt~e additional costs incurred by claimants for compliance with these regulations, to the extent that. tfiese. costs are reasonable and necessary (e.g.' as required by the Regulating Agencies to assure adequate investigation or cleanup of a contaminated site). If you have any questions, please contact your County or Local Implementing Agency, Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) or Regional Board representative. For co~.mties in the Central Valley Regional Board j urif~t, fction, please call the local office in Fresno at (559) 445-5116, Redding at (530) 224-48~cramento at (916) 255-3212. GORDg,N LEE BOGGS ' Under, gSound Tank Program Manager Cent/al Valley Region Robert Schneider, Chair Winston H. Hickox Gray Davis Secretary for Fresno Branch Office Governor Environmental Intemet Address: http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/~rwqcb5 Protection 3614 East Ashlan Avenue, Fresno, California 93726 Phone (559) 445-5116 · FAX (559) 445-5910 4 March 2002 Regional Board Case No. 5T15000836 Mr. David Bird Sullivan's Petroleum Company, LLC P.O. Box 5007 Bakersfield} California 93308 UNDERGROUND TANK RELEASE, DOWNTOWN CHEVRON STATION, 2317 "L" STREET, BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY You submitted Expanded Groundwater Assessment Report For The Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC, Downtown Chevron Service Station (Report) dated 19 February 2002 and prepared by Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Bakersfield (HFA). The Report describes the installation of groundwater monitoring wells and additional soil vapor ektraction (SVE) wells proposed in Preliminary 'Groundwater Assessment Report dated 25 June 2001. We approved the installation of additional SVE and groUndwater monitoring wells by our letters dated 23 July and 25 September 2001. Petroleum product floating on groundwater and high concentrations of gasoline constituents, including the fuel oxygenate methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) have been detected in groffndwater samples collected from monitoring and SVE wells On-site. We request that you expedite the remediation of impacted sOils to prevent the spread of impacted groundwater. We approve the proposed installation and operation of the SVE remediation system. We concur with HFA that a remediation system pilot test may be conducted after system startup and that quarterly groundwater monitoring be initiated. We also request that a work plan for lateral definition of impacted groundwater be submitted. Summaries of the project, the RepOrt, and our comments follow. Summary of the Proiect By a letter dated 28 June 2001, the City of Bakersfield Fire Department (CBFD) referred the subject case to our agency for regulatory oversight. The site was reconstructed as a convenience store with retail fuel sales and reopened during early 1999. Gasoline is dispensed from six dispensers and is stored in one split-chambered 20,000-gallon underground storage tank (UST) and one 10,000-gall0n UST in the southeast portion of the site. An examination of Pi:oduct reconciliation records for April 1999 suggested a Potential fuel. release of at least 400 gallons from product piping conn~ecting the premium grade UST to the southeastern dispenser. Investigation revealed cuts in the inner flexible and outer containment product piping. Total petroleum California Environmental Protection Agency' Recycled Paper Mr..David Bird 4 March 2002 hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPH-g), and the gasoline constituents benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes, and MTBE (BTEX & MTBE) were detected by laboratory analysis of a soil sample collected beneath the piping at5 feet below ground surface (bgs) during May 1999 by AJ Environmental (AJE), ' Bakersfield. Based on the analYtical results of the AJE investigation, the CBFD required further investigation to determine the vertical and lateral extent of impacted soils by a letter dated 21 June 1999. The additional investigation was performed by HFA on 17 August and 26 September 1999. Five soil borings (B-1 through B-5) were drilled and sampled. Boring B-'.i was drilled within the apparent release source area. The remaining borings were drilled to determine lateral extent. Borings B-l, B-4 and B-5 reached approximately 45 to 50 feet bgs prior to refusal. Borings B-2 and B-3 reached approximately 20 feet bgs prior to refusal. Refusal was caused by layers of cobbles and boulders present at approximately 18.5 to 22.5 feet bgs and 37.5 to 48 feet bgs in the predominant well-graded sands. TPH-g concentrations ranging from-6;50Oto 26;000 mitligrams-per-kitogram-(mg/kg)--were detected in samples · collected to 15 feet bgs in B-1. TPH-g was not detected below 15 feet bgs. MTBE concentrations ranging from 0.33 to 1,400 mg/kg were detected in B-1 to 45 feet bgs. TPH-g concentrations up to 19,000 mg/kg and MTBE concentrations up to 220 rog/kg were detected in B-2, west of the USTs and dispensers, and in B-3, west of the USTs and dispensers. TPH-g was not detected in B-4 and B-5, west and south of the dispensers, respectively. MTBE was detected in all samples analyzed from B-4 and B-5 at concentrations ranging from 0.023 to 11 mg/kg. The CBFD required the preparation of a CAP by a letter dated 29 December 1999. HFA prepared the CAP dated 12 April 2000, which was subsequently approved by the CBFD. HFA estimated that a total volume of 4,700 cubic yards of soils was impacted and that a total weight of 5,580 pounds (900 gallons) of adsorbed hydrocarbons was present in site soils..The CAP selected SVE as the most feasible corrective action alternative. The CAP proposed the installation of one deep central SVE well, one intermediate central SVE well, one shallow central SVE well, and three shallow lateral zone SVE wells. HFA also proposed that the.deep central well be sampled to determine the vertical extent of impacted soils. HFA proposed to operate the remediation system on weekends using a mobile SVE unit due' to the lack of surface area onsite for construction of a remediation compound and the high volume of traffic passing over the site. The CBFD approved the CAP by a letter dated 25 April 2000. HFA drilled one central soil boring and three lateral borings during January and February 2001. The central boring, VW 1-d,--was completed-as-a combination, gr. ound~vater monitoring and. SVE well screened from approximately 70 to 120 feet bgs. Groundwater was encountered at approximately 110 feet bgs. The lateral borings, VW-2 through VW-4, were completed as SVE wells screened from 5 to 45 feet bgs. The well installations and results of soil and groundwater s,amples analyses were described in the Preliminary Groundwater Assessment Report (Report) dated 25 June 2001 and prepared by HFA. Soil samples collected from VW-ld at 50, 60, 65, 80, and 100 feet bgs were analyzed for TPH-g by EPA Method 8015M, and BTEX and MTBE by EPA Method 8020. TPH-g, benzene, and MTBE were detected at 2,300, 9.2 mg/kg, and 87 mg/kg, respectively, in the sample collected from 100 feet bgs. A groundwater sample collected from monitoring well VW-1 d during March 2001 was analyzed for TPH-g by EPA Method 8015M, and BTEX, MTBE, tertiary butyl alcohol (TBA), di-isopropyl ether (DIPE), - ethyl tertiary butyl ether (ETBE), and tertiary amyl methyl ether (TAME) by EPA Method 8260. Benzene was detected at 2,400 micrograms per liter. (fig/L). MTBE was detected at 120,000 gg/L. U:\uGTUDw_files\2002 Correspondence\City of Bakersfield Cases\Dwntwn Chevron 2~02.doc Mr, David Bird 3 4 March 2002 HFA also proposed the installation of three additional combination groundwater monitoring and SVE (MW-1 through MW-3) in positions lateral to the impacted soils and additional shallow and intermediate zone SVE wells (VW-ls and VW-li) in the central area near existing deep SVE well VW-ld. MW-1 through MW-3 would be screened from 75 to 125 feet bgs. VW-ls would be screened from 5 to 35 feet bgs, while VW-li would be screened from 40 to 70 feet bgs. HFA again proposed that remediation be conducted on weekends using a mobile SVE unit. By a letter dated 23 July 2001, we requested that remediation by SVE be expedited to prevent the further migration and spread of MTBE and other gasoline range petroleum constituents to groundwater. We also approved the HFA' s proposed installation of the central shallow and intermediate zone SVE wells and three combination groundwater monitoring and SVE wells. To expedite remediation system startup, and because of the permeable sandy soils, we did not request that a pilot test be implemented prior to remediation system startup and that a vacuum influence test be conducted after system startup. We did not approve the limited (weekend)remediation' system-operation-schedule-proposed'by HFA. We .... requested that a brief CAP Addendum proposing full-time remedial system operation and radius-of- influence (ROI) testing be submitted. We requested that further investigation to identify water wells in the site vicinity be conducted. HFA submitted Addendum To The Corrective Action Plan (Addendum) dated 13 August 2001. The addendum described procedures for ROI testing and again proposed part-time remedial system operation. By our letter dated 25 September 2001, we_approved the proposed ROI testing and requested the results of an investigation to identify water wells and other sensitive receptors in the site vicinity. Summary of the Report Five soil borings were drilled under the oversight of HFA on 30 November to 2 November 2001. Borings MW-1 through MW-3 were drilled to 125 feet bgs in positions lateral to the UST system release. MW-1 through MW-3 were competed as 2-inch diameter monitoring wells screened from 75 to 125 feet bgs. Central borings VW-ls and VW-li were drilled to 35 and 75 feet bgs, respectively. VW-ls and VW-li were completed as 4-inch diameter SVE wells. VW-ls and VW-li were screened from 5 to 35 and 40 to 75 feet bgs, respectively. Soil samples were collected at 10-foot intervals in MW-1 through MW-3. Groundwater was encountered~.at 114 feet.bgs. Soil samples were not collected from borings VW-ls and VW-li due to their proximity to previous borings. Soil samples were analyzed for TPH-g by EPA Method 8015M and BTEX, MTBE, TBA, DIPE, ETBE, and TAME by EPA Method 8260B. Soils encountered during the investigation were logged by HFA as sand, gravel, and sand with gravel. Pebbles and cobbles up to 1 foot in diameter were encountered. Slight to strong petroleum odor was noted in soil samples and cuttings from MW-1. TPH-g was detected at 200 mg/kg in MW-1 at 70 feet bgs, and at 1.2 mg/kg in MW-1 at 110 feet bgs. Benzene was detected'at 0.26 mg/kg in MW-1 at 70 feet bgs. MTBE was detected in all soil samples ~ollected from MW-1 at concentrations from 0.0059 to 84 mg/kg. The highest MTBE concentration was detected at 70 feet bgs. MTBE was also detected in three samples from MW-2 (at 50 to 70 feet bgs) and in six samples from MW-3 from 40 to 100 feet bgs. MTBE concentrations detected in MW-2 and MW-3 were less than 0.5 mg/kg. TBA was detected in MW-1 at concentrations up to 10 mg/kg at 10 to 20 feet bgs and 100 to 110 feet bgs. U :\UGTUDW_files\2002 CmTespondence\City of Bakersfield Cases\Dwntwn CheVron 2-02.doc Mr..David Bird 4 4 March 2002 Groundwater samples were Collected from MW-1 through MW-3 and VW-1 d by HFA on 26 November 2001. Depth-to-groundwater ranged from 113.20 to 115.15 feet below the top of the casings (below TOC). Groundwater flow direction was calculated by HFA to be toward the southeast with a slope of 0.029 feet per foot. Floating petroleum product was measured at a thickness of 0.25 feet on groundwater in VW-ld. Groundwater samples were analyzed for TPH-g by. EPA Method 8015M and BTEX, MTBE, TBA, DIPE, ETBE, and TAME by EPA Method 8260B. TPH-g was detected at 67,000, 280, 10,000 and 5,300,000 gg/L in the samples collected from MW-I, MW,2, MW-3, and VW-ld, respectively. Benzene was detected at 530, 25, 90, and 72,000 gg/L in MW-l, MW-2, MW-3, and VW-ld, respectively. MTBE was detected at 34,000, 2.4, 7,400, and 4,100,000 ggFL, respectively. TBA, DIPE, ETBE, and TAME were not detected in the groundwater samples. California Water Service-well #7 is-1,00Ofeet-east-southeast of the'site. HFA's investigation did not identify additional water wells within 2,500 feet of the site. The Downtown Elementary School, Bakersfield City School District, is 1,250 feet south of the site. San Joaquin Community Hospital is 1,500 feet northwest of the site. HFA recommends that quarterly groundwater monitoring be initiated. Groundwater samples should be analyzed for TPH-g, BTEX, MTBE; TBA, DIPE, ETBE, TAME, 1,2-dicholorethane (1,2-DCA), and ethylene dibromide (EDB). Groundwater samples collected during two non-consecutive quarters will be analyzed for general minerals, nitrate, and total Kjeldahl nitrogen. The SVE remediation system equipment compound will be located in the northeastern portion of the site. SVE wells VW-ls, VW-li, VW-1 d, VW-2, VW-3, and VW-4 will be connected through a manifold to a thermal oxidizer in the remediation compound to be operated 24 hours per day, 7 days per week for a period of 6 months or, · until influent vapor concentrations reach asymptotic levels. The remediation system will then be shut down and confirmation soil samples will be collected. After remediation system startup, an SVE pilot test will be performed to determine the extraction flow.rates and ROIs in the shallow, intermediate, and deep zones. HFA will present the results of the pilot test in a quarterly remediation system progress report. Comments to the Report Based on reuiew of the above-summarized reports, we have the following comments: Gasoline range petroleum constituents, including MTBE, have migrated through the permeable sandy/gravelly site soils and have been detected in groundwater beneath the southern portion of the site. Floating petroleum product 0.25 feet thick was measured on groundwater in SVE well VW-1 d during the 26 November 2001 monitoring event. MTBE and benzene were detected in groundwater.samples at very high maximum concentrations of 4,100,000 and 72,000 gg/L,' respectively. The lateral extent of -impacted groundwater has not been defined. MTBE may be transported in groundwater greater distances away from the release point than other gasoline constituents due to its relatively high solubility and low adsorption to soils. A municipal water supply well is within 1,000 feet of the site in the downgradient direction. We request that you expedite soil remediation by SVE to minimize the migration and spread of gasoline and MTBE in site soils and groundwater and possible impacts to the municipal well. U :\UG'IMDW_files\2002 Correspondence\City of Bakersfield Cases\Dwntwn Chevron 2-02.doc Mr?David Bird - 5 - 4 March 2002 We approve the installation and operation of the proposed SVE remediation system. Permitting and system startup should be' expedited. Please contact this office by 22 April 2002 to provide an estimated startup date. We concur with HFA that after system startup, an SVE pilot test should be conducted to determine the extraction well airflow rates and the ROI of the shallow, intermediate, and deep screened intervals. We previously approved a proposed SVE pilot test (vacuum influence test) by our letter dated 25 September 2001. HFA indicates that they will summarize the results of the pilot test in a quarterly remediation status report. We request that the remediation design specifications be included in the status report. If no final design changes are necessary, your consultant should also indicate this in the status report. ~ MTBE, benzene, and other gasoline constituents h'ave been detected in samples collected from all on-site monitoring wells. The lateral extent of impacted groundwater has not been defined. Please submit a work plan to define lateral extent by 13 May 2002. The work plan should include monitoring well installations downgradient and cross gradient of the release point. We concur with HFA that quarterly groundwater monitoring should be initiated at the site. Groundwater samples should be analyzed for TPH-g by EPA Method 8015M, and the volatile organic compounds usually repgrted in a full EPA Method 8260 analysis (usually 63 to 67 compounds). The EPA Method 8260 analysis should include BTEX, MTBE, TBA, DIPE, ETBE, TAME, 1,2-DCA, and EDB. At least one sample.' collected from a monitoring well upgradient of the release and two samples collected from monitoring.wells downgradient of the release should be analyzed for general minerals, nitrate, and total Kjeldahl nitrogen during non-consecutive quarters. You may request that the scope of analyses be reduced after contaminants of concern are identified. Please submit a groundwater monitoring report for the first quarterly monitoring event by 10 June 2002. Please be aware that Sections 2729 and 2729.1 for Underground Storage' Tanks were added to the California Code of Regulations requiring you to submit analytical and site data electronically. Enclosed is our letter (Required Electronic Deliverable Format for Laboratory and Site Data Submittals to Regulating Agencies) exPlaining how to obtain information to implement the requirements. Please contact this office at least fi'~e days prior to fieldwork. If you have any questions regarding this · correspondence, please contact me at (559) 445-5504. Assoc. Engineering Geologist RG No. 5951 Enclosure: Required Electronic Deliverable Format For Laborat~ry a~ D, ata Submittals... · akersfield'"~' cc: Mr. Howard Wines 1II, City of Bakersfield Fire Department, Ms. Barbara Rempel, SWRCB, UST Cleanup Fund,· Sacramento Mr. Robert E. Tornstrom, President, Service Station Holdings LLC Mr. Mark Magargee, Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Bakersfield U:\UGTUDW_files\2002 Correspondence\City of Bakersfield Cases\Dwntwn Chevron 2-02.doc California Regional Water Quality ontrol Board Central Valley Region Robert Schneider, Chair Winston II. Hickox Secretary for Fresno Branch Office Environmental Internet Address: http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/-rwqcb5 Protection 3614 East Ashlan Avenue, Fresno, California 93726 Phone (559) 445-5116 · FAX (559) 445-5910 Gray Davis Governor 4 March 2002 Regional Board Case No. 5T 15000836 Mr. David Bird Sullivan's Petroleum Company, LLC 1-50-8 1'8th -S [~, 'S~ite 222 Bakersfield, California 93301 UNDERGROUND TANK RELEASE, DOWNTOWN CHEVRON STATION, 2317 "L" STREET, BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY You submitted Expanded Groundwater Assessment Report For The Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC, DoWntown Chevron Service Station (Report) dated 19 February 2002 and prepared by Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Bakersfield (HFA). The Report describes the installation of groundwater monitoring wells and additional soil vapor extraction (SVE) wells proposed in Preliminary Groundwater Assessment Report dated 25 June 2001. We approved the installation of additional SVE and groundwater monitoring wells by our letters dated 23 July and 25. September 2001. Petroleum product floating on groundwater and high concentrations of gasoline constituents, including the fuel oxygenate methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) have been detected in groundwater samples collected from monitoring and SVE wells on-site. We request that you expedite the remediation of impacted soils to prevent the spread of impacted groundwater. We approve the proposed installation and operation of the SVE remediation system. We concur with HFA that a remediation system pilot test may be conducted after system startup and that quarterly groundwater monitoring be.initiated. We also request that a work plan for lateral definition of impacted groundwater be submitted. Summaries of the project, the Report, and our comments follow ..... Summary of the Proiect By a letter dated 28 June 2001, the City of Bakersfield Fire Department (CBFD) referred the Subject case to our agency for regulatory oversight. The site was reconstructed as a convenience store with retail fuel sales and reopened during early 1999. Gasoline is dispensed from six dispensers and is stored in one split-chambered 20,000-gallon underground storage tank (UST) and one 10,000-gallon UST in the southeast portion of the site. An examination of product reconciliation records for April 1999 suggested a potential fuel release of at least 400 gallons from product piping 6onnecting the premium grade UST to the southeastern dispenser. Investigation revealed cuts in the inner flexible and outer containment product piping. Total petroleum California Environmental Protection Agency ~ Recycled Paper Mr. David Bird - 2 - 4 March 2002 hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPH-g), and the gasoline constituents benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes, and MTBE (BTEX & MTBE) were detected by'laboratory analysis of a 'soil sample collected beneath the piping at 5 feet below ground surface (bgs) during May 1999 by AJ Environmental (AJE), Bakersfield. Based on the analytical results of the AJE investigation, the CBFD required further investigation to determine the vertical and lateral extent of impacted soils by a letter dated 21 June 1999. The additional investigation was performed by HFA on 17 August and 26 September 1999. Five soil borings (B-1 through B-5) were drilled and sampled. Boring B:I was drilled within the apparent release source area. The remaining borings were drilled to determine lateral extent. Borings B-i, B-4 and B-5 reached approximately 45 to 50 feet bgs prior to refusal. Borings B-2 and B-3 reached approximately 20 feet bgs prior to refusal. Refusal was caused by layers of cobbles and boulders present at approximately 18.5 to 22.5 feet bgs and 37.5 to 48 feet bgs in the predominant well-graded sands. TPH-g concentration s~_r~.~..an_.g~g~r~o~6, _5_00~.tO 26,00_0_mill_igrams~per&ilogram~(mg~g)~were-detected-in-sample s .... collected to 15 feet bgs in B-1. TPH-g was not detected below 15 feet bgs. MTBE concentrations ranging from 0.33 to 1,400 mg/kg were detected in B-1 to 45 feet bgs. TPH-g concentrations up to 19,000 mg/kg and MTBE concentrations up to 220 mg/kg were detected in B-2, west of the USTs and dispensers, and in B-3, west of the USTs and dispensers. TPH-g was not detected in B-4 and B-5, west and south of the dispensers; respectively. MTBE was detected in all samples analyzed from B-4 and B-5 at concentrations ranging from 0.023 to 11 mg/kg. The CBFD required the preparation of a CAP by a letter dated 29 December 1999. HFA prepared the CAP dated 12 April 2000, which was subsequently approved by the CBFD. HFA estimated that a total volume of 4,700 cubic yards of soils was impacted and that a total weight of 5,580 pounds (900 gallons) of adsorbed hydrocarbons was present in site soils: The CAP selected SVE as the most feasible corrective action alternative. The CAP proposed the installation of one deep central SVE well,, one intermediate central SVE well, one shallow central SVE well, and three shallow lateral zone SVE wells. HFA also proposed that the deep central well be sampled to determine the vertical extent of impacted soils. I-IFA proposed to operate the remediation system on weekends using a mobile SVE unit due to the lack of surface area onsite for construction of a remediation compound and the high volume of traffic passing over the site. The CBFD approved the CAP by a letter dated 25 April 2000. HFA drilled one central soil boring and three lateral borings durind January and February 2001. The ......... c entral~boring;~VW~l~= d7 w as-completed~as-a~combination~groun-dw ater-monitoring-~nd-SVE W-~ll screened from approximately 70 to 120 feet bgs. Groundwater was encountered at approximately 110 feet bgs. The lateral borings, VW-2 through VW-4, were completed as SVE wells screened from 5 to 45 feet bgs. The well installations and results of soil and groundwater samples analyses were described in the Preliminary Groundwater Assessment Report (Report) dated 25 June 2001 and prepared by HFA. Soil samples collected from VW-ld at 50, 60, 65, 80, and 100 feet bgs were analyzed for TPHTg by EPA Method 8015M, and BTEX and MTBE by EPA Method 8020. TPH-g, benzene, and MTBE were detected at 2,300, 9.2 mg/kg, and 87 mg/kg, respectively, in the sample collected from 100 feet bgs. A groundwater sample collected from monitoring well VW-1 d during March 2001 was analyzed for TPH-g by EPA Method 8015M, and BTEX, MTBE; tertiary butyl alcohol4TBA), di-isopropyl ether (DIPE), ethyl tertiary butyl ether (ETBE), and tertiary amyl methyl ether (TAME) by EPA Method 8260. Benzene was detected at 2,400 micrograms per liter (gg/L). MTBE was detected at 120,000 gg/L. U:\UGTUDW_files\2002 Correspondence\City of Bakersfield Cases'dDwntwn Chevron 2-02.doc Mr. David Bird - 3 - 4 March 2002 HFA also proposed the installation of three additional combination groundwater monitoring and SVE (MW-1 through MW-3) in positions lateral to the impac~ted soils and additional shallow and intermediate zone SVE wells (VW-ls:and VW-li) in the central area near'existing deep'SVE well VW-ld. MW-1" through MW-3 would be screened from 75 to 125 feet bgs. VW-ls would be screened from 5 to 35 feet bgs, while VW-li would be screened from 40 to 70 feet bgs. HFA again proposed that remediation be conducted on weekends using a mobile SVE unit. ' By a letter dated 23 July 2001, we requested that remediation by SVE be expedited to prevent the further migration and spread of MTBE and other gasoline range petroleum constituents to groundwater. We also approved the HFA's proposed installation of the central shallow and intermediate zone SVE wells and three combination groundwater monitoring and SVE wells. To expedite remediation system startup, and because of the permeable sandy'soils, we did not request that a pilot test be implemented prior to remediation system startup and that a vacuum influence test be conducted after system startup. We did not-approve the: limited~(weekend)-remediafion system~operation:schedule proposed by-HFA. We - - requested that a brief CAI:' Addendum proposing full-time remedial system operation and radius-of- influence (ROI) testing be submitted. We requested that further investigation to identify water wells in the site vicinity be conducted. HFA submitted Adden[tum To The Corrective Action Plan (Addendum) dated 13 August 2001. The addendum described procedures for ROI testing and again proposed part-time remedial system . operation. By our letter dated 25 September 2001, we approved the proposed ROI testing and. requested the results of an investigation to identify water well~ and other sensitive receptors in the site vicinity. Summary of the Report Five soil borings were drilled under the oversight of HFA on 30 November to 2 November 2001. ' ' Borings MW-1 through MW-3 were drilled to 125 feet bgs in positions lateral to the UST system release. MW-1 through MW-3 were competed as 2-inch diameter monitoring wells screened from 75 to 125 feet bgs. Central borings VW-ls and VW-li were drilled to 35 and 75 feet bgs, respectively. VW-ls and VW-li were completed as 4-inch diameter SVE wells. VW-ls and VW-li were screened from 5 to 35 and 40 to 75 feet bgs, respectively. Soil samples were collected at 10-foot intervals in MW-1 through MW-3. Groundwater was encountered at 114 feet' bgg. 'Soil gamtSl~s ,d, ere not collected frorfi 130tings- V~V-i s ~ihd:VW~ 1 i i:t'ue i~o ' ' their proximity to previous borings. Soil samples were analyzed for TPH-g by EPA Method 8015M and BTEX, MTBE, TBA, DIPE, ETBE, and TAME by EPA Method 8260B. Soils encountered during the investigation were logged by HFA as sand, gravel, and sand with gravel. Pebbles and cobbles up to 1 foot in diameter were encountered. Slight to strong petroleum odor was noted in soil samples and cuttings from MW-1. TPH-g was detected at 200 mg/kg in MW-1 at 70 feet bgs, and at 1..2 mg/kg in MW-1 at 110 feet bgs. Benzene.was detected at 0.26 mg/kg in MW-1 at 70 feet bgs. MTBE was detected in all soil samples collected from MW-1 at concentrations from 0.0059 to 84 mg/kg. The highest MTBE concentration was detected at 70 feet bgs. MTBE was also detected in.three samples from MW-2 (at 50 to 70 feet bgs) and in six samples from MW-3 from 40to 100 feet bgs. MTBE concentratiOns detected in MW~2 and MW-3 were less. than 0.5 mg/kg. TBA was detected in MW-1 at concentrations up to 10 mg/kg at 10 to 20 feet bgs and 100 to 110 feet bgs. U:\UGTUDW files\2002 Correspondence\City of Bakersfield Cases\Dwntwn Chevron 2-02.doc Mr. David Bird - 4 - - 4 March 2002 c, Groundwater samples were collected from MW-1 through MW-3 and VW-1 d by HFA on 26 November 2001. Depth-to-groundwater ranged from 113.20 to 115.15 feet below the top of the casings (below TOC). Groundwater flow direction was calculated by HFA to be toward the southeast with a slope of 0.029 feet per. foot. Floating petroleum product was measured at a thickness of 0:25 feet on groundwater in VW-ld. Groundwater samples were analyzed for TPH-g by EPA Method 8015M and BTEX, MTBE, TBA, DIPE, ETBE, and TAME by EPA Method 8260B. TPH-g was detected at 67,000, 280, 10,000 and 5,300,000 gg/L in the samples collected from MW-l, MW-2, MW-3, and VW-ld, respectively. Benzene was detected at 530, 25, 90, and 72,000 gg/L in MW_l, MW-2, MW-3, and VW-ld, respectively. MTBE was detected at 34,000, 2.4, 7,400, and 4,100,000 gg/L, respectively. TBA, DIPE, ETBE, and TAME were'not detected in the groundwater samples. C_~ajif_o_mia _Wa_a&t__er S_e_roc~e _w___e_!Lg? i_s3.,00_0_feet east;southeast_of the, site._. HFA'-s-investigation-did-not== .... identify additional water wells within 2,500 feet of the site. The Downtown Elementary School, Bakersfield City School District, is 1,250 feet south of the site. San Joaquin Community Hospital is 1,500 feet northwest of the site. ~ I-IFA recommends that quarterly groundwater monitoring be initiated. Groundwat~.r samples should be analyzed for TPH-g, BTEX, MTBE, TBA, D1PE, ETBE, TAME, 1,2-dicholorethane (1,2-DCA), and ethylen,e dibromide (EDB). Groundwater samples collected during two non-consecutive quarters will be analyzed for general minerals, nitrate, and total Kjeldahl nitrogen. The SVE remediation system, equipment compound will be located in the northeastern portio,n of the site. SVE wells VW-1 s, VW-Ii, VW- 1 d, VW-2, VW-3, and VW-4 will be connected through a manifold to a thermal oxidizer in the remediation compOund to be operated 24 hours per day, 7 days per week for a period of 6 months or until influent vapor concentrations reach asymptotic levels. The remediation system will then be shut down~ and confirmation soil samples will be collected. After remediation system startup, an SVE pilot test will be performed to determine the extraction flow rates and ROIs in the shallow, intermediate, and deep zones. HFA will present the results of the pilot test in a quarterly remediation system progress report. Comments to the Report Based on review-of-the-above-summarized relSorts; we have-the--following 'comments: .... ---- Gasoline range petroleum constituents, including MTBE, have migrated through the permeable sandy/gravelly site soils and have been detected in groundwater beneath the southern portion of the site. Floating petroleum product 0.25 feet thick was measured on groundwater i~n SVE well VW-ld during the 26 November 2001 monitoring event. MTBE and benzene were detected in groundwater samples at very high maximUm concentrations of 4,100,000 and 72,000 [tg/L, respectively. The lateral extent of impacted groundwater .h...as not been defined. MTBE may be transported in groundwater greater distances away from the release point than other gasoline constituents due to its relatively high solubility and low adsorption to soils. A municipal water supply well is within 1,000 feet of the site in the downgradient direction. We request that you expedite soil remediation' by SVE to minimize the migration and spread of gasoline and MTBE in site soils and groundwater and possible 'impacts to the municipal well. U:\UGTUDW_files\2002 Correspondence\City of Bakersfield Cases\Dwntwn Chevron 2-02.doc Mr. David Bird -5- 4 March 2002 We approve the installation and operation of the proposed SVE remediation system. Permitting and system startup should be expedited. Please contact this office by 22 April 2002 to provide an estimated startup date...We concur With HFA that after system startup, an SVE pilot test.should be conducted to determine the extraction well airflow rates and the ROI of the shallow, intermediate, and deep screened intervals. We previously approved a proposed SVE pilot test (vacuum influence test) by our letter dated 25 September 2001. HFA indicates that they will summarize the results of the pilot test in a quarterly remediation status report. We request that the remediation design specifications be included in the status report. If no final design changes are necessary; your consultant should also indicate this in the'status report. MTBE, benzene, and other gasoline constituents have been detected in samples collected from all on-site monitoring wells. The lateral extent of impacted groundwater has not been defined. Please submit a work plan to define lateral extent by 13 May 2002. The work plan should include monitoring well installations d0wngradient and cross gradient of the release pqint. :"' ' ~ - "'~ .... "' '' ~' ~ ~ --~ '- ~"-~--- ~-'-'- ' '- ........ ~ ....... L '__ We concur with HFA that quarterly groundwater monitoring should be initiated at the site. Groundwater samples should be analyzed for TPH-g by EPA Method 8015M, and the volatile organic compounds usually reported in a fulll EPA Method 8260 analysis (usually 63 to 67 compounds). The EPA Method 8260 analysis should include BTEX, MTBE, TBA, DIPE, ETBE, TAME, 1,2-DCA, and EDB. At least one sample collected fr6m a monitoring well upgradient of the release and two samples collected from monitoring wells downgradient of the release should be analyzed for general minerals, nitrate, and total Kjeldahl nitrogen during non-consecutive quarters. You may request that the scope of analyses be reduced after contaminants of concern are identified. Please submit a groundwater monitoring report for the first quarterly monitoring event by 10 June 2002. Please be aware that Sections 2729 and 2729.1 for Underground Storage Tanks were added to the California Code of Regulations requiring you to submit analytical and site data electronically. Enclosed is our letter (Required Electronic Deliverable Format for Laboratory and Site Data Submittals to Regulating Agencies) explaining how to obtain information to implement the requirements. · Please contact this office at least five days prior to fieldwork. If you have any questions regarding this correspondence, please contact me at (559) 445-5504. John D. Whiting Assoc. Engineering Geologist RG No. 5951 Enclosure: Required Electronic Deliverable 'Format For Laboratory and Site Data Submittals... · cc: Mr. Howard Wines 1II, City of Bakersfield Fire Department, Bakersfi 'Ms. Barbara Rempel, sWRCB, UST Cleanup Fund, Sacramento Mr: Robert E. Tornstrom, President, Service Station Holdings LLC Mr. Mark Magargee, Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Bakersfield U:\UGTUDW_filesL2002 Correspondence\City of'Bakersfield Cases\Dwntwn Chevron 2-02,.doc California Re,, g nal Water Quality C Central Valley Region Robert Schneider, Chair ~ston H. Hickox Gray Davis Secretary for Sacramento Main Office Governor Environmental Internet Address: http://www.swrch, ca. gov/rwqcb5 Protection ' 3443 Routier Road, Suite A, Sacramento, California 95827-3003 :z.. Phone (916) 255-3000. FAX (916) 255-3015 9 November 2001 { trol Board Underground Storage Tank Owners and Operators Other Interested Parties REQUIRED ELECTRONIC DELIVERABLE FORlVlAT FOR LABORATORY AND SITE DATA SUBMITTALS TO REGULATING AGENCIES Effective 1 January 2001, Assem~i~ B'[ll 5886-add~ SectiOns i5'-195 ~--'-i3198 {o th~California W~.ter - Code requiring that the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Boa'rd) d?velop emergency regulations for underground storage tanks (LIST). These new regulations (California Code of Regulations, Title 23, Chalhter 16, Article 12; Sections 2729 and 2729.1) specify that Underground Tank Owners and/or Operators (!ndividually or collectively the Responsible Party) or their agent submit analytical data electronically via the Intemet to the Regulating Agencies, using formats designated by the State Water Board that are both non-proprietary and available as public domain. To meet these objectives the State Water Board designated the Electronic Deliverable Format (EDF) developed for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. EDF enables laboratories and consultants to produce data in a standardized format that can be transmitted electronically to the Responsible Part~ .and Regulating Agencies, For more information about the EDF process you may log-on to the State Water' Board Web site at http://_~eotracker.swrcb.ca.gov and then click on the information link to AB 2886. All EDF data must be submitted over the Internet to the State Water Board Geographic Environmental Information Management System database (GeoTracker). Developed under the direction of State Water Board staff, GeoTracker is a robust database that allows for storage of interrelated site data including the above electroniC data'submittals. Regulating Agencies review the data submitted for final acceptance into GeoTracker. Since 1 September 2001, analytical laboratories have been required to submit electronic data using EDF for their analyses of soil and/or groundwater samples, These submittals, in addition to the customary paper format, are for all UST sites (including both the preventive and investigative/cleanup components of the UST program). After 1 January 2002, in addition to the laboratory data, site specific information is required to be submitted electronically for the following: 1) the latitude and longitude of ground water monitoring wells (including any other well or permanent sampling point designated as part of the site monitoring pre)gram) accurate to within one meter; 2) the surveyed elevation, relative to mean sea level, for any. ground water sampled, accurate to within a tenth of a foot; 3) groundwater information, including depth California Environmental Protection Agency Recycl~d Paper The energy challenge facing California is real. Every Californian needs to take immediate action to reduce energy consumption. For a list of simple ways you can reduce demand and cut your energy costs, see our Web-site a[ hrtp://www.swrcb.ca, gov/rwqcb$ EDF Reporting - 2 - ' 9 November 2001 to water, free product presence/thickness and well status; and,'4) a site map in electronic format showing property boundaries, buildings, and soil and water sampling locations. PASSWORD: To initiate the EDF in GeoTracker, the Responsible Party is required to obtain a password by logging-on ;to the State Water Board Web site at http://~eoU'acker.s'~wcb.ca.~ov and then clicking on the information link to AB 2886. The passwprd is used by the Responsible Party (or their agent) to upload the required analytical data into the GeoTracker database. ASSISTANCE: I£ you, as a Responsible Party, require assistance' to obtain or use a password (or to submit data and maps electronically), you may have an agent assist you (e.g. an environmental consulrantl engineer, attorney, etc.), or call the GeoTracker help-desk (1-800-506-9118). Also, for detailed information regarding the regulatory requkements or to find a State Water Board staff contact, the Responsible Party (or designated agent) may log-on to the AB 2886 in£ormation link on the _GeoTracker-Web-site_ listed_abo~'e. - For eligible sites, the California Leaking Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund will cover the additional costs incurred by claimants for compliance with these regulations, to the extent that these costs are reasonable and necessary (e.g.' as required by the Regulating Agencies to 'assure adequate investigation or cleanup of a contaminated site). If you have any questions, please contact your County or Local Implementing Agency, Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) or Regional Board representative. For co~.mties in the Central Valley Regional Board jurisd;r~ction, please call the local ofice' in Fresno at (559) 445-5116, Redding at (530) 224-484~. cramento at (916) 255-3212. ' ' GORDg~q' LEE BOG//'~ - OS ' UnderjgSound Tank pro,ram Manager Ce~)/al Valley Region ~ Winston H. Hickox Secretary for Environmental Protection California Regional Water Quality C0i trol Board Central Valley Region Robert Schneider, Chair Fresno Branch Office Intemet Address: http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/rwqcb5 3614 East Ashlan Avenue, Fresno, California 93726 Phone (559) 445-5116 · FAX (559) 445-5910 Gray Davis Governor 18 January 2002 Mr. David Bird Sullivan's Petroleum Company, LLC P.O. Box 5007 Bakersfield, California 93308 RWQCB Case No. 5T15000836 OVERDUE REPORT, UNDERGROUND TANK RELEASE, DOWNTOWN CHEVRON STATION, 2317 "L" STREET, BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY You submitted Preliminary Groundwater Assessment Report (Report) dated 25 June 2001 and prepared by your consultant Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Bakersfield. We approved the installation of additional soil vapor extraction (SVE) wells and dual-purpose groundwater monitoring/SVE wells proposed in the Report by our letter dated 23 July 2001. We requested that you submit a letter describing SVE vacuum influence test procedures, an addendum proposing the final SVE operation strategy and schedule, and the results of an investigation to identify vicinity water wells by 17 September 2001. We also requested that you submit a report describing the SVE and dual-purpose well installations, and the results of the initial groundwater monitoring event by 17 September 2001. We understand that the SVE and dual-purpose wells were installed during late October 2001. As of the date of this letter, we have not received these items. Please have your consultant submit these items by 14 February 2002 or contact this office to discuss your situation. As the responsible party, you must implement corrective action in a timely manner. Continued failure to comply with our requests may result in enforcement actions and co_uld jeopardize.ygur access to the_UST_ Cleanup Fund. Should you have questions regarding these matters, please contact me at (559) 445-5504 JOHN D. WHITING Associate Engineering Geologist RG No. 5951. CC: Ms. Barbara Rempel, UST Cleanup Fund, Sacramento s~field''° Mr. Howard Wines 111, City of Bakersfield Fire Department, Baker Mr. Mark Magargee, Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Bakersfield California EnVironmental Protection Agency ~ Recycled Paper The energy challenge facing California is real. Every Californian needs to take immediate action to reduce energy consumption. For a list of simple ways you can reduce demand and cut your energy costs, see our Web-site at http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/rwqcb5 Winston H. Hi'ckox Secretary for Environmental .Protection California Regional Water Quality trol Board Central Valley Region Robert Schneider, Chair Gray Davis Fresno Branch Office Governor Internet Address: http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/~rwqcb5 3614 East Ashlan Avenue, Fresno, California 93726 Phone (559) 445-5116 · FAX (559) 445-5910 ' 25 September 2001 Regional Board Case No. 5T15000836 Mr. Tim Sullivan Sullivan's PetroleumCompanY, LLC P.O. Box 5007 Bakersfield, California 93308 UNDERGROUND TANK RELEASE, DOWNTOWN CHEVRON STATION, 2317 "L" STREET, BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY You submitted Addendum To The Corrective Action Plan (Addendum) dated 13 August 2001 and prepared by Holguin, Fahan & Associates, 'Bakersfield (HFA). The Addendum describes procedures for a soil vapor extract, ion (SVE) vacuum influence test. We approved the installation of additional SVE and groundwater monitoring wells by our letter dated 23. July 2001. HFA proposed weekend SVE operation using a mobile remediation unit because the site lacks available space for a dedicated unit. We disapproved the proposed weekend SVE operation schedule and requested full-time operation. We requested that a vacuum influence test be conducted after system startup and that vacuum influence test procedures and SVE operation strategy be described in an addendum. We understand that HFA will install dedicated remediation equipment for full-time operation offsite if an agreement can be reached with the property owner. If an agreement cannot be reached, we request that the dedicated equipment be installed onsite. We believe potential locations exist onsite. We approve the proposed vacuum influence test. Summaries of the project, the Addendum, and our Comments follow. Summary of the Proiect -' By a letter dated 28 June 2001, the City of Bakersfield Fire Department (CBFD) referred the subject case to our agency 'for regulatory oversight. The site was reconstructed as a convenience store with retail fuel sales and reopened during early 1999. Gasoline is dispensed from six dispensers and is stored in one split-chambered 20,000-gallon underground storage tank (UST) and one 10,000-gallon UST in the southeast portion of the site. An examination of product reconciliation records for April 1999 suggested a potential fuel release of at least 400 gallons from product piping connecting the premium grade UST to the southeastern dispenser. ,~vestigation revealed cuts in the inner flexible and outer containment product piping. Total petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPH-g), and the gasoline constituents benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes, and MTBE (BTEX'& MTBE) were detected by laboratory analysis of a soil sample collected beneath the piping at a depth of 5 feet bgs during May 1999 by AJ Environmental (AJE), Bakersfield. California Environmental Protection Agency Recycled Paper Mr. Tim Sullivan 25 September 2001 Based on the analytical results of the AJE investigation, the CBFD required further investigation to determine the Vertical and lateral extent of impacted soils by a letter dated 21 June 1999. The additional investigation was performed by HFA on 17 August and 26 September 1999. Five soil borings (B-1 through B-5) were drilled and sampled. Boring B-1 was drilled within the apparent release source area. The remaining borings were drilled to determine lateral extent. Borings B-1, B-4 and B-5 reached depths of approximately 45 to 50 feet bgs prior to refusal. Borings B-2 and B-3 reached approximately 20 feet bgs prior to refusal. Refusal was caused by layers of cobbles and boulders present at depths of approximately 18.5 to 22.5 feet bgs and 37.5 to 48 feet bgs in the predominant well-graded sands. TPH-g concentrations ranging from 6,500 to 26,000 mifligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) were detected in samples collected to 15 feet bgs in B-1. TPH-g was not detected below 15 feet bgs. MTBE concentrations ranging from 0.33 to 1,400 mg/kg were detected in B 1 to a depth of 45 feet bgs. TPH-g concentrations up to. 19,000 mg/kg and MTBE concentrations up to 220 mg/kg were detected in B-2, west of the USTs and dispensers, and in B-3, west of th_e UST.s. a_nd dispe_nser_s. TPH-g was 'not detected in B-4 and B-5, west'and south of the dispensers, respectively. MTBE was detected in all samples analyzed from B-4 and B-5 at concentrations ranging from 0.023 to 11 mg/kg. The CBFD required the preparation of a CAP by a letter dated 29 December 1999. HFA prepared the CAP dated 12 April 2000, which was subsequently approved by the CBFD. HFA estimated that a total volume of 4,700 cubic yards of soils was impacted and that a total weight of 5,580 pounds (900 gallons) of adsorbed hydrocarbons was present in site soils. The CAP indicated that SVE was the most feasible corrective action alternative. The CAP proposed the installation of one deep central SVE well, one intermediate central SVE well, one shallow central SVE well, and three shallow lateral zone SVE wells. HFA also proposed that the deep central well be sampled to determine the vertical extent of impacted soils. HFA proposed to operate the remediation system on weekends using a mobile SVE unit due to the lack of surface area onsite for construction of a remediation compound and the high volume of traffic passing over the site. The CBFD approved the CAP by a letter dated 25 April 2000. HFA drilled one central soil boring and three lateral borings during January and February 2001. The central boring, VWi-d, was completed as a combination groundwater monitoring and SVE well screened from approximately 70 to 120 feet bgs. Groundwater was encountered at approximately 110 feet bgs. The lateral borings, VW-2 through VW-4, were completed as SVE wells screened from 5 to 45 feet bgs. The well installations and results of soil and groundwater samples analyses were described in the preliminary GroundWater Assessment Report (~Report)dated 25 June-2001 and prepared by HFA. Soil samples collected from VW-ld at. 50, 60, 65, 80, and 100 feet bgs were analyzed for TPH-g by EPA Method 8015M, and BTEX and MTBE by EPA Method 8020. TPH-g, benzene, and MTBE were detected at 2,300, 9.2 mg/kg, and 87 mg/kg,'respectively, in the sample collected from 100 feet bgs. A groundwater sample collected from monitoring well VW-ld during March 2001 was analyzed for TPH-g by EPA Method 8015M, and BTEX, MTBE, tertiary butyl alcohol (TBA), di-isopropyl ether (DIPE), ethyl tertiary butyl ether (ETBE), and tertiary amyl methy! ether (TAME) by EPA Method 8260. Benzene was detected at 2,400 micrograms per liter (gg/L). MTBE was detected at 120,000 [tg/L. HFA also proposed the installation of three additional combination groundwater monitoring and SVE (MW-1 through MW-3) in positions lateral to the impacted soils and additional shallow and intermediate zone SVE wells (VW-ls and VW-li) in the central area near eXisting deep SVE well VW-ld. MW-1 through MW-3 would be screened from 75 to 125 feet bgs. VW-ls would be screened from 5 to 35 feet U:\UGTXJDW_files\2000-2001 Correspondence\City of Bakersfield Cases\Dwntwn Chevron 9-01 .doc Mr. Tim SUllivan~ 25 SePtember 2001 bgs, while VW-li would be screened from 40 to 70 feet bgs. HFA again proposed that remediation be conducted On weekends using a mobile SVE unit. By a letter dated 23 July 2001, we requested that remediation by SVE be expedited to prevent the further migration and spread of MTBE and other gasoline range petroleum constituents to groundwater. We also approved the HFA's proposed installation of the central shallow and intermediate zone SVE wells and three combination groundwater monitoring and SVE wells. To expedite remediation system startup, and because of the permeable sandy soils, we did not request that a pilot test be implemented prior to remediation system startup and that a vacuum influence test be ~onducted after system startup. Summary of the Addendum Upon installation and startup of the initial SVE system, HFA will conduct an SVE vacuum influence test to determine the extraction well flow rates and radius of influence within the' shallow, intermediate, and deep zones. SVE wells V-is, VWli, and VW-ld will be used as the extraction wells. SVE wells VW-2, VW-3, and VW-4 and combination wells MW-I, MW-2, and MW-3 will be used as observation wells. Soil vapors will be extracted in step tests at three different flow rates (and vacuums) for a duration of 20 minutes per step. Flow rates and wellhead vacuums will be measured throughout the test period. The data collected will be used to calculate the radius of vacuum influence (ROI), for each flow rate and the intrinsic soil permeability. Vapor samples will be collected at the beginning and end of each step test. Vapor samples will be analyzed in the laboratory for BTEX and MTBE. HFA will present the test data in a quarterly progress report. HFA proposes that SVE remediation be conducted approximately 60 hours per week on weekends using a mobile, self contained VES thermal oxidizer'unit since thereis no available surface area onsite and a high volume of traffic across the site area. The SVE unit would be connected to the extraction wells using flexible hoses connected to a collection manifold. HFA indicates that full-time operation using a mobile SVE unit is not feasible because some of the dispensers would become inaccessible to customers. The only feasible option for full=time-remediation involves-constmctingthe remediation compound offsite, on the property to the west, assuming that an access agreement can be reached. I-IFA requests that Board staff reconsider their request for full-time remediation system operation. HFA will identify water wells and other sensitive receptors within 2,500 feet of the site. The results of the investigation Will bepresentedin a quarterly Progress rePort. Comments Based on review of the hbove-summarized reports, we have the following comments: We approve the proposed vacuum radius of influence test. Each step test should .be continued until the field technician determines that vacuum readings remain .constant. We understand from an onsite meeting with Mr. David Bird, Operations Manager of Sullivan's 'Petroleum Company LLC (Sullivan) and Mr. Mark Magargee of HFA On 24 September 2001, that dedicated remediation equipment for full-time operation will be installed offsite if an access agreement can be reached with the property owner to the west. We concur with offsite installation. However, if an access agreement cannot be reached, we request that the dedicated remediation equipment be installed U:\UGTUDW_files\2000-2001 Correspondence\City of Bakersfield Cases\Dwntwn Chevron 9-01 .doc g/Mr. Tim Sullivan -4- 25 September 2001 We identified potential locations based on our review of photographs taken on 24 September and onsite reconnaissance.. It may be possible to install.remediation equipment in the driveway and planter area in the southeast corner of the site, in a location along the northwest portion of the canopy, or in the alley along the carwash facility wall. Please inform this office when an .agreement has been reached. Please contact this office if an agreement has not been reached by 15 October 2001. We requested that the results of the investigation to identify water wells and other sensitive receptors be submitted by 17 September 2001 based on our desire to expedit~ site investigation and cleanup. We do not approve the proposed submission of the investigation results' as part of a quarterly status report. We will provide an extension for completion of this investigation. The results of the investigation to identify water wells and other sensitive receptors are now due by 24 October 20'01. By our letter dated 23 July 2001 we approved the installation of combination wells MW-1 through MW- 3 and the-SVE wells-VW~-ls and VW-li-and requested that.a report d_escribing the we!! installations and the results o2 the initial groundwater monitoring event be submitted by 1 October 2001. HFA indicated during a telephone conversation with Board staff On 13 August 2001, that a drill rig with a low mast for installation of VW-ls and VW-li beneath the canopy has been scheduled for late September 2001. During the 24 September 2001 onsite meeting, Mr. Magargee indicated that the wells would be installed during the first half of October 2001. With this letter we are providing an extension for submission of the well installation and groundwater monitoring report. We request that you provide the report by 12 November 2001 or contact this office to discuss your situation. Please contact this office at least 5 days prior to fieldwork. If you have any questions regarding this correspondence, please contact me at (559)445-5504. ~ng~' ~ff/~' Assoc. Engineering Geologist RG No. 5951 CCi Mr. H~wardWines 1IIi-ci{k'of Bakersfield Fire Department, Bakersfield Ms. Sandy Gill, SWRCB, UST Cleanup Fund, Sacramento Mr. Robert E. Tornstrom, President, Service Station Holdings LLC Mr. Mark Magargee, Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Bakersfield U:\uGTUDW_files\2000-2001 Correspondence\City of Bakersfield Cases\Dwntwn Chevron 9-01 .doc HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. August 13, 2001 Mr. John D. Whiting California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region 3614 East Ashlan Avenue Fresno, California 93726 Subject: ADDENDUM TO THE CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN FOR THE SULLIVAN PETROLEUM COMPANY, LI.C, DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION 2317 "L" STREET, BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA (BFDESD PERMIT #BI-0166) Dear Mr. Whiting: Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. (HFA) is pleased to present the following Addendum to the Corrective Action Plan (CAP), dated April 12, 2001, for the above-referenced site. The addendum has been prepared in response to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region's (5) (CRWQCB-CVR's)case review letter dated July 23, 2001 (see Attachment 1 for a copy of the CRWQCB-CVR correspondence). SITE LOCATION AND CONTACT PERSONS The site is located at 2317 'L'; Street, Bakersfield,. Kern County, California (see Figure 1 - Site Location Map). The site is located within the commercial district, which flanks 23rd and 24th streets. The site is at an elevation of approximately 404 feet above MSL, and the topography is relatively flat with a slight slope to the southwest. The site is located within the northwestern quarter of the northwestern quarter of Section 30, Township 29 South, Range 28 East, MDBM. The site is a newly constructed retail fuel sales facility and mini.mart, which opened during the first quarter of 1999. The subject site is the location of double-walled USTs and product piping (see Figure 2 - Plot Plan). The property owner contact is Mr. Tim Sullivan, President, Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC, 1508 18th Street, Suite 222, Bakersfield, California, 93301, (661) 327-5008. The consultant contact is Mr. Mark R. Magargee, Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc., 2820 Pegasus Drive, Suite 1, Bakersfield, California, 93308, (661) 391-0517. ENVIRONMENTAL: SCIENTISTS * GEOLOGISTS · ENGINEERS Contaminated Site Assessments · Phase I Audits ·Site Remediation * Hazardous Waste Management 143 South Figueroa Street5940 Lakcshore Drive . 2820 Pegasus Drive, Suite 1 · 1003 East Cooley Drive, Suite 201 1215 South Park Lane, Suite 1 Venmra, Califomia 93001 Cypress, California 90630Bakersfield, California 93308 Colton, California 92324 Tempe, Arizona 85281 (805) 652-0219 (714) 236-1741 (805) 391-0517 (909) 422-8988 (480) 505-3332 (805) 652-0793 FAX (714) 236-1745 FAX (805) 391-0826 FAX (909) 422-8099 FAX (480) 505-3336 FAX Inlemet: ftrst last@ldO.eom lntenmt: first_last@hfa.com Internet: firstJa~t@hfa.com Intemet: first_lmst@hfa.comlnternet: firstJast@hfa.com www.hfa.com '~ HOLGUIN, Assocmr~s, INC.. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. John D.-Whiting CRWQCB-CVR August 13, 2001 - Page 2 TOPOGRAPHY, GEOLOGY, AND HYDROGEOLOGY The site is located at an elevation of approximately 404 feet above MSL, and the topography slopes'slightly to the southwest (see Figure 1 ). The subject site is located on the eastern flank of the San Joaquin Valley and west of the southern Sierra Nevada. The surface of the San Joaquin Valley is'composed primarily of unconsolidated Pleistocene (1.6 million to 11,000.years ago) and Recent (11,000 years ago to the present) alluvial sediments. Beneath the alluvial sediments, are older, predomi.nantly lake-bed deposits. These lie unconformably on Mio-Pliocene marine sediments, which extend to a crystalline basement at a depth of approximately 50,000 fbg (California Divisi~on of Mines and Geology (CDMG), 1965, Geologic Map of California, Bakersfield Sheet). At the subject site, surface deposits consist of Quaternary (recent) unconsolidated alluvium overlying Quaternary (Pleistocene) nonmarine sediments. GeolOgic deposits in the study area include Pleistocene alluvial sediments that form a homocline dipping gently to the southwest. The deposits are alluvium consisting of indurated and dissected fan deposits (CDMG, 1965). Surface soils are classified by the Soils Conservation Services as Kimberlina Urban Land - Cajon Complex and are characterized as 35 percent Kimberlina fine, sandy loam with moderate permeability; 30 percent Urban land with impervious Surfaces and altered fills; and 20 percent Cajon loamy sand with high permeability. Subsurface soils observed at nearby UST sites during the constr'uction of water supply wells in the area are characterized as fine-grained to coarse-grained sands with significant intervals of gravels, cobbles, and boulders, and minor intervals of thinly bedded silts and clays through the depth of groundwater at approximately 110 fbg. The site is located in the southern portion of the Great Valley geomorphic province. The Great Valley is a north-south-trending valley, approximately 400 miles- long by 50 miles wide, the southern portion of which is known as the San Joaquin Valley. Surface water and groundwater in the San Joaquin Valley are derived predominantly from the Sierra Nevada to the east and are transported by five major rivers, the closest to the site being the Kern River. The subject site is located approximately 1 mile south of the Kern River. The depth to the regional, unconfined aquifer is approximately 110 fbg, and the groundwater gradient is to the southwesf; away from the Kern River and toward the ancient Kern Lake bed (Kern County Water Agency (KCWA), 2000, 1996 Water Supply Report, July 2000). Perched groundwater at depths as shallow as 20 fbg is known to be present flanking the current HOLGUIN, FAme& ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. John D. Whiting CRWQCB-CVR August 13, 2001 - Page 3 course of the Kern River, but is not known to extend to the site (KCWA, 2000). California Water Service Company (CWSC) operated Well #7 approximately 1,000 feet from the site. PREVIOUS WORK During April 1999, product reconciliation records indicated a potential release in the product piping extending from the premium UST to the southeastern multiple product dispenser (MPD). However, the leak detection alarm system had not indicateda release. Subsequently, the MPD was shut off, and the inner flex product piping was removed from the outer flex containment piping. A breach was observed in the inner flex product piping. Therefore, Sullivan Petroleum filed an unauthorized release report with .the Bakersfield Fire Department Environmental Services Division (BFDESD). On April 30, 1999, the concrete above the product piping was removed, and an exploratory trench was excavated, exposing the product piping. A breach was also observed in the outer flex containment piping. On May 10, 1999, A.J. Environmental, Inc. advanced a hand-augered soil boring (SC-1) adjacent to the location of the product piping breach (see Figure 2 for the soil boring location). Adsorbed-phase TPH as gasoline, BTEX, and MTBE concentrations were detected in the soil sample collected from soil boringSC-1 at adepthof5fbg (see Table 1 -Summary of Soil Sample Analytical Results). Based on the soil sampling and laboratory analytical results, the BFDESD, in its letter dated June21, 1999, required a preliminary assessment of the vertical and lateral limits of the gasoline-containing soil and an assessment of the potential for the release to impact groundwater resources. HFA prepared a work plan, dated July 8, 1999, to perform the requested work, which was subsequently approved for implementation by the BFDESD in its letter dated July 21, 1999. HFA performed the drilling and sampling activities on August 17, 1999, and September 26, 1999. Five soil borings (B-1 through B-5) were drilled during this phase of soil investigation (see Figure 2 for the soil boring locations). On August 1 7, 1999, soil borings B-1 through B-3 were advanced to a depth of 20 fbg using HFA's 10-ton direct-push sampling rig where refusal was experienced due to the presence of a layer of cobbles. On September 26, 1999, soil boring B-1 was deepened to a depth of 48 fbg using a torque-modified MobileTM B-53 hollow-stem auger drill rig operated by Melton Drilling Company of Bakersfield, California. Drilling refusal was experienced at a depth of 48 fbg due to encountering a second layer of larger diameter cobbles and occasional HOLGUIN, FAHA~ & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. John D. Whiting CRWQCB-CVR August 13, 2001 - Page 4 boulders. On September 26, 1999, soil borings B-4 and B-5 were also drilled at. the site to a depth of 45 fbg where drilling refusal occurred.' Soil boring B-1 was drilled adjacent to the potential source area; soil borings B-2 and B-3 were drilled as lateral-assessing soil borings located 15 feet to the east and west,, respectively, of the potential source area; and soil borings B-4 and B-5 were drilled as lateral-assessing soil borings advanced 25 feet to the northeast and southwest, respectively, of the potential source area (see Figure 2]. soils encountered during drilling included well-graded sands, iPite?bedded with a layer of cobbles in the interval ranging in depth from approximately 18.5 to 22.5 fbg and a second layer of larger diameter cobbles and occasional boulders in the interval ranging in depth from approximately 37.5 fbg to the maximu, m depth (48 fbg) penetrated during t.he investigation. Groundwater Was not encountered during drilling. Significant adsorbed-phase TPH as gasoline and benzene concentrations were detected in the soil samples collected from the vertical-assessing soil boring (B-1) to a depth of less than 22 fbg and in the soil samples Collected from the lateral-assessing soil borings (B-2 and B-3) less than 25 feet laterally from the potential source area. Minor adsorbed-phase MTBE concentrations Were also detected in the soil samples collected from soil borings B-1 through B-5 to the total depth of the soil borings (see Figure 3 - TPH as Gasoline/Benzene~MTBE Concentrations in Soil and Table 1). The BFDESD, in its letter dated December 29, 1999, required the preparation of a CAP to determine the appropriate remedial actions for adsorbed-phase hydrocarbon-containing soils at the site. HFA prepared the requested CAP, dated April 12, 2000, which was subsequently approved by the BFDESD for implementation. An RI/FS was conducted to assess the feasibility and cost effectiveness of mitigation technologies. The results of the RI/FS analysis were that in-situ vapor extraction is the technology that appears most suitable for this site. A vapor extraction well field consisting of central, shallow-zone and deep-zone vapor extraction wells (.VW-ls and VW-ld, respectively) and three lateral, shallow-zone vapor extraction wells (VW-2and VW-4) was proposed (see Figure4- Plot Plan Showing VES and Figure 5- VES Schematic Diagram). In association with the construction of the central, deep-zone vapor extraction well (VW-1 d), soil sampling and laboratory analysis would be performed to assess the vertical limits of gasoline-containing soil and the potential for the release to impact groundwater resources, and the well construction details would be modified dependant on the depth of the boring and whether groundwater was encountered. HOLGUIN, FAHA~ & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. John D. Whiting CRWQCB-CVR August 13, 2001 - Page 5 On February 1 through 3, 2001, HFA advanced soil boring VW-ld to a depth of 125 fbg, which was completed as a combination groundwater monitoring/vapor extraction well, and soil borings VW-2 through VW-4 to a depth of 45 fbg, which were completed as vapor extraction wells (see Figure 2 for the groundwater monitoring and vapor extraction well locations). HFA performed the drilling and sampling of combination groundwater 'monitoring/vapor extraction well VW-ld on February 1 through 3, 2001, using a limited-access, dual-walled percussion, air rotary drill rig, operated by West Hazmat, Inc., of Sacramento, California. The limited access rig (LAR) was used because of the height of the canopy above the drill location, and the dual-walled percussion, air rotary LAR was required due to the requirement to drill through cobbles and boulders. The three lateral vapor extraction wells (VW-2 through · VW-4) were drilled with a conventional dual-walled percussion, air rotary drill rig with a normal height mask. Soil samples were collected at depths of 50, 65, 80, and 100 fbg while drilling soil boring VW-ld, with groundwater encountered at an approximate depth of 110 fbg. Soil samples were not collected while drilling soil borings VW-2 through VW-4 due to their positioning in close proximity to previous soil borings drilled to similar depths. Soils encountered during drilling included well-graded sands, pebbles, and cobbles up to 1 foot in diameter. Field screening of the soil cuttings and soil samples indicated the presence of V©Cs using a PID to the total depth of soil boring VW-ld. Groundwater was encountered in the soil boring at a depth of approximately 110 fbg. Therefore, the soil boring was drilled to a depth of 1 25 fbg and installed as a monitoring well with slotted casing in the interval ranging in .depth from 75 to 125 fbg to serve as a combination groundwater monitoring and vapor extraction well. Soil borings VW-2 through VW-4 were drilled to a depth of 45 fbg and installed as vapor extraction wells with slotted casing in the interval ranging in depth from 5 to 45 fbg. Because theLAR was required to be used at another site, time was not available to install central, shallow vapor extraction well VW-ls during this phase of investigation. Vapor extraction well VW-ls will be installed during the next phase of investigation. An adsorbed-phaseTPH as gasoline concentration of 250mg/kg was detected in the soil sample collected from a depth of 50 fbg, decreased to 5.7 mg/kg in the soil sample collected from a depth of 65 fbg, and was not detected in the soil sample collected from a depth o{ 80 fbg. However, an adsorbed-phase TPH as gasoline concentration of 2,300 rog/kg was detected in the soil sample collected from a depth of 100fbg. Adsorbed-phase benzene concentrations were not detected in the soil samples collected from depths of 50, 65, and 80 fbg. However, an adsorbed-phase benzene concentration of 9.3 rog/kg was detected in the soil sample collected from a depth of 100 fbg. Adsorbed-phase MTBE concentrations were detected in the four soil samples reaching a maximum concentration of 87 mg/kg in the soil sample collected from a depth of 100 fbg (see Figure 3 and Table 1 ). HOLGUIN, F~& ASSOCIATES, I~C. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. John D. Whiting CRWQCB-CVR August 13, 2001 - Page 6 .On March 14, 2001, a groundwater sample was collected from monitoring well VW-ld. The depth to groundwater in the well was measured to be 107.43 fbg. Dissolved-phase TPH as gasoline, BTEX, and MTBE concentrations Were detected in the groundwater sample collected from monitoring well VW-ld, with a dissolved-phase benzene concentration of 5,200 flg/I and a dissolved-phase MTBE concentration of 1 20,000 pg/I. Dissolved-phase TBA, DIPE, ETBE, and TAME concentrations were not detected in the groundwater sample collected from monitoring well VW-ld (see Table 2- Summary of Groundwater Sample Analytical Results). In order to further delineate the lateral limits of gasoline hydrocarbon concentrations in soil and groundwater, HFA's Preliminary Groundwater Assessment Report, dated June 25, 2001, recommended that an expanded groundwater investigation be conducted and consist of the installation of three additional groundwater monitoring wells (MW-1 through MW-3) (see Figure3 for the proposed monitoring well locations). The three lateral groundwater monitoring wells will be positioned outside the car~opy so they may be drilled with a conventional dual-walled percussion, air-rotary drill rig with a normal height mask. The wells should be drilled to a dePth of approximately 125 fbg (15 feet below the groundwater surface) and installed with 50 feet of slotted PVC casing to potentially-serve the dual purpose of groundwater monitoring and vapor extraction. Soil samples will be collected at 20-foot intervals during drilling, and selected soil samples will be analyzed for TPH as gasoline using EPA Method 8015 (M) and BTEX and MTBE using EPA Method 8020. The monitoring wells will be constructed with 2-inch-diameter PVC casing and the appropriate filter pack sand installed from the bottom of the soil boring to 3 feet above the slotted interval. Blank PVC casing packed in neat cement grout will extend from the surface downward to the 3-foot bentonite seal placed above the filter pack. Locking, water-tight well covers will be set in concrete to protect and secure the wellheads. Following installation, the monitoring wells will be developed by surging and bailing to remove drilling residues and to produce Iow-turbidity groundwater. Prior to 'sampling, the proposed monitoring wells wiil be purged with a pre-cleaned bailer in order to remove stagnant water in the wells. During purging, key parameters including temperature, conductivity, and pH will be measured with a portable electronic meter and recorded. The purging will continue until the monitored parameters stabilize (usually after 3 casing volumes of groundwater has been removed). Following purging, groundwater samples will be collected with pre-cleaned TeflonTM bailers and discharged with a non-aerating, bottom-emptying device into sterilized glass containers, capped with TeflonTM septa, labeled, and chilled in an ice chest for transport. The proposed monitoring wells will be surveyed relative to the existing monitoring well and a permanent structure, and from a designated point on the northern side of the top of the well HOLGUIN, F~,HA~ & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. John D. Whiting CRWQCB-CVR August 13, 2001 - Page 7 casing, the groundwater level will be measured in the wells to an accuracy of _+0.01 foot. The groundwater samples will be analyzed for TPH as gasoline~ BTEX, MTBE, TBA, DIPE, ETBE, and TAME using EPA Method 8260B. In order to complete the vapor extraction well field installation, HFA recommended that the previously app[oved central, shallow-zone vapor extraction well (VW-ls) be installed as well as central, intermediate-zone vapor extraction well VW-1 i (see Figure 4 for the proposed vapor extraction well locations). Because of the height of the canopy above the drill locations and the requirement to drill through cobbles and boulders, the dual-walled percussion, air rotary LAR will be required. The central, intermediate-zone well (VW-li) will be drilled to a depth of 70 fbg and completed with 30 feet of 4-inch-diameter slotted casing. The central, shallow-zone well will be drilled to a depth of 35 fbg and constructed with 30 feet of 4-inch-diameter slotted casing (see Attachment 4). Soil sampling will not be conducted during well construction since the wells are positioned adjacent to the location of previous soil borings drilled to similar'depths. Because there is no surface location available in the area of the petroleum release for a treatment enclosure, the CAP proposed to use a mobile, self-contained, thermal oxidation VES unit. Because of the significant volume of traffic that passes over the area of the petroleum release, the CAP proposed that the VES unit would be mobilized to the site on a weekly basis and operated only during weekend hours from 8 pm on Friday evenings through 6 am on Monday mornings. The vapor extraction wells will be connected by flexible hoses to a collection manifold, which is connected to the mobile VES unit. Separate valves are provided for each extraction well so that the overall flow rate and extracted hydrocarbon concentrations are maximized. This process of weekend extraction activities will continue until extracted vapor concentrations reach asymptotic levels. The system will then be shut down pending verification soil sampling. The CRWQCB-CVR's case review letter, dated July 23, 2001, approved implementation of the expanded groundwater assessment plan with the 'added conditions that soil samples be. collected and analyzed at a 1 O-foot interval and that all detections of MTBE be confirmed using EPA Method 8260. In addition, quarterly groundwater sample analysis will include 1,2-DCA and EDB by EPA Method 8260 along with the previously proposed TPH as gasoline, BTEX, MTBE, TBA DIPE, ETBE, and TAME; and groundwater samples collected from two no'n-consecutive quarters will be analyzed for general minerals, nitrate, and total Kjeldahl nitrogen. The CRWQCB-CVR's case review letter approved implementation of the VES work plan with the added conditions that a vapor extraction test work plan be provided' to CRWQCB-CVR to determine the extraction well flow rates, and the radius of influence (ROI) within the 'shallow, HOLGUIN, F~A~ & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. John D. Whiting CRWQCB-CVR August 13, 2001 - Page'8 intermediate, and deep zones. In addition, the CRWQCB-CVR is requiring full-time operation of the VES and not the limited weekend operations. This may be accomplished using a mobile treatment system, or the construction of a fixed treatment system connected to the vapor extraction wells by underground piping. The CRWQCB-CVR's case review letter requested that the location of all water wells within 2,500 feet of the site be identified, and the construction details, uses, and operation schedules be provided, along with the identification of any other sensitive receptors within the area. CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN ADDENDUM Upon installation of the vapor extraction well .field and initiation of VES operations at the site, a vapor extraction test will be performed to determine the extraction well flow rates and the ROI within the shallow, intermediate, and deep zones. The vapor extraction test will be conducted using vapor extraction wellsVW-ls, VW-li, andVW-ld as the extraction wells and vapor extraction wells VW-2, VW-3, an;d VW-3, as well as combination vapor extraction and groundwater monitoring wells MW-l, MW-2, and MW-3 as the observation wells. Step tests will be performed by extracting soil vapors at three different vacuums for a duration of approximately 20 minutes. Selected vacuum steps will be approximat.ely one-third of the maximum vacuum achieved by the blower. Flow rates and corresponding wellhead vacuums and subsurface vacuums will be monitored, and the data will be recorded on a vapor extraction test recording log. The results of'the test will be summarized graphically and in tabular form, 'and the information Will be utilized to calculate an ROI for various flow rates and the intrinsic soil permeability of the extracted zone. At the beginning and end oftt~esteptest, vapor samples will be collected in TedlarTM bags from the extraction well and analyzed by a California state-certified laboratory for TPH as gasoline, BTEX, and MTBE. The results will be presented to the CRWQCB-CVR as part of a quarterly progress report. Because there is no surface location available in the area of the petroleum release for a treatment enclosure, the CAP proposed to use a mobile, self-contained, thermal oxidation VES unit. Because of the significant volume of traffic that passes over the area of the petroleum release, the CAP proposed that the VES unit would be mobilized to the site on a .weekly basis and operated only during weekend hours from 8 pm on Friday evenings through 6 am on Monday mornings. The vapor extraction wells would be connected by flexible hoses toa collection manifold, which is c~onnected to the mobile VES unit. The CRWQCB-CVR is requiring full-time operation of the VES and not the limited weekend operations. This may be. HOLGUIN, FtHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. John D. Whiting CRWQCB-CVR August 13, 2001 - Page 9 accomplished using a mobile treatment system, or the construction of a fixed treatment system connected to the vapor extraction wells by underground piping. The use of a mobile treatment system is not feasible because the significant volume of traffic that passes over the area of the petroleum release would require that a portion of the service station would have to be closed throughout the duration of the treatment activities. Therefore, installing a fixed VES unit connected by undergroundpiping is the only available option for full-time operation. However, there is no surface location available in the area of the petroleum release for a treatment enclosure. The only potential alternative is to obtain an access agreement from the owner of the property to the west of the site and position the VES unit on the adjacent property, if Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC, could obtain such an access agreement, that system configuration would result in underground piping runs in excess 'of 100 feet, which would result in decieased extraction flow rates from the wells. While Sullivan's will continue to investigate'the potential to obtain'the access agreement, HFA recommends that the CRWQCB-CVR reconsider whether the 60 hours per week achieved through weekend operation is sufficient when compared to the 168 hours per week achieved from full-time operation. The CRWQCB-CVR's case review letter requested that the location of all water wells within 2,500 feet of the site be identified, and the construction details, uses, and operation schedules be provided, along with the identification of any other sensitive receptors within the area. .HFA will Perform a drive-by reconnaissance and contact CWSC and the California Department of Water Resources to identify the wells and acquire as much of the requested information that is publicly available. The results of the receptor assessment will be reported to the CRWQCB-CVR in a quarterly progress report. HOLGUIN, FAH~& ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. John D.' Whiting CRWQCB-CVR August 13, 2001 - Page 10 Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc., trusts that you will find this Addendum to the Corrective Action Plan to your satisfaction. If you have any qUestions or require additional ir]formation, please contact Mr. Mark Magargee at (661) 391-0517 or at e-mail address Mark_Magargee@hfa.com. Respectfully submitted, Mark R. Magargee, CHG, RG Senior Hydrogeologist Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. MRM:rri Enclosures: Figure 1 Figure 2 - Figure 3 Figure 4 - Figure 5 - Table 1 Table 2 Attachment 1 Site Location Map Plot Plan TPH as Gasoline/Benzene/MTBE Concenfrations in Soil Plot Plan Showing VES VES Schematic Diagram ' Summary of Soil Sample Analytical Results Summary of Groundwater Sample Analytical Results - CRWQCB-CVR Correspondence cc: Mr. Tim Sullivan, Sullivan Petroleum company, LLC Mr. Howard H. Wines, Ill, BFDESD HOLGUIN, F~.~ & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS · -.~....;:.: ~ ' ,' , ~< -- were __ ~~-]~ .... ~~'9~"L~' -,' ' ~ "_ ~ L l IIVI~ ..... ~ ....... 7.~ .... ~ ~ / ~ ~ -- ~ , L .... . '.'- ...... ~.- - ~ee I ~, . II : ~ '- ~ =~ : ~ ' ' ' ' " -" ,, ~ z~,' '-'~ q. o. '- . , Wale ~ ~, o oI ....... r ,.y . .... - . .... -~--~;,~ ...... · ~ I /" ' ¢~ ..... ~ .1~ o , .., · ' ~" ~ " I ~ - -~'"n ' z .... · '/ILK? ,, ~' i: ..~ ,,-'". r r'-'~-'-, - . .7~- ~ ,. ,~,~. , ~~.-~--,- , ~ ',s ....... · , --i--:-- '~ ~. ..... x~ ', ..... ........ ~, . ',' ~ ~, .,~ ,~.,.;~, ~z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~L_l., .. '~i .:~ ,~,, ~.~,;~ )114 ~ ~~q..,ll .~>. ~:.~:..,~..:?~ LEGEND SULLIVAN PETROLEUM COMPANY, LLC O.S 1 MILE ~ DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION o m [ ,m m f .,m m ~ 4 I n o ~,~o ~.~ ~.~ d,~ ~,~¢t~T ~i J] 2317 "L" STREET ~ ~ ~ ~ ; t ] BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA o 0.5 t KILOMETER FIGURE 1 - SITE LOCATION MAP USGS OILDAL~GOSFORD 7.5 MINUTE SERIES QUADRANGLESI HOLGU~, F~ & ASSOC~TES, INC, HOLGUIN, F.~,t~ & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS CAR z MINI MART ...,- La WASH Z 31 LU cc DISPENSER ISLANDS n- F- LU Q.. O B-4 cANoPY__~. EX TORY TRENCH I~ VW-2 LOCATION -ld z B-3 B.2 [ VW-3 GASOLINE UST DISPENSER ISLANDS 201000~GALLON, l[] o o [] ]~ SPLIT-CHAMBERED, GASOLINE UST VW-4 B-5 /ff APPROACH ~ PLANTER SIDEWALK 23RD STREET SCALE IN FEET 0 15 30 LEGEND SULLIVAN PETROLEUM COMPANY, LLC ,~ SOIL BORING DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION GROUNDWATER · [] FILL END 2317 "L" STREET ~ MONITORINGNAPOR EXTRACTION o TURBINE END BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA WELL (~) VAPOR EXTRACTION WELL FIGURE 2 - PLOT PLAN HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. REVISION DATE: JUNE 25, 2001: RRI HOLGUIN, F,~.~I & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS B-4 50-- 23 6 , 10 - - ND/ND/O.023 65- - 5.7/ND/14 , 20- - N~)/ND/0.19 NI~/ND/3.5 - -/~,370/9.3/87 ' 40- - N /ND/3.7 B-3 ~L'~d ' io 15 6,300/0.3/3 J 15 - 4,600/0.82/2 ! 5~ -- 26,000~ 64/1,400 B-5 10 - -- 6,500/28/76 '~' 15 - - 7,000/26/85 '~' 22-- ND/ND/0.48 ~' x/~ ~ 10 - -ND/ND/ND 25 - -- ND/ND/0.33 20- -ND/ND/0.15 30-- ND/ND/3.1 J ' ' 35-- ND/ND/2.6 40 - --ND/0.12/11 40 - - ND/ND/3.2 45-- ND/0.0062/5.2 23RD STREET SCALE IN. FEET 0 15 30 LEGEND SULLIVAN PETROLEUM COMPANY, LLC )~, SOIL BORING ND NOT DETECTED DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION GROUNDWATER [] FILL END 2317 "L" STREET · ~P~ MONITORING/VAPOR EXTRACTION WELL o TURBINE END BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA _L#/#/# TPH AS GASOLINE/BENZENE/MTBE FIGURE 3 - TPH AS GASOLINE/BENZENE/MTBE CONCENTRATIONS IN SOIL (pgA) CONCENTRATIONS IN SOIL #_L DEPTH OF SAMPLE (fbg) HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. REVISION DATE: JUNE 25, 2001: RRI HOLGUIN, FiHA~ & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS I-- MW-2 MW-$ B-5 VW-4 23RD STREET SCALE IN FEET 0 15 30 LEGEND SULLIVAN PETROLEUM COMPANY, LLC SOIL BORING DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION GROUNDWATER ~ FILL END 2317 "L" STREET MONITORINGNAPOR EXTRACTION o TURBINE END BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA WELL VAPOR EXTRACTION WELL FIGURE 4 - PLOT P~N SHOWING VES ~O~N, ~ ~ ~SSOC~, INC. PROPOSED MONITORING WELL LOCATION REVISION DATE: JUNE 25, 2001: RRI HOLGUIN, Fame& ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS VW-1 VW-li VW-ld VW-2 VW-3 VW-4 -X -X -X - '~: : 7:. ~!~ ~ -'~:,:.:-~. :~:' ::::~.~.~?~:: ?~.., ~: ~ INFLUENT MONITORING POINT BLOWER WITH SILENCER ATMOSPHERE EFFLUENT MONITORING POINTs- I THERMAL/CATALYTIC' SUPPLEMENTAL FUEL NOT TO SCALE LEGEND SULLIVAN PETROLEUM COMPANY, LLC PRESSURE OR VACUUM GAUGE VALVE FLOW GAUGE SAMPLE TAP DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION 2317 "L" STREET BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA FIGURE 5 - VES SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM HOLGUIN, FAHAN '& ASSOCIATES, INC. REVISION DATE: JUNE 25, 2000: RRl:jet HOLGUIN, FAIt~ & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF SOIL SAMPLE ANALYTICAL RESULTS DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION, BAKERSFIELD,*CALIFORNIA SAMPLE DATE TPH AS ETHYL- TOTAL SOURCE SAMPLED DEPTH SAMPLE ID GASOLINE BENZENE TOLUENE BENZENE XYLENES MTBE REF (fbg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) EPA ANALYTICAL METHOD 8015 (M) 8020 N/A REPORTING LIMIT VARIES-SEE LABORATORY REPORTS N/A SC-1 15-10-991 5 I SC-1-5 26,000 64 1,7001 3201 2,900 1,400 A B-1 8-17-99 10 B-1-10 6,500 28 230 85 430 76 B 8-17-99 15 B-1-15 7,000 26 250 94 430 85 B 9-26-99 22 B-1-22 ND ND ND ND ND 0.48 B 9-26-99 25 B-1-25 ND ND ND ND ND 0.33 B 9-26-99 30 B-1-30 ND ND 0.041 ND 0.094 3.1 B 9-26-99 35 B-1-35 ND ND 0.011 ND ND 2.6 B 9-26-99 40 B-1-40 ND ND 0.0099 ND 0.022 3.2 B 9-26-99 45 B-1-45 ND 0.0062 0.018 ND ND 5.2 B B-2 8-17-99 5 B-2-5 19,000 50 1,000 260 1,400 220 B 8-17-99 15 B-2-15 4,600 0.82 150 73 410 2 B B-3 8-17-99 5 B-3-5 6,ND300 0.014 0.21 0.085 0.72 3.8 B 8-17-99 15 B-3-15 0.3 150 81 740 3 B B-4 9-26-99 10 B-4-10 ND ND ND ND ND 0.023 B 9-26-99 20 B-4-20 ND ND ND ND ND 0.19 B 9-26-99' 30 B-4-30 ND ND 0.012 ND 0.023 3.5 B 9-26-99 40 B-4-40 ND ND 0.0065 ND ND 3.7 B B-5 9-26-99 10 B-5-10 'ND ND ND ND ND ND B 9-26-99 20 B-5-20 ND ND ND ND ND 0.15 B 9-26-99 30 B-5-30 ND ND 0.007 ND ND 1.3 B 9-26-99 40 B-5-40 ND 0.12 0.51 0.032 0.16 11 B VVV-ld 2-1-01 50 VVV-ld-50 250 ND 0.12 ' 0.032 0.25 3.6 C 2-1-01 65 VVV-1d-65 5.7 ND ND ND ND 14 C 2-1-01 80 VVV-ld-80 ND ND ND ND ND 115 C 2-2-01 100 VW-ld~100 2,300 9.3 210 41 260 87 C REF = Report reference. N/A = Not applicable. ND = Not detected. A = A.J. Environmental, Inc.'s, report dated May 1999. B = Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc.'s (HFA's) report dated November 17, 1999. C = HFA's report dated June 25, 2001. TABLE 2. SUMMARY OF GROUNDWATER SAMPLE ANALYTICAL RESULTS DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION, BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA DEPTH TO FLOATING GROUND- WELL ID AND DATE GROUND- PRODUCT WATER TPH AS ETHYL- TOTAL ELEVATION* SAMPLED WATER THICKNESS ELEVATION GASOLINE BENZENE TOLUENE BENZENE XYLENES MTBE TBA DIPE ETBE TAME REF (feet-MSL) (fbg) (feet) (feet-MSL) (pg/I) (~Jg/I) (l~g/I) (pg/I) (l~g/I) (pg/I) (pg/I) (l~g/I) (~Jg/I) (l~g/I) EPA ANALYTICAL METHOD I 8015 (M) 8260B N/A CCR TITLE 22 DRINKING WATER MCL I ** I 1{ 100/ 6801 1'7501 131 ** I ** I ** I ** N/A REPORTING LIMIT I VARIES-SEE LABORATORY REPORTS N/A VW-ld 0.00 8,500 ND 404.00 3-14-01 107.43 296.57 2,400 5,200 1,200 120,000 ND ND ND A TRIP BLANKI 3-14-01 I N/A N/Al N/A -- I ND ND ND NDI ND ' ..... I -- A REF = Report reference. N/A = Not applicable. ND = Not detected. -- = Not analyzed. *Measured to the top of the well casing. **No CCR Title 22 MCL established. A = Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc.'s, report dated June 25, 2001. HOLGUIN, F,a.I-i~ & ASSOCIATES, INC. · ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS ATTACHMENT 1. CRWQCB-CVR CORRESPONDENCE Winston H. Hickox Secretary for Environmental Protection California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region Fresno Branch Office Internet Address: http:llwww.swrcb.ca.govl-rwqcb5 3614 East Ashlan Avenue, Fresno, California 93726 Phone (559) 445-5116 · FAX (559) 445-5910 Gray Davis Governor 23 July 2001 Mr. Tim Sullivan Sullivan's Petroleum Company, LLC P.O. Box 5007 Bakersfield, California 93308 UNDERGROUND TANK RELEASE, DOWNTOWN CHEVRON STATION, 2317 '%" STREET, BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY In a letter dated 28 June 2001, the City of Bakersfield Fire Department (CBFD} referred the subject case to our agency for regulatory oversight. It also provided us with information that indicates gasoline leaked at the subject facility and degraded soil and groundwater. We have reviewed Preliminary Groundwater Assessment Report (Report) dated 25 June 2001. and prepared by Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc., Bakersfield (I-IFA) and other documents provided by' the CBFD. The lateral extent of impacted soil and groundwater has not been determined. Methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE), a gasoline oxygenate additive, has been detected at a high concentration in groundwater beneath the site. MTBE does not readily degrade in most subsurface environments, is soluble, and therefore is usually transported greater distances in groundwater than other gasoline constituents. We requi~e that remediation by soil vaPor extraction (SVE), utilizing the existing SVE wells onsite, be expedited to prevent the further migration and spread of MTBE and other gasoline range petroleum constituents to groundwater. We approve the proposed installation and sampling of groundwater monitoring wells. Summaries of the project, the Report, and our Comments follow. Summary of the Pr°iect The CBFD provided copies of the Report, Corrective Action Plan (CAP) dated 12 April 2000, and Preliminary Site Assessment Report (Preliminary Report) dated 17 November 1999. The Report, CAP · and Preliminary Report were prepared by HFA. The site was reconstructed as a convenience store with retail fuel sales and reopened during early 1999. Gasoline is dispensed from six dispensers and is stored in one split-chambered 20,000-gallon underground storage tank (UST) and one 10,000-gallon UST in the southeast portion of the site.' The depth to groundwater is approximately 1 I0 feet below ground surface (bgs), and groundwater flow is to the southwest away from the Kern River, based on information published by the Kern County Water Agency and cited in the Report. An examination of product reconciliation records for April 1999 suggested a potential fuel release of at least 400 gallons from product piping connecting the premium grade UST to the southeastern dispenser. Investigation revealed cuts in the inner flexible and outer containment product piping. Total petroleum California Environmental Protection Agency ~ Rec~,cled Paper Mr. Tim Sullivan 2 23 July 2001 hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPH-g), and the gasoline constituents benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes, and MTBE (BTEX & MTBE) were detected by laboratory analysis of a soil sample collected beneath the piping at a depth of 5 feet bgs during May 1999 by AJ Environmental (AJE), Bakersfield. Based on the analytical results of the AJE investigation, the BCD required further investigation to determine the vertical and lateral extent of impacted soils by a letter dated 21 June 1999. The additional investigation was performed by HFA on 17 August 1999' and 26 September 1999. Five soil borings (B-1 through B-5) were drilled and sampled. Boring B-1 was drilled within the apparent release source area. The remaining borings were drilled to dete}mine lateral extent. Borings B-1, B-4 and B-5 reached depths of approximately 45 to 50 feet bsg prior to refusal. 'Borings B-2 and B-3 reached approximately 20 feet bgs prior to refusal. Refusal was caused by layers of cobbles and boulders present at depths of approximately 18.5 to 22.5 feet bgs and 37.5 to 48 feet bgs in the predominant well-graded sands. TPH-g concentrations ranging from 6,500 to 26,000 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) were detected in samples collected to 15 feet bgs in B-1. TPH-g was not detected below 15 feet bgs. MTBE concentrations ranging from 0.33 to 1,400 mg/kg were detected in B1 to a depth of 45 feet bgs. TPH-g concentrations up to 19,000 mg/kg and. MTBE concentrations up to 220 mg/kg were detected in B-2, west of the USTs and dispensers, and in B-3, west of the USTs and dispensers. TPH-g was not detected in B-4 and B-5, west and south of the dispensers, respectively. MTBE was detected in all samples analyzed from B-4 and B-5 at concentrations ranging from 0.023 to 11 mg/kg. The BCFD required the preparation of a cAP by a letter dated 29 December 1999. HFA prepared the CAP dated 12 April 2000, which'was subsequently approved by the BCFD. HFA estimated that a total volume of 4,700 cubic yards of soils was impacted and that a total weight of 5,580 pounds (900 gallons) of adsorbed hydrocarbons was present in site soils. SVE was the most feasible corrective action alternative determined in the CAP. The CAP proposed the installation of one deep central SVE well, one intermediate central SVE.well, one shallow central SVE well, and three shallow lateral zone SVE wells. HFA also proposed that the deep central well be sampled to determine the vertical extent of impacted soils. HFA proposed to operate the remediation system on weekends using a mobile VES unit due to the lack of surface area onsite for construction of a remediation compound and the high volume of traffic passing over the site. The BCFD approved the CAP by a letter dated 25 April 2000. Summary of the Report I-IFA drilled four soil borings during January and February 2001. Boring VW-ld, the central boring, was completed as a combination SVE and groundwater monitoring well screened continuously 70 to 125 feet bgs. The three lateral borings, VW-2 through VW-4, were completed as SVE wells screened from approximately 5 to 45 feet bgs. Soil samples were collected from boring VW-ld at depths of 50, 65, 80, and 100 feet bgs to determine the vertical extent of impacted soils.. Soil samples were not collected from VW-2 through VW-4 due to their proximity to previously sampled soil borings. The soil samples collected from boring VW 1-d were analyzed for TPH-g by EPA Method 8015M and BTEX & MTBE by EPA Method 8020. TPH-g was detected at 250 mg/kg at a depth of 50 feet bgs. TPH-g was detected at 5.7 rog/kg and was not detected in the samples from 65 and 80 feet bgs, respectively. A TPH-g concentration of 2,300 rog/kg and a benzene concentration of 9.3 mg/kg were detected in the deepest sample, collected from 100 feet bgs. MTBE was detected in all the soil samples. The highest MTBE concentration, 87 mg/kg, was detected at 100 feet bgs. Groundwater was encountered in the boring at 110 feet bgs. U:\UGTODW_filesX2000-2001 Correspondence\City of Bakersfield Cases\Dwmwn Chevron 1st La' 7-01 .doc Mr. Tim Sullivan - 3 - 23 July 2001 Groundwater monitoring well VW-td was developed and sampled during March 2001. The depth to groundwater was measured at 107.43 feet bgs. The Chain-of-Custody documentation included in the report indicates that the groundwater sample collected from VW-ld was analyzed for TPH-g by EPA Method 8015M and BTEX, tert-butyl alcohol (TBA), MTBE, di-isopropyl ether (DIPE), ethyl tert-butyl ether (ETBE), tert-amyl methyl ether (TAME) by EPA Method 8260. Benzene was detected at 2,400 micrograms per liter (gg/L). MTBE was detected at 120,000 gg/L. TBA, DIPE, ETBE, and TAME were not detected. The analytical report for TPH-g was not included in the Report. HFA concluded that the BCFD would be likely to require further investigation of the lateral extent of impacted soil and groundwater and would require soil remediation by SVE. HFA recommends that further installation of the extenf of impacted soils and groundwater and the proposed SVE remediation be conducted. HFA recommends installation of three dual-purpose groundwater .monitoring/SVE wells (MW-1 through MW-3) screened from 70 to 125 feet bgs. MW-1 woUld be within City of Bakersfield right of way, in the sidewalk along "L" Street, east of the USTs and dispensers. MW-2 and MW-3 would be onsite, northwest and southwest of the dispensers, respectively. Soil samples would be collected from the borings at 20-foot intervals and would be analyzed for TPH-g by EPA Method 8015M, and BTEX & ' MTBE by EPA Method 8020. The monitoring wells would be developed and sampled. Groundwater samples would be analYZed for TPH-g by EPA Method 8015M, and BTEX, MTBE, TBA, DIPE, ETBE, and TAME by EPA Method 8260B. HFA also recommends'to installation of the shallow central SVE well previously proposed in the CAP (VW-1S) and one additional central SVE well of intermediate depth (VW-II). VW-IS would be screened from 5 to 35 feet bgs. VW-1I would be screened from 40 to 70 feet bgs. Soil samples would not be collected from the wells due to the proximity of other sampled borings. A mobile thermal oxidation VES unit would be deployed to the site and operated on weekend hours, as. proposed in the CAP. According to the referral letter prepared by the BCFD, California Water Servi~:e (CWS) Well Station #7 is located within 1,000 feet of the site, in the expected downgradient direction of groundwater flow. The BCFD advised the CWS of the release and requested that th~iy monitor and ensure that water quality is maintained in their distribution system by a letter dated 28 June 2001. Comments Based on review of the above-summarized reports, we have the following comments: Gasoline range petroleum constituents, including MTBE have migrated through the permeable sandy/gravelly site soils and have been detected in groundwater beneath the former USTs. MTBE has been detected in groundwater at a concentration of 120,000 gg/L. MTBE may be transported in groundwater greater distances away from the release source than other gasoline constituents because it is soluble and does not readily degrade. A municipal water supply well is within 1,000 feet of the site in the expected downgradient flow direction. The extent of petroleum constituents in groundwater has not been defined. We require that you expedite soil remediation by SVE to minimize the migration and spread of gasoline and MTBE in site soils and groundwater and possible impacts to the municipal well. U:\UGT~JDW_files~000-2001 Correspondence\City of Bakersfield Cas6s\Dwntwn Chevron I st Ltr 7-01 .doc Mr. Tim Sullivan -4- 23 July 2001 We approve operation of the proposed SVE system and installation of the central shallow and intermediate SVE wells (VW-1S and VW-1I). After system startup, a vacuum influence test should be conducted to determine the extraction well airflow rates and the radius of effective vacuum influence of the shallow, intermediate, and deep screened intervals. Please submit a brief letter describing the proposed vacuum influence test procedures by 17 September 2001. We do not approve the limited (weeked) SVE system operation schedule prOposed. We require that the remediation system be operated 24 hours per day 7 dayg per week. Final system operation may be implemented by a mobile SVE unit operated serially at each sV~ well, or by a dedicated remediation compound with subsurface piping connecting to the SVE wells. Please submit a brief CAP addendum proposing the final SVE operation strategy and operation schedule by 17 September 2001. We approve installation of dual-purpose groundwater monitoring/SVE wells MW- 1 through MW-3. Soil samples should be collected at 10-foot intervals in the borings. Soil samples should be analyzed for TPH-d by EPA Method 8015M, and BTEX and MTBE. Detected concentrations of MTBE should be confirmed by EPA Method 8260. We require quarterly groundwater monitoring. Groundwater samples should be analyzed for TPH-g by EPA Method 8015M, and BTEX, 1,2-DCA, EDB,.MTBE, TAME, DIPE, ETBE, and TBA by EPA Method 8260. In addition to the COCs, we require that you sample groundwater for general minerals, nitrate, and total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) during two nonconsecutive quarterly sampling events (minimum of six months between sampling events). It is not necessary to sample all monitoring wells for these constituents during these sampling events; a minimum of three wells, including at least one upgradient well, should be sufficient. Please submit a report describing the 'monitoring well installations and the results of the initial groundwater monitoring event by 1 October 2001. We require that further investigation to identify water wells in the site vicinity be conducted. A drive-by reconnaissance, discussion with California Water Service and other local water purveyors, and examination of well completion records available from the California Department of Water Resources should identify water wells within 2,500 feet of the site. Construction details, uses and operation schedules of identified wells and discussion of other sensitive receptors in the area should be included. Please provide this information by 17 September 2001. Identification of Other Responsible Party Notification If you have evidence to support identification of other potentially responsible parties for degradation at this site, we request that you identify them now by providing such evidence so they may be notified of the potential responsibility. Evidence should include the beginning and ending dates and type of involvement, the names and current addresses of all potentially responsible parties, and copies of any documents that would verify the terms and conditions of involvement. ' U:\UGTODW_fiIe.,;\2000-2001 Correspondence\City of Bakersfield Cases\Dwntwn Chevron 1st Ltr 7-01 .doc Mr. Tim Sullivan - 5 - 23 July 2001 Please contact this office at least 72 hours prior to fieldwork. correspondence, please contact me at (559) 445-5504. Assoc. Engineering Geologist RG No. 5951 ff you have any questions regarding this CC; Mr. Howard Wines Ill, City of Bakersfield Fire Department, Bakersfield Ms. Sandy Gill, SWRCB, UST Cleanup Fund, Sacramento Mr..Robert E. Tomstrom, President, Service Station Holdin~LC Mr. Mark Magargee, Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Bakersfield",,o U:\UGTODW_fites~000-2001 Correspondence\City of Bakersfield Case.s\Dwntwn Chevron ist Ltr 7-01.doc California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region Winston H. Hickox Fresno Branch Office Secretary,[br lnternet Address: http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/~rwqcb5 Environmental 3614'East Ashlan Avenue, Fresno, California 93726 Protection Phone (559) 445-5116 · FAX (559) 445-5910 Gray Davis Governor 23 July 2001 Mr. Tim Sullivan Sullivan's Petroleum Company, LLC P.O. Box 5007 Bakersfield, California 93308 UNDERGROUND TANK RELEASE, DOWNTOWN CHEVRON STATION, 2317 "L " STREET, BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY In a letter dated 28 June 2001, the City of Bakersfield Fire Department (CBFD) referred the subject case to our agency for regulatory oversight. It also Provided us with information that indicates gasoline leaked at the subject facility and degraded soil and groundwater. We have reviewed Preliminary Groundwater Assessment Report (Report) dated 25 June 2001 and prepared by Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc., Bakersfield (HFA) and other documents provided by the CBFD. The lateral extent of impacted soil and groundwater has not been determined. Methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE), a gasoline oxygenate additive, has been detected at a high concentration in groundwater beneath the site. MTBE does not readily degrade in most subsurface environments, is soluble, and.therefore is usually transported greater distances in groundwater than other gasoline constituents. We require that remediation by soil vapor extraction (SVE), utilizing the existing SVE wells onsite, be expedited to prevent the further migration and spread of MTBE and other gasoline range petroleum constituents to groundwater. We approve the proposed installation and sampling of groundwater monitoring wells. Summaries of the project, the Report, and our Comments follow. Summary of the Project The CBFD provided copies of the Report, Corrective Action Plan (CAP) dated 12 April 2000, and Preliminary Site Assessment Report (Preliminary Report) dated 17 November 1999. The Report, CAP and Preliminary Report were prepared by HFA. The site was reconstructed as a convenience store with retail fuel sales and reopened during early 1999. Gasoline is dispensed from six dispensers and is stored in one split-chambered 20,000-gallon underground storage tank (UST) and one 10,000-gallon UST in the southeast portion of the site. The depth to groundwater is approximately 110 feet below ground surface (bgs), and groundwater flow is to the southwest away from the Kern River, based on information published by the Kern County Water Agency and cited in the Report. An examination of product reconciliation records for April 1999 suggested a potential fuel release of at least 400 gallons from product piping connecting the premium grade UST to the southeastern dispenser. Investigation revealed cuts in the inner flexible and outer containment product piping.' Total petroleum California Environmental Protection Agency ~ Recycled Paper Mr. Tim Sullivan - 2 - 23 July 2001 hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPH-g), and the gasoline constituents benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes, and MTBE (BTEX & MTBE) were detected by laboratory analysis of a soil sample collected beneath the piping at a depth of 5 feet bgs during May 1999 by AJ Environmental (AJE), Bakersfield. Based on the analytical results of the AJE investigation, the BCFD required further investigation to determine the vertical and lateral extent of impacted soils by a letter dated 21 June 1999. The additional investigation was performed by HFA on 17 August 1999 and 26 September 1999. Five soil borings (B-1 through B-5) were drilled and sampled. Boring B-1 was drilled within the apparent release source area. The remaining borings were drilled to detei:mine lateral extent. Borings B-1, B-4 and B-5 reached depths of approximately 45 to 50 feet bsg prior to refusal. Borings B-2 and B-3 reached approximately 20 feet bgs prior to refusal. Refusal was caused by layers of cobbles and boulders present at depths of approximately 18.5 to 22.5 feet bgs and 37.5 to 48 feet bgs in the predominant well-graded sands. TPH-g concentrations ranging from 6,500 to 26,000 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) were 'detected in samples collected to 15 feet bgs in B-1. TPH-g was not detected below 15 feet bgs. MTBE concentrations ranging from 0.33 to 1,400 mg/kg were detected in B 1 to a depth of 45 feet bgs. TPH-g concentrations up to 19,000 mg/kg and MTBE concentrations up to 220 mg/kg were detected in B-2, west of the USTs and dispensers, and in B-3, west of the USTs and dispensers. TPH-g was not detected in B-4 and B-5, west and south of the dispensers, respectively. MTBE was detected in all samples analyzed from B-4 and B-5 at concentrations ranging from 0.023 to 11 mg/kg. The BCFD required the preparation of a CAP by a letter dated 29 December 1999. HFA prepared the CAP dated 12 April 2000,- which was subsequently approved by the BCFD. HFA estimated that a total volume of 4,700 cubic yards of soils was impacted and that a total weight of 5,580 pounds (900 gallons) of adsorbed hydrocarbons was present in site soils. SVE was the most feasible corrective action alternative determined in the CAP. The CAP proposed the installation of one deep central SVE well, one intermediate central SVE well, one shallow central SVE well, and three shallow lateral zone SVE wells. HFA also proposed that the deep central well be sampled to determine the vertical extent of impacted soils. HFA proposed to operate the remediation system on weekends using a mobile VES unit due to the lack of surface area onsite for construction of a remediation compound and the high volume of traffic passing over the site. The BCFD approved the CAP by a letter dated 25 April 2000. Summary of the Report HFA drilled four soil borings during January and February 2001. Boring VW-ld, the central boring, was completed as a combination SVE and groundwater monitoring well screened continuously 70 to 125 feet bgs. The three lateral.borings, VW-2 through VW-4, were completed as SVE wells screened from approximately 5 to 45 feet bgs. Soil samples were collected from boring VW-ld at depths of 50, 65, 80, and 100 feet bgs to determine the vertical extent of impacted soils. Soil samples were not collected from VW-2 through VW-4 due to their proximity to previously sampled soil borings. The soil samples collected from boring VWl-d were analyzed for TPH-g by EPA Method 8015M and BTEX & MTBE by EPA Method 8020. TPH-g was detected at 250 mg/kg at a depth of 50 feet bgs. TPH-g was detected at 5.7 mg/kg and was not detected in the samples from 65 and 80 feet bgs, respectively. A TPH-g concentration of 2,300 mg/kg and a benzene concentration of 9.3 mg/kg were detected in the deepest sample, collected from 100 feet bgs. MTBE was detected in alt the soil samples. The highest MTBE concentration, 87 mg/kg, was detected at 100 feet bgs. Groundwater was encountered in the boring at 110 feet bgs. U:\UGTMDW_files\2000-2001 Correspondence\City of Bakersfield Cases\Dwntwn Chevron 1st Ltr 7-0l.doc Mr. Tim Sullivan - 3 - 23 July 2001 Groundwater monitoring well VW-ld was developed and sampled during March 2001. The depth to groundwater was measured at 107.43 feet bgs. The Chain-of-CustOdy documentation included in the report indicates that the groundwater sample collected from VW-1 d was analyzed for TPH-g by EPA Method 8015M and BTEX, tert-butyl alcohol (TBA), MTBE, di-isopropyl ether (DIPE), ethyl tert-butyl ether (ETBE), tert-amyl methyl ether (TAME) by EPA Method 8260. Benzene was detected at 2,400' micrograms per liter ([tg/L). MTBE was detected at 120,000 ggFL. TBA, DIPE, ETBE, and TAME were not detected. The analytical report for TPH-g was not included in the Report. HFA concluded that the BCFD would be likely to require further investigation of the lateral extent of impacted soil and groundwater and would require soil remediation by SVE. HFA recommends that further installation of the extent of impacted soils and groundwater and the proposed SVE remediation be conducted. HFA recommends installation of three dual-purpose groundwater monitoring/SVE wells (MW-1 through MW-3) screened from 70 to 125 feet bgs. MW-1 would be within City of Bakersfield right of way, in the sidewalk along "L" Street, east of the USTs and dispensers. MW-2 and MW-3 would be onsite, northwest and southwest of the dispensers, respectively. Soil samples would be collected from the borings at 20-foot intervals and would be analyzed for TPH-g by EPA Method 8015M, and BTEX & MTBE by EPA Method 8020. The monitoring wells would be developed and sampled. Groundwater samples would be analyzed for TPH-g by EPA Method 8015M, and BTEX, MTBE, TBA, DIPE, ETBE, and TAME by EPA Method 8260B. HFA also recommends to installation of the shallow central SVE well previously proposed in the CAP (VW-IS) and one additional central SVE well of intermediate depth (VW-II). VW-1S would be scr.,eened from 5 to 35 feet bgs. VW-1I would be screened from 40 to 70 feet bgs. Soil samples would not be collected from the wells due to the proximity of other sampled.borings. A mobile thermal oxidation VES unit would be deployed' to the site and operated on weekend hours, as Proposed in the CAP. According to the referral letter prepared by the BCFD, California Water Service (CWS) Well Station #7 is located within 1,000 feet of the site, in the expected downgradient direction of groundwater flow. The BCFD advised the CWS of the release and requested that thdy monitOr and ensure that water quality is maintained in their distribution system by a letter dated 28 June 2001. Comments Based on review of the above-summarized reports, we have the following comments: Gasoline range petroleum constituents, including MTBE have migrated through the permeable sandy/gravelly site soils and have been detected in groundwater beneath the former USTs. MTBE has been detected in groundwater at a concentration of 120,000 ~tg/L. MTBE may be transported in groundwater greater distances away from the release source than other gasoline constituents because it is soluble and does not.readily degrade. A municipal water supply well is within 1,000 feet of the site in the expected downgradient flow direction. The extent of petroleum constituents in groundwater has not been defined. We require that you expedite soil remediation by SVE to minimize the migration and spread of gasoline and MTBE in site soils and groundwater and possible impacts to the municipal well. U:\UGTUDW_filesL2000-2001 Correspondence\City of Bakersfield Cases\Dwntwn Chevron 1st Lrr 7-01 .doc Mr.' Tim Sullivan - 4 - 23 July 2001 We approve operation of the proposed SVE system and installation of the central shallow and intermediate SVE wells (VW-1S and VW-II). After system startup, a vacuum influence test should be conducted to determine the extraction well airflow rates and the radius of effective vacuum influence of the shallow, intermediate, and deep screened ~ntervals. Please submit a brief letter describing the proposed vacuum influence test procedures by 17 September 2001. We do not approve the limited (weeked) SVE system operation schedule proposed. We require that the remediation system be operated 24 hours per day 7 days per week. Final system operation may be- implemented by a mobile SVE unit operated serially at each SVE well, or by a dedicated remediation compound with subsurface piping connecting to the SVE wells. Please submit a brief CAP addendum proposing the final SVE operation strategy and operation schedule by 17 September 2001. We approve installation of dual-purpose groundwater monitoring/SVE wells MW-1 through MW-3. Soil samples should be collectdd at 10-foot intervals in the borings. Soil samples should be analyzed for TPH-d by EPA Method 8015M, and BTEX and MTBE. Detected concentrations of MTBE should be confirmed by EPA Method 8260. We require quarterly groundwater monitoring. Groundwater samples should be analyzed for TPH-g by EPA Method 8015M, and BTEX, 1,2-DCA, EDB, MTBE, TAME, DIPE, ETBE, and TBA by EPA Method 8260. In addition to the COCs, we require that you sample groundwater for general minerals, nitrate, and total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) during tw, o nonconsecutive quarterly sampling events (minimum of six months between sampling events). It is not necessary to sample all monitoring wells for these constituents during these sampling events; a minimum of three wells, including at least one upgradient well, should be sufficient. Please submit a report describing the monitoring well installations and the results of the initial groundwater monitoring event by 1 October 2001. We require that further investigation to identify water wells in the site vicinity be conducted. A drive-by reconnaissance, discussion with California Water Service and other local water purveyors, and examination of well completion records available from the California Department of Water Resources should identify water wells within 2,500 feet of the site. Construction details, uses and operation schedules of identified wells and discussion of other sensitive receptors in the area should be included. Please provide this information by 17 September 2001. Identification of Other Responsible Party Notification If you have evidence to support identification of other potentially responsible parties for degradation at this site, we request that you identify them now by providing such evidence so they may be notified of the potential responsibility. Evidence should include the beginning and ending dates and type of involvement, the names and current addresses of all potentially responsible parties, and copies of any documents that would verify the terms and conditions of involvement. U:\UGTUDW_files\2000-2001 Correspondence\City of Bakersfield Cases\Dwntwn Chevron 1st Ltr 7-01.doc ~JMr. Tim Sullivan 23 July 2001 Please contact this office at least 72 hours prior to fieldwork. correspondence, please contact me at (559) 445-5504. _ ~hitin~ng' Assoc. Engineering Geologist RG No. 5951 If you have any questions regarding this cc: Mr. Howard Wines m, City of Bakersfield Fire Department, Bake~ Ms. Sandy Gill, SWRCB, UST Cleanup Fund, Sacramento Mr. Robert E. Tornstrom, President, Service Station Holdings LLC Mr. Mark Magargee, Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Bakersfield U:\UGTODW_files\2000-2001 Correspondence\City of Bakersfield Cases\Dwntwn Chevron ist La' 7-01.doc Sent By: CALIFORNIA RWQCB FRESNO; 559 445 5910; Jui-23-01 14:22; Page 1/5 California RegionalcentralWatervalleyQualitYRegion Control Board illll01 . Illllll I Illlll II Wil~ton H. Hickox Fresno Branch Office Sgc~etary for Interne! Address: http:/Iwww.swrcb.ca.govl~rwqcb$ Environmental 3614 East Azh~an Avcnuc,-FIcano, California 93726 Prot~cl~ott Phone (559) 445-5116 · FAX (559) 445-591 o. Gray Davis 23 July 2001 Mr. Tim Sullivan Sullivan's Petroleum Company, P.O. Box 5007 Bakersfield. California 93308 POSt-It'" brand fax !ra. smitta, memo 7671 [#of ~,.... "~'- UNDERGROUND TANK RELEASE. DOWNTOWN CHEVRON STATION. 2317 "L" STREET. BAKERSFIELD. KERN COUNTY In a letter dated 2g June 2001, the City of Bakersfield Fire Department (CBFD) referred the subject case to our agency for regulatory oversight. It also provided us with intbrmation that indicates gasoline leaked at the subject t:acility and degraded soil and groundwaIer. We have reviewed Preliminary Groundwater Assessment Report (Report) dated 25 June 2001 and prepared by HOlguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc., Bakersfield (HFA) and other documents provided by the CBFD. The later',d extent impacted soil and groundwater has not been determined. Methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE), a gasoline oxygenate additive, has been detected at a high concentration in groundwater beneath the site. MTBE does not readily degrade in most subsurface environments, is soluble, and therefore is usually transported greater distances in groundwater than other gasoline constituents. We require that 'remediation by soil vapor extraction (SVE), utilizing the existing SVE wells onsite, be expedited to prevent the further migration and spread of MTBE and other gasoline range petroleum constituents to groundwater. We approve the proposed installation and sampling of groundwater monitoring wells. Summaries of the project, the Rcl~rt, and our Comments follow. of the Project The CBFD provided copies of the Report, Corrective Action Plan (CAP) dated 12 April 2000, trod Preliminary Site Assessment Report (Preliminary Report) dated 17 November 1999. The Report, CAP and Preliminary Report were prepared by HFA. The site was reconstructed as a convenience store with retail fuel sales and reopened during early 1999. Gasoline is dispensed from six dispensers and is stored in one split-chambered 20,000-gallon underground storage tank. (UST) and one I0,O00-gallon UST in the southeast portion of the site. The depth to groundwater is approximately 110 feet below ground surface (bgs), and groundwater flow is to the southwest away from the Kern River, based on information · published by the Kern County Water Agency and cited in the Report. An examination of product reconciliation records tbr April 1999 suggested a potential fuel release of at least 400 gallons from product piping connecting the premium grade UST to the southeastern dispenser. Itivestigation revealed cots in the inner flexible and outer containment product piping. Total petmteum California Environmental Protection Agency ~ l~Cyclcd Pal~er Sent By: CALIFORNIA RWQCB FRESNO; 559 445 5910; Ju1-23-01 14:23; Page 2/5 · ~ Mr. Tim Sullivan - 2 - 23 July 2001 hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPH-g), and the gasoline constituents benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes, and MTBE (BTEX & MTBE) were detected by laboratory analysis of a soil sample collected beneath, the piping at a depth of 5 feet bgs during May 1999 by AJ Environmental (AJE), Bakersfield. Based on the analytical results of the AJE investigation, the BCFD required further .investigation to determine the vertical and lateral extent of impacted soils 'by a letter dated 21 lune 1999. The additional investigation was performed by HFA on 17 August 1999 and 26 September 1999, Five soil borings (B-1 through B-5) were drilled and sampled. Boring B-I was drilled within the apparent release source area. The remaining borings were drilled to dctermine lateral extent. Borings B-t, B-4 and B-5 .reached depths of approximatcly 45 to 50 feet bsg prior t° refusal. Borings B-2 and B-3 reached approximately 20 feet bgs prior to refusal. Refusal was caused by layers of cobbles and boulders present at depths of approximately 18.5 to 22.5 feet bgs and 37.5 to 48 feet bgs in the predoafinant well-graded sands. TPH-g concentrations ranging from 6,500 to 26,000 milligrams per kilogram (mgtkg) were detected in samples collected to 15 feet bgs in B-1. TPH-g was not detected below 15 feet bgs. MTBE concenU:ations ranging from 0.33 to 1,400 mg/kg were detected in B 1 to a depth of 45 feet bgs. TPH-g concentrations up to 19,000 mg/kg and MTBE concentrations up to 220 mg/kg were detected in 'B-2, west of the USTs and dispensers, and in B-3, west of the LISTs and dispensers. TPH-g was not detected in B4 and B-5, west and south of the dispensers, respectively. MTBE was detected in -MI samples analyzed from B-4 and B-5 at concentrations ranging from 0.023 to 11 rog/kg. The BCFD required the preparation of a CAP by a letter dated 29 December 1999. HFA prepared the CAP dated 12 April 2000, which was subsequently approved by the BCFD. }IFA estimated that a total volume of 4,700 cubic yards of soils was impacted and that a total weight of 5,580 pounds (900 gallons) of adsorbed hydrocarbons wa.s present in site soils. SVE was the most feasible corrective action alternative determined in. the CAP. Thc CAP proposed the installation of one deep central SVE well, one intermediate central SVE well, one shallow central SVE well, and three shallow lateral zone SVE wells. HFA also proposed that thc deep central well be sampled to determine the vertical extent of impacted soils. HFA proposed to operate the remediation system on weekends using a mobile VES unit due to the lack of surface area onsite for construction of a remediation compound and the high volumc of traffic passing over the site. The BCFD approved the CAP by a letter dated 25 April 2000. S,,ummary of the Report HFA drilled tour soil borings during January and February 2001. Boring VW-ld, the central boring, was completed as a combination SVE ,and groundwater monitoring well screened continuously 70 to 125 feet bgs. The three lateral borings, VW-2 through VW-4, were completed as SVE wells screened from approximately 5 to 45 feet bgs. Soil samples were collected from boring VW-Id at depths of 50, 65, 80, and 100 feet bgs to determine the verdcM extent of impacted soils. Soil samples were not collected from VW-2 through VW-4 due to their proximity to previously sampled soil borings. Thc soil samples collected from boring VWi -d were analyzed for TPH-g by EPA Method 8015.M and BTEX & MTBE by EPA Method 8020. TPH-g was dete~'.ted at 250 rog/kg at a depth of 50 feet bgs. TPH-g was detected at 5.7 ing/kg and wa,~ not detected in the samples from 65 and 80 feet bgs, respectively. A TPH-g concentration of 2,300 rog/kg and a benzene concentration of 9.3 rog/kg were detected in the deepest sample, collected from 100 feet bgs. MTBE was detected in all the soil samples. The highest MTBE'concentration, 87 rog/kg, was detected at 100 feet bgs. Groundwater was encountered in the boring at 110 feet bgs. U:\'UGIXIDW filcsk2OOO-2ODl Correspondence\City of' B~kexafield C:z~esXl)w~ttw*~ Chcvrun l~t Ltr 7-()l .duc Sent By: CALIFORNIA RWQCB FRESNO; 559 445 5910; Jul-23-01 14:24; Page 3/5 Mr. Tim Sullivan 3 23 July 201}t Groundwater monitoring well VW-ld was developed and sampled during March 2001. The depth to groundwater was measured at 107.43 feet bgs. The Chain-of-Custody documentation included in the report indicates that the groundwater sample collected Ii'om VW-ld was analyzed for TPH-g by EPA Method 8015M and BTEX, left-butyl alcohol (TBA), MTBE, di-isopropyl ether (DIPE), ethyl terbbutyl ether (ETBE), tert-amyl methyl ether (TAME) by EPA Method 8260. Benzene was detected at 2,400 micrograms per liter (gg/L). MTBE was detected at 120,000 gtg/L. TBA, DIPE, ETBE, and TAME were not detected,' Tlae analytical report for TPH-g was not included in the Report. HFA concluded that the BCFD would be likely to require further investigation of the lateral extent of impacted soil and groundwater and would require soil remediation by SVE. HFA recommends that fmlher installation of the extent of impacted soils and groundwater and the proposed SVE remediation be conducted. HFA recommends installation of three dual-purpose groundwater monitoring/SVE wells (MW-1 through MW-3) screened from 70 to 125 feet bgs. MW- 1 would be willfin City of Bakersfield fight of way, in thc sidewalk along "L" Street, east of the USTs and dispensers. MW-2 and MW-3 would be onsite, northwest and southwest of the dispensers, respectively. Soil samples would be collected from the borings at 20-Ibot intervals and would be analyzed for TPH-g by EPA Method 8015M, and BTEX & MTB.E by EPA Method 8020. The monitoring wells would be developed and sampled. Cxroundwater samples would be analyzed for TPH-g by EPA Method 8015M, and BTEX, MTBE, TBA, DIPE, ETBE, and TAME by EPA Method 8260B. FrFA also recommends to installation of the shallow central SVE well previously pre)posed in the CAP (VW-1S) and one additional central SVE well of intermediate depth (VW-II). VW-I S would be screened from 5 to 35 feet bgs. VW-II would be screened from 40 to 70 feet bgs. Soil samples would not be collected from thc wells due to the proximity of other sampled borings. A mobile thermal oxidation VES unit would be deployed to the site and operated on weekend hours, ms proposed in the CAP. According to the referral letter prepared by the BCFD, California Water Service (CWS) Well Station//7 is .located within 1,000 feet of the.site, in the expected downgradient direction of groundwater flow. The BCFD advised the CWS of the release and requested that they monitor and ensure that water quality is maintained in their distribution system by a letter dated 28 June 2001. Comme,nts, Based on review of the above-summarized repmts, we have the following comments: Ciasoline range petroleum constituents, including MTBE have migrated through the permeable sandy/gravelly site soils and have been detected in groundwater beneath the former USTs. MTBE has been detected in groundwater at a concentration of 120,000 p.g/l.. MTBE may be transported in groundwater greater distances away fi'om the release source than other gasoline constituents because it is soluble and docs not readily degrade. A municipal water supply well is within 1,000 feet of tlae site in the expected downgradient flow direction. The extent of petroleum constituents in groundwater has not bccn defined. We require that you expedite soil remediation by SVE to m.inimize the m/gration and spread of gasoline and MTB'E in site soils and groundwater and possible impacts to the municipal well. U:\[IGT~J'OW filcak2000-2001 Con~espondcnct:\C'ity of Bak,~,nficld Ctu~ADwnpatn Chevron lSl l.lr 7-01.doc Sent By: CALIFORNIA RWQCB FRESNO; 559 445 5910; Ju1-23-01 14:24; Page 4/5 Mr, Tim Sullivan -4 - 23 July 2001 We approve operation of the proposed SVE system and installation of the ce~'~ta:al, shallow and intermediate SVE wells (VW-IS and VW-1I). After system startup, a vacuum influence test should be conducted to deternfine the extraction well airflow rat. ex and the radius of effective vacumn influence of thc shallow, intermediate, and deep screened intervals. Please submit a brief letter describing the Proposed vacuum influence test procedures by '1 ? September 2001. We do not approve the limited (weeked) SVE system operation schedule proposed. We require that the remediation system be operated 24 hours per day 7 days per week. Final system operation may be implemented by a mobile SVE unit operated serially at each SVE well, or by a dedicated remediation compound with subsurface piping connecting to the SVE wells. Please submit a brief CAP addendum proposing the final SVE operation strategy and operation schedule by 1.7 September 2001. We approve inst~lation of dual-purpose groundwater monitoring/SVE wells MW- 1 through MW-3. Soil samples should be collected at 10-foot intervals in the borings. Soil samples should be analyzed for TPH-d by EPA Method 8015M, and BTEX and MTBE. Detected concentrations of MTBE should be confirmed by EPA Method 8260. We require quarterly groundwater monitoring. Groundwater samples should be analyzed for TPH-g by EPA Method 8015M, and BTEX. 1.2-DCA, EDB, MTBE, TAME, D1P.E, ETBE, and TBA by EPA Method 8260. In addition to the COCs, we require that you sm-nple groundwater for general minerals, nitrate, and total Kjeld~l nitrogen (TKN) during two nonconsecutive quarterly sampling events (minimum of six months between sampling events). It is not necessary to sample all monitoring wells for these constituents during these sampling event.s: a minimum of three wells, including at least one upgradient well, should be sufficient. Please submit a report describing the monitoring well installations and the results of the initial groUndwater monitoring event by 1 October 2001.' We require that further investigation to identify water wells in the site vicinity be conducted. A drive-by reconnaissance, discussion with California Water Service and other local water purveyors, and exarnination of well completion .records available from the Czdifornia Department of Water Resources should identify water wells within 2~500 feet of the site. Construction details, uses and operation schedules of identified wells and discussion of other sensitive receptors in the area should be included. Please provide this information by 17 September 2001. l~_dentificatlon of Qt,h,,er Responsible Party Notification If you have evidence to support identification of other potentially responsible parties for degradation at this site, we request that you identify them now by providing such evidence so they may be notified of the potential responsibility. Evidence should include the beginning and ending dates and type of .involvement, the. names and current addresses of all potentially responsible parties, and copies of any documents thai would verify the terms and conditions of involvement. ! h\t Jr i'lMDW_fiies\20t~l-20{) 1 Cort~sponclenc~\Ci~.y of Bakor.~field Cascs\Dwntwn Chewon 1 ~t Ltr 7-01 .doc . Sent By: CALIFORNIA RWQCB FRESNO; 559 445 5910; Jul-23-01 14:25; Page 5/5 Mr, Tim Sullivan - 5 - 23 July 2001 .Please contact this office at least 72 hours prior to ficldwork. correspondence, please contact me at (559) 445-5504. Assoc. Engineering Geologist RG No. 5951 If you have any questions regarding this Mr. Howm-d Wines 111, City of Bakersfield Fire Department, Bakersfield Ms. Sandy Gill, SWRCB, UST Cleanup Fund, Sacramento Mr. Robert E. T~rnst. rom, President, Service Station Holdings LLC Mr. Mark Magargee, Holguin, Fahaa & Associates, Bakersfield U:\I J¢,i'IMDW..fiIa:~LgOO0-2(X) I ¢:orrc.spon0cnce\City of Bakersfield C. aae. sLOwntwn Chevmll I' st 1.st 7-O1 June 28,2001 Mr. John Whiting, RG Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region 3614 East Ashlan Av. Fresno, CA 93726 FIRE CHIEF RON FRAZE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 2101 "H" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3941 FAX (661) 395-1349 SUPPRESSION SERVICES 2101 "H" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3941 FAX (661) 395-1349 PREVENTION SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3951 FAX (66t) 326-0576 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3979 FAX (661) 326-0576 TRAINING DIVISION 5642 Victor Ave~ Bakersfield, CA 93308 VOICE (661) 399-4697 FAX (661) 399-5763 RE: REFERRAL FOR RWQCB OVERSIGHT MTBE detectiOn in shallow groundwater at Downtown Chevron, 2317 L Street, located within 1000 feet of a domestic water well Dear Mr. Whiting, Enclosed, please find the Preliminary Groundwater Assessment Report, dated June 25, 2001, prepared by Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. for the above referenced facility. Other pertinent records for this release investigation are also enclosed. The report shows that first encountered groundwater (107 fog) under the facility is impacted above the respective MCLs for Benzene (2,400 ug/1), Toluene' (5,200 ug/1), Ethyl Benzene (1,200 ug/1), Xylene (8,500 ug/l), and MTBE (120,000 ug/1). An underground fuel dispenser pipe had leaked and was repaired in April 1999. At that time, it was estimated that at least 4,00 gallons of unleaded gasoline had been released to the subsurface before the leak was reported. The leak has been stopped and a vapor extraction system is currently being proposed to remove the residual fuel entrained in the soil beneath the site. Further assessment of the extent of the groundwater impact is also being proposed by the responsible party in the enclosed documents. Geographic information shows California Water Service Well Station #7 to be within 1000 feet, in a predicted down gradient direction, of the fuel leak site. California Water Service has been notified of these facts under separate cover. Sincerely,- Howard H. Wines, III Registered Geologist No. 7239 Hazardous Materials Specialist Office of Environmental Services cc; T. Sullivan M. Magargee, HFA Z 410 286 937 US Postal Service Receipt for Ge~ifiQd Mail No Insurance Coverage PmVJ~Jed. DO not ~ TIM SU3 Street & Number _ P 0 BOX 5007 Post Office, State, & ZIP Code _ BALI~RSF~]~.n CA 93308 "~OStage $ o 3 2~ Certified Fee -- - l.lO Spedal Delivery Fee -- Resti~cted Delive~ Fee -- Return Receipt Showing to ~Whom & Date Delivered ]-. 1~ ..Re.turn Receipt Showing to Whom - ua[e, & Addressee's Address TOTAL Postage & Fees Z 410 2,46 898 US Postal Service Receipt for Certified Mail No Insurance Coverage Provided. Do not use for International Mail. Sent to ................. ' t '"='= ' =v=~='u/ TI}f SULLIVAN Street & Number P 0 BOX 5007 Post Office, State, & ZiP Code BAKERSFIELD CA 93388 Postage .32 Certified Fee l.lO Spedal Delivery Fee Restricted Delivery Fee Retum Receipt Showing to Whom & Date Delivered Return Receipt Showing to Whom Date, & Addressee's Address TOTAL Postage & Fees . ,~ 'nat we can ~.e-t'~'n~t~r~;~ the reverse.. , ~tach this card to the ~-=-~ A, ..o You. or on the front if space ~,-u,, ur [ne mailpiece, Art/cie Addressed to. St/LLI~.N PESOL o ~ 5oo7 ~ S~s~z~ ~ 93388 5007 A. ~Received by (P/ease Print Clear/~ different from item 1 ? If YES. enter del/very address below: Date of Delivery /~ Agent ' ~98 '~ - ~ -. (Extra Fee) + PS Form 38~ '/, July 1999 ' ' DOmestic Return Receipt '------- ~ No I 102595'99-M-~789 ~ E:/Yes Certified Mail [~ EXpress Mail , Registered ~ Return Receipt for Merchandise UNITED ·STATES POSTAL SERVICE ' Sender: Please print and BAKERSFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Avenue, Suite 300 Bakersfield, CA 93301 item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. · Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. · Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits· 1. Art/cie Addressed to: TIM $1ILLIVAN SULLIVAN PETROLEUM CO LLC P 0 BOX 5007 BAKERSFIELD CA 93308 RE: 2317 "L" STREET PS Form 381 'J, July 1999 Agent D. Is delivery address different from item 1 Yes If YES enter delivery address below: r-1 No 3. Service Type  Certified Mail r~ Express Mail I' Registered I-3 Return Receipt for Merchandise I [] Insured Mail I~ C.O.D. · 1 4. Restricted De very? (Extra Fee) [] Yes DOmestic Return Receipt UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE Postage & Fees Paint USPS Permit No. G-10 · Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box · BAKERSFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Avenue; Suite 300 BaEersfield, CA 93301 HOLG UIN, FAHAN & ASS OCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS June 25, 2001 Mr. Howard H. Wines, Iit City of Bakersfield Fire Department Environmental Services Division 1 715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, California 93301 Subject: PRELIMINARY GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT REPORT SULLIVAN PETROLEUM COMPANY, LLC DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION 2317 'L" STREET, BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA (BFDESD PERMIT #BI-0166) Dear Mr. Wines: Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. (HFA) is pleased to present the following Preliminary Groundwater Assessment Report for the above-referenced site. The soil and groundwater sampling activities were conducted to further delineate the vertical limits of gasoline-containing soil and the potential for the release to impact groundwater resources at the above-referenced site. This work was required by the Bakersfield Fire Department Environmental Services Division (BFDESD) as a result of the discovery of gasoline-containing soil in and around the area of the premium grade unleaded gasoline product pipdine extending to the southeastern multiple product dispenser (MPD) at the site. SITE LOCATION AND CONTACT PERSONS The site is located at 2317 "L" Street, Bakersfield, Kern County, California (see Figure 1 -Site Location Map). The site is located within the commercial district, which flanks23rd and 24th streets. The site is at an elevation of approximately 404 feet above MSL, and the topography is relatively flat with a slight slope to the southwest. The site is located within the northwestern quarter of the northwestern quarter of Section 30, Township 29 South, Range 28 East, MDBM. The site isa newly constructed retail fuel sales facility and mini mart, which opened during the first quarter of 1999. The subject site is the location of double-walled USTs and product piping (see Figure 2 - Plot Plan). The property owner contact is Mr. Tim Sullivan, President, Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC, 1508 18th Street, Suite 222, Bakersfield, California, 93301, (66t) 327-5008. The consultant contact is ENVIRONMENTAL' SCIENTISTS * GEOLOGISTS * ENGINEERS Conlaminated Sites Assessments · Phase I Audits * Site Remediation · Hazard Waste Management 143 Soulh Figueroa Street Venlura, California 93001 {805) 652-0219 (805) 652-0793 FAX Inlemel: firsl_lasl@hl'a.com 5940 Lakeshore Drive Cypress, California 90630 (714) 236-1741 {714) 236.1745 FAX Inlernet: firsl_last@hfa.com 2820 Pegasus Drive. Suite 1 Bakersfield, California 93308 {661) 391-0517 {661) 391<)826 FAX hltemel: firstJasl@hfa.com www. hfa. corn 3001 South 35lh Slreel. Suile C-I 1 Phoenix, Arizona 85034 (800} 7894)219 * {602) 426-1000 (602) 426-0113 FAX tnternel: firsl_lasl@h fa.colY~ HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. Howard H. Wines, III BFDESD June 25, 2001- Page 2 Mr. Mark R. Magargee, Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc., 2820 Pegasus Drive, Suite 1, Bakersfield, California, 93308, (661) 391-0517. TOPOGRAPHY, GEOLOGY, AND HYDROGEOLOGY The site is located at an elevation of approximately 404 feet above MSL, and the topography slopes slightly to the southwest (see Figure 1). The subject site is located on the eastern flank of the San Joaquin Valley and west of the southern Sierra Nevada. The subject site is located on the eastern flank of the San Joaquin Valley, west of the southern Sierra Nevada. The surface of the San Joaquin Valley is composed primarily of unconsolidated Pleistocene (1.6 million to 11,000 years ago) and Recent (11,000 years ago to the present) alluvial sediments. Beneath the alluvial sediments are older, predominantly lake-bed deposits. These lie unconformably on Mio-Pliocene marine sediments, which extend to a crystalline basement at a depth of approximately 50,000 fbg (California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG), 1965, Geologic Map of California, Bakersfield Sheet). At the subject site, surface deposits consist of Quaternary (recent) unconsolidated alluvium overlying Quaternary (Pleistocene) nonmarine sediments. Geologic deposits in the study area include Pleistocene alluvial sediments that form a homocline dipping gently to the southwest. The deposits are alluvium consisting of indurated and dissected fan deposits (CDMG, 1965). Surface soils are classified by the Soils Conservation Services as Kimberlina Urban Land - Cajon Complex and are characterized as 35 percent Kimberlina fine, sandy loam with moderate permeability; 30 percent Urban land with impervious surfaces and altered fills; and 20 percent Cajon loamy sand with high permeability. Subsurface soils observed at nearby UST sites during the construction of water supply wells in the area are characterized as fine-grained to c.oarse-grained sands with significant intervals of gravels, cobbles, and boulders, and minor intervals of thinly bedded silts and clays through the depth of groundwater at approximately 110 fbg. The site is located in the southern portion of the Great Valley geomorphic province. The Great Valley is a north-south-trending valley, approximately 400 miles long by 50 miles wide, the southern portion of which is known as the San Joaquin Valley. Surface water and groundwater in the San Joaquin Valley are derived predominantly from the Sierra Nevada to the east and are transported by five major rivers, the closest to the site being the Kern River. The subject site is located approximately 1 mile south of the Kern River. HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCLATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. Howard H. Wines, III BFDESD June 25, 2001- Page 3 The depth to the regional, unconfined aquifer is approximately 110 fbg, and the groundwater gradient is to the southwest, away from the Kern River and toward the ancient Kern Lake bed (Kern County Water Agency (KCWA), 2000, 1996 Water Supply Report, July 2000). Perched groundwater at depths as shallow as 20 fbg is known to be present flanking the current course of the Kern River, but is not known to extend to the site (KCWA, 1998). PREVIOUS WORK During April 1 999, product reconciliation records indicated a potential release in the product piping extending from the premium UST to the southeastern MPD. However, the leak detection alarm system had not indicated a release. Subsequently, the MPD was shut off, and the inner flex product piping was removed from the outer flex containment piping. A breach was observed in the inner flex product piping. Therefore, Sullivan Petroleum filed an unauthorized release report with the BFDESD. On April 30, 1999, the concrete above the product piping was removed, and an exploratory trench was excavated, exposing the product piping. A breach was also observed in the outer flex containment piping. On May 10, 1999, AJE advanced a hand-augered soil boring (SC-l) adjacent to the location of the product piping breach (see Figure 2 for the soil boring location). Adsorbed-phase TPH as gasoline, BTEX, and MTBE concentrations were detected in the soil sample collected from soil boring SC-1 at a depth of 5 fbg (see Table 1 - Summary of Soil Sample Analytical Results). Based on the soil sampling and laboratory analytical results, the BFDESD, in its letter dated June21, 1999, required a preliminary assessment of the vertical and lateral limits of the gasoline-containing soil and an assessment of the potential for the release to impact groundwater resources. HFA prepared a work plan, dated July 8, 1999, to perform the requested work, which was subsequently approved for implementation by the BFDESD in its letter dated July 21, 1999. HFA performed the drilling and sampling activities on August 17, 1999, and September 26, 1999. Five soil borings (B-1 through B-5) were drilled during this phase of soil investigation (see Figure 2 for the soil boring locations). On August 17, 1999, soil borings B-1 through B-3 were advanced to a depth of 20 fbg using HFA"s 10-ton direct-Push sampling rig where refusal was experienced due to the presence of a layer of cobbles. On September 26, 1999, soil boring B-1 was deepened to a depth of 48 fbg using a torque-modified MobileTM B-53 hollow-stem auger drill rig operated by Melton Drilling Company of Bakersfield, California. Drilling refusal was experienced at a depth of HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. Howard H. Wines, Ill BFDESD June 25, 2001 - Page 4 48 fbg due to encountering a second layer of larger diameter cobbles and occasional boulders. On September 26, 1999, soil borings B-4 and B-5 were also drilled at the site to a depth of 45 fbg where drilling refusal occurred. Soil boring B-1 was drilled adiacent to the potential source area; soil borings B-2 and B-3 were drilled as lateral-assessing soil borings located 15 feet to the east and west, respectively, of the potential source area', and soil borings B-4 and B-5 were drilled as lateral-assessing soil borings advanced 25 feet to the northeast and southwest, respectively, of the potential source area (see Figure 2). Soils encountered during drilling included well-graded sands, interbedded with a iayer of cobbles in the interval ranging in depth from approximately18.5 to 22.5 fbg and a second layer of larger diameter cobbles and occasional boulders in the interval ranging in depth from approximately 37.5fbg to the maximum depth (48 fbg) penetrated during the investigation. Groundwater was not encountered during drilling. Significant adsorbed-phase TPH as gasoline and benzene concentrations were detected in the soil samples collected from the vertical-assessing soil boring (B-1) to a depth of less than 22 fbg and in the soil samples collected from the lateral-assessing soil borings (B-2 and B-3) less than 25 feet laterally from the potential source area. Minor adsorbed-phase MTBE concentrations were also detected in the soil samples collected from soil borings B-1 through B-5 to the total depth of the soil borings (see Figure 3- TPH as Gasoline/Benzene/MTBE Concentrations in Soil and Table 1 ~). The BFDESD, in its letter dated December 29, 1999, required the preparation of a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) to determine the appropriate remedial actions for adsorbed-phase hydrocarbon-containing soils at the site. HFA prepared the requested CAP, dated April 12, 2000, which was subsequently approved by the BFDESD for implementation. An RI/FS was conducted to assess the feasibility and cost effectiveness of mitigation technologies. The results of the RI/FS analysis were that in-situ vapor extraction is the technology that appears most suitable for this site. A vapor extraction well field consisting of central shallow-zone and deep-zone vapor extraction wells (VW-ts and VW-ld, respectively) and three lateral shallow-zone vapor extraction wells (VW-2 and VW-4) was proposed (see Figure 4 - Plot Plan Showing VES and Figure 5 - VES Schematic Diagram). In association with the construction of the central deep-zone vapor extraction well (VW-1 d) soil sampling and laboratory analysis would be performed to assess the vertical limits of gasoline-containing soil and the potential for the release to impact groundwater resources, and the well construction details would be modified dependant on the depth of the boring and whether groundwater was encountered. HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. Howard H. Wines, Ill BFDESD June 25, 2001- Page 5 Because there is no surface location available in the area of the petroleum release for a treatment enclosure, a mobile, self-contained, thermal oxidation VES unit will be used. Because of the significant volume of traffic that passes over the area of the petroleum release, the VES unit will be mobilized to the site on a weekly basis and operated only during weekend hours from 8 pm on Friday evenings through 6 am on Monday mornings. The vapor extraction wells will be connected by flexible hoses to a collection manifold, which is connected to the mobile VES unit. Separate valves are provided for each extraction well so that the overall flow rate and extracted hydrocarbon concentrations are maximized. This process of weekend extraction activities will continue until extracted vapor concentrations reach asymptotic levels. The system will then be shut down pending verification soil sampling. SITE EVALUATION METHODS Four soil borings were drilled during this phase of soil investigation, with the central soil boring (VW-1 d) completed as a combination groundwater monitoring/vapor extraction well and the three lateral soil borings (VW-2 through VW-4) completed as vapor extraction wells. On February 1 through 3, 2001, HFA advanced soil boring VW-ld to a depth of 125 fbg, and soil borings VW-2 through VW-4 were advanced to a depth of 45 fbg (see Figure 2 for the groundwater monitoring and vapor extraction well locations). SOIL INVESTIGATION AND SAMPLING RESULTS Prior to conducting the current assessment, underground utilities such as water, electricity, and sewer were mapped by Underground Service Alert of Northern California, and a groundwater monitoring well permit to drill and construct combination groundwater monitoring/vapor extraction well VW-1 d was obtained from the Kern County Department of Environmental Health Services (KCDEHS) (see Attachment 1 for the KCDEHS monitoring well permits). HFA performed the drilling and sampling of combination groundwater monitoring/vapor'extraction well VW-1 d on February 1 through 3, 2001, using a limited-access, dual-walled percussion, air rotary drill rig, operated by West Hazmat, Inc., of Sacramento, California. The limited access rig (LAR) was used because of the height of the canopy above the drill location, and the dual-walled percussion, air rotary LAR was required due to the requirement to drill through cobbles and boulders. The three lateral vapor extraction welis(VW-2through VW-4) were drilled with a conventional dual-walled percussion, air rotary drill rig with a normal height mask. Soil samples were collected at depths of 50, 65, 80, and 100 fbg while drilling soil boring VW-ld, with groundwater encountered at an approximate depth of 110 fbg. Soil samples were not HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. Howard H. Wines, BFDESD June 25, 2001 - Page 6 collected while drilling soil borings VW-2 through VW-4 due to their positioning in close proximity to previous soil borings drilled to similar depths. Soils encountered during drilling included well-graded sands, pebbles, and cobbles up to 1-foot in diameter. Field screening of the soil cuttings and soil samples indicated the presence of VOCs using a PID to the total depth of soil boring VW-ld. Groundwater was encountered in the soil boring at a depth of approximately110 fbg. Therefore, the soil boring was drilled toa depth of 125 fbg and installed as a monitoring well with slotted casing in the interval ranging in depth from 75 to 125 fbg to serve as a combination groundwater monitoring and vapor extraction well (see Attachment 2 for the soil boring and well construction procedures and Attachment 3 for the logs of exploratory borings]. Soil borings VW-2 through VW-4 were drilled to a depth of 45 fbg and installed as vapor extraction wells with slotted casing in the interval ranging in depth from 5 to 45 fbg (see Attachment 4 for the well construction details). Because the LAR was required to be used at another site, time was not available to install central shallow vapor extraction well VW-ls during this phase of investigation. Vapor extraction well VW-ls will be installed during the next phase of investigation. The soil samples collected from soil boring VW-ld were submitted to BC Laboratories, Inc., a California state-certified laboratory, for analysis. The soil samples were analyzed for TPH as gasoline using EPA Method 8015 (M) and BTEX and MTBE using EPA Method 8020. An adsorbed-phaseTPH as gasoline concentration of 250mg/kg was detected in the soil sample collected from a depth of 50 fbg, decreased to 5.7 mg/kg in the soil sample collected from a depth of 65 fbg, and was not detected in the soil sample collected from a depth of 80 fbg. However, an adsorbed-phase TPH as gasoline concentration of 2,300 mg/kg was detected in the soii sample collected from a depth of 100fbg. Adsorbed-phase benzene concentrations were not detected in the soil samples collected from 50, 65, and 80 fbg. However, an adsorbed-phase benzene concentration of 9.3 mg/kg was detected in the soil sample collected from a depth of 100 fbg. Adsorbed-phase MTBE concentrations were detected in the four soil samples reaching a maximum concentration of 87 mg/kg in the soil sample collected from a depth of 100 fbg (see Figure 3, Table 1, and Attachment 5 for the laboratory report for soil). All drilling spoils were subsequently transported by a licensed waste hauler to a licensed disposal facility under non-hazardous waste manifest (see Attachment 6 for the non-hazardous waste manifest). HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. Howard H. Wines, Ill BFDESD June 25, 2001- Page 7 GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION AND SAMPLING RESULTS Because groundwater was encountered in soil boringVW-ld ata depth of approximately 110 fbg, the well was drilled to a depth of 125 fbg and completed with 50 feet of 4-inch-diameter well screen to serve the dual purpose as a combination groundwater monitoring and vapor extraction (see Attachments 2 and 3). Prior to the initial sampling of the monitoring well, the well was developed by pumping until non-turbid groundwater was produced. On March 14, 2001, a groundwater sample was collected from monitoring well VW-1 d. At the same time, the depth to groundwater was measured to an accuracy of _+0.01 foot. Before sampling, the monitoring well was checked for an immiscible layer, and none was found. The well was then purged prior to extracting a sample representative of the in-situ groundwater. During the purging process, the conductivity, temperature, and pH of the groundwater were constantly monitored and recorded ona water sample log. Purging continued until 4.8 casing volumes of groundwater had been removed and the monitored parameters had stabilized. A groundwater sample was collected after the well had recharged to greater than 80 percent of its initial static water level (see Attachment 7 for the well purging and groundwater sampling procedures and Attachment 8 for the water sample log). A disposable TeflonTM bailer was used to sample the well. The groundwater sample was placed in chilled VOA vials containing hydrochloric acid as a preservative', labeled; sealed; and recorded on a chain-of-custody record in accordance with the procedures outlined in the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region (5) (CRWQCB-CVR) LUFT guidance document. The groundwater sample contained no visible suspended matter, and no headspace was observed in any of the vials. The groundwater sample was placed in a container filled with Blue-IceTM for cooling purposes and submitted to BC Laboratories, Inc., for analysis. The groundwater sample was analyzed forTPH as gasoline, BTEX, MTBE, TBA, DIPE, ETBE, andTAME using EPA Method8260B. QA/QC sampling included a trip blank, instrument blanks, spikes, and duplicates. The depth to groundwater in the well was measured to be 107.43 fbg. Dissolved-phase TPH as gasoline, BTEX, and MTBE concentrations were detected in the groundwater sample collected from monitoring well VW-ld, with a dissolved-phase benzene concentration of 5,200/~g/I and a dissolved-phase MTBE concentration of 1 20,000/~g/i. Dissolved-phase TBA, DIPE, ETBE, and TAME concentrations were not detected in the groundwater sample collected from monitoring well VW-1 d (see Table 2 - Summary of Groundwater Sample Analytical Results and Attachment 9 for the laboratory report for groundwater). HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. Howard H. Wines, III BFDESD June 25, 2001- Page 8 CONCLUSIONS Based upon the laboratory analytical results of the soil and groundwater samples collected form the soil borings and monitoring wells at the site, adsorbed-phase and dissolved-phase TPH as gasoline, BTEX, and MTBE concentrations are observed in the soil and groundwater at the site. The BFDESD will likely require additional investigating of the lateral limits of gasoline-containing soil and groundwater; as well as performing the previously approved in-situ vapor extraction activities to reduce the hydrocarbon concentrations in the soil at the site. RECOMMENDATIONS In order to further delineate the lateral limits of gasoline hydrocarbon concentrations in soil and groundwater, HFA recommends that an expanded groundwater investigation be conducted and consist of the installation of three additional groundwater monitoring wells (MW-1 through MW-3) (see Figure 3 for the proposed monitoring well locations). The three lateral groundwater monitoring wells will be positioned outside the canopy so they may be drilled with a conventional dual-walled percussion, air-rotary drill rig with a normal height mask. The wells should be drilled to a depth of approximately 125 fbg (15 feet below the groundwater surface) and installed with E~ feet of slotted PVC casing to potentially serve the dual purpose of groundwater monitoring and vapor extraction. Soil samples will be collected at 20-foot intervals during drilling, and selected soil samples will be analyzed for TPH as gasoline using EPA Method 8015(M) and BTEXand MTBE using EPA Method 8020. The monitoring wells will be constructed with 24inch-diameter PVC casing and the appropriate filter pack sand installed from the bottom of the soil boring to 3 feet above the slotted interval. Blank PVC casing packed in neat cement grout will extend from the surface downward to the 3-foot bentonite seal placed above the filter pack. Locking, water-tight well covers will be set in concrete to protect and secure the wellheads (see Attachments 3 and 4). Following installation, the monitoring wells will be developed by surging and bailing to remove drilling residues and to produce Iow-turbidity groundwater. Prior to sampling, the proposed monitoring wells will be purged with a pre-cleaned bailer in order to remove stagnant water in the wells. During purging, key parameters including temperature, conductivity, and pH will be measured witha portable electronic meter and recorded. The purging will continue until the monitored parameters stabilize (usually after 3 casing volumes of groundwater has been removed). Following purging, groundwater samples will be collected with pre-cleaned TeflonTM bailers and discharged with a non-aerating, bottom-emptying device into sterilized HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. Howard H. Wines, Ill BFDESD June 25, 2001- Page 9 glass containers, capped with TeflonTM septa, labeled, and chilled in an ice chest for transport. The proposed monitoring wells will be surveyed relative to the existing monitoring well and a permanent structure, and from a designated point on the northern side of the top of the well casing, the groundwater level will be measured in the wells to an accuracy of _+0.01 foot. The groundwater samples will be analyzed for TPH as gasoline, BTEX, MTBE, TBA, DIPE, ETBE, and TAME using EP Method 8260B (see Attachment 7). In order to complete the vapor extraction well field installation, HFA recommends that the previously approved central, shallow-zone vapor extraction well VW-ls be installed as well as central, intermediate-zone vapor extraction well VW-1i (see Figure 4 for the proposed vapor extraction well locations). Because of the height of the canopy above the drill locations and the requirement to drill through cobbles and boulders, the dual-walled percussion, air rotary LAR will be required (see Attachment 2). The central, intermediate-zone well(VW-li) will be drilled to a depth of 70 fbg and completed with 30 feet of 4-inch diameter slotted casing. The central, shallow-zone well will be drilled to a depth of 3,5 fbg and constructed with 30 feet of 4-inch diameter slotted casing (see Attachment 4). Soil sampling will not be conducted during well construction since the wells are positioned adjacent to the location of previous soil borings drilled to similar depths. Subsequent to the installation of the additional vapor extraction wells, HFA recommends that the operation of the mobile, self-contained, thermal oxidation VES unit be initiated. Because of the significant volume of traffic that passes over the area of the petroleum release, the VES unit will be mobilized to the site on a weekly basis and operated only during weekend hours from 8 pm on Friday evenings through 6 am on Monday mornings. The vapor extraction wells will be connected by flexible hoses to a collection manifold. The manifold will be connected to the mobile VES unit. Separate valves are provided for each extraction well so that the overall flow rate and extracted hydrocarbon concentrations are maximized. This process of weekend extraction activities will continue until extracted vapor concentrations reach asymptotic levels. The system will then be shut down pending verification soil sampling. HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. Howard H. Wines, BFDESD June 25, 2001- Page 10 Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc., trusts that you 'will find this Preliminary Groundwater Assessment Report to your satisfaction. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Mr. Mark Magargee at (661) 391-0517 or at e-mail address Mark_Magargee@hfa.com. Respectfully submitted, Mark R. Magargee, CHG, RG Senior Hydrogeologist Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. MRM:rri:jet Enclosures: Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 - Table 1 Table 2 Attachment 1 Attachment 2 Attachment 3 Attachment 4 Attachment 5 - Attachment 6 - Attachment 7 Attachment 8 - Attachment 9 Site Location Map Plot Plan TPH as Gasoline/Benzene/MTBE Concentrations in Soil Plot Plan Showing VES VES Schematic Diagram Summary of Soil Sample Analytical Results Summary of Groundwater Sample Analytical Results KCDEHS Monitoring Well Permits Soil Boring and Well Construction Procedures Logs of Exploratory Borings Well Construction Details Laboratory Report for Soil Non-Hazardous Waste Manifests Well Purging and Groundwater Sampling Procedures Water Sample Log Laboratory Report for Groundwater cc: Mr. Tim Sullivan, Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC Mr. John Noonan, California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region (5) IHOLGUIN, ,~ &./LSSOC~T~, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. Howard H. Wines, III BFDESD June 25, 2001- Page 11 .'. , i /' r Ir ,,r~,~,, ,, ~.G' '"'~"~ ' ' ~CALLOWAY ,' ............. L ~ ' 4~.. - D '~ wE,. ....... :,, .. '" . 5' t~ . , ," 0 -"', ' ,' ....... NO ~ . .' ~ ' ~, ~t / · ' . ~ .. [ ' I~ " ~ ' =.~F .I.' ' ~~-~, ~.,,,,u,.~ ~ II 11'-]~.; .,, ~ ~,i~ ..... ~.-., ~. o. I" · , Wate ~. ~ ~ · .. I . . ~ · ~ ". , , ~ --~ ~ - ~ ' ~ '~ ........ [-" ~ '. '1 , ~'. · .. ". /'1_~~ '-; ....... ' , --~ "~J~i /,~11~ ~ ~ ~ ,;(~];".¢ '?~ ~ ~]~t," - ~L.I ",~ __ ~_, /.. ....... ~ : ..... .~.. ; :. ~ , - BM~ )l~ · · _ /.,j: . ~ ,.. . · . ,~, LEGEND SULLIVAN PETROLEUM COMPANY, LLC ~ ~LE ~ DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION o 0.5 I I I I I I I ] t I I o ,,ooo ~.~o ~.~ ~,~ ~,~E[~ ~i il 2317 ~L" STREET ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ 1 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA oL ~ ~ o.s~ ~ . ~LO~E~ ~ FIGURE I - SITE LOCATION MAP USGS OILDALE/GOSFORD L5 MINUTE SERIES QUADRANGLES~ ~O~, ~ ~ ~SOO~S, I~C. HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. Howard H. Wines, III BFDESD June 25, 2001- Page 12 n~ _ CAR z WASH MINI MART <~ c3w z .-r- iii >- © ~" r'r DISPENSER ISLANDS n- l'-- uJ n B-4 EX TORY CANOPY~ TRENCH (~ VW-2 LOCATION I VW-3 [o S~':';J ~ ~-- 10'000'GALLON GASOLINE UST DISPENSER ISLANDS [I 20,'O00'GALLON, o o o u ~ SPLIT-CHAMBERED, · GASOLINE UST B-5 VW-4 .~ I PLANTER APPROACH L SIDEWALK 23RD STREET SCALE IN FEET 0 15 30 LEGEND SULLIVAN PETROLEUM COMPANY, LLC ~ SOIL BORING DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION GROUNDWATER o FILL END 2317 "L" STREET ~.~ MONiTORINGNAPOR EXTRACTION o TURBINE END BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA WELL ~) VAPOR EXTRACTION WELL FIGURE 4 - PLOT PLAN SHOWING VES HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. REVISION DATE: JUNE 25, 2001: RRI HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. Howard H. Wines, III BFDESD June 25, 2001- Page 13 B-4 · 50-- 23 .6 -~- 65--- 5.7/ND/14 '/ 10- - ND/ND/0.023 80--- ND/ND/1.5 , 20- N~/ND/0.19 ~ ~1 ' ~ ' 30- 'N~/ND/3'5 00---/2,3/00/9.3/87 i ~,VW~d ! 40 - N~/ND/3.7 5 i ND/°'°14/3'66,300/0.3/3 [° s~iD} ~ ~55 Jr' 19'°°°/5°/22°-A ~n.,..o,o 15 [ / , [] o o o 5--- 26,000/64/1,400 B-5 10 - -- 6,500/28/76 ~ 15--- 7,000/26/85 ~ ~ 22-- ND/ND/0.48?- ~ 10 - --ND/ND/ND 25 ND/ND/0.33 20---ND/ND/0.15 30--- ND/ND/3.1_ / k 30---ND/ND/1.3 35--- ND/ND/2.6 40 ---ND/0.12/11 40 -- ND/ND/3.2 45--- ND/0.0062/5.2 23RD STREET SCALE IN FEET 0 15 30 LEGEND SULLIVAN PETROLEUM COMPANY, LLC ~, SOIL BORING ND NOT DETECTED DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION GROUNDWATER 2317 "L" STREET ~ [] FILL END WELLMONITORINGNAPOR EXTRACTION o TURBINE END BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA _b #/#/# TPH AS GASOLINE/BENZENE/MTBE FIGURE 3- TPH AS GASOLINE/BENZENE/MTBE CONCENTRATIONS IN SOIL (pg/I) CONCENTRATIONS IN SOIL #_b DEPTH OF SAMPLE (fbg) HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. REVISION DATE: JUNE 25, 2001: RRI HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. F~NVIRONMF~NTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. Howard H. Wines, III BFDESD June 25, 2001- Page 14 uJ iii I-- MW-2 rJ3 i~) VW-2 VW-3 SC-I[~ J VW-4 MW-3 B-5 (~) 23RD STREET · SCALE IN FEET 0 15 30 LEGEND SULLIVAN PETROLEUM COMPANY, LLC SOIL BORING DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION GROUNDWATER ~ FILL END 2317 "L" STREET MONITORING/VAPOR EXTRACTION o TURBINE END BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA WELL VAPOR EXTRACTION WELL FIGURE 4 - PLOT PLAN SHOWING VES PROPOSED MONITORING WELL LOCATION F.,~--I_,~LN & ASSOCIATES, INC. HOLGUIN, REVISION DATE: JUNE 25, 2001: HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. Howard H. Wines, III BFDESD June 25, 2001- Page 15 <250 scfm VW- 1 VW- 1 i VW- 1 d VW-2 VW-3 VW-4 ATMOSPHERE --fKNOCK-OUT DRUMI ~( INFLUENT MONITORING POINT BLOWER WITH ~ SILENCER SUPPLEMENTAL FUEL EFFLUENT MONITORING POINT THERMAL/CATALYTIC OX D ZER NOT TO SCALE LEGEND SULLIVAN PETROLEUM COMPANY, LLC PRESSURE OR VACUUM GAUGE VALVE FLOW GAUGE SAMPLE TAP DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION 2317 "L" STREET BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA FIGURE 5 - VES SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. REVISION DATE: JUNE 25, 2000: RRl:jet HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. Howard H. Wines, III BFDESD June 25, 2001- Page 16 TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF SOIL SAMPLE ANALYTICAL RESULTS DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION, BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA SAMPLE DATE TPH AS ETHYL- TOTAL SOURCE SAMPLED DEPTH SAMPLE ID GASOLINE BENZENE TOLUENE BENZENE XYLENES MTBE REF (fbg) (mg/kg) (rog/kg) (mg/kg) (rog/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) EPA ANALYTICAL METHOD 18015 (M) I 8020 I N/A REPORTING LIMIT I VARIES-SEE LABORATORY REPORTS I N/A sc-1 [ 5-10-991 5 I s0-1-5 I 26,0001 641 1,7001 3201 2,900[ 1,400/ A B-1 8-17-99 I 10 B-1-10 6,5001 28 230 85 430 76 B 8-17-99 15 B-1-15 7,000 26 250 94 430 85 B 9-26-99 22 I B-1-22 ND ND ND NDI ND 0.48 B 9-26-99 25 B-1-25 ND ND ND ND ND 0.33 B 9-26-99 30 B-1-30 ND ND 0.041 ND 0.094 3.1 B 9-26-99 35 B-1-35 ND ND 0.011 ND ND 2.6 B 9-26-99 40 B-1-40 ND ND 0.0099 ND 0.022 3.2 B 9-26-99 45 B-1-45 ND 0.0062 0.018 ND ND 5.2 B B-2 8-17-99 5 B-2-5 I 19,000 501 1,000 260 1,4001 220 B 8-17-9915 B-2-15I 4,6001 o.821 150 73 41012 B 8-17-991 15 B-3-15 O.3 1501 81 74O B B-4 9-26-99110 B-4-10I ND NNDD ND! NNDD 0.~,c~ 0.023 B 9-26-99 20 B-4-20 ND; ND ND 0.19 B 9-26-99 20 B-5-20ND ND NDI ND ND 0.15 B 9-26-99 30 B-5-30 ND ND 0.007 ND ND 1.3 B 9-26-99 40 B-5-40 IND 0.12 0.51 0.032 0.161 111 B VW-ld 2-1-01I 50 VW-ld-50 250 NDI 0.121 0.032 0.25 3.614 C 2-2-01 100 VW-ld-100 2,300 2101 41 260 C REF = Report reference. N/A: Not applicable. ND: Not detected. A: A.J. Environmental, Inc.'s, report dated May 1999. B -- Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc.'s (HFA's) report dated November 17, 1999. C -- HFA's current report. TABLE 2. SUMMARY OF GROUNDWATER SAMPLE ANALYTICAL RESULTS DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION, BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA DEPTH TO FLOATING GROUND- WELL ID AND DATE GROUND- PRODUCT WATER TPH AS ETHYL- TOTAL ELEVATION* SAMPLED WATER THICKNESS ELEVATION GASOLINE BENZENE TOLUENE BENZENE XYLENES MTBE TBA DIPE ETBE TAME REF (feet-MSL) (fbg) (feet) (feet-MSL) (pg/I) (tJg/I) (tJg/I) (jig/I) (~Jg/I) (lJg/I) I(~Jg/I) (tJg/I) (l~g/I) (pg/I) EPA ANALYTICAL METHOD I 8015 (M) 8260B N/A CCR TITLE 22 DRINKING WATER MCL I " I 11 1001 6801 1,7501 131 ** I "I ** I ** N/A REPORTING LIMIT I VARIES-SEE LABORATORY REPORTS N/A VW-ld 107.43 0.00 296.57 5,200 1,200 8,500 I ND ND 404.00 3-14-01 2,400 120,000 ND ND A TRIP BLANKI 3-14-01 I N/Al N/Al N/Al -- I ND NDI NDI NDIND--- I --I --IA REF = Report reference. N/A -- Not applicable. ND -- Not detected. -- -- Not analyzed. *Measured to the top of the well casing. **No CCR Title 22 MCL established. A = Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc.'s, current report. HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS ATTACHMENT 1. KCDEH$ MONITORING WELL PERMITS KERN COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT 2700 "M" STREET, SUITE 300 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301 No. of Wells/Borings: ;5' PTO No.: / ~0o / 7 welt No(s).: m~: ~3'qq-t ~ .,~...,<, ' ~PL[CATION ~ PE~I'I' FOR ~O~TO~G ~LS This application is to: [] Construct [] 1Vodify [] Destroy Type of well/boring 1~ Groundwater [] Cathodic Peotection [] Test Hole [] Other It..':', .., · t,: ....'.-'s t,.~.,,~s,~, ~,,/~ c.,:/o..,: ~.. I~.~z~/~/jclt ^~,,..! /, ooo./~;,:~//. ~ ~,,// Zip O City , , State ZiI~ · ::::::::::::::::::::: CONTRACTOR'S INFOR~TION Proposed start date: ..~/$---- O0 Drilling Contractor License # and TYpe ,~- 0 B 2- 70 GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THIS PERMIT FOR CONSTRUCTION: I.. Wel| she approvat is required before beginning any work related to well construction. It i-~ unlawt~], to continue wc':,!~ !',,.. the stage at which an inspection is required unless inspection is waived or completed. 2. Other required inspections include: conductor casing, all annular seals, and final consmaetion features. 3. : ..... A phone call to the Department office is required on the morning of the day that wnrk is to commence and 24 hours' the placement of any seals or plugs. 4. Construction under this Permit is subject to any instruc,:ions by Deparnnent representatives. 5. All wells cons..*ructed of PVC located at a cen'~---ninated :;.itc where de-jadati~n may eccm- m,,_,st be des~eyed after '.~.-:~::~ y'. or prove no degradation is occurring or has occurred. 6. Any misrepresentation or noncompliance with required Permit Conditions or Ordinance will result in issuance of a: ::,'i' .. WORK ORDER." 7. A copy of the Department of Water Resources Driller's. Report, as well as copies of logs, water quality :analyse,;, builts of wells must be submitted to the Environmental tlealth Services Department within 14 days after completmn work. GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THIS PERMIT FOR DESTRHCT1ON:. 1. A well destruction application must be filed with this Department if a well is being destroyed that is n_._oi in cortj:.;m~' ,: with a test hole permit. 2. Destruction procedures must be followed as per UT-50. 3. Placement of the seal must be witnessed by a representative of this Department. Twenty-four-hour advanced required for an appointment. SPECIAL CONDITIONS: THIS APPLICATION BECOMES A PERMIT WHEN APPROVED WELL CONSTRUCTION INFORMATION WELL DEPTH GROUND ELEVATION (IF KNOWN) BOKEHOLE DIAMETER CASING--INSIDE DIAMETER CASING MATERIAL & GAUGE SCREEN MATERIAL & GAUGE TYPE OF BENTONITE PLUG & DEPTH ANNULUS SEALANT & DEPTH FILTER PACK MATERIAL & SIZE SCREEN SLOT SIZE & LENGTH SEALANT PLACEMENT METHOD LOCKING WELL CAP WELL. #/R~2-/~,;t.~ ~ WELL # WELL # WELL ' ¥0 fo )/ ,// FACILITY PLOT PLAN ZONE OF INFLUENCE VADOSE ZONE Vv~ELLS Provide a description of the :facility to 'be monitored, including: location of tank.?;, :.' monitoring and placement, nearest street or intersection, location of any water wells or s~a:..'f:~:. '. within 500' radius of facility; ))lease attach. Information on zone of influence, such as mathematical calculations or field tes~ da~a, may ~:.c "- upon review of the application. WELL DESTRUCTION INFORMATION WELL DEPTH CASINO MATEKIAL SEALANT MATERIAL SEALANT PLACEMENT METHOD DESCRIBE DESTRUCTION PROCEDURE: I have read and agree to comply with the general conditiom: notf, q~ This ~mit musLbg~signed. IIy e.,it~;r the contrac~'or' O~.~r'~ si~..tu. Date "~,~.¢tor';~;.~ ' - ~' ? .... ' Approved By: ff. Total Fee ~'}.~ Paid On _~ (~-' ch THIS APPLICATION BECONIES A PERMIT WHEN APPROVED HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVI~IONMENT~.L MANAGEMENT (~ON~ULTANT~ ATTACHMENT 2. SOIL BORING AND WELL CONSTRUCTION PROCEDURES SOIL BORING AND WELL CONSTRUCTION PROCEDURES HAND-AUGERING PROCEDURES Each soil boring is manually drilled utilizing a 2-inch-OD hand auger manufactured by Xitech Industries. Soil samples are collected with a drive sampler, which is outfitted with 1.5-inch by 3-inch stainless steel or brass sleeves. When the sample is withdrawn, the ends of the sleeve are covered with aluminum foif or TeflonTM tape followed by plastic caps. During the drilling process, soil cuttings are field screened for VOCs using a PID calibrated to 100 ppmv isobutylene. Any soil staining or discoloration is visually identified. All data is recorded on logs of exploratory boring under the supervision of a state of California registered geologist. Soils are classified according to the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Specific geologic and hydrogeologic information collected includes depth to groundwater, plasticity, density, stiffness, mineral composition, moisture content, soil type, structure, grain size, and other' features that could affect contaminant transport. The samples are labeled, sealed, recorded on a chain-of-custody record, and chilled in accordance with the procedures outlined in the State Water Resources Control Board's(SWRCB's) LUFT field manual. Sample preservation, handling, and transportation procedures are consistent with Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc.'s (HFA's) QA/QC procedures. The samples are transported in a chilled container to a California state-certified hazardous waste testing laboratory. TRUCK-MOUNTED DRILLING AND SOIL SAMPLING PROCEDURES Underground Service Alert of Northern California is notified at least 48 hours before drilling activities commence, Each soil boring is manually drilled for the first 4 feet to establish that the area is clear of subsurface structures. The soil borings are drilled with eithera hollow-stem auger or an air rotary bit, and soil samples are collected with a California modified split-spoon sampler, The sampler is outfitted with 1.5-inch by 6-inch stainless steel or brass sleeves. When the sample is withdrawn, the ends of the sleeve are covered with aluminum foil or TeflonTM tape followed by plastic caps. During the drilling process, soil cuttings are field screened for VOCs using a PID calibrated to 100 ppmv isobutylene. Any soil staining or discoloration is visually identified. All data is recorded on logs of exploratory boring under the supervision of a state of California registered geologist. Soils are classified according to the USCS. Specific geologic and hydrogeologic information collected includes depth to groundwater, plasticity, density, stiffness, mineral composition, moisture content, soil type, structure, grain size, and other features that could affect contaminant transport. The samples are labeled, sealed, recorded on a chain-of-custody record, and chilled in accordance with the procedures outlined in the SWRCB's LUFT field manual. Sample preservation, handling, and transportation procedures are consistent withHFA'sQA/QC procedures. The samples are Soil Boring and Well Construction Procedures Page 2 transported in a chilled container to a California state-certified, hazardous waste testing laboratory. DECONTAMINATION PROCEDURES Before each sampling episode, the sampling equipment is decontaminated using a non-phosphate, soap and water wash; a tap water rinse; and two deionized water rinses. The drill string is decontaminated with a steam cleaner between each soil boring. WASTE MANAGEMENT AND DISPOSAL The cuttings from the soil borings are stored in 55-gallon, Department of Transportation (DOT)-approved drums. Each drum is labeled with the number of the soil boring from which the waste is taken and the date the waste was generated. The drums are stored at the site of generation until sampte analytical results are obtained, at which time the soil is disposed of appropriately. SOIL BORING COMPLETION PROCEDURES All soil borings are either properly abandoned or completed as a well. Abandonment Each soil boring that is not completed as a well is backfilled with bentonite grout, neat cement, concrete, or bentonite chips with a permeability less than that of the surrounding soils. The grout is placed by the tremie method. Well Construction Wells are designed according to Department of Health Services and State Water Resources Control Board guidance manuals. All well design and construction completed during the investigation are documented with the following information: · Date/time of construction; · Drilling method and drilling fluid used; · Well location (+5 feet)', · Well depth (_+0.1 foot); · Drilling and lithologic logs; · Casing material; Screen material and design; · Casing and screen joint size; · Type of protective cap; · Top of casing or well cover elevation (+_0.01 foot); · Detailed drawing of well; · Well development procedures; · Screen slot size/length; · Filter pack material and size; · Filter pack placement method; · Soil boring diameter and well casing diameter; · Sealant volume; · Sealant placement method; · Sealant materials; and · Surface seal design/construction. Soil Boring and Well Construction Procedures Page 3 Groundwater Monitoring Wells Well Surveyin.q: The elevation of the monitoring well cover or top of well casing is surveyed to an accuracy of _+0.01 foot. All measurements are reproduced to assure validity. Well Development: Well development is conducted by simple pumping if bridging of the screen does not occur. If bridging occurs, well surging is conducted for adequate well production. Well surging is created by the use of surge blocks, bailers, or pumps, whichever method is most convenient at the time. Only formation water is used for surging the well. Well development continues until non-turbid groundwater is produced. All purged g~oundwater is held on site in covered 55-gallon DOT-approved drums until water sample analytical results are received. DATA REDUCTION The data compiled from the soil borings is summarized and analyzed. A narrative summary of the soil characteristics is also presented. The logs of exploratory borings are checked for the following information: · correlation of stratigraphic units among borings; · identification of zones of potentially high hydraulic conductivity; · identification of the confining formation/layer; · indication of unusual/unpredicted geologic features (fault zones, fracture traces, facies changes, solution channels, buried stream deposits, cross-cutting structures, pinchout zones, etc.); and · continuity of petrographic features such as sorting, grain-size distribution, cementation, etc. Soil boring/well locations are plotted on a properly scaled map. If appropriate, soil stratigraphy of the site is presented in a scaled cross section. Specific features that may impact contaminant migration (e.g., fault zones or impermeable layers) are discussed in narrative form and supplemented with graphical presentations as deemed appropriate. HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS ATTACHMENT 3. LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS LITHOLOGY (UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM) CROUP MAJOR DIVISIONS TYPICAL NAMES SYMBOLS WELL-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND Z GRAVEL GRAVELS WITH LITTLE G'VV MIXTURES, LI"FFLE OR NO FINES -J I- MORE THAN OR NO FINES ~ POORLY-GRADEDGRAVELSOR ~ GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES, LI~rLE OR NO FINES g a::: HALF COARSE I LU FRACTION IS Girl S~LTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND-SILT MIXTURES r-~ ~ uJ , GRAVELS WITH OVER I LU '~ ,,>, LARGERTHAN i ~ i No. 4 SIEVE SIZE 12% FINES G~ CLAYEY GRAVELS. , GRAVEL-SAND-CLAY MIXTURES OO SW WELL-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY O, <z: ~ SAND SANDS WITH LITTLE SANDS. LITTLE OR NO F~NES rJ~ ~ ~ MORE THAN OR NO FINES ~o POORLY'GRADED SANDS OR GRAVELLY SANDS, LI'FTLE OR NO FINES I rr ~- -' HALF COARSE (~ "' ' FRACTION IS SM SILTY SANDS, SAND-SILT MIXTURES 0 0 SMALLER THAN SANDS WITH OVER ~ No. 4 SIEVE SIZE 12% FINES S0 i CLAYEY SANDS, SAND-CLAY MIXTURES INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, ~: ML SILTY OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY'FINE SANDS (J') ~ OR CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY D .~ ILl INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY, m ~_">' SILT AND CLAY CL GRAVE',YOLAYS, SANDYOLAYS, S,LTYOLAYS, LEANOLAYS LU ,'7 ~ Ob ORGANIC SILTSLowAND PLASTICITyORGANIC SILTY CLAYS OF O INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR DIATOMACEOUS FINE Z Z MN SANDY OR SILTy SOILS, ELASTIC SILTS ~, <z LU ~ ~- SILT AND CLAY i CHINORGANICCLAYSOFHIGHPLASTIC~TY, FATCLAYS O ~ OH ORGANIC CLAYS OFoRGANicMEDIUMsiLTsTO HIGH PLASTICITY, HIGHLY ORGANIC SOIL Pt P~TANDOTHERH,GHLYORGAN,OSO,LS SYMBOLS AND NOTES ~ ASPHALT I SAMPLE COLLECTED FOR ANALYSIS ~ CONCRETE ~' SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED CONCRETE GROUT ~ GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED DURING DRIllING ~ BENTONITE CHIPS Y STABILIZED WATER LEVEL (DATE) ~ FILTER SAND PAcK (DATE) NATIVE SOIL 1~ WELL BOX WITH LOCKING CAP PID = PHOTOIONIZATION DETECTOR ppmv = PARTS PER MILLION BY VOLUME BLANK SCHEDULE 40 PVC CASING USCS = UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM --~ SLOTTED SCHEDULE 40 PVC CASING gw = GROUNDWATER WELL, vw = VADOSE WELL ---- fbg = FEET BELOW GRADE '-~ BO'I-I'OM PLUG OD = OUTSIDE DIAMETER ~ HOLGUIN, ~ FAHAZq & KEY TO LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING ~ ASSOCIATES, INC. MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP TYPICAL NAMES SYMBOLS WELL-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND Z GRAVEL GRAVELS WITH LITTLE ~vv MIXTURES, LI'FFLE OR NO FINES -r' MORE THAN OR NO FINES (~ mX~RL¥-~EDGRAVELS OR ~ J-- GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES, LI~rLE OR NO FINES g r.r HALF COARSE LU FRACTION IS ,~, S~LTy GRAVELS, ~lVl GRAVEL-SAND-SILT MIXTURES E~ mn' LU LARGER THAN GRAVELS WITH OVER 12% FINES CLAYEY GRAVELS, No. 4 SIEVE SIZE 1~  -- ~ GRAVEL-SAND-CLAY MIXTURES OO SW WELL-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY O, <z: ~ SAND SANDS WITH LITTLE SANDS. LITTLE OR NO F~NES rJ~ ~ ~d MORETHAN ORNOFINES ~o POORLY-GRADED SANDS OR GRAVELLY SANDS, LI'FTLE OR NO FINES HALF COARSE  ) LU ' FRACTION IS SM SILTY SANDS, SAND-SILT MIXTURES 0 0 SMALLER THAN SANDS WITH OVER No. 4 SIEVE SIZE 12% FINES S0 CLAYEY SANDS, SAND-CLAY MIXTURES INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, ~: ML SILTY OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY'FINE SANDS ~1 L~ OR CLAYEY SILTS W,TH SUGHT PLASTICITY ~(.~ ~.~ III INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITy, ~_">' SILT AN D C LAY CL GRAVELLY CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS LU ,T g OL ORGANIC SILTSLowAND PLASTICITyORGANIC SILTY CLAYS OF OI~/~U INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR DIATOMACEOUS FINE Z Z IVlI'-I SANDY OR SILTy SOILS, ELASTIC SILTS LU ~ ~- SILT AN D CLAY CH INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAYS O ~ ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS HIGHLY ORGANIC SOIL Pt *EATANDOTHERHIGHLYORGANIOSOILS Revision 1/96 SAMPLE CLIENT: Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC C_OMPLETION DETAIL x GROUNDWATER WELL ~ 03 ~- VADOSE WELL - PROJECT: Downtown Chevron Service Station ~-"' -- 03 -- ~ C3 ~ 0 SPARGE WELL ~ "r- _ -- ~-'~ "L" ~,~ ~ ~ 03 BORING ~ ~.~ LOCATION: 2317 Street, Bakersfield, California ~ ~ -- LU ~.~_. CASING: 2" Sch. 40 PVC ~ ~ DESCRIPTION AND SOIL CLASSIFICATION ca SLOT SIZE: 0.03 inch -- NAME: %gravel/sand/fines, gradation/plasticity, color, angularity, maximum size (gravels), density/consistency, moisture, odor, stain FILTER PACK: aquarium sand - o ~.i _ [:~., o - 20 ~i~il _ -- 30 30 DRILLING METHOD: Odex percussion hammer DATE DRILLED: January 3, 2001 SAMPLER TYPE: California-modified, split spoon LOGGED BY: M. Magargee, RG #4892 TOTAL BORING DEPTH: 125 fb,q APPROVED BY: M. Magargee, RG #4892 DEPTH TO WATER: 110 fbg DRILLED BY: West Hazmat ~ HOLGUIN, VW-1 d ~'AZ-ZAN az LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING ~ Page 1 of 4 ~ ASSOCIATES, INC. COMPLETION DETAIL SAMPLE CLIENT: Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC ~- GROUNDWATER WELL Q:: -- UJ CO VADOSE WELL - PROJECT: Downtown Chevron Service Station o.,,. ~- ~ -- CO C~ ~ E (D __ SPARGE WELL ~ ,,,.~- .~ LOCATION: 2317 "L" Street, Bakersfield, California °.T¢~ Z ~' v~°' cO:::) __ BORING CASING: 2" Sch. 40 PVC ~ r'-, DESCRIPTION AND SOIL CLASSIFICATION m SLOT SIZE: 0.03 inch -- NAME' %aravel/sand/fines gradation/plasticity, color, angularity, FILTER PACK: aquarium maxim~Jm ~ize (gravels), density/consistency, moisture, odor, stain sand -- 35 35 -- 40 40 -- 45 45 5O · -- 50 WELL-GRADED SAND: 100/0/0, tan, loose, dry, 15,23,29 750 SW _ moderate odor, no stain -- 55 55 __ WELL-GRADED GRAVEL: tan, loose, dry, minor GW ,odor, no stain --~.~.~. 60 60 · ~ 65 WELL-GRADED SAND: 100/0/0, tan, loose, dry, no 20,24,28 100 SW · 65 odor, no stain -- 70 70 DRILLING METHOD: Odex percussion hammer DATE DRILLED: January 3, 2001 SAMPLER TYPE: California-modified, split spoon LOGGED BY: M. Ma~argee, RG #4892 TOTAL BORING DEPTH: 125 fbg APPROVED BY: M. Magargee, RG #4892 DEPTH TO WATER: 110 fb9 DRILLED BY: West Hazmat ~ HOLGUIN, VW-ld FAtLAN & LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING ~ Page 2 of 4 ~ ASSOCIATES, INC. SAMPLE CLIENT: Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC C_OMPLETION DETAIL CC ' x~ GROUNDWATER WELL -r PROJECT: Downtown Chevron Service Stationco~ Q~' r.o __ VADOSE WELL E 0 _ SPARGE WELL ~-a. 'a=LOCATION: 2317 "L" Street, Bakersfield, California ~ Cz a-- ~. :D(/~ __ BORING u.I ~..~. ~O~ v CASING: 2" Sch. 40 PVC ~z ~/2 , DESCRIPTION AND SOIL CLASSIFICATION m SLOT SIZE: 0.03 inch NAME: %gravel/sand/fines, gradation/plasticity, color, angularity, maximum size (gravels), density/consistency, moisture, odor, stain FILTER PACK: aquarium sand -- 70 WELL-GRADED GRAVEL: 100/0/0, tan, loose, dry, no GW :.....::..:..... !.::.y....:.. 70 · -- 80 WELL-GRADED SAND: 100/0/0, tan, loose, dry, no 40,50,75 20 SW ?;, ~i:?.'. ---- ~i:?-~i:?.:.-i 80 DRILLING METHOD: Odex percussion hammer DATE DRILLED: January 3, 2001 SAMPLER TYPE: California-modified, split spoon LOGGED BY: M. Magargee, RG #4892 TOTAL BORING DEPTH: 125 fbg APPROVED BY: M. Magargee, RG #4892 DEPTH TO WATER: 110 fbg DRILLED BY: West Hazmat ~ HOLGUIN, VW-1 d ~AHAt~ & LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING ~ Page 3 of 4 ~ ASSOCIATES, INC. COMPLETION DETAIL SAMPLE CLIENT: Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC ~ GROUNDWATER WELL gu ~ VADOSE WELL -~ PROJECT: Downtown Chevron Service Station ~-'" ~' ~ -- ~ T C/') ~D ~:~ /:: O -- SPARGE WELL ~ Q. ~ LOCATION: 2317 "L" Street, Bakersfield, CaliforniaCZ ~_ ¢j~ BORING u.I ~. ~ ~ ~ CASING: 2" Sch. 40 PVC 2: ~ DESCRIPTION AND SOIL CLASSIFICATION rn SLOT SIZE: 0.03 inch NAME: %gravel/sand/fines, gradation/plasticity, color, angularity, maximum size (gravels), density/consistency, moisture, odor, stain FILTER PACK: aquarium sand -- 105 GW ..:..-.::.. _ ,..:.....-..-.: 105 :.'..... :.':.: :.' _=. :.':... :.'.....::: m :.......:..:.::: = ,:::.......:...:..: -- ;:..;:..: :.':'; :.':'.. :.' -- __ '.:,,',:,.'. ~ ,',:,,::-.-.: ~ m 110 - ..".'.'.?.'.: = ?.::..:.'-:.. ~ 110 -- :::...:..:..... _-- ,:?,..........:.~ -- __ :.':'.. :.':...... _= :::'...'.':... :.~ ~ :..:.......:...:, -- :.-:...:..:...:..: '.:;'.:..' ~ '.:'.;:'.;: :;:......'........': ~ 120 :.':'.. :::'.. ~ : :::'..:.':'..:.': ~ 120 ?:.:..::.?...:..::.?...?:.:.! __ :..-':.:..-':.:..::.:...':.:..::.:..::.:.! __ __ :..:{.. ~'...':. ::'...:.. :..'.::.. ?:. :..'...:-. :..:: _ ?... :..::. :..:... :::... :...'... :.:'... ? -- 125 ':":":":'""':" ~ 125 -- 130 -- 130 -- 135 -- 135 -- 140 -- 140 DRI[~LING METHOD: Odex percussion hammer DATE DRILLED: January 3, 2001 SAMPLER TYPE: California-modified, split spoon LOGGED BY: M. Macjargee, RG #4892 TOTAL BORING DEPTH: 125 fbg APPROVED BY: M. Magargee, RG #4892 DEPTH TO WATER: 110 fb9 DRILLED BY: West Hazmat ~ HOLGUIN, VW-1 d ~ ~'AHAN & LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING ~ ASSOCIATES, INC. Page 4 of 4 HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS ATTACHMENT 4. WELL CONSTRUCTION DETAILS VAPOR EXTRACTION/GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL CONSTRUCTION DETAILS Client Name Project Name Site Address Date Completed Supervised by Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC Downtown Chevron Service Station 2317 "L" Street, Bakersfield, California Proposed Mark R. Magargee, CHG, RG Well Nos MW-1 through MW-3 Aquifer Unconfined WELL COVER GROUND SURFACE ;AP elevation of reference point -404 feet above MSL SURFACE SEAL -- ANNULARSEAL depth of surface seal type of surface seal annular seal thickness type of annular seal 2 fbg Neat cement 65 feet Bentonite chips 3 feet Bentonite chips 2 inches Schedule 40 PVC Iow permeability seal thickness LOW PERMEABILITY SEAL type of Iow permeability seal -- WELL CASING diameter of well casing type of well casing GRAVEL PACK depth of top of gravel pack type of gravel pack 70 fbg Aquarium sand )WATER depth of groundwater from reference point 110 fb9 --SCREEN depth of top of screen screen slot size 75 fbg 0.03 inch depth of well diameter of borehole depth of borehole 125 fbg 8 inches 125 fbg -- BOTTOM WELL CAP HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. (661) 391-0517 2820 Pegasus Drive, Suite Bakersfield, California 93308 VAPOR EXTRACTION WELL CONSTRUCTION DETAILS Client Name Project Name Site Address Date Completed Supervised by Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC Downtown Chevron Service Station 2317 "L" Street, Bakersfield, California February 2, 2001 Mark R. Ma~largee, CHG, RG Well Nos VW-2 -- WELL COVER GROUND SURFACE -- SURFACE SEAL depth of surface seal type of surface seal ~ANNULARSEAL annular seal thickness type of annular seal Iow permeability seal thickness -- LOW PERMEABILITY SEAL type of Iow permeability seal WELL CASING diameter of well casing type of well casing -- GRAVEL PACK depth of top of gravel pack type of gravel pack 1 fbg Neat cement 1 foot Neat cement 2 feet Bentonite chips 4 inches Schedule 40 PVC 4 fbg Aquarium sand --SCREEN depth of top of screen screen slot size 5 fbg 0.03 inch 45 fbq 8 inches 45 fbg -- BOTTOM WELL CAP depth of well diameter of borehole depth of borehole HOi, Gt~ZN, ~'Ai-tAN & .&SSOCZ.&TES, iNC. 2820 Pegasus Drive, Suite 1 (661) 391-0517 Bakersfield, California 93308 VAPOR EXTRACTION WELL CONSTRUCTION DETAILS Client Name Project Name Site Address Date Completed Supervised by Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC Downtown Chevron Service Station 2317 "L" Street, Bakersfield, California February 1,2001 Mark R. Ma~argee, CHG, RG Well Nos. VW-3 -- WELL COVER GROUND SURFACE TOP WELL CAP SURFACE SEAL ANNULAR SEAL LOW PERMEABILITY SEAL WELL CASING GRAVEL PACK depth of surface seal type of surface seal annular seal thickness type of annular seal Iow permeability seal thickness type of Iow permeability seal diameter of well casing type of well casing depth of top of gravel pack type of gravel pack 1 fbg Neat cement 1 foot Neat cement 2 feet Bentonite chips 4 inches Schedule 40 PVC 4 fbg Aquarium sand -- SCREEN depth of top of screen screen slot size 5 fbg 0.03 inch BOTTOM WELL caP depth of well diameter of borehole depth of borehole 45 fbq 8 inches 45 fbg I-IOI, GI.TIN, I~'AI-IA_N & .&SSOCIA'I']~S, II~C. 2820 Pegasus Drive, Suite 1 (661) 391-0517 Bakersfield, California 93308 VAPOR EXTRACTION WELL CONSTRUCTION DETAILS Client Name Project Name Site Address Date Completed Supervised by Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC Downtown Chevron Service Station 2317 "L" Street, Bakersfield, California February 1,2001 Mark R. Magargee, CHG, RG Well Nos. VW-4 -- WELL COVER GROUND SURFACE -- TOP WELL CAP -- SURFACE SEAL depth of surface seal type of surface seal annular seal thickness ANNULAR SEAL type of annular seal Iow permeability seal thickness LOW PERMEABILITY SEAL type of Iow permeability seal diameter of well casing WELL CASING type of well casing depth of top of gravel pack GRAVEL PACK type of gravel pack I fbg Neat cement I foot Neat cement 2 feet Bentonite chips 4 inches Schedule 40 PVC 4 fbg Aquarium sand --SCREEN depth of top of screen screen slot size 5 fbg 0.03 inch 45 fbq 8 inches 45 fbg -- BOTTOM WELL CAP depth of well diameter of borehole depth of borehole HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. (661) 391-0517 2820 Pegasus Drive, Suite Bakersfield, California 93308 HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS ATTACHMENT 5. LABORATORY REPORT FOR SOIL Laboratories nc. Purgeable Aromatics and Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons pa~]'e HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES 2820 PEGASUS DR., ~2 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Attn: MARK MAGARGEE 805-391-0517 Project Number: S091 Sampling Location: SULLIVAN PETROLEUM Sample ID: VW-1D-50 Sample Matrix: Soil Sample Collected By: M. MAGARG~ Date Reported: 02/26/200:. Date Receiw~-d: 02/05/200L Laboratory No.: 0!-01377-:. Date Collected: Date Extracted-8020: Date Analyzed-8020: Dat.,~ Extracted-8015M(g) : Date Analyzed-8015M(~) : o2/~/2oo:., o~/~/~oo:. 02/14/200:. 02/14/'200:_ Constituents Benzene Toluene Ethyl Benzene Methyl-t-butylether Total Xylenes Gasoline Range Organics (C4 C12) Surrogate % Recovery Practici~:- Analysis Reporting Quant. itat:.c~:~ Results Units Limit ~one Detected mg/kg 0.03 0.12 mg/k9 0.03 0.032 mg/kg 0.03 3.6 mg/kg 2. 0.25 mg/kg 0.05 250. mg/kg 200. 111. % 70-130 TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.K.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA E~thod 5030/8020. Note: PQL~s were raised due to high concentration of target analytes requiring sample dilution. Chromatogram not typical of gasoline. Results confirmed by GC/MS. Californi~J Cert. ~1186 StUart G. Butrram Department Supervisor Ar] re=ults list~ in t~is repo~c are ~'or the exclusive u.~e of the submitting pa~'y. BC Laboratories, Inc. =~.~sumes no responsibility for report atter;~t[on, detachment cr thir,~ I:ar~ .,~t~rr~. ~ .~.l~= ,, 4100 Arias Court * Bakersfield, CA 93308, * ['661)327-4~:-,~ 1 * Fax(661)327-1918 * ~,vw.bclabs.com Laboratortes, Inc. Purgeable Aromat i cs and Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons HOLGUIN, PAEAN & ASSOCIATES 2820 PEGASUS DR., ~2 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Attn: MARK MAGARGEE 805-391-0517 Project Number: S091 Sampling Location: SULLIVAN PETROLELT~ Sample ID: VW-1D-65 Sample Matrix: Soil Sample Collected By: M. MAGARGEE Date Reported: Date Received: Laboratory No.: Date Collected: Date Extracted-8020: Date Analyzed-80~0: Dat~ Extracted-8015~(g) : Dat~ Analyzed-8015~(g) : 02/26//2001[ 02/05/2001[ 01-01377-2 02/01/2001 ~; 15:].!; '02/13/200:L 02/13/200:L 02/13/200:L 02/13/2001 Const i tuent s Benzene Toluene Ethyl Benzene Methyi-t-butylether Total Xylenes Gasoline Range Organics (C4 C12) Surrogate % Recovery Practical Aha 1 ys i s Rep or t ing Quant i tat Results Units Limit None Detected mE/kg 0.03 None Detected mE/kg 0.03 None Detected mE/kg 0.03 14. mE/kg 5. None Detected mE/kg 0.05 5.7 mE/kg 5. 108. % 70-130 TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA ~[ethod 5030/8020. Note: PQL's were raised due to high concentra=ion of target aha:Lyres requiring sample dilution. Chromatograrn not typical of gasoline. Californi~~.H.S. Cert. Stuart G. Buttram Department Supervisor ~1186 A~I results lislsd b this repcrt are for th~ exctus]ve use of lhe subm~n9 pm~. BC Laboratories: ~nc. a ~sumes no m~ponsibil~ for repo~ 4100 Atlas Coud * Bakersfield, CA 93308 * (661)32/-~, * Fax{661~327-1918 * w~.bc[abs.com Laboratories, Inc. Pur~eable Aromatics and Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons HO'LGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES 2850 PEGASUS DR., ~2 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Attn: I~RK PiAGARGEE 805-391-0517 Project Number: S091 Sampling Location: SULLIV~LN PETROLEUI~ Sample ID: VW-1D-80 Sample Matrix: Soil Sample Collected By: M. MAGARGEE Date Reported: 02/26/200~[ Date Received: 02/05/200~[ Laboratory No.: 01-0137~-3 Date Collected: 02/01/2001 Date Extracted-8020: · 02/13/200~[ Date Analyzed- 8020: 02/13/200~[ Dat:.~= Extracted-8015M(g) : 02/13/200~[ Date Ana!yzed- 8015M (g} : 02/13/200[[ Constituents Benzene Toluene Ethyl Benzene Methyl-t-butylether Total Xylenes Gasoline Range Organics (C4 Cl2) Surrogate % Recover]z Practical Analysis Reporting Quantitati¢,n Results Units Limit None Detected mg/kg 0.00!5 None Detected mg/kg 0.005 None Detected mg/k~ 0.005 1.5 mg/kg 1. None Detected mg/k~ 0.01 None Detected m~/k~ 1. 30. % 70-130 TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Indivldual constituents by EPA M~thod 5030/8020. Note: PQL's were raised due to high concentration of ~arget analytes requirin~ sample dilution. Flag Explanations: *20 = Surrogate is low due to matrix interference. second extracEion/analysis. *22 = Associated s~rrogate recovery is low. C~for~ia/~'~H.H.S. Cert. ~1186 Stuart G. Buttram Departme~t Supervisor Interference verified, th:.~ough All resul[s listeG in t~is report are for the exclusive use of the submitting gan'y, BC Laboratories, Inc. ~:~$umes no responsibility for report alteration, detac.~ment er [h~n~ par[~, itv.~;: ;>'( .~ I,,, 41 OD Atlas Cour~" Bakersfield, CA 93308 * (661)327-49'i 1 * Fax(661~327-1918 * w-,,,,w.bctgbs.com Laboratories, Inc. Purgeable Aromatics and Total Petroleum Hyd:cocarbo~s HOLGUIN, F/kHAN & ASSOCIATES 2820 PEGASUS DR., ~2 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Attn: MARK MAGARGEE 805-391-0517 Project Number: S091 Samplin~ Location: SULLIVAN PETROLEUM Sample ID: VW-1D-100 Sample Matrix: Soil Sample Collected By: M. MAGARGEE Date Reported: Date Received: Laboratory Date Collected Date Extracted- 8020 Date Analyzed- 80:!0 Date Extracted-8015M(g) Date Analyzed- 8015~4 (g) 02/26/200~. o2/o5/:~oo]. 01-01377-4~ 02/02/200]. 02/08/2003. 02/08/2003. 02/08/200]. 02/08/200]. Constituents Prac;ica]. Analysis Reporting Quantitatic~ Results Units Limit Benzene Toluene Ethyl Benzene Methyl-t-butylether Total Xylenes Gasoline R~nge Organics (C4 CZ2) Surrogate % Recovery 9.3 mg/kg ?- 210. mg/kg 20. 41. mg/kg 20. 87. mg/kg 50. 260. m~/kg 30. 2300. mg/kg 2000. 120. % 70-1~0 TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.K.S. / L.U.F.T. Manua[ Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. Note: PQL~s were raised due to high concentration of target analytes requiring sample dilution. California~~-H.S. Cert. ~1186 Stuart G. Bu5tram Department Supervisor Alt tesul'~s listecl in this report are for the eXclusive use of the submitting party, BC Laboratories. I~c. assumes no responsibility ~or repo~ ~,ltera~Jon. detachman: ¢¢ ~hirJ :,a,~'/ir;re:FroM :~". ~100 Atlas Court * Bakersf~etd, CA 93308 * (~61~327-491 ~ * Fax(661~327-1918 * wwwbclabs.com Laboratories, Inc. Purgeal01e Aromatics and Total Petroleum ~ydrocarbons l?a{te HOLGUIN, FAH3~N & ASSOCIATES 2820 PEGASUS DR., ~2 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Attn: MARK MAG~RGEE 805-391-0517 Project Number: Sampling Location: SULLIVAN PETROLEU~ Sample ID: DRUI~CO~PVW-1 Sample Matrix: Soil Sample Collected By: Date Reported: 02/26/200:. Date Received: 02/05/200L Laboratory No.: 01-01377-5 Date Collected: 02/03/200:. Date Extracted-8020: · 02/15/2001. Date Analyzed- 8020: 02/15/200L Date Extracted- 8015M (_g) : 02/15/200:. Date Analyzed- 801~M (g): 02/15/200_'. Prac'tic~l Analysis Reporting Quantitaticu Constituents Results Units Limit Ben~ne None Detected m~/kg 0.005 Toluene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 Ethyl Benzene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 Methyl-t-butylether 0.032 mg/kg 0.02 Total Xylenes None Detected mg/kg 0.01 Gasoline Range Organics (C4 - C12) None Detected mg/kg Surrogate % Recovery 93. % 70-130 TEST ~iETHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified I~PA 8015 Indfvfdual constftuents by EPA M~thod 5030/8020. Califor ia~~.H.S. Cert. ~1186 Stuart G. Buttram Department Supervisor All results ~Jsted in this report ere for the exclusive use of ff',e submitting party. BC Laboratories, inc, a ~sume$ no responsibility ~r report alter'ation, detachmen', cr thir.'l I:a~ ,", int,~rF,"(,.~ ', ,:: 4'~00 Atlas Court * Bakerst~eld, CA 93308 * ('661~327-47H 1 * Fax(6Gl~327-1918 ' w'ww, bclabs.com Laboratories, Inc. Purgeable Aroma tics and Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons Page? HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES 2820 PEGASUS DR., ~2 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Attn: MARK MAGARGEE 805-391-0517 Project Number: S091 Sampling Location: SULLIVAN PETROLEUM Sample ID: DRUMCOMPVW-2 Sample Matrix: Soil Sample Collected By: M. MAGARGEE Date Reported: Date Received: Laboratory No.: Date Collected: Date Extracted~8020: Date Analyzed-8020: Date Extracted-8015M(g) : Date Analyzed-8015M(g) : 02/26/'2001 02/05/2001 01-01377-~ o2/o2/~,oo~. 02/z5/~.00 ~ 02/z5/~00~ 02/z5/~00~ 02/15/~00~ Analysis Reporting Constituents Results Units Benzene None Detected ms/kg Toluene None Detected ms/kg Ethyl Benzene None Detected mg/kg Methyl-t-butylether None Detected ms/kg To~al Xylenes None Detected ms/kg Gasoline Range Organics (C4 - C12) None Detscted m~/kg Surrogate % Recovery 96. % Practic,a]. Quant i tau J.. o.t] Limit C. 005 6. 005 C. 005 0.02 C.01 l. 70-130 TEST METHOD: TP}{ by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - l~odified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. Californ/i~Cert. ~t186 Stuart G. Buttram Department Supervisor 4100 Atlas Courl * Bakersfield, CA 93308 * ,'681'~327-4 [~11 * Fax(B61~327-1918 * www.bc[abs.com Laboratories, nc. Purgeabl e Aromatics and Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES 2820 PEGASUS DR., ~2 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 At,n: F/ARK MAGARGEE 805-391-0517 Date Reported: Date Receiw~d: Laboratory No.: Project Number: S091 Sampling Location: SULLIVAN PETROLEUM Sample ID: DRUMCOMPVW-3 Sample Matrix: Soil Sample Collected By: M. MAGARGEE Date Collected: Date Extracted-8020: Date Analyzed-8020: Date Extracted-80z5M(~) : Date Analyzed-8015M(53) : 02/26/2002.. 02/05/2002. 01-01377-'? 01/31/200:. 02/14/.2002.. 02/14/200:. 02/14/ 02/1~/200:. Practicz~3. Analysis Reporting Quan~i~aticu. Constituents Results Units Limit Benzene None Detected mE/kg Toluene None Detected mg/kg Ethyl Benzene None Detected mg/kg Methyl-t-butylether 0.37 mE/kg Total Xylenes None Detected mE/kg Gasoline Range Organics (C4 - C12) None Detected mE/kg Surrogate % Recovery 87. % 0. 005 0.00.=; 0.00-~i 0.02 0.01 1. 70-1.30 TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual[ Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. Californi~ D/~.S. Cert. ~1186 Stuart G_ Buttram Department Supervisor A,{ resulL~ listed i[fl this report are for the exclusive use of the subm{tting party, BC La~oratories, Inc. e.';sumes no responsibility fo[ report aitera'Jon, demchmen.', or third p:ar~ int~e.~p e~ ~. ,=, 4100 Atlas Court * Bakersfietd, CA 933{38 * (061)327-4911 * Fax('661 )327-'[ 91 {3 * w~v.bclabs.com ............ 11" ................... ~ ...... I Il!{ Laboratorte.s, Inc. Purgeable Aromatics and Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons HOLGUIN, FAKAN & ASSOCIATES 2820 PEGASUS DR., ~2 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Attn: MARK MAGARGEE 805-391-0517 Project Number: Sampling Location: Sample ID: Samp.~e Matrix: Sample Collected By: S091 SULLIVAN PETROLEUM DRUMCO~PVW-4 Soil M. MAGARGEE Date Reported: Date Received: Laboratory No.: Date Collected: Date Extracted-8020: Date Analyzed-8020: Date Extracted-8015M(g) : Date Analyzed-8015M(g) : 02/26/2001 02/05/200~L 01-01377-;~ 02/01/200iL 02/~4/200:L 02/14/2001 02/~4/200;L 02/~4/200:L ¢: 113: ]! Constituents Benzene Toluene Ethyl Benzene Methyl-t-butylether Total Xylenes Gasoline Range Organics (C4 C12) Surrogate % Recovery Analysis Results Practici~l Reporting Quant i ta~: :[ UniEs Limit None Detected m~/kg 0.005 0.0086 mt/kg 0.005 None Detected mt/kg 0.005 0.34 mg/kg 0.02 ~one Detected mg/kg 0.01 None Detected mg/k9 82. % 70-130 TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA 5l~thod 5030/8020. California ~~.S. Cert. ~1186 Stuart G. But~ram Department Supervisor A~t ~esults lisled in this repcr~ are tot the exclusive use of t~,e submitting party, 8C Lal3oratortes. lac. a$$umes no responsibility [or report alteration, demchmen; cr lhir.3 l~ar'~' ,nt~rp-~.~; t., :, 4100 Atlas Court * Bakersfie[d, CA 93308 * (66t~327-4911 * Fax(661~327-1918 * www.bclabs.com Laboratories, Inc. B C LABORATORIES QUALITY CONTROL REPORT flOL. GUIN, FAHAN & A$$OGIATE$ 28E0 PEGASUS bR., #2 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 MARK MAGARGEE Samples Affected: 0t-0t377-1, 01-01377-7, 01-01377-8 Method j BLank J Readings lunits i Constituents Benzene [ < 0.005 Jmg/k9 Toluene J < 0.005 JmEIZ. k~ Ethyl Benzene J < 0.005 Img/kg !Methyl-t-butyLether l < 0.02 leg/kg p+m Xylenes J < 0.01 )mg/k.q o-XyLenes J < O.OO5 !rlr~/kg 'Total Pet Hydrocarbons (gas) J < 1. Img/kg Date of Report: Saa~te Matrix: QC Batch ID: 0Z/26/2001 Soil 200101577-1=aTX-'rF'H I I I I 'lspike ~Rec I MS I.SD ISPike ILcs I cent~,t il06. t~13. ! 7. llo7. ~ 80 - ~2o lloo- I~os. 1 s. lie6. I 80 - 12o ! ~s. 1.9~. ! 9. peg. I ~o-qzo JqoB. IjlS.~J 7. j111. J 8o - ~2o Iqos. I~l. I ~- I 9F. I ~o- ~so I Preci s i c,n I LC!~ % Rec Control. i I.ionl roL Limits [ I. il'~zs J Lei ~s - lis !_oJ ~s - lqs J MS = Matrix Spike; MSD = Matrix Spike Duplicate; LES = Laboratory Control Sample RPD : Eelative Percent Difference Quality C~n t C/o~].' er / ,,;~,'" ~' .......... Danette Bohra ~/ Al! ~esulI~ listed in this report are ,'or the exclusi,ce use of the submittfng party, BC Laboratories, lac, Ji ~sumes no reSponsibility for report alteration, de~achmen: cr third I;m,~' interp '4,,:, ;, :' 4100 Atlas Court * Bakersfield. CA 93308 * (661 '~327-4911 * Fax(661)327-1918 * w-/c~'.bclabs,com .......... ri ......... 1 ...... I im Laboratories, Inc. B C LABORATORIES QUALITY CONTROL ~EPORT HOLGUIH, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES 2820 PEGASUS DR., #2 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 MARK MAGARG£E Samples Affected: D1-01377-2, 01-01377-3 Constituents I Readings lunits Rec :Benzene I < 0.005 Im~/kg I [Totuene I < 0,005 Img/kg .... 1106. !Ethyl Benzene { < o.oos Im~/k~ [100. iMethyl~t~butylather Ima/kg I 85. ~p+m x¥[enes !mg/kg !106. :o-xylenes !mg/kg [105. <0.02 i < O.Ol iiTota[ Pet ~ydrocar~ons (~a~) I < 1, Img/kg = I I Date of Report: 02/~6/2001 Sample Matrix: 5oi[ QC Batch ~D: 200101377-2*B"X-TPk I ' Im I ~1 {,lSD ISpike I LCS { Control I Control {% Rec IR.P.D.)X Rec I Limits } Limits ]~ I ~.- m ~ k..'~-{ ~. I.~-.. I ~o- 1~o! ~,] ~s-~.ll I'Ll~ I 7. {Io5. I ~o .-lZO[ lo ~ - ~1~.11 I'LRH.I 7. ~nno. I ~0-~01 ~,] 8s - ~.11 MS '='Matrix Spike; MSD = Matrix Spike Duplicate; LCS = L~boratory Control Sample RPD = ReLative Percent Difference QualityyYJon~t~'Officer / , ~'-" ..~ : rL ....... Danette Bohn, ~ Ail results li$1ed in this report afa ,'or the exctu$)ve use of the submitting party, BC Laboratories, Inc. a~sume$ no responsibility for report aiter, ation, detachmen', or third p;~r,'¥ int(~cp~i .: L,' 41 O0 Atlas Court * Oekersfietd. CA 93308 * (66~327-4!;11 * Fax(661)327-1918 * w~v,bclabs.com Laboratories, Inc. B C LABORATOg~IES QUALITY CONTROL REPORT HOLGUIN, FAflAN & ASSOCIATES 2820 PEGASUS DR., #2 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 MARK MAGARGEE Date of Report: 02/26/2001 Sample Matrix: Soil QC Batch ID: 20010137Z-4*BTK-"F.I Samples Affected: 01-01377-4 ii i i 1Constituents I Readings luMts :}Benzene I < 0.005 Im~/kn {ITeluene I < 0.005 !ms/k9 IIEthyt Benzene l < 0.005 I[Methyt-r-.butyleth.er .... [ < 0.02 IIp+m ~Lerms I < 0.01 ~mB/k ]]Torat Pet Hydrocarbons (oas) J < 1. J~/kg P I , I I I I I Isp e X, ecl PrecisioniLCS ;'6 Eec · I ,si,sD Ispike I LCS I Control I Control. 1%Rec Ik;Rec I"-P-D-1%ROe I Limits I Limits 1106. 1113. 17. I10~. I aO-~OI '~91 I100. 1los, ..l... 5. ~0. I 8o' ~20l 1106. 1~13. t 7,.. m~!o. I 8o-~201 29L llOa. ]!~5- ! 7. !111. ] 80-120[ 1.91 t~5-115~ 1105. I~11. 16. 11~7- 180-~201 20 MS = Matrix Spike; MSD = Matrix Spike DupJicate; LCS = Laboratory Control Sample RPD = ReJative Percent Difference Al! results tisted in this report are for the exclusive use of the submitting party, BC Laboratories, I~c. ~msumes no responsibilibt' [Dr report alteration, detachment or thim p.,r%' mte.-r).~ :a:.< 4100 Atlas Court * Bakersf, eld, CA 93308 * (661~327-4911 ' Fax(661)327-191 g * w,~v.bclabs.com ........ Tr ............ I .... i Ill Laboratories, Inc. B C LABORATO~:IES OUALIT¥ CONTROL REPORT HOLGUINj FAHAN & ASSOCIATES 2820 PEGASUS DR,, BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 MARK MAGARGEE Samples AFfected: 01-01377-5 - 01-01377-6 Date of Report: 02/26/2001 Sample Matrix: Soil QC Batch ID: 200101377-5*BTX-"PH ] Method I la.k I Constituents ) Readings )Units )% Eec ]% Rec IR.P.D. IX Rec ) Limits; I Limits I I.i,~il:~ Toluene ] <0.005 mmv/kg 1106. m)l), I 7. ltll. I ~o- 12Dj I.~ ~5-11~; mm Xylenes I, < 0.01 tm~/kg 1106. l!ls. I Z. Ills. I aa - q~o( 't~L ~)5 - 115 o-XyLenes ,[,.fO.05 Img/kn I107. t~lO. I Z. Ill)- I 80-~20~ ~ a)5- 115~ Total Pet Hydrocarbons (gas) ) ~ 1. [~/kg )105, ~111.m 6. m 86, m 7o - I]o) 2om ([5 . 115: MS = Matrix Spike; MSD : Matrix Spike Duplicate; LCS ~ Laboratory Control Sample EPD = ~elative Percent Difference Quality. gonJ~r~l, er . ~- -~:~ ......... Danette Bohm (.~7 A,I results Ii,leO in ".his repcrt are for the axc[l~slve use of the submitting party. BC Laborato[ies. linc. a.~sumes no ~e~ponsibiJity for repo~ alteration, detachmen; cr t~rJ i:al.~, inb~,r;'~ ,.~ '.. i *.*.:. 4100 Atlas Court * Bakersfield. CA 93308 * (061)327-4Ed 1 ~ Fax(66I)327-1918 * www.bctab$.com Sampler's N~me Sampler,sSignatulre , .... Date Matrix (soil, Other Information No. and .~ HFA Date Tlme ground water, (e.g., sampling location, depth, Type of ~_ ~ ~ ~ (i.e,, turnaround time, etc.) Sample. Samded Sampled air. water) soil bOdng or MW #. etc.) Containers r " .... _ ......... , , , ~ee ~e for r~uimd de t~ion t~m~s ....... , ' PRESERVATIVE ADDED? , , · ..... I Detiver~ to HFA's refrigerator for tem~ra~ HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS ATTACHMENT 6. NON-HAZARDOUS WASTE MANIFEST LoAO T~M[ .. DAT~ O~=e 'tOAD TI/dF. DATE '~a~t -' ' STOP TOTAL ~. SUI~HAC~LER: WEIGHT'T~KET ~: Nt.ANIFF-~T ~.- ~ ' . ~qdu~./PM I STAI~Pr -- /?'PM · BEGINNING -F~M~ .......... : · ~ ! - 't' ~?~ -? ' I:.'.~' ~ . ~ .- ' TOTAL , . TOTAL HOU~ __ ~ ~ ......... ~ .- WEtCHT TICKET ~: OEDUCTION$ / ADDITIONS R/O 8IN ,l: r, IET HOURS ... . /So ........ II I IIII II I II II ~1~,': NOTE: ' ' Thl~ fo~ tO be t~ lieu of the %xic Subs~nce Controls hazardous' " · wa~e manifest. To be used for NON;H~RDOUS WASTES bnly. Mailing Address: Waste Description: TPP, SOIL Generating Locatiofi': DOWNTOWN C'~EVRO~ Quantity- 2S [ ]B8~ .... [ ]GLS [ ]YnS [ ]TONS 'CONTAiNER TYPE: [ ]T^NKTRUGK E ]CUMPTRUCK C~RUMS , JBIN$ [ DESIGNATED FACILITY: ~ASTE ~M~A~EMENT / ~GF. ITTRSCE 35~33 NAME: ADDRESS ' CtTY/$TATEJZIP: ~fCMITT~ICEo CA 93251 PHONE# MP VACUUM TRUCK SERVICE · MP ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. 3400 Manor Street ,. Bakersfield, CA. 93308 8O5 / 393-1151 N&me: Address ' City/State/Zip- Phone No: Discrepancy- Signature' w'~i~posa; Meth~: 56533 HiGRWAY 56 WEST ~"'"'"" '~..,'Le~filr ,,-,.._ TOTAL TO 'd ~ULLIVAN PETROLEUM PO BOX 5507 BBKERSFI~LD BILL TO: TERMS /~IET 30 O'AYS DUE DATE: 03/07/e]. 323 HYDROCRANE FLATBEO TRK HRL¥ LABOR HRLY O[$POSAL CHARGE 20 50.00 1,80~iI .. :' i. 565 ,, This not an Zr','¢oice. Number)}> 11 ........... }( X X: % X × ::;" HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS ATTACHMENT 7. WELL PURGING AND GROUNDWATER SAMPLING PROCEDURES WELL PURGING AND GROUNDWATER SAMPLING PROCEDURES The regulatory agency with jurisdiction over the subject site is notified 48 hours prior to sampling. WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS Prior to purging the monitoring wells, water level measurements are collected according to the following procedures: · Alt wells are checked for floating product with an acrylic bailer or oil/water interface meter. · Water levels within each well are measured to an accuracy of +0.01 foot using an electric measuring device and are referenced to the surveyed datum (well cover or top of casing). · All wells are monitored within a short time interval on the same day to obtain accurate measurements of the potentiometric surface. · All measurements are reproduced to assure validity. PURGING PROCEDURES The monitoring wells are purged using either a submersible electric pump, bailer, hand pump, or bladder pump. A surge block is used if it becomes apparent during pumping that the weli screen has become bridged with sediment or the produced groundwater is overly turbid. During the purging process, groundwater is monitored constantly for temperature, pH, conductivity, turbidity, odor, and color. These parameters are recorded on a water sample log. Purging continues until all stagnant water within the wells is replaced by fresh formation water, as indicated by removal of a minimum number of well volumes and/or stabilization of the above outlined parameters. Purge water is stored on site in 55-gallon Department of Transportation-approved drums until water sample analytical results are received from the laboratory, or the water is treated and disposed of on site. If permanent pumps are installed in the wells for groundwater remediation, the pumps are operated for at least 24 hours before sampling to ensure adequate purging. Well Purging and Groundwater Sampling Procedures Page 2 SAMPLE COLLECTION PROCEDURES Measurements collected in the field before sampling include water tevel, pH, conductivity, temperature, and turbidity (all in conformance with the Environmental Protection Agency's publication "A Compendium of Superfund Field Operations Methods"). Sampling is performed after the well recharges to at least 80 percent of hydrostatic water level. After purging and adequate recharge, groundwater samples are collected as follows: · A l-liter TeflonTM bailer is lowered and partially submerged into the well water to collect a groundwater sample. For volatile organic analyses, groundwater samples are collected in chilled, 40-milliliter, VOA vials with TeflonrM-lined caps. Hydrochloric acid preservative is added to all 9ials by the laboratory to lower sample pH to 2. Samples are held at a temperature of 4°C while in the field and in transit to the laboratory. Other appropriate containers, preservatives, and holding protocols are used for non-volatile analyses. HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS ATTACHMENT 8. WATER SAMPLE LOG WATER SAMPLE LOG CLIENT NAME: Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC DATE: March 14, 2001 PROJECT NAME: Downtown Cheveron WELL NUMBER: VW-ld WELL DEPTH: 125' WELL CASING DIAMETER: 4" WEATHER CONDITIONS: Clear, warm, calm OBSERVATIONS/COMMENTS: No floating layer, no odor (e.g., floating la,.fer, odor, color) QUALITY WATER SAMPLING METHOD: TeflonTM bailer AS S U R A N C E WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: Electronic water level meter PUMP LINES / BAILER ROPES-- NEW OR CLEANED?: Cleaned METHOD OF CLEANING BAILER / PUMP: QA/QC METHOD OF PURGING WATER: pH METER: Hydac CALIBRATED: Yes SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE METER: Hydac CALIBRATED: Checked COMMENTS: pH STD. CALIBRATION STD. FIELD TEMP °C 4.0 34170-127 4.0 27.0 7.0 34170-130 7.0 27.0 CONDUC- DATE TIME DISCHARGE TEMP. pH TIVITY COLOR ODOR TURBIDITY (IJmhos/cm) (gallons) (°C) field @ 3-14-01 1505 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER AT START OF PURGING: 129.51' 3-14-01 1520 10 27.0 7.05 465 clear odorless medium 3-14-01 1535 20 26.7 7.15 425 clear odorless medium 3-14-01 1550 30 26.8 7.10 435 clear odorless Iow 3-14-01 1605 40 26.7 7.15 425 clear odorless Iow 3-14-01 1620 50 26.7 7.20 430 clear odorless Iow 3-14-01 1630 55 26.8 7.15 430 clear odorless Iow 3-14-01 1630 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER AT END OF PURGING: 108.72' 3-14-01 1635 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER AT TIME OF SAMPLING: 107.76' TOTAL DISCHARGE: 55 gallons CASING VOLUMES REMOVED: 4.8 METHOD OF DISPOSAL OF DISCHARGED WATER: stored on site in 55-gallon drums AMOUNT AND SIZE OF SAMPLE CONTAINERS FILLED: three VOA vials WATER SAMPLE DESCRIPTION (e.g., color, turbidity): clear, low turbidity SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS: VW-ld DATA COLLECTED BY: Mark Magarge HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. 2820 Pegasus Drive, Suite 1, Bakersfield, California (661)391-0517 HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS ATTACHMENT 9. LABORATORY REPORT FOR GROUNDWATER Laboram es, Inc. 6613Z?1918 2820 Date R~ceived: L~Ora~oxy ~[0-: C1-02.99'2-X ~.2,Dichtoroe~hane-~% Toluene-d8 Date RepOrc£ng 03/1&/2001 .~ 1200. #9/ ~200. ~g/L S$O0. ~giL None De~ec~d ~g/L Non~ Detected ~g/L None Detected ~/L None 120000. ~lL 300. ~00. 500. Soo. ~00~. 5o0~ 500. Quality co:.=rol 109. 101. 100. 86-115 ~quiring sample dilu;lo~, Flag E~lanacxo~s: · 60 = Diluclon factor i~ $000, California D.O.H.5, COT=. $1186 Laboratories, Inc. 56T~ZTl~TU (EPA M~ho~ ~260) ~OL~UIN, FAKAN &ASSOCIATES BAK~FIELD, CA ]3308 Da:e Repor~c~ d: Laboratory ]~'o.; O1-02997-2T~ Date Collec=~.d: Dage Da:% Analyze~: Toluene 1,2-Dichlo~o~aneod% Toluene-d8 NOnS De=e¢ced ~g/L ~0~ D~c:ed ~g/L 0,5 None Detected Qua.lmcy 106. 100. 88-110 California P.O.H.$- Cer=. g11~6 Depar=men~ Supervisor Cfient HFA N~qle Hoiguin, Faha~ & Associates, Inc. 143 Se, F~uema St,, Ventura, CA 93001 St., Costa lvlesa~ CA 92627 Dr., BaXemBeld, CA ~ Arm: TURNAROUND TI ~(lo~) [] 40-H~ SPECIAL iNSTRUCTIONS REQUIRED DETECTION LIMITS see reverse limit~ SAMPLE RECEIPT PRE. SERVATIVE ADDED? Ag Seml:~ee sto~ overnight at HFA are lhe labora3oq' in cx~ters ~le~ with B~ue IceTM. Delivered to HFA's refrigerator for temporary~ storage on (Initials) , t,~,,r~ ,~ c~ ~ CS4gr, uu~) ~ ~,B¥: ($~n~tur~:~anZa~ton) ~ ~ ~ Here: Re.~_,rn _~.a.m~e(s)/cooler to: Hotguin, Fahan &. Associates, Inc. · 2550 Eastman, Unit #1, Vent. ara, CA 93003 · (@0.5) 650-7750 · FAX # (805) 650-6810 CI~RRECTION N 0 TiJIiC E BAKERSFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT Location Sub Div. Blk Lot You are hereby required to make the following corrections at the above location: 1076 Cot, No Completion Date for Corrections Date ~/:2../01 InSpector 326-3979 November 13, 2000 Chevron Chevron Mr. Howard Wines, III Hazardous Materials Specialist Office of Environmental Services 1715 Chester Ave ~, t/d"/ ~'~ Bakersfield, CA 93301 ~2~ Re: Downtown Chevron, 2317 L StreeU~:p~,~ Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC Jobber, Chevron Products Company E0. Box 5007 Bakersfield, CA 93388-5007 Phone 661 393 5017 800 339 5003 Dear Mr. Wines, Per our telephone conversation on November 9, 2000 I have contacted the contractor, I-IFA, to find out when they will start corrective action at the Downtown Chevron. Mr. Margargee was unavailable at the time of my call, however I did leave a message requesting information as to when work would start at our Chevron site. Mr. Margagee returned my call and indicated that a contractor would be selected and scheduled during the week of November 13th. I will let you know the date work will begin on the site as soon as I am notified by IIFA. Sincerely, David Bird Retail Manager Re% c!ed Paper ,® ' i D October 16, 2000 FIRE CHIEF RON FRAZE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 2101 "H" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3941 · ~ FAX (661)395-1349 SUPPRESSION SERVICES 2101 ~H" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3941 FAX (661) 395-1349 PREVENTION SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 ~/OICE (661) 326-3951 FAX (661) 326-0576 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3979 FAX (661) 326-0576 TRAINING DIVISION 5642 Victor Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93308 VOICE (661) 399-4697 FAX (661) 399-5763 Mr. Tim Sullivan Sullivan's Petroleum Company, LLC P.O. Box 5007 Bakersfield, Ca 93308 CERTIFIED MAIL CORRECTIVE ACTION ORDER RE: Downtown Chevron Station, 2317 L Street in Bakersfield Dear Mr. Sullivan: Our records indicate that the above referenced site is subject to Corrective Action Requirements under Article 11 of Chapter 16 of Title 23 of the California Code of Regulations (23 CCR) concerning leaking underground storage tanks. You were originally notified of these requirements on June. 21, 1999, subsequently ordered to take corrective action on December 29, 1999, ordered to appear at an office hearing on March 15, 2000 for failure to comply with the prior order, and again notified on August 2, 2000 to begin vapor extraction within 30 days. In order to avoid formal enforcement action being taken by this office to effect the required corrective action, please comply with the order to begin vapor extraction system installation within 30 days of this letter. If you have any questions regarding this order, please call me at 326-3979. Sincerely, Howard H. Wines, III Hazardous Materials Specialist Office of Environmental SerVices HHW/dm cc: M. Magargee, I-IFA S. Gill, SWRCB Walt H. Porr, Jr. Deputy City Attorney HOLd'dIN, FAHAN & INC. ENVIRONMENTAL M'ANAGEMENT CONSULTANTs September 29, 2000 Mr. Tim Sullivan Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC Post Office Box 5007 Bakersfield, California 93388 Subject: STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT AND REQUEST FOR PAYMENT Dear Mr. Sullivan: In accordance with Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc.'s (HFA's) authorized contract dated June 25, 1999, and subsequent change order dated June 23, 2[]~, you hired HFA to provide environmental consulting services for your property located at 2337 Eye Street, Bakersfield, California. Previously, you have used the State of California Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund (USTCF) to pay for HFA's services. Attached is a statement of your account showing the invoice and payment history for this project. Due to delays in payment by the USTCF, your account is past due. HFA can no longer operate its business in this manner and allow for delayed payment of services through the USTCF. As provided in HFA's contract, HFA will complete the current phase of work on your project, but will not perform any additional work until your account is current. HFA can assist you with obtaining financing for this work through an outside party including lending institutions as well as companies that provide financing for environmental cleanup for clients who have letters of commitment with the USTCF. HFA will continue to support your reimbursement efforts through the USTCF. At this time, HFA requests payment of the outstanding invoices as described in the attached statement of account, and as provided in the General Terms and Conditions of our authorized contract. ENVIRONMENTAL: SCIENTISTS · GEOLOGISTS ° ENGINEERS FAI lAN & A$$OCIA'I'I~%, II",IC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT Q(_]N,_~IJI_TANi'-,-q Mr. Tim Sullivan Sul ~an Petroleum Company, LLC September 29, 2000 - Page 2 Holguin, Fahon & Associates, Inc., looks forward to you bringing your account current and continuing to provide environmental services so that your project can be successfully completed. If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Mark Magargee at (661) 391-0517 or at e-mail address Mark_Magargee@hfa.com. Respectfully submitted, Mark R. Magargee, CHG, RG Senior Hydrogeologist Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. MRM:rri Enclosures: Statement of Account cc: Mr. Howard W. Wines, II1, City of Bakersfield Fire Department Mr. Allan Patton, USTCF I HOLGUIN' FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS 43 South Figueroa Street · Ventura, California 93001 · (805) 652-0219 FAX (805) 652-0793 STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT Page: 1 CLIENT Sullivan Petroleum Co. LLC Post Office Box 5007 Oildale, CA93308 HFA: Contract No.: S092 HFA: Project Manager : Ken Mitchell Site ID: Sullivan THE FOLLOWING IS OUR STATEMENT OF YOUR ACCOUNT. PLEASE PAY THE BALANCE DUE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. YOUR PROMPT ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER IS GREATLY APPRECIATED CONTBACT STATUS: Contract/ Amendment N~eciept Dat~ontract/Amendment Description Amount S092 6/29/19 Preliminary soil assessment Amendment 1 5/31/2 Addendum 1 $ 9,870.00 3,000.00 Contract Total to Date $12,870.00 INVOICE AND RECIEPT STATUS: Invoice Date Invoice No. Invoice Amt. Paid Check No. Reciept Amt. Balance , I I I ~ -- Jul 31, 1999 99-BK23138 $516.25 ~/ $516.25 Sep 16, 1999 99-BK23138 1890 $516.25 $0.00 OCt 31, 1999 99-BK23937 $5,803.77 -?P- 85,803.77 Nov 30, 1999 99-BK24096 $2,591.25 " $8,395.02 Dec 31, 1999 99-BK24214 $230.00 " $8,625.02 Jan 31, 2000 00-BK24460 $282.50 " $8,907.52 Mar 31, 2000 00-BK24842 $150.00 " $9,057.52 May 31, 2000 00-BK25249 $335.00 " $9,392.52 Jul 31, 2000 00-BK25682 $120.00 -- $9 512.52 Aug 16, 2000 99-BK23937 1828 $4,483.75 $5,028.77 Aug 31, 2000 00-BK26092 $291.90 -- $5,320.67 Reciept Amount for site Sullivan $5,000.00 Date Printed 9/27/2000 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS 143 South Figueroa Street · Ventura, California 93001 ° (805) 652-0219'FAX (805) 652-0793 RECIEPT STATUS = I Invoice Date I Invoice No. I Invoice Amt. I CURRENT STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT: Total Invoices to-date (including this invoice) Total payments to-date Paid I Check No. I Reciept Amt. I Balance ] $ 10,320.67 5,000.00 OUTSTANDING BALANCE: PLEASE PAY THIS AMOUNT - $ $5,320.67 Date Printed 9/27/2000 FIRE CHIEF RON FRAZE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 2101 'H" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3941 FAX (661) 395-1349 SUPPRESSION SERVICES 2101 'H" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3941 FAX (661) 395-1349 PREVENTION SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3951 FAX (661) 326-0576 ENVIRONMENTAl. SE~ICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3979 FAX (661) 326-0576 TRAINING DIVISION 5642 Victor Ave, Bakersfield. CA 93308 VOICE (661) 399-4697 FAX (661) 399-5763 D August2,2000 Mr. Tim Sullivan Sullivan Petroleum Co., LLC P.O. Box 5007 Bakersfield, CA 93308 RE: Downtown Chevron Station, 2317 "L" Street Dear Mr. Sullivan: Our records indicate that your former underground storage tank site is currently subject to Corrective Action Requirements under Article 11 of Title 23 California Code of Regulations concerning leaking underground tanks. Accordingly, pursuant to Section 2722(b) of Article 11, you are hereby directed to begin the 'necessary work at your site within 30 calendar days from the date of this letter. The required work shall include: Installation of a vapor extraction well field and vapor extraction system unit to be operated during weekends to reduce residual petroleum and MTBE concentrations to a level protectiveof the groundwater resource. Please be aware that, pursuant to Section 2722(c) of Article 11, you are required to have an approved workplan on file with this office prior to initiation of any corrective action work. In addition, you are to provide ongoing status reports of all activities involving the progress of this case to this office every 90 days. If you have any questions regarding the provisions of this letter, please call me at (661)326-3979. Sincerely, Howard H. Wines, III Hazardous Materials Specialist Office of Environmental Services HHW/dm cc: M. Magargee, HFA S:\USTFORMS~UST.LSB Winston H. Hickox Secretary for Environmental Protection jUN - 6 2000 State Water Resources Contr Ool Board Division of Clean Water Programs 2014 T Street · Sacramento, California 95814 · (916) 227-4411 Mailing Add,:ess: P.O. Box 944212 · Sacramento, Calitbmia · 94244-2120 FAX (916) 227-4530 · Interact Address: http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/.-cwphome/ustcf Mr Tim Sullivan Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC P O Box 5007 Bakersfield, CA 933'08 Gray Davis Governor UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK CLEANUP FUND. ~LAIM NO. 01 ADDRESS' 2317 L ST, BAKERSFIELD FOR SITE The State Water Resources Control Board (State Board) is able to issue, pursuant to applicable regulations, the enclosed Letter of Commitment (LOC) in an amount not to exceed $40,000. This LOC is based upon our review of the corrective actiOn costs you reported to have incurred to date. The LOC may be modified by the State Board. 'ii is very important that you read the terms and conditions listed in the enclosed LOC. Claims filed with the Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund far exceed .the funding available and it is iiyex;y~importaht,that you. make:tise:O'f th~ funding'~hat:h~ been;dommiffed t6'Y0ur clkariup in a timely manner. You are reminded that you must comply:with all'?egulatory agehcy time schedules and requirements and you must obtain three bids for any required corrective action. Only corrective action costs required by the regulatory agency to protect human health, safety and the environment can be claimed for reimbursement. Unless waived in writing, you are required to obtain preapproval of costs for all future corrective action work (form enclosed). If you have any questions on obtaining preapproval of your costs or the three bid requirement, please call Wennilyn Fua, our Technical Reviewer assigned to claims in yOur Region, at (916) 227- 45 ! 8, -Failure to obtain preappr, Oval of your future costs may result in the CoSts not'being' reimbUrsed. The following documents needed to submit your reimbursement request are enclosed: "Reimbursement Request InstructiOns" package~ Retain this package for future reimbursement requests: These instructions must be followed when seeking reimbursement for correctiye action;costsincurred afterJanuaryq, ~1988: Included in the instruction package are samples of completed reimbursement request forms and spreadsheets. "~j~:S _ummary;S,heet'.~cto. !~st tnformatlon on bi,~s r.ecel .v. ed -wh~.c.~. mu~s.t be .~ ,c,,0m, pleted ..a~ ,~:. :':i, . :' "'" ~ ' ' ", .'C-,.". ;':; , ? , ~ , ,;~:,:~.~,.- '".' : "~eimbUrsement Request" forms which you must use to request reimbursement of costs CabTor#ia Enviroameatal ProtecO'oa Age#cy ~ ' Recycled paper · ' Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC =2- ' "Spreadsheet", forms which you must use'in conjunction with your reimbursement request. THIS IS iMPORTANT TO YOU~ PLEASE NOTE: You have 90 calendar days from the date of this letter to submit your first reimbursement request for incurred corrective action costs. NO EXTENSIONS CAiN BE GRANTED. If you fail to do so, your LOC funds will automatically be reduced to zero (deobligated). Once this occurs, any future funds for this site are subject to availability when you submit your first reimbursement request.· We continuously review the status of all active claims. You must continue to remain in compliance and submit a reimbursement request every 6 months. Failure to do so will result in ~g~Steps~to, wi~draw,your.EOE~-~-~=~ - _ ~ __ ,.~_--~.: . .... ...... ~-_-_ .... If you have any questions regarding the enclosed documents, please contact Jesus Genera at (916) 227-4514. Sincerely, Allan V. Patton, Manager UST Cleanup Fund Program Enclosures cc: Mr. John No°nan RWQCB, Reg. 5 - Fresno 3614 E. Ashlan Ave. Fresno, CA 93726 x/Mr. Howard Wines ............ Cit~6t' B~il~?~fi~ld Fire D~-pt.- 1715 Chester Ave., 3rd Floor Bakersfield, CA 93301 REL~E4SE CONFIRM~ITON DALE: Record the date the release was confmned by the local agency: " ' . . '.' "' ~ ' · " FII~TDIRECTIPE: Record the date of the fa'st directive issued by thejlocal agency/Regi.ona} Board: .: .. ~.:.....~ .:~..~ .. . ......-...,..:::. . . ~. ;.'~ :... / GROSS NEGLIGENCE: Rei~O~'d'~U{~*~iaa~e ~f ~r0~s n~gligcn'c~ fond'in th6;'i°cai' agc~/iiegi'onal Board INE£lGIBLE COST$:' Rec°rd an'~'6viden~'~f ineli'ble c°sts related to'this claim: ' ' ":: ::::::::::::::::::::: ':':':':':':'":':':' ':':':':'' ':'": ":'" :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::: ':::':::::':'-' '-" "' "'--' ~".'; ;'-'-' '.':::~ '-'""'"" ': ' '::': ::'::: "========================= OTI-I~R FUNDS: Does evidence indicate that claimant has receiV~i funding fr(~ other sources? ' ' - '- . · . .:.:.\" :-:.'. ~' ';C':T?-,:":~:;.:". '. -'~ . -&,'.'-. '~ ' .-.".' - '., ~,., :,~,'. ~ ' . · '.: - '. .'. :.' . SErrZ:£MENr, .~.~/E.~ ~.s°:, ~ ~?pPr0pOat~ d°Cmncntation been rc{i~W~:l byth~ Settlements . .- '. :.;.': ..... , '....~-.. Does evidence indicate'~at joint claimant is eligible to participate ia the FUnd? ' · -" .... ~'/ ~ CO-PAYEE AGREEMENT: If a~,c'~-payee kxists, has the co-payee agreement been approved by the Settlemeuts Unit? TANK/SUBSTANCE: Does evidence indicate that tmck/substm~ce is eligible? '~-~Lf - ~ /I ..V 0 / ti ~ USTCFO25.COM ('New. 11/97) Page I ~'-00 Claimant in corrective action Compliance ~.' ,. ~ Claimant not"in Corrective action compliance (90'day letter required) ~=] Claimant not m corrective action compliance - rejection recommended LEAD AGENCY SIGNATURE CLAIMS Rt USTCFO2~.COM (New 11/97) [GNATURE Page 3 D April 25, 2000 FIRE CHIEF RON FRAZE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 2101 'H' Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3941 FAX (805) 395-1349 SUPPRESSION SERVICES 2101 'H' Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3941 FAX (805) 395-1349 . PREVENTION SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3951 FAX (805) 326-0576 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3979 FAX (805) 326-0576 TRAINING DMSION 5642 Victor Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93308 VOICE (805) 399-4697 FAX (805) 399-5763 Mr. Mark.Magargee, CHG, RG Holguin, Fahan, & Associates 2820 Pegasus Drive, Suite 1 Bakersfield, CA 93308 RE: Downtown Sullivan's Chevron at 2317 "L" Street Dear Mr. Magargee: This is to notify you that the work plan for the above stated address is satisfactory. Please give this office 5 working days notice prior to the commencement of work. Please be advised that any work done that is not performed under direct oversight by this office will not be accepted, unless previously approved. If you have any questions, please call.me at (661) 326- 3979. Sincerely, Howard H. Wines, III Hazardous Materials Specialist 'Office of Environmental Services HHW/dlm cc: Service Station Holdings S:\USTFORMS\UST.L3 04/20/00 10:41 Winston Secretory for Envi~nmcnt~l State Water Resources Control Board Division of Clean Water Programs 2014 T Strut * Sacran,~.nto, CatTfomia 95814 ' (916) ZZ7-4all Mail~§ Address: P.O. Box 944212 · Sacrau~to, Ca)Jforn~a - 9¢2t, a-:2120 FAX (916) 227-a510 ' Int~rrte! Address: h~p:/lwV~.swt~b,ca.§ov/--cw~hOme-/ustcf N0.821 Gr~y DavL~ C~over~or FAX MEMORANDUM TO: Howard Wines CitY of Bakcrsfield Fire Dep~ent Fax Number: (661) 326-0576 FROM: Sandy Gill, (916) 227-4411, FAX (916) 227-4530 Claim Review Unit UST CLEANUP FUND PROGKAM DIVISION OF CLEAN WATER PROGKA.MS 2014 T Street, Sacramento, CA 95814 DATE: April 20, 2000 SUBJECT: COMPLIANCE REVIEWS This is to confirm that Shad Kniericrn and I will be at your office on Tuesday, May 9, 2000 around 11 AM to l~view the following files: NO Pri CLAIMANT NAME 15186 C Sullivan Petrole.um, LLC . 15'[87 C Sullivan Petroleum, LLC SITE ADDRESS 2326 Eye St. Bakersfield 2317 L St. Bal(ersfielcI Thanks! Winston H. Hickox Secreta~for Environmental Protection State Water Resources Contr°I i oard Division of CleawWater Programs 2014 T Street · Sacramento, California 95814 · (916) 227-4411 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 944212 · Sacramento, California · 94244-2120 ~ . · ~ . FAX (916) 227-4530 · Intemet Address: ht~p://www.swrcb.ca.gov/~cwphome/ustc£ Gray Davis Governor APR - 4 2OOO Mr Tim Sullivan Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC P O Box 5007 Bakersfield, CA 93308 UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK CLEANUP FUND PROGRAM, NOTICE OF ELIGIBILITY DETERMINATION: CLAIM NUMBER 015187; FOR SITE ADDRESS: 2317 L ST, BAKERSFIELD Your claim has been accepted for placement on the Priority List in Priority Class "C" with a deductible of $5,000. We have completed our initial review. The next step in the claim review process is to conduct a compliance review. Compliance Review: Staff reviews, verifies, and processes claims based on the priority and rank within a priority class. After the Board adopts the Priority List, your claim will remain on the Priority List until your priority Class and rank are reached. At that time, staff will co.nduct an extensive Cqmpliance Review at the 10ca! regulatory agency or Regional Water Quality Confrol Board. 'During this. Compliance Review, staffmay r~quest additional information needed to verify eligibility. Once the Compliance Review is completed, staffwill determine if the claim is valid or must be rejected. If the claim is valid, a Letter of Commitment will be issued obligating funds toward the cleanup. If staff determine that you have not complied with regulations governing site cleanup, you have not supplied necessary information or documentation, or your claim application contains a material error, the claim will be rejected. In such event, you will be issued a Notice of Intended Removal from the Priority List, informed of the basis for the proposed removal of your claim, and provided an opportunity to correct the condition that is the basis for the proposed removal. Your claim will be barred from further participation in the Fund, if the claim application contains a material error resulting from fraud or intentional or negligent misrepresentation. ~Record keeping:. During your cleanup project you should keep_complete and. ~w. ell.orgamzed, records of.a!! ..... corrective action activity and payment transactions. If you are eventually issued a Letter of Commitment, · you will be required to submit: (1) copies of detailed invoices for all corrective action activity performed (including subcontractor invoices), (2) copies of canceled checks used to pay for work shown on the invoices, (3) copies of technical documents (bids, narrative work description, reports), and (4) evidence that the claimant paid for the work performed (not paid by another party). These documents are necessary for reimbursement and failure to submit them could impact the amount of reimbursement made by the Fund. It is not necessary to submit these documents at this time; however, they will definitely be required prior to reimbursement. Compliance with Corrective Action Requirements: In order to be reimbursed for your eligible costs of cleanup in~firred afier December 2, 1991, you must have complied with corrective action requirements of Article 1'17 Chapter 16, Division 3, Title 23,~California Code of RegUlations. Article 11 categorized the .co~ec~fixe a,cti'on process into phases. In addition, Article 11 requires the responsible party to submit an California Environmental Protection Agency ~ Recycled Paper Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC -2- APR - 4 2OOO investigative workplan/CorrectiveAction Plan (CAP) before performing any work.- This phasing process and' the. workplhn/CAP requirements ·were intended to: . . . 1'.. help 'the responsible pan~y undertake the necessary corrective action in ai cost~effective~ efficient and "timely manner; 2. enable the regul~id~ agenc~ t0'~review and approve the proposed cost-effective corrective action alternative before any corrective action work was performed; and 3. ensure the Fund will only reimburse the most cost-effective corrective action alternative required by the regulatory agency to achieve the minimum cleanup necessary to protect human health, safety and ' . the environment. hazard to public health, or the environment. Program regulations allow the responsible party to undertake interim remedial action after: (1) notifying the regulatory agency of the proposed action, and; (2) complying with any requirements that the regulatory agency may set. Interim remedial action should only be proposed when necessary to mitigate an immediate demonstrated hazard. Implementing interim rentedial action does not eliminate the requirement for a CAP and an evaluation of the most cost- effective corrective action alternative. Three bids and Cost Preapproval: Only corrective.action costs required by the regulatory agency to protect human health, safety and the environment can be claimed for reimbursement. You must comply with all regulatory agency time schedules and requirements and you must obtain three bids for any required corrective action. Unless waived in writing, you are required to obtain preapproval of costs for all future corrective action work If you do not obtain three bids and cost preapproval, reimbursement is not assured and costs may be rejected as ineligible. If you have any questions, please cOntact me at (916)' 227-4411. Sincerely, Sandy Gill .-" Claims Review Unit Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund CCZ Mr. John Noonan RWQCB, Reg. 5 - Fresno 3614 E. Ashlan Ave. Fresno, CA 93726 Mr. Howard Wines City of Bakersfield Fire Dept. 1715 Chester Ave., 3rd Floor Bakersfield, CA 93301. California Environmental Protection Agency Recycled Paper Sullivan Pe{roieum CompanY, LLC -2- APR - 4 2000 investigative workplan/Corrective ACtion Plan (CAP) before performing any work. This phasing process and'the workplarffCAP requirements were intended to: 1. help the responsible party undertake the necessary corrective action in a cost-effective, efficient and timely manner; 2. enable the regulatory agency' to review and approve the proposed cost-effective corrective action · alternative before any corrective action work was performed; and 3. ensure, the .Fund will only reimburse the most cost-effective corrective action alternative required by the regulatory.agency to achieve the minimum cleanup necessary to protect human health, safety and the environment. In some limited situations interim cleanup will be necessary to mitigate a demonstrated immediate hazard to public health, or the environment. Program regulations allow the responsible party to undertake interim remedial action after: (1) notifying the regulatory agency of the proposed action, and; (2) complying with any requirements that the regulatory agency may set. Interim remedial action should only be proposed when necessary to mitigate an immediate demonstrated hazard. Implementing interim remedia. 1 action does not eliminate the requirement for a CAP and an evaluation of the most cost- effective corrective action alternative. Three bids and Cost Preapproval: Only corrective action costs required by the regulatory agency to protect human health, s~ifety and the environment can be claimed.for reimbursement.. You must cqmp~ly with all regulatory agency time schedules and requirements and you must obtain three bids for 'any required corrective action. Unless waived in writing, you are required to obtain preapproval of costs for all .future correCti~)e action worlc If you do not obtain three bids and cost preapproval, reimbursement is trot assured and costs may be rejected as ineligible. If you have any questions, Please contact me at (916) 227-4411. Sincerely, Sandy Gill Claims Review Unit Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund cc: Mr. John Noonan RWQCB, Reg. 5 - Fresno 3614 E. Ashlan Ave. Fresno, CA 93726 Mr. Howard Wines City of Bakersfield Fire Dept. 1715 Chester Ave., 3rd Floor Bakersfield, CA 93301 California En vironmen tal Protection Agency O Recycled Paper Winston H. Hickox Secretary for Enviromnental Protection APR - 4 200O State Water Resources Contr ll Board Division of Clean-Water Programs 2014 T Street · Sacramento, California 95814 · (916) 227-4411 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 944212 · Sacramento, California · 94244-2120~ ' ' ' FAX (916) 227-4530 ·[ntemet Address: http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/-cwphome/ustcf Gray Davis Governor Mr Tim Sullivan Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC P O Box 5007 Bakersfield, CA 93308 UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK CLEANUP FUND PROGRAM, NOTICE OF ELIGIBILITY DETEPdVHNATION:. CL ~AtM ~NUMBER 015186; FOR SIT-E ADDRESS: 2326 EYE ST .... BAKERSFIELD Your claim has been accepted for placement on the Priority List in Priority Class "C" with a deductible of $5,000. We have completed our initial review. The next step in the claim review process is to conduct a compliance review. C'ompliance Review: Staff reviews, verifies, and processes claims based on the priority and rank within a-pri0rity class. After the Board adopts the Priority List, your claim will remain on the Priority List until. your Priority Class and rank are reached. At that time, staff will conduct an extensive Compliance Review at the local regulatory agency or Regional Water Quality Control Board. During this Compliance Review, staff may request additional information needed to verify eligibility. Once the Compliance Review is completed, staff will determine if the claim is valid or must be rejected. If the claim is valid, a Letter of Commitment will be issued obligating funds toward the cleanup. If staff determine that you have not complied with regulations governing site cleanup, you have not supplied necessary information or documentation, or your claim application contains a material error, the claim will be rejected. In such event, you will be issued a Notice of Intended Remova1 frOm the Priority List, informed of the basis for the proposed removal of your claim, and provided an opportunity to correct the condition that is the basis for the proposed removal. Your claim will be barred from further participation in the Fund, if the claim application contains a material error resulting from fraud or intentional or negligent misrepresentation. Record keeping: During your cleanup project you should keep complete and well organized records of all corrective action activity and payment transactions. If you are eventually issued a Letter of Commitment, you will be required to submit: (1) copies of detailed invoices for all corrective action activity.performed (including subcontractor invoices), (2) copies of canceled checks used to pay for work shown on the invoices, (3) copies of technical documents (bids, narrative work description, reports), and (4) evidence that the claimant paid for the work performed (not paid by another party). These documents ar~ necessary for reimbursement and failure to submit them could impact the amount of reimbursement made by the Fund,:.!.tjs not necessary to submit these documents at this time; however, they will definitely be reqUired prior to reimbursement. ~Compiian~e with Corrective Action Requirements: ~.!n order to be reimbursed for your eligible colts of · cl~.~nup.incury, ed after December 2, 1991, you must have complied with correctiv6' action requirements of Article 11, Chapter 16, Division 3, Title 23, California Code of Regulati6ns. Article' 11 categorized the. corrective action process into phases. In addition, Article 11-requires the responsible party to submit an California En vironmental Protection Agency ~ Recycled Paper Winston H. Hickox Secretary for Environmental Protection State ater ResOurces Control ard Division of Clean Water Programs 20[4 T Street · Sacramento, California 95814 · (916) 227-4411 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 944212 · Sacramento, California · 94244-2120 FAX (916) 227-4530 · Intemet Address: http://www.swrcb.ca, gov/~cwphome/ustcf Mr Tim Sullivan · Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC P O Box 5007 Bakersfield, CA 93308 MAR ,, 8 2000 Gray Davis Governor UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK CLEANUP FUND PROGRAM, REQUEST FOR FURTHER DOCUMENTATION DURING INITIAL REVIEW: CLAIM NUMBER 015187; FOR SITE ADDRESS: 2317 L ST, BAKERSFIELD -A'f~sr reviewing '5,ourZiiim ap'~licati'oh-to'the-Cleanup Fbnd;-we find-that-the fol'lowi ,ng additional information is needed to determine your eligibility for placement on the Priority List: Your application states the UST Owner and Operator is Sullivan Petroleum Company. What is the relationship of Sullivan Petroleum Company and Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC? The claimant must have owned or operated the UST that leaked. Who owned and operated the UST that leaked, Sullivan Petroleum Company or Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC? Who is the claimant, Sullivan Petroleum Company or Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC? You are requesting Priority Class C. Submit documentation supporting the number of employees (i.e., Department of Employment DeveloPment (DE6) payroll reports for the last four quarters). You provided a copy of the Permit to Operate A GasolineDispensing Facility..i. ssued by San J0aquin Valley_Air Pollution Control District. This is not ac. ce. ptable: ' .We .require a coPY of the Permit to Operate the USTs issued by the City of Bakersfield Fire Department, Office of Environmental Services. NOTE: Failure to respond to this request within thirty (30) calendar days from the date of this letter may result in an ineligibility determination of your claim. If you have any questions, please coritact me at (916) 227-4411. Sincerely, . Claims Review Unit Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund cc: Mr. John Noonan RWQCB, Reg. 5 - Fresno 3614 E. Ashlan Ave. Fresno, CA 93726 Mr. Howard Wines City of Bakersfield Fire Dept. 1715 Chester Ave., 3rd'Floor Bakersfield, CA 93301 California Environmental Protection A~enc~ ~ RecycledPaper HOLC , FAHAN & A -- I I-CIAT , INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS March 14, 2000 Mr. Tim Sullivan Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC Post Office Box 5007 Bakersfield, California 93388 Subject: COST PROPOSAL FOR PREPARATION OF A CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN FOR THE SULLIVAN PETROLEUM COMPANY, LLC DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION 2317 "L" STREET, BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA (BFDESD PERMIT #BI-0166) Dear Mr. Sullivan: In response to your request for proposal, Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. (HFA) is pleased to present this cost proposal for environmental services associated with preparing a corrective action plan for the mitigation of the gasoline-containing soils at the site. BACKGROUND The site is located at 2317 "L" Street in the city of Bakersfield, Kern County, California (see Figure 1 -Site Location Map). The site is located within the commercial district, which flanks 23rd and 24th streets. The site Is at an elevation of approximately 40~ feet above MSL, and the topography is relatively fiat wilh a slight slope to the southwest. The site is located within the northwestern quarter' of the northwestern quarter of Section 30, Township 29 South, Range 28 East, MDBM. The site is a ~ewly constructed retail fuel sales facility and mini mart, which opened during the first quarter of 1999. The subject site is the location of double-walled USTs and product piping (see Figure 2 - Plot Plan). The property owner contact is Mr. Tim Sullivan, President, Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC, Post Office Box 5007, Oildale, California, 93308, (661) 393-5017. The consultant contact is Mr. Mark R. Magargee, Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc., 2820 Pegasus Drive, Suite 1, Bakersfield, California, 93308, (661) 391-0517. SITE GEOLOGY The subject site is located on the eastern flank of the San Joaquin Valley, west of the southern Sierra Nevada. The surface of the San Joaquin Valley is composed primarily of unconsolidated Pleistocene (1.6 million to 11,000 years ago) and Recent (11,000 years ago to the present) alluvial ENVIRONMENTAL: SCIENTISTS o GEOLOGISTS · ENGINEERS tqOLGUIN, FAHAN at A.S.S(XSIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENT/~L MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS sediments. Beneath the alluvial sediments ore older, predominantly lake-bed deposits. lhese lie unconformably on Mio-Pliocene marine sediments, which extend to o crystalline basement of a depth of approximately 50,000 fbg (California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG), 1965, Geologic Map of California, Bakersfield Sheet). Mr, Tim Sullivan n Petroleum Company, LLC March 14, 2000 - Page 2 At the subject site, surface deposits consist of Quaternary (recent) unconsolidated alluvium overlying Quaternary (Pleistocene) nonmarine sediments. Geologic deposits in the study area include Pleistocene alluvial sediments that form a homocline dipping gently to the southwest. The deposits are alluvium consisting of indurated and dissected fan deposits (CDMG, 1965). Surface soils are classified by the Soils Conservation Services as Kimberlina - Urban Land - Cajon Complex and are characterized as 35 percent Kimberlina fine, sandy loam with moderate permeability; 30 percent Urban land with impervious surfaces and altered fills; and 20 percent Cajon loamy sand with high permeability. $11E HYDROGEOLOG¥ The site is located in the southern portion of the Great Valley geomorphic province. The Great Valley is a north-south-trending valley, approximately 400 miles long by 50 miles wide, the southern portion of which is known as the San Joaquin Valley. Surface water and groundwater in the San Joaquin Valley are derived predominantly from the Sierra Nevada to the east and are transported by five major rivers, the closest to the site being the Kern River. The subject site is located approximately 1 mile south of the Kern River. The depth to the regional, unconfined aquifer is approximately 1,,~ fbg, and the groundwater gradient is to the south, away from the Kern River and toward the ancient Kern Lake bed (Kern County Water Agency (KCWA), 1998, 1997 Report on Water Conditions, Improvement District No. 4, February 1,1998). Perched groundwater at depths as shallow as 20 feet is known to be present flanking the current course of the Kern River, but is not known to extend to the site [KCWA, 1998, 1995 Water Supply Report, January 1998). PREVIOUS WORK During April 1999, product reconciliation records indicated a potential release in the product piping extending from the premium UST to the southeastern MPD. However, the leak detection alarm system had not indicated a release. Subsequently, the MPD was shut off, and the inner flex producl piping was removed from the outer flex containment piping. A breach was observed in the inner flex product piping. Therefore, Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC, filed an unauthorized release report with the City of Bakersfield Fire Department Environmental Services Divisio~n (BFDESD). On April 30, 1999, the concrete above the product piping was removed, and 14OLGUIN, FAHAN & IATEZ, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS an exploratory trench was excavated, exposing observed in the outer flex' containment piping. Mr. Tim Sullivan n Petroleum Company, LLC March 14, 2000 - Page 3 the product piping. A breach was also On May 5, 1999, A.J. Environmental, Inc., advanced a hand-augered soil boring (SC-l) adjacent to the location of the product piping breach (see Figure 2 for the soil boring location). Adsorbed-phase TPH as gasoline, BTEX, and MTBE concentrations were detected in the soil sample collected from soil boring SC-1 at a depth of 5 fbg (see Table 1 - Summary of Soil Sample Analytical Results): Based on the soil sampling and laboratory analytical results, the BFDESD, in its letter dated June21, 1999, required a preliminary assessment of the vertical and lateral limits of the gasoline-containing soil and an assessment of the potential for the release to impact groundwater resources. HFA prepared a work plan, dated July 8, 1999, to perform the requested work, which was subsequently approved for implementation by the BFDESD, in its letter dated July 21', 1999. HFA performed the drilling and sampling activities on August 17, 1999, and September 26, 1999. Five soil borings (B-1 through B-5) were drilled during this phase of soil investigation (see Figure 2 for the soil boring locations). On August 17, 1999, soil borings B-1 through B-3 were advanced to a depth of 20 fbg using HFA's 10-ton direct-push sampling rig where refusal was experienced due to encountering a layer of cobbles. On September 26, 1999, soil boring B-1 was deepened to a depth of 48 fbg using a torque-modified MobileTM B-53 hollow-stem auger drill rig operated by Melton Drilling Company of Bakersfield, California. Drilling refusal was experienced at a depth of 48 fbg due to encountering a second layer of larger diameter cobbles and occasional boulders. On September 26, 1999, soil borings B-4 and B-5 were also drilled at the site to a depth of 45 fbg where drilling refusal occurred. Soil boring B-1 was drilled adjacent to the potential source area; soil borings B-2 and B-3 were drilled as lateral-assessing soil borings located 15 feet to the east and west, respectively, of the potential source area; and soil borings B-4 and B-5 were drilled as lateral-assessing soil borings advanced 25 feet to the northeast and Southwest, respectively, of the potential source area (see Figure 2). Soils encountered during drilling included well-graded sands, interbedded with a layer of cobbies in the interval ranging in depth from approximately 18.5 to 22.5 fbg and a second layer of larger diameter cobbles and occasional boulders in the interval ranging in depth from approximately 37.5 fbg to the maximum depth (48 fbg) penetrated during the investigation. Groundwater was not encountered during drilling. - Mr. Tim Sullivan "~i~- I-IOL©IjIN, sA Petroleum company, LLC ~~ FAFIAN March 14, 2000- Page 4 ~ & ~IATF~S, INC. ENVlt~ONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONE~ULTAN-I-S Significanl adsorbed-phase TPH as gasoline and benzene concentrations were detected in the soil samples collected from the vertical-assessing soil boring (B-l) to a depth of less than 22 fbg and in the soil samples collected from the lateral-assessing soil borings (B-2 and B-3) less than 25 feet laterally from the potential source area. Minor adsorbed-phase MTBE concentrations were also detected in the soil samples collected from soil borings B-1 through B-$ to the total depth of the soil borings (see Figure 3 - TPH as Gasoline/Benzene/MTBE Concentrations in Soil and Table 1). It is HFA's understanding that Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC, is seeking proposals to prepare a CAP for the site. HFA's cost to provide the professional services to perform the requested scope of work are presented on the following pages. PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES AND ASSOCIATED COSTS CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN DEVELOPMENT HFA will prepare a CAP for the potential mitigation of the gasoline-containing soils and groundwater at the subject property. CCR, Title 23, Article 11, Section 2725 requires that a CAP contain an "assessment of the impacts" of the unauthorized release and a feasibility study (FS) to evaluate and select the most cost-effective corrective action. Within the CAP, the responsible party is required to recommend target cleanup levels for long-term corrective action to the regulatory agency for concurrence. To assess the impacts and to determine whether the site qualifies as a Iow-risk site and whether passive or active remedial 'activities are appropriate for the site, HFA recommends that a risk evaluation be conducted in conformance with the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Designation: E-1739 RBCA; the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories' Recommendations to Improve the Cleanup Process for California's Leaking Underground Fuel Tanks report dated October 16, 1995; the State Water Resources Control Board's (SWRCB's) Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund Technical Review Guidance Document No. 4, dated December 27, 199,5; and the SWRCB's Resolution No. 1021b Policy for Investigation and Cleanup of Petroleum Discharges to Soil and Groundwater. The ASTM Designation E- 1739 RBCA Tier 1 and 2 risk evaluation will assess whether the potential .exposure pathways exceed the permissible lifetime lx10-6 exposure levels given the concentration of benzene in the soils and groundwater at the site, and whether mitigation is required to reduce these concentrations to a permissible residual level that is protective of human health and the environment. The Tier 1 and 2 risk evaluation will specifically address the Mr. Tim Sullivan HOLGUIN, su Petroleum Company, LLC FAHAN March 14, 2000 - Page 5 & IATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS fate and transport of the hydrocarbon-containing groundwater to determine whether receptors to the groundwater are present, which should be protected from concentrations of hydrocarbons exceeding the CCR Title 22 drinking water MCLs. Potential receptors include off-site municipal water supply wells, the nearest being approximately 2,000 feet west-southwest of the site, and outdoor exposure to vapors, which could potentially migrate through the concrete cover above the release point (see Attachment 1 for the KCWA Water Wells and Water Spreading Areas, Improvement District No.,4). The CAP should also assess the feasibility and cost effectiveness of available mitigation technologies. The analysis shOuld determine whether the time frame for natural biodegradation, bioventing, vapor extraction, or excavation is sufficiently protective of human health and the environment, and which one of the methods that is sufficiently protective is the most cost-effective alternative. In the event that the risk assessment indicates that actions beyond intrinsic bioremediation are required, the CAP should include a work plan for the implementation of the selected mitigation technology. It is HFA's understanding that the likely result of the risk evaluation will determine that the site is a Iow-risk site based upon the commercial use of the property, the concrete cover above the release point, the limited volume of gasoline hydrocarbons in the subsurface, an excess of 100feet of vertical separation from the deepest known gasoline-containing soils and the first-encountered groundwater, and an excess of 2,000 feet to the nearest water supply well. However, because of the presence of MTBE in the subsurface, it is likely that active source removal will be required. Therefore, the CAP will also include a discussion of a remedial investigation (RI)/FS to determine the Best Available Technology (BAT) to conduct soil remediation. The results of the RI/FS will be incorporated into the CAP with design criteria to implement the selected BAT. Based on site-specific conditions, it is likely that in-situ vapor extraction of the gasoline~containing soils within a 50-foot radius of the release point will be the selected mitigation activity. HFA recommends drilling four vapor extraction wells (VW-1 through VW-4), with vapor extraction well VW-1 positioned adjacent to the release point and vapor extraction wells VW-2 through VW-4 positioned 30 feet laterally from the release point (see Figure 3 for the proposed vapor extraction well locations). The vapor extraction Wells should be drilled to a deplh of approximately 50 fbg and completed with 45 feet of 4-inch-diameter slotted PVC casing packed in aquarium sand. Because of the limited volume of gasoline hydrocarbons in the soil and lack of a convenient location to position a fixed VES unit, HFA recommends that a portable high-vacuum VES unit be used for the vapor extraction of the gasoline hydrocarbons at the site. The unit is self-conlained and can be positioned above' individual wells unlil cleanup levels are & IATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS obtained. Upon competition of the active remediation HFA recommends that a verification soils investigation be conducted. Upon authorization of Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC, HFA will prepare the CAP for submission to the BFDESD. Mr. Tim Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC March 14, 2000 - Page 6 ESTIMATED COST FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN DEVELOPMENT: $ 2,5OO TERMS AND CONDITIONS The aforementioned site assessment services will be conducted on a time-and-materials basis, for an estimated cost of $2,500. Invoices will be submitted on a monthly basis and upon completion of the project. Any additional work performed beyond the scope of the proposed tasks outlined above will be conducted in accordance with the enclosed Schedule of Rates. The enclosed Schedule of Rates and General Terms and Conditions for an hourly rate contract are included for your review and should be considered part of this proposal. The services performed by HFA will be conducted in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of its profession currently practicing under similar conditions in the state of California. No other warranty is expressed or implied. If you accept this proposal, please sign where indicated and return an executed copy of the proposal and the General Terms and Conditions. HFA is prepared to proceed with the project upon receipt of the signed agreement. Mr, Tim Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC March 14, 2000 - Page 7 HOLGUIN, sA FAFIAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIF::IONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc., looks forward to the opportunity of prodding this service for Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contacl Mr. Mark Magargee at (661) 391-O517 or at e-mail address Mark_Magargee@bk.hfa.com. Respectfully submitted, Mark R. Magargee, CHG, RG Senior Hydrogeologist Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. MRM:rri Enclosures: Figure 1 - Site Location Map Figure 2 Plot Plan Figure 3 TPH as Gasoline/Benzene/MTBE Concentration's in Soil Table 1 Summary of Soil Sample Analytical Results Attachment 1 - KCWA Water Wells and Water Spreading Areas, Improvement District No. 4 'HFA's Schedule of Rates dated July 1,1994 HFA's General Terms and Conditions Sign Here for Acceptance of Proposal: SIGNATURE DATE PRINT NAME TITLE ~ HOLGUIN, '~ FAHAN ~ & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. Tim Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC March 14, 2000 - Page 8 .... ~ ' '1 ] EE .' ~h. ~ -.-~:~,~'E' ~'.~: :E. tL.-Z'--:.E ..... ~. ?~ ....... ~ ..... '>~-:~wT'-', ...... ~ ,;~ ~ ~ ~ . , .,.~,,~ ~ ........ [.~ , ~.' . ~ :, ... ~ '~ q. ~. "' . .'~ . W~i~ ~* ~D' ':' :~ : . ~ ,l=~ , ~~~.. ~ 'q::ll;.'~ ~ 11 ,, ...... ,,,~ ,, .,~ . ~'. ~ o ........ ~ .....,,? .~ . ..: . .: ........... ,. ,. ~, ,-. , --: . ... ,~ =-. - . I /~/ , ,.' ,~,,: .':, .................. ..... ~,. · . .. ~ ~,::,,,;'~,,, :: IIII ' "' ~r ~ ' "' ' '~'""~' ....... .... ~ ~X ~."r ' ~ s r ' ----:-~'-'-;';~;~~: :':'tt:' ....... Jl{ .:~ -~ .,~ ~~-~ ' :: ', ~ ' -' - '- - ~;-~J ' . "' ' ' " v' ' CALl ORNI ~ "; :~' ;'~ ; ~,' ' ' YE I* 'i ' ' '- -- .... -.~:.,'~ ~ ~.:" ---. , ~ ~~~~,.: ~' .... .,' ~ ~ .. ' · ' . -~ ~ ~,. ~,,~:' ,[ -~.,.. t :-- , ~ ".',:t[ :~ LEGEND SULLIVAN PETROLEU~ O0~PANY, LLC 05 1 MILE ~ DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION o o ,.,oo ~.ooo ~.~ ~.~ ~.o~ ~CE~ ~J 2317 "L" STREET [~]~i~]~---~ ~ ~ ~ BAKERSFI ELD, CA o o.~ ~ ~LOU~t~n { FIGURE 1 - SITE LOCATION MAP USGS Oil DAL~GOSFORD 7.5 MINUTE SE[UES QUADRANGLES HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATF~S, INC. ENVIIq©NMENT/~L M~,NA~EMENT OONSULTANTS Mr. Tim Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC March 14, 2000 - Page 9 CAR Z WASH MINI MART I z T LU >- O rr- rr DISPENSER ISLANDS rr I- n o B-4 CANOPY ~ EXPLORATORY TRENCH ~ ~ ~ LOO/TION i ~'rr j z L~ B-3 B-1 I t [ o ~ 10.000-GALLON GASOLINE UST DISPENSER ISLANDS [ 20,'000-'GALLON, u o o SPLIT-CHAMBERED, GASOLINE UST B-5 ............ ~. SIDEWALK . 23RD STREET SOALE IN FEET o 15 30 LEGEND SULLIVAN PETROLEUM COMPANY, LLC SOIL BORING DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION FII L END 2317 "L" STREET TURBINE END BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA ' FIGURE 2 - PLOT PLAN HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES', INC. REVISION DATE: MARCH 14, 2000: RRI HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ~IATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Su Mr. Tim Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC March 14, 2000 - Page 10 VW_~'~xl0zkx¢ - - ND/ND/0.023 ' 20 - Nb/ND/0.19 ' 40- - N~/ND/3.7 B-3 B-1 5 ND/0.014/3.8 VW-4 o SC-ln I - 19,000/50/220 15 ~ 4,800/0.82/2 -- 26,000,154/1,400 lO-- 6'5°°/28/7152vw 13-5 3 ( 22 = =-ND/ND/0.48--  [ 10 - -ND/ND/ND 25 - -- ND/ND/0.33 20 - -ND/ND/0.15 30= ~_ND/ND/3.1 30- -ND/ND/1.3 35 --- ND/ND/2.15 40 - -ND/O. 12/11 40 - -- ND/ND/3.2 45--- ND/0.00~2/5.2 23RD STREET SCALE IN FEET 0 15 30 LEGEND SULLIVAN PETROLEUM COMPANY, LLC )~ SOIL BORING ND NOT DETECTED DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION o F~LL END ~;~ PROPOSED VAPOR 2317 'L" STREET o TURBINE END~ EXTRACTION WELL BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA -C #/#/# TPH AS GASOLINE/BENZENE/MTBE LOCATION FIGURE 3 - TPH AS GASOLINE/BENZENE/MTBE CONCENTRATIONS IN SOIL (Hg/I) CONCENTRATIONS IN SOIL #_.L. DEPTH OF SAMPLE (pg/I) HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. MARCH 14, 2000: RRI HOL©UIN, FAI-IAN & A.SSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF SOIL SAMPLE ANALYTICAL RESULTS DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION, BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Mr. Tim Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC March 14, 2000 - Page 11 SAMPLE DATE ! SAMPLE TPH AS ETHYL- TOTAL -- SOURCE SAMPLED DEPTH ID GASOLINE BENZENE TOLUENE BENZENE XYLENES MTBE REF i i (fbg) / (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) EPA ANALYTICAL METHOD 8020 N/A REPORTING LIMIT VARIES-SEE LABORATORY REPORTS N/A SC-1 ! 5-10-99I 5 SC-1-5 26,000 64 1,700 320 2,900 1,400 A B-1 ! 8-17-99i 10 B-1-10 6,500 28 230 85 430 76 B i 8-17-99 { 15 B-1-15 7,000 26 250 94 430 85 B ' 9_26_99i 22 B-1-22 ND ND ND ND ND 0.48, ~- , 9-26-99 _ 2~5__ B-1-25 ND ND ND ....... ND ND 0.331 B I 9-26-99 i 40 B-1-40 ND ND 0.0099 ND 0.022 3.2 B t -- i 9-26'99 i 45 B-1-45 ND 0.0062 0.018 ND ND 5.2 B B-2 8-17-99 I 5 B-2-5 19,000 50 1,000 260 1,400 __ 220 B i 8-17-99/ 15 B-2-15 4,600 0.82 150 73 410 2 B B-3 .8_-!7-9_9__I_- 5 B-3-5 ND 0.014 0.21 0.085 0.72 3.8 a 8-17-99 15 B-3-15 6,300 0.3 150 81 740 3 B B-4 ._ 9-26-99 I 10 B-4-10 ND ND ND ND ND 0.023 B 9-26-99 i__ 20 B-4-20 ND ND ND ND ND 0.19 B i_ 9-26-99 30 B-4-30 ND ND~ 0.012 ND 0.023 3.5 B I 9-26-99 I 40 B-4-40 ND ND 0.0065 ND ND 3.7 B B-5 ! 9-26-99 i 10 B-5-10 ND ND ND .... ND ND ND B I 9-26-99 ~ 20 B-5-20 ND ND ND ND ND 0.15 B ! 9-26-99 ii 30 4 B-5-304 ND ND .......... 0.007 NDi ND 1.3 B REF = Repod reference. N/A = Not applicable. ND = Not letected. A = A.J. Environmental, Inc.'s, repod dated May 1999. B = Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc.'s, repod dated November 17, 1999. HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ~IATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS ATTACHMENT 1. KCWA WATER WELLS AND WATER SPREADING AREAS, IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 4 HOLGUIN, ~ FAHAN ~ & ASSOC~T~, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS SCHEDULE OF RATES* (Effective July 1, 1994) PERSONNEL: Principal ......... .'. ............................................................................................................................................. Project Manager ...................................................................................................................................... Registered Environmental A~c~)r ................................................................................................ Certified Industrial Hygienist ............................................................................................................... Senior Scientist ........................................................................................................................................... Environmental Professional/Geologist/Engineer/Chemist: Senior/Registered/Professional ............................................................................................... Associate Chemist ......................................................................................................................... A~stant ............................................................................................................................................... Senior Technician ..................................................................................................................................... Field Technician ........................................................................................................................................ Drafting/Graphics on Intergraph System ..................................................................................... Drafting/Graphics ................................................................................................................................... Document Editor ...................................................................................................................................... Clerk ............................................................................................................................................................... Labarer I ........................................................................................................................................................ EQUIPMENT AND MISCELLANEOUS: PhotovacTM Field Gas Chromatograph ........................................................................................ HnuTM Meter (Photolonlzaflon Detector) ...................................................................................... SU If ~M rrm Interests Flame Ionization Detector ............................................................................ Four-RunnerTM Gas Detector .............................................................................................................. In-Situ Aquifer Test Equipment ............................................................................................................ Combustibility Meter .............................................................................................................................. Generator .................................................................................................................................................... Electric Groundwater Sampling Kit .................................................................................................. Manual Groundwater Sampling Kif .................................................................................................. Soil Sampling Kit ......................................................................................................................................... Health and Safety Kit - Level D ........................................................................................................... Health and Safety Kit - Level C ........................................................................................................... Decontamhaflon Kit ............................................................................................................................... Vapor Ex'fraction System Measurement ~t .................................................................................. Vapor Extraction System and Measurement Kit ........................................................................ Soil Vapor Accessories ......................................................................................................................... Steam Cleaner ........................................................................................................................................... MMC Interface Probe ............................................................................................................................ Mileage/Vehicle ...................................................................................................................................... .......................................................................................................................... ~ ................................................ Flatbed TnJck .............................................................................................................................................. ..................................................................................................................................................... , ..................... SOILVAPOR ~VEY: ......................................................................................................................................... VAPOR EXTRACTION SYSTEM: Mobile Vapor Extraction System (Catalytic and Thermal Oxidation Unit)". ............... Carbon Adsorption Unit'*'. ................................................................................................................. BIOREMEDIATION: Bioremediation Unit ................................................................................................................................. ~ Outside services are actual cost plus 15% to cover overhead. $110.00/hour 90.00/hour 75.00/hour 75.00/hour 100.00/hour ~.00/hour 80.00/hour 75.00/hour 05.00/hour 55.00/hour 45.00/hour 55.00/hour 45.00/hour 40.00/hour 25.00/hour 35.00/hour 25.00/hour 400.O0/day 125.00/day 125.00/day 75.00/day 500.00/usage 25.00/day 50.O0/dcp/ 300.O0/day 150.O0/day lO0.O0/day No Charge 25.00/day/person 25.00/day 75.00/usage 500.O0/day 150.O0/day 125.00/day 25.00/day 0.35/mile or 75.00/day 0.70/mile or 150.00/day 2,500.00/day Quoted Quoted Quoted Per Diem; $85/day/person for any location requiring overnight lodging due to distance from home office. DePositions; Charged at 1.5 times the houdy rate. Coud ADDearances: Charged at 2 times the hourly rate. "Individual houdy rates Include salaries, overhead, administration, and profit. "Depending upon the size (100 to 500 cubic feet per minute). """Carbon canisters are charged extra at $950 each, Including canister disposal costs. HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATF~S, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT I-~ONSULTANTS GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS FEES AND PAYMENT 1. The fee for services will be based on HFA's standard hourly rates current at the time the work is performed. A current copy of these standard rates is attached. These rates are re-evaluated each January ls! and July 1st, following which time they are adjusted to reflect the then current rates for classifications given. Non-salary expenses directly attributable to the project like (1) living and traveling expenses of employees when away from the home office on business connected with the project, (2) identifiable communication expenses, (3) identifiable drafting and stenographic supplies and expenses, and (4) identifiable reproduction costs applicable to the work will be charged at actual cost plus a 15% service charge. For the use of computers, word processors, etc., fees will be in accordance with the most recent fee schedule. 2. Unless otherwise stated, any cost estimate is for budgetary purposes only and is not a fixed, lump-sum bid. The Client will be notified if and when (due to unforeseen circumstances) the budgete, d figure may need to be exceeded. 3. The fee for outside services will be at actual cost plus 15% of actual cost to cover overhead and administration. 4. Monthly invoices describing the work performed and expenses incurred during the preceding month will be issued on the first of every month and will be payable upon receipt unless otherwise agreed. In order to defray carrying charges resulting from delayed payments, simple interest at the rate of 18% per annum (but not exceeding the maximum rate allowable by law) will be added to the unpaid balance of each invoice. The interest period shall commence 30 days after the date of the odginal invoice and shall terminate upon request. Payments will first be credited to interest and then to principal. No interest charge will be added during the initial 30-day period following the date of invoice. COMMENCEMENT OF WORK The work shall commence immediately upon receipt of notice 'to proceed or upon signing of the work proposal by an authorized company representative. If, after comme'ncement of the work, the project is delayed for any reason beyond the control of HFA for more than 60 days, the terms and conditions contained herein are subject to revision. In the event that the Client requests termination of the work prior to completion of a report, HFA reserves the right to complete such analyses and records as are necessary to place its files in order and, where considered by it necessary to' protect its professional reputation, to complete a report on 1he work performed to date. A termination charge to cover the cost thereof in an amount not to exceed 30% of oil charges incurred to the date at the stoppage of the work may, at the discrelion of 14FA, be made. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 1. BOOKS OF AGGOUNT - HFA will mainlain books of accounts of payroll cods, travel, subsistence, field and incidental expenses. Said books will be available at reasonable times to lhe Clienl af HFA's office. 2, INSURANCE - t-IFA will maintain insurance as will protect the Clienl from claims under the Workers' Compensalion laws and from general Iiabilily claims for bodily injury, deolh, or property damage, which may arise from lhe negligent performance by its employees in the funclions and services required under lhis agreement. HFA's liability for injury o~ damage to persons or properly arising out of work performed lot the Clienl and for which legal liabilily may be found to rest upon HI-A, olhe~ lhon for professional errors and omissions, will be limited 1o HFA's general Iiabilily insurance coverage, which is maintained in lirnils exceeding $1,000,000. FoP any damage on account of any e,oL omission, or other professional negligence, 14FA's Iiabilily will be limiled Io o sum not 1o exceed $50,000 or HFA's fee less direct, HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ~~TES, lNG. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS GEi~IAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS Page 2 third-party costs, whichever is greater. In the evenl that the Client does not wish to limit HFA's professional liabilily to this sum, HFA agrees 1o waive this limitation upon receiving the Client's written request and agreemenl to pay an additional fee to be negotiated, All limit increases must be requested before commencement of services. 3. WARRANTY AND LIABILITY - HFA warranls thai its services are performed, within the limits prescribed by its Clienl, with the usual thoroughness and competence of the consulting profession, in accordance with the standard for professional services at the time those services are rendered. No other warranty or representation, either expressed or implied, is included or intended in its proposals, contracts, or reports. HFA's liability shall be limited to injury or loss caused by the negligence or willful misconduct of HFA, its subcontractors and/or its agents hereunder. HFA has neither created nor contributed to the creation or existence of any hazardous substance, radioactive material, toxin, irritant, pollutant, or other dangerous substance or condition at the site, and its compensation hereunder is in no way commensurate with potential risks of injury or loss that may be caused by exposure to such substances or conditions. 4. DOCUMENTS - All tracings, survey notes, and other original documents as instruments of service ore and shall remain the propedy of HFA, except where by law or precedent these documents become public property or unless other arrangements ore mode by the Client. The Client agrees to hold harmless, indemnify, and defend HFA against all damages, claims, expenses, and losses arising out of any reuse of the plans and specifications without the written authorization of HFA. 5. TERMINATION OR ABANDONMENT - If any podion of the work is terminated or abandoned by the Client, then the provisions of these Terms and Conditions in regard to compensation and payment shall apply insofar os possible to that podion of the work not terminated or abandoned. If said termination occurs prior to the completion of any phase of the project, the fee for services performed during such phase shall be based on HFA's reasonable estimate of the portion of such phase completed prior to said termination, plus a reasonable amount to reimburse HFA for termination costs. 6. .REVISION OF TERMS - If notice to proceed is delayed for any reason beyond 60 days, the terms and conditions contained herein are subject to revision. 7. ATTORNEYS' FEES - If either party becomes involved in litigation arising out of this contract for the performance thereof, the court in such litigation shall award reasonable costs and expenses, including attorneys' fees, to the party justly entitled thereto. 8. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS - All of the terms, conditions, and provisions hereof shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns provided, however, that no assignment of the contract shall be made without written consent of the parties to the agreement. 9. INDE!MNIFI(~,ATION - The Client shall indemnity and hold harmless HFA from all losses, claims, expenses, damages, liabilities, or obligations of any kind (including legal fees and expenses) arising from or connected with the performance of its duties under this agreement, except for losses, claims, expenses, damages, liabilities, or obligations (including legal fees and expenses) arising from or connected with HFA's willful misconduct or breach of its obligations under this agreement. SIGNATURE DATE PRINT NAME I'ITLE " GTC 9/97 D February 28, 2000 FIRE CHIEF RON FRAZE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 2101 "H" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3941 FAX (661) 395-1349 SUPPRESSION SERVICES 2101 "H' Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3941 FAX (661) 395-1349 PREVENTION SERVlCE~ 1715 Chester Ave, Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3951 FAX (661) 326-0576 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3979 FAX (661) 326-0576 TRAINING DIVISION 5642 Victor Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93308 VOICE (661) 399-4697 FAX (661) 399-5763 Mr. Tim Sullivan Sullivan Petroleum LLC P.O. BOx 5007 Bakersfield, Ca 93388-5007 CERTIFIED MAIL RE: Office Hearing for Failure to Comply with Corrective Action Order Dear Mr. Sullivan: On December 29, 1999 you were notified that a site assessment was required to determine the full extent of contamination associated with the underground storage tank(s) located at Downtown Chevron Station 2317 "L" Street. You were requested to submit a work plan for this assessment, to this office, within thirty (30) days. Your failure to submit this corrective action (work plan) is a concern. You are therefore ordered to appear at an office hearing to be held on March 15, 2000, at 10:00 a.m., to be held in the Office of Environmental Services Conference Room located on the third floor of the City of Bakersfield Development Services Building, 1715 Chester Avenue. Failure to comply will result in additional enforcement action. At this meeting, you should be prepared to explain why you have not complied with the corrective action notice or submit your work plan for further assessment of this contaminated site. If you have any questions, or must re-schedule this office hearing, feel free to call me at 661-326-3979. Office of Environmental Services REH/dm S:\USTFORMS\UST,L2B Jan 10,2000- . City of Bakersfield Fire/~pepa~tment' ' Office ofEnvirome, pt~ Services C/o Ralph Huey,,l~ector 1715 Chester ~enue · Bakersfield,,~A 93301 ' Re: Do~fown Chevron, 23171 Street, Bakersfield Chevron Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC Jobber, Chevron Products Company P.O. Box 5007 Bakersfield, CA 93388-5007 Phone 805 393 5017 Phone800 339 5003 Dear Mr. Huey, ' /~ ~'.2t700 '"~/ Enclosed are the completed forms as requested your ~~../ in letter dated Dec 9 If any further information is needed please feel free to contact me at 66-393-5017 ext. 12 David Bird Retail Manager CC: H.Wines O Prir~ted on . .- Recycled ,Paper SamPle Letter (3) Notice of ,osed Action Submitted to Local Agency Date: City of Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services c/o Ralph E. Huey, Director 1715 Chester Avenue, Suite 300 Bakersfield, CA 93301 RE: Notice of Proposed Action Submitted to Local Agency fo~/~z~i~ ~--7~t.oQ c~i~name F_ q -g I-7 Site address _ccor.dance withr~tion 25297.15(a) of Ch. 6.7 of the Health & Safety Code, I, //t ~',,,,f.~3'"~ c::_',--r',-w?6t.v/'t~ f_~ ~ (' . , certify that I have notified all Name of primary responsible party responsible landowners of the enclOsed proposed action. Check space for applicable action(s): ~ cleanup proposal (corrective action plan) _,~ site closure proposal local agency intention to make a determination that no further action is required. local agency intention to issue a closure letter. Sincerely, · -~ CC: (Names and addresses of all record fee title Owners) · Sign.amre"'f~o pri~ible party Name ~primary respon, sible party Sample Letter (2): List of L~ ;Form Date: City of Bakersfield Fire Department ' Office of Environmental Services c/o Ralph E. Huey, Director 1715 Chester Avenue, Suite 300 Bakersfield, CA 93301 RE: Certified List of Record Fee Title Owners for Site address Fill out item 1 if there are multiple site landowners. If you are the sole site landowner, skip item 1 and fill out item 2. Site name In~c, cordqnce with s;e~o.n 25297.15(a) of C_.hapter 6.7 of the Health & Safety Code, I, ._~c)J l),u,mr4 i e___..--r~ole.,.-.,,~ (~:~,p~,-~? ~.L Name of primary responsible party certify that the following is a complete list of current record fee title oWners and their mailing addresses for the above site: OOL,~ L_A~r>Oco¢~l~ iS; e.,z w r'-',o,-t I d L C (- Z~ l ~9 ~ Ingccordance with section 25297.15(a) of Ch. 6.7 of the Health & Safety Code, I, Name of primary responsible party certify that I am the sole landowner for the above site. Sincerely, Signature of pr/mary responsible party N~ of primary responsible party LLC Jan 10,2000 01evron Chevron City of Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services C/O Ralph Huey, Dkector 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 Re: Downtown Chevron, 2317 1 Street, Bakersfield Dear Mr. Huey, Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC Jobber, Chevron Products Company · P.O. Box 5007 Bakersfield, CA 93388-5007 Phone 805 393 5017 Phone 800 339 5003 Enclosed are the completed forms as requested in your letter dated Dec. 30, 1999. If any further information is needed please feel free tO contact me at 66-393-5017 ext. 12 David Bird Retail Manag~er . ' ; Sample Letter (3) Notice o ~l~ posed Action Submitted to Local Agency Date: f-- / 0 "- 7~Oc-z~ ~ City of Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services c/o Ralph £. Huey, Director 1715 Chester Avenue, Suite 300 Bakersfield, CA 93301 RE: Notice of Proposed Action Submitted to Local Agency fo~/-~zv/,o,~--'~t-o,~/ -_Z~ [._~ t~- -~TY"~-~--"F'"~thqe~_..~"~tJd, ~2} q~ alit)name Site address ~x~ccor.dance wit%~tion 25297.15(a) of Ch. 6.7 of the Health & Safety Code, I, / It ~,",m,l_ f c_.:r-.r',_~/~o,.a,a [___ ~ ~ , certify that I have notified all Name of primary responsible party responsible landowners of the enclosed proposed.action. Check space for.applicable action(s): cleanup proposal (corrective action plan) site closure proposal local agency intention to make a determination that no further action is required. local agency intention to issue a closure letter. Sincerely, CC: (Names and addresses of all record fee title owners) S ig n atu~rit~6'~ib I e part2,.' 1//4 Name of primary respon, sible party Sample Letter (2): List of Lewners Form 'Date: City of Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services c/o Ralph E. Huey, Director 1715 Chester Avenue, Suite 300 Bakersfield, CA 93301 RE: Certified List of Record Fee Title Owners Site address . Site name Fill out item 1 if there are multiple site landowners. If you are the sole site landowner, skip item 1 and fill out item 2. In~c, cordq_nce with s .e~.o.n 25297.15(a) of ~hapter 6.7 of the Health& Safety Code, I, Name ofpfimaw responsible pa~ ce~i~ that the following is a complete list ofcu~ent record fee title oxmers ~d their mailing addresses forthe abOve site: DOk~ LA¢OOco¢~ i%; In_accordance with section 25297.15(a) of Ch. 6.7 of the Health & Safety Code, I, ~-, Name of primary responsible part)~ certify that I am the sole landowner for the above site. Sincerely, Signature of primary responsible party N~ of primary responsible parLv LLC December 30, 1999 FIRE CHIEF RON FRAZE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 2101 'H" Street Bakersfmldo CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3941 FAX (805) 395-1349 SUPPRESSION SERVICES 2101 "H" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3941 FAX (805) 395-1349 · PREVENTION SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3951 FAX (805) 326-0576 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3979 FAX (805) 326-0576 TRAINING DM$1ON 5642 Victor Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93308 VOICE (805) 399-4697 FAX (805) 399-5763 Tim Sullivan Sullivan's Petroleum Company, LLC P.O. Box 5007 Bakersfield, CA 93308 New Landowner Notification and Participation Requirements DowntoTM Chevron Service Station at 2317 "L" Street Dear Mr. Sullivan: ' This letter is to inform you 'of new legislative requirements pertaining to cleanup and closure of sites where an unauthorized release of hazardous substance, including petroleum, has occurred from an underground storage tank (UST). Section 25297.15(a) of Ch. 6.7 of the Health & Safety Code requires the primary or active responsible party to notify all current record owners of fee title to the site of: 1) a site cleanup proposal, 2) a site closure proposal, 3) a local agency intention to make a determination that no further action is required, and 4) a local agency intention to issue a closure letter. Section 25297.15(b) requires the local agency to take all responsible steps to accommodate responsible landowners' participation in the cleanup or site closure process and to consider their input and' recommendations. For purposes of implementing these sections, you have been identified as the primary or active responsible party. Please provide to this agency, within twenty (20) calendar days of receipt of this notice, a complete mailing list of all current record owners of fee title to the site. You may use the enclosed list of landowners form (sample letter 2) to comply with this requirement. If the list of current record owners of fee title to the site changes, you must notify the local agency of the change within twenty (20) calendar days from when you are notified of the change. If you are the sole landowner, please indicate that on the landowner list form. The following notice requirements do not apply to responsible parties who are the sole landowner for the site. In accordance with Section 25297.15(a) of Ch 6.7 of the Health & Safety Codei you must certify to the local agency that all current record owners of fee title to the site have been informed of the proposed action before the local agency may do any of the following: 1) consider a cleanup proposal (corrective action plan) 2) consider a site closure proposal 3) make a determination that no further action is required 4) issue a closure letter You may use the enclosed notice of proposed action form (sample. letter 3) to comply with this requirement. Before approving a cleanup proposal or site closure proposal, determining that no further action is required, or issuing a closure letter, the local agency will take all reasonable steps necessary to accommodate responsible landowner participation in the cleanup and site closure process and will consider all input and recommendations fi.om any responsible landowner. Sincerely, Howard H. Wines, m Hazardous Materials Specialist HHW/dm enclosures S:\USTFORMS~UST.L4 Sample Letter (2): List of Lanq~ers Form Date: City of Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services c/o Ralph E. Huey, Director 1715 Chester Avenue, Suite 300 Bakersfield, CA 93301 RE: Certified List of Record Fee Title Owners for Site name Site address Fill out item 1 if there are multiple site landowners. 1 and fill out item 2. If you are the sole· site landowner, skip item In accordance with section 25297.15(a) of Chapter 6.7 °fthe Health & Safety Codei I, Name of primary responsible party certify that the following is a complete list ofcun'ent record fee title owners and their mailing addresses for the above site: In accordance with section 25297.15(a) of Ch. 6.7 of the Health & Safety Code, I, Name of primary responsible party certify that I am the sole landowner for the above site. Sincerely, Signature of primary responsible party Name of primary responsible party Sample Letter (3) Notice of Pried. Action Submitted to Local Agency Date: City of Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services c/o Ralph E. Huey, Director 1715 Chester Avenue, Suite 300 Bakersfield, CA 93301 RE: Notice of Proposed Action Submitted to Local Agency fOr Site name Site address In accordance with section 25297.15(a) of Ch. 6.7 of the Health & Safety Code, I, , certify that I have notified all Name of primary responsible party responsible landowners of the enclosed proposed action. Check space for applicable action(s): cleanup proposal (Corrective action plan) ,....~ site closure proposal local agency intention to make a determination that no further action is required. local agency intention to issue a closure letter. Sincerely, Signature of primary responsible party Name of primary responsible party CC: (Names and addresses of all record fee title owners) D December 29, 1999 FIRE CHIEF RON FRAZE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 2101 'H' Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3941 FAX (805) 395-1349 SUPPRESSION SERVICES 2101 "H' Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3941 FAX (805) 395-1349 PREVENTION SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3951 FAX (8O5) 326-0576 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3979 FAX (805) 326-0576 TRAINING DMSION 5642 Victor Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93308 VOICE (805) 399-4697 FAX (805) 399-5763 Mr. Tim Sullivan Sullivan's Petroleum Company, LLC P.O. Box 5007 Bakersfield, CA 93308 CORRECTIVE ACTION ORDER Preliminary Assessment Report for Dox~ntown Chevron Service Station Located at 2317 "L" Street Dear Mr.' Sullivan: I have reviewed the above referenced report, dated November 17, 1999, prepared by Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. (HFA). This Office cannot concur with HFA's recommendation to issue a no further action determination and consider the site for closure at this time for the following reasons: Section 25299.37.1 of the California Health and Safety Code reads as follows: "No closure letter pursuant to this chapter shall be issued unless the soil or groundwater, or both, where applicable, at the site have been tested for MTBE and the results of the testing are known to the regional board." o G0vemor Davis issued Executive Order D-5-99 on March 25, 1999, and signed Senate Bill 989 on October 8, 1999. These documents recognize tl'iat if not managed properly, MTBE can cause significant adverse impacts to current and future beneficial uses of ground and surface water. The City of Bakersfield is located above an aquifer which is the source of water supply for this community. The site is also within 1000' of a domestic water supply well located at 2116 "N" Street. (California Water Service Pump Station No. 7). The amount of gasoline which was released is not accurately known, but based on the physical evidence of the damaged fuel line and its operation over several months since installation until notification of release and repairs to the line, the release could be on the order of hundreds, if not thousands of gallons of leaked gasoline into the environment. The soil types beneath the site, consisting of well graded sands and gravel, indicates that the gasoline, in all likelihood, has migrated to depths beneath these porous and permeable soil layers. It was these same gravel layers which also caused the sampling auger to bind up and not proceed below 40 t~ in depth. Therefore, vertical definition of the MTBE contamination has not yet been adequately defined. Therefore, prior to 30 January 2000, you shall submit a workplan addressing interim remedial action and further, site characterization. Please follow the enclosed Draft Guidelines for Investigation and Cleanup of MTBE and Other Ether-Based Oxygenates, dated 12/13/99, for additional information regarding the implementation of corrective actions at your Downtown Chevron Service Station. If you have any questions regarding this Corrective Action Order, please contact me at (661) 326-3979. Sincerely, Howard H. Wines, III Hazardous Materials Specialist Office of Environmental Services HHW/dm enclosure CC: B. Myers, RWQCB M. Magargee, I-IFA ..~~1~[i. EIM.v. iR~N!MENTAL MANAGEMENT CiZ)NsU. L~IAN¥.S Noverhb&r t.~,~i999 '~._-':_::__.- - :.- ~-: ~_: . Mr, Howard H~ City of Bakersfield Fire DePart'ment Environmental Servldes~ DiVision -~. · -1715 Chester Avenue:-' -Bakersfie d, Cali~ornla~9330 ~ ': '- - 'SUbject: : -PRELIMINARY:SITE ASSESSMENT REPORT,:SULLIVAN PETROLEUM COMPANYi LLC DOt~/NTOWN CHEVRON, SERVICE STATIQN,:. 2317 "L" STREET BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA (BFDESD PERMIT #BI-0166) -- H°lguin, 'Fahan & -Associates,-Inc, (HFA) is pleased- to present the following P~eliminary Site Assessment RepOrt for: the aboVe-referenced site, The drilling and soil sampling activities were conducted to further"delineate the extent Of gasolin~-containing soil detected at the above-referenced site, This work was required ,by the Bakersfield-Fire Department Environmental Services: Division (BFDESD) in its letter dated_ June 21, 1999, as a result of the discovery of gasoline-c°n-tainlng soil in and around the area of the premium grade unleaded gasoline product'pipeline.extending to the southeastern multiple product dispenser (MPD) at the site, - _ _ ~ :' .SITE DEscRIPTION The site is located at 23_17 "L" 'Street in the city of Bakersfield, (see Figure 1 -Site Location-Map). The site is located within the commercial district, which flanks 23rd'and 24th streets. The site is at an elevation-of approximately 404 feet above MSL, and the topography-Is relatively flat with a slight slope to the southwest. The site is located withtn the northwestern ~qUarter of the northwestern quarter- of Section 30, Township 2? South, Range 28 East, MDBM, The site is a newly constructed' retail.fuel Sales facility and mini mart, which opened during the first quarter of ]999. The subject site is the location of double-walled USTs and product Piping (see Figure 2 - Plot Plan). ' - The property owner contact Is Mr. Tim Sullivan, President, Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC, Post Office Box 5007, Oildale, California, 93308, (661) 393-50171 . The consultant:contact is Mr. Mark R. Magargee, Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc.,' 2820 Pegasus 'Dr~e, Suite 1, Kern Count, California -' Bakersfield, California, 93308¢ (661) 391:0517. ENVIR:OIX]MENT. A-b.h_: SCIENT'ISTS * GEOLOGISTS *'-ENG'INEER:S ':' ' ~ '' -Contaminated site-Ass~ssm~'nts · Phase I Audits · Site Remediation · Hazardous~Waste M~hag~ment 14-3 South Figueroa Street - ' ~ · '1657~)-Aston Street . ~ : 2820 Pegasus Drive; Suite I -- '~ ,Ventura, California 93001 "'-_ lrvine, California 92606 ~ - ; . Bakersfield, Califoriaia 93308 (805) 652-0219 .~ ' ~ (949) 4-42-6665 ' -: (805) 391~-051 ~ - ;-..= ~ 652-0793 FAX ¢ '~ .~:(949)-724-0446 FAX .... :-:-(805) 3¢1'~0826 FAX~ ' :- Internet: firsl_last@hfa.c_om lnternet: fir~l' l~t~l~fa-.~)~'*n- : ~= ' I~ternei~ first-last@hfa.com _ . ....___ %,-: . -~: ;' :..., 3001 S(~uth'35tti Street, Suite C-I 1 Ph6eni~-Arizon~ 85D3'4 _(800)~789.-9219-o 602 42.6-100_0. ; .: ~(602) 426-0113 FAX ~=~ - - Inter net :- fi~$t-' last @ph .t~fa~ ~o-n~ - ' . +.~ HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. Howard H. Wines, III BFDESD November 17, 1999 - Page 2 SITE BACKGROUND PREVIOUS WORK During April 1999, product reconciliation records indicated a potential release in the product piping extending from the premium UST to the southeastern MPD. However, the leak detection alarm system had not indicated a release. Subsequently, the MPD was shut off, and the inner flex product piping was removed from the outer flex containment piping. A breach was observed in the inner flex product piping. Therefore, Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC, filed an unauthorized release report with the BFDESD. On April 30, 1999, the concrete above the product piping was removed, and an exploratory trench was excavated, exposing the product piping. A breach was also observed in the outer flex containment piping. On May 5, 1999, A.J. Environmental, Inc., advanced a hand-augered soil boring (SC-l) adjacent to the location of the product piping breach (see Figure 2 for the soil boring location). Adsorbed-phase TPH as gasoline, BTEX, and M.TBE concentrations were detected in the soil sample collected from soil boring SC-1 at a depth of 5 fbg (see Table 1 - Summary of Soil Sample Analytical Results). Based on the soil sampling and laboratory analytical results, the BFDESD, in its letter dated June 21, 1999, is currently requiring a preliminary assessment of the vertical and lateral limits of the gasoline-containing soil and an assessment of the potential for the release to impact groundwater resources. HFA prepared a work plan, dated July 8, 1999, to perform the requested work, which was subsequently approved for implementation by the BFDESD, in its letter dated July 21, 1999. HFA performed the drilling and sampling activities on August 17, 1999, and September 26, 1999. The results of the requested site investigation are presented in this report. SITE GEOLOGY The site is located at an elevation of approximately 404 feet above MSL, and the topography slopes slightly to the southwest (see Figure 1). The subject site is located on the eastern flank of the San Joaquin Valley and west of the southern Sierra Nevada. The surface of the San Joaquin Valley is composed primarily of unconsolidated Pleistocene (1.6 million to 11,000 years ago) and Recent (11,000 years ago to the present) alluvial sediments. Beneath the alluvial sediments are older, predominantly lake-bed deposits. These lie unconformably on Mio-Pliocene marine sediments, which extend to a crystalline basement at a depth of approximately 50,EEO fbg (California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG), 1965, Geologic Map of California, Bakersfield Sheet). Mr. Howard H. Wines, BFDESD November 17, 1999 - Page 3 HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOC T , INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS At the subject site, surface deposits consist of Quaternary (recent) unconsolidated alluvium overlying Quaternary (Pleistocene) nonmarine sediments. Geologic deposits in the study area include Pleistocene alluvial sediments that form a homocline dipping gently to the southwest. The deposits are alluvium consisting of indurated and dissected fan deposits (CDMG, 1965). Surface soils are classified by the Soils Conservation Services as Kimberlina Urban Land - Cajon Complex and are characterized as 35 percent Kimberlina fine, sandy loam with moderate permeability; 30 percent Urban land with impervious surfaces and altered fills; and 20 percent Cajon loamy sand with high permeability. SITE HYDROGEOLOGY The site is located in the southern portion of the Great Valley geomorphic province. The GreatValley is a north-south-trending valley, approximately 400 miles long by 50 miles wide, the southern portion of which is known as the San Joaquin Valley. Surface water and groundwater in the San Joaquin Valley are derived predominantly from the Sierra Nevada to the east and are transported by five major rivers, the closest to the site being the Kern River. The subject site is located approximately 1 mile south of the Kern River. The depth to the regional, unconfined aquifer is approximately 150 fbg, and the groundwater gradient is to the south, away from the Kern River and toward the ancient Kern Lake bed (Kern County Water Agency (KCWA), 1998, 1997 Report on Water Conditions, Improvement District No. 4, February 1998). Perched groundwater at depths as shallow as 20 feet is known to be present flanking the current course of the Kern River, but is not known to extend to the site (KCWA, 1998, 1995 Water Supply Report, February 1998). SITE EVALUATION METHODS The intent of this report is to present the methodologies used to assess the vertical and lateral extents of gasoline-containing soil and to determine the possibility of groundWater contamination resulting from the release at the site. Five soil borings (B-1 through B-5) were drilled during this phase of soil investigation (see Figure 2 for the soil boring locations). On August 17, 1999, soil borings B-1 through B-3 were advanced to a depth of 20 fbg using HFA's 10-ton direct-push sampling rig where refusal was experienced due to encountering a layer of cobbles. On September 26, 1999, soil boring B-1 was deepened to a depth of 48 fbg using a torque-modified MobileTM B-53 hollow-stem auger drill fig operated by Melton Drilling Company of Bakersfield, California. Drilling refusal was experienced at a depth of 48 fbg due to encountering a second layer of larger diameter cobbles and occasional HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. Mr. Howard H. Wines, III BFDESD November 17, 1999 - Page 4 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS boulders. On September 26, 1999, soil borings B-4 and B-5 were also drilled at the site to a depth of 45 fbg where drilling refusal occurred. Soil boring B-1 was drilled adjacent to the potential source area; soil borings B-2 and B-3 were drilled as lateral-assessing soil borings located 15 feet to the east and west, respectively, of the potential source area; and soil borings B-4 and B-5 were drilled as lateral-assessing soil borings advanced 25 feet to the northeast and southwest, respectively, of the potential source area (see Figure 2 and Attachment 1 for the logs of exploratory borings). SOIL INVESTIGATION AND SAMPLING RESULTS Prior to conducting the current assessment, underground utilities such as water, electricity, and sewer were mapped by Underground Service Alert of Northern California. HFA performed the drilling and sampling on August 17, 1999, and September 26, 1999. Soils encountered during drilling included well-graded sands, interbedded with a layer of cobbles in the interval ranging from approximately 18.5 to 22.5 fbg and a second layer of larger diameter cobbles and occasional boulders in the interval ranging in depth from approximately 37.5 fbg to the maximum depth (48 fbg) penetrated during the investigation. Groundwater was not encountered during drilling (see Attachment 1 and Attachment 2 for the soil boring and sampling procedures). All drilling spoils were subsequently transported by a licensed waste hauler to a licensed disposal facility under non-hazardous waste manifest (see Attachment 3 for the non-hazardous waste manifest). Soil samples were submitted to HFA Environmental Laboratories, a California state-certified laboratory, for analysis for TPH as gasoline using EPA Method 8015 (M) and BTEX and MTBE using EPA Method 8020 (see Table 1 and Attachment 4 for the laboratory reports). Significant adsorbed-phase TPH as gasoline and benzene concentrations were detected in the soil samples collected from the vertical-assessing soil boring (B-l) to a depth of less than 22 fbg and in the soil samples collected from the lateral-assessing soil borings (B-2 and B-3) less than 25 feet laterally from the potential source area. Minor adsorbed-phase MTBE concentrations were also detected in the soil samples collected from soil borings B-1 through B-5 to the total depth of the soil borings (see Figure 3- TPH as Gasoline/Benzene/MTBE Concentrations in Soil, Table 1, and Attachment 4). HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. Howard H. Wines, Ill BFDESD November 17, 1999 - Page 5 CONCLUSIONS Based upon the laboratory analytical results of the soil samples collected during the previous and recent drilling activities, significant gasoline hydrocarbon concentrations were detected in the soil samples collected from beneath the potential source area to a depth of less than 22 fbg and laterally less than 25 feet from the potential source area, with minor MTBE concentrations persisting to the total depth of the investigation at 48 fbg where drilling refusal is experienced in a layer of cobbles and boulders. Based on the findings of this preliminary site assessment, given the significant depth to groundwater, the limited depth of significant gasoline hydrocarbon concentrations, and the drilling refusal in a layer of cobbles and boulders, the BFDESD will likelY not require additional assessment of the vertical and lateral limits of gasoline concentrations in the soil at the site. The depth to the regional unconfined aquifer is approximately 1El fbg at the site. Therefore, in excess of 100 feet of separation exists between the deepest known impacted soil and the first occurrence of groundwater. The BFDESD will likely not require additional assessment of the potential to impact groundwater resources. The site appears to qualify as a Iow-risk site in accordance with the criteria specified in the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory's Recommendations to improve the Cleanup Process for California's Leaking Underground Fuel Tanks report dated October 16, 1995; the State Water Resources Control Board's [SWRCB's) Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund Technical Review Guidance Document No. 4, dated December 27, 1995; and the SWRCB's Draft Resolution No. 1021b Policy for Investigation and Cleanup of Petroleum Discharges to Soil and Groundwater. The conditions that qualify the site as a Iow-risk site include the fact that the hydrocarbons are limited to the unsaturated zone, with greater than 100 feet of vertical separation to groundwater; the soils are not saturated with petroleum defined as substantially filling the soil pore volume with petroleum; and neither gasoline-containing soils nor gasoline-containing vapors in the interval ranging in depth from 0 to 3 fbg is known to be present beneath an occupied building. In addition, the methodology of the American Society for Testing and Materials Designation: E-1739 RBCA Tier 1 and 2 risk evaluations indicates that potential exposure pathways do not exceed the permissible lifetime lx10-6 exposure levels given the maximum concentration of benzene detected in the soil samples collected at the site. HOLGUIN, FAHAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS RECOMMENDATIONS Mr. Howard H. Wines, III BFDESD November 17, 1999 - Page 6 On behalf of Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC, HFA recommends that the BFDESD issue a no further action determination and consider the site for closure. Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc., trusts that you will find this Preliminary Site Assessment Report to your satisfaction. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Mr. Mark Magargee at (661) 391-0517 or at e-mail address Mark_Magargee@bk.hfa.com. Respectfully submitted, Environment~il Tecnnician Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. MRM:rri Enclosures: Figure 1 - Figure 2 - Figure 3 - Table 1 - Attachment 1 Attachment 2 Attachment 3 Attachment 4 Mark R. M'agargee, CHG, R~/ -' ~/ Senior Hydrogeologist ? Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. Site Location Map Plot Plan TPH as Gasoline/Benzene/MTBE Concentrations In Soil Summary of Soll Sample Analytical Results - Logs of Exploratory Borings - Soil Boring and Sampling Procedures ' - Non-Hazardous Waste Manifest - Laboratory Reports cc: Mr. Tim Sullivan, Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC [HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ~IATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. Howard H. Wines, III BFDESD November 17, 1999 - Page 7 ~/'/'IF' ,,,, ;; ;,'~',. x-%A , ..... E.,..,~.~ _--'.:-~-2~**' %., ,, ..., I, ........... /tlW_ I '1~ ' ',h,,,.,,, '~ ~ ~w~., __:~~ .,:. ~ ',~ ......... U~ · · ~. ~ .... ~ ---~ p ., · ~ · . · ~:::~MII c~'~ ~ N ~ , ,,.,,~,, ~ ~ ::', .:" , . I.~ , o o ill 0%. "I ~ ,{,. ':~ ~o . _ ~'fl~>ll' ~l'X:~ ~ ,, ~. ~ ~ ..... ~ ....... ': "" ~ ~' ' '' ~" ' I '% '~ ' ' ... ........ . . , ., .' .,:. '-, ,&i~:;~.:. ' o~ _ ~..... ~/; ,,~ ....... }t~[_~~~~~~~~L_, ..'..,, ' /0 " ," - ..'0, · .. ,, .. ~: '. L..( ' - : : · , ,~EE .. ~ ." ' "2~:'..'. .:.-n": .' ~ : ~ ~ .... --;A~: ....... ,,_ ...... ~ --~~~ ', / Is ..... ' 'F:-i-': ....... ~ .- - ..:~=~ ; ~ ~ ' ~ ~,',, ~ , ,~/~. · ~" ' : :'2"F 7~--~E~ r ~~--~-~E ''*:"T~~ ;~ ;~l? ;~'(~' ~ *, [:,H¢~' ,I ~II - ~ /-"' ' XX'-- " '-"" ....~'"'"" ""'"'"'"*~' ...... LEGEND SULLIVAH PETROLEUM COMPANY, LLC 05 1 MIEE ~ DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION 0 L__~ I t I I I I I I I 0 1,0~ 2,~ a.~ 4.~ 5,~ FEET~l~I 2317 "L" STREET ~~-- ~ ~ i ~ BAKERSFIELD, CA 0 05 I KILOMETER FIGURE 1 - SITE LOCATION MAP USGS OILDAL~GOSFORO 7.5 MINUTE SERIES QUADRANGLES HOLGU~, F~ & ~SOC~TES, INC. HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. Howard H. Wines, III BFDESD November 17, 1999 - Page 8 CAR Z i WASH MINI MART '~ r~u~ >- 0 rr DISPENSER ISLANDS rr I.- O < =' CANOPY--~ EXPLORATORY TRENCH - I --- 10,000-GALLON GASOLINE UST DISPENSER ISLANDS l I ~ 20,'000'GALLON, o o o n SPLIT-CHAMBERED, GASOLINE UST SIDEWALK 23RD STREET SCALE IN FEET 0 15 30 LEGEND SULLIVAN PETROLEUM COMPANY, LLC DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION SOIL BORING 2317 "L" STREET FILL END BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA TURBINE END FIGURE 2 - PLOT PLAN HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. REVI: --: NOVEMBER 16, 1999: RRI HOL©UIN, FAHAN & ASSOC T , INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. Howard H. Wines, III BFDESD November 17, 1999 - Page 9 B-4 10 - - N[ ~/ND/0.023 i 20- - NI~/ND/0.19 40- - N6/ND/3.7 B-3 B-1 B-; 5 ND/0.014/3.8 °'""~1 '~ 5 - 19,000/50/220 15 6,300/0.3/3 15 - 4,1~00/0.8W2 5- 26,000~ $4/1,400 B-5 10 - - 6,500/28/76 / ~ 15 - - 7,000/26/85 /) ~ 22- - ND/ND/0.48 10---ND/ND/ND 25- - ND/ND/0.33 20 - _ND/ND/0.15 30 - _ N D/ND/3.1 ..// 30- --ND/ND/1.3 35- - ND/ND/2.6 40 - --ND/0.12/11 40 - - ND/ND/3.2 45 -- - ND/0.0062/5.2 23RD STREET SCALE IN FEET 0 15 30 LEGEND SULLIVAN PETROLEUM COMPANY, LLC ~ SOIL BORING ND NOT DETECTED DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION u FILL END 2317 "L" STREET o TURBINE END BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA _L #/#/# TPH AS GASOLINE/BENZENE/MTBE FIGURE 3 - TPH AS GASOLINE/BENZENE/MTBE CONCENTRATIONS IN SOIL (pg/I) CONCENTRATIONS IN SOIL #_C DEPTH OF SAMPLE (pg/I) HOLGtIIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ~EVISION DATF: N(%VICMR~:R 1R I~Q~' RFII HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATF , INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. Howard' H. Wines, Ill BFDESD November 17, 1999- Page 10 TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF SOIL SAMPLE ANALYTICAL RESULTS SULLIVAN PETROLEUM COMPANY, DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION, BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA SAMPLE I DATE SAMPLE TPH AS ETHYL- TOTAL SOURCE SAMPLED DEPTH ID GASOLINE BENZENE TOLUENE BENZENE XYLENES MTBE REF (fbg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) EPA ANALYTICAL METHOD I 8020 N/A REPORTING LIMIT VARIES-SEE LABORATORY REPORTS N/A SC-1 ~ 5-10-99 5 SC-1-5 26,000 64 1,700 320 2,900 1,400 A B-1~ 8-17-99 10 B-1-10 6,500 28 230 85 430 76 B ~ 8-17-99 15 B-1-15 7,000 26 250 94 430 85 B 9-26-99 22 B-1-22 ND ND ND ND ND 0.48 B 9-26-99 25 B-1-25 ND ND ND ND ND 0,33 B 9-26-99 30 B-1-30 ND ND 0.041 ND 0,094 3.1 B 9-26-99 35 B-1-35 ND ND 0,011 ND ND 2.6 B 19-26-99 40 B-1-40 ND ND 0.0099 ND 0.022 3.2 B 9-26-99 45 B-1-45 ND 0.0062 0.018 ND ND 5.2 B B-2 8-17-99 5 B-2-5 19,000 50 1,000 260 1,400 220 B '~' 8-17-99 15 B-2-15 4,600 0.82 150 73 410 2 B B-3 8-17-99 5 B-3-5 ND 0.014 0.21 0.085 0.72 3.8 B 8-17-99 15 B-3-15 6,300 0.3 150! 81 740 3 B B-4 9-26-99 10 B-4-10 ND ND ND ND ND 0.023 B 9-26-99 20 B-4-20 ND ND ND ND ND 0.19 B 9-26-99 30 B-4-30 ND ND 0,012 NE) 0.0?_3 ~,.5 9-26-99 40 B-4-40 ND ND 0.0065 ND ND 3.7! B B-5 9-26-99 10 B-5-10 ND ND ND ND ND ND B 9-26-99 20 B-5-20 ND ND ND ND ND 0.15 B 9-26-99 30 B-5-30 ND ND 0.007 ND ND 1,3 B 9-26-99 40 B-5-40 ND 0.12 0.51 0.032 0.16 11 B REF = Report reference. N/A = Not applicable. ND = Not detected. A = A.J. Environmental, Inc.'s, report dated May 1999. B = Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc.'s, current report. HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS ATTACHMENT 1. LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS LITHOLOGY (UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM) MAJOR DIVISIONS ~ TYPICAL NAMES SYMBOLS WELL-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND z GRAVEL GRAVELS WITH LrFrLE GYM MIXTURES, LFI~LE OR NO FINES t--'T' MORE THAN ,' OR NO FINES aD POORLY-GRADED GRAVELS OR ~ GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES ~O rr HALF COARSE ILl SILTY GRAVELS, (.9 FRACTION IS I~M ' GRAVEL-SAND-SILT MIXTURES E} rr LU LARGER THAN GRAVELS WITH OVER ua<~> ~u No. 4 SIEVE SIZE 12% FINES Gl0 CLAYEY GRAVELS, Z (/) ~ GRAVEL-SAND-CLAYMIXTURES WELL-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY -J g SW SANDS, LI'I-R-E OR NO FINES ~ ~ ~. SAND SANDS WITH LITTLE LU ~ OR NO FINES POORLY-GRADED SANDS OR GRAVELLY SANDS. r,J) ~ MORE THAN ~P LrrrLE OR NO FINES rr :z: HALF COARSE LU FRACTION IS SM SILTY SANDS, SAND-SILT MIXTURES r,,D ~O SMALLER THAN SANDS WITH OVER No. 4 SIEVE SIZE 12% FINES ~C CLAYEY SANDS, SAND-CLAY MIXTURES i I INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, ~ ~, ML SILTY OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY O ~ LU INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY, o') ~ ,,>,_ SILT AND CLAY CL GRAVE'LYCLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SlLTYCLAYS, U--ANCLAYS LU ,T o GL ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS OF O LOW PLASTICITY ~ ~ ~ ~ INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUSOR DI^TOMAOEOUS FINE ua ~- z SILT AN D CLAY CH INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY. FAT CLAYS LL O HIGHLY ORGANIC SOIL Pt PEAT AND OTHER HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS SYMBOLS AND NOTES ~ ASPHALT I SAMPLE COLLECTED FOR ANALYSIS ~ CONCRETE ~' SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED ~ CONCRETE GROUT ~ GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING ~ BENTONITE CHIPS ~ STABILIZED WATER LEVEL (DATE) ~ FILTER SAND PACK (DA-~E) ~ NATIVE SOIL ~ WELL BOX WITH LOCKING CAP PID = PHOTOIONIZATION DETECTOR ppmv = PARTS PER MILLION BY VOLUME BLANK SCHEDULE 40 PVC CASING USCS = UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM _------i' SLOTTED SCHEDULE 40 PVC CASING gw = GROUNDWATER WELL, vw = VADOSE WELL  fbg = FEET BELOW GRADE I BOTTOM PLUG OD = OUTSIDE DIAMETER ~__ HOLGUIN, ~ ~'AF__,~ & KEY TO LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING ~ ASSOCIATES, INC. MAJOR DIVISIONS C~)LP TYPICAL NAMES SYMBOLS WELL-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND z GRAVEL GRAVELS WITH LR-rLE ~vv M~XTURES, LrrrLE OR NO F~NES t-"r' MORE THAN OR NO FINES aD POORLY-GRADED GRAVELSOR -- GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES ~O rr HALF COARSE "' FRACTION IS "'~ SILTY GRAVELS, ~..~Vl ' GRAVEL-SAND-SILT MIXTURES ~ <~ ~ LARGER THAN GRAVELS WITH OVER _~ ~ NO. 4 SIEVE SIZE 12% FINES GC CLAYEY GRAVELS,  GRAVEL-SAND-CLAY MIXTURES U_ O WELL-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY ~,.~V V SANDS, LITrLE OR NO FINES ~ ~ ~. SAND SANDS WITH LITTLE ,~ z MORETHAN OR NO FINES c:~ POORLY-GRADED SANDS OR GRAVELLY SANDS, ~ ~~ LrFrLE OR NO FINES ~- HALF COARSE (~) FRACTION IS SM SILTY SANDS, SAND-SILT MIXTURES r,,D O SMALLER THAN SANDS WITH OVER No. 4 SIEVE SIZE 12% FINES ~C CLAYEY SANDS, SAND-CLAY MIXTURES INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, r.q, ~, ML SILTY OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY ._1 ~__~ ,,,~ LU INORGANIC CLAYS Of LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY, ~ ,,>,_ SILT A N D C LAY CL GRAVELLY CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY :o © GL ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC "1- ~ INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR DIATOMACEOUS FINE Z Z [V~ SANDY OR SILTY SOILS, ELASTIC SILTS ua ~- z SILT AN D CLAY CH INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY. FAT CLAYS 0 /'"1LJ ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS HIGHLY ORGANIC SOIL Pt PEAT AND OTHER HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS Revision 1/96 SAMPLE CLIENT: Sullivan Petrole'lffr-n Company ..,,- C__OMPLETION DETAIL cE __ GROUNDWATER WELL uJ ~ VADOSE WELL PROJECT: Downtown Chevron Service Station "'" ;' ~ I-- ~ ~" c~ ~ BORING Q-.~ LOCATION: 2317 "L" Street, Bakersfield, California ~ r~ DESCRIPTION AND SOIL CLASSIFICATION rd'J CASING: N/A -- SLOT SIZE: N/A NAME: %gravel/sand/fines, gradation/plasticity, color, angularity, maximum size (gravels), density/consistency, moisture, odor, stain FILTER PACK: N/A __ SILTY SAND: 0/85/15, poorly graded, brown, SM subangular, loose, soft, moist, strong odor, no stain · 10 -- 2,000+ ,, ,, ~ ,, ,, ,, , -- 10 · -- 15 dense -- 2,000+ ...... . -, ,, -, -, -, -, , ~'-- 15 · __ SAND: 10/80/10, well graded, tan, subangular, -- 2,000+ SW maximum gravel size 0.5, loose, stiff, dry, strong -- odor, no stain -- · 25 maximum gravel size 0.25 .... 1,874 ,,,,,,,,,,,,, -- 25 -- ,,,,,,,., %,.,,_ -- ,., ,., ,-, ,, ,, ,, , __ ,,,,,,,,,,,,, -- -- ,,,.,,,,, ~,,,,-- .', ,, ,.. ,,,,,,,, -- 30 · ---- 30 maximum gravel size 1" __ 959 - ;,;,;,',,'; ;.; _ -- 35 ".,",',','..','~ 35 DRILLING METHOD: direct-push to 20 fb.q & hollow-stem au.qer DATE DRILLED: 8-17-99 & 9-26-99 SAMPLER TYPE: ShelbyTM tube & split spoon LOGGED BY: B. Skenfield TOTAL BORING DEPTH: 48 fbg APPROVED BY: M. Magargee, RG #4892 DEPTH TO WATER: Not encountered DRILLED BY: HFA & Melton Drilling Company __~__ HOLGUIN, FAHAN & LOG OF XPLORATOHY BORING .--'- ~ ASSOCIATES, INC. Pag~ t of SAMPLE CLIENT: Sullivan Petrole'~n Company -~- C_OMPLETION DETAIL __ GROUNDWATER WELL - PROJECT: Downtown Chevron Service Station nLd~ ~ ~. ~ __ VADOSE WELL ~ ::]E ~ ~ ~ E (O __ SPARGE WELL I-- ~~. A'- o.~ (/) BORING ~ ,. ,. LOCATION: 2317 "L" Street, Bakersfield, California z x LLI ~.. O~ ,..c, CASING: N/A ~ ~ DESCRIPTION AND SOIL CLASSIFICATION m -- SLOT SIZE: N/A NAME: %gravel/sand/fines, gradation/plasticity, color, angularity, maximum size (gravels), density/consistency, moisture, odor, stain FILTER PACK: N/A · 11-- 35 maximum gravel size 0.5", moist -- 765 SW ,',,',,,',,-~,',,-,,,'i ~ 35- I-- 40 maximum gravel size 1" -- 768 ',',',-,',-,, -- 40 ~ 45 maximum gravel size 0.5" -- 787 %%%%%%, -- 45 _ auger refusal ~,~,~, ~, ~,~,~ ~ 50 ~ 50 ~ 55 -- 55 -- 60 -- 60 -- 65 ~ 65 -- 70 ~ 70 DRILLING METHOD: MobileTM B-53, 8"-OD, hollow-stem augep DATE DRILLED: September 26, 1999 SAMPLER TYPE: ShelbyTM tube & split spoon LOGGED BY: B. Skenfield TOTAL BORING DEPTH: 48 fbg APPROVED BY: M. Magargee, RG ff4892 DEPTH TO WATER: Not encountered DRILLED BY: Melton Drilling Company B-1 ~ ~~ & LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING ~ ~SSOC~S, [~C. Page 2 of 2 -,-,- COMPLETION DETAIL SAMPLE CLIENT: Sullivan Petrole"~'~ Company -- OE __ GROUNDWATER WELL LU cO VADOSE WELL - PROJECT: Downtown Chevron Service Station ~-'" - fO __ SPARGE WELL ~ ~ LOCATION: 2317 "L" Street, Bakersfield, California_z o.. v ~ o3::D ~j BORING u.I v O~ ~) CASING: N/A ~_ ~ DESCRIPTION AND SOIL CLASSIFICATION m SLOT SIZE: N/A NAME: %gravel/sand/fines, gradation/plasticity, color, angularity, maximum size (gravels), density/consistency, moisture, odor, stain FILTER PACK: N/A -- 0 ,,, ~,..,......, ~.. .. -- 0 __ SILT: 0/10/90, Iow plasticity, brown, loose, soft, moist, ML ;, ;, ;, ;, ;, ~, .; _ very strong odor, no stain "-- ',',',',',,',' -- 5 · 5 __ 2,000+ _ ;,;,;,;,;,;,; _ ·- 10 """'"'""' -- 10 __ SAND: 0/85/15, well graded, tan, subangular, loose, -- 2,000+ SW ,,,,,,,,,,~,, _ __ stiff, dry, strong odor, no stain ~,~,;,~,~,,~,~ _ · ~ 15 __ 2,000+ -- 20 z_c_.z_z_c_.z.~~ 20 -- 25 -- 25 -- 30 -- 30 -- 35 -- 35 DRILLING METHOD: 10-ton direct-push ri,q DATE DRILLED: August 17, 1999 SAMPLER TYPE: Modified ShelbyTM tube LOGGED BY: B. Skenfield TOTAL BORING DEPTH: 20 fbg APPROVED BY: M. Magargee, RG #4892 DEPTH TO WATER: Not encountered DRILLED BY: Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. B-2 FAI-IAN & LOG OF £XPI..OR IOR¥ BORING ~ ASSOCIATES, INC. Page 1 of 1 COMPLETION DETAIL SAMPLE CLIENT: Sullivan Petrole'~ Company ""=' -- GROUNDWATER WELL ~ ~ - v^oosE WELL ~ PROJECT: Downtown Chevron Service Station a-'" ~ ~ ~_ ~ ~ ~ E3 E O __ SPARGE WELL o_.a LOCATION: 2317 "L" Street, Bakersfield, California ~. ~ o') x BORING ,,,~ o,g v ~ -- ~ ~ DESCRIPTION AND SOIL CLASSIFICATION c~ SLOT SIZE: N/A CASING: N/A NAME: %gravel/sand/fines, gradation/plasticity, color, angularity, maximum size (gravels), density/consistency, moisture, odor, stain FILTER PACK: N/A -- o ,,,,,,,,,,,,. o _ SILTY SAND: 0/80/20. poorly graded, gray. loose, SM ,,,,,,,,,,~,, _ soft moist degraded odor gray stain · 5 .. 2.000+ ....... 10 _ -- 1,878 ,~,,,.,-,,,,~,,-, _ I~ 15 -,-,,,-,-,,,,-- 15 __ SAND: 0/85/15, well graded, tan, loose, soft. moist, -- 2,000+ SW ,,,,-,,,,,,,, _ __ very strong odor, no stain ~ 20 '''''"'~ 20 ~ 25 ~ 25 ~ 30 ~ 30 -- 35 ~ 35 DRILLING METHOD: 10-ton direct-push rig DATE DRILLED: August 17, 1999 SAMPLER TYPE: Modified ShelbyTM tube LOGGED BY: B. Skenfield TOTAL BORING DEPTH: 20 lb§ APPROVED BY: M. Magargee/RG #4892 DEPTH TO WATER: Not encountered DRILLED BY: Holcjuin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. ~ HOLGUIN, ~ FAHAN & LOG OF EX~LORATOFI¥ BOFII~G ~ ASSOCIATES, I~C. Pa~e COMPLETION DETAIL SAMPLE CLIENT: Sullivan Petrole'1~l~ Company v -- GROUNDWATER WELL n" __ LU 03 VADOSE WELL PROJECT: Downtown Chevron Service Station ~-'" ~ 03 -- 03 (~ ~3 E O SPARGE WELL ~ t-- ~ o.. x BORING ~_ ,-, LOCATION: 2317 "L" Street, Bakersfield, California ~ z ~. 03 CASING: N/A ~ DESCRIPTION AND SOIL CLASSIFICATION 03 SLOT SIZE: N/A NAME: %gravel/sand/fines, gradation/plasticity, color, angularity, FILTER PACK: N/A maximum size (gravels). density/consistency, moisture, odor. stain m 0 ,,,, ,,,, ,, ,,,, .,,, ,,,,, 0 __ SAND: 0/90/10. well graded, tan. subangular, loose, SW stiff, dry, no odor, no stain -- 5 ', ', ', '., ', ', '. -- 5 · 10 ,,,,,,,,,,,,.,, 10 __ 2,2,2 33 -- 15 ,,-,-.,-,,-,,,,,,.-- 15 20 -- 20 0/85/15 2,3,4 0 __ ~ron stain ~ 25 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,-- 25 L._ 30 ,,,,,,,.,,,,.,,~ 30 · 10/80/10, maximum gravel size 0.25", moist, no stain 8,8,8 124 _ maximum gravel size 0.25", no stain ; ,, , , ,, ,, , .-- 35 DRILLING METHOD: MobileTM B-53, 8"-OD hollow-stem auger DATE DRILLED: September 26, 1999 SAMPLER TYPE: 1.5"-diameter, California-modified split spoon LOGGED BY: B. Skenfield TOTAL BORING DEPTH: 45 fbg APPROVED BY: M. Magargee, RG #4892 DEPTH TO WATER: Not encountered DRILLED BY: Melton Drilling Company ao uI , B-4 & LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING ~ ASSO(~]J~T]~S, ~[I~C. Page 1 of 2 SAMPLE CLIENT: Sullivan Petrole'l~rn Company ~ C~OMPLETION DETAIL GROUNDWATER WELL 8E __ UJ r~ VADOSE WELL -~ PROJECT: Downtown Chevron Service Station ~-'" ~ ~ -- ~O~ ~ E O ~ SPARSE WELL [ ~ LOCATION: 2317 "L" Street, Bakersfield, California~z [ ~ ~ x BORING q~ ~ ~ -- ~ ~ DESCRIPTION AND SOIL CLASSIFICATION ~ CASING: N/A -- '' NAME: %gravel/sand/fines, gradation/plasticity color angularity SLOT SIZE: N/A maximum size (grave s), dens ty/consistency, moisture, odor, stain = FILTER PACK: __ N/~ -- 35 SW ~,,,,, ~, ~, 35 ~ 40 sand and cobbles, moist, minor odor -- 771 ',~',~,,, ~ 40 auger refusal ',',',',',',' -- 45 ..... ' ' 45 -- 50 -- 50 ~ 55 ~ 55 ~ 60 ~ 60 -- 65 -- 65 -- 70 ~ 70 DRILLING METHOD: MobileTM B-53, 8"-OD hollow-stem auger DATE DRILLED: September 26, 1999 SAMPLER TYPE: 1.5"-diameter, California-modified split spoon LOGGED BY: B. Skenfield TOTAL BORING DEPTH: 45 fbg APPROVED BY: M. Magargee, RG ~4892 DEPTH TO WATER: Not encountered DRILLED BY: Melton Drilling Company  HOLGUIN, & LOG OF XPLO ATO Y BOdiNG ~ ASSOC~TES, INC. pa9~ a o~ a SAMPLE CLIENT: Sullivan Petrole'1~rrn Company '..,, C__OMPLETION DETAIL GROUNDWATER WELL ct' __ ._, PROJECT: Downtown Chevron Service Station ~ ~' u') __ VADOSE WELL ~ T ~ 5 "~ E r,O __ SPARGE WELL I'- '~ ~- x BORING ,=, o- ,-, LOCATION: 2317 "L" Street, Bakersfield, California _ ,,,~ O~ ~ ~ -- z c3 DESCRIPTION AND SOIL CLASSIFICATION - CASING: N/A -- SLOT SIZE: N/A NAME: %gravel/sand/fines, gradation/plasticity, color, angularity, maximum size (gravels), density/consistency, moisture, odor, stain FILTER PACK: ~N/A~ w 0 ,,,. ~,,,,,,,; 0 w SAND: 0/90/10, poorly graded, tan, subangular, loose, SP stiff, dry, no odor, no stain ~ SAND: 0/90/10, well graded, tan, subangular, loose, SW __ stiff, dry, no odor, no stain · 10 ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, , ~ 10 __ 2,3,3 -- -- · 20 0/85/15 7,7,7 21 ',',',',',',' 20 __ iron stain -- 25 "'~""""'~ 25 · -- 30 10/80/i0, maximum gravel size 0.25", moist, no stain 4,14,10 515 ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, , ~ 30 w maximum gravel size 0.5", no stain -- 35 ",.'~',"..',,~,"~ 35 DRILLING METHOD: MobileTM B-53, 8"-OD hollow-stem auger DATE DRILLED: September 26, 1999 SAMPLER TYPE: 1.5"-diameter, California-modified split spoon LOGGED BY: B. Skenfield TOTAL BORING DEPTH: 45 fbg APPROVED BY: M. Magargee, RG #4892 DEPTH TO WATER: Not encountered DRILLED BY: Melton Drilling Company  HOLGUIN, 'AHAN & LOG OF XPLO ATO Y ~ ASSOCIATES, INC. Page ~ of 2 SAMPLE CLIENT: Sullivan Petrole"lff~n Company ,~. C__OMPLETION DETAIL GROUNDWATER .WELL n- __ ~ PROJECT: Downtown Chevron Service Station ~- ~ ~ _ VADOSE WELL ~ T ~(~ ~ c> ~ -- SPARGEWELL o_ x BORING ~ ~ LOCATION: 2317 "L" Street, Bakersfield, California >z - ~ 9~ ~ ~ - Z ~ DESCRIPTION AND SOIL CLASSIFICATION ~ CASING: N/A -- NAME: %gravel/sand/fines, gradation/plaslicity, color, angularity, SLOT SIZE: N/A maximum size (gravels), density/consistency, moisture, odor, stain _. FILTER PACK: ~ N/~ 35 GRAVELLY SAND: 10/90/0, well graded, tan, GW ~ subangular, maximum gravel size 0.5, loose, stiff, d~, no odor, no stain ~-- 40 sand and cobbles, moist, minor odor 12,24,51 282 ~',~'~ 40 auger refusal -- 45 45 -- 50 -- 50 ~ 55 ~ 55 -- 60 ~ 60 ~ 65 ~ 65 ~ 70 -- 70 DRILLING METHOD: MobileTM B-53, 8"-OD hollow-stem auger DATE DRILLED: September 26, 1999 SAMPLER TYPE: 1.5"-diameter, California-modified split spoon LOGGED BY: B. Skenfield TOTAL BORING DEPTH: 45 fbg APPROVED BY: M. Magargee, RG ff4892 DEPTH TO WATER: Not encountered DRILLED BY: Melton Drilling Company  HOLGUIN, ~ ~~ & LOG OF ~XPLO~ATO~Y 80~[NG --~ ~ ASSOC~TES, INC. Page 2 o[ 2 HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS ATTACHMENT 2. SOIL BORING AND SAMPLING PROCEDURES SOIL BORING AND SAMPLING PROCEDURES SITING Soil borings were positioned as noted in the report. TRUCK-MOUNTED DRILLING AND SOIL SAMPLING PROCEDURES Each soil boring was manually drilled for the first 5 feet to establish that the area was clear of subsurface structures. The soil borings were drilled with 8-inch-OD, hollow-stem augers to the depths noted in the report. During the drilling process, soil cuttings were continuously monitored in conformance with the monitoring procedures, and data was recorded on logs of exploratory borings by a state of California registered geologist. Soil samples were collected with a California-modified, split-spoon sampler at intervals consistent with the work plan, unless a change in lithology was noted, in which case an additional sample was collected. The sampler was outfitted with 2.5-inch by 6-inch stainless steel or brass sleeves. When the sample was withdrawn, the ends of the sleeve were covered with aluminium foil or TeflonTM tape followed by plastic caps. Sample preservation, handling, and transportation procedures were consistent with HFA's QA/QC procedures. SOIL BORING MONITORING PROCEDURES Cuttings from soil borings were continuously classified according to the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) and logged by a state of California registered geologist. Specific geologic and hydrologic information that was collected included stratigraphy (i.e., layer thickness, unit correlation, aquifer thickness, depth to groundwater, and confining units, if any), relative permeability, observed porosity, plasticity, moisture content, soil type, structure, size, and other features that could affect contaminant transport. Specific geologic and hydrologic information that was Obtained during soil boring construction includes the following: · Stratigraphic characteristics: thickness, correlation of units, extent (horizontal and vertical) of aquifers and confining units, if any; · Observed porosity; · Volatile organic content; · Particle-size distribution; · Moisture content; · Plasticity; · Strength; · Mineral composition; · Depth to groundwater; · Soil type, structure, size; and · Distribution of soil type. Soil and Sampling Procedures Page 2 The data was recorded on individual logs of exploratory borings, including observations regarding the types and quantities of waste materials encountered and any PID readings. This data was recorded on a standardized log sheet in the Field Log Book. Specific information that was recorded is listed in Table 1, below. TABLE 1. SOIL BORING LOG INFORMATION GENERAL · Project name · Soil boring name/number · Date started and finished · Geologist's name · Driller's name · Soil boring location; map and elevation · Rig type (bit size/auger size) · Petrologic lithologic classification scheme used (Wentworth, USCS) · Sheet number INFORMATION COLUMNS · Depth · Sample location/number · PID or FID Reading · Gradation · Narrative description · Soil Classification NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION Geologic Observations - Soil/rock type - Color and stain - Gross petrology - Friability - Degree of weathering - Particle shape - Particle Size - Depositional structures - Bedding - Fossils - Moisture content - Formational strike and dip - Organic content - Odor - Suspected contaminant - Discontinuities - Water-bearing zones Drilling Observations - Changes in drilling method - Readings from detection equipment (if any) - Drilling difficulties - Advance rates or equipment rig chatter - Caving/hole stability - Amounts and types of any liquids used - Water levels Other Remarks - Equipment failures - Possible contamination - Deviations from drilling plan - Weather Ail field logs were typed and presented verbatim in an appendix of the report. The typed log of exploratory boring is on a form identical to that used in the field log book. Each log of exploratory boring includes a graphic log in which a symbol for each USCS soil group is included for each soil interval. Soil and Sampling Procedures Page 3 DATA REDUCTION The data compiled from the soil borings has been summarized and analyzed. A narrative summary of the soil characteristics was also presented. The logs of exploratory borings were checked for the following information: · Correlation of stratigraphic units among soil borings; · Identification of zones of potentially high hydraulic conductivity; · Identification of the confining formation/layer; · Indication of unusual/unpredicted geologic features (fault zones, fracture traces, facies changes, solution channels, buried stream deposits, cross-cutting structures, pinchout zones, etc.); and · Continuity of petrographic features such as sorting, grain-size distribution, cementation, etc. Soil boring locations were plotted on a properly scaled map. The purpose of each soil boring/piezometer/monitoring well/pit/soil sample is indicated on the map. Depending on the results of this analysis, the soil stratigraphy of the site is presented in a scaled stratigraphic column (if soil stratigraphy is laterally homogeneous) or, more likely, in a scaled cross section or a fence diagram (if soil is laterally heterogeneous). Specific features that may impact contaminant migration (e.g., fault zones or impermeable layers) are discussed in narrative form and supplemented with graphical presentations as deemed appropriate. DECONTAMINATION PROCEDURES Prior to each sampling episode, the sampling equipment was decontaminated using a non-phosphate soap and water wash, a tap water rinse, and two deionized water rinses. The drill string was decontaminated with a steam cleaner between each soil boring. WASTE MANAGEMENT AND DISPOSAL The cuttings from the soil borings were stored in 55-gallon, Department of Transportation-approved drums, Each drum was labeled with the date on which the waste was generated and the numbers of the soil borings from which the waste was withdrawn. The drums were stored at the site of generation until sample analyses were obtained. Sample analyses and an inventory of drums were then given to the client, who coordinated proper disposal of the soil, according to Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements. HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS ATTACHMENT 3. NON-HAZARDOUS WASTE MANIFEST NON-HAZARDOUS ~. Generator's US EPA ID No. WASTE MANIFEST ........... Generator's Name and Mai~,ng Address, lIi y tr o Name 6. ' ~amo I Manifest Doc. No. 2. Page 1 .... of US EPA ID Number 8. US EPA ID Number 1109 "s Phone B. Transporter's Phone 9. Designated Facility Name and Site Address SOIL REM CORPORATION 408 E. PACHECO BAKERSFIELD, CA 93307 10. US EPA ID Number C. Facility's Phone 661-397-9641 11. Waste Shipping Name and Description 12. Containers 13. Total Quantity D. Additional Descriptions for. Materials Usted Above E. Handling Codes for Wastes Listed Above 15. Special Handling Instructions and Additional Information 16. GENERATOR'S CERTIFICATION: I certify the materials described above on this'manifest are not subject to'federal regulations for. reporting proper disposal Of Hazardous Waste. :. Printed/Typed Name . I Signature ' ~ I Acknow~edger~ent of Receipt of Matadals ' Month Day Year Month Day 18. Transporter 2 Acknowledgement of Receipt of Materials Printed/Typed Name ~//~. · p cy Indication Spa/ca 19, D~scre an Signature Month Oay Year 20. Facility Owner or Operator: Certification of receipt of waste materials covered by this manifest except as noted in item 19. Pdntedfl'yped Name I Signature/o~ ~ ' Ac ORIGINAL - RETURN TO GENERATOR Month Day Year HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATF~, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS ATTACHMENT 4. LABORATORY REPORTS HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIFIONMENTAL LABOFIATOFllES At]giSt 30, 1999 CLIENT: Sullivan Petro. PROJECT: Downtoval Chevron 143 Souih Figuefoa Si'feet · Veni'ufa, California 93001 · (805) 652-0219 - FAX: (805) 652-0793 REPORT OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS Page 1 Analyzed By: T. Karageorge Sampled By: K. Mitchell Units: mg/kg Matrix: Soil Analyses Methods: BTEX: EPA 8020 TPH: 8015-M CONCENTRATION OF TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (TPH) WITH BTEX DISTINCTION CONSTITUENT TPH- TPH- Ethyl Total Percent Lab Sample Dates Sampled, Gasoline Diesel Benzene Toluene Benzene Xylenes MTBE Surrogate No. No. Received and Tested RL RL RL RL RL RL RL Recovery 991451 B-l-10 8/17/99 8/24/99 8/24/99 6500 28 230 85 430 76 147% lO .005 .005 .015 .015 .02 991452 B-l-15 8/17/99 8/24/99 8/24/99 7000 26 250 94 430 85 160% 10 .005 .005 .015 .015 .02 991453 B-2-5 8/17/99 8/24/99 8/24/99 19000 50 1000 260 1400 220 143% 10 .005 .005 .015 .015 .02 991454 B-2-15 8/17/99 8/24/99 8/24/99 4600 .82 150 73 410 2 10 .005 .005 .015 .015 .02 991455 B-3-5 8/17/99 8/24/99 8/24/99 ND .014 .21 .085 .72 3.8 129% 10 .005 .005 .015 .015 .02 991456 B-3-15 8/17/99 8/24/99 8/24/99 6300 .3 150 81 740 3 182% i0 .005 .005 .015 .015 .02 991451, 991452, 991453, 991456 High surrogate recovery due to matrix interference. 991454 Surrogate not recovered due to matrix interference. Ri, = Reporting Limit (may vary with Dilution Factor) ND Not Detected at or above RL Lab Cerci[ication: CAELAP ~1fl78; 1/31/00 Laboratory Manager: Holguin. Fahan & Associates. Inc. Environmental Laboratories 22~5 N, Venf~ra Ave. Unite B Ventura. CA 9300! (80~ &.~2-287& METHOD BLANK REPORT REPORT OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS QC Batch ID: 8/24/99 Instrument ID: Hp 5890 GC- I Lab No. Date Analyzed: Analyzed By: Analysis Method: CONCENTRATION OF TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (TPH) WITH BTEX DISTINCTION In mg/Kg (soil} 24-Aug-99 TDK 8015-m/8020 TPH- Ethyl Tolal Client Gasoline Benzene Toluene Benzene Xylenes Sample No. Malrlx RL . RL RL RL RL 36140 Method Blank Soil ND ND ND ND ND I0 0.005 0.005 0.015 0.015 Volatile fuel'hydrocarbons are quantitated against a gasoline standard. Hydrocarbons detected by this method range from C4 to C12. Analytes reported as ND were not present above the stated limit of detection. RL = Method Reporting Umit ND = Not Detected at or above RL LAB CERTIFICATION: CAELAP # 1878; I/31/2000 Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. Environmental Laboratories 2255 N. Ventrua Ave. Unit B Ventura, CA 93001 (805)652-2876 Sample ID: MS / MSD Date Analyzed: 24-Aug-99 Lab NO: 99 i 421 Matrix: Soil Instrument ID: HP5890 GC-1 Dilution Factor: 1 Matrix Spike Worksheet EPA 8020 Matrix Spike Results J Matrix Spike Duplicate Results Compound Sample Matrix Spk. Dup Spike Sol. Recovery Control Conc.(ppb) Conc. Jppb) Conc. JppbJ {%} Limits MTBE 0.00 25.58 20 128 45-158 Benzene 0.00 20.35 20 102 59-138 Toluene 0.00 20.55 20 103 59-133 Efhylbenzene 0.00 19.96 20 100 55-123 m, p-Xylenes 0.00 4 I. 60 40' 104 53-135 o-Xylene 0.00 20.43 20 102 59-130 Average Recovery & RPD Data ~.ompound Spike Matrix Spk. Dup Average %RPD Control Recovery Recovery Recovery Limits k4TBE 133 128 130 3.8 <22 Benzene 104 102 103 1.8 < 14 Toluene 104 103 103 i, 1 <14 Ethylbenzene 101 100 100 0.7 <16 m,p-Xylenes 104 104 104 O. 1 <16 o-Xylene 102 102 102 0.3 " <15 Compound Sample Matrix Spike Spike Sol. Recovery Control Conc. Jppb) Conc.(ppb): Conc. Jppb) (%J Umits MTBE 0.00 26.58 '. 20 133 45-158 Benzene 0.00 20.71' " 20 104 59-138 Toluene 0.00 20, 78 20 104 59-133 EthYlbenzene 0,00 20.11 20 101 55.123 m;p-Xylenes 0.00 41.65 40 104 53-135 o-Xylene 0.00 20.49 20' 102 59-130 H°lguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. Environmental Laboratories 2255 N. Ventrua Ave, Unit B Ventura, CA 93001 (805)652-2876 Sample ID: MS / MSD Date Analyzed: 24-Aug-99 Lab No: 991421 Matrix: Soil Instrument ID: HP5890 GC-1 Dilution Factor: 1 Matrix Spike Worksheet EPA 8020 Matrix Spike Results Compound Sample Matrix Spike . Spike' Sol. Recovery Control Conc.{ppb) Conc.(ppb) Conc.(ppb) (%) Umifs MTB E 0.00 26.07 20 130 45-158 Benzene 0.00 20.29 ' 20 101 59-138 Toluene 0.00 20.82 20 104 59-133 Ethylbenzene 0.00 20.14 20 101 55-123 m,p*Xylenes 0~00 42.85 40 107 53-135 o-Xylene 0.00 21.06 20 105 59-130 Matdx Spike Duplicate Results ~.ompound Sample Matrix Spk. Dup Spike Sol. Recovery Control Conc. Jppb) Conc.{ppb) Conc.{ppb} {%) Limits ~TBE 0.00 25.88 20 129 45-158 Benzene 0.00 19.91 20 100 59-138 toluene 0.00 20.25 20 101 5?- 133 Ethylbenzene 0.t~X) 19.38 20 97 55-123 m, p-Xylenes 0.00 4 I. 22 40 103 53-135 o-Xylene 0.00 20.20 20 101 59-130 Average Recovery & RPD Data ;Compound Spike Matrix Spk. Dup Average %RPD Control Recovery Recovery Recovery Limits V~TBE 130 129 130 0.8, <22 Benzene 101 100 100 1.9 <14 toluene 104 101 103 2.8 <14 Ethylbenzene 101 97 99 3.9 <16 m,p-Xylenes 107 103 105 3.9 <16 o-Xylene 105 101 103 4.2 <15 Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. Environmental Laboratories 2255 N. Venfruo Ave. Unit B Venturo, CA 93001 {805)652-2876 Sample ID: MS / MSD Date Analyzed: 24-Aug-99 Lab No: 991421 Matrix: Soil Instrument ID: HP5890 gc-i Dilution Factor:. 1 Matrix Spike Worksheet EPA 8020 Matrix Spike Results Compound Sample Motdx Spike Spike Sol. Recovery Control Conc.(ppb) Conc.(ppb) Conc.(ppb) (%) Limits MTBE 0.00 17.51 20 88 45-158 Benzene 0.00 18.51 ' 20 93 57-138 Toluene 0.00 20.20 20 101 59-133 EthYlbenzene 0.00 19.52 20 98 55-123 m,p-Xylene$ 0.00 42.04 40 105 53-135 o-Xylene 0.00 20.48 20 102 59-130 Matrix Spike Duplicate Results ~ompound Sampe Matrix Spk. Dup Spike Sol. Recovery Control Conc. Jppb) Conc~(ppb} Conc:(ppbJ {%) Umits ~TBE 0.00 17.91 20 90 45-158 Benzene 0.00 16.48 20 82 59-138 I'oluene ' 0.00 ' 19.95 20 100 59-133 Ethylbenzene 0.00 19.27 20 96 55-123 m,p-Xylenes 0.00 41.15 40 103 53-135 o-Xylene 0.00 20.15 20 101 59-130 Average Recovery &. RPD Data Compound Spike Matrix Spk. DuP Average %RPJ) Control RecOvery Recovery Recovery Limits k4TBE 88 90 89 2.3 <22 Benzene 93 82 87 11.6 < 14 [oluene 101 1 DO 1DO i .3 < 14 Ethylbenzene 98 96 97 1.3 < 16 m,p-Xylene$ 105 103 104 2.2 < i 6 o-Xylene 102 101 102 1.6 < 15 CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY RECORD Page ~ of / Client Name '.~&./.-IV,'a,a] /c~'r'~.O' Project~,/ame Client Contact/Phone No. Send report to: Contract Code .~ ~ c~/ ,..~ol,.JI, J'ro~,)/~,/ ~--~t'F--VIO, Df,] /~R, T/Pt 5(jt,.J..I V'/4/g Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. ~"E~J /~I r~ ~'-/?'-'~ ~ ~ Bakersfield, CA 93308_ Matrix {roil, Other Inlormation No. and HFA Date Time ground water, (09. sampling location, depth. Type o! ~ ~ ~*v~ SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS Sample Il Sampled Sampled air. water) soil boring or MW it, etc.) Containers.-- -~ (i.e.. turnaround time. etc.) 0730. i' .r f \ Y. ~ ~n~ ~ra ~n~ ~ SW~6 see reverse for required det~tion limits ~ SAMPLE RECEIPT  y~  PRESERVATIVE ADDED?  NI ~les stor~ ~emight at HFA are _ rel~mt~ at 4'C. ~s ~e t~ to · e ~to~ in ~lem fill~ ~h ~ I~m.  ~livered to HFA's refd~mtor for tem~ra~ storage on - ~ (Initials) 1_/ Return sampte(s)/cooler to: Holguin. Fahan & Associates, Inc. · 2820 Pegasus Drive, 1, HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, ENVIFIONMENTAL LABOFIATOFllES INC. October 12, 1999 CLIENT: Sullivan Petroleum PROJECT: Downtown Chevron 143 South Figueroa Street · Ventura, California 93001 · (805) 652-0219 · FAX: (805) 652-0793 REPORT OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS Page 1 Analyzed By: T. Karageorge Sampled By: B. Skenfield Units: mg/kg Matrix: Soil Analyses Methods: BTEX: EPA 8020 TPH: 8015-M CONCENTRATION OF TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (TPH),WITH BTEX DISTINCTION CONSTITUENT TPH- TPH- Ethyl Total Percent Lab Sample Dates Sampled, Gasoline Diesel Benzene Toluene Benzene Xylenes MTBE Surrogate NO. No. Received and Tested RL RL RL RL RL RL RL Recovery 991703 B-1-22 9/26/99 9/29/99 9/29/99 ND ND ND ND ND .48 178% 10 .005 .005 .015 .015 .02 991704 B-1-25 9/26/99 9/29/99 9/29/99 ND ND ND ND ND .33 97% 10 .005 .005 .015 .015 .02 991705 B-1-30 9/26/99 9/29/99 9/29/99 ND ND .041 ND .094 3.1 100% 10 .005 .005 .015 .015 .02 991706 B-1-35 9/26/99 9/29/99 9/29/99 ND ND .011 ND ND 2.6 92% 10 .005 .005 .015 .015 .02 991707 B~1-40 9/26/99 9/29/99 9/29/99 ND ND .0099 ND .022 3.2 97% 99~708 B-1-45 9/26/99 9/29/99 9/29/99 ND .0062 .018 ND ND 5.2 95% 10 .005 .005 .015 .015 .02 991709 B-4-10 9/26/99 9/29/99 9/29/99 ND ND ND ND ND .023 95% 10 .005 .005 .015 .015 .02 991710 B-4-20 9/26/99 9/29/99 9/29/99 ND ND ND ND ND .19 94% 10 .005 .005 .015 .015 .02 991711 B-4-30 9/26/99 9/29/99 9/29/99 ND ND .012 ND .023 3.5 97% 10 .005 .005 .015 .015 .02 991712 B-4-40 9/26/99 9/29/99 9/29/99 ND ND .0065 ND ND 3.7 95% 10 .005 .005 .015 .015 .02 991713 B-5-10 9/26/99 9/29/99 9/29/99 ND ND ND ND ND ND 95% 10 .005 .005 .015 .015 .02 991714 B-5-20 9/26/99 9/29/99 9/29/99 ND ND ND ND ND .15 95% 10 .005 .005 .015 .015 .02 991715 B-5-30 9/26/99 9/29/99 9/29/99 ND ND .007 ND ND 1.3 95% 10 .005 .005 .015 .015 .02 991716 B-5-40 9/26/99 9/29/99 9/29/99 ND .12 .51 .032 .16 11 184% 10 .005 .005 .015 .015 .02 991703. 991716 High surrogate recovery due to matrix interference RL = Reporting Limit (may vary with Dilution Factor) ND = Not DeEected at or above RL Lab Certification: CAELAP #]878; 1/31/00 Laboratory Manager: Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. Environmenfal Laborafories 2255 N. Venlura Ave. Unite B Ventura, CA 73001 (805) 652-2876 METHOD BLANK REPORT REPORT OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS QC Balch ID: 9/29/99 Instrumen! ID: HP 5890 GC- I Date Analyzed: Analyzed By: Analysis Method: 29-Sep-99 TDK 8015-m/8020 Lab No. CONCENTRATION OF TOTAl. PE1,ROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (I'PH) WITH BTEX DISTINCTION in mg/Kg (soil) TPH- Ethyl Total Client Gasoline Benzene Toluene Benzene Xylenes Sample No. Matrix RE RL RI.. RE RE 36140 Method Blank Soil ND ND ND ND ND I0 0.005 0.005 0.015 0.015 Volatile fuel hydrocarbons are quantJtated against a gasoline standard. Hydrocarbons detected by this method range from C4 to C12. Analytes reported as ND were not presenl above the stated limit of detection. RL = Method Reporling Limit ND = Not Detected at or above EL LAB CERI'IFICA~'ION: CAELAP # 1878; 1/31/2000 Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. Environmental Laboratories 2255 N. Ventura Ave. Unite B Venlura, CA 73001 (805) 652-2876 METHOD BLANK REPORT REPORT OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS QC Batch ID: 9/29/99 instrument ID: HP 5890 GC- I Dale Analyzed: Analyzed By: Analysis Method: 29-Sep-99 TDK 8015-m/8020 Lab No. CONCENTRATION OF'TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (I'PH) WITH BI'EX DISTINCTION in mg/Kg (soil) TPH- Ethyl Total Client Gasoline Benzene Toluene Benzene Xylenes Sample No. Matrix RL RL RL RL RL 36140 Method Blank Soil ND ND ND ND ND I0 0.005 0.005 0.015 0.015 Volatile fuel hydrocarbons are quantitated against a gasoline standard. Hydrocarbons detected by this method range from C4 to C1 2. Analytes reported as ND were not present above the stated limit of detection. RL = Method Reioorting Limit ND = Not Detected al or above RL LAB, CERI'IFICAflON: CAELAP # 1878; 1/31/2000 Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. Environmental Laboratories 2255 N. Venluro Ave. Unite B Venturo, CA 73001 (805) 652-2876 METHOD BLANK REPORT REPORT OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS QC Batch iD: 9/29/99 Instrument ID: HP .5890 GC-I Date Analyzed: Analyzed By: Analysis Method: 29-Sep-99 TDK 80 t 5-m/8020 Lob No. CONCENTRATION OF TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (TPH) WITH BTEX DISTINCTION in rog/Kg (soil) TPH- Ethyl Total Client Gasoline Benzene Toluene Benzene Xylenes Sample No. Matrix RL RL RL RL RL 36140 Method Blank Soil ND ND ND ND ND I0 0.005 0.005 0.015 0.015 Volatile fuel hydrocarbons are quantitated against a gasoline standard. Hydrocarbons detected by this method range from C4 to C12. Analytes reported as ND were not present above the stated limit of detection. RL = Method Reporting Limit ND = Not Detected at or above RL LAB CERTiFICAtION: CAELAP Ct 1878; 1/31/2000 Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. Er~viror~mental Laboratories 2255 N. Ventrua Ave. Unit B Ventura, CA 93001 (805)652-2876 Sample ID: MS / MSD Date Analyzed: 29-Sep-99 Lab No: 991676 Matrix: Soil Instrument ID: HP5890 GC-1 Dilution Factor: 1 Matrix Spike Worksheet EPA 8020 Matrix Spike Results Compound Sample Matrix Spike Spike Sol. Recovery Control Conc.(ppb) Conc.(ppb) Conc.(ppb) (%) Limits ~enzene Ethylbenzene 0.00 17.07 20 85 55-123 0.00 35.12 40 88 53-135 m,p-Xylenes Matrix Spike Duplicate Results Conc.(ppb) Conc.(ppb) Conc.(ppb) (%) Limits MTBE 0.00 20.82 20 104 45-158 Benzene 0.00 20.31 20 102 59-138 Toluene 0.00 17:23 20 86 59-133 Ethylbenzene 0.00 17.39 20 87 55-123 0.00 35.63 40 89 53-135 m,p-Xylenes Average Recovery & RPD Data ,ne Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. Environmental Laboratories 2255 N. Venfrua Ave. Unit B Ventura, CA 93001 (805)652-2876 Sample ID: MS / MSD Date Analyzed: 29-Sep-99 Lab No: 991676 Matrix: Soil Instrument ID: HP5890 GC-1 Dilution Factor: 1 Matrix Spike Worksheet EPA 8020 Matrix Spike Results Compound Sample Matrix Spike Spike Sol. Recovery Control Conc.(ppb) Conc.(ppb) Conc.(ppb) (%) Limits MTBE 0.00 ! 9.38 20 97 45-158 Benzene 0.00 19.42 20 97 59-138 toluene 0.00 16.39 20 82 59-133 Ethylbenzene 0.00 16.67 20 83 55-123 m,p-Xylenes 0.00 34.31 40 86 53-135 o-Xylene 0.00 16.61 20 83 59-130 Matrix Spike Duplicate Results ~ompound Sample Matrix Spk. Dup Spike Sol. Recovery Control Conc.(ppb) Conc.(ppb) Conc.(ppb) (%) Limits v~TBE 0.00 19.06 20 95 45-158 ~,enzene 0.00 19.17 20 96 59-138 TOluene 0.00 16.22 20 81 59-133 Ethy~benzene 0.00 16.45 20 82 55-123 jm,p-Xylenes 0.00 33.84 40 85 53-135 o-Xyiene 0.00 16.46 20 82 59-130 Average Recovery & RPD Data Compound Spike Matrix Spk. Dup Average %RPD Control Recovery Recovery Recovery Limits MTBE 97 95 96 1.7 <22 Benzene 97 96 96 1.3 < 14 Ioluene 82 81 82 1.0 <14 Ethylbenzene 83 82 83 1.3 < 16 _ ~n,p-Xylenes 86 85 85 .1.4 <16 _ o-Xylene 83 82 83 0.9 < 15 Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. Environmental Laboratories 2255 N. Ventrua Ave. Unit B Venfura, CA 93001 (805)652-2876 Sample ID: MS / MSD' Date Analyzed: 29-Sep-99 Lab No: 991676 Matrix: Soil Instrument ID: HP5890 GC-1. Dilution Factor: 1 Matrix Spike Worksheet EPA 8020 Matrix Spike Results Compound Sample Matrix Spike Spike Sol. Recovery Control Conc.(ppb) Conc.(ppb) Conc.(ppb) (%) Limits MTBE 0.00 18.54 20 93 45-158 Benzene 0.00 19.00 20 95 59-138 Toluene 0.00 15.98 20 80 59-133 Ethylbenzene 0.00 16.18 20 81 55-123 m, p-Xylenes 0.00 33.51 40 84 53-135 o-Xylene 0.00 16.07 20 80 59-130 Matrix Spike Duplicate Results ,Compound Sample Matrix Spk. Dup Spike Sol. Recovery Control i' Conc.(ppb) Conc.(ppb) Conc.(ppb) (%) Limits X4TBE 0.00 ,19.53 20 98 45-158 Benzene 0.00 19.05 20 95 59-138 ~oluene 0.00 16.09 20 80 59-133 Ethylbenzene 0.00 16.20 20 81 55-123 m,p-Xylenes 0.00 33.43 40 84 53-135 o-Xylene 0.00 16.23 20 81 59-130 Average Recovery & RPD Data Compound Spike Matrix Spk. Dup Average %RPD Control Recovery Recovery Recovery Limits MTBE 93 98 95 5.2 <22 Benzene 95 95 95 0.3 <14 Foluene 80 80 80 0.7 <14 Ethylbenzene 81 81 81 0.1 <16 m,p-Xylenes 84 84 84 0.2 < 16 o-Xylene 80 81 81 1.0 < 15 CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY RECORD Page.__L of I Client Name ~'~/J. 3~..~ ~,~ Project Name Client Contact/Phone No. Send report to: CONTRACT CODE _~o ?! ~oz~,,.,f.~O~.~-,' ~'.~'e.,'~/'-~,~' Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. Samotefs Name , S.~3n?plefs/Slgn~a~re /~'./7/~ Date Ana~es Re(: uested 2820 Pegasus Drive, Suite 1 Matrix (so~, Other Information No. and SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS HFA Date ~ ground water, (e.g., sampling location, depth, T)13e of (i.e., tumarou~l time. etc.) see reverse for re~ared detec~on #m~s PRESERVATIVE ADDED?. - /71¢ ~ reff,~e,-ated at 4'C. ~ am tmflsptxted to - :- I 17:C /,/ ,~'-' ;~ '"" ~""(~ '~ ~,/~ /'~ ~" t~/ / 7/_.~ ~' // DerNered to HFA's refrigerator for temporary storage on (In,als) ~, ) Laborato~7 Name & C~ ~ BT. (S~et~WOn3anlza'~o.) Da'~rT3me R~ ~ ~ {~~r~) , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~: Return sample(s)/cooler to: Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. · 3157 Pegasus Drive, Bakersfield, California, 93308 · (805) 391-0517 - FAX # (805) 391-0826 Sep-13-99 04:36P Holgu- P.01 Fahan & Associat 661~91 0826 TO: A'UrN: FAX #: FROM: FAX OPERATOR; HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS 2820 Pegasus Drive. Suite 1 · Bakersfield, California · (661) 391-0517 FAX (~61) 391-0826 FAX (company name) COVER SHEET ,~._ ...... DATE: (person to whom fax Is to bo deli~,ered) 3 ?.X..-/3¢? A"~_.. NUMBER OF PAGES: (1o verily receipl) (including this covor page) COMMENTS ! SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: Subject & date of documont: Original WILL NOT be mailed to recipient Original documonl WILL be mailed to recipient by: tF;legular US Mail US Express Mail (arrive by 3:30 p.m. next day) Federal Express (arrive by 10:30 a.m, next day) Other (please specify): ENVIRONMENTAL. SCIENTISTS · GEOLOGISTS · ENGINEERS Co,[:,tninared Site A.~.,~eyi.~mcl'tts ·Phasc I Audil~ -Silc Rcmediarion - Haxarduu.~ Waslc Mana~.¢mcnl Sep-13=99 04:36P Holgul~n, Fahan & Associat 661/91 0826 P.02 "~ ~il'i~ ., ....... '%.,, '~..~, . \,:,.,.~.,.,,,,..,,, . ~ .... ~,..,-' ,, , -' .,,,I :.,; ..... J ~ ( i ~' ' .'. .... .'~L~.. x.'; \w,',~ . -' .:-"-'~-"~ :"'~"'~'"'~" ~.' . iiii::, '. ' , ~ I ",,. I J~ ~ '"~J ii ., ,n!.,~.', ,.'~.~ ~ 'i, ...... ~.~.-'.=:-~" . ...... ,~'""~ .Ih, il -$~-. ~.:./ -J ... ,~' =.-, .: ' ~ ..... ,% .... ;;~ . .,."9..L- .' '. "~,/~ s :'i; ..... '1 · " - ~" ,.: ~:"'~S.'I T I .......... 'T ........ j~..~ ' ' "~---¢',-"': ' ~ ,¢ -" ' tl , .,. ...... ]1 ..... :.~!:.'.~ / ,;~,=,~\ 'N ,,,, .' ,,,,,, ,,.,,,- ".,- I,. .... .-: ' ' L'-'~.' le,~e,~ I I I '~ ~. ; ' ' , ~_ -; ~.', ..: ',, .'L~:,~. f, ~l~t,~ . J...,.. . ~ , ~ i, .. : ., ,, .. ( ' ~ - ,,,- ~ ~ *" ' ' ' " 9 " ' u~ '~' ; ! .... 'I ' ' · ' ;, · · - " ~' " ~ " ¢/: I I .... · ,, il.r-. ... 4 ..... ~, , '~ - .;_J .... .... :... ',, -. · i"~~<)' ,," ~..., 1.~ ~'~. ,,, ..'L ._--'-;iL ~,". '","; '" "I ~ ~' '~ "~ % "-'"", I 1~,' r' I NL. ~ . ". = ',Lv--. .... ~" i ~,' ;" ~%, .~. - - '-~--- ~. ,: .. .... 15". ": · ~~?. ,"~I ~~~-~;-::?---,' '-:--.. · . :: , ~, . ..~ , ,~ Z.~ ?......~ ~iij ".-'v., .,' , .. .~,-.'~,w~,e' ~, ~.. ,,,'. .'~rqr~lr,,i~,m'i,...'Nc' L. ~'r JJ tJ ," t',.,1 · .'- ~. . / ...... , · , .,.. , . ~ .___iL_....¢ ~, ._ ........ ~ !:1~',".:''~ ..../ ~'~rCC~. ~. I:?~'...~"~:~I_L..,_L_ ,'.': 'L',"~-~'~ · . · .' .~ ' ' / ,i ..i. · ~ '~ ?~:- - " , [,-4~ b.''~ .... .... ~~:~~~ ~i:D~~.::.~ ) '/ "' ~.' '1 .~ ~ - . ' ' -~.~ ~. [, .. ~ .~ ..- I ~ . ~ . ~ ' ' ~1} .'" f~. I. r · ;"? '' I . ~ ~'. ~;: : ' :" '. ~ < ,, .,~ , , ~ =... . ~ ~ I: ~ .I ,.. . . . :',, ~.': "',' '.': ' . , ,- .. ~, . "' ,.::.". .... ,'~: ........ . _ = . _ :~ . ~ .-' , . , j' ':" ':~: _ ~ :~7':.'. ' ' : ~ I ~ ~ .. 2 1~ *o~ . . .... .... ..?' .... '. .' ~ ~.,~'" ";.', '~ /~ .... J .... ~J~ .~_- , ~ . ..', .* : ~ '- n ' I, ,,. k'~,- .~'::~'~:~-~.-~ ~'._ , ~ ~r. ,,, ~ ~'-'t-~.~=~ , . ' · ~~:~~. " '""' ' .. 7~.,':. '" · ~ ~ .... ;" ~ ....... ~ :~'''.''''' "' "~: · , . ......... ¢;¢¢~ .. ~ , , ~ , ¢ :~ · ~ ... ..... :_ ..,,,.. :' . .. . L_ '" '~ ' ' ...... "" ':';' - __~.. , . . -.- ,~ ~.~ - , . . . . :":,','. XX ~: r- ~ ,...T,. ~ ~ ,,~ '~_' ' ,.~, .... ~ .~ --.0.~~~_ , ...... ~' ~.1 ;Iii,'' ' ~ ~ = ~ ~ ~ ~'1: . ~ '--' ' '. ' : ........ i '.' : .... .'.: ~', ,t'" .r ...... '.:~ ':. II ,. :." ..,%%&'. ~= ~ .: - '~ ~;vZ~ ] ,H~~ ~ ~ ~ I1"~/'"'I ~~t~'~' ~':' .;~ ~':':."~:.~F~'i~:~:'t~ ~ ~L~ ~ ~.'. ":~' .' f : _~ , " .. i' . -.~, .,.. '~ ::> '1 . ", ', :-~ .,';~'.-' .-:-.' :. ~";'::; ,. ~ ':" ' ~: . ' , II/~ ~ ~$i ~ .I[-L ': .: ' [ .;; ~i~ I'm~'.~':~'~ ~ ~=~'~ "~;~'~, ,~'~<% --', '""~ ~f~ ~d, ' '-q~ ........ ' = - ' ' ' '--=. :~: . ' ~; 't...~¢~. -~ -.- ¢:~, .. ~. LEGEND SULLIVAN PETROLEU~ COMPANY, LLO 1 MILE ~ DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION 0 0.5 o ~.o~ ~,,~ ~,~ ~,~ sooo r~ ,,jq~J 22 ~ 7 "L" ST ~ E ET L~' ~. ~_L.L:"" .L;. T.:~ .... .. I - '- _.. J BAKErSFiELD OA 0 g.h 1 KILOM~ IH{ ' [' '"'F. ; _~.~'-' ~ b.:~" ~--'~d FIGURE 1 - SI'rE LOCATION MAP HOLGUIN, ~SOC~TES, INC. Sep-13-99 04:37P Holgu~n, Fahan & Associat 661 391 0826 P_03 CAR MINI MART z J n-- DISPENSER ISLANDS n-. I~, i '" - ..... ~ ' ..... ..../ .... CANOPY ---.~. I ' I ' ~ .. ~ ...... I ..... ~ -.: -.- .... I I ~ O,O00-~ALLON GASOLINE UST DISPENSI::R 'SLANDS [ i .... 20,Q00-GALLON GASOLINE , , ,. ""r SPLIT-CHAMBERED UST B-5 .... AP,_P_ROACH ~;~ PLANTER ./ J / ,, SIDEWAE~( 23RD STREET SCALE IN FEET /~"' 0 '~ 5 30 LEGEND SULLIVAN PETROLEUM COMPANY, LLC ~ PROPOSED DIRECT-PUSH SAMPLING LOCATION DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION 2317 "L" STREET BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA FIGURE 2 - PLOT PLAN Z-~OI.,GO'[~i', F',A.l-l.z~ &r. ASSOC]JL?~S, ];NC. t'EVISIC~N DATE: JULY ~J, I.'~.'-I: Sep-13-99 04:37P Holgu - Fahan & Associat 661d91 0826 P.04 ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORIES 143 ~ouff~ Fig~ efoa 5troot - ve,'m~,~:, C. olifornlo 93001 , (605) 6..'.52-0219 - FAX: {~,['~5) 652.0793 REPORT OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS Sep-13-99 04:37P Ho]gu Fahan & Associat 661 391 0826 P.05 -t HoJBuin, Fehan & Aasocimta$, Inc. Environment(il Laboratories 22SS N. Vll~uro Ave, Un~e I VehK. O, CA 93001 (~) &~2-287& METHOD BLANK REPORT REi'ORT OF ANAL¥11CAL RESULTS QC Balch tO; 8/24~9 Insln.~rnent IO: HP 5890 GC- I Date Analyzeo: Analyzed By; Analysis Melhod: 24-Aug--99 TDK 8015-m/80~0 Lab NO. CONCENTRATION OF TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDI~OCARBONS (TrH) WITH ITEX DISTINCTION in rog/Kg (soil) TPH- Ethyl Total Cllerll Gasoline, Bet~ene Toluene Benzene Xylenes No. ~ol~x RL . RL R/,. RL EL 36140 Melhoa' Blank Soil ND ND ND ND ND I0 O. OO$ 0.005 0.015 O. O I S Volatile fuel 'hydro(~arbons are qu~ntitated against o gasoline slondard. Hydrocarbons detected by this method range tram C4 to C12. Analytes reported as ND were not Present above the stated limit of detection. EL = Meihoct Kepo~fing LI~I~ ND = NOl D,[¢cled of Of qDove EL LAB C~RTI~ICATION: C;AE~P J 1878:1/31/~ 5ep-13-99 O4:37P Ho3gu Fahan & Associat 661 391 0826 P.06 Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. Environmental Laboratories 2255 N. Ventrua Ave. Unit B Venture, CA 93001 (805J652-2876 Sample ID: MS / MSD Dote Analyzed; 24-Aug-99 Lab NO: 99142! Matrix: Soil Instrument ID; HP5890 GC-1 Dilution Factor: Matrix Spike. Worksheet EPA 8020 Matrix Spike Results Compound Sample Matrix Spike Spike SOL Recovery Control Conc,(ppb) Conc. Jppb~ Conc,{ppb) (%J Limits MTBE 0.00 26.58 20 133 ' ' 45-! 58 "~enzene " 0.00 20~71 20 104 59-138 /oluene O, OO ' 20.78 '20 104 59-~33 -~thylbenzene '~).~)0 20. ! 1 20 101 ' 55-123 -n,p-Xylenes 0.00 41.65' 40 104 53-135 o-Xyi'ene 0.00 20.49 20 102 59-130 I II I I Matrix Spike Duplicate Results ~ompound Sample Matrix Spk. Dup Sp~e Sol,' Recovery Control Conc.(ppb,I Conc.(ppb} Conc.(ppb) (%j Limits ~TBE 0.00 25.58 20 ' 128 45`158 Benzene 0.00 20.35 20 102 ' 59'13~ Toluerie O.I;~J" 20.55 20 103 5Y-133 EthylT~enzene O.00 19.96 20 1OO ' 55-123 m,p-Xylenes_ 0.00 41.60 40 104 53- ! 35 ' ' ?Xylene 0.00 20,43 20 ' I02 5Y-130 Average Recovery & RPD Data Compound Sp~e Matrix Spk, Dup Average %RPD' C~r~'ol _ Recovery Recovery Recovery Limits MTBE '" 133 " ' 128 130 3-8 ' <22 Benzene 104 102 103 l.B ' <]4 Toluene 104 103 103 1. l < 14 g_thylbenzene 101 '100 ' t00 0.7 <~'6 rn,p-Xylenes 104' 104 104 0.1 < 16 o-Xylene ' '[O2 '102 102 0.3 ' <I5 Sep-13-99 04:37P Holgu Fahan & Associat -661 0826 P.07 - Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. Environmental Laboratories 2255 N. Ventrua Ave. Unit B Venturo, CA 93001 (805)652-2876 Sample ID: /vis / MSD Date Analyzed: 24-Aug-99 Lab No' 991421 Matrix: Soil instrument fO: HP5890 GC-1 Dilution Factor: 1 Matrix Spike Worksheet EPA 8020 Matrix Spike Results ,~.ompound Sample Mafdx Spike Spike Sol. Recovery Control Conc.(ppb] Conc.{ppb) Conc.(ppb) (%) Umlts ~TBE 0.gO 2~,07 20 130 45-158 Benzene O~OO 20.29 ' ' 20 ' 101 " 59-138 roluene 0.00 20.82 20 104 59-133 EtlWlD~nzene 0.00 20,14 20 101 .... '~,5--i ~3 m,p-Xylenes 0.00 42.85 40 ) 07 53-135 o-Xylene O.00 ' 2'1.06 " 20 105 59~130 Matrix Spike Duplicate Results Compound sa~mple' MO''iX Spk. oum~. ' S'~m~l~ ~OI. R-covery 'Cor~t~ Conc,JppbJ Conc.(ppb) Conc,(ppb) (%) Limits ~TBE ' '0.~ 25,~' 26 "T29 45-158 g~nzene 0.~ 19.91 ~ 1 ~ ~ 38 toluene 0~ ....... 20.25 20 101 59-133 Ethy~e,,Z~ne 0.~ 19 38 ~ 9 ~ .... 55-123 m,p-Xylenes 0.~ 4~.22 ~ .... 103 53-135 ~-Xy~ene 0.~ ~.20 ' ~'" 101 ~-130 Average Recove~ & RPD Data ~.ompound Spike MatrL~ Spk. Dup Average . %RPD Control Recover,/ Recovery Recovery Limits MTSE 130 129 ' '130 0.8 <22 Bet's. erie 101 100 '- ' 100 " 1,9 <~"4 Toluene 104 .... 101 103 2~8 <14 Ethy~e~zene 101 97 99 ' 13.9 <16 m,p-XyleneS 107 -' · 103 105 3.9 < 16 o-Xylene 105 101 103 4.2 < I5' Se@-13-99 04:38P Holgui, Fahan & As$ociat 661 91 0826 P . 08 Holguin,.fahan & Associates, Inc.. Environmental Laboratories 2255 N, Ventruo Ave. Unit B Venture. CA 93001 (805)652-2876 Sample ID:' MS / MSD Date Analyzed.' 24-Aug-99 Lab No: 99142 ! Matrix: Soil Instrument ID: HP5890 GC-! Dilution Factor; 1 Matrix Spike Worksheet EPA 8020 Matrix Spike Results Compound Sample Matrix Spike Spike 5ol. RecovecY Control Conc.jppb} Conc,[ppb) Conc,{ppb) [%J Limits MTBE O~00 17.'~"1 20 88 45-158 BeInzer'le ........ 0'~ ]8'S ~ ' 20 73 59-138 Toluene 0.00 20~20 20 101 Eth¥1benzene 0.130' ]?.52 20 .... 48 55-123 m,p-Xylenes 0.00 42.04 40 105 53-135 o-Xylene B.00 20.48 20 t 02 5Y-130 Mc;fi, ix Spike Duplicate Results Compound I'§ample Mat,ix S~k. Dup Sp~ke SoL ReCOvery Control Conc. JppbJ Conc:Jppb) Conc, JppbJ {%J Units MTBE -0,00 17,91 20 90 45-158 Benzene 0.00 16,48 20 82 59-138 Iroluene 0,00 19.95 20 1 O0 59- ! 33 Ethyll3enzene O,00 19.27 20 ~6 .... 55--123 rn.p-Xyle nes O ,~ 41 , l 5 ~ ..... 103 53-135 o-Xylene 0.00 20.15 20 101 59-130 Average Recovery & RPD Dota Compound Spike . Matrix Spk. Dup Average %RPD Control Recovery Recovery Recovery Limits ~TBE B8 90 89 2.3 <22 toluene 101 100 II I 100 1,3 <14 Ethyll=enzene 98 96 ~ 97 1.3 ~16 "n,p-XyJenes 105 103 104" 2.2 < ! 6 3-Xylene 102 101 102 ~' 1,6 <TS - -- CHAiN-OF-CUSTODY RECORD Page ~. o4_/__ 31ier.q NAme .f~LlV4~"'/='E'rf~O, Projec! Name .... C~ent C~lac~one No. ' ~e~ ~epo~ Io: ~~ "~guin, r.han & As~ates, Inc, Sam~ers Name ' Date Anal~ R~qu~st~ 2820 Pegasus D~ve, S~ite 1 ~ ~1~ ~'1~ ~ BakerslJeld, CA 9~08_ S~ a ~ff~ ~ ~r. ~er) ~ ~g of MW ~, e~c.) ~ers (i.e.. tuff. nd i~. e~.) :~-~-~s or~ ( , .. ./~ / ~~ ,,. ~ 'a - ~ o ?30 ]'~ ~ ~ s~ reverse lot ~im~ ~n ti~its  ~PLE RECE[PTy~ ~ PR~S~RVAT~E ADOE9?  ~l~er~ to HFA's ~e~t~ f~ t~ ~ge on 1120 P~ Drive, ,.~uila I. B4ker~414, CA B3308 · (661) :I~1,O517 · FAX I (E61) 391.0~26 0 4~ 0 ii '11 0 .h D July 21, 1999 FIRE CHIEF RON FRAZE ADMINISTRATWE SERVICES 2101 'H' Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3941 FAX (805) 395-1349 SUPPRESSION SERVICES 2101 'H" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3941 FAX (805) 395-1349 PREVENTION SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3951 FAX (805) 326-O576 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3979 FAX (805) 326-0576 TRAJNING DMSION 5642 Victor Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93308 VOICE (805) 399-4697 FAX (805) 399-5763 Mark Magargee Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. 2820 Pegasus Drive, Suite 1 Bakersfield, CA 93308 RE: Work Plan For Site Assessment at Sullivan Petroleum Company's Chevron Service Station Located' at 2317 "L" Street · Dea~ This is to notify you that the work plan for the above stated address is satisfactory 'in its limited scope. However, this office is interested in a full assessment, that is a determination of the full vertical and horizontal extent of the contamination plume. If you are able to obtain (non detect) samples below the plume, and adequately def'me the horizontal extent of the plume then this work plan is satisfactory. Please be advised that we will require additional sampling if you are unable to achieve this. Please give this office 5 working days notice prior to the commencement of work. Please be advised that any work done that is not performed under direct oversight by this office will not be accepted, unless previously approved. If you have any questions, please call me at (661) 326-3979. Sincerely, Office of Environmental Services REH/dlm cc: Tim Sullivan, Sullivan's Petroleum Co. S:\USTFORMS\UST.L3 .... : . ~_~- :2._- Mr. Howard H. Wines, II1'- ~._. :.' City of Bakersfield F'ir~ Depc~r~ment ~ Environmental ServiCes ~DiVisic~n ~ ~' :~ -' '~:715~Chester Avenue ' ' .,.~_ _- · Bakersfield, California9330) · Subjecti WORK PI,AN FOR PRELIMINARY SITE ASSESSMENT AT THE . SULLIVAN PETROLEUM COMPANY'S DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION 231~7 ".L". STREET, BAKERSFIELD,' CALIFORNIA (BFDESD-PERMIT #BI-0166) Dear Mr-, Wines:.-.~ ~' - - The following: work plan outlines Holguin, Fahan & Associates, 'lnc.'s (HFA's) proposed methodology.for.;c..ondUcting a prelimina_.~/ site-assessment at the above-referenced site. HFA proposes to advance three direct-push sampling Ia'cations to an approximate' maximum depth of 20 fbg and analyze seven soil samples for TPFI as gasoline, BTEX-,-and MTBE during this of side assessment. This. work is being required .by the Bakersfield Fire Department Environmental Services~ Division_(BFDESD) in its letter dated June 21, 1999, as a result of the discovery of gasoline~6~ntaining soil in and around the area of the premium 'grade unleaded gasoline Product pipelin~ to the-southeastern multiple product dispenser (MPD) at the site. -'E N.VI R-O N. ~M-E:N _T_.'_-'..A~.::-'~S-~' IE N ~1 S T S · G.E O L O G i s T S · .-E N~G I N E E R S ContamihatedSite Asse.ssments.. P.hase i.Audits *'Site_~Remediation * Hazardous Waste_~Management PURPOSE AND SCOPE: The purpose of this work plan is.to outline the method61ogy to be followed ~for-the assessment of the-diesel-containing soil at the subject site. The proposed scope of- W~rk'~foi fhis prC;ject includes the ~oll6wing major tasks: ~ ' - · develop al'wark plan and worker h~alth and safety plan for the preliminary site assessmeF~t~ at the Sullivan Petroleum Company's Downtown Chevron Service Stc~tion; · advance three direct-push sampling locations to an approximate maximum depth of ' 20-.fbg~ - · analyze c~pProximately seven soil samples for TPH as gasoline, BTEX, and MTBE; and · prepare a Preliminary Site Assessmenf~ R~port documenting the.drilling activities, sample results, data analysis, conclusions, and recommendations for any-further action that .may be. n. ecessary, 1'43 South-Figuc~oa Street :' "~ ' £ ~65'70-A~on Street. ' -2820 Pegasbs~Drive, Suite I ' 3~)01 South -35th Street,'Suite C-I I _Bakersfield, CaLifornia 93308 (8_05) 391-0517 (805) 391-0826 FAX Interknit! first last@hfa.com ~_ ~': E ~_ Ventura, California 930'01 i: i' : -Irvine, California 926.06 - - (805) 652-0219 - · :~ -- · * - (949) 442-6665' : .~ (805) 652-0793 FAX (949) 724-0446 FAX ' ~'i .... : Internet: first_last@~fa:E:E)m ~' - : Internet: fir§t'last@hfa.com . ~- .: - HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOC~TB, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Howard H. Wines, Ill BFDESD July 8, 1999 - Page 2 SITE DESCRIPTION: The site is located at 2317 "L" Street in the city of Bakersfield, Kern County, California (see Figure 1 ~ Site Location Map). The site is located within the commercial district, which flanks 23rd and 24th streets. The site is at an elevation of approximately 404 feet above MSL, and the topography is relatively flat with a slight slope to the southwest. The site is located within the northwestern quarter of the northwestern quarter of Section 30, Township 29 South, Range 28 East, MDBM. The property owner contact is Mr. Tim Sullivan, President, Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC, Post Office Box 5007, Oildale, California, 93308, (661) 393-5017. The consultant contact is Mr. Mark R. Magargee, Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc., 2820 Pegasus Drive, Suite 1, Bakersfield, California, 93308, (661) 391-0517. 3. SITE MAPS: Site maps are included as Figures 1 and 2. TOPOGRAPHY, GEOLOGY, AND HYDROGEOLOGY: The site is located at an elevation of approximately ~]4 feet above MSL, and the topography slopes slightly to the southwest (see Figure 1). The subject site is located on the eastern flank of the San Joaquin Valley and west of the southern Sierra Nevada. The surface of the San Joaquin Valley is composed primarily of unconsolidated Pleistocene (1.6 million to 11,000 years ago) and Recent (11,000 years ago to the present) alluvial sediments. Beneath the alluvial sediments are older, predominantly lake-bed deposits. These lie unconformably on Mio-Pliocene marine sediments, which extend to a crystalline basement at a depth of approximately 50,000 fbg (California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG), 1965, Geologic Map of California, Bakersfield Sheet). At the subject site, surface deposits consist of Quaternary (recent) unconsolidated alluvium overlying Quaternary (Pleistocene) nonmarine sediments. Geologic deposits in the study area include Pleistocene alluvial sediments that form a homociine dipping gently to the southwest. The deposits are alluvium consisting of indurated and dissected fan deposits (CDMG, 1965). Surface soils are classified by the Soils Conservation Services as Kimberlina-Urban Land Cajon Complex and are characterized as 35 percent Kimberlina fine, sandy loam with moderate permeability; 30 percent Urban land with impervious surfaces and altered fills; and 20 percent Cajon loamy sand with high permeability. The site is located in the southern portion of the Great Valley geomorphic province. The Great Valley is a north-south-trending valley, approximately 400 miles long by 50 miles wide, the southern portion of which is known as the San Joaquin Valley. HOLGUIN, FAF[AN & ASSOCIATES, 'INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Howard H. Wines, III BFDESD July 8, 1999 - Page 3 Surface water and groundwater in the San Joaquin Valley are derived predominantly from the Sierra Nevada to the east and are transported by five major rivers, the closest to the site being the Kern River. The subject site is located approximately 1 mile south of the Kern River. The depth to the regional, unconfined aquifer is approximately 200 fbg, and the groundwater gradient is to the south, away from the Kern River and toward the ancient Kern Lake bed (Kern County Water Agency (KCWA), 1998, 1997 Report on Water Conditions, Improvement District No. 4, February 1998). Perched groundwater at depths as shallow as 20 feet is known to be present flanking the current course of the Kern River, but is not known to extend to the site (KCWA, 1998, 1995 Water Supply Report, February 1998). TANK HISTORY: The site is a newly constructed retail fuel sales facility and mini mart, which opened during the first quarter of 1999 and houses double-walled USTs and product piping (see Figure 2 - Plot Plan). 6. IDENTIFICATION AND ESTIMATED QUANTITY OF MATERIAL hydrocarbons: the quantity released is unknown. RELEASED: Gasoline PREVIOUS WORK: During April 1999, product reconciliation records indicated a potential release in the product piping from the premium UST to the southeastern MPD. However, the leak detection alarm system had not indicated a release. Subsequently, the MPD was shut off, and the inner flex product piping was removed from the outer flex containment piping. A breach was observed in the inner flex product piping. Therefore, Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC filed an unauthorized release report with the BFDESD. On April 30, 1999, the concrete above the product piping was removed, and an exploratory trench was excavated, exposing the product piping. A breach was also observed in the outer flex containment piping. On May 5, 1999, A.J. Environmental, Inc., advanced a hand-augered soil boring (SC-l) adjacent to the location of the product piping breach (see Figure 2 for the soil boring location). Adsorbed-phase TPH as gasoline, BTEX, and MTBE concentrations were detected in the soil sample collected from soil boring SC-1 at a depth of 5 fbg (see Table 1 -Summary of Soil Sample Analytical Results). The BFDESD, in its letter dated June 21,1999, is currently requiring performance of a preliminary assessment of the vertical and lateral limits of the gasoline-containing soil and an assessment of the potential for the release to impact groundwater resources. HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Howard H. Wines, III BFDESD July 8, 1999 - Page 4 STRATEGY AND PROCEDURES FOR ASSESSING THE VERTICAL AND LATERAL EXTENT OF GASOLINE-CONTAINING SOILS: The intent of this work plan is to present the methodologies to be used to assess the vertical and lateral extent of gasoline-containing soils and the potential for the release to impact groundwater resources. HFA proposes to accomplish this by advancing three direct-push sampling locations (B-1 through B-3) to a depth of approximately 20 fbg and analyzing seven soil samples for TPH as gasoline, BTEX, and MTBE (see Figure 2 for the proposed direct-push samPling locations). DESCRIPTION OF WORK TO BE PERFORMED: Prior to any intrusive methods being conducted at the site, Underground Service Alert of Northern California will be utilized to map out the underground structures. Based on the clearances obtained, HFA will site the direct-push sampling locations in safe locations. Soil Investigation Drilling A total of three direct-push sampling locations will be advanced during this preliminary site characterization. The direct-push sampling locations will be advanced using HFA's 10-ton direct-push sampling rig to an approximate maximum depth of 20 fbg. In order to assess the vertical limit of gasoline-containing soil, direct-push sampling location B-1 shall be advanced adjacent to the potential source area, and direct-push sampling locations B-2and B-3 will be advanced as lateral-assessing direct-push sampling locations positioned 20 feet to the east and west of the potential source area, respectively (see Figure 2 for the proposed direct-push sampling locations). Flexibility will be maintained in the location and depth of the direct-push sampling locations based on field observations. The lateral-assessing direct-push sampling locations will be advanced to the depth at which gasoline hydrocarbon concentrations are encountered in the vertical-assessing direct-push sampling location. Soil samples will be collected at 5-foot intervals. Based on field screening, the soil borings will be advanced to the depth of 10 consecutive feet of unimpacted soil, impenetrable soil or bedrock, or the capillary fringe of groundwater, where a soil sample will be collected (see Attachment 1 for the direct-push sampling procedures). Laboratory analysis will be conducted on soil samples collected at 5-foot intervals in the vertical-assessing direct-push sampling location (excluding the soil sample collected at the same depth collected during previous soil assessment activities) and no more than 10-foot intervals in the lateral-assessing direct-push sampling locations, with two consecutive soil samples collected from the base of the lateral-assessing direct-push sampling locations if gasoline-containing soils are penetrated. HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Howard H. Winesl III BFDESD July 8, 1999 - Page 5 During the drilling process, each soil sample will be field-screened for VOCs using a PID calibrated to 100 ppmv isobutylene, and observations will be made for the visual identification of any soil staining or discoloration. Soils will be classified according to the Unified Soil Classification System by an experienced environmental geologist under the direct supervision of a state of California registered geologist, and all data will be recorded on logs of soil Sample descriptions. Soil samples will be wrapped in TeflonTM, followed by close-fitting plastic caps, and held at a temperature of 4°C while in the field and in transit to the laboratory. Soil sampling equipment will be decontaminated between sampling attempts using a non-phosphate, soap and water wash; a tap-water rinse; and a distilled, deionized water rinse. Chemical Analysis of Soil Samples Soil samples will be sent to HFA Environmental Laboratories, a California state-certified laboratory, for analysis. Based on field observations, approximately seven soil samples will be selected for laboratory analysis. The selected soil samples will be analyzed for TPH as gasoline using EPA Method 8015 (M) with an MRL of 10 mg/kg and BTEX and MTBE using EPA Method 8020 with an MRL of 0.005 mg/kg. Report PreD~r~tigr~ Upon completion of the drilling activities and receipt of the laboratory rePort, HFA will provide a Preliminary Site Assessment Report that details the field activities, sample collection, analytical results, data analysis, conclusions, and HFA's recommendation for further assessment or remedial activities, if required. chain-of-custody documents will be included. 10. EQUIPMENT DECONTAMINATION PROCEDURES: Certified laboratory reports and Sampling equipment will be decontaminated using a non-phosphate, soap and water wash; a tap water rinse; and a distilled, deionized water rinse. The direct-push sampling rod will be decontaminated in a similar manner between sampling locations. 11. WASTE DISPOSAL PROCEDURES: Direct-push sampling does not generate drill cuttings, which would potentially require disposal. The equipment washing rinsate will be disposed as sewage with the permission of the appropriate agency. 12. EMERGENCY OR INTERIM CLEANUP: Not applicable. HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Howard H. Wines, III BFDESD July 8, 1999 - Page 6 13. WORK SCHEDULE: Work will begin within 2 weeks subsequent to the acceptance of this work plan by -the BFDESD. The BFDESD will be notified at least 48 hours before any on-site work commences. A Preliminary Site Assessment Report will be submitted to the BFDESD approximately 4 weeks after commencement of the work. 14. SITE SAFETY PLAN: A worker health and safety plan developed by HFA's industrial hygienist for UST site investigations outlines the procedures for conducting all on-site work. Site-specific information is provided on the cover page of the worker health and safety plan (see Attachment 2 for the worker health and safety plan). All work will be conducted in accordance with all regulatory requirements as defined by the State Water Resources Control Board's LUFT Field Manual and the BFDESD guidance documents. Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc., trusts that you will find this work plan to your satisfaction. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Mr. Mark Magargee at (661) 391-0517 or at e-mail address Mark_Magargee@bk.hfa.com. Respectfully submitted, Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. Mark R. Magargee, C G, Senior Hydrogeologist Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. MRM:rri Enclosures: Figure 1 Site Location Map Figure 2 Plot Plan Table 1 Summary of Soil Sample Analytical Results Attachment t - Direct-Push Sampling Procedures Attachment 2 - Worker Health and Safety Plan cc: Mr. Tim Sullivan, Sullivan Petroleum Company, LLC HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ~IATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Howard H. Wines, III BFDESD July 8, 1999 - Page 7 '?: ' IIII SITE LOCATION L LEGEND 0 05 ! MILE 0 1,000 2,000 3 ,(YO0 4.000 5.000 FEET 0 0 5 ~ KILOMEIER USGS OII O&LIE/(~OSI fllH) ~ 5 MINUTE SEI~IES OUADRANGLES SULLIVAN PETROLEUM COMPANY, LLC DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION 2317 "L" STREET BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA FIGURE 1 - SITE LOCATION MAP HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. HOL(3UIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Howard H. Wines, III BFDESD July 8, ~ 999 - Page 8 CAR WASH MINI MART i~ z,~, c~w z T W >- O rr DISPENSER ISLANDS rr F- w O_ Q- o CANOPY ---~ ~ w DISP[NSFR ISLANDS I I I 20,000-GALLO~ G^SOIJNE o o o [] ~ SPLII-CHAMBERED UST APPROACH SIDEWALK 23RD STREET SCALE IN FEET 0 15 30 LEGEND SULLIVAN PETROLEUM COMPANY, LLC DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION PROPOSED DIRECT-PUSH SAMPLING LOCATION 2317 STREET FILL END BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA TURBINE END FIGURE 2 - PLOT PLAN HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. REVISION DATE: JULY 8, 1999: RRI HOLGUIN, FAHAN &.ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Howard H, Wines, III BFDESD July 8, 1999 - Page 9 TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF SOIL SAMPLE ANALYTICAL RESULTS SULLIVAN PETROLEUM COMPANY'S DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION, BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA SAMPLE DATE SAMPLE TPH AS I IETHYL- I TOTAL SOURCE SAMPLED DEPTH ID GASOLINE BENZENE TOLUENE BENZENE XYLENES MTBE REF I ! ! (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) EPA ANALYTICAL METHOD 8015 (M) 8020 N/A REPORTING LIMIT 10 0.0051 0.005 0.0151 0.015 0.02 N/A SC-1 ! 5-10-99 I 5 ! S0-1-5 26,0001 641 1,700 320i 2,900 1,400 A REF = Report reference. N/A = Not applicable. A -- A J Environmental, Inc.'s, report dated May 1999. HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS ATTACHMENT 1. DIRECT-PUSH SAMPLING PROCEDURES DIRECT-PUSH SAMPLING PROCEDURES SITING Direct-push sampling will be conducted as noted in the work plan. TRUCK-MOUNTED DRILLING AND SOIL SAMPLING PROCEDURES Each sampling location will be manually drilled for the first 4 feet in order to establish that the area is clear of subsurface structures. Direct-push sampling will be conducted with Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc.'s (HFA's) 10-ton hydraulic-push rig to the depths noted in the work plan. During the drilling process, lithology data will be recorded on a log of soil sample descriptions by an experienced environmental geologist under the direct supervision of a state of California registered geologist. Soil samples will be collected with a modified California split-spoon sampler at intervals consistent with the work plan, unless a change in lithology is noted, in which case an additional sample will be collected. The sampler will be outfitted with 1.5-inch by 3-inch stainless steel or brass sleeves. When the sample is withdrawn, the ends of the sleeve will be covered with aluminum foil or TeflonTM tape followed by plastic caps. Sample preservation, handling, and transportation procedures will be consistent with HFA's QA/QC procedures. SOIL CLASSIFICATION PROCEDURES Soil in each direct-push sampling location will be continuously classified according to the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) and logged by an experienced environmental geologist under the direct supervision of a state of California registered geologist. Specific geologic and hydrologic information that will be obtained during direct-push sampling include the following: · stratigraphic characteristics: thickness, correlation of units, extent (horizontal and vertical) of aquifers and confining units, if any; · observed porosity; · volatile organic content; · particle-size distribution; · moisture content; · plasticity; · strength; · mineral composition; · depth to groundwater; · soil type, structure, and size; and · distribution of soil type. The data will be recorded on individual logs of soil sample descriptions, including observations regarding the types and quantities of waste materials encountered and any HD readings. Direct-P~ piing Procedures Page 2 This data is recorded on a standardized log sheet in the field log book. The specific information that will be recorded is listed in Table 1, below. TABLE 1. LOG OF SOIL SAMPLE DESCRIPTION INFORMATION GENERAL · Project name · Direct-push sampling · location name/number · Date started and .finished · Geologist's name .Driller's name · Direct-push sampling location; map and elevation · Rig type (bit size/auger size) · Petrologic lithologic classification scheme used (Wentworth, USCS) · Sheet number INFORMATION COLUMNS · Depth * Gradation · Sample location/number · Narrative description · PID or FID reading · Soil classification NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION · Geologic Observations - Soil/rock type - Particle size - Color and stain - Depositional structures ~ Gross petrology - Bedding - Friability - Fossils - Degree of weathering - Moisture content - Particle shape - Formational strike and dip - Organic content - Odor - Suspected contaminanl - Discontinuities - Water-bearing zones Drilling Observations - Changes in drilling method - Readings from detection equipment (if any) - Drilling difficulties - Advance rates or equipment rig chatter - Caving/hole stability - Amounts and types of any liquids used - Water levels Other Remarks - Equipment failures - Possible contamination - Deviations from drilling plan - Weather All field logs will be typed and presented verbatim in an appendix of the preliminary soils assessment report. The typed logs of soil sample descriptions will be on a form identical to that used in the field log book. Each log of soil sample descriptions includes a graphic log in which a symbol for each USCS soil group is included for each soil interval. Direct-PusOampling Procedures Page 3 DATA REDUCTION The data compiled from the sampling locations will be summarized and analyzed. A narrative summary of the soil characteristics will also be presented. The logs of soil sample descriptions are checked for the following information: · correlation of stratigraphic units among sampling locations; · identification of zones of potentially high hydraulic conductivity; · identification of the confining formation/layer; · indication of unusual/unpredicted geologic features (fault zones, fracture traces, facies changes, solution channels, buried stream deposits, cross-cutting structures, pinchout zones, etc.); and · continuity of petrographic features such as sorting, grain-size distribution, cementation, etc. Direct-push sampling locations will be plotted on a properly scaled map. The purpose of each soil sample is indicated on the map. Depending on the results of this analysis, the soil stratigraphy of the site will be presented in a scaled stratigraphic column (if soil stratigraphy is laterally homogeneous) or, more likely, a scaled cross section or a fence diagram (if soil is laterally heterogeneous). Specific features that may impact contaminant migration, e.g., fault zones or impermeable layers, will be discussed in narrative form and supplemented with graphical presentations as deemed appropriate. DECONTAMINATION PROCEDURES Prior to each sampling episode, the sampling equipment will be decontaminated using a non-phosphate soap and water wash, a tap water rinse, and two deionized water rinses. The drill string will be decontaminated with a steam cleaner between each sampling location. SAMPLING LOCATION ABANDONMENT The sampling locations will be abandoned with a 5-percent bentonite neat cement grout delivered by a grout pump through a tremie pipe. HOLGUIN, FAHAN ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS ATTACHMENT 2. WORKER HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN WORKER HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN FOR UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK INVESTIGATIONS SITE-SPECIFIC INFORMATION Site Address: 2317 "L" Street, Bakersfield, California Name of Business Occupying Site: Downtown Chevron Service Station Owner Contact: Mr. Tim Sullivan Owner Tel. #: (661 ) 393-5017 BFDESD Contact: Mr. Howard H. Wines, III Tel. #: (661)326-3979 FIELD ACTIVITIES AND GOALS OF THIS INVESTIGATION: Advance three direct-push sampling locations to a depth of 20 fbg to assess gasoline hydrocarbons in soil. KNOWN HAZARDS AT THE SITE INCLUDE: Gasoline hydrocarbons KEY PERSONNEL AND RESPONSIBILITIES: NAME RESPONSIBILITIES Kenneth J. Mitchell, REA (661 ) 391-0517 SITE SAFETY OFFICER- Primarily responsible for site safety, response operations, and protection of the public. Responsible for work site inspections to identify particular hazards and define site security. Marl< R. Magargee, CHG, RG (661) 391-0517 PROJECT MANAGER - Primarily responsible characterization. The project manager delineates coordinates activities and functions, and directs related to mitigative efforts of cleanup contractors. for site authority, activities Kenneth J. Mitchell, REA (661) 391-0517 SITE INVESTIGATIVE PERSONNEL- Responsible for actual field work including sampling, monitoring, equipment use, and other related tasks as defined by the project manager. ANTICIPATED WEATHER CONDITIONS FOR THIS AREA DURING THE PROJECT'S DURATION WILL BE: Temp. range: 80-100°F Humidity: 20-40% Ambient temp.: 90°F Potential for heat stress: High: X Medium: Low: ANTICIPATED PROTECTION LEVEL DURING THIS PROJECT* Level "D" *Will be upgraded or downgraded to fit situations as they arise. EMERGENCY INFORMATION: All emergency calls: 911 Closest hospital with emergency room: San Joaquin Community Hospital 2615 Eye Street, Bakersfield, California, (661) 395-3000 Map Showing Route from Site to Hospital Attached? Yes: X No: WORKER HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN FOR UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK SITE INVESTIGATIONS This document outlines Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc.'s (HFA's) worker health and safety plan for its employees to be used at City of Bakersfield UST site investigations. Site-specific information is provided on the cover page of this document. This worker health and safety plan was developed by HFA's industrial hygienist through consultation of the following documents: · Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) 29 CFR 1910 - "Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response, Final Ruling," March 1989; · NIOSH/OSHA/USCG/EPA "Occupational Safety and Health Guidance Manual for Hazardous Waste Site Activities," October 1985; and · HFA's Corporate Health and Safety Program. This worker health and safety plan is divided into the following categories: 1. Job Hazard Assessment; 2. Exposure Monitoring Plan; 3: Personal Protective Equipment; 4. Work Zones and Security Measures; 5. Decontamination and Disposal; 6. Employee Training; and 7. Emergency Procedures. 1. JOB HAZARD ASSESSMENT immediate tasks at any leaking UST site include an evaluation of any present or potential threat to public safety. Questions need to be answered regarding the dangers of significant vapor exposures and potential explosion hazards. Potential Chemical Hazards The chemical components of gasoline that are the most dangerous to site workers are the volatile aromatics, benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene, and potentially, organic lead (see Appendix 1 for the Material Safety Data Sheet). Additionally, solvents such as 1,2-dichlorobenzene and 1,2~dichloroethane may also be used as cleaning solutions at service stations. The primary health' risks associated with each of these chemicals are described below. Worker~alth and Safety Plan Page 2 Gasoline - Suspected human carcinogen. A TLV of 300 ppm or gE][] mg/m3 has been assigned to gasoline. This value of 300 ppm was assigned based on an average of 3 percent benzene (10 ppm TLV) in gasoline. Low-level inhalation exposure to gasoline can cause irritation to the eyes, nose, and respiratory system; headache; and nausea. Benzene - Suspected human carcinogen. A TLV of 10 ppm or 30 mg/m3 has been assigned to benzene. Benzene has a iow odor threshold limit of 1.4 ppm. Low-level inhalation exposure to benzene can cause irritation to the eyes, nose, and respiratory system; headache, and nausea. Toluene - A TLV OF 100 ppm or 375 mg/m3 has been assigned to toluene. Toluene has a Iow odor threshold limit of 2.1 ppm. Low-level inhalation exposure to toluene can cause fatigue, weakness, confusion, and euphoria. Ethylbenzene - A TLV of 100 ppm or 435 mg/m3 has been assigned to ethylbenzene. Ethylbenzene has a Iow odor threshold limit of 2 ppm. Low-level inhalation exposure to ethylbenzene can cause irritation to the eyes and mucous membranes. Xylene - A TLV or 100 ppm or 435 mg/m3 has been assigned to xylene. No Iow odor threshold limit has been established for xylene. Low-level inhalation exposure to xylene can cause dizziness, excitement, and drowsiness. 1,2-Dichlorobenzene A TLV of ,~0 ppm or 306 mg/m3 has been assigned to 1,2-dichlorobenzene. 1,2-dichlorobenzene has a Iow odor threshold limit of 4.0 ppm. Acute vapor exposure can cause coughing, dizziness, and drowsiness. It may cause skin irritation. 1,2-Dichloroethane- A TLV of 200 ppm. No data is available concerning odor threshold. Acute vapor exposure can cause coughing, dizziness, drowsiness, and skin irritation. Tetraethyl Lead - A TLV of 0.1 mg/m3 has been assigned to tetraethyl lead. Tetraethyl lead is a colorless or red-dyed liquid at atmospheric conditions. No data is available concerning odor threshold. Acute vapor exposure can cause insomnia, delirium, coma, and skin irritation. Potential Physical Hazards Trenching- Dangerously high fuel vapor levels will be monitored using an LEL meter, The presence of underground utilities are also of concern, and Underground Service Alert will Work~ and Safety Plan Page 3 be notified in advance of any trenching work for identification of all underground utilities in the immediate area. Drilling - Dangerously high fuel vapor levels will be monitored using an LEL meter. The presence of underground utilities are also of concern, and Underground Service Alert will be notified in advance of any drilling work for identification of all underground utilities in the immediate area. Sampling - Use of personal protective equipment will minimize the potential for exposure of personnel conducting site investigation activities. Heat stress will be monitored by each individual and controlled through regular work breaks as outlined in the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists' TLV's for heat stress conditions. 2. EXPOSURE MONITORING PLAN Potential exposure hazards found at UST sites primarily include toxic airborne vapors from leaking USTs. The most dangerous airborne vapor likely to be encountered during a UST investigation is benzene. Gasoline vapor concentration levels will be monitored in the breathing zone with a PID calibrated to benzene. When the action level of 150 ppm (one half the TLV of gasoline) is detected in the breathing zone, respiratory protection will be required utilizing full-face or half-face respirators with organic vapor cartridges. Monitoring for combustible gases will also be performed using an LEL meter when vapor concentrations above 2,000 ppm are detected with the PID. The action level is 35 percent of the LEL for gasoline vapors or 4,500 ppm. If this level is attained or exceeded, the work party will be IMMEDIATELY withdrawn. 3. PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT The level of protection during the site investigation will usually be level "D." Level "D" protective equipment includes coveralls, safety boots, safety glasses, gloves, and hard hats if drilling or trenching operations are in progress. Upgrading the protection level would be based on airborne benzene concentration levels equal to or exceeding the action level. An upgrade to level "C" protection would be required if the action level is equaled or exceeded. Additional equipment required for level "C" would be a full-face or half-face air purifying canister-equipped respirator and TyvekTM suits with taped arm and leg seals. WorkerOalth and Safety Plan Page 4 If the action level is met or exceeded (35 percent) for the LEL, work will cease until the vapor level is measured to be below 20 percent of the LEL. A fire extinguisher will be maintained on site. Decisions for workers' safety are based on a continual evaluation of existing or changing conditions. 4. WORK ZONES AND SECURITY MEASURES To facilitate a minimum exposure to dangerous toxic vapors and/or physical hazards, only authorized persons will be allowed on the job site. Work zones will be defined by HFA staff who will also be responsible for maintaining security within these zones. Only the minimum number of personnel necessary for the UST investigation will be present in the work zone. 5. DECONTAMINATION AND DISPOSAL HFA's standard operating procedures establish practices that minimize contact with potentially contaminated materials. Decontamination procedures are utilized if there is suspected or known contamination of equipment, supplies, instruments or any personnel surfaces. Soap and water will be utilized to remove contaminants from personnel surfaces as well as equipment and instruments. Contaminated wash water will be disposed of in accordance with procedures outlined in the City of Bakersfield Fire Department LUFT guidance document. 6. EMPLOYEE TRAINING All HFA employees working on the site will have had, at a minimum, the required 40-hour OSHA Training for Hazardous Waste Site Activities (29 CFR 1910, 120), which includes training in the use of personal protective equipment. Individualized respirator fit testing is required of all HFA employees working at the site. 7. EMERGENCY PROCEDURES HFA employees are trained in emergency first aid, and emergency first aid provisions will be brought to the site. In the event of overt personnel exposure (i.e., skin contact, inhalation, or ingestion), the victim will be transported to and treated at the closest hospital (see Hospital Map). Worker~l~alth and Safety Plan Page 5 t SAN FRANCISCO FIELD !1.1_ E L 3000 LOS ANGELES SULLIVAN PETROLEUM COMPANY, LLC DOWNTOWN CHEVRON SERVICE STATION 2317 "L" STREET BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA HOSPITAL MAP HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. APPENDIX 1. MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET AUTOHOT IVE GENIUM PUBLISH~NG C~ORAT~ON ~SOL[NE L~-FREE 1145 CATALYN STREET ' SCHENECTADY. NY 12~18~ U~ ~[e Oc[ober SECT]O~ I. ~TERIA[ IDENTIFICATION D~C~I~ION: A ~o~[tle bXe~ DE h~drocarboas ~o~ auc~octve fuel ~FA~: Avai~ble fr~ s~eral ~pliers. SECTION !I. INGREDIENTS AND ~ZARDS z ltAIARO DATA A hyd~oc~rb~ blend ~C ~ lnc[~e no~l and br~ch~ 900 ~/m~a cMln aloes, cycloal~es, aloes, armtics ~d other tddittves.i~ (~ad ~ 0.013 t/L, phospho~ ~ 0.0013 g~, sulfur ~ 0.10 vii. ~y contain Eye: 500 helena, <52; see ~ D3606). ~erate i. itltion IACGIH 1981 ~V (Intended ~es ~is~). See also ~e c~positiou of [uel la varied ~th altitude and T~o 900 seasonal requir~ts for a l~lity. ~e blend ~sc ~e~ ~i~ock requir~n~. (~tknock Indez ~ AS~ D~39.) SECTION !II, PHYSICAL DATA Datilla~lon at i a~, Initial, deg C >39 Specitic gravity, ~/60 F - 0.72-0.76 hd point .... <210 Evaporation race N/A Solubili~y in water Insoluble Appearance ~d Odor: A clear~ ~bile liquid rich a characteristic odor ~lch ~n be recoinized a~ abou~ I0 p~ In air. (Gasoline ~y be colored vl~h dye.) SECTION IV. FIRE AND EXPLOSION D~ LO,eR UPPER -45 F 5~853 F I by vol~e l.i 7.6 ~aluishiui Hedla: D~ ch~icIl' cirb~ divide, Ilcohol fo~. Use of vi~er ineffective ~o ex~gish fi~e, bu~ ute vi~er spray for c~liu{ fire-e~osed dr~ . ~d ~anks ~o pr~ven~ pressure ~p~ure. I~ is a danier~s fire end t~loti~ hazard ~n exposed ~o hee~ ~ flms. repots can fl~ Ilon{ surfaces, r~ach dJs~ ~l~ s~rcas ~d flash back. ~ resc~ violently ~th oxidizin{ Firef~hCers s~ld ~er self~ined breechini apparatus and ful{ pro~c~lv~ SECTION V. REACTIvi~DATA This is a stable ~terial in closed c~cainets at r~ t~perature u~et noel s[orage and handling c~di~l~s. I~ does hOC ~der~o hazardous pol~ritatl~. ~ls Is an OS~ Class ~ f1~bl.e liquid. I ~lxturn of lasoline viers and air can explosive. It Is lnc~a~iblt vith o~ldizing Theml-oxidative deEradaCl~ can yield carb~'m~oxldt ~d partlslly ~tdit~ hydrocarbons. GENIUM PUBLISHING NO 467 SECTION VI. HEALTH HAZARD [NFORHATION TLV 300 ppm (see Sect. IX) Inhalation causes intense burninB of the mucous nembranes, throat and resvLratorv tract o va ors can lead to bronchopneumonta. Itdtalatton of hiRh ~.o.n.c,. can. taus overexposure t ,p . _ ___, .... d .bt, ~,,o auses ~et-mat~LZS0 ~an fatal ulmonary eoen~, aepeaCe~ or pzu,,,,K.'~u o~-.. e-,.. sure.c -- -o eves can taus- .cause ~.list.ertng of skin due co its defatttng propertzes. ~q}osutt nypet~m~a ut the conjunctive. Ingestion or excessive vapors can cause inebriation, dr~lness, blurred vision, vertigo confusion, v~lting and cyanosis (2000 ppm produces mild a~sthesia in 30 mis, higher cone. are intoxicating .tn less time.) Aspiration after iniesti~ ca, es br~chit, ts, pne~nia, or ed~ ~hich can be fatal. FXRST Eye Contact: lrlush thoroughly vith t~_mntng varec for L5 min. including ~der eyelids. Skin Contact: P~ve ~ntami~ted clothing, ld~h affected ares with ~ap ~d varec. Inhalati~: R~e to fresl~ air. ILestore breathin~ end administer oxygen tf needed. InRestion: l)o not induce vomittn~. Aspiration ha~rd. C~t~cc physician. Seek pro-pt ~d£r~l assistance for further creat~sent, observation ~d support. SECTION VII. SPILL~ LEAK~ AND DISPOSAL PROCEDURES Notify safety perso~el of leaks or spi~ls. Re,ye sources vide adequate ventilation. Clean-up personnel require protection against liquid con- tact and vapor inhalation. Xf a leak or spill has not i~nited, ~e rater spray to disperse vapors and to protect ~n attempting co stop the leakage. Contain spill. not allow to enter se~er or surface varec. Add absorbent solid to s~ll spills or residues and pick up for disposal. D~SPOSAL: Bu~ scrap ~ter£al in an appr~ed incinerator, lu~ e~taninaced liquid by spraying into ~ incinerator, lmollov Federal, State, and Loca1 regulacl~s. SECTION Vlll. SPECIAL PROTECTION INFORMATION Use general and local exhaust ventilation (_explosion-p~o[) to keep vapors belov the requirements in the vorkplace. Respirators should be available for nonroutine Or emergency use above the TLV. Avoid eye contact' by use of chemical safety goggles and/or full faceshield vhere iai is possible. ~ear protective clothini appropriate for the ~ork situation to minimize skin contact such as rubber ~loves and boo~s. Clothlni to be changed daily and laundered. Eyevash fountains, sho~ers and rushing facilities should be readily accessible Provide suitable training to those handlini and vorkin~ vi. th this naterial. SECTION iX, SPECIAL PRECAUTIONS AND COMMENTS - Store in closed c~tainers in a cool, dry, ~ll-venttlated area ~ay from sources heat, lgnitim~ and strong oxidizing agents.- ProteCt containers fr~ physical drags. Avoid direct sunltsht. Storage must meet requirements of OSHA Class IA liquid. Outdoor or detached storage preferred. No smoking in areas of use. Prevent static electric sparks and use exl~loelon-proof electrical services. (Nust meet code.) skin ~nd eye contact. Avoid inhalation of vapors. Mear clean york clothing Indoor use of this material requires exhaust ventilation to remove vapors. ICC Flammable Liquid, Red Label. I.~RF.I.: t'lan~ndble Llouid DOT I.D. No. UN 1203. DOT Classification: FLANI~LE LIOUIU SOURCE(S) CODE: 2.~-9.3~.37 HCR~ene lad $ yg ,,]_. /and Safety ¥~/U /,. ~.rf _ H~DICAL REVISe: :~a November lqOl GENIUM PUBLISHING GASOLINE C/~: 8006-6 I-9 Bulk Handling TLV-TWA, ~ ppm (= ~00 n~m') TLV-STEL~ SO0 ppm (= 1504~ t~/m~) C~soline is a clear, fl~nm,~ale, volatile I~id ~ a ~~s ranging ~ C~ ~ C,, ~. ~ ~m~ ~ ~ 2S0 ~e ~~s m ~a~ ~1 I~.'" ~~ ~ i~l~: S~iF~ ~vi~ 0.72 to 0.76 at ~°F ~ili~ ~nc'* J9*C; ~*C (10% di~il~; I IO°C (50%]; 170°C (~%]; 2~*C FI~ ~nt: -SO*F ~ lim~: I.~% ~ 6.0% by ~u~ in air ~uMe in wae~, ~ is ~y ~ in ~, ~1~, ~z~, a~ a~e alc~. ~i~ is a ~ fm ~&4~i~, ~n~ ~i~ ~gi~. A ~ical m~m ~line ~i~on ~ld ~ 14% a~ti~, a~ 6% ol~ns. ~ mean ~ c~q~q~ w~ ~i~ing in ~bli~ing a ~V.'~ ~ ~n~ '~nicular a,enti~, if ~L am ~, ~, ~ti~, a~ c~in ~ns."s-* A ~t~ic v~ ~ ~ has ~ ~1~ fm 142 i~i~l ~li~ in ~ air ~ple ~ v~.'" ~e toxiciw is simila~u-e f~ all ~mli~. ~ ~ ~lly ~ ~ ~tic ~ am mu~ ~m~ i~ ~ ~ is ~. In~lati~ is ~ ~ i~nt ~ ~ ~1 ~. ~ ~~ ~ intoxic~, ~, blu~ ~, di~k ~, ~ m~a am ~t c~ s~s ~ ~ ~. ~ ~~ ~i~v~: 1~270 ~ ~ mi~ a~a in ~ mi~l~~n Hi~ ~ ~ i~- ~ng in ~10 mi~~ ~ ~d f~ i~i~ ~i~ ~m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~s ~ e~ h~ c~ is ~ ~. H~, ~ ~1~ ~m ~ TLV of ~ ~ is ~. du~ng ~ ~ ~i~ ~ ~ ~ ~% ~, ~ly I.S%, ~i~ i~ of ~ and ~ ~ ~ 2%. ~e ~m (i~ ~ ~ i~ I~I~ ~ ~% a~ 6% ~ ~ I~al, while ~z~ I~ a~ xyl~ !~ ~i~ ]%. A~ c~ist~ ~ ol~ high ~iling in~i~Is (C, Io C., II is no(eworthy I~a! the co~:e~tralion of ar~alics in ~e va~r was m~ ~s ~n in ~e liquid, ~ich, on ~ average, con,ins 14~ a~ h~s. Runic, ~, ~ 24% Io 27% ~al a~ in vad~s 8r~ of ~ bra~ of ~li~.' ~e ~n ~t~t ~ ~ vast, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ stay,'" a TLV ~ ~ was ~o~ ~ ~ ~i~ vast. ~is ~s ~a~, ~ con~w~ fi~, f~ ~ o~i~s inv~, ~ ~ ~1~8 of ~li~. In ~ a ~t or ~in~ (~ ~, ~ ~ ~ ~e liquid is v~z~, a ~t I~ limit mi~t ~ in ~r. im~ lim~ ~ 4%. ~ ~i~ ~ly ~y c~in up to 5% ~.'~ A~l~is ~ 86 ~ ~n ~ing ~ti~s ~1~ ~t 5% ~i~ z~, ~ ~e hig~ ~z~ ~t ~ng 4.8%.~ ~ ~ t~ ~diti~ to ~ ~li~, di~l~ and ~lly ~ di~, am ~t in ~ ~all a~nu ~t ~ to ~ toxiciW u~ ~ ~i~? T~r~hyl ~ ~ am ~ I~ in ~li~ ~t ~ aim o~i~dly ~ liffie ~al~ ~ in ~ ~lin8 ~ ~ ~i~. in8 ~. ~ ~ ~ ~V is lim~ to ~lk ~lin8 p~, i~i~ filling ~ti~ ~fi~, ~ ~ d~ ~ ~t t~ ~xi~ ~ t~ hi8~ ~ilin8 ing~U ~i~ might ~' 't ~i~tifi~ 8% lo ~si~ of ~ h~a~s, ~ average ~1~ ~i~t ~ ~ 72.5. ~fo~, 3~ ~ ~ld ~ m ~ A ti~t~ a~ TLV ~ 3~ ppm ~ ~d~, for ~lk ~lin8 ~ ~mli~ ~ ~ Runi~'sm ~l~lalions on 1. ~ CF. a~d IUC ~ Am. /nd. H,/g. Assoc./..19:!18 (1978l. ~. TheMe~lclnde~. 10~ed..p. 624. Mm~&Co..Irtc..Rahway. Newk'e',eY (19~]}. 3. ~ H.L el al: Am. Ind. ~ Assoc. I. 24:99 (1963L & ~ H.I. and ~ IGlUarel, k.: Ibid. J9:!10 {1978). $. C~a~Je~ I*LW : Indu~rial Hy.gieoe and 7ozico~o~,. 2nd ed.. F. Pa~'. Ed. It~te~sc~q~ce. New Yo~ (196]L f~ 14ende~m ami 14ag~: Nox~Ou~ C,,ues. Rev. ed. Reinhold Pubhthm$ Coq~. (1943). 7, ~ H.L: Ibid. 36:336 (19751. L K,l~V,,Pt~phe~a(Neum~,aflerAdd*Cl~:~oP~ml.B't Medl 1:216 tl9661. 9. Tal~,~*-~, ¥. e~ al: Pol¥~.umoa~hy C..a~ by P~roleurn 8e~tt'~ Int. A~-h. ArbOr Med. 34:185 lt9751. D June 21, 1999 FIRE CHIEF RON FRAZE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 2101 'H' Street Bakersfield. CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3941 FAX (805) 395-1349 SUPPRESSION SERVICES 2101 'H' Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3941 FAX (805) 395-1349. PREVENTION SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave, Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3951 FAX (805) 326-0576 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave, Bakersfield. CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3979 FAX (805) 326-0576 TRAINING DMSION 5642 Victor Ave, Bakersfield, CA 93308 VOICE (805) 399-4697 FAX (805) 399-5763 Tim Sullivan Sullivan Petroleum P.O. Box 5007 Bakersfield, CA 93308 RE: Laboratory results from preliminary site assessment conducted at the Sullivan Petroleum Company located at 2317 "L' Street. Dear Mr. Sullivan: Upon reView of the recently submitted laboratory results from your facility, this office has determined that the extent of the contamination plume, associated with the leak in the supply line located on your property, has not been adequately defined. This office requires (in accordance with Chapter 6.7 of the California Health and Safety Code and Chapter 16, Title 23 of the California Code of Regulations) that further assessment be done to define the vertical and horizontal extent of the contamination plume. Please submit a work plan for further assessment, to this office, within 30 days from receipt of this letter. The work plan should follow guidelines found in: Appendix A -Reports, Tri - Regional Board Staff Recommendations for Preliminary_ evaluation and Investigation of Underground Tank Sites; July 6, 1990. Additionally, be advised that oversight cost for this project will be billed to you at a rate of $75.00 per hour. If you have any questions, please call me at (661) 326-3979. Sincerely, 'Office of Environmental Services REH/dlm $:\USTFORMS\UST.L2 STEPHEN t. CLIFFORD JAMES E. BBOWN ROBERT D. HARDINg ARNOLD ANCHORDOOUY ANTHONY L. 1EGgIO PATRICK J. OSBORN MICHAEL L. O'DELL GROVER B. WALDON John R. SZEWC:ZYK STEPHEN H. BOYLE~ JAMES B. WIENS RICHARD G. ZIMMER CHARLES D. MELTON ~ lLM TAXAtiON tERI a. BJORN STEPHEN P. WaINER SCOtt L. HARPER BILL J. KUENZ~NGER WiNIFRED tHOMSON HOSS KURt S. rONNOW JONATHAN B. BARNES* KIMBERIY m. WOODYABD OF COUNSEL tHOMAS M. StANTON CURTIS DARLING CLIFFORD & BROWN A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW BANK OF AMERICA BUILDING I430 TRUXtUN AVENUE, SUITE 900 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93301-5230 June 1, 1999 Mr. Steve Underwood, Inspector Bakersfield Fire Department Environmental Services 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, California 93301 Re: Sullivan Petroleum Company KELLY ZIM MERMAN OFFICE ADMINISTRATOR SHIRLEY m. KRISTEll CONTR.O LLER TELEPHONE NO. (805) 3R 2-8023 TELECOP~ER NO. (805) 32 ~-3508 E-MAIL cblaw@clifford-brownlaw.com jUN U 2 1999 Dear Mr. Underwood:. Please find enclosed a copy of the report prepared by/NJ Environmental, Inc. in connection with the hand auger sampling. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Very truly yours, GHW:jc [Enclosure] 110\21240-15\UNDERWOOD-LTR loc: James Brown, Esq. cc: Tim Sullivan Sullivan Petroleum (w/enc.) A J nvironmental, Inc. 4100 Easton Drive, Suite 12, Bakersfield, CA 93309 Bus: (661) 327-7429 Fax: (661) 327-1707 SULLIVAN PETROLEUM COMPANY Leak Investigation 2317 "L" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 HAND AUGER SAMPLING Prepared for Mr. Grover Walden Clifford & Brown Bank of America Building. 1430 Truxtun Avenue, Suite 900 Bakersfield, CA 93301-5230 May 1999 Registered Environmental Assessor State of California No. REA-02251 Expiration Date: 06/30/99 Harold .,d,d~Sugden Registered Geologist State of California No. 1954 Expiration Date: 04/30/01 ,.A J INTRODUCTION At the request of. Mr. Grover H. Waldon of Clifford & Brown, A J Environmental, Inc. obtained a hand auger soil sample from the Sullivan Petroleum Company location at 2317 "L" Street in the City of Bakersfield, California. The purpose of the sampling was to determine the presence or absence of soil contamination beneath the supply lines in the hole that was excavated beneath the Southeast corner of the south canopy and dispenser area. The work was performed on May 5, 1999. Exhibit 1 shows the sampling location. SUMMARY The sample collected during our fieldwork was delivered to B. C. Laboratories, a State Certified Laboratory for analysis. It was analyzed for Benzene, Toluene, Ethyl Benzene, Methyl-t-butylether, Total Xylenes and Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons - Gasoline. A Work, Health and Safety Plan was prepared, read and signed by all field personnel prior to commencement of operations. Results from the laboratory analysiS indicated that each constituent tested was above action levels. DISCUSSION Boring The boring was drilled using an AMS, extendible, hand auger. Samplin.q Pro.qram Prior to boring, a 5' x 7W slab of concrete overlying the supply lines was removed. The overlying.gravel~and soil was excavated to a depth of approximately two feet exposing the lines. The two and half inch diameter auger was lined with a two-inch diameter by six-inch long brass sampling tube. POrtions of the sample below the brass tube were used for Photo Ionization Detector (PID) readings. The six-inch brass sample tube was sent to the laboratory for analysis. Prior to sampling, all equipment was washed with a non-phosphate detergent solution, rinsed with distilled water and air-dried. This was also done between sampling intervals and between borings to minimize the possibility of cross contaminatiOn. The sample was field checked for contamination using an HNU Portable Hydrocarbon Photo Ionization Detector (PID) prior to transport to the laboratory. The PID was also used as a screening tool to ensure the health and safety of field personnel. The PID is an organic vapor analyzer that responds to hydrocarbons at very Iow concentration levels. It AJE provides a continuous, direct readout of total organic vapor concentrations and does not respond to ambient gases such as carbon monoxide or carbon dioxide. Measurements were recorded in parts per million (ppm). Immediately after sampling, the brass tube was sealed with Teflon tape, capped with plastic end caps, sealed with duct tape, labeled and placed in a cooler and kept at a ........ .temperature of four degrees Celsius or less for transport to a State Certified Laboratory. Chain-of-Custody forms were completed when the sample was collected and maintained until the sample was relinquished to the laboratory. Borehole Abandonment The borehole was backfilled with cuttings from the hole. The water table was not reached. Field Results The samples had a very strong hydrocarbon odor and PID readings eXceeded 2,000 ppm, the maximum that the instrument can detect. Analytical Results The soil sample was delivered to B. C. Laboratories Inc., a state certified laboratory, for analysis. The laboratory reports and chain of custodY documents are included in Appendix I. CONCLUSIONS Based on the analytical test results, it can be concluded that significant soil contamination is present as the result of an unauthorized release of hydrocarbons at this site. Depth to groundwater occurs at 185 feet below ground level (Kern County Water Agency, February !, 1999. 2 A J !:: EXHIBITS LABORATORY RESULTS Benzene 64 mg/k_o Toluene 1,700 m(~/kq Ethyl Benzene 320 mq/kg Methyl-t-butylether 1,400 mq/ke iTotal Xylenes 2,900 m_q/k~ iTPH-Gasoline 26,000 m(~/kc~ LEGEND ~ - Fuel Dispenser -- Excavation · .- Hand Auger Hole SC #1-5 (5'0"-5'6") 23rd Street Scale: 1"=20' AJ El 4100 Easton Drive, #12 Bakemfield, CA93309 (661) 327-7429 Fax(661) 327-1707 CLIFFORD & BROWN SULLIVAN PETROLEUM COMPANY 2317 "L" STREET BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA HAND AUGER SAMPLING - 5/5/99 EXHIBIT 1 ! DATE: MAY 1999 ! A J 'E APPENDIX I Name:,~ ,~'~',vv/~z~vM~,/ra_ Project: ¢~',~vf~v Address:~/o~~ ~/~ Project ~: City: ~F/e~ Sampler Name:~~ _ State: C~ Zip: ~33~ Other: ~u~ _ ' ' - __~ ...... ~__~ . ent: ~~ ~ ~ ~~: (Sign~ , D~te:', . ¢o.M' Name:A ~ ~/~¢¢~.~0, ~-~:. ....... Receivea~FTS~am) Dat~ ~: ...... · - Helinquisneo Dy: t~gna~ure) ~z~ Address: ~/o~ ~T~ ~/v~ W / ~ ~/~/~ ~uo~ Citv, gN~rl¢;y ~' ~'"~'~' ~ State ~ ¢.~3~. ~ Relinquished by: (Signature). Received by: (Signa~re) Date: ~me: ~9 ¢ Attention: ~/~ ~~ Relinquished by: (Signature) Received by: (Signature} Date: ~me: . ' ~me: Miles: . Relinquished by: (Signature) Received by: (Signs;ute) Date: ~me: Sample Disposal p~ ~ ~ Rehnqu~shed by (S gnature) BC LABORATORIES INC. SAMPLE RECEIPT FORM Rev. No.6 10/13198 Page m Of __ Submission #: q:~ --~_~ ~- ~ 2. Project Code: SHIPPING INFORMATION Federal Exprees 1:3 UPS [] Hand Delivery 8C Lab Field Service [] Other [] (Specify) . SHIPPING CONTAINER Ice Chest [] None ~/ Box [] Other [] (Specify) Refrigerant: Ice [] Blue Ice I-1 None ~ Other [] Comments: Custody Seals=~~~] .~'' .......... ~ None ~2~ Comments: All samples received? Yea ~ No [3 SAMPLE CONTAINERS All samples containers Intact? Yes~ No [] Ice Chest'lD ~ Date/Time ~ ~.~~I Temperature: ~.~, °C ~ Thermometer ID: ~ Analyst In-'~'~, Emissivity ~ Container Description(s) match COC? Ye~ No [] Ice Chest ID Date/Time Temperature: __ °C Thermometer ID:__ Analyst Init Emissivity Container SAMPLE NUMBERS QT GENERAL MINERAL/GENERAL PHYSICAL PT PE UNPRESERVED OT INORGANIC (~HEMICAL METALS PT INORGANIC CHEMICAL PT CYANIDE PT NITROGEN FORMS PT TOTAL SULFIDI~ 2oz.'NITRATE I NITR~TE OR~ OT TOX ~ PT CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND 100mi PHENOLICS I 40mi VOA VIAL TRAVEL BLANK ~ 40mi VOA VIAL OT EPA 413.1r 413.2, 411~.1 PT ODOR RADIOLOGICAL BACTERIOLOGICAL !PT EPA 504 f QT EPA S081S081808Q iQT EPA 515.1t8150 GT EPA 525 QT EPA S25 TRAVEL BLANK 100mi EPA 547 100mi EPA 531.1 QT EPA 548 QT EPA 549 OT EPA 632 QT EPA 8015M OT QA/OC QT AMBER 8 OZ. JAR 32 OZ. JAR SOIL SLEEVE .PCB VIAL PLASTIC BAG 3omments: ~lirnole Numberina Comoleted By: ~ * Date/Time: ~/~ [ Y Q ~ [F:~WPSO~'LAB-OOCS~FORMS~$AMREC2*WPD] Laboratories, Inc. Purgeable Aromatics and Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons Page 1 AJ ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. 4100 EASTON DRIVE SUITE ~12 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93309 Attn: MIKE FELDMAN 805-327-7429 Sampling Location: CHEVRON 2317 L ST Sample ID: SC ~1-5 Sample Depth: 5'0"-5'-6" Sample Matrix: Soil Sample Collected By:FELDMAN/SUGDEN Date Reported: 05/13/99 Date Received: 05/05/99 Laboratory No.: 99-05254-1 Date Collected: Date Extracted-8020: Date Analyzed-8020: Date Extracted-8015M(g): Date Analyzed-8015M(g): 05/05/99 ® 12:36PM 05/10/99 05/10/99 05110/99 05/10199 Constituents Benzene Toluene Ethyl Benzene Methyl-t-butylether Total Xylenes Gasoline Range Organics (c5 c14) Surrogate % Recovery Practical Analysis Reporting Quantitation Results Units Limit ~64. mg/kg 1700. mg/kg 320. mg/kg 1400. mg/kg 2900. mg/kg 26000. mg/kg 117. % 100. 30. 400. 200. 20000. 70-130 TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. Note: PQL's were raised due to dilution required to bring target analytes into calibration range. Stuart G. Buttram Department Supervisor All results listed in this report arc for thc exclusive use of the submitting patty. BC Laboratories, Inc. assumes no responm'bility for report..al~ .m.t~on, scp.ara~o,n, dchachmcnt or third part~ mterpreUtmn. UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK UNAUTHORIZED RELEASE (LEAK) / CONTAMINATION SITE REPORT NAME OF INDIVDU~ FILING REPORT PHONE ~- ~ ~ ~ REPRSSENT,Ne ~ ~NE~PE~TO. ~ .EG,ON~ BOAR~ I ~'PANYOR ~ENCYNA'~ ~ ~ L~ALAGENCY OTHER ~[[~ ~O~e~ Co~ ~C ADDRESS NAME ~NT~T PERSON I PHONE ADDRESS 200 e. Minner A~ue Bakersfield c~ California ~,~93308 Chevron Station Company LLC ADDRESS CRO~ STREET 23~d a~d ~ REGION~ BOARD PHONE (1) NAME QUANTI~ LOST (~LLONS) ~ UNK~WN DA~ DI~VERED I HOW DIS~VER~ ~ INVENTORY ~NT"~ ~ SU~URFACE MONITORING ~ NUIS~CE ~NDITIONS HAS DISCHARGE BEEN STOPPED ? ~ REPAIR TANK ~ CLOSE TANK & FILL IN P~CE ~ CHANGE PR~EDURE SOURCE OF DIVERGE CAUSE(S) ~ ~ TANK.AK ~ UNKNOWN ~ OVERFI~ ~ RUP~R.AILURE ~ SPILL CHECK ONE ONLY ~ UNDERMINED ~ SOIL ONLY ~ GROUNDWATER ~ DRINKING WATER - (CHECK ONLY. IF WATER WELLS HA~ AC~ALW BEEN AFFEC~D) CHECK ONE ONLY ~ NO ACTION TArN ~ PR~IMINARY S~ ASSE~MENT ~R~N SUBM~ED ~' POLLUTION CHA~C~RI~TION ~ LE~ BEt~ ~NFIRMED ~ PR~IMINARY SI~ A~E~M~T UNDERWAY ~ POST CLE~UP MONITORING IN PROGRE~ ~ REMEDIATION P~N ~ CASE ~ED (CLE~UP ~MPLE~D OR UNNECE~AR~ ~ CLE~UP UNDERWAY CHECK APPROPR~TE ACTION(S) ~ EXCAVA~ & DISUSE (E~ ~ REMOVE FREE PRODUCT (FP) ~ ENH~CED BIO DEG~DATION (1~ ~ CAP Sl~ (CD) ~ EXCAVATE & TREAT (E~ ~ PUMP & TREAT GROUNDWA~R (G~ ~ REP~CE SUPPLY (RS) ~ ~NTAINMENT BARRIER (CB) ~ ~ ACTDN REQUIRED (FA) ~ TREA~ENT AT H~P (HU) E~om p~ima~7. co~ai~me~t ~Uel 1i~e' gxcavatio~ ~o co. Diem 1eRA be~o~d made ~o~ g~vi~o~me~tal~ Se~ices to be ~otiEied' oE da~e a~d ~ime excavation