HomeMy WebLinkAboutUST REP.-11/21/86P%b- 0o%%
5ERVICf.
Z
i \
I
T,Y, *zip
~:, _,.~_ _ _
I
f~,~' ~No. Merced Fresno Visalia 'Bakersfield
..... . BAKERSFIELD FIRE DEPARTME~'i-.,?(~;:,
BUREAU OF FIRE PREVENTION'.":
- '~ .... APPLICATION :' ' ' ~- '
· " ~
In conformi~ with provisions of ~inent ordinances, codes an~or mgulat,oh~Ta~licafiO9~;is,'~de;~:
'..-., Address.
'to display, sto~e, install, use, operate, sell or handle materials' br procesSes ':inv°lving:"0~
ditions deemed hazardous to-life or property as follows: . .;.
issued ~ ~
Permit ~jlll#~ .~-~..~-...~. ~.-~.../,,~y~ .........
/ D~te
?
_/oox. :h ........
Mobil Oil Corporation
April 18, 1988
Mr. F. Scott Nevins
· Regional Water Quality Control Board
3614 East Ashlan Avenue
Fresno, California 93726
3800 WEST ALAMEDA AVENUE, SUITE 700
BURBANK, CALIFORNIA 91505.433!
MOBIL OIL CORPORATION
FORMER S/S #10-GBM
1200 OAK STREET
BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA
Dear Mr. Nevins:
On June 18, 1987 Mobil Oil requested closure relative to the site
mitigation project at the referenced location. To date, we have not
received a response from your office.. As of May 2, 1988, we will
consider this matter closed unless notified by your office.
Should you have any questions, contact Jane Keith at (818) 953-2519.
Sincerely,
JMK:ars
10950
.~. J. Edwards
Region Environmental Manager
CC:
Mr. Richard Casagrande
Kern County
Envi ........
1700
Bake
Scot,c,,¥ 7664 "Post-it" Routing-Request Pad
ROUTING - REQUEST
Please
PR
I--1 FORWARD
[~ RETURN
[] KEEP OR DISCARD
-'--I REVIEW WITH ME.
Date
Mobil Oil Corporation
3800 WEST ALAMEDA AVENUE, SUITE 700
BURBANK, CALIFORNIA 91505-4,.'.'.'.'.'.'.%31
June 18, 1987
Mr. F. Scott Nevins
Regional Water Quality Control Board
3614 East Ashlan Avenue
Fresno, California 93726
MOBIL OIL CORPORATION
LOT 1200 OAK STREET
BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA
Dear Mr. Nevins:
Attached is our consultant's report regarding the additional
sampling at the referenced location.
soil
Laboratory analysis indicated non-detectable levels of EDB and organic
lead at the location. Mobil Oil believes that no further clean-up action
is required, and would like to consider this incident closed. Mobil
would appreciate a response regarding this matter.
Should you have any questions, please contact Jane Keith at (818)
953-2519.
JMK:ars
attachment
92010
rds
nvi ronmental
Manager
cc: ~Mr?'Richard Casagrande Kern County
Environmental Health Department
1700 Flower Street
Bakersfield, California 93305
KRAZA'N & ASSOCIATES, INC.
5oils Engineering
Comp.ct,on Z. st,ng
Engineered Septic Systems
Construction Testing
Geotechnical Investlaetions
June 15, 1987
Proj. No. 86-1}1
Mobil Oil Corporation
3800 West Alameda Avenue, Suite 700
Burbank, CA 91505-t,~31
Attn: Ms. ,lane Keith
RE: EDB and Organic Lead Sampling and Testing
Lot 1200 Oak Street
Bakersfield, California
Gentlemen:
In accordance 'with your request we have completed soil sampling and
chemical analysis of soil samples obtained adjacent to our previous soil sampling
location No. 7. This sampling and testing was in accordance with the request of
the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. They requested during our
May 11, 1987 meeting that a location where a higher total lead had been
detected, such as at Boring No. 7-10 foot depth, an additional sample be
obtained and tested for ethylene dibromide and organic lead.
Our new sampling location is identified as Boring No. 13 in this report, and
was placed immediately adjacent to Boring No. 7 as numbered in our previous
report. Sampies were obtained at depths of I0 , 15, 20, 25, 30 and 35 feet. The
10, 15, and 20 foot samples were tested for organic leads and EDB. The results
of these tests is presented in the following table:
Main Office: Fresno/Clovis · 3860 N. Winery · Fresno, California 93726 · (209~ 297-7337
Bakersfield (805) 393-2343 ~ Visalia (209) 625-8251 [] Merced (209) 383-3993
Page No. 2
Proj. No. 86-131
Table of Concentration of Gasoline
Constituents in Soil Samples
Sample Location
Boring No. 13.-
Boring No. 13 - 15'
Boring No. 13 - 20'
N/D - Non-Detected
Ethylene Dibromide
]n-Organic Lead
N/D N/D
N/D N/D
N/D N/D
As indicated in the above table, no contamination was detected at the
location Sampled. It is therefore concluded that no significant contamination of
EDB and organic lead exists at the location sampled.
If there are any questions or if we can be of further assistance, please do
not hesitate to contact our office;
Respectfully Submitted,
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
MRE/Ic
1 c Steve Pao
Michael R. Erwin
Civil.Engineer
RCE #18625
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, iNC.
Project LOT 1200 OAK STREET · Boring No, [-~
BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Proj. No. 86-131
DATE DR LLED: May 29, 1987 TYPE OF BORING: HO11 OW Stem Auger
HOLE ELEV: -- GROUNDWATER LEVEL: NE LOGGED BY:_ SC'
oz~ ~.- '- .,-~ SOIL DESCRIPTION ~: ~'*= m==" ~1 ~;'=_3~ ~
FILL Fine to medium SILTY SAND (SM); dark
brown, damp,, with gravel, drills easy
Fine SILTY SAND (SM); medium brown, damp,
drills easy
5--
_ Fine SAND (sP); tannish broWn, damp, drills
easy
10-- X ,
Very fine to fine SAND (SP); dark brown,
damp, drills easy.
..... ~ ........................................ - .... ~.- ...................
Fine to coarse SAND (SW); dark brown,
damp, with fine gravel, drills easy
15-- X
20-- X
_ Fine to coarse SAND (SW); tannish light
brown, damp, dri 11 s easy
25-- X
'R = /%ofusal, groator
than 100 blows/foo~
I(RAZAN & ASSOCIATES
Fresno3 Visalia Bak~_ r_~li~_ld
Slmot ..... .~ ..... ol _. 1
Project LOT 1200 OAK STREET ' Boring No.
BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Proj. No. 86-131
DATE DRILLED: m m May 29, 1987 TYPE OF BORING: Hol 1 ow Stem Auaer
HOLE ELEV:, -- GROUNDWATER LEVEL: NE LOGGEI~ BY: SC
~ -- ~-~ ~o SOIL DESCRIPTION ~'-~:m' ~ ~8~ ~ ~: ~ ~':
Fi~e to coarse SAND (S~); bro~, damp,
~ith.f~e coarse g~avel, drills eas~
Fi~e to medium SAND (SP); clea~,
30_ x ta~, damp, drills easy
- Y~e to medium SAND (SP); clea~, ~h~t~sb
ta~, damp, drills easy
35 ...... ~ ........................ ..................................
BOTTO~ OF BORIN~
'R = Refusal, greater
than 100 blows/foot
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES
Sheet 1 of 1
I
<',
I
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Fr~no Vl~atlla Baker,field
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN. Governor
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD--
CENT L VALLEY REGION
SAN JOAOUIN WATERSHED BRANCH OFFICE:
3614 EAST ASHLAN AVENUE
FRESNO, CALIFORNIA 93726
PHONE: (209) 445-5116
3 APRIL 1987
Mr. R.J. Edwards
Mobil Oil Crop.
3800 West Alameda Ave.
Suite 700
Burbank, CA 91505
UNDERGROUND TANK LEAK AT 1200 OAK ST. BAKERSFIELD - KERN COUNTY
We have received and reviewed your submittal of 2 March 1987.
Enclosed for your information is a copy of a memorandum
containing our review of that submittal. The memorandum indicates
that Mobil has failed to address our concerns and requests of
23 January 1987.
Therefore prior to 8 May 1987, please submit a report to our
office containing the information requested of 23 January 1987.
Any person failing to furnish a report requested by a Regional
Board is guilty of a misdemeanor and may be required to pay up to
one thousand dollars ($1,000) for each day in which the violation
occurs. If we do not receive an adequate response within the
allotted time period we will take appropriate action.
Ail submittals will be subject to our review and approval and
must be prepared under the direction of a California registered
civil engineer, engineering geologist, or geologist. Enciosed for
your information is a copy of our 23 January 1987 letter.
If you should have any question regarding this matter please
contact Chris Chalfant at (209) 445-6191.
KERN ~ ....
OF PUBLIC HEAL, TH
Enclosure
cc: Kern County Health Departmenti: Bakersfield
Wlernorandurn
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD -CENTRAL VALLEY REGION
3614 E. Ashlan SAN JOAQUIN WATERSHED BRANCH Telephone: (2.09) 445-5116
Fresno, CA 93726-6905 State Lease Line: 421-5116
TO: F.SCOTT NEVINS
SENIOR ENGINEER
FROM: CHRIS CHALFANT
STAFF ENGINEER
SUBJECT: LEAKING UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK AT MOBIL STATION 10-GBM-
1200 OAK STREET, BAKERSFIELD-KERN COUNTY
BACKGROUND
On 23 January 1987, we requested Mobil Oil Corporation (Mobil)
to provide~ us with a report discussing the following .points
concerning a discharge of gasoline at the subject site.
1. A justification for not removing shallow soil contaminated
with benzene at a concentration over 100,000 times the
drinking water action level. ~
2. A discussion supported by analytical data on high lead levels
found at the site. It was suspected that these concentrations
were organic lead.
3. Results of soil analysis for Ethylene Dibromide (EDB), a
' constituent associated with leaded gasoline.
CURRENT SUBMITTAL
On 4 March 1987, we received a submittal from Mobil. The
submittal was prepared by Krazan and~Associates Inc. (Krazan) and
addressed each of the three points mentioned above. The following
are my comments concerning that submittal on a point by point
basis.
1. Krazan contends that the conditions necessary for migration of
the benzene would not occur at the site. The report states
that it appears that conditions at the site are not conducive
to contaminant migration and that a natural process of..
degradation would occur over a 20 to 50 year period. ~'~
The report does not present'any data to substantiat~ the above
claims. Krazan does not state that the site conditions will
remain the same over the 20 to 50 year period required for
degradation. It seems likely that the contamination will not
stay in place for that long of a period.
IReviewed bY:l I i
MOBIL STATION 10-GBM
1200 OAK .STREET, BAKERSFIELD
-2- 3 APRIL 1987
The area of degradation is small and shallow (less than 5 feet
deep). It appears that to remove the affected area would be a
simple task and that Mobil is attempting to avoid the minimal
cost of excavation by leaving this potential for ground water
impairment in place.
2. The submittal does not address our concerns regarding the
presence of organic lead at the site. Our letter of
23 January 1987, requested additional work in this area. The
submittal does state that the elevated lead levels correlate
with the areas of degraded soils, this statement confirms our
concern that organic lead was discharged by Mobil at the site.
Again it appears that Mobil is attempting to avoid to resolve
this issue.
3. The submittal indicates that analysis for EDB were not
performed nor does it indicate if such analysis will be
performed. Again it appears that Mobil is attempting to avoid
the issue.
SUMMARY
The submitted report does not address our concerns with potential
ground water quality impairment due to Mobil's discharge. Mobil
appears to be avoiding the basic issues presented in our
23 January 1987 letter.
CCC:djb
Mobil Oil Corporation
o
Mr. F. Scott Nevi ns ~,
Regional Water Quality Control' Boardi'i'
3614 East Ashlan Avenue
Fresno, California 93726
~ WEST ALAMEDA AVENUE, SUITE
BURBANK, CALIFORNIA 91505-4331
March 2, 1987 ~, j~ ,</;Z:. c '"' ~:,
-- "" '"" ~'"~h .-
/ AR
0 1987 -"="'
MOBIL OIL CORPORATION
SIS #10-GBM
1200 OAK STREET
BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA
Dear Mr. Nevins:
Per your letter of January 23, ~lease find enclosed our consultant's
response to your letter. Our consultant's response addresses the
concerns discussed in C. Chalfant's memo to you.
Upon completion of your review, it is requested that mY office be advised
as to the satisfaction of your concerns.
If you have any questions, please call C. E. Galloway of mY office at
(818) 953-2519.
CEG:ars
EXPRESS MAIL
enclosure
84350
Edwards
Environmental Manager
CC:
M~j'"Richard Casagrande
Environmental Health Department
Kern County
1700 Flower Street
Bakersfield, Ca~lifornia 93305
KRAZAN & ASSOCIA'I ES, I-N
Compaction Testing
Engineered Septic Systems
Construction Testing
Geotechnical Investigetions
February 13, 1987
Mobil Oil Corporation
3800 West Alameda Avenue, Suite 200
Burbank, Ca 91505-t~331
Attention: Craig Galloway
RE:
California Regional Water Quality Control Board
Letter dated 3anuary 23, 1987
Regarding Site Investigation ~t.1200 Oak Street
Bakersfield, California ~
Gentlemen,
In accordance with your request, we are addressing .points of inquiry
from the California Regional 'Water Quality Control . Board per their
correspondence to the Mobil Oil Corporation pertaining to the above-referenced
project site.
At the request of the Kern' County Environmental Health Department,.
Mobil Oil Corporation was required to perform a site characterization for the
above-referenced project site. Mobil Oil Corporation then retained the services
of Krazan and Associates, Inc. to submit a site characterization proposal to the
Kern County Environmental Health Department, which was accepted.
Three elements of concern in the letter are those of the minor
contamination of soils at the project site, and the levels of lead revealed by
chemical analysis results obtained during our field investigation, and possible
presence of EDB. These points are discussed as follows:
1. It would appear that the area of contaminated soil at the project site is
highly localized in both depth and area.
With regard to the small area of contaminated soils left in place, it was
the intention of our report to show that contamination would not be exposed to
Main Office: Fresno/Clovis * 3860 N. Winery * Fresno, California 93726 * (209) 291-7337
Bakersfield (805) 393-2343 [.1 Visalia (209) 625-8251 L.I Merced (209) 383-3993
Page No. 2
those potentials necessary for migration. As was stated in our report, the
project site is intended to be paved with asphalt and concrete. This area of
pavement is understood to extend from the structure, on site, over the entire
project site to the sidewalks, curbs and gutters. Additionally, the area
previously occupied by the service station would be located completely beneath
the pavement.
When considering the necessary components needed to transport the
contamination from their near surface domain downward (infiltration by
precipitation run=off, coarser grained soils, etc.) none seem to be present, given
that the site. would be entirely paved. Additionally, the soils profile at the
project site consisted generally of fill soils over silts. The silts area gener, ally
less pervious that' the sand it overlays.
There are a host of factors which influence chemical transport through
soil. Among the necessary transport: mechanisms, (mass flow, liquid diffusion and
vapor diffusion) certain soil and environmental parameters should-be considered.
In consideration of such factors, which affect these transport mechanisims (soil
water content, bulk density or porosity, depth to ground water, field capacity
water retention, precipitation and' evapotranspiration) management parameters
of fate and transport of contaminants in soil may. be established. When viewing
these factors in light of the depth to ground water, which is understood to be-
approximately 100 feet below the existing site 'grade, it would appear that
conditions are not conducive to contamination transport.
It is widely accepted that degradation of the hydrocarbon contamin, ati°n
in the soil would occur over time from microbial activities. This natural process
may require as much as 20 to fl0 years. Since the elimination' o! a transport
mechanism (infiltration specifically) the area of contamination would appear
immobile. As the reduction occurs to the rather immobile contaminated soils
(considering ground water depths are removed a considerable distance from a
potential source of contamination) it would not appear that a significant threat
to ground water resources is eminent.
2. With regard to the Icad concentrations revealed, by laboratory chemical
analysis, a question has been 'posed as to whether the compounds were organic
or inorganic, and whether or not it is a hazardous waste.
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Page No. 3
The requirement of the Kern County Environmental Health Department
'guidelines for assessment and characterization of hydrocarbon contaminated
sites did not specify differences between organic and inorganic lead compounds.
It was upon review of our site characterization proposal that a verbal request
~or Total Lead analysis was made.
Upon review of laboratory analysis data, it appears that the some what
elevated lead values correlate rather closely to the localized area of
hydrocarbons contamination.
The Title 22 list of inorganic persistent and bioaccumutative toxic
substances and their Soluble Threshold Limit Concentrations (STLC) and Total
Threshold Limit Concentrations (TTLC) are from 5.0 mg/l (STLC) by extraction.
for analysis and 1)000.0 mg/kg (TTLC) actual concentration wet-weight for total
lead. It does not seem that a differences between organic or inorganic is as
much the issue in Title 22 as in t,h~ total concentration in soil at this specific
project site. The levels appear to be well below the 1,000 mg/kg action level
presented in Title 22.
As was expressed previously) the contaminants in question would require
some' vehicle for transport (migration), such as the gasoline which created the
contamination or infiltration of precipitation. If the transport potential is
eliminated, so is threat of radical movement of contaminants.
With the project site understood to be completely paved, it may be
assumed that food crops would not be planted, and dermal and air-born
particulate contact with the exposed soil would be drastically reduced (as
exposure pathways).
The remaining potential exposure pathway would be ground water. Due to
the depth of ground water from a potential source of contamination (of which
potential mobility would be greatly reduced) it would not appear that
contaminants could experience the necessary conditions to migrate to ground
water.
3. With regard to EDB analysis of samples obtained at the 'project site','~EDB
'analysis was not a requirement of the Kern County Environmental Health
Department's 'guidelines at the time of our investigation.
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Page No. #
I! there are any questions or if we can be of further assistance, please
do not hesitate to contact our office.
MRE/Ic
herewith
Respectlully Submitted~
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES
Michael R. Erwin
Geotechnical Engineer
RCE #18~;25
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
K.RAzAN ASSOCIA ES,
INC.
Compaction Testing
Engineered Septic Systems
Construction Testing
Geotechnical Investigations
February 13, 1987
Mobil Oil CorPoration
3800 West Alameda Avenue, Suite 200
Burbank, Ca 91505-03:31
Attention: Craig Galloway
RE:
California Regional Water Quality Control Board
Letter dated January 23, 1987
Regarding Site Investigation .pt 1200 Oak Street
Bakersfield, California ;
Gentlemen~
In accordance with your request~ we are addressing points of inquiry
from' the California Regional Water Quality Control Board per their
correspondence to the Mobil Oil Corporation pertaining to the above-referenced
project site.
At the request of the Kern' County Environmental Health Department~
Mobil Oil Corporation was required to perform a site characterization for the
above-referenced project site. Mobil Oil Corporation then retained the services.
of Krazan and Associates,. Inc. to submit a site characterization proposal to the
Kern County Environmental Health Department, which was accepted.
Three elements of concern in the letter are those of the minor
contamination of soils at the project site, and the levels of lead revealed by
chemical analysis results obtained during our field investigation~ and possible
presence of EDB. These points are discussed as follows:
1. It would appear that the area of contaminated soil at the project'site is
highly localized in both depth and area.
~Vith regard to the small area of contaminated soils left in place~ it was
the intention of our report to show that contamination would not be exposed to
Main Office: Fresno/Clovis · 3860 N. Winery · Fresno, Cafifornia 93726 · (209) 291-7337
Bakersfield (805) 393-2343 I ] Visafia (209) 625-8251 LJ Merced (209) 383-3993
Page No. 2
those potentials necessary for migration. As was stated in our report, the
project site is intended to be paved with asphalt and concrete. This area o:[
pavement is understood to extend from the structure on site, over the entire
project site to the sidewalks, curbs and gutters. Additionally, the area
previously occupied by the service station would be located completely beneath
the pavement.
When considering the necessary components needed to transport the
contamination from their near surface domain downward (infiltration by
precipitation run-off, coarser grained soils, etc.) none seem to be present, given
that the site would be entirely paved. ^dditional[y~ the soils profile at the
project site consisted generally of fill soils over silts. The silts area generally
less pervious that the sand it overlays.
There are a host of factors which influence chemical transport through
soil. Among the necessary transports'mechanisms, (mass flow, liquid diffusion and
vapor di:[:[usion) certain soil and environmental parameters should be considered.
In consideration of such :[actors which a:[fect these transport mechanisims (soil
water content, bulk density or porosity~ depth to ground water, :[ield capacity
water retention, precipitation and evapotranspiration) management parameters
of :[ate and transport of contaminants in soil may be established. When viewing
these factors in light o:[ the depth to ground water, which is understood to be
approximately 100 feet below the existing site grade, it would appear that
conditions are not conducive to contamination transport.
It is widely accepted that degradation of the hydrocarbon contamination
in the soil would occur over time from microbial activities. This natural process
may require as much as 20 to 50 years. Since the elimination of a transport
mechanism (infiltration specifically) the area of contamination would appear
immobile. As the reduction occurs to the rather immobile contaminated soils
(considering ground water depths are removed a considerable distance from a
potential source of contamination) it would not appear that a significant threat
to ground water resources is eminent.
2. .-~ With regard to the lead concentrations revealed by laboratory chemical
analysis, a question has been posed as to whether the compounds were organic
or inorganic, and whether or not it is a hazardous waste.
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Page No. 3
The requirement of the Kern County Environmental Health Department
guidelines for assessment and characterization of hydrocarbon contaminated
sites did not specify differences between organic and inorganic lead compounds.
It was upon review of our site characterization proposal that a verbal request
for Total Lead analysis was made.
Upon review of laboratory analysis data, it appears that the some what
elevated lead values correlate rather closely to the localized area of
hydrocarbons contamination.
The Title 22 list of inorganic persistent and bioaccumutative toxic
substances and their Soluble Threshold Limit Concentrations (STLC) and Total
Threshold Limit Concentrations (TTLC) are from 2.0 mg/l (STLC) by extraction
for analysis and 1,000.0 rog/kg (TTLC) actual concentration wet-weight for total
lead. It does not seem that a differences between organic or inorganic is as
much the issue in Title 22 as in the total concentratiOn in soil at this specific
project site. The levels appear to be well below the 1,000 mg/kg action level
presented in Title 22.
As was expressed previously, the contaminants in question would require
some' vehicle for transport (migration), such as the gasoline which created the
contamination or infiltration of precipitation. If the transport potential is
eliminated, so is threat of radical movement oJ contaminants.
With the project site understood to be completely paved, it may be
assumed that food crops would not be planted, and dermal and air-born
particulate contact with the exposed soil would be drastically reduced (as
exposure pathways).
The remaining potential exposure pathway would be ground water. Due to
the depth of ground water from a potential source of contamination (of which
potential mobility would be greatly reduced) it would not appear that
contaminants could experience the necessary conditions to migrate to ground
, water.
3. With regard to EDB analysis of samples obtained at the project sit~ED5
analysis was not a requirement of the Kern County Environmental Health
Department's guidelines at the time of our investigation.
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Page No, ts
If there are any questions or if we can be of further assistance, please
do not hesitate to contact our office,
MRE/lc
v" 3 c herewith
Respectfully Submitted,
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES
Michael R. Erwin
Geotechnical Engineer
RCE #18625
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
KRAZAN & .... ASSOCIA?I ES,
I N C.
Compaction Testing
Engineered Septic Systems
Construction Testing
Geotechnical Investigations
February 13, 1987
Mobil Oil Corporation
3800 West Alameda Avenue, Suite 200
Burbank, Ca 91505-#331
Attention: Craig Galloway
RE:
California Regional Water Quality Control Board
Letter dated January 23, 1987
Regarding Site Investigation fat 1200 Oak Street
Bakersfield, California ~.
Gentlemen,
In accordance with your request, we are addressing points of inquiry
from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board per their
correspondence to the Mobil Oil Corporation pertaining to the above-referenced
project site.
At the request 'of the Kern County Environmental Health Department,
Mobil Oil Corporation was required to perform a site characterization for the
above-referenced proiect site. Mobil Oil Corporation then retained the services
of Krazan and Associates, Inc. to submit a site characterization proposal to the
Kern County Environmental Health Department, which was accepted.
Three elements of concern in the letter are those of the minor
contamination of soils at the proiect site, and the levels of lead revealed by
chemical analysis results obtained during our lield investigation, and possible
presence of EDB. These points are discussed as follows:
1. It would appear that the area of contaminated soil at the project si~te is
highly localized in both depth and area.
With regard to the small area of contaminated soils left in place, it was
the intention of our report to shOw that contamination would not be exposed to
Main Office: Fresno/Clovis · 3860 N. Winery · Fresno, California 93726 · (209) 291-7337
Bakersfield (805) 393-2343 I ] Visalia (209) 625-8251 I:l Merced (209) 383-3993
Page No. 2
those potentials necessary for migration. As was stated in our report, the
project site is intended to be paved with asphalt and concrete. This area of
pavement is understood to extend from the structure on site, over the entire
project site to the sidewalks, curbs and .gutters. Additionally, the area
previously occupied by the service station wou!d be located completely beneath
the pavement.
When considering the necessary components needed to transport the
contamination from their near surface domain downward (infiltration by
precipitation run-off, coarser grained soils, etc.) none seem to be present, given
that the site would be entirely paved. Additionally, the soils profile at the
project site consisted generally of fill soils over silts. The silts area generally
less pervious that the sand it overlays.
There are a host of factors which influence chemical transport through
soil. Among the necessary transport mechanisms, (mass flow, liquid diffusion and
vapor diffusion) certain soil and environmental parameters should be considered.
In consideration of such factors which affect these transport mechanisims (soil
water content, bulk density or porosity, depth to ground water, field capacity
water retentions precipitation and evapotranspiration) management parameters
of fate and transport of contaminants in soil may be established. When viewing
these factors in light of the depth to ground water, which is understood to be
approximately 100 feet below the existing site grade, it would appear that
conditions are not conducive to contamination transport.
It is widely accepted that degradation of the hydrocarbon contamination
in the soil would occur Over' time from microbial activities. This natural process
may require as much as 20 to 50 years. Since the elimination of a transport
mechanism (infiltration specificallY) the area of contamination would appear
immobile. As the reduction occurs to the rather immobile contaminated soils
(considering ground water depths are removed a considerable distance from a
potential source of contamination) it would not appear that a significant threat
to ground water resources is eminent.
2. With regard to the lead conce~ntrations revealed by laboratory chemical
analysis, a question has been posed as to whether 'the compounds were organic
or inorganic, and whether .or not it is a hazardous waste.
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES~ INC.
Page No. 3
The requirement o! the Kern County Environmental Health Department
guidelines for assessment and characterization of hydrocarbon contaminated
sites did not specify differences between organic and inorganic lead compounds.
It was upon review of our site characterization proposal that a verbal request
for Total Lead analysis was made.
Upon review of laboratory analysis data, it appears that the some what
elevated lead values correlate rather closely to the localized area of
hydrocarbons contamination.
The Title 22 list of inorganic persistent and bioaccumutative toxic
substances and their 5oluble Threshold Limit Concentrations (STLC). and Total
Threshold Limit Concentrations (TTLC) are from 5.0 mg/l (STLC) by extraction
for analysis and 1,000.0 mg/kg (TTLC) actual concentration wet-weight for total
lead. It does not seem that a differences between organic or inorganic is as
much the issue in Title 22 as in th~ total concentration in soil at this specific
project site. The levels appear to be well below the 1,000 mg/kg action level
presented in Title 22.
As was expressed previously~ the contaminants in question would require
some~ vehicle for transport (migration), such as 'the gasoline which created the
contamination or infiltration of precipitation. If the transport potential is
eliminated~ so is threat of radical movement of contaminants.
With the project site understood to be completely paved~ it may be
assumed that food Crops would not be planted~ and dermal and air-born
particulate contact with the exposed soil would be drastically reduced (as
exposure pathways).
The remaining potential exposure pathway would be ground water. Due to
the depth of ground water from a potential source of contamination (of which
potential mobility would be greatly reduced) it would not appear that
contaminants could experience the necessary conditions to migrate to ground
water.
3. With regard to EDB analysis of samples obtained at the project sit~-EDB
analysis was~ not a requirement of the Kern County Environmental Health
Departmentts'guidelines at the time of our investigation.
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
.Page No. ~
IJ there are any questions or if we can be of further assistance, please
do not hesitate to contact our office,
MRE/Ic
3 c herewith
Respectfully Submitted,
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES
Michael R. Erwin
Geotechnica[ Engineer
RCE #1862~
KRAZAN &-ASSOCIATES, INC.
:.J AlJ~ J)i'- CALII OHI'~jA
CALIFORNIA R[GIONAL WAT[R QUALITY. CONTROL BOARD----
CENTRAL VALLEY REGION
SAN JOAQUIN WATERSHED BRANCH OFFICE:
3G14 EAST ASHLAN AVENUE
FRESNO. CALIFORNIA 93726
PHONE: 1209) 445-5116
23 January 1987
Mr. R. J. Edwards
Mobil Oil Corporation
3800 West Alameda Avenue
Suite 700
Burbank, CA 91505
SITE INVESTIGATION UNDERGROUND TANK LEAK, HOBIL OIL CORPOPATION,
1200 OAK STREET, STATION BAKERSFIELD - KERN COUNTY
We have reviewed the report on the investigation into a discharge of
petroleum products at the subject site. Enclosed for ~our information
is a copy of a memorandum containing our review of that report. The
memorandum indicates that additional work is needed to adequately
evaluate the potential for ground water degradation.
Prior to 25 February 1987, please provide us with a report ~vhich
addresses the issues described in the memorandum. The report must
provide sufficient detail to allow us to determine the adequacy of
it's conclusions and must be prepared under the direction of a
California registered civil engineer, engineering geologist, or
geologist.
If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please contact
Chris Chalfant at (209) 445-5145.
F. SCOTT NEVINS
Senior Engineer
CCC:djb
Enclosure
cc: Department of Health Services, Fresno
Kern County Health Department, Bakersfield ,"
Mr. Mike Erwin, Karazan and Associates, Fresno, 3860 N. Winery, ~resno 93726
SURNN E
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD ~,CENTRAL VALLEY REGION
3614 E. Ashlan SAN JOAQUIN WATERSHED BRANCH Telephone: (209) ~45-5116
Fresno. CA 93726-6905 State Lease Line: 421-5116
TO: F. SCOTT NEVINS FROM:
Senior Engineer
CHRIS C. CHALFANT
Staff Engineer
SUBJECT: MOB~L 0IL CORPORATION, GAS STATION AT 1200 OAK STREET, BA~KERSFIELD-
KERN COUNTY
BACKGROUND:
UndergroUnd storage tanks and product piping were removed from the subject site
on 17 July 1986. At the time of the tank removal Bakersfield Construction
Inspection sampled soils at various depths and locations beneath the product
l~nes and tanks. The soils were analyzed for B,T, X compounds and showed low
levels of these constituents beneath some of the tanks and the product lines.
The affected soils were removed. Kern County Health Department requested a
further investigation of the site on 25 August 1986. Krazan and Associates
performed that site investigation and submitted the results on 2 December 1986.
A shopping center is currently being built on the site.
RESULTS OF SITE INVESTIGATION:
A total of 12 exploratory soil borings were advanced to a maximum depth of
25 feet. Surface soils consist of fill containing brick, concrete, and debris
in a~sand and silt matrix to a depth of 2 feet. From 2 to 8 feet deep a silty
fine sand exists. From 8 to 25 feet fine sands interbedded with lenses of
silt are found. Ground water was not encountered in the investigation and is
expected to be about 100 feet deep.
Review of the soil analysis at the site indicates that shallow 'degradation (less
than 5 feet deep) remains in an area identified as B-7. This area is located
midway between the station structure and a. pumping island, over a product line.
At B-7 benzene was found at 9.47 ppm in the soil. The drinking water level for
benzene is 0:07 ppb over a hundred thousand times less than the level reported.
The area of .degradation is indicated to be about 4 feet in diameter. The report
indicates that this degraded soil would be left in 91ace. No discussion is
presented as to the eventual fate of this degration and its affect on the bene-
ficial uses of ground Water. Natural reduction of volatile organic constituents
is possible with time. However the report does not indicate if the conditions
necessary for reduction exist at the site. Such conditions would Include,moisture,
aeration, and the presence of appropriate bacteria. If the in~ention of the
report is to show that the affected area will not migrate, then the conditions for
immobility must be considered such as infiltration, soil moisture, and soil types.
Movement or nonmovement needs to be correlated with degradation and ~an appropriate
time frame worked out for any affect on the beneficial use of the ground water.
MOBIL OIL CORPORATION -2-
23 Januar~ 1987
A second element of concern is the high lead levels found in the soil at the
site. Organic lead is a constituent associated with leaded gasoline. The
report does not indicate if the presented levels represent organic or inorganic
lead. Without such a distinction we must assume a conservative interpretation
that all the values reported are organic lead. The state Department of Health
Services has set a level of 13 ppm for organic lead in defining a hazardous waste.
Soil samples from the site show concentrations approaching 132 ppm of lead.
Whether the soil at this site is a hazardous waste or not must be addressed. In
addition, the delineation of the lead degraded soils is not completely defined.
Table 1 (attached), indicates the relative location of soil borings and the
associated lead concentrations. More information is needed for B-8 and B-11
where increases with depth are noted. The report indicates that these high lead
levels are due to natural background levels, however the report fails to support
this. A background sample, unaffected by the discharge, would be needed for
verification.
Another constituent associated with gasoline is ethylene dibromide .(EDB). No
results are presented for EDB. The drinking water standards for'EDB are the
limit of quantification (20 ng/1) - State Action Level or zero - U. S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency recommended level. Due to these very low limits the
presence of EDB in the soils at the site must be investigated.
CONCLUSIONS:
The following is needed to complete the investigation of the fate of petroleum
products discharged at the site:
A report on the fate of the gasoline constituents at location B-7 and any
possible affects these constituents may have on the beneficial uses of ground
water. The report must include a proposed program to verify the fate of those
constituents.
Additional work and a repOrt on the lead concentrations in the soils at the
site is needed. The report must indicate if organic lead is present, delineate
the boundaries of the soils affected by the lead degradation, and present
natural background levels for the site. The report must also include any
affects on the beneficial uses of ground water associated with the lead
degradation.
3. Analysis of EDB in the soils at the site must be completed and reported.
CCC:djb
Attachment
TABLE I
MOBIL OIL CORP.
1200 OAK ST. STATION
BAKERSFIELD
LEAD IN SOILS
(PARTS PER MILLION)
Depth B12 B8 B9 Bll B7 BIO B6
2 3.1
5 47.1 0.6 5..4 21.7 . 5.6 3.1
10 111.0 2.7 47.1 132.0 4.5 6.8
15 3.1 5.9
20 37.2
Office MemorandUm ·
TO :
I~RO lyf :
KERN
COUNTY
Telephone No.
KC 96-5004
Mobil Oil Corporation
Ms. Antv Green
· Environmental Health Department
Kern County
1700 Plower Street
Bakersfield, California 93305
3800 WEST ALAMEDA AVENUE, SUITE 700
BURBANK, CALIFORNIA 91505-4331
MOBIL OIL CORPORATION
FORMER S/S #10-GBM
1200 OAK STREET '~
BAKERSF I ELD, CAL IFORN IA
Dear Ms. Green:
Per our meeting of November 5, please find enclosed our consultant's
report on the above location. This report includes soil results from
borings completed, and the initial site assessment report.
Based on the results presented in the report, minor contamination was
present. The contamination appeared to be localized in the area of soil
boring B-7. Groundwater in this area is at approximately lO0 feet. The
area concerned will be paved preventing the risk of perculation from
rainfall.
For the above reasons, Mobil believes no further cleanup actions should
be required~ Groundwater should not be impacted by the contamination
present. Mobil therefore requests that this incident be considered
closed. No further actions will be completed unless notified otherwise
by your office.
Your cooperation in this matter is appreciated. If you have any
questions, please call C. E. Galloway of my office at (818) 953-2519.
RJE:ars
enclosure
78820
CC:
Regional Water Quality Control Board
Fresno Branch Office
3374 East Shields Avenue, Room ~18
Fresno, California 93726
R~,gion
Environmental Manager
UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK UNAUTHORIZED RELEASE (LEAK)/COh FAMINATION SITE REPORT
EMERGENCY HAS STATE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES ST,ATE TANK ID ~
NAME~ INDIVIDUAL FILING REPORT PHONE
~TREET CITY ~TATE ZIP
I> NAME ' / I CONTACT PERSON. ~/~ I PHONE '"
¢ a STREET CITY ~TATE ZIP
FACIL.I~Y NAME ,IF ) I OPERATOR m PHONE
~ STREET CiTY COUNTY ZiP
~ CROSSSTREET TYPEOf AREA ~COMMERCIAI ~INDUSTRIAI I TypEOf bUSiNESs ~RETAIL fUEISTATION
LOCAL AGENCY AGENCY NA~[ CONTACT PERSON PHONE
~ ( )
-- ( )
~ CAS ~ (ATTACH EXTRA SHEET if N~EDED) NAME ~ , QUANTITY LOST (GALLONS)
m>
'~ I O ~ ROUTINE MONITORI"O ~REMOVAL ~ NUISANCE CONDITION'; ~ OTHER:
~Z
~ DATE DISCHARGE BEGAN METHOD USED TO STOP DISCHARGE (CHECK AL~ THAT APPLY)
~ ~ HAS DISCHARGE BEEN STOPPED? ~ REPAIR TANK ~ REPAIR PIPINg ~ CHANGE PROCEDURES
~ES ~NO IF YES. D'ATE ~ MI M{ DI D[ Y{ Y ~OTHER
CAUSE(S)
<~ ~ TANK LEAK= ~OURCE(S)or OF DISCHARGE~ UNKNOWN TANKSAGE I/IONLY/CAPACITY~ YRS. ~ ./t~UNKNOwN ~ GA L ~ OVERFILL ~ CORROSION
U
I MATERIAL ~RUPTURE/FAllURE E~ SPILL
~ ~ OTHE~ (SPECIFY) ~ OTHER ' ~ UNKNOWN ~ OTHER
RESOURCES AFFECTED WATE~ SUPPLIES AFFECTED THREAT- UN-- ~ OF
~ so,~(v,ooss zo.~) ~ ~ E5
O OTHER (SPECIFY) E] ~ ~ ~ OTHER(sPEC'FY) ~ ~ ~ ~ ....
~ m GROUNDWATER BASIN NAME ~ UNKNOWN
COMPLETE AND ATTACH A CLEANUP TRACKING REPORT IF ANY CLEANUP WORK OR PLANNING HAS STARTED dsc os (10/851
1700 Flower Street
Bakersfield, California 93305
Telephone (805) 861-3636
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH'DIVISION
PERMIT FOR TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT
CLOSURE/ABANDONMENT OF UNDERGROUND
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES STORAGE FACILIT
HEALTH OFFICER
!Leon M Hebertson, M.D.
DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Vernon S. Relchard
Permit Number A165
CT 17
Facility Name and Address:
Owner Name and Address:
Charles Mobil Service
1200 Oak Street
Bakersfield, CA
Mobil Oil Company
P.O Box 127
Richmond, CA 94807
Permit to Abandon
4 tanks at above
location.
Permit Expires
Approval Date
Approved By
July 18, 1987
...... . ............... POST ON PREMISES ....................
Conditions as Follows:
1. Permittee must obtain a Fire Department permit prior to
initiating abandonment action.
2. All procedures used must be in accordance with requirements
of Standards and Guidelines developed for implementation of
Kern County Ordinance Code #G-3941. A copy of' these
requirements are enclosed with this permit.
3. A minimum of four samples must be retrieved beneath each 8000
and 5000 gallon tank. Samples are to be retrieved from depths
of approximately 2' and 6', one-third from the end of each
tank. Every 15 linear feet of pipe run must also be sampled at
2' and 6' depths.
4. A minimum of two samples must be retrieved at depths of 2' 'and
6' beneath the center of the 550 gallon tank.
5. All gasoline samples must be analyzed for benzene, toluene,
xylene, and total petroleum hydrocarbons. All waste oil samples
must be analyzed for oil, grease and lead.
6. Advise this office of the time and date of proposed sampling
with 24 hours advance notice.
, .
DISTRICT OFFICES
Facility
[-]Permit to Operate
[]Construction Permit
[]Permit to abandon~/~/~J'- ~7 No.
[~Amended Permit Conditions
~Permit Application Form,
_j~Application to Abandon
~]Annual Report Forms
FILE CONTENTS INVENTORY
Date
of Tanks ~ .Date
~_/' Tank Sheets, Flow
~/ ~anks(s) Date
C'h'a r t
[]Copy of Written Contract Between Owner & Operator
[]Inspection Reports
~Correspondence - Received ' .~
' ,,, ' Date
~Corresponden~
Date
Da te
Date
DUnautho.rized Release Reports
[]Abandonment/Closure Reports
[]Sampling/Lab Reports
[~MVF Compliance Check (New Construction
[~STD Compliance Check (New Construction
[-]MVF Plan Check (New Construction)
[~STD Plan Check (New COnstruction)
[]MVF Plan Check (Existing Facility)
[-]STD Plan Check (Existing Facility)
[]'Incomplete Application" Form
[-]Permit Application Checkl.ist
Checklist)
Checklist)
[-]Permit Instructions
~]Tightness Test Results
[]Discarded
[~Mon
[2] Env
itoring Well Construction Data/Permits
ironmental Sensitivity Data:
[-]Groundwater Drilling, Boring Logs
[]Location of Water Wells
[-]Statement of Underground Conduits
~Plot Plan Featuring All
[]Photos []Construction Drawings
[]Half sheet showing date received and
[]Miscellaneous ..~
Date
Date.
Date
Environmentally Sensitive Data
Location: ~-
tally of inspection ti'me, etc
Kern County Health Departme~--'
Division of Environmental He~,
1.700 Flower Street, Bakersfield, CA
Appl ication
93305 No. of .Tanks to be Abandoned
BAZARIXX~ SUBST~ S'IX)i%~E FACILITY
T_~ of Application . (Fill Out One Application Per Facility)~
~]T--~porary Closure/Abandonmen--~ ~Pemanent CloSure/Abandonment
A. Project:Contact (name, ia~ea codg, phone): Days Nights
Facility Name C~£/,~_ ~ /%//~/DJ / ~,'~
Facility Address /o~O~) (~Yo./~' ~. Nearest Cross St.
T R SEC (Rural Locations Only)
Owner /~ ~ ,'/ ~,' / ~. . Telephone ~//~' %~ ? 7. ~
Address ~ .d~). ~ o-~ /.o~ ? J~!~ J~ ~ ,~,, ,,~. ~,~ Zip ~/~
Operator ' ~ Telephone
Address Zip
B. Water to Facility Provided by C~/.' ~ ~ ~_~ ~ £ Depth to Groundwater
.Soil Characteristics at Facility ~_~ ~ ~ ~/
Basis for Soil Type and Groundwater Depth ~terminations
C. Tank Removal Co~tractor ~~ ~~.~CA License No.~
Proposed Starting Date ~ '/'~ 3 //~ ~ Proposed Ccmpletion Dante . ~F//~/
Worker's Compensation Cerfifica~ion ~ Insurer/~~~ ,/-~~-
Environmental Assessment C°ntractor CA License No.
Address ZiP Telephone
Proposed Starting Date Proposed Completion Date
Worker s Compensation Certificati°n ~
Insurer
D.' Chemical Composition of Materials Stored
Tank .~ Chemical Stored (non-con~uercial name) Dates Stored
Chemical Previously Stored
(if different)
E. Describe Method for Retrievin~ Samples'
,
~plus Will ~'Anal'~ 'f6r ~e~z~,~ -
~ratory T~t ~ill Perfo~ ~alyses of S~ples
F. This application for: ~moval or ~a~ndo~ent in pla~
* * EL~qE ~IDE I~O~TION REq~STED ~ ~E SIDE OF ~IS SHE~ BE~RE ~U~I~I~
kPPLICATI~ ~R ~.
This fo~m has been completed under penalty of perjury and to the best of my knowledge is true
correct.
Date .~'""/~ --/~'
Provide Description of,~sical Layout of Facility Using~ce
Include Ail the Follc-~.~nformation: ........
Location of Tan. ,), Piping & Dispenser(s)
Proposed Sampling Locations Indicating Approximate DePth
of Samples
Nearest Street or Intersection
Any Water Wells or Surface Waters within 100' Radius of
Facility ·
NORTH
Provided Below;
Approved By
. Scale
FILE CONTENTS INVENTORY
~Pe~mit to 0petite ~
[-]Construction Permit ~
[']Permit to abandon~ No. of Tanks
[]Amended Permit Conditions
[]Permit Application Form, _ 'J7~ Tank Sheets
BApplication to Abandon tanks(s)
Annual Report Forms
Da te
Date
Date
Da te
[]Copy of Written Contract Between 'Owner& Operator
[]Inspection Reports
[-]Correspondence - Received
'Da t e
Da te
Date
[]Correspondence - Mailed
[]Unauthorized Release Reports
[]Abandonment/Closure Reports
[]Sampling/Lab Reports
[]MVF Compliance Check (~N'ew Construct'i'on Chec'kl'ist)
[]STD Compliance Check (New Construction Checklist)
[]MVF Plan Check (New Construction)
[]STD Plan Check (New Construction)
[]MVF Plan Check (Existing Facility)
[]STD Plan Check (Existing Facility)
[]"Incomplete Application" Form
[]Permit Application Checklist
[]Permit Instructions []Discarded
[~Tightness Test Results
[]Monitoring Well ConstruCtion-Da'ta/Pe-rmits
Da te
Date
Da te
Da te
Da te
Da te
[-]Environmental Sensitivity Data:
[]Groundwater Drilling, Boring Logs
[~Location of Water Wells
[-]Statement of Underground Conduits
~Plot Plan Featuring All Environmentally Sensitive Data..
['lPhotos Construction Drawings Location -z/7'/~ /..
[]Half sheet showing date received and tally of inspection time,~etc
D Miscellaneous .
Kern Cocnt~ Heaith DePartment
Division or Environmental Heal~
1700 Flower Street, Bakersfiel.
Permit No, -- / '/~(J(Y ~/~_~
Appl ication
93305 Dso
APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO OPERATE UNDERGROUND
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES ST(tgAGE FACILITY
~ of Appltcatt'on (check):
. [-]New Facility [']Modification of Facility ~Exlstirg Facility FTTransfer of O~nership
l~ergency 24-Hour Contact (name, area code, phone): Days ~F~'-'
Type of Business (check)': ~Gasoline Station ~]Other (describe)
Is Tank(s) Located on an Agricultural Farm? r~Yes [~No
Is Tank(s) Used Primarily for Agricultural Purposes? []Yes
T R SEC (Rural Locations
Owner .~.~,. ~?~ ff iZ /'0/~'~/7~//~ Contact Person
o~ra~or ~/V/~/~ ~'~ ~/~L~/_ _ conta~ Person
A~d~ess /~d ~/f~ $~ /~/;~'££/~7.~ Zip ~/ Telephone
Water to Facility Provided by ~/~ A//TF~7~'~f/2f~')' Depth ~: Gro~~r ~~ff
~il ~racteristics at ~cllity //~~
· ~sis for Soil ~ ~ Gro~~r ~p~ ~temi~tio~ ~~ "~'"
C~tractor :~ ~ ~ntractor's U~e ~.
~dc e~ Ztp ~ le~
~rker' s C~~ti~ .Certi fi6ati~ i l~urer ....
D. If This Permit Is For Modification Of An Existin~ Facility, Briefly Dascribe Modifications
Proposed ,, _ ,,~"~ ,, ,
Tank(s) Store (check all that apply):
Tank J ~ast~ Product Motor Vehicle Unleaded Regular Pr~mt~
----~el -
2 O [] []
Die~l Waste
Ch~nical C~position of Materials Stored (not necessary for motor v~hicle funls)
Tank $ Chemical Stored (non-con~ercial name) CAS ! (if. kno~) Chemical Previously Stored
- (if different)
Transfer of Ownership
Date of ~-ansfer
Previous Facility Name
n~ify or tern{inate the
Previous O~er
a~ept fully all obligations of Pemi't N~. - issued to
· I understand that the permit~ting Authority may review and
transfer of the permit to Oparat~ this ~derqroc~ storage
facility upon re~'eiving this c~npleted fora.
?his fora ,h~b~en~ieted under toenalty of
Stg~e .~.~,~,,
perjury and to the best of my knowledge is ·
Title ~6~/('rJ/'~/~v/~%% Date
pem~t No. / /
TANK'{{ (FILL OUT SEPARATE FORM TANK)
.... ~FOR EACH SECTION, CHECK ;~r.T. APPROPRIATE BOXES
1. Tank is: [[]Vaulted [-~Non-Vaulted [~Double-Wall ~ir~le-Wall
2. ~ Material
~Ca--~ Steel [] Stainless Steel [] ~lyvinyl Chloride [~ Fiberglass-Clad Steel
'[~Fiberglass-Reinforced Plastic [] Concrete [] Al~in~n [] Bronze []Unknown
[~] Other (describe)
3. Primary Containment .
Date Installed Thickness (Inghes) Capacity.(Gallons) Manufacturer/
'YZ-- , ' ,
Tank Secondary Contair~nt
[']Double-Wall Iq Synthetic Liner [-~Lined Vault ~one
~] Other (descr lbe): Manufacturer ~
[-~Material Thickness (Inches) Capacity (Gals.)
5. Tank Interior Lining
--] [ ubber []Alkyd nEpoxy ]menolic •Glass nClay [2] li..d []Ummo
[]Other (describe): .
6. Tank Corrosion Protection
-~Galvanized ~ass-Clad []Polyethylene Wrap [']VinYl.Wral~ir~
[~]Tar or Asphalt [-]Ug~kno~n ~one []']Other (describe)
Cathodic Protection: ]~one [qI~p~essad Current System :[]Sacriff~'lal
Describe System & Equipment:
7. Leak Detection, Monitoring, and Int~
~. ~-~.. ~isual (Vaulted' ~nks only) [qGround~ater MonitOrir~' ~ll(,)
[lVadose Zone Monitorir~ t~ell(s) ['~U-Tube Without Liner
e
FlU-Tube with Caupatible Liner Directing Flow to Monitoring Well(s)~
['1 Vapor Datector* [1 Liquid Level Sensor~ {-[ Conductivit~ Sensor~ '
[] Pressure Sensor in Annular Space of Double Wall Tank
[] Liquid Retrieval & Inspection Frcm U-Tube, Monitoring Well or Annular Space
Daily Gauging & Inventory Reconciliation [1 Periodic Tightness Testing
None [] Unkno~ [] Other
b. Piping: Flow-Restricting Leak Detector(s) for Pressurized Piping'
[] Monitoring Sc~p with Racevay . [] Sealed Concrete Rece~ay
Ii]Half-Cut Ccmpatlble Pipe Raceway [] Synthetic Liner Raceway [1Nof~
~Unknown [] Other
*ge~crlbe Make & Nodel~
8. Tank Tightness
l~--This Tank Been Tightness Tested? [1Yes []No ~Unknomel
10.
· Date of Last Tightness Test
Test Name
Repai red? [] Yes
Date(s) of Repair(s)
Describe Repairs
Overfill Protection
Results of Test
Testing Company
~ aT~a~rator Fills, Controls, & Visually Monitors Level
Float Gauge [-IFloat Vent Valves I-IAuto Shut- Off Controls
fi Capacitance Sensor ['lSealed Fill Box I-IN•ne [-]Unkno~
Other:
List Make & Model For Above Devices
11.
Pipir~
a. L~derground Piping: ~Yes •NO ~kno~n Material
Thic.kness (inches)~/~/~-Diameter
U]~pressuren~,' ~Suct~Gravity )%oproximate Length
b. erground Piping Corrosion PrOtection
[]Galvanized []Fiberglass-Clad []Impressed Current ~]Sacrificial Anode
[]Polyethylene Wrap [1Electrical Isolation-[1Vinyl Wrap [-ITar or Asphalt
OUnkno [None []Other ( escribe):
c. Underground Pipirg, Secondary Contai~aent:
[]Double-Wall []Synthetic Liner Syste~n ~one
[]Other (describe):
TANK I (FILL OUT SEPARATE FORMF~~EACH TANK)
FOR EACH SECTION, CHECK Ar.T. APPROPRIATE BOXES
n vaulted ['IN•n-Vaulted [']~ouble-Wal 1
1. Tank is:
2. ~ Material
o a'rbon Steel O stainless Steel D~lyvinyl Chloride
iberglass-Reinforced Plastic ['] Con~rete ~] Alumin~n
ther (describe) ~/
3. Primary Containment
Date Installed Thickness (IncUes) Capacity_ (Gallons)
4.
Conta i nment
[~Pouble-~all [[]Synthetic Liner [-]LinedVault ~[None
o
o
~Sirgle-4~al 1
[] Fiberglass-Clad Steel
[] Sronze []Unknown
7. Leak Detection, ~onitorin~, and Int~
~. 'Tank: C]Vis,~l (~aulted' ~ only) ~]Ground~ater Monitorir~'
C]Vadose Zone ~onitorl~ ~ell(s) [']U-Tube Without Liner
~t~nufacturer /
C]Unkno~
C]Other (describe): f~nufacturer:
[-l~t~terial Thickness (Inches) Capacity (Gals.)
Tank Interior ~
--~Rnbber ~]Alkyd []EpoXy ~menolic []Glass ~7Cla¥ F'~t~lirdd n~
D Other (describe): //8/t/~
Tank Corrosion Protection ~ ' ....
~Galva~i'zed ~ass-Clad FTPol~ethylene Wrap []vinyI Wral~lrq
[-[Tar or Asphalt' [~Unknc~n J~None ~]Other (describe)
Cathodic protection: J~one ' ~Iml:~essed Current System ~['~Sacrifi¢ial ~W~ode S~tem
Describe System & Eguil~nent~
[]U-Tube with Ca~_petible Liner Directing Flow to ~4onitoring Me.ll(s)*
[] Vapor Detector' [] Liquid Level Sensor* [] Condwtivity Sensor'
[] Pressure Sensor ~ Annular Space of Do~ble Wall Tank'
Liquid Retrieval & Inspection From U-Tube,~4onitorin~ ~ell or Annular S~ace
Daily ~Gauging &' Inventory Reconciliation [-[ Periodic Tightne~ Testin~
[] None 0 Unknown [] Other
b. Pipit]: Flc~-Restrictinq Leak Detector(s) for Pressurized Pipits'
[~Monitorirg S~up with Race~¥ [-~sealed Concrete ~acma¥ ·
[]Half-Cut Compatible Pipe Raceway C] Synthetic Liner
~Unkno~ 0 Other
'~scribe f~ake & Nodel~
8. ~en Tightness Tested? I-lyes []No ~jlJrlno~
late of Last Tightness Test
Test Name
Results of Test
Testirg O~npany
~ &TOpe&per&tot Fills, Controls, & Visually ~onitors ~evel
Float Gauge []Float Vent Valves F7 A~to Shut- Off Control~
BCapacitsnce Sensor [-]Sealed Fill Box , I-IN•ne FTt~kno~a~
Other: List ~ake a ~bdel Fo~ Able Devices
[]Galvanized ['lFiberglass-Clad l'llmp~essed Current ~Sacrificial knode
I-IPolyeth¥1ene Wrap ~El~tri~l I~lati~ ~Vinyl Wr~ ~Tar ~ ~lt
~O~o~ ~ O~r (~ri~):
c. U~ergro~ Pipi~ ~ary Con~i~nt:
~1~11 ~~etic U~r ~st~ ~ O~om
~Ot~r (de~rl~):
Facility Name /t~/,y_/~//. ~71~ ~_ /~-~ Pe~xt ~. / / ~U~ ~
T~K $ {FILL ~T SEP~TE ~ T~K)
~R ~ SE~I~, ~ECK ~ ~PROPRIATE ~XES
Ho
1. Tank is: []Vaulted []'TN•n-Vaulted []Double-Wall ~TSi~]le-Wall
2. ~ Material
~Ca--~-~ Steel ['T Stainless Steel [-]polyvin¥1 Chloride n Fiberglass-Clad Steel
~ Fiberglass-Reinforced Plastic [] Concrete [] Altnin~n [-1 Bronze [-1Unknown
[] Other (describe)
3. Primary Containment'
'~at® Installed Thickness (Inches) Capacitor (Gallons)
,, l q
4. T~nk Secondary Containment -
[]~ouble-Wall D Synthetic Liner []Ltr~ Vault
[]Other (describe):
[~Material Thickness (Inches)
5. Tank Interior Lining
-- m bber []Alky I-IEpoxy_ J en lic []Glass
•Other (describe):
6. Tank Corrosion Protection
---~Galvanized "~-~-~ass-Clad [~Pol~thylene Wrap []Viny1 Wrapping
[]Tar or Asphalt []Unkno~ ~None []Other (describe)
Cathodic Protection: _~N?ne ['II, pressed Current System ['lga¢'ri-~i'cial ~ System
~e--s~ribe System & Equil~ent:
Manufacturer
P~'~ufacturer:
Capacity (Gals.)
7. Leak Detection, Monitoring, and Int~
~. ~-'~: His-ual (vaulted t~n~ only)-]~Ground~ter ~onitoring'l~ll(s)
[-IVadose Zone Monitoring tgell(s) ['l~ Without Liner
flU-Tube with C~mpatible Liner Directing Flow to Monitorirq We.ll(s)e
Vapor Pstector* [] Liquid Level Sensors [] Conductivit~ Sensor'
[-1 Pressure Sensor in Annular Space of Double Wall Tank-
Liquid Retrieval & Inspection Fr~n U-Tube,~Monitorir~ Well or Annular Space
Daily Gat~ling & Inventory Reconciliation I-lperiodic Tightness T~ting
None [] tMkno~ [] Other
10.
b. Piping: Flow-Restricting Leak Detector(s) for Pressurized
[] Monitoring St~p with Race~a¥ [] Sealed Concrete Race~ay
[]Half-Cut Canpatible Pipe Race~a¥ []Synthetic Liner Race,my
~Unkno~ [] Other
*Describe Make & Pkxtel~
8. Tank Tightness
Has This Tan~ i~een Tightness Tested? []Yes []NO [~t~kno~
Date of ~ Tightne~ Test Resul~ of ~
~st ~e ~sti~
9.._~ Repair
Repaired? t-lYes r-IN• ]~L~nknown
Date(s) of Repair(s)
Describe Repairs
Overfill Protection
TOperator Fills, Controls, & Visually Monitors I~vel
ape Float Gau~e []Float Vent Valves []Auto Shut- Off Controls
fi Capacitance Sensor []sealed Fill Box []None []t~kno~
Other: List l~ake & l~odel Fc~ ~ove Devices
11.
Piping
&o
bo
Co
tJhdergro~d Piping: ~Yes []NO []L~kno~ Material ff'/~
Thic~ (i~hes)~ Dieter ~ ~nufac~rer ~
~essure ~[l~n ~Gravity ~rOXi~ ~ of ~ ~
U~ergro~ Pipi~ Corrosi~ Prot~tt~ :
~lvani~ ~Fi~rgla~l~ ~ess~ ~r~t ~crificial ~e
~l~yle~ Wrap ~El~tri~l I~lati~ ~Vinyl Wr~ ~Tar ~ ~lt
~U~o~ ~ ~r (~ri~):
Underground Piping, Secondary Contairment:
,l~Double-Wall •Synthetic Liner System ~None []Unkno~n
•Other (describe):
TANK Il _.~ (FI'LL OUT SEPARATE FORM TANK)
'F~R F.~CH SECTION, C~IECK J~'.l'. APPROPRIATE BOXF.~
H. 1. Tank ts: [~Vaulted DNon-Vaulted DDouble-Wall ~lngle-Wall
2. ~ Material
~Ca--~ Steel D Stainless Steel. []Polyvinyl Chloride [] Fiberglass-Clad Steel
[]'Fiberglass-Reinforced Plastic []Concrete [] Alum~inum []Bronze []Unknown
[] Other (describe)
Capacity .(Gallons) Manufacturer ,
[]Lined Vault ~None []Unkno~
Manufacturer:
Thickness (Inches) Capacity (Gals.)
3. Primary Containment
Da~stal led Thickness (Ipches)
4. T, ank-~econdary containment
ODouble-Wall [] S~nthetic Liner
~Other (describe):
[]Material
5. Tank Interior ~
---~Ru6ber ~Alkyd ['iEpex¥ [-Imenolic []Glass ['1Clay ~Ualin~d ~lt~m~
[]Other (describe) -. /~7/~u/~
60 Tank Corrosion Protection · ' .....
---~GalVa~ized ~ass-Clad []Pol~th¥1ene Wrap []Vinyl Wrapgir~
~TTar or Asphalt []Unkno~ [~Non~ rlOther (describe)-.
Cathodic Protection: ~None[~I~pressed Current System ~]Sa~rificial ~ S~st~
'DeSCribe System & Equil~ent-.
7. Leak Detection, ~onitorinq, and Int~
~. 'Tank: ViVisual (vaulted' ~ only) [2Groundwater Monitorirg' We11(8)
~7Vadose Zone Monitoring Well(s) [~]O-Tube Without Liner
~i~U-Tube with Ccmpatible Liner Pirectirg Flow to Monitoring We.Il(s)* Vapor Detector' [] Liquid Level Sensor* [] Conductivity[ Sensor'
[] Pressure Sensor ~ Annular Space of Double Wall Tank-
Liquid Retrieval & Inspection From U-Tube,_Monitoring Well or Annular Space
Daily Gauging & Inventory Reconciliation [~eriodic Tightness T~sting
I-I None I-I Lhkno~n [] Other .........
b. Piping-' .Flo~-Restricting Leak Detector(s) for preSSuriZed Piping'
· [:]Manitorlng SL~p ~ith Flace~a¥ I-ISeeled Concrete Flace~a¥
I-IHalf-Cut Ccmpatible Pipe Race~a7 []Synthetic Liner Race~¥ []l/one
l .Unkno n !:] Other
Tank Tightness
Has T~is Tan~ Been Tightness Tested?
Date of Last Tightness Test
Test Name
[]yes
Results of Test
Testing Company
Repaired? ['l~es I-INo ~kno~
Date(s) of l~pair(s)
Dascribe Repairs
Overfill Prot~ction
TT~a tarot Fills, Controls, & Visually Monitors revel
pe Float Gau~e [-1Float Vent Valves []Auto Shut- Off Controls
B Capacitance Sensor []Sealed Fill Box [~Nor~ Flt~kno~
Other ~
10.
List Make & Model For Above Devices
11.
Piping ' ,'~.
a. Underground Piping: ~Yes l~No []Unkno~m Material ~
Thickness (l~hes)~ Dieter ~ ~nufacturer ~
~es~re ~tion ~Gravity ~roxi~te ~ of ~ ~
b. U~ergro~ Pipi~ Corrosi~ prot~tl~ :
~lvanl~ ~Fi~rqlas~l~ ~ess~ ~rent ~crificial ~e
~Pol~yle~ Wrap ~El~tri~l I~lati~ ~Vinyl Wr~ ~Tar ~ ~lt
~U~o~ ~ ~r (~ri~): _
0~1~11 ~~ettc ~r ~st~ ~ ~o~
~O~r (de~rl~):
R.J. Edwards
October 29, 1986
Page Two
The department's
proposals is enclosed.
final document.
outline for site characterization/mitigation
It may be used as a guide in preparation of your
['lease feel free to call me: at (805) 861-3636 if you have any
questions.
Sincerely,
A y E. ree
Environmental Health Specialist
Hazardous ~taterials ~lanagement Program
AEG:aa
Enclosure
1700 Flower Street
Bakersfield, California 93305
Telephone (805) 861-3636
;ERN COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTM
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION
December 9, 1986
HEALTH OFFICER
Leon M Hebertson, M.D.
DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Vernon S. Reichard
Mobil Oil Company
P.O. Box 127
Richmond, CA 94807
Attn: Steve Pao:
Dear Sir:
This is to advise you that this department has reviewed the project
results for the subsurface contamination investigation conducted at
Charles Mobil Service, 1200 Oak Street, Bakersfield, California;
Based upon the findings described in the report, this department is
satisfied that the assessment .is complete and no .significant soil
contamination remains from the fuel tank leakage at the site.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Amy E. Greel~
Environmental Health Specialist
Hazardous Materials Management Program
AEG:aa
DISTRICT OFFICES
Delano . *Lamont . Lake Isabella Mojave . Rldgecrest . Shafter . Taft
1700 Flower Street
Bakersfield, Calllornla 93305
Telephone (805) 861-3636
COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTM~)
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION
HEALTH OFFICER
Leon M Hebertaon, M.D.
DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Vernon S. Reichard
September 26, 1986
Valley Steel Construction
P. O. Box 1446
Bakersfield, California 93302
Attn: John Antonino.
RE: SOIL CONTAMINATION BELOW LC~ATIONWHERE PIPING EXISTED, AT THE MOBIL
STATION ON THE CORNER OF CALIFORNIA AND OAK.
Dear Mr. Antonino:
The laboratory results received on August 22, 1986, show soil contamination
in soil samples retrieved beneath the area where the product line was located.
To evaluate the extent of contamination present in that area you must prepare
a site characterization proposal.
This department does not approve any additional work in the area around
the contamination either in'defining the plume or providing a permanent cover
at the site until the site characterization proposal is approved by this department.
The department's outline for preparation of the site characterization
proposal is enclosed. It may be used as a guide in preparing the proposal.
Please submit your proposal to this department within 60 days.
If you have any questions please call me at (805) 861-3636.
Hazardous Materials Management Prog,~am
A~G: sw
Enclosure
Delano . Lamonl .
DISTRICT OFFICES
Lake lsabella . Molave . Rldgecrest Shefter . Taft
1700 Flower Street
Bakersfield, California 93305
Telephone (805) 861-3636
..;OUNTY HEALTH DEPARTME{~t
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION ~
October 29, 1986
HEALTH OFFICER
Leon M Hebertson, M.D.
DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Vernon S. Reichard
Mobil 01[ Corporation
612 So. Flower Street
P.O. Box 2122
Los Angeles, CA 90051
Attn: R.J. Edwards
Re: Site Characterization Proposal for the Site at 1200 Oak Street,
Bakersfield, California
Dear Mr. Edwards:
The site characterization proposal prepared for the site on 1200 Oak
.Street was received on October 24, 1986, and reviewed by a
representative from this department. Rick Stauber was called on October
27, 1986 to discuss the following:
1. Reason for including EPA method #8240 in his proposed analytical
plan.
Proposed use of total organic halides (Tox)-EPA method #9020 for
soil samples retrieved below the area once occupied by the waste
oil tank.
The exchange of total organic halide (Tox)-EPA method #9020 with EPA
method 18240 was discussed. Rich Stauber agreed to make this exchange.
All other aspects of the proposal was acceptable to this department.
You may proceed to characterize the site using the plan submitted,
with'the change in this letter.
You must advise .this office 24 hours before boring, and submit the'
Site Characterization/Mitigation proposal within 60 days after
laboratory results are received.
DISTRICT OFFICES
Delano . Lamont . Lake Isabella Mojave . Ridgecrest . Shafter . Taft
Mobil Oil Corporation
612 SOUTH FLOWER STREET
P.O. SOX 2122
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90051
October 21, 1986
Ms. Amy 'Green
Environmental Health Dept.
· Kern County
1700 Flower Street
Bakersfield, CA 93305
· RE:
MOBIL OIL CORPORATION
FORMER S/S IO-GBM
1200 OAK STREET
BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA
Dear Ms. Green:
Enclosed for your review and records is our consultant's report for the above
location. As discussed in the report, minor contamination was present in two
areas. While Mobil does not believe the levels warrant further investiga-
tion, work will be completed per your agency's reqUest.
If you. have any questions, please call C. E. Galloway of my office at (213)
683-5520.
CEG:ram
Enclosure
(74700)
c.c.: California Regional Water
Quality Control Board
Fresno Branch Office
3374 E. Shields Ave., Room 18
Fresno, California 93726
Si ncerel y,
R. ~_~wards
I nvi ronmental Manager
KRAZAP ) & 'ASSOCIATES
Specialized Fuel Seepage Studies
LaboratorySoilsTesting
Soils Engineering
Geotechnical Investigations
October 16, i986
Mobil Oil'Company
P.O. Box 127
Richmond, CA 9#807
ATTN: Mr. Steve Pao
RE: Site Characterization Proposal
Mobil Station #10-GBM
1200 Oak Street
Bakersfield, California
Gentlemen:
It is understood that the Mobil Oil Service Station located at 1200 Oak
Street in Bakersfield, California has been demolished. As part of the demolition
activities, four underground storage tanks were removed. The following table
summarizes the underground storage tanks located at the site.
Tank No. Capacity. Product
1 10,000 gal. Unleaded Gasoline
2 ~,000 gal. Regular Gasoline
3 5,000 gal. Super Unleaded Gasoline
t~ 550 gal. Waste Oil
Soil sampling and chemical analysis for the tank removal was.conducted
by Bakersfield Construction Inspection of Bakersfield, California. The follbwing
tables present the results of this testing.
Main Office:Fresno/Clovis * 3860N. Winery * Fresno, California 93726 * (209) 291-7337
Bakersfield (805) 832-8909 [] Visalia (209) 625-8251 [] Merced (209) 383-3993
Page No. 2
Mobil Oil Co.
Location
of Sample
CONCENTRATION OF GASOLINE CONSTITUENTS IN SOIL
Concentration (ppm)
Benzene Toluene Xylenes Total Volatile Hydrocarbons
TANK NO. I (10,000 GALLONS)
Test Hole No. I
ca 2 Ft. 0.31 1.31 1.36
Ca 6 Ft. (0.1 <0.1 <0.3
Test Hole No. 2
Ca 2 Ft. (0.1 <0.t (0.3
Ca 6 Ft. <0.1 <0.1 <0.3
92.73
<0.5
(0.3
C0.5
TANK NO. 2 (8,000 GALLONS)
Test Hole No. 3
Ca 2 Ft. <0.1 <0.1 <0.3
Ca 6 Ft. <0.1 <0.I <0.3
Test Hole No. #
Ca 2 Ft. (0.t <0.! <0.3
Ca 6 Ft. (0.I (0.I <0.3
<0.5
<0.5
(0.5
<0.5
TANK NO. 3 (5,000 GALLONS)
Test Hole No. 5
Ca 2 Ft.
(a 6 Ft. <O.l
<0.1 <0.3
<O.I <0.3
<0.5
<0.5
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Page No. 3
Mobil 0il Co.
CONCENTRATION OF GASOLINE CONSTITUENTS IN SOIL
Location
of SampLe
Benzene
PRODUCT PIPING
Concentration (ppm)
Toluene Xylenes Total Volatile Hydrocarbons
Test HoLe No. I
0 2 Ft. 0.21
Test Hole No. 2
0 2 Ft. 0.39
cd 6 Ft. 0.19
<0.10 <0.30 <0.50
0.10 <0.30 <0.50J
<0.10 <0.30 <0.50
<0.I0 <0.30 <0.50
,Test Hole No. 3
0 2 Ft. , 0.70
cd 6 Ft. .', 0.71
<0.10 .<0.30 <0.50
<0.I0 <0.30 <0.50
Test Hole No.
(3 2 Ft. 3.0
cd 6 Ft. 0.67
Test Hole No. 5
Cd 2 Ft. 0.16
Cd 6 Ft. <0.10
2.~0 5.10
0. I 0 <0.30
<0.10 <0.30
<0.10 <0.30
2.70'"~
0.11
<0.50
CONCENTRATION OF WASTE OIL CONSTITUENTS IN SOIL
Location
of Sample
TANK 'NO. # (550 GALLONS)
Test Hole No. 1
Cd 2 Ft.
~6Ft.
Concentration (ppm)
and Grease Lead
/ 60 1#.0
~ #53 25.9
Based on these results, Kern County Health Department, Division of
Environmental Health has requested a site characterization proposal. The
purpose of the site characterization proposal is to review existing mformazton,
· ,suggest areas requiring further investigation, propose the scope and methodology
for this further investigation. The following site characterization proposal is
based-on the outline supplied, by Kern County.
COST ESTIMATE
MOBIL OIL COMPANY
MOBIL STATION I[10-GMB
BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA
Drilling ahd Sampling
16 hfs (a $95.00/hr
$1520.00
*Chemical Analysis
BTX and TVOH
Oil and Grease
Volatile Organics (GC/MS)
Total Lead
Field Screening (PID)
10 0 $125/ea 1250.00
10 ~ $30/ea 300.00
l'0 0 $350/ea 3500.00
10 0 $30/ea 300.00
30 0 $I0/ea 300.00
Engineering Consultation and
Project Administration
Cement/Bentonite Slurry
8 hrs (a $55/hr
2 yrds3 0 $50/yrd3
##0.00
100.00
TOTAL $7710.00
*The number of soil samples requiring chemical analysis will be dependent
upon the extent of the soils contamination. This cost estimated was based on
the analysis of 10 samples from the product piping network and 10 samples from
below the waste oil tank. Billing for chemical analysis will be on a per unit
basis. If analysis should be required on more than the estimated number of
samples presented in this estimate, the increase to this cost estimate would be
presented for approval to Steve Pao of the Mobil Oil Company before the
analysis is conducted.
Bakersfield Construction Inspection
3014 Union Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93:305
(805) 32a~-1815
Laboratory. No. P86-0083
Date Reported: 8/19/86
County of Kern
Health Department
Environmental Health Services
1700 Flower Street
Bakersifeld, CA 93305
Attention: Ms. Amy Green
Subject: Soils Report and Logs for Underground Gasoline Tank Removal
Gentlemen:
Submitted herewith are the soil test results and loggings that we did on the
removal of thre (3) gasoline tanks, one (1) waste oil tank, and associated
product lines on the Mobile Gasoline Station on the Northeast corner of
California Avenue and Oak Street, Bakersfield, California.
Ail tests for contamination were taken at 2' and 6' below the bottom of each
tank and project lines. (See attached drawing for test locations). The depth
to ground water in this area according to the Kern County Water Agency 1984
Water Supply Report is approximately 50'.
The soil samples taken for ~nalysis of contamination were marked and kept in
glass containers and taken to B. C. Laboratories, Inc. and Stan Comer,
Chemist/Consultant for testing. The results of these tests show. minimal
amounts of contamination in the product line area. Ail tests taken in the
tank areas appear to be clean with the exception of Test Hole #1 at 2'-0".
The waste oil tank area does indicate larger amounts of contamination.
The soil logs, a drawing showing the tank locations and test locations, along
with the test results for contamination are attached.
Thomas C. ~oddy
~?~'~"~;~:." R~~
- 7.i'
A61IICU~
Cri[MIEA~ AlgAl Y$15
PEI'ROd£UM
LABORA]ItORI S ,NC
lEG CHfM iNGI
MAIN OFFICE 4100PIERCE ROAD BAKERSFIELD CA 93308PHONE 327-4911
PURGEABLE AROMATICS
(SOIL)
BAKERSFIELD CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION
3014 Union Avenue
Bakersfield, California 93305
SAMPLE
DESCRIPTION:
~.H. ~1 @ 2' Unleaded
10~000 Gallon Tank
SW END
DATE/TIME
SAMPLE COLLECTED:
7-17-86
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED @ LAB:
9-19-86
TEST METHODS: Purgeable Aromatics
CONSTITUENT
REPORTING
UNITS
Benzene ug/g
Hexane ug/g
Toluene ug/g
Ethylbenzene ,ug/g
Isopropylbenzene ug/g
p-Xylene ug/g
o-Xylene ug/g
m-Xylene ug/g
EPA 5020,/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
TVH: 92.73 ug/g. MRL: 0.5 ug/g.
ANALYSIS
Date of
REPORT:. ?-25-86
LAB No.: 12500
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
3-25=86
ANALYSES
RESULTS
0.31
none detected
1.31
0.23
none detected
0.34
0.38
0.6~
MINIMUM
REPORTING
LEVEL
0.i
0 1
0 1
0 1
0 I
0 1
0 1
0 1
By
ISIS
LABORA ORIFS
J J IrGUN. lEG CHfM {NGII
MAIN OFFICE 4100PIERCE ROAD BAKERSFIELD CA 9]308PHONE 327-49] !
PURGEABLE AROMATICS ANALYSIS
(SOIL)
BAKERSFIELD CONSTRUCTION
3014 Union Avenue
Bakersfield, California 93305
INSPECTION
SAMPLE
DESCRIPTION:
T.H. ~1 ~ 6' Unleaded
10,000 Gallon Tank
SW END
DATE/TIME
SAMPLE COLLECTED:
3-17-86
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED @ LAB:
9-17-86
TEST METHODS: Purgeable Aromatics
CONSTITUENT
REPORT I NG
UPI I TS
BeAzene ug/g
Hexane ug/g
Toluene ug/g
Ethylbenzene ug/g
Isopropylbenzene ug/g
p-Xylene ug/g
o-Xylene ug/g
m-Xylene ug/g
EPA 5020/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromato~aohy
TVH: None Detected MRL: 0.5
ug / g.
Date of
REPORT: 7-25-86
LAB No.: 12501
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
7-25-86
ANALYSES
RESULTS
MINIMUM
REPORTING
LEVEL
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
detec'ted
detected
0.1
0.1
0.t
0.1
0.1
0.i
0.1
0.1
By
P~TItOI£UM
LABORA-IIIORIES
J J EGLIN, llG CHUM tiNGe
MAIN OFFICE 4100PIERCE ROAD BAKERSFIELD CA 93308PHONE 327-49! !
PURGEABLE AROMATICS ANALYSIS
(SOIL)
BAKERSFIELD CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION
3014 Union Avenue'
Bakersfield, California 93305
SAMPLE
DESCRIPTION:
T.H. ~2 ~ 2~ Unleaded SW
10,000 Gallon Tank
END
DATE/TIME
SAMPLE COLLECTED:
7-17-86
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED @ LAB:
7-17-86
TEST METHODS: Purgeable Aromatics
REPORTING ANALYSES
CONSTITUENT UNITS RESULTS
Benzene ug/g
Hexane ug/g
Toluene ug/g
Ethylbenzene ug/g
Isopropylbenzene ug/g
p-Xylene ug/g
o-Xylene ug/g
m-Xylene ug/g
EPA 5020/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
TVH: None Detected MRL: 0.5
ug/g.
By
Date of
REPORT: 7-25-86
LAB No.: 12502
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
9-25-86
MINIMUM
REPORTING
LEVEL
none
none
none
none
none
none
rlone
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
0.1
0.i
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
C#~MI£,IZ ~kMI )'SIS
LABORA- ORIES
J J fGLIN, ling CHEM ~klGII
MAIN OFFICE 4100PIERCE ROAD BAKERSFIELD CA 93306PHONE 327-491 !
BAKERSFIELD CONSTRUCTION
3014 Union Avenue
Bakersfield, California 93305
SAMPLE DEscRIPTION:
T.H. ~2 ~ 6'
PURGEABLE
· INSPECT I ON
AROMATICS ANALYSIS
(SOIL)
Date of
REPORT: ?-25-86
LAB No.: 12503
DATE/TIME
SAMPLE COLLECTED:
9-19-86
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED ,D LAB:
?-17-86
TEST METHODS: Purgeable Aromatics
REPORTING ANALYSES
CONSTITUENT UNITS RESULTS
Benzene ug/g
Hexane ug/g
Toluene ug/g
Ethylbenzene ug/g
Isopropylbenzene ug/g
p-Xylene ug/g
o-Xylene ug/g
m-Xylene ug/g
EPA 50~0/8020
TVH': By Gas Chromatography
TVH: None Detected MRL: 0.5
ug/g.
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
?-25-86
MINIMUM
REPORTING
LEVEL
none
none
none
none
~o~e
none
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
0.1
0,1
0.1
0,1
0,1
0,1
0..1
0.1
LABORATORIES
J J EGLIN.. lllG CHEM INGII
MAINOFFICE 4100PIERCE ROAD BAKERSFIELD CA 9330EPHONE
327-49ll
PURGEABLE AROMATICS ANALYSIS
(SOIL)
BAKERSFIELD CONSTRUCTION
3014 Union Avenue
Bakersfield, California 93305
INSPECTION
SAMPLE
DESCRIPTION:
T.H. ~3 ~ 2~
8,000 Gallon
Regular NE END
Tank
DATE/TIME
SAMPLE COLLECTED:
9-19-86
DATE/TIME 'SAMPLE
RECEIVED @ LAB:
9-19-86
TEST METHODS: Purgeable Aromatics
CONSTITUENT
REPORTING
UNITS
Benzene ug/g
Hexane ug/g
Toluene ug/g
Ethylbenzene ug/g
Isopropylbenzene ug/g
p-Xylene ug/g
o-Xylene ug/g
m-Xylene ug/g
EPA 5020/80~0
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
TVH: None Detected MRL: 0.5
ug/g.
Date of
REPORT: ?-25-86
LAB No.: 12506
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
?-25-86
ANALYSES
RESULTS
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
MINIMUM
REPORTING
LEVEL
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0..1
0.1
By
A6 ~tCUI YWti
CHEMIC,4t A~IAI Y$15
PETROLEUM
LABORATORIES
MAIN OFFICE 4100PIERCE ROAD BAKERSFIELD CA 93308PHONE
:327-49] !
BAKERSFIELD CONSTRUCTION
3014 Union AvenUe
Bakersfield, California 93305
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION:
T.H. ~3 @ 6'
PURGEABLE
INSPECTION
AROMATICS ANALYSIS
(SOIL)
Date of
REPORT: ?-25-86
LAB No.: 12505
DATE/TIME
SAMPLE COLLECTED:
9-19-86
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED @ LAB:
7-17-86
TEST METHODS: Purgeable Aromatics
REPORTING
CONSTITUENT UNITS
Benzene ug/g
He~ane ug/g
Toluene ug/g
Ethylbenzene ug/g
Isopropylbenzene ug/g
p-Xylene ug/g
o-Xylene ug/g
m-Xylene ug/g
EPA 5020/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
TVH: None Detected MRL: 0.5
ug/g.
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
7-25-86
ANALYSES
RESULTS
MINIMUM
REPORTING
LEVEL
~one
none
none
none
~ooe
none
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
0.1
0.1
O.i
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
O. 1
By
~H~ MI~,41, )aNAlYSIS
P£TROZ£UM
LABORATORIES
MAiN OFFICE 4100 PIERCE ROAD BAKERSFIELD CA 9~1306PHONE
327-49] I
PURGEABLE AROMATICS
(SOIL)
BAKERSFIELD CONSTRUCTION IPlSPECTION
3014 Union Avenue
Bakersfield, California 93305
SAMPLE
DESCRIPTION:
T.H. #4 @ 2' Regular
8,000 Gallon Tank
SW END
DATE/TIME
SAMPLE COLLECTED:
3-13-86
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED @ LAB:
3-17-86
.TEST METHODS: Purgeable Aromatics
CONSTITUENT
REPORTING
UNITS
Benzene ug/g
Hexane ug/g
Toluene ug/g
Ethylbenzene ug/g
Isopropytbenzene ug/g
p-Xylene ug/g
o-Xylene ug/g
m-Xytene ug/g
EPA 5020/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
TVH: None Detected MRL: 0.5 ug/g.
ANALYSIS~
Date of
REPORT: ?-25-86
LAB Plo.: 12506
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
?-25-86
ANALYSES
RESULTS
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
M I N I MUM
REPORT I big
LEVEL
0.1
0.1
0.I
0.1
0.1
0.1
O.t
0.1
By
CHemiCAl A~AI Y$15
LABORA-I ORIES
MAIN OFFICE. 4100 PIERCE ROAD BAKERSFIELD CA 93308 PHONE 327-491 !
PURGEABLE AROMATICS ANALYSIS
(SOIL)
BAKERSFIELD CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION
3014 Union Avenue
Bakersfield, California 93305
Date of
REPORT: 7-25-86
LAB No.: 1.2507
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION:
T.H. ~4 @ 6' Regular SW END
8,000 Gallon Tank
DATE/TIME
SAMPLE COLLECTED:
9-17-86
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED @ LAB:
7-13-86
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
7-25-86
TEST METHODS: Purgeable Aromatics
REPORTING
CONSTITUENT UNITS
ANALYSES
RESULTS
MINIMUM
REPORTING
LEVEL
Benzene ug/g
Hexane ug/g
Toluene ug/g
Ethylbenzene ug/g
Isopropylbenzene ug/g
p-Xylene ug/g
o-Xylene ug/g
m-Xylene ug/g
EPA 5020/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
TVH: None Detected MRL: 0.5 ug/g.
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.t
0.!
0.I
By
~£#[ ¥1~',I1 ,IIIMI Y$1$
LABoRA IIORIES
J J EGLIN, lEG CHfM fNGII
MAIN OFFICE 4100PIERCE ROAD BAKERSFIELD CA 9330B PHONE 327-49] !
PURGEABLE AROMATICS ANALYSIS
(SOIL)
BAKERSFIELD CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION
3014 Union Avenue
Bakersfield, California 93305
Date of
REPORT: ?-25-86
LAB No.: 12508
SAMPLE
DESCRIPTION:
T.H. ~5 @ 2' Super
5,000 Gallon Tank
SW END~
DATE/TIME DATE/TIME SAMPLE DATE ANALYSIS
SAMPLE COLLECTED: RECEIVED @ LAB: COMPLETED:
9-19-86 ?-17-86 ?-25-86
TEST
METHODS: Purgeable Aromatics
REPORTING
CONSTITUENT .UNITS
ANALYSES
RESULTS
MINIMUM
REPORTING
LEVEL
Benzene ug/g none
Hexane ug/g none
Toluene ug/g none
Ethylbenzene ug/g none
Isopropylbenzene ug/g none
p-Xylene ug/g none
o-Xylene ug/g none
m-Xylene ug/g none
EPA 5020/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
TVH: None Detected MRL: 0.5 ug/g.
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.i
0.1
0.1
0.1
By
LABORA-I ORIES IN(]
MAIN OFFICE 4100 PIERCE ROAD BAKERSFIELD CA 93306 PHONE
327-4911
PURGEABLE
BAKERSFIELD CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION
3014 Union Avenue
Bakers~field, California 93305
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION:
T.H. ~5
AROMATICS ANALYSIS
(SOIL)
Date of
REPORT: ?-25-86
LAB No.: 12509
DATE/TIME DATE/TIME SAMPLE DATE ANALYSIS
SAMPLE COLLECTED: RECEIVED ~ LAB: COMPLETED:
3-17-86 ?-17-86 9-25-86
TEST METHODS: Purgeable Aromatics
REPORTING
CONSTITUENT UNITS'
Benzene ug/g
Hexane ug/g
Toluene ug/g
Ethylbenzene ug/g
Isopropylbenzene ug/g
p-Xylene ug/g
o-Xylene ug/g
m-Xylene ug/g
EPA
TVH: By Gas Chcomatography
TVH: None Detected MRL: 0.5
ug/g.
ANALYSES
RESULTS
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
MINIMUM
REPORTING
LEVEL
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
STAN COMER
Chemist/Consultant
P.O. Box 80835
Bakersfield, CA 93380
Customer Name:' Bakersfield Construction Inspection
Address: 3014 Union Avenue, Bakersfield,CA 93305
Date Sample Received: 7-25-86
Date Analysis Completed: 7-29-86
Date of Report: 7-30-86
Laboratory No. 5414 through 5425
Analysis Requested: BTX & TVH
Lead, Grease and Oil - EPA 625/6-74-003
Method of AnalySis: EPA 5020/8020
EPA 625/6-74-003
RESULTS OF ANALYSIS:~ Mobil Waste Oil and Gasoline Tanks and Product Lines
California and Oak Street
Test Hole #1, Waste Oil Tank, 2' below tank
60 mg/Kg Oil and Grease
14.O mg/Kg Lead
Test Hole #1, Waste Oil Tan, 6' below tank
453 mg/Kg Oil and Grease
25.9 mg/Kg Lead
Test Hole #1, Product Line, 2'
Test Hole #1, Product Line, 6'
Test Hole #2, Product Line, 2'
Test Hole #2, Product Line, 6'
Benzene: 0.21 ppm.
Benzene: 0.94 ppm
Toluene: 0.10 ppm
Benzene: 0.39 ppm
Benzene: 0.19 gpm
Test Hole #3, Product Line',. 2' below tank
Benzene: 0.70 ppm
Test Hole #3, produdt Line's:, 6' below tank
Benzene: 0.71 ppm
Test Hole #~, Prod~dt Line,-:
2' below tank
Benzene:
Toluene:
Ethylbenzene:
isopropylbenz:
m,p-Xylene:
o-Xylene:
TVH:
3.0 ppm
2.4 ppm
1.3 ppm
1.0 ppm
3.3 ppm .
1.8 ppm
2.7 ppm
Test Hole #~, Product'Line~, 6' below tank
Benzene:
Toluene:
TVH:~
0.67 ppm
0.10 ppm
0.35 ppm.
Test Hole #5, Prodnct_Line,~ 2' below tank
Benzene:
TVH~
0.16 ppm
0.11 ppm
Test Hole #5,
Prod~ct.:Line:;~ 6' below tank
No organic (BTX or T~H) residue detected.
MRL: 0.1 ppm
TYH = Total Volatile Hydrocarbons
MRL = Minimum Reporting Level
:UNIFIED
SOIL CLASSIFICATION
MET}IOD OF SOIL CLASSIFICATION.
MAin. m.~,inn, Gro,o Log T~ NAm~
Symbols
~ ~ o GC~ Chyey invel~ [~vei.~nd~hy mix-
~yS of p~ity, fat
high
OH
Highly OrgAnic S~h ~ ~ P~t ~ ~r highly o~
~Compinng Sods At EquAl Liqmd
Toughness and D~ St~ngth l~r~l
wtth I~sins Pl~ti~ty ln~x · ,
10 20 10 40.
SYSTEM'
PLASTICITY INDEX
Laboratory No. P86-0083 Date Reported: 8/19/86
TEST HOLE #1
GASOLINE TANK
Depth
Feet Lo~ ;Ymbol Soil Description
1 SM Silty Sand - medium to dark grayish brown when dry. Sand medium to
- fine_grained.
2
· ·
4 · ·
· ·I SP Sand light gray when dry. Fine to medium-grained. Predominately
· 5 · · fine-grained. Micaceous.
· ·
6 · ·
Boring Terminated
LabOratory No. P86-0083 Date Reported: 8/19/86
TEST HOLE #2
· GASOLINE TANK
Depth,
Feet Log ,ymbol Soil Description .......
· · SP Sand - medium gray when dry Medium to fine-grained with some coarse-
· · grained. Trace silt. MicaceoUs.
4 · · SP Sand - medium yellowish gray when dry. Medium to fine-grained.
, · · Predominately medium-grained. ' Trace silt. Micaceous.
Boring Terminated
- ~aboratory No. P86-0083 Date Reported: 8/19/86
TEST HOLE #3
GASOLINE TANK
Depth
Feet L,o8 ;ymbol , , Soil Description , ·
t · · ~ ~ SW Sand - light yellowish gray when dry. Well-graded fine to coarse-
grained. Trace silt. Micaceous.
'2 ~, · ee
eeoo
3
4 · · ' * SW Sand - medium yellowish gray when dry. Well-graded fine to coarse-
e · · ~ grained.
Trace
silt.
Micaceous.
5
6 e e&d
Boring Terminated
!
I - ~L~boratory No. P86-0083 Date Reported: 8/19/86
TEST HOLE #4
GASOLINE TANK
Depth
Feet Log ~ymbol ,,. Soil Descri~tSon
SW Sand - medium brownish gray When dry. Fine to coarse-grained.
- Predominately medium-grained. Micaceous.
3
4 * ~ '' SW Sand - medium yellowish gray when dry. Well-graded. Fine to coarse-
'5 · 8 · · grained. Predominately coarse and medium-grained. Micaceous.
Boring Terminated
~La~oraZory No. P86~0083 Date Reported: 8/19/86
TEST HOLE #5
GASOLINE TANK
Depth
Feet LOg ;ymbpl , Soil Description
1
SM Silty Sand - dark grayish brown when dry. Fine to medium-grained
.2~- sand.
4 ' · SP Sand - light yellowish gray. Poorly-graded. Fine to medium-grained.
5' ~, ~ Micaceous.
6 ~ ·
Boring Terminated
Labor~torY No. P86-OO83
TEST HOLE #1
WASTE OIL
Date Reported: 8/19/86
Soil Description ~ .
Silty Sand - medium to dark brownish-gray when dry. Sand fine to
very fine-grained. Micaceous.
Silty Sand - medium brownish gray. Sand fine-grained.
Boring Terminated
,Laboratory No. P86-0083 Date Reported: 8/19/86
TEST HOLE #1P
PRODUCT LINE
Depth
Feet L,o~ ;ymb91 ,, ,S°il, Description
1 SM Silty Sand - medium grayish brown when dry. Sand well-graded, fine
to coarse-grained. Some well-rounded gravel.
3
4 i SM Silty Sand - dark gray when dry. Very silty fine-grained sand with
5 ' some medium-grained sand.
6
Boring Terminated
La~oratory No. P86-0083
TEST HOLE #2P
PRODUCT LINE
Date Reported: 8/19/86
Soil Description
Sandy Silt - dark gray when dry. Silt with approximately 40% very
fine-grained sand.
Silty Sand - dark brownish gray when dry. Very silty fine-grained
sand.
Boring Terminated
~ ~. ~boy~tory No. P86-0083
Date Reported: 8/19/86
'' TEST HOLE #3P
PRODUCT LINE
Depth
Feet Lo ~ 3ymb.ol ..S°~l pescriptioB ....
1
SM Silty Sand - dark gray when dry. Very silty fine-grained sand with
· -2 some coarse-grained. Trace coarse gravel.
'3
4
ML Sandy Silt - dark gray when dry. Silt with an abundance of fine
5 to very fine grained sand. Trace gravel.
6
Boring Terminated
I
;
I
~Laborm~ory~No. P86-0083 Date Reported: 8/19/86
TEST HOLE #4P
PRODUCT LINE
Depth
Feet L~og 3ymbol Soil Descr. iption ......
1 SM Silty Sand.- dark gray when dry. Sand predominately fine to very
t fine-grained. Some medium and coarse-grained.
'2
4 4 SM Silty Sand - dark grayish brown when dry. Very silty fine-grained
5 I' , t sand trace medium-grained.
Boring Terminated
I
.... i,abo[*a-tor'y No. P86-0083
Date Reported: 8/19/86
TEST HOLE #5P
PRODUCT LINE
Depth
Feet Log SymboJ .,, So~J Descriptio,n .
1 SM Silty Sand - dark grayish brown when dry. Very silty fine to coarse-
--- grained sand.
2.
'3
4 ~ SM Silty Sand'- dark gray. when dry. Sand fine to medium-grained, Trace
coarse-grained sand.
Bor±ng Term±hated
I
!
Page No. #
Mobil Oil Co.
SITE HISTORY
For the past 1# years, the site has been occupied by a Mobil Oil service
station. The tanks which .contained Regular, Regular Unleaded, Premium
Unleaded and waste oil have been in place for approximately 1# years. No spills,
leaks, or descrepancies in the past inventory have been recorded or reported.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
According to the logs of boring in the preliminary investigation, the site
soil consisted primarily of Sand (SP) and Silty Sand (SM).
Based on the Kern County Water Agency's report on water conditions in
improvement district number four, the depth to groundwater below the site in
1983 and 198# was approximately I00 feet.
SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION
In view of the results of the preliminary investigation, several areas
appear to be relatively free of gasoline constituents and, in our opinion, should
not need further investigation. These areas include:
1. Area below Tank No. 1 (10~000 gal.). Two borings were
advanced below Tank No. 1; one at each end of the tank. Very low levels
o£ gasoline constituents were detected at two feet below the tank bottom
in boring No. 1. The concentration of fuel constituents atenuated in this
boring and were undetected in the sample obtained at 6 (eet below the
tank bottom. Neither of the samples taken below .the opposite end
contained detectable levels of gasoline constituents. Based on these
results, there does not appear to be significant levels of contamination
below Tank No. 1.
2. Area below Tank No. 2 (8~000 gal.). The presence of gasoline
cm~stituents was not detected in samples taken from below Tank No. 2.
3. Area below Tank No. 3 (~000 8al.). The presence of gasolifle
constituents was not detected in samples taken ~rom below Tank No. 3.
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Page No. 5
Mobil Oil Co.
Based on the results of the preliminary investigation, two areas appear to
warrant further investigation.
I. Area below Tank No. 4 (550 gal.). Chemi'cal analysis of soil samples
taken from below the 550 gallon waste oil tank resulted in concentrations
of oil and grease which increased f. rom 60ppm at 2 feet below the tank
bottom to #53ppm at 6 feet below the tank bottom.
2. Area below.product piping network. The results of chemical analysis of
soil samples obtained from below the product piping network indicate very
low levels of gasoline present at the locations tested. Testing of soil in
the vicinity of product lines is .normally accoinplished at about 15 foot
intervals. Areas around joints and fittings are usually targeted, This
technique allows the investigation a reasonable chance of detecting a
leak. Since this method is somewhat random in nature the detection of any
contamination normally warrants further investigation.
PROPOSAL FOR IDENTIFYING PLUME
Waste Oil Tank
1. One boring would be advanced in the approximate center of the
backfilled waste oil tank excavation to a depth of approximately 30 to #5
feet. Sampling would be' conducted at five foot intervals beginning at a
depth of 15 feet. Each sample would be screened in the field utilizing a
PhotoIonization Detector (PID). 'two consecutive samples which produced
no deflection on the Photolonization Detector would be considered
sufficient evidence for terminating a boring.
Due to the possibility of non-volatile contamination (i.e. grease, metals)
from a waste oil tank, the borings would be advanced to a minimum depth
of 30 feet. If sufficient evidence for the presence of contamination
existed, the boring would be continued to depths in excess of #5 feet (with
the owner's permission), but not to exceed 80 feet (20 feet above the
current estimate of the depth to groundwater).
2. After completion of the first boring, a second boring would be advanced
approximately 10 feet from the first. Sampling and screening would be
completed in this boring following the same procedures used in the first
boring.
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Page No. 6
Mobil Oil Co.
3. A third boring would be advanced either'between the first
and second borings or 10 feet from the second boring-opposite the first
boring. The placement of this third boring would depend on whether or not
significant levels of .§asoline constituents were detected by PID field
~creening of soil samples from the second boring. Sampling and screening
would be completed in this boring following the same procedure used in the
first and secm~d borings.
/4.. A fourth boring would be placed along the same line as the first three,
but on the opposite side o£.the plume. The purpose for this fourth boring
would be to verify the symetry of the plume (if it i's, in fact, radially
symetrical to a first approximation). This boring would be advanced
following the procedures of the ~irst three borings. The following diagram
outlines the proposed boring locations.
I 10' J, I¢',,
} '"'-",~.¥.'.:."~?.
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Page No. 7
Mobil Oil Co.
5. Chemical analysis of soil samples collected from the exploratory borings
would be conducted in two steps. Initially, several tests would be
performed on the soil sample which appeared to contain the highest levels
of contaminants (most likely, the sample from a depth of 15 feet in the
first boring). After initial testing has revealed which contaminants are
present in the soil, additional samples would be analyzed to delineate the
extent of the plume.
PRODUCT LINES
The levels of contamination detected within the product piping network
were not significant. The purpose of this portion of the investigation is to
locate any area of product and determine their extent. Initial testing was
conducted at 15 foot intervals along the piping to a depth of approximately 6
feet. !his testing revealed very Iow levels of contamination along the entire
piping network. To determine if significant levels of contamination exist below
the product piping network, the depth and frequency of 'borings would be
increased as follows.
1. Ten shallow borings (10-15 feet in depth) would be advanced along the
product piping network. One boring would be advanced for every 6-8 feet
of piping. Drilling returns would be screened utilizing a Photolonization
Detector. A soil sample would be taken at the termination depth of each
boring. The terminal samples would also be screened in the field utilizing a
Photolonization Detector.
2. This shallow drilling pattern should be sufficient to locate any "hot
spots" along the product piping network. If such areas of significant
contamination (any contamination below 10-15 feet or high levels at
shallow depths) are discovered by field screening, the extent of these
plumes.would be determined in a fashion similar to that used for the waste
oil tank.
3. Results of field testing would be reported as parts per million of total
volatiles in air on a volume basis. A minimum of ten soil samples from
depths of 10-15 feet in the shallow borings would be analyzed for Benzene,
Toluene, the Xylenes and Total Volatile Hydrocarbons. These results would
be reported as parts per million of each constituent in soil on a unit
weight basis.
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Page No. 8
Mobil Oil Co.
'METHODOLOGY
1. Exploratory borings wOuld be advanced utilizing a Simco 2800 drilling
rig mounted on a one ton truck. The borings would be accomplished by a
/4 1/8 inch "Lite-Flite" hollow stem auger.
2. Drilling returns and soil samples would be logged in accordance with the
Unified Soils Classification System (ASTM D2#88 "Visual - Manual
edure for the Description and Identification of Soils"). .
Drilling .returns would be stockpiled on site pending results of the~~
mical analysis. The borings would be backfilled with a cement/bentonite
try to within 5 feet of the surface. The upper 5 feet of the borings
d be backfi[led with native soil.
_
# Soil samPles would be obtained utilizing 8 inch long by 2 inch "~
316 stainless steel, thin walled tubes (ASTM 1587 "Thin Wailed Tube
Sampling of Soil").
5. Soil samples would be sealed and stored; chain of custody procedures
would be followed in accordance with EPA S~/-8#6 "Test Methods for
'Evaluating Solid Vgaste" (Method 8020 and Section 1.3).
6. Field screening of soil samples would be accomplished util!zing an H-NU
301-12 Photolonization Detector.
7. Chemical analysis of soil samples would be conducted by B.C.
Laboratories of Bakersfield, California. The following table presents the
test methods which would be used.
CONSTITUENT
Bellzene
Toluene
Xylene
Total Volatile Hydrocarbons
Oil and Grease
Volatile Organics (GC/MS)
Lead
TEST METHOD
EPA 8020
Freon Extraction
EPA 8240
EPA 3050/7#20
8. Laboratory QA/QC methods are available upon request from B.C.
Laboratories of Bakersfield, California.
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Page No. 9
Mobil Oil Co.
If you have any questions or if we can be of further 'assistance, please do
not hesitate to cOntact 'our office.
Respecti ully Submitted,
KRAZAN &. ASSOCIATES, .INC2
Richard M. Stauber
Staff Engineer
Michael Erwin
Principal Engineer
RCE t~18625
ME/RMS/cr
2 c herewith
I c Mobil Oil Company (Los Angeles)
Attn: Craig Galoway
KRAZAN & A$SOCIATES~ INC.
K.i~'A Z A N & A S S O C I.~~E S , IN C.
Soils Engineering
Compaction Testing
Engineered Septic Systems
Construction Testing
Geotechnical lnvestigations
December 2, 1986 Proj. No. B86-131
Mobil Oil Company
P.O. Box 127
Richmond, Ca 94807
RE:
Site characterization Investigation
Mobil Oil Station No. 10-GBM
1200 Oak Street
Bakersfield, California
· Gentlemen:'
In accordance with your request, we have completed an Site
Characterization Investigation for the above-referenced site. The results of our
investigation are presented in the attached report. -
If you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance, please do
not hesitate to contact our office.
ME/3SP/ko
Respectfully Submitted,
3effery S. Palmer
Environmental Specialist
Michael Erwin
Geotechnical Engineer
RCE 1/18625
Main Office: Fresno/Clovis · 3860 N. Winery · Fresno, Cafifornia 93726 · (209) 291-7337
Bakersfield (805) 393-2343 F-1 Visalia (209) 625-825l F.I Merced (209) 383-3993
SITE CHARACTERIZATION INVESTIGATION
MOBIL STATION NO. 10-GMB
1200 OAK STREET
BAKERSFIELD~ CALIFORNIA
Project No. B86-131
December 2, 1986
prepared for
Mobil Oil Company
P.O. Box 127
Richmond~ Ca 9#807
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY
SOILS PROFILE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Ground Water Conditlons
EXTENT OF CONTAMINATION
Table I
Table II
Table III
REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES
RECOMMENDATIONS
LIMITATIONS
LOGS OF BORINGS (1 thru 12)
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
1
2
3
#
#
6
7
8
9
9
Appendix A
Appendix B
KRAZAN &
ASSOCIATES,
INC.
Compaction Testing
Engineered Septic Systems
Construction Testing
Geotechnical Investigations
December 2, 1986
Mobil Oil Company
P.O. Box 127
Richmond, Ca 9#807
Attention Mr. Steve Pao
Proj. No. B86-131
RE: Site Characterization Investigation
Mobil Station No. 10-GBM
1200 Oak Street
Bakersfield, California
Gentlemen:
In accordance with our proposal dated October 16, 1986, we have
completed the site characterization investigation for the above-referenced
project site.
This investigation was requested by the Kern County Environmental
Health Department in a letter addressed to Mobil Oil Company dated August 25,
1986.
It is understood that underground storage tanks and product piping were
removed from the project site on July 17~ 1986. At the time of the tank
removal, Bakersfield Construction Inspection sampled Soils at various locations
beneath the product lines and underground storage tanks.
Analysis of the soils for Benzene, Toluene, Xylenes and TOtal Volatile
Hydrocarbons yielded low levels of these constituents in the soils beneath some
of the tanks and product piping which were removed.
The purpose of this report is to summarize the findings of our additional
site investigation and discuss possible re~nedial actions.
Main Office: Fresno/Clovis · 3860 N. Winery · Fresno, California 93726 · (209) 291-7337
Bakersfield (805) 393-2343 t I Visalia (209) 625-8251' I I Merced (209) 383-3993
Page 3
Proj. No. B86-131
5. Soils samples were obtained from the waste oil tank boring at
.5-foot intervals with sampling commencing at 10 feet. Sampling did
not occur in the upper '10 feet since this was backfill material and
the original tank bottoms were located at approximately 10 feet
below existing grade.
6. Soil samples were obtained along the pipeline pathways at
depth intervals of 5 feet.
7. Exploratory soil borings were made by means of 'hollow stem
auger. Sampling was conducted by pushing stainless steel tubes
into the soil (Test Method ASTM D-1597-$3, "Thin-Walled Tube
Sampling of Soil").
g. As samples were obtained, they were field screened with an
Hnu photoionization detector capable of detecting very low levels
of volatile organic hydrocarbons as trace gas. Additionally, auger
cuttings were also field screened with this device. Selected
samples were then transported to B.C. Laboratories for an~alysis.
9. Chemical analysis of th'e soil samples was limited to detection
of Benzene, Toluene, Xylenes and Total Purgeable Hydrocarbons,
Total Organic Halides, Total Lead and Oil & Grease.
Please refer to the drawing no. 1 at the end of this text for specific
boring locations.
SOILS PROFILE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
A total of 12 exploratory soil borings were advanced to a maximum
depth of 25 feet at the project site. Surface soils consisted of fil!.'~soil
containing brick, concrete and debris in san? and silt to an approximate del~th
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Page
Projo No, B$6-131
of 2 feet. Below the 2 foot strata to an approximate depth of g feet, a silty
very fine sand was encountered. Below $ feet to the maximum depth of the
exploratory borings, a fine sand with lnterbedded lenses of silt was encountered.
For more detailed information regarding the subsoils at the project site, please
refer to the logs of borings in Appendix A of this report.
Ground Water Conditions
Ground water was not encountered in any of our exploratory soils
borings at depths drilled. Review of Kern County Water Agency map titled
"Depth to Ground Water, Unconfined and Equivalent Wells Used for Control,
Spring, 1985" indicates that the ground Water table below the project site is
approximately 100 feet. However, numerous factors influence ground water
fluctuations, and evaluation of such factors is beyond the scope of this
investigation. Please refer to drawing no. 2 at the end of the text regarding the
.ground water conditions.
EXTENT OF CONTAMINATION
It is understood that the Mobil OI1 Service Station located at 1200 Oak
Street in Bakersfield, California, has been demolished. As-part of the demolition
activities, four underground storage tanks and associated product .piping was
removed.
Soil sampling and chemical analysis for the tank removal was conducted
by Bakersfield Construction Inspection of Bakersfield, California. Please refer
to Appendix B of this report for information regarding preliminary sampling by
Bakersfield construction Inspection at the project site. The results of
'this analysis is summarized in Table I and II as follows:
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Page 5
Proj. No. B86-131
TABLE I
Concentrations of Gasoline Constituents in Soil
Location
of 5ample Benzene
Tank No. I (10,000 Gallons)
Test Hole t11
0 2 feet 0.31
0 6 feet <0.1
Test Hole. #2
0 2 feet <0.1
(8 6 feet <0.1
Tank No. 2 (8,000 Gallons)
Test Hole #3
(8 2 feet <0.1
(8 6 feet <0.1
Test Hole ##
(8 2 feet <0.1
0 6 feet <0.1
Tank No. 3 (5,000 Gallons)
Test Hole #5
(8 2 feet <0.1
(~ 6 feet <0.1
Product Piping
Test Hole #1
(8 2 feet 0.21
(8 6 feet 0.9#
Test Hole #2
(8 2 feet 0.39
(8 6 feet 0.19
Test Hole /t3
(8 2 feet 0.7
0 6 feet 0.71
Concentrations (ppm) it,
Toluene Xylenes Total Volatile Hydrocarbons
1.31 1.36 92.73
<0.1 <0.3 <0.5
<0.1 <0.3 <0.5
<0.1 <0.3 <0.5
<0.1 <0.3
<0.1 <O.3
<0.I <0.3
<0.1 <0.3
<0.I <0.3
<0.1 <0.3
<0.1 <0.3
0.1 <0.3
<0.1 <O.3
<0.I <0.3
<0.1 <0.3
<0.1 <0.3
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<O.5
<0.5
<O.5
<0.5
<0.5
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Page 6
Proj. No. B86-131 /
TABLE I (cont.)
Concentrations of Gasoline Constituents in Soil
Location
of Sample Benzene
Product Piping (cont.)
Test Hole #4
0 2 feet 3.0
0 6 feet 0.67
Test Hole #5
Ca 2 feet 0.16
Cd 6 feet <0.1
Concentrations (ppm)
Toluene Xylenes Total Volatile Hydrocarbons
2.4 5.1 2.7
0.1 <0.3 0.35
<0.1 <0.3 0. I!
<0.I <0.3 <0.5
TABLE II
Concentration. 9f Waste Oil Const. ituents in Soil
Location
of Sample Oil & Grease Lead
Tank No. # (550 Gallons)
Test Hole ltl
0 2 feet 60 14.0
Cd 6 feet 453 25.9
During the course of our field investigafion, no fuel aroma was detected
in either the samples obtained or auger cuttings from any of our exploratory
soil borings, with the exception of boring B-7. Likewise, field screening of the
samples and auger cuttings with the field photoionization detector did not yield
any detectable reaction with the exception of boring B-7. The results of the
laboratory chemical analysis of soil samples obtained during our field
investigation are summarized in Table III: ,'~.
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Page 7
Proj. No. B86-I3t - --
TABLE III
Concentra,.t,.ions of 'Gaso.,line Constituents ,in Soil (parts. per re.ill,on)
Location.
of Sample Benzene Toluene
Waste Oil Tank
B-2 0 /0' N/D N/D
B-2 0 15' N/D N/D
B-2 C~ 20' N/D N/D
B-2 0 25' N/D N/D
Total volatile Total Oil &
Xylenes Hydrocarbons Lead Grease
N/D N/D 2.3 <20.0
N/D N/D 1.3 <20.0
N/D N/D 2.g 27.0
N/D N/D 1.0 0,.$
Produizt Line Pathways
B-3 (8 5' N/D N/D
B-# (~ 5' N/D N/D
B-5 (a Y N/D N/D
B-5 (8 S' N/D N/D
B-6 (8 5' N/D N/D
B-6 Cd 10' . N/D N/D
B-7 (a 2' 9./47 1.69
g-7 [~ 5' N/D N/D
B-7 ~ 10' N/D N/D
g-7 Cd 15' N/D N/D
B-7 (8 20' N/D N/D
B-8 0 5' N/D N/D
B-8 L~ 10' N/D N/D
B-9 0 10' N/D N/D
S-9 0 15' N/D N/D
a-to 0 N/D
a-tO 0 tO' N/O
B-tl (~ 5' N/D N/D
B-12 ~ 5' 'N/D NIB
N/D N/D
N/D N/D
N/D N/D
N/D N/D
N/D N/D
N/D N/D
8.# 68.23
0.27 6.9
N/D 42.#5
N/D 2.61
N/D N/D
N/D 'N/D
N/D N/D
N/D N/D
N/D N/D
N/D N/D
N/D N/D
N/D N/D
N/D N/D
26.2
4.9
8.5
5.#.
3.1
6.8
3.1
21.7
132.0
5.9
37.2
0.6
111.0
2.7
3.1
5.6
4.50,
5.0,
0,7.1
Please refer to Appendix B for laboratory test results.
TOX
(EPA 9020)
<20.0
<20.0
<20.0
<2O.O
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Page g
Proj. No~ Bg6-131
At the time of our field investigation, the project site was under
construction. The area in which our investigation had taken place had
experienced soil grading.' This grading process removed soils which were directly
below the product piping. Therefore~ any low l~vel contaminated soils may have
been removed from the site prior to our investigation.
Che. mical analysis of the soils sampled at the project site indicate non
detected limits of contamination, with exception of soil boring B-7. The results
of analysis of samples at this exploratory hole showed low 'levels' of
comtamination from 2 feet below grade to about 15 feet below existing grade.
It would appear that attenuation occurs from the 2 foot to l~ foot strata and
becomes non-detected at 20 feet below grade. This contamination appears highly
local'ized, as radial borings placed at # foot intervals around B-7 yielded non
detected results (radial borings are B-g, B-9, B-10, and B-11')'.
Chemical analysis of soil samples obtained from the boring which
explored the waste oil tank showed no level of contamination of Benzene,
Toluene, X¥1enes, Total Hydrocarbons or Total Organic Halides (TOX).
Results of the Total lead analysis shows concentrations of lead ranging
from 0.6 ppm to 132.0 ppm. These levels were detected in the same samples
showing no other gasoline constituents, and therefore may be a natural
occurrence.
REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES
After review of the field and laboratory data, one remedial action
alternative was considered for this project site. The alternative selected was
one of No Action.
It is understood, from information provided to this office regarding the
proposed use of the project site, that the area in which the isolated pocket of
low level contamination was observed would be located beneath a paved parking
area, and therefore not subject to free-percolation transport potential.
These facts along with the depth to ground water below the site. f-make
C-
it feasible to leave the contaminated soil in place. This alternative wbuld
results in a very low capital cost and disruption to business~ and would provide
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Page 9
Proj. No. B$6-131
a low risk to ground water. Long term financial liability with this option would
be low due to the existence to the contaminated soil below the site for a period
of several hundred years ·until biological degradation had occurred.
RECOMMENDA'rlON5
Based on the levels of contamination in the soil and the depth to ground
water below the site, it is not believed that the contamination at this site is of
a sufficient threat to ground water resources to warrant further investigation,
excavation and/or disposal. Although the No Action alternative is not without
disadvantages, it is felt that this solution would be the .most appropriate for
this particular site.
LIMITATIONS
The recommendations presented in this report are based on the results of
field investigation, laboratory chemical analysis and field observation, combined
with interpolation of the subsurface conditions between the borings. Therefor
data is evident only to the degree implied by comparison of data obtained at
each boring location and extrapolation.
t;xploratory soil borings were located in the field by 'tape measurements
from existing landmarks, as interpreted from available maps. These locations
should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the methods used
to located them.
The conclusions oI this report are based on the information provided
regarding the project site, review of data and chemical analysis, as well as the
subsurface condition encountered at the boring locations at the time of this
report.
The geotechincal data presented herewith is based upon professional
interpretation utilizing the "state of the art" and a degree of conservatism
deemed proper as Of the report date. It is not warranted that such data ,cannot
be superseded by future geotechnica[ developments.
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Page 10
.Proj. No. B86-131
If you have any questions of if we can be of further assistance, please
do not hesitate to contact our office.
Respectfully Submitted,
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
ME/aSP/ko
3effery S. Palmer
Environmental Specialist
Michael Erwin
Geotechnical Engineer
RCE #18625
2 c plus invoice herewith
c Kern County Environmental Health Department
Attention: Amy Green
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
' (. ")
X ~ -- ~ -- ~ .-
~"~ ""~~ ~~ K~ZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
A~d~
~oject No~ Drawing No. ' Fresno Visalia Bakersfield
/orth
=rom:
.!
. .~,.
, Pr. oject Site
.I-
.I-
Kern County Water Agency Map "Depth to Ground
Water, Unconfined and Equivalent Wells used for
· Control, Spring, 1985"
Scale:NTS
Drawn by:
Project Ho.
A,~pp~roved by:
JP yammer
Drawing Ho.
2 of 2
· I,
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Fresno Visalia Bakersfield '!
,Project 1200 OAK STREET Boring No.
BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Proj. B86-].31
DATE DRILLED: November 19/20, 1986 TYPE OF 8ORING: Auger
HOLE ELEV: -- GROUNDWATER LEVEL: None LOGGED BY: KG
- _ .~_~_ § ~o~
~: - = ~ SOI'L DESCRIPTION ~ ~ -.-
~ ~ ~ :~> o ~o~ o _o
Fill -'Demolition debris, brick, angular
gravel, slag
Very fine SANDY SILT (ML); brown, damp,
drills easy
5--
Fine SAND (SP); tan, damp, drills easy
10-
SILT (ML); brown, damp, drills easy
· . Fine SAND (SP); tan, damp', drills easy
15-
BOTTOM OF BORING
20--
25 ~
*I~ = Refusal, greater KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES Sheet 1 of__
than 100 blows/foot
Fresno · Visalia · Bakersfield
, 1
Proiect 1200 OAK STREET Boring No.
BAKERSFIELD,'CALIFORNIA --- Proj. B86-131
DAlE DRILLED: November 19/20, 1986 TYPE OF 8ORING: Auger
HOLE ELEV: -- GROUNDWATER LEVEL: None LOGGED BY: KG
CDC:
· '~,, · ~,~ ~.- -c:
.
~ ~ =5 m SOIL DESCRIPTION
. - o
Fill - DemoliLion debris, brick, ~rmvel,
slag
~ Very fine SILTY SAND (SM); brown, damp,
5-
drills easy.
SILT (~); dark brown, damp,' drills easy
fine SAND (SP); tan, damp, drills easy
10-
Grades coarser with depth
15-
Becomes fine to medium sand at 19 feet
20--
Gravel streak at 22 feet
Gravelly at 25 feet
25--
BOTTOM OF BORING
*R = Refusal, greater
than 100 blows/foot
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES
Fresno · Visalia · Bakersfield
Sheet 1 of 1
~Projec¢. 1200 OAK STREET ' Boring No.
BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Proj. B86-131
DATE DRILLED: November 19/20, 1986 TYPE OF 8ORING: Auger
· HOLE ELEV: -- GROUNDWATER LEVEL: None LOGGED BY: KG
= ~ = ~ ~ SOIL DESCRIPTION ~ ~ '-- ~ ~ ~ '-- -~ ~
Fill - Fine to medium SILTY SAND (SM);
brown, damp, gravelly, drills easy
SILT (ML); brown, damp, drills firm
Fine SAND (SP); tan, damp, drills easy
5--
~ BOTTOM OF BORING
10--
15--
20--
25-- .-
*R = Refusal, greateF
than 100 blows/foot
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES
Fresno · Visalia · Bakersfield
Sheet 1 of 1
MOBIL S~BM
project 1200 OAK STREET Boring No.
-'- BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Proj. B86-131
DATE DRILLED: November 19/20, 1986 TYPE OF 8ORING: Auger
HOLE ELEV: -- GROUNDWATER LEVEL: None LOGGED BY: KG
D DO . ~o
Fill - Fine to medium SILTY SAND (SM);
brown, damp, gravelly, drills easy
- fine to medi~ SILTY SAND (SM); tan, damp
drills firm. Gravelly from 3 to 4 feet
SILT (~); dark br~wn, damp, drills firm
5
BOTTOM OF BORING
20--
25--
*1% = Refusal, greater
than 100 blows/foot
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES
Fresno · Visalia · Bakersfield
Sheet 1 of 1
,Project 1200 OAK STREET o Boring No.
BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Proj. B86-131
DATE DRILLED: November 19/20, 1986 TYPE OF BORING: Auger
HOLE ELEV: -- GROUNDWATER LEVEL: None LOGGED BY: KG
~ e ~ SOIL DESCRIPTION ~ g ~ ~ ~ = "- -.- ~
Fill - Fine SILTY SAND (SM); brown, damp,
gravelly, .drills easy
Fill - Fine SILTY SAND (SM); tan, damp,
~ gravelly, drills easy
- SILT (~); dark brown, damp, gravelly,
drills easy
5-
BOTTOM OF BORING
10--
20--
25-
*1% = Refusal, greater
than i00 blows/foot
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES
Fresno · Visalia · Bakersfield
Sheet 1 of ' 1
MOBIL STATIO10-GBM
Project 1200 OAK STREET Boring No.
BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Proj. B86-131
DATE DRILLED: November 19/20, 1986 IYPE OF BORING: Auger
HOLE ELEV: -- GROUNDWATER LEVEL: ' None LOGGED BY: KG
Fine to medium SILTY SAND (SM); brown,
damp, gravelly, drills easy
SILT (~); dark brown, damp, drills firm
5-
Fine SAND (SP); grey, damp,e drills easy
10-
BOTTOM OF BORING
20--
25--
*1% = Refusal, greater
than 100 blows/foot
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES
Fresno · .Visalia · Bakersfield
Sheet 1 of __
MOBIL STATIO~0-GBM O ~
,ProjeGt 1200 OAK STREET Boring No.
BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA .- Proj. B86-131 [
DATE DRILLED: November 19/20, 1986 TYPE OF BORING: Auger
HOLE ELEV: -- GROUNDWATER LEVEL: None LOGGED BY: KG
- <,'6 ~
_ ~. -~ SOiL DESCRIPTION ~ ~, ~"~ ..~ - ~ o, .-
Fine to medium SILTY SAND (SM); brown, ..
damp, gravelly, drills easy · ..
SILT (ML); brown, damp, drills easy
5~
Very fine SAND (SP); brown, damp, drills
easy
10-
Grades slightly coarser with depth
15-- Fine SAND (SP); tan, damp, drills easy
20--
BOTTOM OF BORING
25--
*R = Refusal, greater
than 100 bloWs/foot
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES
Fresno · Visalia · Bakersfield
Sheet 1 of 1
· Project 1200 OAK STREET Boring N°.
BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA !Proj. B86-131 I'
DATE DRILLED: November 19/20, 1986 TYPE OF BORING: Auger
HOLE ELEV: -- GROUNDWATER LEVEL: None LOGGED BY: KG
£- -~ ~- '~ SOIL DESCRIPTION 's~ ~ ~ ~oa~= ~=~ =~ -'-~
Fine SILTY SAND (SM); brown, damp,
gravelly, drills easy
SILT (ML); dark brown, damp, drills firm
5--
. Very fine SAND (SP); brown, damp, drills
easy
Fine SAND (SP); tan, damp, drills easy
10-
BOTTOM OF BORING
15--
20--
25--
*1% = 1%efusal, greater
'than 100 blows/foot
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES
Fresno · Visalia · Bakersfield
Sheet 1 of 1
MOBIL STATION ~-GBM
projec~ 1200 OAK STREET Boring No.
BAKERSFIELD, iCALIFORNIA Proj. B86-131
DATE DRILLED: November 19/20, 198~ TYPE OF 8ORING: Auger
HOLE ELEV: -- GROUNDWATER LEVEL: None LOGGED BY: KG
~ m~ ~ ~,~s= ~ mm~ SOIL DESCRIPTION .~
D
Fill - Fine to medium SILTY SAND (SM);
brown, damp, gravelly, drills easy
SILT (~); dark brown, damp, drills firm
5-
Fine SAND (SP); tan, damp, drills easy
10-
Medium to coarse SAND (SW); tan, damp,
drills easy
15-
BOTTOM OF BORING
20--
25--
*R = Refusal, greater.
than 100 blows/foot
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES
Fresno · Visalia · Bakersfield
Sheet 1 of ' 1
MOBIL STATION ~GBM
P. roject~ 1200 OAK STREET O Boring No.
! BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Proj. B86-131
DATE DRILLED: November 19/20, 1986 TYPE OF BORING: Auger
HOLE ELEV: -- GROUNDWATER LEVEL: None LOGGED BY: KG
. _
": - wE'~ o. '~· SOIL DESCRIPTION ~ ~ ~ ~o ~. ~ ,-, '~ = '" ~:~.'~- -
'Fill - Fine to medium SILTY SAND (SM);
brown, damp, gravelly, drills easy
SILT (ML); dark brown, damp, drills firm
.J
Fine SAND (SP); tan, damp, drills easy
BOTTOM OF BORING
15--
20--
25--
*l:t = Refusal, greater
than 100 blows/foot
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES
Fresno · Visalia ° Bakersfield
Sheet 1 ,. of 1
MOBIL STATION~-GBM
.Project 1200 OAK STREE~r
Boring No.
BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Proj. B86-131
DATE DRILLED: November 19/20, 1986 TYPE OF 8ORING: Auger
HOLE ELEV: -- GROUNDWATER LEVEL: None LOGGED BY~ KG
D
Fill - Fine to medium SILTY SAND (SM);
brown, damp, gravelly, drills easy
SILT (ML); brown, damp, drills firm
5--
BOTTOM OF BORING
20--
25--
*R = Refusal, greater,
than 100 blows/foot
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES
Fresno · Visalia · Bakersfield
Sheet 1 .. of 1
'MOBIL STATION OGBM
P, roject~ 1200 OAK STREET-'- Boring No.
BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Proj. B86-131
DATE DRILLED: November 19/20, 1986 TYPE OF BORING: Auger
HOLE ELEV: -- GROUNDWATER'LEVEL: None LOGGED BY: KG
·
~=' ~, ~ ~s= ~ ~ SOIL. DESCRIPTION
Fill - Fine to medium SILTY SAND (SM);
brown, damp, drills easy
SILT (~); brown, damp, drills firm
5~
BOTTOM OF BORING
10--
15--
20--
25--
*R = Refusal, greater
than 100 blows/foot
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES Sheet 1 of 1
Fresno · Visalia · Bakersfield
J. J. EGLIH. It£G. CHEM. ENGL
PETROLEUM
MAIN OFFICE: 4100 PIERCE ROAD, BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93308 PHONE 327-4911
Purgeable Aromatics
K.~AZAN AND ASSOC. INC. ATT. JEFF PALMER
3860 .NORTH WINERY
~.'":ESNO~ CA. 93?86
Sample Description: B-8 @ 10'
Date of
REPORT:il-SA-86
LAB No.:20758
D TE/TIME
S.MPLE COLLECTED:
11-19-86
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED @ LAB:
11-80-86
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
11-24-86
Constituent
Reporting
Units
Benzene
Toluene
Ethyl Benzene
p-Xylene
m-Xylene
o-Xylene
Isopropyl Benzene
TVH
.ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
EPA 5020/8080
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
Cc ~ments: PROJECT: B86-132
SOIL
TC al Lead: 2.3 rog/kg
Oi. 6 Grease: less than 20 mg/kg
TOX: less tham2~mg/kg
Analyses
Results
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
Minimum
Reporting
Level
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.5
MAIN OFFICE: 4100 PIERCE ROAD, BAKERSFIELD. CA. 93308 PHONE 327-4911
Purgeable Aromatics
! RAZAN AND ASSOC. INC. ATT. JEFF PALMER
~860 NORTH WINERY
FRESNO, CA. 93?26
'ample Description: B-2 @ 15'
Date of
REPORT:Il-24-86
LAB No.:20753
PATE/TIME
~MPLE COLLECTED:
-- 11-19-86
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED @ LAB:
11-20-86
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
11-2q-86
Constituent
Benzene
Toluene
Ethyl Benzene
p-Xylene
m-Xylene
o-Xylene
Isopropyl Benzene
~TVH
Reporting
Units
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g'
ug/g
ug/g
EPA 5020/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
C mments: PROJECT: B86-138
SOIL
O;t ~ Grease: less than 20 mg/kg
2~ :al Lead: I.$ mg/k.g
VJ[/J. Fd~l in
TOX:
Analyses
Results
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected ~
none detected
none detected
less than 20 mg/kg
Minimum
Reporting
Level
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.I
0.5
' LABORATORIES
J J EGLIN R£G CHEM ENGII
PETROLEUM ~
MAIN OFFICE: 4100 PIERCE ROAD, BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93308 PHONE 327-4911
KRAZAN AND ASSOC.
' 'B60 NORTH WINERY
RESNO, CA. 93786
Purgeable Aromatics
INC. ATT. JEFF PALMER
'~mple Description: B-8 @
Date of
REPORT:il-84-86
LAB No.:8075~
LATE/TIME
SAMPLE COLLECTED
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED @ LAB:
11-80-86
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
11-84-86
Constituent
Reporting
Units
Benzene
Toluene
Ethyl Benzene
p-Xylene
m-Xylene
o-Xylene
Isopropyl Benzene
TVH
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
EPA 5020/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
Comments: PROJECT: B86-138
SOIL
] tal Lead: 2.4 mg/kg
Oil ~ Grease: 27 mg/kg
Tc]: les~ than 20 m_g/kg
Analyses
Results
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
Minimum
Reporting
Level
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.5
Jt
,~,,~, ,~,~ ~ LA B O R AT O R I ES~ ,~.
J .I EGLIN ItEG CHEM EHGR
PETROL£~IM ~
MAIH OFFIC~.: 4100 PIERCE ROAD~ E3AKERSFI£L.D, GA. c33308 PHC)HE 327-49~ 1
Purgeable Aromatics
"RAZAN AND ASSOC. INC. ATT.. JEFF PALMER
' 360 NORTH WINERY
FRESNO, CA. 93986
~ ~mple Description: B-8 · 85'
Date of
REPORT:il-84-86
LAB No.:80955
DATE/TIME
P~MPLE COLLECTED:
11-19-86
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED @ LAB:
11-80-86
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
11-8A-86
Constituent
Reporting
Units
Benzene
Toluene
Ethyl Benzene
p-Xylene
m-Xylene
o-Xylene
Isopropyl Benzene
TVH
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
EPA 5020/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
Cnmments: PROJECT: B86-132
SOIL
Total Lead: 1.0 mg/kg
O.~ ~ Grease: 4.8 mg/kg
T~ (: less than 2_~ ~g/kg
Analyses
Results
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
Minimum
Reporting
Level
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.5
· LABORA_iIORiES
AGflICUL TUI~
£H£M~CAL ANAL¥~ I N~ .
J. J. EGLIN, ~EG. CHEM. IENGII.
PETROLEUM
MAIN OFFICE: 4100 PIERCE ROAD, BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93308 PHONE 327-4911
Purgeable Aromatics
B !AZAN AND ASSOC. INC. ATT. JEFF PALMER
3860 NORTH WINERY
F~ESNO, CA. 937~6
Sample Description: B-3 @ 5'
Date of
REPORT:ll-2A-86
LAB No.:20756
D TE/TIME
S MPLE COLLECTED:
11-19-86
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED 8 LAB:
11-20-86
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
11-24-86
Constituent
Reporting
Units
Benzene
Toluene
Ethyl Benzene
p-Xylene
m-Xylene
o-Xylene
Isopropyl Benzene
TVH
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
EPA 5020/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
CO ments: PROJECT: B86-132
SOIL
To:. il Lead: 26.2 mg/kg
Analyses
Results
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
Minimum
Reporting
Level
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.5
LABO RATO R I ES
C"£141C. AI ANAII~/~ I NC.
J. I. EGLIH, lEG. CHEM. ENGII.
PETROLEUAt
· . MAIN OFFICE: 4100 PIERCE ROAD, BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93308 PHONE 327-4911
! ·
:AZAN AND ASSOC. INC.
3860 NORTH WINERY
ERESNO, CA. 93?86 :
S~mple Description: B-4 @ 5'
D^TE/TIME
S MPLE COLLECTED:
11-19-86
Purgeable Aromatics
ATT. JEFF PALMER
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED @ LAB:
11-20-86
Constituent
Benzene
Toluene
Ethyl Benzene
p-Xylene
m-Xylene
o-Xylene
Isopropyl Benzene
TVH
Reporting
Units
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
EPA 5020/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
C~ ~ments: PROJECT: B86-132
SOIL
Tc'al Lead: 4.9 mg/kg
Date of
REPORT:Il-24-86
LAB No.:20757
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
11-24-86
Analyses
Results
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
Minimum
Reporting
Level
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.5
By
""' ' ' ' '__ LABORATORIES
· 'tEI~I~AL AtlALY~ INC.
J. J. EGLIN, lEG. CHEM. ENGL
~TROLE~
YAIN OFFICE: 4100 PIERC~ ROAD. BAKERSFIELD. CA. 93308 PHON~ 327-49~ ~
Purgeable Aromatics
KRAZAN AND ASSOC. INC. ATT. JEFF PALMER
NORTH WINERY
RESNO, CA. 93?86
Sample Description: B-5 @ 3'
Date of
REPORT:il-85-86
LAB No.:80758
~TE/TIME
SAMPLE COLLECTED:
11-19-86
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED @ LAB:
11-80-86
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
11-85-86
Constituent
Reporting
Units
Benzene
Toluene
Ethyl Benzene
p-Xylene
m-X¥1ene
o-Xylene
Isopropyl Benzene
TVH
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g.
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
EPA 5080/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
~omments: PROJECT: B86-138
SOIL
)tal Lead: 8.5 mg/kg
Analyses
Results
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
Minimum
Reporting
Level
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1'
0.1
0.1
0.5'
LAB O'RATO R I ES
J, J. EGLIN, lEG. CHEM.
PETROLEUM
MAIN OFFICE: 4100 PIERCE ROAD, EIAKERSFIELO, CA. 93308 PHONE 327-4911
Purgeable Aromatics
KI ~ZAN AND ASSOC. INC. ATT. JEFF PALMER
3860 NORTH WINERY
FPESNO, CA. 93?.26
Sample Description: B,5 @ 5'
Date of
REPORT:Il-25-86
LAB NO.:20759
DC-E/TIME
St. IPLE COLLECTED:
11-19-86
Constituent
Benzene
Toluene
Ethyl Benzene
p-Xylene
m-Xylene
o-Xylene
Isopropyl Benzene
TVH
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED @ LAB:
11-80-86
Reporting
Units
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
EPA 5020/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
Co ments: PROJECT: B86-132
SOIL
Td al Lead: 5.4 mg/kg
,,,,
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
11-25-86
Analyses
Results
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
Minimum
Reporting
Level
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.5
' ._ LABORATOR ES
C/~ U'1¢4/. ~/l~/..l~'t2' J INC.
J. J. EGLIN, IIEG. CHEM. ENGB..
PETROLEUM
" MAIN OFFICE: 4100 PIERCE ROAD, BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93308 PHONE 327-4911
Purgeable Aromatics
K[ ~ZAN AND ASSOC. INCo ATT. JEFff PALMER
3~o0 NORTH WINERY
FRESNO~ CA. 93?26
S~' ,pla Description: B-6 @ 5'
/TIME
SA PLE COLLECTED:
'11-19'86
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED @ LAB:
11-20-86
Date of
REPORT:Il-25-86
LAB No,:20760
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
11-25-86
Constituent
Reporting
Units
Toluene
Ethyl Benzene
p-Xylene
-m-Xylene
o-Xylene
Isopropyl Benzene
TVH
ug/g
ug/g
'ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
EPA 5020/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
o~ .ants: PROJECT: B86-132
SOIL
'oral Lead: 3.1 mg/kg
Analyses
Results
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
Minimum
Reporting
Level
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.I
0.1
0.5
Y
'
lES
J. J. EGLIN, IIEG. CHEM.
PETSOLEUM
MAIN OFFICE: 4100 PIERCE ROAD. BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93308 PHONE 327-4911
Purgeable Aromatics
KP'~ZAN AND ASSOC. INC. ATT. JEFF PALMER
3E 0 NORTH WINERY
FR~SNO~ CA. 93?26
Date of
REPORT:ii-25-86
LAB No.:20761
!,Sa"pie Description: B-6 @ 10'
D~TE/TIME
SAMPLE COLLECTED:
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED 8 LAB:
11-20-86
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
11-25-86
Constituent
Reporting
Units
Benzene
Toluene
Ethyl Benzene
p-Xylene
m-Xylene
o-Xylene
Isopropyl Benzene
TVH
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
EPA 5080/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
Zomments: PROJECT: B86-138
SOIL
':total Lead: 6.8 mg/kg'
Analyses
Results
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
Minimum
Reporting
Level
0.1
0.1
0ol
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.5
LABORATORIES
J. J. EGLIHo IIEG. CHEM. EHGil..
PETROLEUM
/
MAIN OFFICE: 4100 PIERCE ROAD, BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93308 PHONE 327-4911
Purgeable Aromatics
KRAZAN AND' ASSOC. INC. ATT. JEFF PALMER
3~"-50 NORTH WINERY
Fi ESN0~ CA. 937~6
S.-'uple Description: B-7 @ 2'
DATE/TIME
S,'. ~PLE COLLECTED:
.... 11-19-86
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED @ LAB:
11-20-86
Date of
REPORT:Il-85-86
LAB No.:80762
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
11-85-86
Constituent
Reporting·
Units
Benzene
Toluene
Ethyl Benzene
p-×ylene
m-Xylene
o-Xylene
Isopropyl Benzene
TVH
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
EPA 5080/8080
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
Analyses
Results
9.47
1.69
O.A9
1.49
3.75
3.16
none detected
68.23
Minimum
Reporting
Level
0.1
0ol
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.5
C( ~ments: PROJECT: B86-138
SOIL
Ti :al Lead:' 3.1 rog/kg
LABORATO RI ES¢
£MI~/. A,~/AI I~'/S I NC.
J. J. EGLIN, I~EG. CHEM. ENGI~.
PETROLEUM
MAIN OFFICE: 4100 PIERCE ROAD, BAKERSFIELD. CA. 93308 PHONE 327-4911
Purgeable Aromatics
KRAZAN AND ASSOC. INC. ATT. JEFF PALMER
J !60 NORTH WINERY
F.IESN0, CA. 93?26
E-'mple Description: B-? @ 5'
Date of
REPORT:il-85-86
LAB No.:20763
O^TE/TIME
,MPLE COLLECTED:
11-19-86
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED @ LAB:
11-80-86
Constituent
Reporting
Units
Benzene
Toluene
Ethyl Benzene
p-Xylene
m-Xylene
o-Xylene
Isopropyl Benzene
TVH
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
EPA 5020/8080'
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
11-85-86
Analyses
Results
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
0.8?
none detected
0.80
6.90
Minimum
Reporting
Level
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.5
C~ nments: PROJECT: B86-138
SOIL
To' al Lead: 21.7 mg/kg
PETROLELI¥ J' J' [c~Lm. ~:c;. CH~.
MAIN OFFICE: 4100 PIERCE ROAD, BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93308 PHONE 327-4911
Purgeable Aromatics
KRAZAN AND ASSOC. INC. ATT. JEFF PALMER
3~ ~0 NORTH WINERY
Fi ~SNO, CA. 93726
S~ ]ple Description: B-7 @ 10'
Date of
REPORT:il-25-86
LAB No.:2076~
DATE/TIME
S; ~PLE COLLECTED:
!:11-19-86
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED @ LAB:
11-20-86
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
11-25-86
Constituent
Benzene'
Toluene
Ethyl.Benzene
p-Xylene
m-Xylene
o-Xylene'
Isopropyl Benzene
TVH
Reporting
Units
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
EPA 5020/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
~ents: PROJECT: B86-132
SOIL
Lead: 132 mg/kg
Analyses
Results
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
42.45
Minimum
Reporting
Level
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1.
0.1
0.1
0.5
· AGRIC11L TU~ ~ ·
'"£MICAt A~4L I'~IS ~ I NC.
LABORATORIES
$. J. EGL~N, ~,EG. CHEM, ENGR.
PETROLEUM ~
MAIN OFFICE: 4100 PIERCE ROAD, BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93308 PHONE 327-4911
Purgeable Aromatics
KRAZAN AND ASSOC. INC. ATT. JEFF PALMER
= 60 NORTH WINERY
F ESNO, CA. 93?26
S-mple Description: B-? @ 15'
Date of
REPORT:Il-25-86
LAB No.:20765
DSTE/TIME
MPLE COLLECTED:
11-19-86
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED @ LAB:
11-20-86
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
11-25-86
Constituent
Reporting
Units
Benzene
Toluene
Ethyl Benzene
p-Xylene
m-Xylene
o-Xylene
Isopropyl Benzene
TVH
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
EPA 5020/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
Analyses
Results
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
2.61
Minimum
Reporting
Level
0.1
0.1
0.1
,0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.5
Cc ;ments: PROJECT: B86-132
SOIL
?c al Lead: 5.9 mg/kg
' .LABORATORIES
~. ~. ~au~. ~£6. c,~. ~.
MAIN OFFICE: 4100 PIERCE ROAD, BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93308 PHONE 327-4911
Purgeable Aromatics
ATT. JEFF PALMER
K[ ~ZAN AND ASSOC. INC. Date of
3860 NORTH WINERY REPORT:11-24-86
FPESNO, CA. 93?26 LAB No.:20766
Sample Description: B-? @ 20'
D¢~E/TIME DATE/TIME SAMPLE DATE ANALYSIS
S¢ IPLE COLLECTED: RECEIVED @ LAB: COMPLETED:
11-19-86 11-20-86 11-24-86
Constituent
Reporting Analyses
Units Results
Benzene
Toluene
Ethyl Benzene
p-Xylene
m-Xylene
o-Xylene
Isopropyl Benzene
TVH
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
EPA 5020/8020
TVH: By Gas.Chromatography
~ents: PROJECT: B86-132
SOIL
.1 Lead: 57.2 mg/kg
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
Minimum
Reporting
Level
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1'
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.5
~y
, , LABORATORIES
J. J. EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGil.
MAIX OFFICE: 4100 PI[RC[ ROAD, B~KERSFI[~D, CA. 93308 PXON[ 327-4911
Purgeable Aromatics
KRAZAN AND ASSOC. INC. ATT. JEFF PALMER
NORTH WINERY
~ESNO, CA. 93?26
Sample Description: B-8 ~ 5'
Date of
REPORT:Il-24-86
LAB No.:20767
t.~TE/TIME
SAMPLE*COLLECTED:
11-19-86
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED @ LAB:
11-20-86
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
11-2A-86
Constituent
Reporting
Units
Benzene
Toluene
Ethyl Benzene
p-Xylene
m-Xylene
o-Xylene
Isopropyl Benzene
TVH
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
EPA 5020/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
Comments: PROJECT: B86-132
SOIL
Tc al Lead: 0.6 mg/kg
Analyses
Results
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
Minimum
Reporting
Level
0.1
0.!
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.5
' ilile LABORATORIES
J. J. EGLIN, REG. CHEM. EHGR.
~ETROL£U¥ ~
~AIN O~FICE: 41e0 ~IERCE ROAD, BAKERSFI[LD, CA. 93308 ~HON~ 327-4911
Purgeable Aromatics.
KF ~ZAN AND ASSOC. INC. ATT. JEFF PALMER
3E~O NORTH WINERY ..
,FRESNO, CA. 93?26
!Sa pie Description: B-8 @ 10'
iDATE/TIME
~SA' PLE COLLECTED:
! L'.11-19-86 .
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED @ LAB:
11-20-86
Constituent
Benzene
Toluene
Ethyl Benzene
p-Xylene
m-Xylene
o-Xylene
Isopropyl Benzene
TVH
Reporting
Units
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
EPA 5020/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
!:on ~ents: PROJECT: B86-132
SOIL
oral Lead: 111 mg/kg
Date of
REPORT:ll-24-86
LAB No.:20768
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
11-24-86
Analyses
Results·
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
Minimum
Reporting
Level
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.5
MAIN OFFICE: 4'100 PIERCE ROAD, BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93308 PHONE 327-4911
~urgeable Aromatics
K~'~ZAN AND ASSOC. INC. ATT. JEFF PALMER
3E. ~0 NORTH WINERY
FRESNO, CA. 93?26
Sa ~ple Description: B-9 @ 10'
iDATE/TIME
iS~'IPLE COLLECTED:
11-19-86
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED @ LAB:
11-80-86
Date' of
REPORT:il-24-86
LAB No.:80769
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
11-24-86
Constituent
Benzene
Toluene
Ethyl Benzene
p-Xylene
m-Xylene
o-Xylene
Isopropyl Benzene
TVH
Reporting
Units
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
EPA 5020/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
,Co-ments: PROJECT: B86-132
I ' SOIL
?oral Lead: 2.7 mg/kg
Analyses
Results
none detected
none detected.
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
.none detected
Minimum
Reporting
Level
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0,5
-- LABORATORIES
¢. ".MIC~ A~lll'g~ INC,
J. J. EGLIN, lEG. CHEM. ENGR.
PEI'ROLEUM ~
" MAIN OFFICE: 4100 PIERCE ROAD, BAKERSFIELD. CA. 93308 PHONE 327-4911
Purgeable Aromatics
KRAZAN AND ASSOC. INC. ATT. JEFF PALMER
3P50 NORTH WINERY
Ft ESNO, CA. 93?86
S~.mple Description: B-9 @ 15'
Date of
REPORT:Il-84-86
LAB No.:80770
D~ 'E/TIME
SAMPLE COLLECTED:
11-19-86
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED @ LAB:
11-80-86
Constituent
Reporting
Units
,Benzene
To luene
Ethyl Benzene
p-X¥1ene
m-Xylene
o-Xylene
Isopropyl Benzene
TVH
ug/g
ug/g
ug'/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
EPA 5080/8080
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
Comments: PROJECT: B86-138
SOIL
To~.al Lead: 3.1 rog/kg
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
11-24-86
Analyses
Results
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
Minimum
Reporting
Level
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.5
LAB O-RATO R
I. I. EGLIN, REG. CHEM. 1:1401.
PETROLEUAI
I~AIN OFFICIO: ~100 PIERCE ROAD, BAK~RSFIECO, CA. 93308 PHON~ ~2~-~9~ 1
Purgeable Aromatics
KAZAN AND ASSOC. INC. ATT. JEFF PALMER
3860 NORTH WINERY
F2--_SNO, CA. 93?26
Sample Description: B-lO @ 5'
Dc'rE/TIME
St.~PLE COLLECTED:
11-19-86
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED @ LAB:
11-80-86
Date of
REPORT:il-SA-86
LAB No.:20771
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
11-24-86
Constituent
Benzene
Toluene
Ethyl Benzene
p-Xylene
m-Xylene
o-Xylene
Isopropyl Benzene
TVH
Reporting
Units
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
EPA 5020/8080
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
Cc ~ments: PROJECT: B86-138
SOIL
ro~ 1 Lead:. 5.6 mg/kg
By
Analyses
Results
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
Minimum
Reporting
Level
0.1
0.I
0'.1
0.1
0.1
0.I
0.1.
0.5
,. lES'
J J EGI. II',I IIEG CHEM ENGtl
PETROLEUM
MAIN OFFICE: 4100 PIERCE ROAD, BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93308 PHONE 327-4911
Purgeable Aromatics
K,,~ZAN AND ASSOC. INC. AT~. JEFF PALMER Date of
3860 NORTH WINERY REPORT:ll-2A-86
Fi ESNO~ CA. 93926 LAB No.:20778
Sample Description: B-lO @ '10'
D~'-.-E/T I ME
S~'!.'tPLE COLLECTED:
11- 19-86
Constituent
i'
Benzene
('" To luene
~. Ethyl Benzene
p-Xylene
~ m-Xylene
· ,'.- o-Xylene
Isopropyl Benzene
TVH
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED @ LAB:
11-80-86
Reporting
units
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g'
ug/g
EPA 5080/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
3o! uents: PROJECT: B86-132
SOIL
To!. L1 Lead: 4.54 rog/kg
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
11-EA-86
Analyses
Results
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
Minimum
Reporting
Level
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.5
't
MAIN OFFICE: 4100 PIERCE ROAD, BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93308 PHONE 327-4911
Purgeable Aromatics
~-'AZAN AND ASSOC. INC. ATT. JEFF PALMER
B 60 NORTH WINERY
FRESNO, CAi 93?26
S mple Description: B-11 @ 5'
Date of
REPORT:ll-2A-86~
LAB No.:20773
DATE/TIME
S 'MPLE COLLECTED:
11-19-86
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED @ LAB:
11-80-86
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
11-2A-86
Constituent
Benzene
Toluene
Et'hyl Benzene
p-Xylene
m-Xylene
o-Xylene
Isopropyl Benzene
TVH
Reporting
Units
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
ug/g
EPA 5020/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
Ccmments: PROJECT: B86-132
SOIL
Total Lead: 5.4 mg/kg
Analyses
Resu 1 t s
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
Minimum
Reporting
Level
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.5
i.., .LAIBO ATO IE8 INC.
PET~OLELI¥ ~ J' J' [CMN. n~C~ CHU~
MAIN OFFICE: 4100 PIERCE ROAD, BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93308 PHONE 327-4911
Purgeable Aromatics
KAZAN AND ASSOC. INC.' ATT. JEFF PALMER
3860 NORTH WINERY
E.~ESNO, CA. 93?26
S=mple Description: B-IR @ 5'
DPTE/TIME DATE/TIME SAMPLE
Si~'~PLE COLLECTED: RECEIVED @ LAB:
..... 11-19-86 11-20-86
Constituent
Reporting
Units.
Benzene ug/g
Toluene ug/g
Ethyl Benzene ug/g
p-Xylene ug/g
m-Xylene ug/g
o-Xylene ug/g
Isopropyl Benzene ug/g
TVH ug/g
EPA 5020/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
C~ ~ments: PROJECT: B86-132
SOIL
To~ .1 Lead: 47.1 mg/kg
Date of
REPORT:ll-24-86
LAB No.:20??A
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
11-24-86
Analyses
Results
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
Minimum
Reporting
Level
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.5
Chain of Custody Record
_ )<razan and Ass0ciates~ Inc. 'PARAt4EI'ERS OTHER
ADO~ _ ~a6ll N~rth .Winery
_ Presno. CA 937~6 ~ ~ ~ '"
(209) 291~7337 u ~ _
SAMPLER.~IGNATURE) m ~ -- -- u O~ERVATIDNS/
SAMPLE ND DATE ) TIME I LOCATION ~ ~ ~
-" " ~,/~f~ ~-~- _,
,, ,, /~ ,.~ ,, <
,, , ,, /?,~-~ ,, ~ ~ ~,~ ,,
,' ¢" 'c<' i'
" " ..... ~'¢ CT' - ----
RELINQU~HED BY
iDAT~/~,~~ DATE RELINQUI$HGDBy DAT[ 'R'ECEiVEDBy D'A~E TOTAL NUMBER
iign~t~rl .~ ~'ig~rl ~igniturl ME3 HOD OF SHIPMENT
, ' OR ~C'~GE REQL IREMENTS
Cbmpanv ~ : ' Com~ny Company Company
m m
~ /~ ~C
S~g~Xure · "~ ~lgniture Signature SIg~ture
, TIME TIM~
Comomnv ~mpeny . ~mpanv A~alvllcal T~cnnolo0iet.
K R A. 7. A N~
~~ Jnvmluga~
Ch-~in'Of cu~;tOd~t Record' ·
_ ~razan and Associates, Inc. ' .... ' "'
· PARA~E'TE R~ OTH£R
ADDRE~ _~R~ Nnrth WiTlerg ...
_Presno. CA 9~726
(209) 2~]-7337
~ , < ~ ~ = <
~MPLE N0 DATE TIME j LOCATION
~.-~ ',i/~?~ ~ lo, '~ ~' z,
/}- ~,, q~/~ ~ ,/T,
~-~ " 707 ~ ,, ~ /
~-~ ~ ~1~.i ~ S ~.. "" ~ ~ .... ~,~
6-~ a." ~ "' . ....
REti~OUmHED aY ,DATE aacalva~ BY' DATE RELINQUISHED aY 'DAT~ R'ECEIVE~ BY DATE ITOTAL NUMBER
Prinl~ Name , '~[Int~ Nama Prlnl~ Name ~rlnt~ Nema '1
/~~ ~SJ 0~. SPECIAL SHIPMENT/HANDLING
' OR ~Q~GE REQUIREMENTS
Company.,.. , ' Com~ny Co~pany Company
RELINQUISHED By ~, DATE ,RECEIVED ~Y DATE. RELINQuI$HED'~y ~'ATE RECEIVED B~ {laborato~J ~DATE
Comoan~ ~mDiny . ~uanV '~ _,.]]~.~ ' '
~ 1700 F~3wer Street
· Bakersfield, California 93305
. - Telephone (805) 861-3536
COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTME-~"
~ I~NVlRONMENTAL HEAL'~H DIVISION
August 25, 1986
HEALTH OFFICER
Leon M Hebertson, M.D.
DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Vernon S. Reichard
Mobil Oil Company
P.O. Box 127
Richmond, CA 9480?
Attn: Steve PaD
Re:
Soil Contamination Detected Around
Tanks and Piping at the Charlie's
Mobil Service located at 1200 Oak
Street in Bakersfield, California
Dear Mr. PaD:
The laboratory results received on August 22, 1986, show soil
contamination in the soil samples retrieved beneath the excavation for
the 10,000 gallon gasoline tank, the 550 gallon waste oil tank, and the
product line near the service area. To evaluate the extent of
contamination present in that area, you must prepare a site
characterization proposal.
This department does not approve of any additional work in the
area around the contamination either in defining the plume or providing
a permanent cover at the site until the site characterization 'is
approved by this department.
The department's outline for preparation of the site
characterization proposal is enclosed. It mas be used as a guide in
preparing the proposal. Please submit your proposal to this department
within 60 days.
If you have any questions, please call me at (805) 861-3636.
Sln~cerely,
Envlronmeht,~l Hea 1 th~i/a 1 t s t
Hazardous Materials Management Program'
AG:aa
Enclosure
DISTRICT OFFICES
Delano . Lament , Lake Isabella . Mojave . Rldgecrest . Shafter . Taft
SiTE CIIARACTERIZATION PROPOSAL
OIITL I NE
III .
I. Site Iiistory
A. Type of business (current and past uses)
B.' ttow long the tank has been Jn place, contents of tank
C. Any discrepancies or reportable vat.lot ions ltl past inventory
moni toting
D. AuX~ spills, or leaks identified ~n the past
E. Knmqn hydrogeo]offy of the site
II. Proposal For Identifying Plmne
A. Soil Sampling
1. Proposed locations of borin[Is, depths, and rational for'
determining sampling locations.
2. Sample collection proced,res.
3. Laboratory analysis
analytical methods and qA/QC
4. Results of preliminary soil sampling.
B. Water Sampling (if necessurs~)
1. Sample locations and rational for choosing them.
2. Sample collection procedures.
3. Laboratory analys£s
analytical methods and QA/QC
C. llealti~ and Safety Consider-arians {protection of workers, onsite
mnnitoring)
Site Maps
A. Site specific plot plans (showing surface, and subsurface pipin[(,
tanks, building, equipment, dri[ling~and sampling locations)
This proposal re,st be prepared by a professional ffeo]ogJst, civil engineer,
mechanical engi. neer, envi. ronme/~tal e,~gi~eer or engineerJ ng geologist
ceffistered with the State of California w.ith experience in perf~rmi?.g
ellvJ ronmental assessments. ~"
Information on the qnalJfjcatinns of ti~e individual or firms contracted to
prepare this proposal must be submitted to this department along ~ith the
outl j ne.
Bakersfield Construction Inspection
3014 Union Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93305
(805) 324-1815
Laboratory No. P86-0083
Date Reported: 8/19/86
County of Kern
Health Department
Environmental Health Services
1700 Flower Street
Bakersifeld, CA 93305
Attention: Ms. Amy Green
Subject: Soils Report and Logs for Underground Gasoline Tank Removal
Gentlemen:
Submitted herewith are the soil test results and loggings that we did on the
removal of thre (3) g~soline tanks, one (1) waste oil tank, and associated
product lines on the Mobile Gasoline Station on the Northeast corner of
California Avenue and Oak Street, Bakersfield, California.
All tests for contamination were taken at 2' and 6' below the bottom of each
tank and project lines. (See attached drawing for test locations). The depth
to ground water in this area according to the Kern County Water Agency 1984
Water Supply Report is approximately 50'.
The soil samples taken for analysis of contamination were marked and kept in
glass containers and taken to B. C. Laboratories, Inc. and Stan Comer,
Chemist/Consultant for testing. The results of these tests show minimal
amounts of contamination in the product line area. Ail tests taken in the
tank areas appear to be clean with the exception of Test Hole #1 at 2'-0".
The waste oil tank area does indicate larger amounts of contamination.
The soil logs, a drawing showing the tank locations and test locations, along
with the test results for contamination are attached.
'1
"' ' UNIFIED -OiL cLASSIFICATiI SYSTEM
METHOD OF SOIL CLASSIFICATION
~ ] ~ I~rganie ehys ot low to m~ium pla~
' '; ; fL liuty, gravelly chya, ~ndy
h~ ~ MH c~ul ~ ~dy or silty ~ib, ehstic
~ .~I ~ I~q~C Chyl Of high p~ticity, fat
: CH'
~ ~ ~ ~ chyL
O~
Hilhly Oriania S~h ~ ~ P~t ~d o~r hilhl~ orlan~ ~1~
'Compar~nl SOill &t ~.~ull Liquid Limi~
: Tousbness and Dry St~ngth I~r~t {//~
~0- wttb I~aiflg Pl~ti~ty In~x /
4o { ~
30 /
~ ~ O~
PLASTICITY INDEX
LABORATORIES
] J [GRIN. I.|G (HIM INC, II
MAINOFFICE 4$00PlERCE ROAD BAKERSFIELD CA 93301PHONE
327-4911
( SO t t. )
BAKERSFIELO COhJSTRUCTION INSPEC?
'~.:~014 Un,on Avenue
.,~akersfield, California 93305
SAMPLE DES~R ~ p'F i C)N:
~.ll. ~i ~ ~?' Unleaded 5W END
J_DaTE/TiaE Da'rE/TlaC SAMPLE
...... SAI'IPLE'COLLECTED: RaCEivED .9 LAB:
T~ST METHODS: Purqeable ~romatic~
REPORT I NG ANAL.'./SF:F;
CONST [ 'I IJEhlT I.jlq [ TS Fd~.LR
DA'rE ANAL YS I,C.
C.(IMPI _E TED:
M I i',I I r-'~ U
~EF'OR'F I NG
LEVi:-L
Benzene ug/g ,]. 3 i
I.-lex ane ug/g r'.r; ne
Toiu~t~e ug/g 1 .3)
Ethyiben,ene- uq/'g_ ~].....,:
I soprop,/1 benzene ug/g none detec'
p-Xy 1 erie ,~g/g 0.
o-Xylene uG/g . 0.:38
m-Xy i erie ug/g O.
EPA
TVH: By Gas C~romatograpny
TVH: 98.?3 ug/g. MRt.: (~.5 uo/g.
'(')
0
i
1
.]
.1
By
LABORATORIES
j J IGLIN. IIG C)41M INGII
· MAINOFFICE 4100PiERCE ROAD BAKERSFIELD CA 9330&PHONE 327-4911
BAKERSFIELD COhlSTP. LJCT I OIq
3014 Union ^¥enue -
l~ke rsfiel d ,.' Cali fo rnia
5AMPL. E
93305
PLiRGEA [~l. E
INSPECT 1 ON
D'E:SCR ] P l' ] ON:
i r:,,]O0 Gal ton
DATE/TIME L)A1E/flME
!'SAMPLE COLLECTED: RL--['E.!VED .D
':. ?-I 9-86 '7- 19-86
I .TEST ME'THODS: Aramatlc.a
Purgeabie
R ..F- P,Q.~T [ KIG
i · CONS l [ TIJL:NT L.,'N I TS
He:: a:~e :.~'~/O
¥o 1 uene ug/g
E'thy 1 benzerie ug/g
I sopr opy t benzene ug/g
p-Xy ~ erie ~.~0/g
a- Xy 1 erie ug/'g
m-Xy 1 en,e :Jg/g
EPA 50~0/80~0
TVH: By Oas Chrom,atog,iaphy
TVI4: None Detected MRL: 0.5
AROMAT
(SO'iL
END.
SAI'IPLE'
LAB:
u.q. / g ·
i"~E!'~Q?~T: ? -~5--~36
DA 'Fi.--. AI'~Ai .yc:~.. ,-.,
(]F. il"lP{.. L: TED:
'/ -P. 5 -86
Ar, At. Y'.--;E ~
M [ N i MUM
REPORT I NG
.... · ,E,t.
O. l
,:,. !
O. i
<). i
By
LABORATORIES
,i J IGIIN. IIG CNIM IIMGI
IvIAINOFF'ICE 4100PIERCE ROAD BA~,F.~$FIF.,LO CA 9~301PIdONE :~27-4c)] !
PURGEABLE AROMATICS ANALYSIS
(SOIL)
i ~KERSFIELD CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION
-i 014 Union Avenue'
:~' BaKersfield, California 93305
qMPLE DESCRIPTION:
T..H. ~2 · 2' Unleadeo SW END
i0,000 Gallon Tank
'%ATE/TIME DATE/TIME SAMPLE
SANPL.E COLLECTED: RECEIVED @ LAB:
.7-17-86 ?-17-86
TEST METHODS: Purgeable Aromatics
i' ·
! REPORTING
~-' CONSTITUENT UNITS
ANALYSES
RESULTS
Benzene ug/g
Hexane ug/g
Toluene ug/g
Ethylbenzene. ug/g
Isopropylbenzene ug/g
p-Xylene ug/g
o-Xylene ug/g
m-Xylene ug/g
EPA 5020/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
TVH: None Detected MRL: 0.5 ug/g.
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
ho.ne detected
none detected
none detected
Date of'
REPORT: ?-25-66
LAB No.: 12502
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
9-25-86
MINIMUM
REPORTING
LEVEL
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0. i
0.I
0.1
,. .~ ..C#,~J~/C4~ A#A~ r$l$
LABORATORIES
J J IGLIN. IIG CHill I#GI
MAIN OFFICE 4,100 PIERCE ROAD 8, AKERSFI£LO CA c~3~0&PMONE ~27-Z~91. i.
PURGEABLE AROMATICS ANALYSIS
(SOIL)
BAKERSFIELD CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION
3014 Union Avenue
Bakersfield, California 93305
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION:
Date of
REPORT: 9-25-86
LAB No.: 12503
DATE-/TIME
SAMPLE COLLECTED:
?-17-86
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED 8 LAB:
7-17-86
TEST METHODS:
PurgeaOle Aromatics
CONSTITUENT
REPORTING
UNITS
Benzene ug/g
Hexane ug/g
Toluene ug/g
Ethyibenzene ug/g
Isopropylbenzene ug/g
p-Xylene ug/g
o-Xylene ug/g
m-Xylene ug/g
EPA 50~0/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
TVH: None Detected MRL: 0.5 ug/g.
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
7-25-86
ANALYSES
RESULTS
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
no~e detected
MINIMUM
REPORTING
LEVEL
O, 1
0.i
0.1
0.1
0.!
~-By
,..-'**. .... ' . PF[I~O~iU4~
LABORATORIES
MAIN OFFICE 4IOUPIERCE ROAD BAKERSFI£LD C& 93*10a PHONE
327-491'I
PURGEABLE
AROMATICS ANALYSIS
(SOIL)
"BAKERSFIELD CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION
i3014 Union Avenue
Bakersfield; Calif0~.ia 93305
SAMPLE-DESCRIPTION:
T.H. #3 · 2' Regular NE END
8,000 Gallon Tank
Date o~
.REPORT: ?-25-B6
LAB No.: 1250~
DATE/TIME DATE/TIME SAMPLE DATE ANALYSIS
SAMPLE COLLECTED: RECEIVED @ LAB: COMPLETED:
" '?-17-86 ?-i?-86 ?-25-~6
METHODS: Purgeable
CONSTITUENT
Aromatics
REPORTING
UNITS
'TE3T
Benzene ug/g
Hexane ug/g
Toluene ug/g
Ethylbenzene ug/g
Isaprapylbenzene ug/g
p-Xylene ug/g
o-Xylene ug/g
m-Xylene ug/g
EPA 5020/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
TVH: None Detected MRL: 0.5
ug / g.
ANALYSES
RESULTS
MINIMUM
REPORTING
LEVEL
none
none
no~e
none
none
none
nO~e
none
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.i
0.I
0.1
By
LABORATORIES
~ J IGIIN. IIG CMIII INGI
'IAKERSFIELD CONSTRUCTION
.014 Union Avenue
_-.Bakersfield, California 93305
,~AMPLE DES~]RIPT ION:
T.H. #3 @ ~'
pURGEABLE
INSPECTION
AROMATICS ANALYSIS
(SOIL)
LJAi'E/T !ME
SAMPLE COLLECTED:
7-17-86
TESF METHODS:
PurgeaOle
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVED @ LAB:
9-19-86
Aromat:cs
Date of
REPORT: 7-25-86
'LAB No.: ij505
DA'FE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
9-25-86
MINIMUM
REPORTING ANALYSES REPORTING
CONSTITUENT UNITS RESULTS LEVEL
Benzene .ug/g
Hexane ug/g
Toluene ug/g
Ethyibenzene ug/g
Isopropylbenzene ug/g
p-Xylene ug/g
o-Xylene ug/g
m-Xylene ug/g
EPA 5020/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
TVH: None Detected MRL: 0.5
ug/g.
15o~e
no~e
no~e
none
none
~one
~one.
rlone
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
~0,1
0,1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
-By
LABORATORIF:S
A4AINOFFIC£ 410L) PlERCE l~OiID 8AKERSFIF. LD CA 9:I301PHONE 327-49]!
.BAKERSFIELD CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION
3014 Union Avenue
'._..B~kersfield, California 93305
*SAMPLE DESCRIPTION:
PURGEABLE AROMATICS ANALYSIS
T.H. #4 ~.2' Regular SW END
8,000 Gallon Tank
(SOIL)
Date of
REPORT: 7-25'86
LAB No.: 12506
DATE/TIME ' DATE/TIME SAMPLE
',SAMPLE COLLECTED: RECEIVED @ LAB:
· .'.'.TEST METHODS: Purgeable Aromatics
CONSTITUENT
REPORTING
UNITS
ANALYSES
RESULTS
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
?-85-86
MINIMUM
REPORTING
LEVEL
Benzene ug/g
He×are ug/g
Toluene ug/g
Ethylbenzene ug/g
Isopropylbenzene ug/g
p-Xylene ug/g
o-Xylene ug/g
m-Xylene ug/g
EPA 5080/00~0
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
TVH: None Detected MRL: 0.5 ug/g.
none detected
none detected
none detected
none detected
none Oetected
none detected
none detected
no~e.detected
0.1
O.l
0.1
0.[
0ol
LABOR XTORIES
J I IGLIN. IIG ClaIM INGI
MAINOFIrlCE 4100 PlERCE ROAD I~AKERSFIE, LD CA 9~30~PHONE
327-49! !
PURGEABLE
AROMATICS ANALYSIS
(SOIL)
.OAKERSFIELD CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION
]014 Union Avenue
:-.utakersfield, California 93305
~ ' ,AMPLE DESCRIPTION:,
" 8,000 Gal Ion
.. ·ATE/TIME
SAMPLE COLLECTED:
9-19-86
'*.-.'E~T METHODS: Purgeab le
Regular SW END
Tank
DATE/TIME SAMPLE
RECEIVE'D 8 LAB:
?-19-86
Aromatics
r REPORTING
~ i' CONSTITUENT UNITS
Benzene ug/g
Hexane ug/g
Toluene ug/g
Ethylbenzene ug/g
Isopropylbenzene ug/g
p-Xylene ug/g
o-Xylene ug/g
m-Xylene ug/g
EPA 5020/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
TVH: None Detected MRL: 0.5
ug/g.
Date of
REPORT: 9-25-06
LAB No.: 12509
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
?-25-(]6
ANAL YSES
RESULTS
none
nof~e
none
none
none
none
n6ne
no ne
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
MINIMUM
REPORTING
LEVEL
0.I
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
O. 1
-y
LA, RIES
J l
MAIN OFFICE 4100PI£RCE ROAD 8Ali£RSFI£LD CA 9:~3OlPHON~. 327-4911
· :--' PURGEADLE AROMATICS ANALYSIS
...... (SOIL)
BAKERSFIELD CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION
3014 union Avenue
..._.....Bakersfield, California 93305
Date of
REPORT: ?-25-86
LAB No.: 12508
3AMPLE DESCRIPTION:
T.H. #5 @ 2' Super 5W END
5,000 Gallon Tank
)ATE/TIME DATE/TIME SAMPLE
~ANPLE COLLECTED: RECEIVED @ LAB:
.... 7'I7-86 7-17-86
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
:E-ST
METHODS: Purgeable Aromatics
REPORTING ANALYSES
CONSTITUENT UNITS RESdLTS
Benzene ug/g none
Hexane ug/g none
Toluene ug/g none
Ethylbenzene ug/g none
Isopropylbenzene ug/g none
p-Xylene ug/g none
o-Xylene ug/g none
m-Xylene ug/g noCe
EPA 5020/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
TVH: None Detected MRL: 0.5 ug/g.
detecteO
detected
detected
detected
.detected
detected
detected
detected
MINIMUM
REPORTING
LEVEL
O,t
O. i
0.i
0.1
0.1
0.i
0.1
0.1
.......... ~ T/IOL £U4~
LABORATORIES
J J EGLIN. liG CHIJ~ I#GI
MAINOFFICE 410UPtERCEROAD BAKERSFIELD CA 9330~PHONE 327-49ll
PURGEABLE
· i::-' BAKERSFIELD CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION
; .3014 Union Avenue
· -' B~kersfield, California 93305
~' S~MPLE DESCRIPTION:
T.H. #5 @ 6'
L_OATE/TIME DATE/TIME
*-*SAMPLE COLLECTED: RECEIVED ~
7-i7-86 7-17-86
TEST METHODS: Purgeable Aromatics
I REPORTING
'. CONSTITUENT UNITS
Beozene ug/g
Hexane ug/g
Toluene ug/g
Ethylbenzene ug/g
Isopropylbenzene ug/g
p-Xylene ug/g
o-Xylene ug/g
m-Xylene ug/g
EPA 5020/8020
TVH: By Gas Chromatography
TVH: None Detected MRL: 0.5
AROMATICS ANALYSIS
(SOIL)
SAMPLE
LAB:
ug/g.
Date of
RIZP,]~T: 7-25-86
LAB No.: 12509
DATE ANALYSIS
COMPLETED:
7-25-86
ANALYSES
RESULTS
MINIMUM·
REPORTING
LEVEL
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
detected
~etected
detected
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
By
STAN COMER
Chemist/Consultant
P.O. Box 80835
Bakersfield, CA 93380
Customer Name: Bakersfield Construction Inspection
Address: 3014 Union Avenue, Bakersfield,CA 93305
Date Sample Received: 7-25~86
Date Analysis Completed: 7-29-86
Date of Report: 7-30-86
Laboratory No.'5414 through 5425
Analysis Requested:
Method of Analysis:
RESULTS OF ANALYSIS:
BTX & TVH
Lead, Grease and Oil - EPA 625/6-74-003
EPA 5020/8020
EPA 625/6-74-003
Mobil Waste Oil and Gasoline Tanks and Product Lines
California and Oak Street
Test Hole #1, Waste Oil Tank, 2' below tank
60 mg/Kg Oil and Grease
14.0 mg/Kg Lead
Test Hole #1, Waste Oil Tan, 6' below tank
453 mg/Kg Oil and Grease
25.9 mg/Kg Lead
Test Hole #1, Product Line,
Test Hole #1, Product Line, 6'
Test Hole #2, Product Line, 2'
Benzene: 0.21 ppm
Benzene: 0.94 ppm
Toluene: 0.10 ppm
Benzene: 0.39 ppm ,~
Benzene: 0.19 ppm
Test Hole #2, Product Line, 6'
Test Hole'#3, Product Line,
Test Hole #3, Product Line,
Test Hole #4, Product Line,
Test Hole #4, Product Line,
Test Hole #5, Product'Line,
Test Hole #5, Product Line,
2' below'tank
Benzene: 0.70 ppm
6' below tank
Benzene: 0.71 ppm
2' below tank
Benzene:
Toluene:
Ethylbenzene:
Isopropylbenz:
m,p-Xylene:
o-Xylene:~
TVH:
3.0'ppm
2.4 ppm
1.3 ppm
1.0 ppm
3.3 ppm
1.8 ppm
2.7 ppm
6' below tank
Benzene:. 0.67 ppm
Toluene: 0.10 ppm
TVH: 0.35 ppm
2''below tank
Benzene: 0.16 ppm
TVH: 0.11 ppm
6' below tank
No organic (BTX or TVH) residue detected.
MRL: 0.1 ppm
TVH = Total Volatile Hydrocarbons
MRL = Minimum Reporting Level
Stan Comer
Laboratory No. P86-'0083 Date Reported: 8/19/86
TEST HOLE #1
WASTE OIL
Depth
Feet Log ~¥mbo] Soil Descrip,tion ....
.I
1
SM Silty Sand - medium to dark brownish-gray when dry. Sand fine to
2 very ,fine-grained. Micaceous.
3
4
SM Silty Sand - medium brownish gray. Sand fine-grained.
5
Boring Terminated
I
,=.v Lgbora~ory No. P86-0083
Date Reported: 8/19/86
TEST HOLE #2
GASOLINE TANK
Depth
-1 ~ * SP Sand - medium gray when dry. Medium to fine-grained with some coarse-
· · grained. Trace silt. Micaceous.
4 · · SP Sand - medium yellowish gray when dry. Medium to fine-grained
5 · · Predominately medium-grained. Trace silt. Micaceous.
Boring Terminated
'_..-' La'bora~ory No. P86-0083
Date Reported: 8/19/86
TEST HOLE #3
GASOLINE TANK
Depth
Feet ,!;og ;ymb?l Emil D~cri ~tinn
.... ,, , d SW Sand - light yellowish gray when dry. Well-graded fine to coarse-
2 · · ,, grained. Trace silt. Micaceous.
3
j 4 * ' '' SW Sand - medium yellowish gray.when dry. Well-graded fine to coarse-
'' 5 , , ,d grained. Trace silt. Micaceous.
Boriag Terminated
I o
I
!
No. P86-0083 DaLe Reported: 8/19/86
J, TEST HOLE #4
GASOLINE TANK
Depth
Feet T?g ;ymbg] , ,qnil,D~rri~inn
· ' :1 ·
· · ·¶ SW Sand -medium brownish gray when dry. Fine to coarse-grained.
'- Predominately medium-grained. Micaceous.
4
· em, SW' Sand - medium yellowish gray when dry. Well-graded. Fine ~o coarse-
5 e · e, grained. Predominately coarse and medium-grained. Micaceous.
Bo~i~g Terminated
I
L~5~'o'rf~'pry No. P86-0083 Date Reported: 8/19/86
TEST HOLE #5
GASOLINE TANK
~epth
Feet Lo~ ;ymbgl ~nil D~cri~tinn
'1 i SM Silty Sand - dark grayish brown when dry. Fine to medium-grained
~' ? sand.
4 ' ' SP Sand - light yellowish gray. Poorly-graded. Fine to medium-grained.
· ·
5 , ~ Micaceous.
· ·
Boring Term±anted
.
, ,aboratory No. P86-0083
TEST HOLE #1P
PRODUCT LINE
Date Reported:
8/~9/86
Depth
Silty Sand - medium grayish brown when dry. Sand well-graded, fine
to coarse-grained. Some well-rounded gravel.
'Silty Sand - dark gray when dry. Very silty fine-grained sand with
some ~edium-gra~ned sand.
Boring Terminated
L~bor~tory No. P86-0083 Date Reported: 8/19/86
"1 ' ' TEST IIOLE #2P
PRODUCT LiNE
Depth
Feet Lo8 ~¥mbol Soil Description
1
ML Sandy Silt - dark gray when dry. Silt with approximately 40% very
"2 ' fine-grained sand.
5 ~ , SM Silty Sand - dark brownish gray when dry. Very silty fine-grained
sand.
6
Boring Terminated
"'~. .Laboraaor¥ No. P~6-00~3
Date Reporte~: 8/19/86
TEST HOLE #3P
PRODUCT LINE
Depth
Feet Log Symbol Soi, 1 Description ,,
'i
! SM Silty Sand - dark gray when dry. Very silty fine-grained sand with
2 some coarse-grained. Trace coarse gravel.
'3
4
ML Sandy Silt - darg gray when dry. Silt with an abundance of fine
5 to very fine grained sand. Trace gravel.
6
Boring Terminated
1'
I
.Laboratory No. P86-00~3
Da~e Reported:
TEST HOLE #4P
PRODUCT LINE
Depth
F'eet ,,~ S~,.~bo] .....Soil Descri. ptien ' ,,, .
1 ! SM Silty Sand - dark gray when dry. Sand predominately fine to very
· i '' i~ fine-grained. Some medium and coarse-grained.
I 45 l~ ~!+ SM Silty sand, Sand trace-medium-grained.dark grayish brown when dry. Very silty fine-grained
I Bor±ng Terminated
No. P,BO-O0~3 D~,t.,. l{el,ort'ud:
TEST HOLE #5P
PRODUCT LINE
Depth
Feet Log.., ~ymbol Soil· D~scr/ption
1 I SM Silty Sand - dark grayish brown when dry. Very silty fine to coarse-
grained sand.
-..2 ~ f
4
;1; SM Silty Sand- dark gray when dry. Sand fine to irtedium-grained. Trace
Ii. coarse-grained sand.
Boring Terminated
I
i J
\
~'~.
I0,0oo G~g,,I,...,
T~%
Bakersfield Construction Inspection
3014 Union Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93305
(805) 324-1815
August 28, 1986
Mobile Oil Corporation
612 South Flower Street
los Angeles, CA 90017
Attention: Mr. Greg Calloway
Dear G{eg
As discussed with Mr. Steve Pao on this date I am forwarding a copy of the
soil contamination study for your review, that we performed for Steve on the
.Mobile service station on the corner of California Ave and Oak St. here in
Bakersfield.
Sincerely,
cc Steve Pao