DERR-2025-002804

. , ATTACHMENT 2
t--.ia:ne V l('c.e_d_ -1)\_Q__ ~
Title '?rel3 f~
Coli'.;)any/Individ~al Representing
~me ? \ E, fu,'SbLi-Lt~)
Adc:-ess 4-CD S /(Q_dw oo d__
C::"r1 l ===~I=-:--· __ .._,,_. '-'•\I
Date G-cl-59 ------......;;_.i. _____ _
i irne /(o (J c:---------------
G . \
to C~l ~~(.ev
I l'r"?( ' Report Received Sy ...j l w --------( \ • \'-c:\,'(\
Title --------------
Pho:, e N.Jmbe:r· -----------
H,V~! G~TD~ • (! f ci ffe:-ent • f ...... :n party :-epo:tirig spill)
/\':r.e ---------------T .... ,. l1.----------------,.. /I .. • . , -t. i..Oi.'Oa~y n::u.vioua_ ~epresen ing ·--------------------
~!"\,-.,::,!-.!:-I....:~· ' .. _., ·-.. _,, .. ._ _____________ _
s='!LL· !~-':ATIDN
Date s~~(!_J,~ 1k LQ't JRGbk::
Lo:~-:!c:.: N!a:-sst towr,/city_· ___ .._?. l ~ trel';s l+ L1~~
hi;h~ay ________________________ _
waterr:ay _________________________ _
Ti.:ie~·--------------
u -t ,.. r v-~e_ .. _, ,-.aiiut ac U!"; .. : • . .c .... cu.. ______________________ _
Addr:ss _________________________________ _
Cause of ~pill._. ________ _;_ ______ :----------
Am:unt Df Spi~l. _______ -:-
5y W'ilo:n? _________ _.;.. __ _ Adcre~s -------------
Ir.st:-u=tio.'1S, Recommenda::ons given by Bureau Pe=sonnel • --------
cf ¥:aste:
OTi-6 AG~l~IES NOT1F!8:, ______________________ _
I
--...._
UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK RELEASE/SPILL REPORT
DATE ASSIGNED LHD ----'~----
TIME SPENT --------
DATE/TIME RECEIVED _ _;4_--=-26=-----=8-=-8 ________ _ RECEIVED 8Y S. Manzano
COMPLAINANT/AFFILIATION Chris Falbo: Blymer Engineering, Environmental Specialist
COMPLAINANT ADDRESS/PHONE 1829 Clement Avenue, Alameda, California 94501
TYPE OF RELEASE (if known) ----'-'x __ PIPING ___ TANK ___ OVERFILL ___ SPILL
LOCATION OF RELEASE ----=5:....:c5----=-S o,;:..;ucc...;t'"'"'h'----'-'-R e.;_d;;..;.w.;..:;o...;;;.o-=-d ......;R..c..;o:....:ca=d_._; -'P'-'.'""'I-'-. -=-E ..;._. -'-N"""'a;...;;.t ....;...i o"""'n-'-'-w.;...,;i...:cd-=-e_T.;...,;r....::u;...:;.c.;.;.k -'-'i n""'""g.__ __ _
CONTACT PERSON RESPONSIBLE & PHONE Len Klimiuk, P.I.E. Shop Manager 328 -9601
Sylvia Lee (904)798 -2380 Jackosnville, Florida
APPROXIMATE RELEASE DATE(S) Noticed 4/25/88 Have had inventory discredencies
last few weeks.
SUBSTANCE RELEASED __ GASOLINE _X_DIESEL __ OTHER, SPECIFY( _______ )
AMOUNT RELEASED 9000 gal. METHOD OF DETERMINATION _ ___;_? ________ _
SPILL IMPACT:
FUMES IN HOME FUMES IN OTHER BUILDINGS __ SEWER/UTILITY LINES
__ EVACUATION __ GROUNDWATER __ SURFACE WATERS _X_SOILS
BIOTIC DAMAGE __ PERSONAL HEALTH
DESCRIBE IMPACT Not known extensively yet -Blymer Engineering is recommending
a site assessment/monitoring wells -want to test all tanks/pipes.
ACTIONS TAKEN BY PRP All product flow through suspected piping has been stopped.
In progress of repair/replacement.
OTHER AGENCIES NOTIFIED:S.L .C.LOCAL HEALTH DIST __ FIRE DEPT __ EPA __ OTHER
=======================--=====
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS I talked with Kent Min &:r , Salt Lake County Health. He
will take the lead on this and keep us updated and coordinate activities with
our Bureau.
Depth to groundwater 11 ft. as per 1979 soil survey.
4932U/mte
UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK RELEASE/SPILL REPORT
DATE ASSIGNED !.. I--!/]
. TIME SPENT
DATE/TIME RECEIVED i bJe /;; y RECEIVED B-Y -::::5-. _IYJ,_,,,,_.J_-b,_J_o> __
1 /
COMPLAINANT/ AF FI u A TI oN (!}(JS 8 LBD : BLv ~61 J66L1Jc-; ~> £,A/v1~GU1A L 5A;('//u sr
COMPLAINANT ADDRESS/PHONE / f2--7 CJ.£r?fP)1.J/£,A/t/£ )U/J/BJ,,I C..,?U/;(JA 'j'-/S'CJ /
TYPE OF RELEASE (if known) X PIPING ___ TANK ___ OVERFILL ___ SPILL
LOCATION OF l~ELEASE ~ 55'5 . R:6,ov/000 R_o~O __ ; 7>..£.£, N~/lcJJe,r.1;{)£ 1W~Jb
L£N f(.L1/Y11u/::_ <::i? ?16 'S11 a PIY),;,J;16eL 3 2....8' -'t t,O I
CONTACT PEl~SON RESPONSIBLE & PHONE S7Ll/1A '-c:£ (cto'-1) -=?-1~-Z,,38'o J,Kj..5,,.,.J.J1u...G , i:'L .
_ f/.f /J£ /IA() 1.,.J ,16'.)-:0-'L-V l>l5CJt..5~l>A.}c..t65
APPROXIMATE RELEASE DATE ( S) No1JCE/) ZS r? -r;,,5 ~ 7 -~8~
SUBSTANCE RELEASED __ GA SOLINE_){_DIESEL_-__ OTHER, SPECIFY( ________ )
AMOUNT RELEASED ~ / 000 r,:::;IJL , METHOD OF DETERMINATION
7
----------
SPILL IMPACT:
FUMES IN HOME FUMES IN OTHER BUILDINGS SEWER/UTILITY LINES
EVACUATION GROUNDWATER SURFACE WAT~ SOILS
BIOTIC DAMAGE PERSONAL HEALTH
DESCRIBE IMPACT No; {NoJ,J -§J([ds;,J&_ Y y,GJ -
,<t '> 1;-£ t1} s-:;-~::·s-s-/Yl£AJT. /4d,.; 1 J?; ,(_ de Wttu_.,.s -
J
3LY(1Jt!q_, LA6/~-Js, 1 s /?&"<$?471?(51.!o/Jc
u-J,½)1 J'a Te<SZ;1U<PJ,LS /2,p65" I
ACTIONS TAKEN BY PRP
::S ;o/7,*-;°0 • 1-1/ ?lloets--:'S" oE ~/>/J 1;r/R£PLACh/'/(~ ·
5.L· ( ~
OTHER AGENCIES NOTIFIED : c.,:,;,.rr-, LOCAL HEALTH DIST--~· FIRE DEPT EPA OTHER --
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS / T-1~0 u I ~-:-..J-r !?1 1,,J~I(_ f) s. C· 05,.JJ;y /.16//U/J
I
(lb w;U..,,pt,£ 1?/5 L£AO OV11//5 /--JO t:a5/J (JS {.,J/J✓.:;),IJ/&z} ,elO C4cf;>t./J;J,1Zi5:
A C-77 Y> r l't!5;i' (_,,./ ff If QJ,L, Bo~ A U ·
4932U/mte
----...
product was not encountered (zero measurement). The notation "NM" means that the well
was not evaluated for the presence of free product.
Free product recovery is currently not successful due to either a leak in the recovery tank
or backwash through the piping due to faulty check valves. Although the recovery tank
passed a precision test, its integrity is still questionable. David Taff, Groundwater
Technology, told me that when he disconnected the piping from the recovery well,
approximately 5 gallons of product was discharged. When the piping is re-connected to the
recovery tank, only 2 gallons is discharged. Backwash is evidenced by the persistent
thickness of free product in the wells. David said that system dismantling and
troubleshooting the problem is scheduled for the end of the month.
It is recommended that all wells with no free product be sampled for the analysis of TPH,
benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes, and naphthalene on a quarterly basis. The duration
of monitoring and actual number of wells to be monitored can be negotiated, but only after
a sufficient amount of data is generated to enable us to make informed decisions concerning
the extent and degree of contamination, offsite impacts, and appropriate corrective action.
Nevertheless, it is likely that quarterly monitoring will be quickly displaced by corrective
action once free product is removed.
I would argue with previous contentions that the extent of soil contamination is defined
since free product has had opportunity to continue spreading laterally and vertically
throughout the capillary fringe and lower vadose zone. It is therefore recommended that
the extent of soil contamination eventually be re-evaluated and remediated.
err\ust\robin.j\wp\4001342.INF
03/05/92, 4:42pm
't:okc:L
~~ /~t-'14 +~aj
8-+i )(~Od
RGb8-S8L(1 os)
.r~~ ~ )\r-1
f 5; \ l--S n-;
~--;y,ov-""t,I (:'-'."~VI•_',~ ....JJ
, t )<ih":J1;--) ?J -ti ~--t ~\ J~ )'o <TV' ~-~ o';~ °'l + ,.j-~ "-Xi) QO° V '[\ -'a )""6 lo , CJ 'Q" OC\j
-71::, ->.., s 1"" S' u + >u-}? + ")\,-'f O --0' + v'-'\,} 0 '
-~,_~~
,,..,. "';--..K)-+-, r O-}-s--t, ~ )-,,.} a'-' : +L I"'"'¥ C: '.-1" : "'""'., i' WI Y11?
"-'. D' ""' : ~-}-" o J c-' °"' ---. H S' r 'd • 51"~ + ~ __, "S"j " "\ t \""
JL ~ ~+·:r='. /+1-~" "0 ~"I\:~
'+f r;)_,_=1 --=l ~ ¼ ( '1b pa~ '1 : \rl } <" w, ~L" ~
~-.. ---~ "'\
·~ ;,,( -,
\
..
1. Public Participation--For each confirmed release in which the
Executive Secretary requires a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) the
public must be notified by a means designed to reach that segment of
the public who may be directly affected by the release and by the
corrective action. If there is sufficient public interest, the
owner/ operator must provide an information repository in a
community building which is easily accessible to community members
interested in reviewing the CAP.
1 ). The methods for public notification may include, but are not
limited to:
a). Public notice in local newspaper.
b ). Block advertisements.
c ). Public service announcements.
d). Publication in a state register.
e ). Letters to individual households.
f). Personal contact by field staff.
2). The following information must be included in the public
notice:
a). Name and address of the LUST/Release site.
b ). A brief summary of the release and the site conditions.
c ). The purpose of the corrective action.
d). The State DERR Project Manager.
e ). The location, dates and times where the Corrective
Action Plan can be reviewed by the public.
3). All public notification must be approved by DERR prior to
distribution.
4 ). Verification of public notification should be provided to the
DERR site Project Manager. Verification may, for example,
consist of copies of newspaper notices or by submission of
certified mail receipts.
(]
' ~ /1 f{/q 7-T ~ ~0 "' ...Jf E i /a.,., '
~ I\S-<::----~ --0 ~ 1'. ( ~ • • (,\.,S.1-,,'\ ';a !J,,,~ -t. 1t ~ '\" Lti u T~o-~ _J
-/4~~~ ~ ~-h~ '""'l
-~, cf w S ( 6 TeX tJ -t W ~
-.J{ Ff t,v,,o~"'T""'~, c.-ep<ct W ~ -f-be.lo-., +h.--(,.,,1>-vf ,-'l_
-.::Cf v0.5 Cw,,,,i ut I:,,. 0 b t ,,_', I\J .P £,,, (. -t. < .x ( ~·, \1(1_,, Ff' T h.' c. l.....s '5
--J b., '. \e,,r l i ....,;-tA tio '05 ) --t~ L~ •cf' r r,, j .s~,
~!i,RA<~
5,,: l 5,,,l.s } I s s 61(::t-J i Tfrt
v1sc
►LU,O, +CW\~
~<-~~ {--( r-""S _j'"-5 I /)\l:.XI--J f .fOlS° Tf't-1
. t if J 3. I 0 V' t-( t, \
+go(D
~ ',~J3,ho 1-e-1uo1
~: fe_t~ 6~"ry) ~/;(!£} &eof~J-.~v(D(jf
l Q ! u<cJ, I"" ~\c.., V\ __)
~ '. f:££ -
uf.Q .. t-e.. i f<l,Q W ~~s ; ..., f J~, w: u ~.,.L:+-,,____
v\?o-r~ tf 1"--~ (i> r Ff (~~, X ~{.Q• •.... j)J} ,C-o s~-:+ ~ ~ f,~
e {9 ~fh (s Le./ c., M DJ
30 IS-{a-2 ,f "'*vi-t IIV"'-""('fs:s k;~ V-"""'---
1,0 -4 f ~ f ~·---t ---J)~ 11c ~ y-e,_s.,:tf 5,
\JJ-J.\ \\ \I -•l "
~J~f ~5
:j~e/ ,._/onJ ~ft( i+/ (p,J:L-{5 ~0~~
1)WtLci_ l,,,J -d--\
\µ-\\ cJ',L~ Tb--+ J:ff="'-+; [~~ \~.
t\J /t f--0 ~wl +y wtf, 1,,. j ·, "-to So---<-.,.,.,e_Q S ) 1n-1 st ,JI sJ~ +_
f;xe J fA 1/\t,j 1:Jl.s oh~ --t:-o k_ ,e<-Aov..._~
5 f◊rNi ~ ,>R-E:J,vi,,.? -fo h,.,.,,<_ M+e_J a S o..._ bf oe:,L
. ,J--~roAcf ;,5 ifool;J t<-f-
/ ~ ~
I?-/'+[ ia.o :;; u/ca HD -~ f_l. E"
G (l 3_0 p I £ Tv-~ L~ ""j
D c --t . 1 , \ n --••
\) 'rL1-t,..,.--.... "''""-'"''"' ,--..... l""-. ev.{,X -
~ t--'\_c,s-\ Jl ~ -h, &-L. +l._ de.,.,.v p., \.; (.1 R Lt-SO-1 D 1
-'~() LL,S &/\,, ~~ \---\CL .. -
~"'u C ezl.J D -f (f: Lt so -l O \ -tc, 0 ,;.. .. +~ -.i-ro~
..... s, (Kol;" -c/e-+€,~:....__ tts + ~ ""'i'L~-~ ,,f dsrs
tr---S\(-t-e-, c~~ F t-JOV-5 +-d,:;,_-~ baM..... .. --
{:_/C Ll c;r~v-tl, r ,
. fo, H ~> UST ~t~:; atovRA:~ rrf), ~ ~ r:/sf.e-re_j)? .
• "· e
Oc-t 3 I
Bo,'.~s (N{..~
TD ~ J,.0-~)1
,
l,\JAfM (e...X..,ftoo-.·P
4.;, u,:p,\ j; ~.
( ,.;(\~ ,te.\ ..Jp,~
~>
CD Pit
'F ~ \e,; ~e_\J"l~l,\,)
. )) :e~ rec I,~ K )' -Lfaoo-0...Q lbs+(,,"'~+· n,co.,c: \ ~J
Lt V\L Lu.\:_ Y'llfi--V ~-v1 ((_ & \:Q _j
({,(j' .'f3 ,<.-\' ro {; ~ J' ~ j F IAJ -To,, L J
~~T
Q).,r;"''J
51
S?..
6~
84
~V\sf~rQ
~
JO -,r,S"
,0-11,f
Io -\I, S-
JO -1 \
\ /4-W + Lf-5,.: \ b b_,_:~ S .
, I go ,s-4 ,g,. I ' . 6 \T E.. \ X.. --rf'rl J:f.!i •.
1, ,o,3 ;:2.,,0 :t,o
I
11
/ <-O, I ; ~O. I L.@,\'\ 330, 38
1
00"0
1' l " 1.o 0
\ ~.o 1°/coo S"'lov(4t8',i)
~ ,--~ -\-, .f ,_, L.' k Ji,..; l \; "") 13 -_z . 4" cl:,.~ i"J c, ,_, • .s
6-~ , ,vC"-~ FP ,r-(!._c·v ✓, .,_,.,<.,....\Q k v-e..ceS..S""--:J. _
1 E x ( "':)-0
6 I ~o
6 ~ 47
c0,~\/1 cf-A s..s OC-
~ 1~ J? e-, :i.. ((:{;!}) ; FP +--,Ji e cu/b I s
t ~ \ :D ~ltftSlA-rtJ) I ~ . ~ 1 h IS
lJ.:fT \ ~-4 1 b~.s:
'FP = 3., gr -f-h~cl
-. ll
ti------•
l-\u..-,tw ES£ ; ~s+,,. \\,P r M._;)S Au") 1-_3 i--1-qJ,J'____ .. . .. . _
(?v-bku_ (_ -f <-t hi' '---kvvi,0 ~~s . ,l ~ .e..= /4_ M v--J ; IAI).-u---h. f)
tvo ✓f h-So"'"K +r-W'JJ o f F~ .f ,o""'-l ~.,, k Sov-...r-c~
~ w -J... > -3 , -7 , -.J-f h_o-J2. L.. Co II F ~
~TW ~ 9 1
_ 1)a.t~b,,.,Y<-
to I<. J;~ ;"" ~.vL--
g \(..
£l
\ 3 M v-J _s ·,"" sf A l t ~fl i 0 c~ C 1 00 "v . 7 \ '1 ll
See_ l~vc;-w,i'_s .,.,/ Ff -tli, ;V\ ,r(,Q
r ,, ( oV be5",,, ·,..., Nov ,I,'\ I~ 8 <l' . As O f ~~i I 'l 89 I ,'V:;, ).00 ,'j ,J
~ e ~,\ hAJ! b.12 e.,._,., ~c.ove.-'\('e» ,
V..IN\~e) 11ue. \l_.s w/ j'{'t'c..-fest t=f +l:c.l"'e~ s
v-0Jl0lc+ :s ... <;-f:ovQ~ ;V\ lil,lV)LA$-Y l1ST.s 11
ovis[+e_, 1-4~1)
0 f J +i"'o-c+ 0\/ S r
6a__s o \ ~ v, ~ U_S T )e_;:, l J;.s c ou&rc_cQ ., t\0v0 u..)0 -th:~ Jocv.~fe&
? '
o<e.~~cOo.+c DV\-.f +o 0d. ~+l _
-0 .b f (,\: 1--t (o v-=> ft, J eu -f .-'%1 ~ ~ { ( ~ lls
-.SA~F--~us ,_JI V\.'O Fi\ d,N\A,lf ~f Tfl-t} 5TeX)fbl +u>Afu.
-Me .q JI/'-"''--'{: ? ; "' ~ ~J
-Ff' _; :, S + on'° •, "'-~ L{ .S f_.1 o.,,.S •, +e... j ---t-h 'f o. N.. '""ij"' \ ~ -+e.Q
,I---+ht.' V' IO C.A -t; _, "'-.> -..l--·, .,,+ ... :r.;-,1<_7 ,,,....sf \,p_ Jo~ M,
c~~k.. (oA..so\~'llL L{S-/
11
<---
I ,4_ ._ --
~If" J~ fu ✓ L,q~ -f"' l~ . ._J}_,, T ~J+"
re\J 'i v.,...J f ·l 1 (.__ 1_x _{ Gl'-✓+i,, ( R ~ " : ._v-J {,' re_/
-t l'&N\ hrr le t .,.._) / I) JcMr--+' 60--v-tt-k ~.
-9< z ,./\ ~ {'i \ C, --
-µ (',\A e_ <o (e_) )(_,,c,--\--e-J'
-A :r ~ ~ +a J<c li t 0lAJ C( e,•. V\~
v;;/ Lt( D
---
M __ --.,'-7'-:....:::..-~~..;;,.--~~-,------
0F---_.l.::l~~::::!....:~:--,L.:=:::::~..L.£~~~~~~L
-PHONE ___ _._.__--'-_,_ __ ....,._ ____ _
MESSAGE --i5) 1:/E
--1--''=--,i..:::-~...:..-..!.:_:....:......,___;:;_;-=~ ........ ~~-:-=:...=:-=-=--=~-~=======-=~\
V f -.::.-'S:::--,
LITHO IN U .S.A.
TOPS • FORM 3002P
I\ /~'tl..-o
( o?--S
-;) ? t '8_ M_ .,)_~:b'---A-L-L~-----KL i:h; _s --..+-: W\ ~ ---------------------
~-----_4__ (_0-VV_~-i-SQ'v~-------~l t'2_, ----------------------------------~---------
... ~~ ~u ;;~_ ~""'s"'H~t ~~-:.l-{firy.~r~i~o=~~~ ~
. .. . . . . --.. . . -----;5Vlb belie.~ ff,,-,.,, -f:..,v\
---~~-------_ --d.Lf•~:i:t_J'f Y\;::t _ ~Q"' J-1 C~V"lsu-.._ _ _ ------_ e SE:_ f L~__s. ±tio_Q7·
t&•=>-strLe._._,,; ? i v\J ,~,L~= ~----_ _ --~---__________ ~
_± ___ c!T"'e~sf __ ~_~}.z'T-0~+'• :) g~'V)/ '.s_ ~, ~-__ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ ______ ____ _ _ _ _____ _
□F------.:!~;_;:::..i...-=a...J_...c:,-=i. _ ____.:::..::...,;:;;.,,....~--
PHONE ____ ___,~-___;.......,;;;~L....J,<d°:''-----''----
AREACOOE NuMeeR EXTENSION
MESSAGE ______________ _
SIGNEQ _________ (_?;4_G __
LITHO IN U.S.A.
TOPS ' FORM 3002P
MESSAGE _______________ _
(!_
SIGNE □---------~------­
LITH □ IN U.S.A.
TOPS ' FORM 3002P
_ _ _ _ ~e/ -€~ I . E.
.. .... --1000 0~-~i~J •
.. . NOV l.f/'l,f tR. .
~ ------~:-l \ "/~l/fit_
ff\ia R~(K ~t
-... •.• c~ suJ-c= Hb Ct~fK;.,'-'~
-------------------------------------~-------------------------
-----~'o.7-u/1.o_i q_o_:t __ 4~_3Q___f_t1__:.. ----------------------------------------------------------------------
U:-t:~ ·~ ~~~~~;~~:-Jir:fu~-~~,·~ -f'I~
~/;JI.ff -,.._ rt<-o~ "'"u-$. fR,,~ -~ ~ic.e,~., bR. -~~ _
-----------------
--__ _ I 111 ~J_ -t~ +-~lk.--c--., _€-\)~""·--__ _
Ch:cago
Los Arigc31es
Son Franc,s,~c
Honoluiu
Seottle
Ja,:,ksonv1lle
M1nneap1Jl1s
5,t LOUIS
Ph1:adelph1a
Holman/Shidler Corporate Capital
10199 Southside Boulevard. Suite 104
Jacksonville. Florida 32256-0757
904 363-1172 F>' Q04 363-12on
September 9, 1992
Mr. Kent P. Gray
Executive Secretary (UST)
Division of Environmental Response and Remediation
Department of Environmental Quality
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4840
RE: Release Site EFFQ, Fonner P.I.E. Trucking Terminal
55 South Redwood Road, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Facility Identification No. 4001342.
LTHE SHIDLER GROUP I
UTAH DEPARTMENT OF
ENViRON:'-lE:NTAL OUAUTY
I
-~ \ SEP 1 4 1!:l!iL
('l\l_ 01= \'=~N!?l'.:NMt:-lTAL
n::.;:,,-ur~i:>.:; Ar~D REMEDlA TiON
Phase II, Reporting and Remediation Schedule Requirements.
Dear Mr. Gray:
In reviewing your records, our consultant Groundwater found the D.E.R.R. is lacking the
following reports:
1. March 17, 1988 -ERT
Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation
2. November 19, 1987 -ERT
Soil Vapor Survey
3. October 3, 1988 -Blymyer
Subsurface Contamination Assessment Phase II
I have enclosed these reports so your records will be complete. Please let me know if you
have any further questions or concerns.
s· rely, ;·
A 1) -·
lJ__,.~yl,, 1/\~ \...._ .. (....{_, JC . , , I I
n Chitty )
President
Asset Management
Enclosure
JAC/mjc
cc: Jim Goetz, GTI (Denver, CO)
ERT
~ 1 1: '_, ,_ i 1,,: ,-' ' , ! : I '
DRAFT REPORT
SOIL VAPOR SURVEY
at the
P.I.E. TRUCK TERMINAL AND SERVICE FACILITY
55 South Redwood Road
Salt Lake city, Utah 84104
November 19, 1987
Prepared for
National Warehouse Investment Company
4 Embarcadero Center, Suite 3150
San Francisco, California 94111
by
ERT, Inc.
19782 MacArthur Boulevard, Suite 365
Irvine, California 92715
1.
2.
3 .
4.
5.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
SITE DESCRIPTION
SOIL VAPOR SAMPLING
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
APPENDIX 1 -SOIL VAPOR SURVEY FIELD CHROMATOGRAMS
Page
1
1
2
2
3
APPENDIX 2 -SOIL VAPOR SAMPLING LOCATIONS AND FIELD NOTES
1. INTRODUCTION
This report documents the results of a 1 imi ted soil gas
survey performed at the P. I.E. truck terminal and service
facility located at 55 South Redwood Road in Salt Lake city,
Utah. The survey was conducted on November 13, 1987 at the
request of National Warehouse Investment Company (NWIC). The
purpose of the survey was to assess and assign an
environmental risk factor associated with the site based on
an investigation of underground fuel storage tanks, fuel
inventory records and reconnaissance of the facility.
Section 2 of this report provides a brief description of the
P.I.E.-Salt Lake city facility and explains specific areas of
focus for the soil gas survey. Methodology used to conduct
the survey is described in Section 3, followed by results of
the site evaluation in Section 4. A brief discussion of the
results and potential environmental risks associated with the
site are presented in Section 5. Soil gas chromatograms are
provided in Appendix 1 and sampling locations and field notes
are included in Appendix 2.
2. SITE DESCRIPTION
The P.I.E. terminal is located at 55 South Redwood Road on
the west side of Salt Lake City. The site is just north of
the I-8 O and Redwood Road intersection. The facility is
located in an industrial district, but there are various
motels and fast-food outlets scattered through the area. The
terminal handles freight and there is a large maintenance
shop with four work bays.
There are a total of 14 underground storage tanks (USTs) on
the property. Seven tanks are used for diesel fuel, two
tanks for waste oil, one tank for leaded gasoline, one tank
for anti-freeze, and three tanks are abandoned and filled
with sand. Of the three abandoned tanks, it is not known
what each tank contained when they were in service. Six
tanks are steel (including the three abandoned tanks) and the
other tanks are constructed of fiberglass. All tanks
currently in use were installed in 1979 and 1980 except for
the waste oil storage tanks which were installed in 1959.
The abandoned tanks were de-commissioned in 1959.
According to employees at the terminal, the site is located
on top of an old municipal dump. At an area south of the
site near I-80, people still come to dig up old bottles.
1
3. SOIL VAPOR SAMPLING
A soil vapor survey was performed by collecting soil vapor
through a 1/4-inch outside diameter stainless steel probe
driven approximately three feet deep and analyzing the vapor
with a portable gas chromatograph equipped with a photo-
ionization detector (PID). The probe was purged and air
blanks were analyzed between sample points to ensure sample
accuracy and avoid cross-contamination. The data was
normalized by subtracting the results of the air blank
analysis from the sample analysis result. All :r:esul ts are
reported in millivolts, as this is the measurement of
response on the PID. This response is related to actual
vapor concentration (i.e., parts per million); however, it
cannot be directly converted to concentration because the
response on a PID varies with the specific characteristics of
differing chemical compounds.
4. RESULTS
Results of the soil gas survey are presented in the form of
chromatograms included as an appendix to this report.
Chromatograms from sample locations were compared to those
obtained from aspirating the headspace above a small quantity
of P.I.E. diesel fuel or gasoline in a glass jar.
Hydrocarbons detected in samples do not necessarily resemble
the chromatograms for pure product due to chemical, physical
and biological interactions of fuels in the soil environment.
Although this method of comparison does not provide
quantitative assessment of hydrocarbons in the soil it is
capable of determining relative levels of soil gas between
samples.
Soil gas samples were collected from 20 locations in 4
separate areas of the facility. Sample locations were
limited in certain areas due to the thickness of overlying
concrete (2 feet). Eight of the 20 sample locations
indicated the presence of hydrocarbons in the soil gas.
Areas of detection include the north diesel tank area and the
used oil tank area. No hydrocarbons were detected near the
east diesel tanks or the gasoline tank areas.
Tank inventory records indicated only minor discrepancies
( <10%) between metered and measured fuel volumes. Water
finding paste investigations were not documented, but the
service manager did mention approximately 1 inch of water was
detected in some of the tanks although he wouldn't say
exactly which tank or tanks.
2
Three abandoned underground fuel storage tanks are also
present beneath the eastern service building. Fuels were
pumped from the tanks which were later filled with sand after
removal from service. No data which reflects the integrity
of the tanks prior to abandonment was available. Soil gas
W~§ not measured near the abandoned tanks due to the presence
of concrete flooring over the entire service building.
5. DISCUSSION
Low levels of hydrocarbons were detected near the north
diesel tank area and the used oil storage tank ~rea. The
north diesel tank area was characterized by a deteriorated
and cracked cement cover. The used oil storage tanks were
located in the steam rack area presumably used to steam clean
the truck fleet. Both oil tanks were notably filled to near
capacity and were located adjacent to a sump that discharged
to the city sewer system. The oil tank area was
characterized by excess oil and grease stains from the steam
cleaning operation.
Discussion with plant employees indicated that the entire
P.I.E.-Salt Lake City site was once occupied by the city
landfill approximately 30 years ago.
Results of the soil gas survey and the relative age of the
underground storage tanks indicate that the potential for
environmental contamination may be associated with the
P. I.E. -Salt Lake City, Utah site. The actual extent of
hydrocarbon contaminants in the soil could not be determined
in the scope of this assessment but may warrant additional
investigations in the vicinity of the north tank area and the
used oil storage tanks. Based on this site assessment, ERT,
Inc. concludes that, due to the previously mentioned factors,
the site poses a moderate to high probability of significant
petroleum hydrocarbon contamination.
Recommendations
ERT's preliminary conclusions, as described above, cannot be
verified without undertaking an analytical testing program.
While the final decision to conduct additional investigative
activities will be dependent upon the client's respective
assessment of the business risks involved, ERT believes that
the performance of additional work activities, including the
implementation of an analytical testing program and
historical research into the precise location of the old
municipal dump, are warranted at this time. In addition,
removal of all underground storage tanks may be advisable.
3
In view of the above considerations, we are of the opinion
that the subject site presents a relatively high level of
probability in terms of the potential presence of significant
petroleum hydrocarbon contamination. This opinion is based
upon our professional judgement of the facts and other
pertinent information collected as part of this
investigation.
Study Limitations
This report, including the appendices attached thereto,
describes the results of ERT's s~il gas survey investigation
to identify the potential presence of a significant
contamination problem involving or affecting the subject
property. The conclusions and recommendations stated herein
represent the application of a variety of engineering and
technical disciplines to material facts and conditions
associated with the subject property. Many of these facts
and conditions are subject to change over time; accordingly,
the conclusions and recommendations must be viewed within
this context.
ERT hns performed this preliminary assessment in a
professional manner using that degree of skill and care
exercised for similar projects under similar conditions by
reputable and competent environmental 1 consultants. ERT shall
not be responsible for conditions or consequences arising
from relevant facts that were concealed, withheld or not
fully disclosed at the time the evaluation was performed.
4
APPENDIX 1
SOIL VAPOR SURVEY
FIELD CHROMATOGRAMS
... NOU 13 198? 12128
SOURCE FIELPI 25
SOUl<CE rowE~ i 51>
Sf\MFLE LEUEL
C~L LEVEL
EUENT '.l LEUEL
EUEr<T 4 LEUEL
EUENT :5 LEUEL
'i
0.0
0.0
'.35.0
0.0
'.l?.0
~-~::
'.35.0
0.0·.._
90.0
35.0
90.0
r ! I,
f
I
1
i
~
~
STOP a--'.300.0 1 -}
51'\MPLE RUN NOU 13 198? 14 :21
f\Nf\LYS!S • 20 SN Rl02? , l
TEMPERl'ITURE 18 CSP PIE SLC UT: {
Gf\IN 2 FLOW 20ML M!r< :· I
' I COllf'O\Jr,10 ~fl.fl£ nJH< "· T. l"'lkl,-'l.1'1'1'11
• I
)
I
i,.
6
1,
-b llhJ l fl\
?jd10.'. \ • ?
• 8 •r
I
I i I
STOP ii 300. 0 ,; -i
~f\MPLE RUN r<ou 13 198? I 4 -2?
flt-l~LYS[S • 21 Sf'I ~102;, I
TEMPER~Tlll'E 18 CSP FIE SLC UT
G~lf'I 2 FLOW 20f1L (1Jt-l
I
UNl<NOWt-1
UNK>lOWN
UNY.NOWN
u,w,,01Jr<
UHl<NOWN
UNKNOtJ:J
t1f"TH!"LE~E
t1tli<!'!Ol.!t-l
,, '
2
3
fj
l. ~, •..;•~
1. :'1-llS
21. <;, rr ~s
! 1 'i 8 ,,.,]~~
"11. ~ :rP. 1)
;n ;_,; l'I :
r·. •Fi!
I' : . I r·~,r. I
.,,,_-·,
• I
l
I
I
n 6
~ ?
• ,,8
,;rrw .1•c,.,•
t:;,-1nrL£ f,:'llN
{lf'l(1\ Y~. I~. u
!l:.Mt'Et-:flTUl-1:. l .. J
GAIN Z
l !t J~.: H 11 :i l
iJN~ tJPl-'I~
llll~:tJO! 'll
l~f..;~ 1..;p•.11J
!'H~-•1: t:p
i!IJI' 1!/:1 't:
f,[Jll1._lfl£
t,1(1~1 J'1 l'W) PJ i'd
~.,.. t,· , ,~ ;-,,
t Lf' f'J!:c: SLr UT
FLOW '...'01'1L t1 I f'I
, 'i I, II~') .11 r,)L!'.,
:-' J \, • J U'>
1 ,.~. 'J. l :11 . m•.JS
",] ,..,1·•.-:-.,..,1•;
:•,1. ,, .., ,s
Poor Qua/lly Original
* I
•.wr '! ;-rio.o
c;n11r1.£ 1i11r-,1
ftf'lf\Ll'ilS P 46 SN 1<107?
• , o ~~~~ERf\TURE 15 CSP PIE SLC UT
2 FLOW 20ML MIN
( Oll!'OUNll r,1nn1: l't::nt< R. T. n1•u::n,..rr,..
\JI-It !lllll[-l ,,1.ri 01. 1 us
:IN1<1-10LJ~ 7?. •; 17.0 us
U~t<tlCJWr,l ~ l~Lf-7e. ➔ us
--~~ tiWH,e -
' '
r 1 1 I/'
/ '
qor ij 100.0
Sl\f1PLE RUN t<OU 13 138? 12•36
A~AUSIS a 3 Sr< Rl02?
TEf1f'ER/lTURE 14 CSP PIE SLC UT
GAIN 2 FLOW 20ML MIN
OFFSET 102.0 ml!
CH~RT SPEED I cil/Min
SLOPE SENG. 5 mU/Sec
UINOOU u-20 Soc
MINIMUM l\1'£1\ 5 mUSGc
PLOTTER OELI\Y 10.0 S•c
I\NI\L YS IS T lr1E 300.0 Soc
CYCLE T lf1E
rDf1PDUl'D t'Af1£
srnr~ Q 'ln~. [l!
SAMPLE !<UN
f',lNAL YS IS a
TEMPERATURE 15
Gf\lN 2
0 n,o
rEA~ R. T. I\REMFFf1
I l
NOU 13 l:Jfl7 12112
SN Rl02?
CSP PIE SLC UT
FLOW 20ML 111N
·2;,.1 8,? rnVS
r
f'
h
;
i
J
I l
l
I
f
/ I:-
STrir 0 ~.11m.n
SAl1PLE RUN
f\NALYSIS a
TEl11'£RATURE
llf\lN
I' r
I Ii
5
15
2
NOLI 13 198? 12 :19
SN R!IJV
r.s~ r IE SLC UT
FLO~ 20ML 11 IN
I' , I
ST~1'T ________ .....
Sl\f1PLE RUN
fll'IALYSIS a
TEnrERflTURE
GP/N
t<OU l'.l 138? 12:56
6 SN RlA2?
15 CSP P /£ SLC UT
2 FLOlJ '.20r1L l111-l
PoorQua/Jty Original
a I
• 2
{~T[tr R :ll11LO
NOU 13 198? 13tl0 51\MPLE RUN
ANnLYSli U
TEMf'ERA TUR£
llf\lN
9 SN R!021
15 CSP PIE SLC UT
2 FLOW 20ML MIN
',Tf"\t-1
• 2
"rn, 'i 111M. c~ •
SAMPLE RUN
ANALYSIS a ?
TEMPERATURE 15
GAIN 2
NOU 13 198? 13> 2
SN Rl02?
CSP Pl£ SLC UT
FLOW 20ML 11 IN
1· -
I
j
j
STOP a '.300.0
SMPLE RUl'I
Flr,tf!L'1'SIS .a
TEr'IPERl'TURE
G/llr<
COMPOUND r,tf\ME
r<OU l'.l ,1387 l'.3I15
10 51'1 1<1an
15 CSP PIE SLC UT
2 FLOIJ 20ML f'Ir<
STARTF __________________ ...
• 1 5L-Ll
I 2
sror a
Sflf'PLE RUl'I
ANALYSIS a
TEMPER/HUR£
GAIN
COMPOUNO NAr-tE
LlNK!'/OWN
riE Tt-ll"LENE CL,
l'IOU 13 138? )'.3!21
II SN Rl02?
16 CSP PIE SLC UT
2 FLOW 20Ml MIN
PEAK R. T. ARC:A/PrM
2?.'.J 7?~.'3 mus
IW.I\ 0.0l~ l'ftl
···~! &
j
;; '~ I
;
·,._, ,.f I· ;
i
l
I
i
I
I.
! i.l
'l l
I
l
'
I l
.l
}
j
a I
c-;1t1f' q '1oc,. e
5AMl'LE RUN
Al'l,_L YS IS •
TEMPERATURE
Gf>Jl'I
ii
:, I'
l'IOU 13 138? I '.l ,2?
12 SN Rl02l
16 CSP PIE 5LC UT
2 ~LOU 2~f1L r'l!r ◄
I'
'.'.;Tt1F'T _____ ----· __________ _
\::--=~
• 2
• '.l
Sflf'PLE RUN
flt,IAL rsrs ::i
TEMPERATURE
GAll'I
l!t~t<.NU, ltJ
i 1~~ .. ·1:r: 11J
t1L [I II l LrJt t L.
l:tl ►:ts;('I..!!~
l'IOU J3 !38? JJ:3'.1
13 51'1 Rl~Z?
16 CSP PIE SLC UT
2 FLOW 20ML f1IN
:: ,'. I 'I 1,• I .,., 1 ,
·_,J_ I .'1'. ~1 u•I 1 ,
1 Jl I 11.•J:', If'[
''.11 ,,,,
Poor Quality Original
' I I '-'
', r11h I
srcr Ii ~(-10.e
SAMPLE RUN
Al'IALYSIS a
TEMPERATURE
G/lll'I
rurir·our-:11 pn11!:.
:·
I
I. ''
i
.1
r<OU 1'.l 1987 13 :39
14 SN Rl02?
16 CSP PIE SLC UT
2 FLOU 20ML 1111<
l'EAK I'. T. AREtVfPM
i I!
I ' ,I
•;rrw ~ inn. n
S.f!Mf"LE ,CUI""
Al'IALYSIS o
TEMPERATURE
GAIN
UtJKt..J(Jl-!N
111-Jt'.Nl 11JJ
!U.:t-.1'1!l11H
11l r111\ Ll,lt: I l .
11r-1t1.rJr:Jr,,i
JS
16
2
l'IDU l'.l 1~8? 13!15
SI< RiG2?
CSP PIE SLC UT
FLOW 20ML r111'1
2?."? 1.1 us
7 ::v.5 2:.1.2 rnl.lS
~ '.',"J 'i ?8. 1 rnUli
1 !'1 I\ ri. fi2~ f f'I!
'.1 1'1/_'1 710.2 l'lus
l
-j
STOP i 300.0
SN11'LE RI.Jl<
ONflLYSIS D 10
TEf1rEf!l'TURE 17
Gf\JN 2
C011PDUND t'f\ME
NOU !3 198? 13:5!
SN RJ027
CSP PIE SLC UT
Fl OW 20f1L MIN
u1 ___ in
STflRT ______________________________ ,.
I 2
c:;ror i J~o. ~
Sf\MrLE RUN
f\Nf\LYSJS a
fEMPERf\TURE
G/l!N
Llf~J<rJOUH
l!!~l<NOWt,I
NOU !3 !98? )3:59
17 SN f!!02?
10 CSP P!E SLC UT
2 FLOW 20f1L MIN
l '2J. J ~0.:J.1 rnu•;
2 1 □3. l 22.a ~.us
••:1· '.
'-" I '1 1
t
.,.
I.
~rn, Q '"•r·n. ['
se<1rLE RUN
ANflLYSIS D 18
TEf1PERf\TURE l?
Gf\lf'I 2
LJilt<IKJ!.Jr.J
L --
srlir 11 J111,.~
Sf\f1PL£ RUN
~NftLTSIS .a 1::1
TEMrERflTUf1£ l 8
Gfllr-l 2
NOU lJ !387 11: S
SN Rl~27
CSP FIE SLC UT
FLOW 20f1L f1 IN
!"DU IJ !987 I~" 15
SN fl 102?
csr r IE ~LC UT
FLOW 2rJl1L rlIN
l't(,K i ,1. fllLII 11,:
Poor Quality Original
r,rrr '1 2rw.n
s~11rLE RUN
ONALYSIS ii
fEMPER/\TIJRE
Gf\JN
snnPLE f!UN
"l'l~LYS!5 .a
TEJ1FEf!l'TUf!E
Gf\JN
t'DU 13 !987 14 :33
22 SN f!!027
l:J CSI' PIE SLC LIT
2 FLOIJ 20f1L MIN
t'OU !3 !987 14:38
23 SN R!027
18 CSP FIE SLC UT
2 FLOIJ 20ML 111N
··/
STf\RT ______________________________ _
'-------------------------------
STOP ij 200.0
Sf\1'1PLE RUl'I riov 13 198? Iq '""
f\l'lflLYS!S < 21 SI" Rl02;,
TEMl'ER/\IURE 13 CSI' I' IE SLC UT
GMI" 2 FLOW WML 1'1IN
corwour~o r-JRME PEfll< f\". T. nRn·vrt·n
STnRT ______________________________ _
STOP ~ 200.0
SAMPLE RUN
ANf\LYSIS •
TEl'1f'ERIHURE
GAIN
I
0
t<OU 13 1987 14 >53
25 SN RlQ'.2;>
18 CSI' f'IE SLC UT
'Z FLOW 20ML rl!N
L
t
,.
I: 'I
_ .. .,,,,,.·,
\ \ ! -c
~,
-I
}._, r
•\
r.ror· g ;,er~.l'
SAMPLE RUN NOV 13 198? J~: 2
SNt1LYSIS a 26 SN Rl02?
l[Ml'ERMURE 18 CSP PIE SL[ IJT
Gf\!N 2 FLOW 20ML MIN
ron rn11111 11r,1;1:
'I
I
= 1
s rpr ~ ;-rr. c-
I l(lp,'. F f
Sf\MPLE RUr< • riou I 3 198? I 5 : 14
f\f'/1'\LYSIS •
TEMP£RMURE
GMN
28 Sf'/ R!B2?
18 CSP PIE SLC UT
2 FLOIJ 20ML MIN
Poor Quality Original
-__ 'l-
c;roP o .-rn:1.0
S~MPLE RUl'I
At,l~LYSIS D
TEMrERIHURE
0f\lf'/
CDrll'DIJNl t!111IL
I· l
" /'
SHI/' 1) ?RrL n
Sf\1'1PLE RUf'/
f\l'lflLYS!5 a
TEMfERf\TURE
Gf\11'1
riou 13 198;> 15 ,22
23 SI" Rlg'Z)
10 C51' fl£ SLC UT
2 FLOW 20ML Mll'I
i
I
.I
NOV I 3 198;> 15 :2e
30 51" 1<102;,
18 CSP PIE SLC UT
2 FLOW '201'1L 1'111'1
I
--/
·-
STCP 8 W0.0
SAMPLE RUN
Al\l~L YS IS ti
TEMPERl'TURE
GMN
NOU 13 198? 15•32
31 SN Rl02?
18 CSP P JE SLC UT
2 FLOLJ WML MIN
STfl T --·-------------------·
STOP @ 7Cil. 0
5f>MPLE RUN NOU 13 198? 15 :38
ANALYSIS # 32 SN R!02?
TEMPERf\TURE 17 CSP PIE SLC UT
GAIN 2 FLOLJ WML MIN
' l
I
J
' I
....
SAMPLE RUN
ANALYSIS ~
TEMPERIITURE
GAIN
c:; Tf1f' SI ·~r,,1~. r.
33
18
2
t-lOU 1:-1 l'.J8J 15!<\J
SN' RJ02?
CSP P !£ SLC UT
FLOW 20ML MIN
SAMPLE RUN NOU 13 198? JS:17
ANALYsrs • '.31 SN k10v
TEMrERATURE 18 csr PIE SLC UT
GAIN 2 FLOW WML MIN
Poor Quality. Original
i.
I I
i;T,"lfi T
~lfl/ IJ ':"'f'r:.ri
SMPLE RUN
ANALYSIS # 3?
TEMPERATURE 18
GAIN 2
NOU 13 198? 16'11
SN R 1027
CSP PIE SLC UT
FLOIJ 20ML Ml N
l'l n"': t,.'. T. ARE(vPF'f1
• 3
',lf11' I) 'flll 11
t;(\/11'1.E t,,:UN
flr-J('ILlSI~~ n J:)
TEMl'fff•fll~l 17
GAIN 2
rrn .r·t~1 •tw t'f1l1L
l!t !l\~-•r·i !~l
lltl ►.IJC:!:tl
lJl~K.~J[Jl.'tJ
tlNt..N{llltJ
NllU l'.3 1987 16'16
s,~ tqi:n;,
CSf' f IE SLC UT
FLOW 2"ML MIN
f'Ef\t-: ~-T. ,w1:rvrrr.
'21. 2 ~75. 5 mU5
2 ·l l .2 11. 6 ,.vs
3 62.3 111.9 mUS
rr;·. 1 5. 3 ,nl.lS
:.
J
I --
1 ~
,-. .-
r;ror e -z00. 0
6Af"IPLE f'UN NOU 13 138? J6:23
flNflL TSIS • 10 SN RJ02?
TEMPERf\TURE 18 CSP PIE SLC UT
Gl'IN 2 FLOW 20ML MIN
•· COMPOUND NN1£ PERK R, T. RR£n,rPl1
•
STf•'c:T __ ;:::;;= ___ =r ____ --~--~-~-c~--l b
l
I ----------------·-----------
STOP a 200. 0
SflMPLE RU!<
R~flL TS 15 •
TEMPERflTURE
Gl'IN
'
11
18
2
rm~r □utio tlf\f1£ -
t
UNKt'OWN
l.!Nr.'.NOWtJ
UNKNOWN
J
i
1
!<DU 13 !38? 16 :2;1
Sr< RJD27
csr PIE SLC UT '
FLOW 20ML MIN "
P£~K F-. T. l"REfl ✓J-fr1
I 27. l l.0 us
2 40. 3 H. ~ rr,U<;
3 tll.l 85. 8 rr,US
i
l
I,
l.
l
I
• ' l
I
I
l
, __ ,... ' ....
1i 'I
i •c
• 1
t;ror ~ .:~u. n
SflMPLE RU!< r<nu I 3 1387 1n :32
nr<flLTS!S • 12" Sr< R!OV
TEMrERf\TUR£ 17 CSP PIE SLC UT
•; l (,~~ l _ _ _ .
l----~-~· l
• 3
c;1r.r q :itir.. e
SAMPLE RUN NnU 13 1987 ltl :1~
flNflLTSIS • 43 SN Rl027
TEnFERflTURE 17 CS~' P 1£ SLC UT
Gf,Jf'I '1 FLOW 2011L MIN
Uf'l ►ll(l:!/-,!
iJl:i--:t!Ul!N
llll>'.NCl:H
7_ ;1 • ! l I ·:,~
,1r_!.tl ·,•,:· 'T 10 i
! l_'i, ,I rr.1)'1
Poor Quality Original
I I
·, r,,i...· r __
';Tor ~ ... cn.0
Sfll'\PLE RU!< NOU 13 1987 11;:15
fll<flL lS!S • 14 Sf'I RIg27
TEMPERflTURE 18 CSP PIE SLC UT
2 FLOW 20ML M II<
'•T1,Fr
~:r.r.r-e ;irm.G •I
SAMPLE RUN NOU 13 1987 10 :58
flNflLTS!S • 15 SN Rl027
T£11P£RflTUR£ 15 CSP P 1£ SLC UT
Gfl!N 2 FLOW 21l11L MIN
.. ,.....,. .. ..;........ ......
, .. :,
i, ) I 1' I 1 ] I
J1 I
' l
I
' i
f
t
STOP f;---200 :o ___ -------------------
SI\MPLE RUN NOV I 3 I 98? I? : 3
I\NI\LYS IS •
TEMPERIITURE
Gl'!Nl
r □['fOUtlO Nl\f1£
i
1
46 SN Rl02?
15 CSP P !£ SLC UT
2' FLOW 20ML MIN
! ' l I ' -, ---,i ' -,----! ~ • ~-----~--! __ _! __ ~ ,' ~-lj__l~ _:__ _ _!
~T(l~~ ____ --··. ·----·-----____ _
\
t
'-----------------------------. -sror,.i:J 200.0
Sf\MP~E RUN
I\Nf\LYSIS •
T£MPERIITUR£
Gf\l N,{
4?
15
2
NOV 13 198? 17 • 8
SN RI02?
CSP PI£ SLC UT
FLOW 20ML t'IIN
r □tlPOUND NM;£ PEA,: R. T. f\R£1\/PPM
t
j
I
~
l
I'
f
I
t
:i I,
if
I,
! •'
I
-... -__ __J
L
',11•1 1
• '.l
r<OU l'.l 198? 1?121
I\NI\LYS!S • 51 SN RI02?
TEf1FERl'TURE 15 CSP FIE SLC UT
GRIN 2 FLOW 20f1L f11N
U~l1.'11(1: •,-,:
l!f!Kt:rn :ti
llrl~ t:liiJl-1
:·?. ::. , , ,.,-,\):...
:1;' 1 ir •Tl:'-_
'l Ht_ l I I~ ,..VI_,
HOU l'.l 198? 1?123
SOURCE F !ELD: 20
SOURCE POWER: 51
~fH1f'LE LEVEL i,_(l "\5.O
rnL LEVEi. ~-" Cl.~
EVENT 3 LEl•EL 3!,;.0 ~0.0
EUENT 4 LEVEL IJ.0 35.0
EVENT 5 LEVEL 3?.0 90. 0
',TlT q l!.f\
Sf\MrLE RUN NOV 13 198? I? :24
I\Nf'ILYS!S • 52 5~ R 102?
T£MF£RI\TURE 14 CSP F !£ SLC UT
Gfl!N 2 FLOW 20ML MIN
OfFSEl B~-e ,,.u
C:HflRT Sf'l:£11 r-il"Mln
SLOl"'t SENS. ,, ~ rnl>/S1•c
~mDOIJ .,_ ,, w •~<> r
M!Nlf1IIM /\REI\ ~ l"IVSP1·
PLOTTER DELM •\B.(i ~~I' C
nr-:AL(SIS Tlf11:: 2Afl.0 St?c.
CYCLE T It:£ " tl.n
fl 11·1 l I 't.'I~ 11(•11 ' I I·~ ••tf,1'111:
Poor Quality Original
--·
APPENDIX 2
SOIL VAPOR SAMPLING
LOCATIONS AND FIELD NOTES
µ..l u z
~
GATE
.11C=:J
ABANDONED FILLED TANKS
(FILLED WITH SAND)_,,7
1 DIESEL
TANKS
1 LJ14
Du
012
Sl(RVJCE
LANES ANTI-FREEZE
TANKS
D
9
3 4 5 6
D D D D
DIESEL TANKS
CAPACITY CONTENTS TYPE
1-12,000 GAL FILLED S'l EEL
2-12,000 GAL FILLED STEEL
3-12,000 GAL DIESEL FIBERGLASS
4-12,000 GAL DIESEL FlBERGLASS
5-12,000 GAL DIESEL FI BERl;LASS
6-12,000 GAL DIESEL FIBERGLASS
7-7, (J(J(J CAL Fl LLEIJ STl·YI.
8-10,000 GAL GASOLINE F lBERGLASS
9-10,000 GAL ANTI-FREEZE STEEL
10-8,000 GAL WASTE OIL STEEL
11-3,000 GAL USED OIL STEEL
12-12,ooc GAL DIESEL F lBERGLASS
13-12,000 GAL DIESEL FlBEl(GLASS
14-12,0UO GAL DIESEL flBERGLASS
---
010
SHOP
l>OCKS
NOT IO SCALE
ERT
A RESOURCE ENGINEERING COMPANY
PIETERMINAL, SLC UTAH
8
D
GAS TANK
DHAWN BY ,(</}/ I DATE: I PROJECT NO.:
CIIK'[) BY I REVISED I DWG NO.
w w w z z z
j j -<
,...l ,...l
,...l w w w -< u u u 3 H H H > > > pc: pc: pc:
w w w
{./) {./) {./)
DOOR DOOR DOOR
SERVICES LANES WITH PUMPS
ENCLOSED IN A METAL BUILDING
SCALE
0 20
l SIIOI'
• Sl.-14
CRASS
□ #l2 0 lOK CAL
OFFICE
0 #13 0 l2K CAI. • SL-lJ
□ #14 0 12K GAL ENTRANCE
,...l • Sl.-12
,...l -< 3
w
f-<
~ u z • SL-11 0 u
0
ANTI -FREEZE
TANK GRASS
#9 • SL-10
lOK GAL
0 SI ,-9 Sl.-8
r,:-;-i • •
Vl·'.NTS
CUNCl<lc'I 1,: l'All • SL-1
ASPHALT
#10 #ll
□ □
V
ll]ESEL 12K GAL • SL-2
SL-7 • ~ □ □ □ □
#3 #4 #5 #6 • SL-3
SL-6 •
• SL-5 • SL-4
ERT
A RESOURCE ENGINEERING COMPANY
PIETERMINAL SALT LAKE CITY
DF1 ... wr~BY· AnlJ 10 ... lE: IPROJECTNO·
CHK'D BY: r>rn l...:.F1_E_v...:.rs_E_D_: ------11 ••
SL.'17 •
1111 ~I o _ __.l
USED OIL TANK
SL.16 •
STEAM P.ACK
SL. 15 •
SL .18 • fl 8
GAS TANK[;]
/sL.19
DISTANCE Ncrr TO SCALE
TANK AT LEAST 200' FROM SHOP
I
f/10 l O I WASTE OIL TANK
llllillllllllllll~ DRA!/
SHOP
~
N
I
SCALE
SL.20 •
() ,o 40 FEET
ERT
A RESOURCE ENGINEERING COMPANY
PIE TERMINAL SALT LAKE CITY
DRAWN BY ~/J1 I DATE I PROJECT NO ..
1-----.,-,C.,~--------
CHK'C BY I REVIS[D I DWG NO
Utilities
Water Source (City? Well?) --"-t ..... 1'--·.,_,..,...)( _____________ _
If well, describe depth ---------------
Sanitary Sewer L City
septic tanks
other ( explain)
fl ow rate -------------
construction details ---------age ______________ _
use
Pretreatment system before discharge to sewer? o2 ~1) JA/6 ~
:/IJ1_ c5.JbJJ f. c:SZJ:AM.l?lGK,J}el}IA,/4<
Telephone
/ overhead
buried
Television cables? __,_,;JdC....,..:...~------------------
Electric L overhead
buried
Are pennits required? Explain --'-';/~)(l ..... /1_· ___________ _
I
Problems with any of the above? ,,. 0'
-----+-'-''--------------
-2 -
Underground storage Tank
Facility Assessment
Background
Facility Name J) I 1--: A 'alt[&: i.:.• 11Ji .. /A.'('.,.,. t~--c• ,-) I Address . > ') . .lo ,., t h. b -c!r:I 1,: , ,, u C,;1
u ... .,.""' (_1/ f,? 'IL. /)./J. ;/
~JC.uager -,-.,..--~-~fi~)/2-~A~l~_L_✓ __ ,,,,,.~-·~,~--'/'--/._P_/n~'-------------
( staple card to fonn) ••
Persons interviewed
Teler•h'"'l1e <a / -.::; '\ C' -<<' I_ U /
:t,-'L.&l,.,I. <.) ' ...... } ~ -~> ' {::1
Business Type
Service Station
Convenience store
_x_ Tenninal
other (explain) __________________ _
Number of people employed at facility ____________ _
Age of facility l</6!J r,Z 7 ½€"j
I •
Property owner-----------------------
Site plan available? yes __ no "(
Pennits an:i licenses and who issues them
I.ocal -----.lJ.----------------------
state -~'-----------------------
Federal -----------------------• Historical photographs yes __ no ..... x...___
Brief site history ____________________ _
-l -
I
I -
I
I
HNU
Access #
Underground Total Depth Fluid Reading
Utility Type 0eeth to Fluid Type {s} {g,m} o:lor Type
l
2
,$JHJJ p ,JI 3' Wrr-lo(r: SL!6lrl-I
${,I/J/,1::J ,,r I --I t};,'t-,,~ /<-.. SLr'J_td-
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
on the map, indicate location of access, and fluid flow direction.
If there are HNU readings in an underground utility, then go to the next
access up and down stream of the facility and take additional readings.
Waste DiseosaJ.
Have the following materials been prcxiuced or dispose:i of onsite?
Date last Records
Material Disp::,sal Methcd Volmnes Prcrluced Prcrluced Kept?
waste oils SoL D
solvents L1./j'.' ;./ ~
WJ 7
radiator fluids .J.JL/ 11 lt!.c ci IJ.,1,c ,~ &-'~~t
anti-freeze /t-'tl fl,/ L-
other A,,•cJ/'/~
batteries c-· -Jt ,( l\ /t' -· S7 'KS l
-3 -
j~OJ)JA
/-310 't
Underground Storage Tanks (fuel, waste oil, white gas, etc. )
Number of tanks (past and present) -~4 1/____ ( assign a number to
each tank)
Active Tanks // (provide tank number)
Aban:loned ~ s-,3 f).+1--&lrt::' '.'i."1~provide tank nmrroer) )/ ,1
Rerocwed Tanks (provide tank number)~
Tank#
(J) Q) ti)
Tank#
(.::J) (q)(5")(lJ
(9)
(f)
0J v 3) v ~) -
(_10)
(I ()
Tank#
3-4--5 -,{.
;;..-;3-19'
Date of
Installation
___,.. __ ___
Tank
Construction
,3 l< t .:-1 1,,-~-~-'
J .5-.; .,:,· ~· l
7.:.,(,[,,.(-.:_;{c~--" 1--
J
9 " (< i':::.t-l,..:i CJ,. ,:., ... ..,,1..,
J
.5/-ey-· {
.5-cec? i-
Total DeEth
I
15 I
Date of Abandornnent
Tank Tank
Protection Volume
Llittr.1[>
/-.'t .. ' i t_•Ol' j
~{._'Cl(I
,/h{:(''0
!,1 U't/
·3 t.'e> ,.> -,,
Distance from manhole
Access to filter caE
I
/1)0 V
-4 -
Date of Removal
Tank
Dimensions
Is filler cap
locked? {yLn}
/IY
Tank#
J.tf-~-1,.
Tank#
J-y-s--C
;z-0-1¥
/IJ
Tank#
I --
Dimensions of covering
concrete slab
Is slab cracked or show
indications of settling
5b1>1e Su~ F ,1 CE.. Cl<.A Ct:s
Water in Tank? (as measured by water sensitive paste)
I 11
Inventories Have inventories
Product History Available indicated losses?
bte5€_ L P~ > /1(()
' [) IP 5e L ,1e11 jt./o ,
tJ,4-5-f~ OfL Y-PS-:: ;Jo I
&J_ tJ fa,? OIL ~p-5 II/'(,)
?
J&5 yor ;Ju ; . ,,.,.)
Histo:cy of Spills, overfilling, Water in Prcx:luct, etc.
-5 -
i -
Taruc#
Tank #
Taruc#
:)--'f-S:-1-
) 2---/3-J 'f
?-
Tank#
/-J-?
Tank #
/-)-)
Leak Tests? (y/n)
--;,/4 /.J e -
Taruc Repair History
#(tJe.--
Paste Investigations?
y'e 5'
;; YP5
/ Yt°.i
When?
CyLn>
Reason for Abandonment/Removal
<if u I l. -f-/1/P tr/ I fc(' ,:.--> :) ,:,
Methcxi of Abandonment/Removal
jJ[,l~l 1f-lj) -; /,-Cf,;£
-6 -
Results?
Reports Available {YLn>
vv
V
;1AJ
D.::x:=l.lmentation
#<; 7 =-
I --
I
I
Tank# Observations During AbandornnentjRemoval
d .c_
Existing Monitoring Wells
Total
Well# Depth
fl/ I fV-L---
Depth to
Fluid
Depth to water
water
Well#
How protected from surface
drainage or vandalism
General Environment
surrourxli.ng land uses
residential
-A-irrlu.strial
cammercial
HNU
reading
Diameter/
Material
Indication of Materials
poured down well? (y/n)
history or prior uses of surrounding area, i.e. urrlev:eloped
larrl, landfill, rnarshlarrl, clean fill and dmrping
-7 -
rural
other (explain)
lJo nearby buildings have basements? (y/n) f/...p S ;
lJo nearby buildings have wells? (y /n) ' tic?
Have any carrplaints e:ver been filed? ----~M _____ cJ _______ _
Site Map
Include the following items on the site map
scale
north arrow
facility boundaries
streets and names
surface drainage directions and indication of amounts of
elevation change across site in feet
outline buildings or other structures and identify (i.e. ,
convenience store, car wash)
obtain local road map if possible
dispenser locations
tank access, lines, vents
outline of concrete pad over tanks
all surface metal plates and manholes and what they cover
orientations of buried utility lines
note above ground clearance of overhead lines
pavement types (asphalt, dirt, concrete) and locations
location of wells (monitoring and others)
septic system
win:i direction ---------
-ambient HNU readings ppm ---------
-take photographs
surrounding land uses
local topography
-8 -
local water bcxiies, flaw directions, and approxirna.te water
levels
ditches
conditions of vegetation
buildings and notes on wells and basements
other potential sources of hydrocarbons
-gas stations
-bus stations
-car rental
-convenience stores
-tenninals
-maintenance yards
-in::iustrial facilities
-dispensors or fill caps
-abandoned lots and buildings
Int~iew suggestions
develop a schedule which is convenient for facility.
keep the interview serious. But remember it is not an
interrcgation.
talk to facility manager an::i ask to talk to the rrost
experienced employee for site history.
avoid talking to neighbors.
infonnation, not to give it.
be polite.
You are there to collect
ask r,ennission to perform the survey.
Recommended Equipment List
transparent bailer
water fi.rrling paste
200 foot tape
blue chalk pov.rjer
-9 -
s..,t{^-f
ne-BEt1'1
I AT6
90'
-:6U t rr ?t ?L 31 2, €. ea
izc<
,o Il
rl
1
t-_
o
U
p
r19
o
cto
o
'o
u.
t_
Il&"s
l!
I
l!
It,
I-,
rr
!1.^'
lr
I_
I-
o17
r-.:1: ht
O ?E, l'ihri9RiNG Y{FLL
+- €RI l'|0NlfliRlllc WELL
FI TANKllll
t ADDIf lOi,AL t10il[f0RlNG './E[i
P.I.E
BLYMYER & SONS. IN c.
5^LT LAK f
TRUCT TER H
SITC PLAN
I
rB
rt3
,llf
o3ilIilt
LJ IJ
t8
.16
I
I
I
I
IL
s
=
oa?14
tt
06
j
a
U
Fl rr
-+
tt
lrfr
].,)T
I rt lt
IJ
:t.Yte,
tLOl.l
a H02
,LOG.
rr l!
---g--
I rl I
-:: 6613
t-
Hr
FIGURE 4
E,5
90
l ;I_ ' ~
I -_
1 :
r~
-.,
I
j -
J
] -
l
I_ __
l_
j
I
.: 4 • • ::: 7 -8 8 L-J E D 1 4 : 7 NATL ·--.----------
FtMCt
-SB-4 • l1 c:::::J □ 10
WAST! OIL t»:rs
~liHDCfll:D rttu1, t~s
( llLUD V1T11 S.UD) SHOP
l
DI£S£t.
IAl'J:S
c::J lit
C]u
Ou
• SB-2
SUVIC! ?
X ontct LAJfES Ell
I -
' , .. _' ' -I--□.o~o o -
DttstPt.ANIJ
CAPActn CONttKTS TUE
1·12 1000 CAL 11Ll.!D Stl!I.
2·U,OOO CAL flLt!"l(_ SI££L
J-U,000 CAL DUSEL ,uucuss
•-U,000 CAL DltSl!'.t, fll!,.CUSS
S•U.000 CAL Dl[StL FIIUCUSS
l•U,000 C>.L DltSEL FllUCUSS
7• 1 1 000 CAL '11.1...£D STtlL
1•10,000 CAL CASOtlNt natJI.CU.SS
,-10,000 C>.L A1ftl-fJl[EU STUL
10· 1,000 CAL \iASU 011., STE!L
11• .S,000 CAL USED OIL StrEL
12·11,000 CAL DlESlL rtBEIICUSS
l3·12,000 CAL DIESEL rtaucuss
11t•l2,000 CAL tll:S!:L rl&ERCUSS
1.....
DOcU
* !
N
I
NOI IO SCAL&
ERT
A AISOUACI INCUNHIIING COt.lPANY
SITE Pl.AN
P. I.E. TERMINAL
SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
48SS-0C!_.-_:
-4-;;.::7-88 WED
~ 'I LJCKijC WELt CAP 1 .. I-ti r c.!:!:I TL
a" ....
2•
21.
TOTAL DEPTH
l-10• . I
WFH·=, INV P. 1 0
WATERTic~-UTILltY aox
CROCNO SURFACE
4INCH {IO)
.SCHEDULE 40 PVC WELL CASINC
CONCRETE
BENTON ITE SEAL
TOP OF SAND PAC[
TOP or SCREEN
0.02 INCH SLOT
SLOttED WELL SCREEN
13 SAND PACJ:
ERT
A RESOURCE ENQINEtAIMO COIOANY
GENERALIZED MONITORING
WELL CONSTRUCTION
- nt !..
9L99 s
?t^ ot
a1 \:
f.p
,tl/ao
l
Jl .tf
arE
0
o+t,
\xrr\)
r-'l
+
C1g-
rru
,-rlt.! 1;
oor {
ll ll I ll
\..t <S'1 /Q lr
I ,vo+ 'A'r!!-')
'qnc
a0Nq
\ : "t sr"J ic ts
v SHnelJ
NYld tJl 9
rHl).J1L ))
, )rvl -tlYE
'3Nl'sNos I u3AllaA'lI
:.1'd
n
rHor. 1,.,,1
'1''l3M tl{lulllNoti ll3 -{-
'l'1lM 9Nl)t-il'i3"r ,3: a
-4t'i:'- t"l
-4tid\l--" sle
-?\^ q\,1o6vOlt
^.
L
l*
t-
I
1Zs
L-o oor\€,.GtHaJ-
6lp*,1t'H
-)\^0\,,1t -?raara
h,t.
'-Al O Lr
i"r"il'?J
ttE
n+\j?ttrr,'c 1'{ot
L
IL
t-
I
I
!
!
:-
(t -t '\\-'c9 rilrr-b f rr
' (8-\s\'zr-1)
SfJz/lr' 1'5-'.,'1r,v] I dJ +'r2
1,1?/', lNllcllpglJ 'iviotJlOOY r
r -5'c\ 4+ :r'o .--^leor
1 '--- "2ruo5 $O
llrI tt glr
qrl*o; l:"1
-) qoL4
Ztc
t) +r dI\Y<
(arvluog
1
t,15
1'ol|r
\rn.t+\ro)
\15
-sl'l
\-'\^?+\ of,
\
"os4'q
n
o
€
'a;
oo
-l
LI \rry'
I
I-,
I
T
t
l
I
t
t
t
>rcC
o0Sr) (-)trd-L
vMv+ua) \:6S
?uo\^
c+
,5\ t*'+"
Jno
q'1t "l-we+v o)'a'
\ ',r t t5d-) }?
l' +r'1
q
o6
sv@
":\l:s f.l
1\l
0z
/JJ.^+t
.5 a=e} fl
4a
-t/o
aual
o2J ct-ooh
J..."aJ ; a'}'ilul1
Q,d
o
Ear^tt"' f-I / "+S
I
L9 , -'ld /J
v *r/..5
,o
t'( t -r,v^l"o)
I
I
:zS
,oLYO
a'/_8Zo
J,*{}u
I
'
r[-
/+,\--j -ll': = €r'iY lt-7'
It,l,
i '''' 'j ^ ,f :'5c; -)'
':.-q cy farrl]
/,nnl+
f\l\?
x"r.l,l g
(j
-
3
d^r',ry r". ltJJ -*
d,nrl-* tl,-S
ct
ao
o
o
r=
N
LJ
o
o
6l
il ilfiil
G
t
r:il
ilIt
e
G
I I rt
ilCIfrL,
tr nEB
ac
u
Et;
tilr
.T
':
:
i
'l
I
'1
.i
i.')
I
il
C
C
E
Eilutr
C
u il
C
tr
t
?Esp Le s?n8tt
C
ilil
oc
Ort
nn [l
e€
0tr oo
n o tr
tr
o
o
o
il 0 $il r
o
n
frugco
o
r
C
o
r-l
,. Yk
\.\ \ rt t | '
trEB
c]
o E
ti
*
Ii
b'
F
s
EI
E
$
g
t
{tI
h
(
$
n
I
s
I
i
cgt
f
Et
IIi
x
6
{(
H
i't'. r'';:---r
I
E{
u*t
?
'f
E!
g
$
IIf
I
F
n
Et:I
E
fif
A
E
F
r
t
I
x
I
!
I
El
g
r
rc^Lrt. . 62Ar
U}l^frN L. W .
ep_:s._t ilftelES
'"*p!E - NA NONWIDE
SALT IAKE CITV" UT
APPqOVED AREA PIAI*
687SJOB
NO e-16tiro
1
i
l
I
I
l
i
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
r
It-
''1
I
-1
I
I
I
l
I
l
0'
3cutt-t .
o'
PL
'TREE-
? 3ct<
I
ll I
a
6l
I
7r,
l''
at
il:
I'r
o
o
(}
aoto
u Ittt Iilt
LJ tJ
*5 i:i hD
O 3Er l'*iii!RING WELL
-r- iRr iloNrrl:RrH6 wtLL
Fr rA.Nl(tl
tl
I ADDIftof\JAL tloilncRtNG',JELL
P.I.E
ELYMYER & SONS. IN c
5elt LAx E
CK T ER, F{
Srft PLAN
=-- (a 66ls
ttt
atl<t-
I
I
IL_Frilr rt tt
ll
oa?14T
l-'lrr
U
O'
ar
TJ
oa
rr tl
+
qno?
) rg(t,
ct.tt?-E
'
LOG
g-
a!ta
i?
90
l'.E'
FIGURE 4
HT
steel measuring tape
flash light
mirror
paper towels
gloves
:bourrl note book
screv.tiriver
crcMbar
Co--VV\Vr-°'-/ f, IV"'
~~i 'cf({ow ~. (flh.o-n.e. book
-10 -
~
"-'t'
FINAL PRIORITY~ 17
DESIGNATION ~ 0
\~
Date -~(11
LUST Site IDA F FQ
Facility ID L\:Oo 134-:t...
Proj. Manager /<plz,'-A Jt/V\k-.~ S
Level Sensitivity ;r:.. ---
LUST SITE/PST FUND PRIORITIZATION CHECKLIST
The following LUST priority categories contain the elements used by LUST Project Managers that are critical
for evaluating LUST sites and determining a specific level of priority for the site. The priority categories and
prioritization elements presented herein are intended for use in conjunction with the LUST Prioritization
Module that is currently being developed by UST staff. For any particular LUST site, the Module will yield
a relative output number designating a priority category. The LUST scientist will then apply the criteria listed
below to determine the necessary action.
Regardless of the level of environmental sensitivity of a site, the Project Manager must determine on a case-by-
case basis if any combination of the criteria listed below constitutes a specific priority for LUST site review
and action.
A. Highest Priority
1. _XExtent and degree of contamination is not defined.
2 . ...2(._Free product on groundwater.
3. X Dissolved aqueous plume is not contained and has migrated offsite.
4. __ Drinking water sources are impacted and alternative drinking water must be supplied.
5 . __ Impact to wells has occurred or is imminent.
6._,¼__Contaminated soils remain in place.'? .,.. .. +.s ... .-e..
7 . __ Surface water has been impacted and has the potential for contacting humans or otherwise druiiig
the biota.
8. __ Wildlife is imperiled or impacted.
9. __ Vapors are present in residences or places of business or both.
10. RP is not known.
11. __ RP is known but unwilling or unable to cooperate with investigation and cleanup.
12. __ PST Fund information is submitted and the extent and degree of contamination is defined.*
13. __ Release detection (interstital monitoring and inventory control) is operational.**
14. Product characterization is submitted.**
1
n
15.~0ther 01: usT.s
0
ll.,,.,. ~s-e \t\o-t LA.f<O..~~-~ I. () I _....u ......... u-,---r fJ
-(~ ~ .. ...,\ell -'\,V~OV'; + \ \ ► ( ~\ -t'_s pf ~ 'tro-J<__ LtJts.
L-(?s T ~J \AU-r ~ylJ f;'4 ttf t.
-,-=~·---------------------
~
.. _______ _
N·ET
• 495/017 LOG NO 3886 -3 -August 23, 1988
ANALYTE: PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS
Extractable,
as Diesel Fuel
-REPORTING LIMIT: 10 (mg/Kg)
6 ' ~
OV-\ "i_j
Descriptor Results Units Lab No.
1 -13522 W-1 2.5-4' 08-02-88 16 mg/Kg
-13523 W-1 7.5-9' 08-02-88 3,900 mg/Kg
-13524 W-1 15-16.5' 09-02-88 11,000 mg/Kg
-13525 W-1 20-21. 5' uS-02-68 NO mg/Kg
-13526 W-2 2.5-4' .08-02-88 ND mg/Kg
2 -13527 W-2 7.5-9' 08-02-88 114000 mg/Kg
-13528 W-2 15-16.5' 08-02-88 56 mg/Kg
-13529 W-2 20-21.5' 08-02-88 ND mg/Kg
-13530 W-3 3-4.5" 08-03-88 ND mg/Kg
~
3 -13531 W-3 9-10.5' 08-03-88 200 mg/Kg
-13532 W-3 12.5-14' 08-03-88 ND mg/Kg ,,c~, I.I_~ t.-0-"" 5' oa~oJ-aa ND mg/Kg -,.J,J,J,J " ,J ,,.
-13534 W-4 3-4.5' 08-03-88 NO mg/Kg
l 4 -13535 W-4 7.5-9' 08-03-88 4,700 mg/Kg
-13536 W-4 12.5-14' 08-03-88 NO mg/Kg
l -13537 W-4 20-21.5' 08-03-88 NO mg/Kg
-13538 W-5 2.5-4' 08-02-88 ND mg/Kg
'l s---13539 W-5 7.5-9' 08-02-88 3,000 mg/Kg
-13540 W-5 15-16.5' 08-02-88 NO mg/Kg
-13541 W-5 20-21. 5' 08-02-88 NO mg/Kg
-13542 W-6 2.5-4' 08-01-88 NO mg/Kg
l ~ -13543 W-6 7.5-9' 08-01-88 2,200 mg/Kg
-13544 W-6 15-16.5' 08-01-88 ND mg/Kg
1 -13545 W-6 20-21.5' 08-01-88 ND mg/Kg
-\3546 W-7 2.5-4' 08-01-88 NO mg/Kg
7 -13547 W-7 7.5-9' 08-01-88 3,100 mg/Kg J -13548 W-7 15-16.5' 08-01-88 ND mg/Kg
8 -13549 W-8 2.5-4' 08-01-88 ND mg/Kg
-13550 W-8 15-16.5' 08-01-88 ND mg/Kg
l
aThis sample contained high-boiling hydrocarbons in addition to the
1 medium-to-high boiling hydrocarbons.
l
THE COVER LETTER AND KEY TO ABBREVIATIONS ARE AN INTEGRAL PART OF THIS REPORT
]
-----._t....__
I
' _J
J
J
7
_j
~
I
J
WELL
MW-1
MW-2
MW-3
MW-4
TOP OF
CASI~G
100.00
l 00. 18
100.24
99.65
ALL MEASUREMENTS IN FEET
DEPTH
TO
WATER
9.06
9.22
9.06
8.05
GROU:-lDWATER
ELEVA TIO~
90.94
90.96
91. 18
91. 60
C
\.^I t P-.0*. f ESf Y+t*s )ocqt[a"-', S v \h"a \^+.[ a €-.-IZdeo^si D'i€.*o)Fflt L
A\)-\
5"h^fn,I
z
3
tr
5
bI
a
I
\(
I rer
ro-47 (v zil \o\c ,!,os
3-? .,(
ttqs"1 \-7 Iz?
Ji', n S-!2
qgt'J ti \
%',mry
r(
Soao -,ru!
B7oL-r - i.\t\
w. c.
w,C.
1g,ooo-o,,1 ft^+,V*z"
rl-- 3
l2-t
ls ^-s
lq -. l^
v,/
tog
ILV
3^ 5
A(,*I
A-. r(( ot;9 ,'^ ((\nt c z-
,.1'v0;-6 L^
r(
l(c€- i{\l
{o
It
\1-
t3
5K ,1^ t It :- l0 \\ r'l
$-tr lzrs-"lLs
'1- t- i\ '\
/\x-/i toL
't -rt 3k
l(
( (ro5E) -) i s, ft.rtCk'5ourH TeM?LC 5rR -r
E:ri
A^',l?-o +..12/
qs8 Dr
I t t ?tlab)
Qo,{t
5rrYiet
?rqb.
,?p,r-"u
L
bl
I
I
i
2 ia7
)Lt(t
i
ot
<!
or
dt
t4
(1
il
LEGENO
o BEI l{0NlfORlNG WtLL
+- ERT M0Nlr0Rltlc WELL
- rANx
tl
G's" ee +1,,'.[^.r l/rrf ,./e
atu o-fcr'-
no Ff
tc\.-ot ooax
a'
5
ql
ql
ot
)iosl
dt
:
i
I
V
ot
sA ee\
4'8'!r q 1,6,,
lllfl.ar ru
lr I lrll .ll.lrJ r: 13L!rs q T;T,,
lr (
, rr/r-r ui I
f IE d IN
P E
t
I l{3, lltc.
LAK '
SAtT
TR
5rrt p!AN
661t
I
i
L
.l
Norman H Bangerter
Governor
Kenneth L. Alkema
Executive Director
KentP. Gray
Director
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
State of Utah
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE AND REMEDIATION
1950 West North Temple
Salt Lake City, Utah
Reply to State of Utah
D1v1s1on of Environmental Response and Remediation
Department of Environmental Quality (801 ) 536-4 100
[phone] Fax Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-4840
MEMORANDUM
Bryan Whitaker, Manager
Underground Storage Tank Branch
Bryon Elwell, Manager
Leaking Underground Storage Tank Section
Robin D. Jenkins, Scientist ~
Leaking Underground Storage Tank Section
March 6, 1992
Former P.I.E. Freight Terminal, 55 South Redwood Road, SLC
Release ID EFFQ, Facility ID #4001342
Recommendation to return regulatory authority to
DERR/LUST
I strongly recommend that the DERR resume as the lead agency in the case file for the
above-referenced facility, rather than Salt Lake City /County Health Department acting as
the lead. Free product continues to persist, and information required over one year ago has
not been submitted, nor have those requirements been enforced. Some of those
requirements include quarterly monitoring of the groundwater monitor wells for evaluation
of the dissolved portion of the plume, and determination of the full extent and degree of
contamination.
cr1\us1\rollin.j\wp\4001342 INF
03/06/92. 3:57pm
Printed on recycled paper
Norman H. Bangerter
Governor
Kenneth L. Alkema
Executive Director
Kent P. Gray
Director
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
--
State of Utah
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DMSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE AND REMEDIATION
1950 West North Temple
Salt Lake City, Utah
Reply to State of Utah
D1v1s1on of Environmental Response and Remediation
Department of Environmental Quality [phone]
(801} 536-4099 Fax Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-4840
MEMORANDUM
Garth Miner
Salt Lake City /County Health Department
Bryan Whitaker, Manager
Underground Storage Tank Branch
Bryon Elwell, Manager
Leaking Underground Storage Tank Section
Robin D. Jenkins, Scientist @~
Leaking Underground Storage Tank Section
March 6, 1992
Former P.I.E. Freight Terminal, 55 South Redwood Road, SLC
Required Action for Release ID EFFQ, Facility ID #4001342
five 20-foot deep, 12-inch diameter recovery wells were emplaced in February 1991 at the
above-referenced facility. The recovery wells are equipped with passive free product
recovery pumps and associated ancillary piping. The recovered product is piped to a 3000-
gallon UST that once stored waste oil.
Greater than 1000 gallons have reportedly been recovered to date.
Product thicknesses (diesel) in approximately 16 of the 26 groundwater monitor wells have
ranged from approximately 0.01 feet to 7.05 feet in measurements made between December
1990 and December 1991. Product thicknesses have fluctuated in some of the wells, but
generally have not significantly decreased since December 1990.
In two telephone conversations with David Taff of Groundwater Technology, on March 5,
1992 and March 6, 1992, I was informed that Applied Geotechnology (Peter Barry) may not
c rr\ ust\ robin .J \ wp\4001342.1 NF
0J/06/92. 3:57pm
Printed on recycled paper
-
be National Warehouse Investment Company's (Jo Ann Chitty) sole contractor, and that
Groundwater Technology may be the current contractor. This needs clarification.
David Taff has informed me that the product recovery tank has water in it for reasons
currently unknown. Only small amounts of water are produced from the recovery wells, and
this usually occurs at the end of the pumping cycle, which is pulsed. Possible explanations
for the ineffectiveness of the recovery operations include a leaky recovery tank or backwash
from the product delivery lines due to faulty check valves in those lines. Mr. Taff stated
that Ms. Chitty has authorized expenditures for Groundwater Technology to investigate and
troubleshoot the problems, and bring the system into operation again. The recovery holding
tank was precision-tested and determined to be tight, but the potential for this tank leaking
must be explored.
Based on the information submitted to date, I recommend that the below-listed actions be
required of National Warehouse Investment Company:
1. Enforce free product recovery operations.
2. Initiate quarterly groundwater monitoring of the monitor wells without
free product in order to monitor the dissolved groundwater contaminant
plume, and ascertain potential offsite impacts.
3. Analyze all groundwater samples for the presence of (Total Petroleum
Hydrocarbons (TPH), benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes, and
naphthalene.
4. Define the full extent of the dissolved plume and evaluate offsite
migration.
5. Determine appropriate corrective action for the soil and groundwater,
in addition to free product recovery. Although the appropriate remedial
method may not be determinable until most of the free product is
recovered, various multi-purpose and multi-media remedial technologies
exist.
6. The soil cleanup levels proposed by Peter Barry, Applied Geotechnolgy,
are those of a Level III environmental sensitivity and may not be
sufficiently protective of human health and the environment due to the
high volume of contaminated soils expected to have resulted from the
many years of free product smearing throughout the lower vadose zone
and capillary fringe. Appropriate soil cleanup levels can be determined
at a later time after the soil and groundwater contamination have been
more fully defined.
err\ust\robin.J\wp\4001342.INF
03/06/92, 11:34am
-
Attached are site maps showing free product thickness measurements for all measuring
rounds from December 1990 through December 1991. There is one map for each
measuring round. The numbers appearing beside each well indicate the free product
thickness in feet. The absence of a number indicates that free product was not encountered
(zero measurement). The notation "NM" means that the well was not evaluated for the
presence of free product.
Call me if you have any comments or questions at [phone].
crr\ust\robm.J\wp\4001342.JNF
03/06/92, 11:34am
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE AND REMEDIATION
Norman H. Bangerter
Governor
Kenneth L. Alkema 1950 West North Temple Reply to State of Utah
Executive Director Salt Lake City, Utah
Kent P Gray [phone]
Director ( 801 ) 536-4099 Fax
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
DATE:
SURJECT:
MEMORANDUM
[)1v1s1on of Environmental Response and Remed1at1on
Department of Environmental Quality
Salt Lake City Utah 84114-4840
Bryan Whitaker, Manager W
Underground Storage Tank Branch
Bryon Elwell, Manager ~ ~
Leaking Underground Storage Tank Section
Robin D. Jenkins, Scientist :;-~S-;_J
Leaking Underground Storag'e Tank Section
March 6, 1992
Former P.I.E. Freight Terminal, 55 South Redwood Road, SLC
Release ID EFFQ, Facility ID #4001342
Recommendation to return regulatory authority to
DERR/LUST
I strongly recommend that the DERR resume as the lead agency in the case file for the
a hove-referenced facility, rather than Salt Lake City /County Health Department acting as
the lead. Free product continues to persist, and information required over one year ago has
not been submitted, nor have those requirements been enforced. Some of those
requirements include quarterly monitoring of the groundwater monitor wells for evaluation
of the dissolved portion of the plume, and determination of the full extent and degree of
contamination.
c rr\us1\robt11.J\ wr\4001342.INf'
I (l/1 l(i/92. 3-.'i7prn
Printed on recycled paper
~~a.. .... w. /,,a....,;. Jr:rq,,ffeJ i..,,-.1/
!<c.. ...... + M~v 4_,.f t...~ "J~~~
~c__ 4-we::. sAul.l.l/ ..;., el'!_ .:>uv-.
P / e ~.se rrt r ... ~ a. I c.-l~r ~ tt...~
01....J.-, ~r a...)VV?~ /.... lh-, -fl,..__o...+ w~
w.'\\ now J.I!. f/..t le~..l //.. .... ~ .,_\\
eorn.rr.,.._/e,,(_I!. ..r~~/,1 l.t s"'l....,,~
'kJ ~~.._+-~ . l]~ Cl"' LJ, f.r
~~ 4 i1'1 ~-,o ia ~LCc HD,
~
,.....
FILE COPY
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE AND REMEDIATION
:\'orman H Bangerter
Kenneth L Alkema 1950 West r Jor,r -,,~::;,e rlep1y ,o State 01 Utan
Execut"e Director Salt Lake C1t'1 U:ah
Kent P Gray (801 I 536-4100
D1recrnr 1801 I 536-4099 Fe,
TO:
TflROUGH:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
MEMORANDUM
Garth Miner
'.}v,s,on of Ec,,"roncnerta' Resoonse and Renced'at,on
Department of Environmer1a1 Oua11tv
~a,t La;e City utan 84 1 ", --l-..\840
Salt Lake City /County Health Department
Bryan Whitaker, Manager fj,0
Underground Storage Tank Branch
Bryon Elwell, Manager 63.c!:
Leaking Underground Storage Tank Section
Robin D. Jenkins, Scientist ,~
Leaking Underground Storage ·Tank Section
March 6, 1992
Former P.l.E. Freight Terminal, 55 South Redwood Road, SLC
Required Action for Release ID EFFQ, Facility ID #4001342
Five 20-foot deep, 12-inch diameter recovery wells were emplaced in Fehruary 1991 at the
above-referenced facility. The recovery wells are equipped with passive free product
recovery pumps and associated ancillary piping. The recovered product is piped to a 3000-
gallon UST that once stored waste oil.
C1reater than 1000 gallons have reportedly been recovered to date.
Product thicknesses (diesel) in approximately 16 of the 26 groundwater monitor wells have
r~tnged from approximately 0.01 feet to 7.05 feet in measurements made hetween December
1990 and Decemher 1991. Product thicknesses have fluctuated in some of the wells, hut
generally have not significantly decreased since December 1990.
In two telephone conversations with David Taff of Groundwater Technology, on March 5,
1 ()92 and March 6, 1992, I was informed that Applied Geotechnology ( Peter Barry) may not
err ,u,t\rot,,n J\v.-p\Hl01342 f:-;F
I J_1,-11(,/'J2. ] 57p111
be National Warehouse Investment Company's (Jo Ann Chitty) sole contractor, and that
Groundwater Technology may be the current contractor. This needs clarification.
David Taff has informed me that the product recovery tank has water in it for reasons
currently unknown. Only small amounts of water are produced from the recovery wells, and
this usually occurs at the end of the pumping cycle, which is pulsed. Possible explanations
for the ineffectiveness of the recovery operations include a leaky recovery tank or backwash
from the product delivery lines due to faulty check valves in those lines. Mr. Taff stated
that Ms. Chitty has authorized expenditures for Groundwater Technology to investigate and
troubleshoot the problems, and bring the system into operation again. The recovery holding
tank was precision-tested and determined to be tight, but the potential for this tank leaking
must be explored.
Based on the information submitted to date, I recommend that the below-listed actions be
required of National Warehouse Investment Company:
1. Enforce free product recovery operations.
2. Initiate quarterly groundwater monitoring of the monitor wells without
free product in order to monitor the dissolved groundwater contaminant
plume, and ascertain potential offsite impacts.
3. Analyze all groundwater samples for the presence of (Total Petroleum
Hydrocarbons (TPH), benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes, and
naphthalene.
4. Define the full extent of the dissolved plume and evaluate offsite
migration.
5. Determine appropriate corrective action for the soil and groundwater,
in addition to free product recovery. Although the appropriate remedial
method may not be determinable until most of the free product is
recovered, various multi-purpose and multi-media remedial technologies
exist.
6. The soil cleanup levels proposed by Peter Barry, Applied Geotechnolgy,
are those of a Level III environmental sensitivity and may not be
sufficiently protective of human health and the environment due to the
high volume of contaminated soils expected to have resulted from the
many years of free product smearing throughout the lower vadose zone
and capillary fringe. Appropriate soil cleanup levels can be determined
at a later time after the soil and groundwater contamination have been
more fully defined.
crr\ust\robm.J\wp\40013421:\"F
03/0(,/92. 11:34am
Attached are site maps showing free product thickness measurements for all measuring
rounds from December 1990 through December 1991. There is one map for each
measuring round. The numbers appearing beside each well indicate the free product
thickness in feet. The absence of a number indicates that free product was not encountered
(zero measurement). The notation "NM" means that the well was not evaluated for the
presence of free product.
Call me if you have any comments or questions at [phone].
err\ ust\robm.J\ wp\4001342 1'.\:F
03/06/92. 11.34am
W-28
s
s
W-27
s
W-26
'ti • 0 a:
1:J
0
0
3:
'ti
GI a:
W-18 C9 .&'\
LEGEND
SW-22
W-17 s
North Tempi• SlrHt
Holiday Inn
sW-23
South Temple StrHI
Shop Bldg.
Service
Bldg.
Rw-1
9 0.1 3
w-e
W-16 s
0.L/-()
sW-10
9 W-:-15
s W-2 Number and approxlm•t• Well locatlon
EB Rw ,J!FepaltM Recovery Welt Locations
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
Geocec:hnicu Engineering
Geology & Hydrogeology
Site Plan
Shidler Group
sW-24
sw-11-
0. 1. 1.
loading Dock
sW-13
Note: Nat To Scale
• Salt Lake City. Utah
J08HUM8ER
15,419.003
DRAWN
OFF
DATe
2 Jen, II
REVISED DATE
FIGURE
1
W-28
s
s
W-27
'ti • 0 a:
'ti
0
0
J
'O
GI a:
w-18 sl. 31
SW-22
--
c--F f) O<: t 21 / q· 1 \
North Temple StrHt
Holiday Inn
sW-23
South Temple Street
SW-9
':f.77
Service
Bldg.
Shop Bldg. W-2
5 0.01
I
W-!i Office I
. I
sW-24
sW-11'
o.3S
Loading Dock
~-1~ I Sj _._ ____________ _
V#-4
sW-13
W-14 5 hla..ck-+,,re~
s
W-26
w-11 tntM-I w-1a .. w~15 ....,__.__ ___ s~o=.a...o,;;;.,.. Y2 s _.;.__ _ __,;; ... ;.__ ____________ _
o-.Je..,r.
o. {,5"
LEGEND
S W-2 Number and approxlmat• Well locatlon
J08MJlleER
15,419.003
EB -PrapalHHi Recovery Wetl Locations
Applled Geotachnology Inc.
Geotechnical Engineering
Geology & Hyarogeology
ORA-
OFF
I-BO
Site Plan
Shidler Group
Salt Lake City, Utah
OATI!
2 JM.11
Nate: Nat Ta Sc:al•
FIGURE
1
OAT&
W-28
s
North Tempie SlrHt
s
W-27
sw-22
Holiday Inn
South Tempi• StrHt
$
W-26
Shop Bldg. W-2
"CJ • 0 a:
-a
0
0
~ -a
«I a:
Service
Bldg.
w-11 s l io
LEGEND
W-17 B.,_'1-\
So. I· 6::J
$ 'J..4Lf-
w-e
W-16
$
S W-2 Number and approxtmat• Wall location
~ropaaea Recovery Well LoGatlona
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
Geotechnical Engineering
Geology & Hydrogeology
so.n
1-80
Site Plan
Shidler Group.
sW-24
loading Dock
w-12 $
NM
sW-13
Nata: Nat To Seal•
• Salt Lake City, Utah
JOII NUMIIEII
15.481.003
ORA-
OFF
DATE DATE
2 Jan. 11
FIGURE
1
W-28
s
s
W-27
s
W-26
'a • 0 a:
'a
0
0 ;:
"O
CII
IC
w-11 s \ tt\
LEGEND
SW-22
W-17 s
0.02..
North Temple StrHt
Holiday Inn
sW-23
South Temple Street
SW-9
4-. 37
Service
Bldg.
Shop Bldg.
so. Gi4-
W-t
W-16
R\IJ-s SW":""15
s w-2 Number and appro,dmat• Well locallon
EB a~o~eucL Recovery Well Locations
Applied Geotechnotogy Inc.
Geotechnical Engineenng
Geology & Hydrogeology
1-80
Site Plan
Shidler Group
FP J:-1 Jo I ~/
sW-24
Loading Dock
w-12 s
fJt1
sW-13
W-14 s
Nr\
~
Nola: Nat To Seal•
FIGURE
• SaJt Lake City, Utah 1
J08NJM881
15,419.003
ORA-
OFF ~ DATI! IIEVISED DATE
2 Jen. 11
...
W-28
s
North Temple Street
Holiday Inn
s SW-22
W-27
$
W-28
South Temple StrHt
·• ••.. ~ sW-21
···-t;f.Sq
(
•••'~ I
··-.~~Rw--'t
•. w-1 •.. s S. 31
OIi/Water Separator Dlachu • Line
SW-9
4.38
Shop Bldg. W-2
'O • 0 a:
'O
0
0
3:
'O
GI a:
W-18 S \ 4-to
LEGEND
W-17 s
0.0\
Service
Bldg.
W-5
lf.3
v.1-I
50. 7.2. w-e
W-18 s
s W-2 Number and approxlmal• Well location
EB Pfepoff4 Recovery Well Loc:atlons
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
Geotechnical Engineenng
Geology & Hydrogeology
s 0 .o~
0. 01
1-80
Site Plan
Shldlar Group
sW-24
sw-11·
0 .. 1 '\
Loading Dock
w-12 s
NM
sW-13
W-14 s
NM
Nate: Nat Ta Seal•
• Salt Lake City, Utah
JOIIMJllaBI
15,4H.OD3
DIIA-
DFF
Do\ft REVISED
2 Jen. 11
FIGURE
1
W-28
s
s
W-27
-0 • 0 a: >,
IS
3
CD
..? -
North Tempt• Street
Holiday Inn
SW-22
South Temple Street
Shop Bldg. W-2
S0.O\
sW-11
o. ;;2.0
-0
0
0
J
-0
CD a:
Service
Bldg.
Loading Dock
s
W-26
W-18 s ,. 3
LEGEND
s W-2 Number and appro1dmat• Well location
JOll l«JMIIER
15,◄19.003
EB JaNpas84 Recovery Wet! Locations
Applied Geotechnotogy Inc.
Geotechnical Eng1neenng
Geology & Hyarogeology
CRAWN
OFF
1-80
W-15 s
Site Plan
Shidler Group
Salt Lake City, Utah
DATE
Z J ... 11
sW-13
Note: Not To Scale
R£YISED
FIGURE
1
W-28
s
s
W-27
"Cl ca
0 a:
"Cl
0
0
3:
SW-22
J.tJ~
W-8
North Temple SlrHt
Holiday Inn
South Temple Street
SW-9
3.'t\
Shop Bldg.
sW-24
sW-11
o. 32.
w-12 s
NM
"Cl
CD a:
Service
Bldg. Loading Dock
s
W-26
W-18 s \ I~
LEGEND
W-17 s
s0.03
W-6
s W-2 Number and approximate-Well locatlon
JOaNJMIIBI
15,411.003
EE) 2r.Gi,eH& Recovery We« Locations
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
Geotec:hnical Eng1neenng
Geology & Hydrogeology
1-80
Site Plan
Shidler Group
Salt Lake City, Utah
DATE
z Jen. 11
sW-13
NM
er
Nata: Nat Ta Scale
REVISED DATE
FIGURE
1
•·.
W-28
s
s
W-27
s
W-26
-0 "' 0 a:
-0
0
0
J
-0
~ a:
~
SW-22
LEGEND
North Temple Street
Holiday Inn
South Temple Street
Shop Bldg. W-2
Service
Bldg.
s 0.13
W-6
W-16 s
SQ.Ols,
s W-2 Number and approxlmat• Well location
EB .S.epase"'--Recovery We41 Locations
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
Geotechnical Engineenng
Geology & Hyc:trogeology
1-80
Site Plan
Shidler Group
9W-24
Loading Dock
sW-13
NM
W-14 s
NM
Note: Nat Ta Scale
• Salt Lake City, Utah
JOa NlJM8SI
15.419.003
ORA-
OFF
DATE REVISED
2 Jan. 11
1
•• >
s
W-27
SW-22
North Tempte StrHt
Holiday Inn
sW-23
South Temple StrHt
sW-10
NM.
Shop Bldg. W-2
5 0.o~
sW-24
sw-11-
,vM
w-12 s
NM
,,
Ill
0
IC ,,
0
0
3: ,,
~
IC
Service
Bldg.
Loading Dock
s
W-26
W-18 S \ 55"
LEGEND
s 0.07
W-8
s w-2 Number and approximate Well locatlon
JOIIMJMUA
15,4119.003
EB J!Fepasue Recovery Welt Locations
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
Geolechnical Eng1neenng
Geology & Hyarogeology
DRAWN
OFF
1-80
Site Plan
Shidler Group
Salt Lake City. Utah
DA1'1!
2 Jan. II
sW-13
NM
W-14 s
NM
Nol.: Not To Seal•
REVISED OATE
FIGURE
1
.....
W-28
s
s
W-27
5 w 25 -a • 0 a:
-a
0
0
J -a
a, a:
sw-22
North Temple SlrHt
HoUday Inn
South Temple StrHt
Shop Bldg. W-2
Service
Bldg.
sNt-1
Loading Dock
w-12 s
s ,~~__., _____________ _
s
W-28
w-11 s
I. ~
LEGEND
-----W-4
W-16 s
6) W-2 Number and approxlmat• Well location
JOaMJMUR
15,411.003
EB ~ei,asea. Recovery W.tt Locations
Applied Geotachnok>gy Inc.
Geotechnical Engineering
Geology & Hyarogeology
°""-OFF
.o
1-80
Site Plan
Shidler Group
• Salt Lake City, Utah
Do\ff
Z J■n. 11
sW-13
W-14 s
N/1
Note: Nat To Sc:al•
REVISED DATE
FIGURE
1
W-28
s
s
W-27
'ti • 0 a:
'ti
0
0
3:
'ti
ID a:
SW-22
·• •... ~ s w-21
,i;:•.""· 5. <o s ~ ··~---..---
North Temple Street
Holiday Inn
South Temple Street
6lW-9
5.50
(
• •• <;;. • • .. -,.
•••••••..... SW-17~
Oil/Water Separator Dlscha e i~.
Service
Bldg.
Shop Bldg.
w-11 s I St
s 3. 9~
w-e
6l
W-26
s W-2
EB
LEGEND
W-17 s
NM
Number and spproxlmat& Well locatlon
Proposed Recovery Welt Locations
1-80
sW-10
W-2
so.al
AppUed Geotechnology Inc.
Geotechnical Engineering Site Plan
· Geology I, Hydrogeotogy Shidler Group
FP
w-12 6l
Loading Dock
sW-13
W-14 6l
Nata: Neri Ta Sc:al•
• Salt Lake City, Utah
J08MJI.ISEl'I
15.419.003
OIIA-
Dff
DAff
2 Jan. 11
IIOISED DAT£
FIGURE
1
W-28
s
s
W-27
SW-22
·• •••• d! 9W-21 Eli·~ .... <o.o3
North Tempt• StrHl
Holiday Inn
9W-23
South Temple SlrHt
sW-10
... ,.
(
•• ~.< ... ~--..-.. --
••••••••.... $ WN~
OH/Water Separator Dlachar e Une
SW
sNM
W-26
Shop Bldg. W-2
25 -a • 0 a: >,
Ill -a 3 0 • 0 ~ 3 ,, a
GI a:
w-11 s I Gi 3
LEGEND
s>JM
W-8
W-17 s
..
Service
Bldg.
sNM
W-8
S W-2 Number and approxtmat• Well location
EB Proposed Recovery Well Locations
Applied GeotechnokJgy Inc.
Geotechnicat Engineering
Geology & Hydrogeology
I
Office :
C\8 I
sNfV\
9 w~1s
1-80
Site Plan
Shidler Group
sW-24
w-12·
$
loading Dock
sW-13
W-14 $·
Nate: Nat Ta Sc:al•
FIGURE
• Salt Lake City, Utah 1
JOBMJIIIIISI
15,411.003
ORA-
OFF ~ DAff IIEWIED
Z Jan. 11
W-28
S notJ,..; lk~ y +
North Temple Slr11t
Holiday Inn
s
W-27
SW-22
o. 14
sW-23
South Temple Street
SW
s
W-26
•• ••.. ~ s W-21 &W-9 e•••t•.,,. 4-. &' 8 i. "1 ~
(·--~~ . ..
•••• W 1
Of •• ••. _ s 3.85"
I/Water Separator Discher e Une
9W-10
Shop Bldg. W-2
25 "Cl as
0 a:
"Cl
0
0
3:
"Cl
GI a:
W-18
>,. .,
3:
CD
> .:
0
s .19
LEGEND
so.).8
W-8
W-17
S \. 3
Service
Bldg.
W-16
So.88 E9
s W-2 Number and approximate-Well locatlon
EB Proposed Recovery Weff Locations
Applled Geotechnology Inc.
Geotechnical Engineering
Geology & Hydrogeology
S0."1(,
s 't.o \
W-3
1-80
Site Plan
Shidler Group
sW-24
loading Dock
w-12 s
sW-13
W-14 s
Note: Nat To Seal•
• Salt Lake City, Utah
JOBNUMIIER
15.489.003
DRAWN
OFF
DATE
2 Jan. 11
REVISED OATE
AGURE
1
STATE OF UTAH
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALl'IY
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE AND REMEDIATION
FAX NUMBER 801-359-8853
FAX COVER SHEET
DATE: ~ ).{.p ( 4 ?_ WW ORG: _____ ACT #: ___ _
TO: GC\\f ±6 M ', V'\ 0v-
AGENCY/FIRM: SL-c/ca H ~
7
FAX NUMBER: ___ c; 34= _./ 4 S-0 d-
. J' ,,,-;--\ I
FROM: \fd? 1 v, ,jeV\ 1 i v, S ut t) B c?
PAGES TO FOLLOW: r_)___
___ __;;;;=--------
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
J\X ~3¥~ OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE AND REMEDIATION
Norman H Bangerter
Governor
Kenneth L Alkema
Executne D1n'ctor
Kent P. nray
D1rectcir
1950 West North Temple
Salt Lake City, Utah
Reply to State of Utah
D1v1s1on of Environmental Response and Remed1at1on
Department of Environmental Quality [phone]
[phone] Fax
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-4840
MEMORANDUM
Garth Miner
Salt Lake City/County Health Department
Bryan Whitaker, Manager
Underground Storage Tank Branch
Bryon Elwell, Manager
Leaking Underground Storage Tank Section
Robin D. Jenkins, Scientist
Leaking Underground Storage Tank Section
March 26, 1992
Former P.I.E. Freight Terminal, 55 South Redwood Road, SLC
Required Action for Release ID EFFQ, Facility ID #4001342
Five 20-foot deep, 12-inch diameter recovery wells were emplaced in February 1991 at the
above-referenced facility. The recovery wells are equipped with passive free product recovery
pumps and associated ancillary piping. The recovered product is piped to a 3000-gallon UST
that once stored waste oil.
Greater than 1000 gallons have reportedly been recovered to date.
Product thicknesses (diesel) in approximately 16 of the 26 groundwater monitor wells have
ranged from approximately 0.01 feet to 7. 05 feet in measurements made between December
1990 and December 1991. Product thicknesses have fluctuated in some of the wells, but
generally have not significantly decreased since December 1990.
In two telephone conversations with David Taff of Groundwater Technology, on March 5, 1992
and March 6, 1992, I was informed that Applied Geotechnology (Peter Barry) may not be
National Warehouse Investment Company's (Jo Ann Chitty) sole contractor, and that
Groundwater Technology may be the current contractor. This needs clarification.
errlustlrobm.jlwp\4001342.INF
03/26/92, 9:20am
Printed 011 recycler! paper
David Taff has informed me that the product recovery tank has water in it for reasons currently
unknown. Only small amounts of water are produced from the recovery wells, and this usually
occurs at the end of the pumping cycle, which is pulsed. Possible explanations for the
ineffectiveness of the recovery operations include a leaky recovery tank or backwash from the
product delivery lines due to faulty check valves in those lines .. Mr. Taff stated that Ms. Chitty
has authorized expenditures for Groundwater Technology to investigate and troubleshoot the
problems, and bring the system into operation again. The recovery holding tank was precision-
tested and determined to be tight, but the potential for this tank leaking must be explored.
Based on the information submitted to date, I recommend that the below-listed actions be
required of National Warehouse Investment Company:
1. Enfo,rce free produpt recoven7 operations. of-1" Jo?, v-n~{) +: "'"" e.. f .r.-vv--. ~ S,
"Tho!.,.,.. J y sf~---. , ..s. broke,.,, "i--f kt v-i ec: ci Tel f, x ; +! ·
2. Initiate quarterly groundwater monitoring of the monitor wells without free
product in order to monitor the dissolved groundwater contaminant plume,
and ascertain potential offsite impacts.
3. Analyze all groundwater samples for the presence of (Total Petroleum
Hydrocarbons (TPH), benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes, and
naphthalene.
4. Define the full extent of the dissolved plume and evaluate offsite migration.
M.6\-~ L c{' ~..,,.,., 4 .5 ➔ 5. Determine appropriate corrective action for the soil and groundwater, in '+ ~ <. , ·[· <. -h v--,,e .s addition to free product rec~very. Al~ough the appropriate rem~
{r.;.,~...,,.., es fo-r c--(AP method may not be determmable until most of the free product 1S
c, v , . .IJ, ..L-, ) recovered, various multi-purpose and multi-media remedial technologies
,-1 """ ~-·,v°' i.: vi • \ ~ -t 1 0 ~ exist.
--i I .L-1
0 L,J>fl ~l {. . ,...,, . + I ,) .:._ C\ ( \ l O •·,.
6. The soil cleanup levels proposed by Peter Barry, Applied Geotechnolgy, are
those of a Level m environmental sensitivity and may not be sufficiently
protective of human health and the environment due to the high volume of
contaminated soils expected to have resulted from the many years of free
"' j product smearing throughout the lower vadose zone and capillary fringe.
? ,-v1 \jJ •• c, Appropriate soil cleanup levels can be determined at a later time after the
f~jw, soil and groundwater contamination have been more fully defined.
~hed aIC site mapsskowiftg free product thickness measurements for all measuring rounds
from December 1990 through December 1991. There is one map for each measuring round.
The numbers appearing beside each well indicate the free product thickness in feet. The absence
of a number indicates that free product was not encountered (zero measurement). The notation
"NM" means that the well was not evaluated for the presence of free product.
Call me if you have any comments or questions at [phone].
err\ust\robin.j\wp\4001342.INF
03/26/92, 9:20am
HJ.:_-?_~~
-1.,~7 1 ,· It..
Lv1~1-t;\~
~emorandum of Project Manager Recorn.mendation
Facility Name
Project Manager
□ LUST Site Closure
~ Allow to join PST Fund
D Dis-Allow to join PST Fund
Facilitv ID Y: 00 I .5 4 ~
LeakID EF~Q
Evidence used for this determination follows the PST application processing protocol,
and includes:
~ nt v0 _ r:f-1~ lU L v-o ""'-
(.. o\~ '('C__ e.~
--+--i.;::;_.-..,""'-'u.,::;...;.._.....aa..;c...L...OJ---''--'--'--~i,..;;...;.--=----~=--..:......;;.=.,;i,;=..: ....... .........:-==---+'-...;..._--'--'-....a:-o,--------"" :J
a-. e e" \M'\, V\. C\::t:, o :r:::--(,lN) ,, 1 , e"" n . -o e...,.
~~~...DJ:..-~~~~r(_..~~..J::;.....!~~~..1+-.a.:D~~~LQ~ieJJ,
~k J;
be.. '1.(~l.\\~M "' o""+:f. r,f Gmfl',~(L, 6--\± :t~t--+ tk:i' f ~ J-tfev-Vli"'\Y)f-<
<l::: ~~~ r:( \eaJU +~v;~av-':0, '1± f?\A.-.. -thL o\Q ~---e..\utS~ ..
T01
AGl!:NCY / F :t.RM 1
E L ~ C Q F t E R B Ii A JI Ei ts T
Utah o~~~e~on Env~ronmente1 H•a1th
288 Nortb 1460 West
P .o. Box 3.f!it5QO
Sait Lake C:~ty, UT 84116-0690
PHONE Its
$, L .1--1 t:,q.1 a:::::3nrl J')Jt:~ C:tTY 1 s;;. :t ::::t::=: ,I ra IFrr<::s:= STATE,
TELE!.'"AX MACH:tNE NUMBEft1 CONFZRMATZON NUMBER1
NUMBER Ul.'" PAGES TO FOLLOW ■
SUBJl!:C:T•
!.'"ROM:
Jl"'AX 4ta
R£MARKS1
LOGGED,
..c20A1n ✓ :;;:;s:::-'"':t:n,-tk::e,.,,...,..S
( 801) §30 §AJ.O
S~T•
CONF:::EJU-,:A.T%ON1
TRANSMISSION
PHONE II•
CONFXRMAT%0N NUM8ER1
REPORT
THIS DOCUMENT
WAS SENT
(REDUCED SAMPLE ABOVE)
**
#
COUNT**
3
< ,r;;c:
***SEND***
NO REMOTE STATION I. D. START TIME DURATION #PAGES COMMENT
1 8015344502 1-31-91 1:25PM 1 '30" 3
TOTAL o:01'30" 3
XEROX TELECOPIER 7021
TO:
TELEC'2_PIER R E O U E S T
Utah Division Environmental Health
288 North 1460 West
P.O. Box 16690
Salt Lake City, UT 84116-0690
PHONE#:
AGENCY / FIRM: 2!,l, HL?-+crl--J DcJ:7 CITY: STATE: _.,,.L'--',-__
TELEFAX MACHINE NUMBER: 5.? '--I -l/ Sc;~ CONFIRMATION NUMBER:
NUMBER UF PAGES TO FOLLOW:
SUBJECT:
FROM:
FAX#: [phone]
REMARKS:
LOGGED:
SENT:
CONFIRMATION:
PHONE#:
CONFIRMATION NUMBER: [phone]
1/11 /" I
~~.~3 PM
Gu'~.(\ I
Mr Co"" \'rV\'\ + __S ut r€_,, ,/'fl', 1/\ o v. 0 o o12 1.,, --r-1--.vr I
SCA 5 f C (__., ; W\ e.,_,, vJ f-iJ,N\_ j D lA s,v.n cQ ~ +,
SENT sv:xerox Telecopier 7021 : 1:=-~-91 ; 4:41PM 80153445~
81 O South 2nd East, Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
Phone: 534·4510
TERRY D.,SADLEA, DIRECTOR
Division of Environmental Health January 30, 1991
Peter p. Berry
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
3001 120th Avenue N.E •.
Bellevue, Washington 98005
Dear Mr, Berry:
IOARD OF HEALTH
Cindy Gutt-Janson
Ch1lrparaon
Paul McClur•
Vice Chairman
OJck Bollard
Joe Duk .. Ro11ttl
Ann Ford
Kirk GIimore, M.D.
Quinn McKay
Nell I<. Nixon, 0.D.S.
Rhoda Ramaey
Rulon Simmons, M.O.
D. Mlohael Stewan
Roy Turner
LeeWanle&e
MIiton Wellenmann
Sandra Ercanbrack
Secretary
8015386016:# 3
After reviewing tno aooumonts Whicn you sUbm1tted reporting
findings of your site visit to 55 South Redwood Road and the
proposal for product recovery, I have discussed pertinent issues
about the site with Robin Jenkins of the Utah Bureau of
Environmental Resionse and Remediation. An outline of those
discussions are 1 sted below:
1, A considerable amount of time has elapsed since water
samples were collected from monitoring wells. It is our
concern that the extent of ground water contamination was
not clearly delineated and that the plume has preaably //'""'''( llc\Vc
~ c~ since0 a-ny-samples w-ere taken. There may no longer
+\1t "s-i'....lts -(Ile ~xteriormonitoring points (wells which consistently show
.,.-Q..-(\.lci\L<..:\tQc..~, no 1miact from the site) to define the ext~nt o; the plume.
w-e. A min mum sized database of analyses from interior
monitoring points are also needed to define the plume. We
think that water samples from all of the wells should be
taken quarterly forr~:~~=--a yea-r,-. Pl_um,e deline~tio~ ,is fl. requirement of 40 CF 65. a_ 71vv:,e _j.,.,ft,, c,e-~t fo,,-(\Sct:--\-c,,_,,~j d"+o-.-
ocp•"cl"'l' \:,, \,-t1w,+\,,o,\t ,.,...,p,J,,'..'J cle, .. ,vlf•
2. A site plan showing groundwater surface contours was not
submitted. We need that drawing to complete a review of
your recovery plan.
If you want to discuss these matters please call me at 801-
534-4542.
sincerely,
Garth C. Miner, M.E.
Bureau of water Quality,
Hazardous Waste
, 1 -ru~_s I t.)./<-t-l0io
I
! I 0 II< rt~ 1
i
6r-J 4"' -re; ~nf,. ~ + h .. t -tk--" H O U '' -z X'. f ).,,_', 11'--
-t ~ fo l(ow12J:
\, wh1 Y°<A o..,e_ --t-l le.-cO '{'d\ th.,,,--t h .. v'\ u~ (be<o.<4-
jo=' v L k,eell'\ -the.-,eu.~ _s:~ce_ tk ~V\~~-t:~ c:>f -t-k-
n~u..Y2--, ) "'-'\,,.'. ~ f..-e -JJ,, +,.Q ""::'.) u1 ST ''j >)
Jo \h6'f we-k cc_~ '/) o"' ~
C o a e ~ o"'c\i ~c ~ -tk ... f Y° <A. ~ u-..-\--e.....;.~ffi!lfl!!:!--=t-=---,--,
3 ~ -rh~t (K 4S'O-\0 \ ~'-\S-t k tAtJ:~-SS/2-p
-
.;450-:-10~-.5. Significance ~evel
:. __ : :s :~e :c~.:.:; :r :~e ~c11: anc ~azar:c~s ~as:e -=~m:::ee :~at,
-~nere c:::ntam1naticn :s ::em:.:. ~1ea :nat :s :e.l.0'.11 aco l.:..:acle vc_' s, Nater . -. . . . . .. . . :_ass1r::at::::n stanaar:s, er a1r :uall:y stanaarcs c: Nnere a:□l.:.cao1e
s:anaarcs ao ~at exi.s: =:r eit~er :~e □arameter .:.~ cwesticn er :~e
-2nvircnmentcl meaia .:.n wnicn cr.e contamination .:.s fGuna, :,:e :.2.ean-uo
scanaarc snall ce escaolisnea using cne Clean-uo 5:anaarcs ~valuaticn
:r.:.teria ana will .:Je set oetween oacKgrouna ana c~e ooservea ~evel cf
:ontam1nation. Shaula it oe aeterminea that tne ooservea level of
::::m:aminaticn will ce allowea to remain, tnis oecames the sit;ni ficance .2.evel.
5.2 ~t any time, snoulo ccntinuea monitoring i □encify contamination aoove
:~e sicnificarce level, :~e Clean-uo Stanaara ~valuation C:iteria will .:Je
:eappliea in connection 'Nith tne Prevention of runner Oegraaatian Pol.icy t.:
:e-evaluate tre neea for corrective act.:.on ana :eter:nine an a □□rapriate
:lean-~p stcnaara.
~450-101-6 :nterim Policy
i"his policy "Hill :e!Tiain in effect until such :.:.:ne as the Committee cnoses
:J ~aaify it ~r a feaeral col.icy, regulation, or statute applica □le to
:orrective action clean-uo levels is estc □lisnea. At the time a feaeral
~alicy is promulgate □ t~e policy will be reviewea for ccnsistancy witn the
"'':Oe!'3l act.::.::m ana will :e maai fiea as a □prapriate ana in accar:ance witn
acplicaale state law.
'r<E'f: hazarcous waste, standards
1988 26-14-6
R4.50-200 Underground Storage Tanks: Definitions
For purposes of unaergrauna storage tank rules:
"Annual unaergrauna storage tank registration fee" means the fee assesseo
an tanks locatea in Utah subject ta the requirement of Section 26-~4e-302,
uCA.
"9aaily injury" snall have the same meaning as provided unaer Section
26-l4e-102(2) l.CA.
"5uraen" means the acaition of the percentcge of .:.nairect casts wnich are
aoaea ta raw laoor casts.
"Certificate" means a aocument that evidences certification.
"Certificate of ccmoliance" means a certificate issue □ oy tne Executive
3ecretary tnat aemonstrates that an owner or a □eratar of a ~etraleum storage
:anK nas met the requirements of 26-~4e-.03 GCA, ta oe eligi □le for payments
of casts rnaae from the Fund-
"Certificate of registration" means a certificate issuea by the Executive
Secretary demonstrating tnat the owner or operator of a regulated er exempt
~etroleum storage tank nas:
(a) notifiea an the existence of the tank;
lb) paid the amual registration fee.
"Certi fication 11 means aooroval by the Executi·,e Secretary ta engage in tr,e
activity appliec for by the indivioual.
"Committee 11 means the utan Solid and Hazardous wastes Committee or its
auly autnorizea representatives.
"Corrective action plan" means a plan ta abate hazarcs and clean
-
R450-l01 CQrrective Action Clean-up Stanaaras Policy --RCRA, UST, ana
CERCLA Sites
~450-101-1 Source Elimination
:c is tr.e oolicv of tr.e Solia ana hazaroous Naste Ccmmittee t~at t~e
_nitial see~ in ail corrective actions implementea at ~CRA, uST, ana CE~C~~
sites is to take a □pro □riate action to eliminate the source of ccntaminati:n
eitr.er thrcugn removal or appropriate source central.
R450-101-2 Clearr-up Standaros Evaluation Criteria
Suosequent to source elimination, clean-up stanaaras for rema1n1ng
contamination which may incluae numerical, tecnnology-oasea or risk-basea
stanaards or any comoination of those stanaaras, shall be determined on a
case-oy-case basis, taking into consideration the fallowing criteria:
l. The iJTl)act or potential impact of the contamination on the puolic
health.
2. The im□act or potential imoact of the contamination on the environment.
3. Economic considerations ana cost effectiveness of clean-u □ options.
4. The technology available for use in clean-uo.
R450-l0l-3 Prevention of Further Degradation
It is the policy of the Solid ana Hazaraous waste Committee that in
aetermining backgrouna concentrations, clean-up stanaaras, and significance
levels, levels of contamination in grouna water, surface water, soils or air
will not oe allawea to aegraoe beyono the existing contamination levels
as-csrminsa ti"'iraugh appropriate monitoring or tr.e use of other c.ata .;.ccepted
by the Committee or tne Executive Secretary as representative.
R450-l01-4 Clean-up Starx1ards
4.1 It is the policy of the Solid and Hazardous waste Committee that the
following snall be the minimum standaras ta be met for any clean-up of
hazaraous sucstances at a RCRA, UST, or CERCLA facility in Utah: (a) for
water-relatea corrective action, the Maximum Contaminant Limits (~L's)
estaolisnea unaer the federal Safe Drinking water Act or other applicable
water classifications ana standaras; ano (b) for air-relatea corrective
action, the appropriate air quality stanaards established unaer the Feceral
Clean Air Act. Other stanoaras as determineo applicacle by the Corrvnittee
may be utilizeo. Clean-up levels below tre t<L's or other applicable water
or air quality standaras may be established by the Coovnittee on a case-
by-case basis taking into consideration the Clean-up Standards Evaluation
Criteria listea above and the Prevention of Further Oegraaation Policy.
4.2 In the case of contamination above the t<L or other applicable water
or air quality stanaaros, if, after evaluation of all alternatives, it is
aetermined that applicable minimun stanaaros cannot reasonably be achieved,
clean-up levels above these minimum standaras may be establishea on a
case-by-case basis utilizing the Clean-up Stanaaras Evaluation Criteria and
the Prevention of Further Degradation Policy. In assessing the evaluation
criteria, the following factors shall be considered:
a. quantity of materials releaseo;
b. mobility, persistence, and toxicity of materials released;
c. exposure pathways;
a. extent of contamination and its relationship to present and potential
surface ana grouna water locations and uses;
e. type ana levels of background contamination; anc
f. other relevant stanoaras ana factors as aetermineo appropriate by tne
Convnittee.
-.,.
(
(
4. Technology conslc»r•t1on~.
Ill. Prevention of Degr•~tlon. Oegr•.:S.tion beyond existing contnln.tlon Is prohlbit,-d.
IV. Applic•ble St•ndards. Existing stan~rds will be applied •s •pproprlate.
913IU
D£CISI<W FLCM own
stl"9
....-----'-'YE=-=S-+I App11c.tl1e C1Nn-up I NO
St•ndanfs 1 _
* The burden of the demonstrltion is on the responsible ~rty.
* Th• burden of ev•Juatlon is on the agency.
or iin
Perlodlully Aoev•lu•t•
Slgnlflcfncr, Level
~
I• ~ ...
• j
! -N
• .. eE Ii~! i~
E ''ii~ ~ ~ i~;i ·i
1;
I~
1.
i 'F.d!!i
i !~!~~
~;~l!
11 ... ~e""' .. r: ti !~ ~i
ii:,::1:~ ~!~'~
lftHO~ll
ltm~t--• l~jir-li
,. i;. .. 1.1ft I-· ,.. r --~-1r1r • ,. . .
--
R450-101 Corrective Action Clean-up Stanaaras Policy --RCRA, UST, ana
CERCLA Sites
R450-101-l Source Elimination
~tis tne oolicv of tr.e Solia ana hazaraous ~aste Ccmmittee tr.at the
~~itial step in ail corrective actions implementea at RCRA, UST, ana CERC~~
sites is to take acpropriate action to eliminate the source of contaminat~cn
eitner througn removal or appropriate source control.
R450-101-2 Clean-up Standards Evaluation Criteria
Suosequent to source elimination, clean-up stanaaras for rema1n1ng
contamination which may incluae numerical, technology-oased or risk-basea
stanaards or any combination of those stanaaras, shall be determined on a
case-oy-case basis, taking into consideration the following criteria:
l. The i~act or potential impact of the contamination on the puolic
health.
2. The impact or potential impact of the contamination on the environment.
3. Economic considerations ana cast effectiveness of clean-up options.
4. The technology available for use in clean-up.
R450-101-3 Prevention of Further Degradation
It is the policy of the Solid ana Hazaraous waste Committee that in
aetermining backgrauna concentrations, clean-up stanaaras, and significance
levels, levels of contamination in grouna water, surface water, soils or air
will not ae allawea to aegraae beyona the existing contamination levels
aeterminsa through appropriate monitoring or tre use of other d~tci ciccepted
by the Committee or the Executive Secretary as representative.
R450-101-4 Clean-up Standards
4.1 It is the policy of the Solid and Hazardous waste Committee that the
following snall be the minimum standaras to be met far any clean-up of
hazaraous suostarces at a RCRA, UST, or CERCLA facility in Utah: (a) far
water-relateo corrective action, the Maximum Contaminant Limits (t-CL's)
establisnea unaer the federal Safe Drinking water Act or other applicable
water classifications ana standaras; ana (b) far air-relateo corrective
action, the appropriate air quality stanaards established unaer the Feceral
Clean Air Act. Other stanaaras as deterrninec applicable by the Committee
may be utilizea. Clean-up levels below tre !'-Cl's or other applicable water
or air quality standaros may be established by the Committee on a case-
by-case basis taking into consideration the Clean-up Standards Evaluation
Criteria listea above and the Prevention of Further Degraaation Policy.
4.2 In the case of contamination above the K:L or other applicable water
or air quality stanaarcs, if, after evaluation of all alternatives, it is
aetermined that applicable minimun stanaaras cannot reasonably be achieved,
clean-up levels above these minimum standaras may be establishea on a
case-by-case basis utilizing the Clean-up Stanaards Evaluation Criteria and
the Prevention of Further Degradation Policy. In assessing the evaluation
criteria, the fallowing factors shall be considered:
a. quantity of materials releasea;
b. mobility, persistence, and toxicity of materials released;
c. exposure pathways;
a. extent of contamination and its relationship to present and potential
surface ana grouna water locations ana uses;
e. type and levels of background contamination; ana
f. other relevant stancaras ana factors as aeterminea appropriate by the
Committee.
P 437 913 221
RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL
NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED
NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL
"' "' "' .. "' N a,
00 "'
0
0..
(!l
en
/See Reverse)
Sent to
=> Postage
Cer11f1ed Fee
Spec1.:il Delivery Fee
Restricted Delivery Fee
Return Receipt showing
to whom and Date Delivered
U1 g,: Return Receipt showing to whom
Date and Address of Delivery
Cl)
§ TOT AL Postage and Fees
""')
s
s
-
0 1-----------------~
o Postmark or Date
CX)
M
E
0 u.
(/)
ll.
UNITED STATES POSl )ERVICE
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
SENDER INSTRUCTIONS
Print your name. ■ddreH and ZIP Cod ■
in th■ apace b ■low.
• Complete Items 1. 2. 3. and 4 on the
revers■.
• Attach to front of article if ap■c■
permits, otherwise affix to back of
article.
• EndorH ■rtlcle "Return Receipt
Requested" adjacent to number.
) 1,t . \.
'I. ,,
~
u .... s •. M.•.1.L
1 -®
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE
USE, $300
RETURN ...... Print Sender's name, address, and ZIP Code in the space below.
TO ..,....
~
=
UTAH DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
BUREAU OF ENVIRONMENTAL
RESPONSE AND REMEDIATION
288 NORTII 1460 WEST
P.O. BOX 16690
SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84116-0690
-
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
;'<Orman H Bangerter
Governor
Suzanne Dandoy. MD , M PH.
Executive Director
Kenneth L Alkema
Director
OEC 1 S i990
JoAnn Chitty
Bureau o· Envirnncre··" ciesoonse and Remed1at1on
288 l~C'l" '."160 ·,•1~c· c : 3GY 16690
Salt La,e C,tv. Utar c~ • ·c,-0690
[phone]
National Warehouse Investment Company
7400 Bay Meadows \Vay, Suite 30)
Jacksonville, FL 32256
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT
REQUESTED
Re: Release Site AFFQ, PIE Nationwide, Inc., 55 S. Redwood Rd., Salt Lake City, Utah
Facility Identification No. -+0013-+2
Reporting and Remediation Schedule
Dear Ms. Chitty:
A release from an underground storage tank (UST) at the above-referenced site was reported on
April 26, 1988 to the Bureau of Environmental Response and Remediation (formerly part of the
Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste). According to Federal rule Title 40 Code of Federal
Regulations (40 CFR) Part 280 Subparts E and F, and State rule R451-202, the release must be
reported, controlled and abated, characterized and remediated, and the full extent and degree of
contamination must be defined. These regulations require that specific reports addressing each
aspect of the release be prepared and submitted to the Executive Secretary (UST) of the Utah
Solid and I-fazardous Wastes Committee within the specific times following a release.
The Project Manager a~:iigned to this site is Robin D. Jenkins, and your site is identified in our
records as leaking underground storage tank (LUST) site AFFQ.
The attached Reporting and Remediation Schedule is issued in order to assist UST owners and
operators in evaluating and remediating releases from USTs, and enable owners and operators to
meet the requirements of applicable State and Federal regulations.
The Remediation Schedule identifies the specific reports required for evaluating a site where a
release has occurred, and the time you have for submitting those reports. The time frame is shown
in the column labeled "Compliance Day Required." The column labeled "Actual Compliance
Dates" is for your convenience in planning due dates.
Although Federal regulations require UST owners and operators to submit the reports within
specific times following a release, the compliance dates for submitting the applicable reports may
begin when you receive this Reporting and Remediation Schedule. For example, you must submit
an Abatement and Site Check Report within 20 days of receipt of this Schedule. The "Response
Dates" are the actual dates in which you must submit the corresponding reports. This column is
Release Site AFFQ
Page 2
also for your convenience to assist in tracking your compliance dates.
Following the Remediation Schedule are the Remediation Schedule Requirements. The
Requirements identify the specific reports and associated tasks that are required when evaluating
releases from USTs. The requirements marked by an "X" in the left hand column indicate which
reports and tasks you are required to perform at the time of the issuance of this Schedule.
As you complete the tasks in each section marked with an "X", you may wish to use the check boxes
next to each task for your own record of completion of those tasks. Requirements in the far left
hand column without an "X" identify items for evaluating releases which you are not required to
perform at this time, hut which may be required in the event that reports indicate the need for
further LUST site evaluation and work.
The required reports may be submitted on the specified staggered schedule, however if you wish
to submit all of the information required by this Schedule in one report, please make arrangements
with the Project Manager to do so.
As the owner/ operator of the UST system, it is your responsibility to meet the requirements
outlined in this Schedule. If you have a consultant or a contractor perform the necessary work, our
staff may work with those people, but you maintain the responsibility for compliance. Please
consult with your Project Manager if you have any questions, or if you anticipate problems in
meeting your Remediation Schedule.
If you have any questions concerning this Schedule and the required reports and tasks contained
herein, please contact Robin D. Jenkins at [phone].
Sincerely,
,~' r;i I/ ,
ntP.Gr';;/7
xecutive Secretary (UST)
Utah Solid and Hazardous Wastes Committee
Enclosures
cc: Gary Kleeman, EPA Region VIII
Harry L. Gibbons, M.D., M.P.H., Director, Salt Lake City /County
KPG/RDJ/cc
Shw\ust\cc\Remrev.28
-
RErvIEDIATION SCHEDULE. AFFO
Release occurs or is detected
Suspected release reported
Release confirmed
Abatement and Site Check Report
Initial Site Characterization Report
Free Product Removal Report
Investigation for Soil & Groundwater
Clean-up Report
Corrective Action Plan
Compliance
Day Required
Day 0
Day 1
Day 8
20 days*
45 days*
45 days*
60 days**
60 days**
Actual
Comp!. Dates
04-25-88
04-26-88
05-03-88
05-15-88
06-11-88
* From date of receipt of this schedule. Date Received ______ _
Response
Date
04-26-88
04-26-88
04-26-88
10-03-88
05-05-89 &
08-30-89
* * These are to be completed as directed by the Executive Secretary or this Compliance Schedule.
REMEDIATION SCHEDULE REQUIREMENTS
1. [ ] Suspected Release--This must be reported within 24 hours of determining that there may be a
release. It is the responsibility of the owner/ operator to report this release.
2. [ ] Confirmed Release--This must be reported within 7 days of determining the suspected release.
Report the confirmed release to the Project Manager and he/she will formulate a Remediation
Schedule.
3. [ ] If you know that you h:we free product on the groundwater or that groundwater or surface waters
have been contaminated, immediatelv notify the Bureau of Water Pollution Control
(801-538-6146) so that necessary permits may be obtained. If you anticipate emitting vapors to
the atmosphere, immediately notify the Bureau of Air Quality (801-538-6108) so that necessary
permits may be obtained.
4. [ ] Overfills and Spills--lf these types of releases involve less than 25 gallons and if they are cleaned
up immediately, you are not required to report them. If they are not cleaned up immediately,
you must report the event to the Executive Secretary, Solid and Hazardous Waste Committee
within 24 hours. If the release involves more than 25 gallons, you are required to report the
occurrence within 24 hours.
5. [X] Well installation and abandonment procedures must be conducted in accordance with the Utah
Division of Water Rights Administrative Rules for water well drillers.
6. [ ] Abatement and Site Check Report--These procedures and the accompanying report are due
within 20 days after receiving this Remediation Schedule. To accomplish this task, you must
1
perform am.I document the following:
a. Empty the UST system and remove all sources of contamination to prevent further release.
b. Visually inspect the site for evidence of contamination.
c. Continue to monitor and mitigate any fire or safety hazards in the contamination zone.
d. Remedy any hazards posed by contaminated soils and water that are excavated or exposed
due to activities associated with the site investigation, abatement measures, or corrective
actions.
e. Measure for the presence of a release at the most likely places and define the full extent of
contamination. Sampling must be performed in accordance with standard soil and/or
groundwater sampling protocol, and the protocol identified in State Rule R451-205-2.
Describe the methods and techniques used for sample collection, and applicable QA/QC
measures.
1. If soil borings are emplaced, submit detailed geologic logs of those borings. Show sample
collection points in the borings and any field vapor measurements obtained while
advancing the boring.
11. If groundwater monitor wells are emplaced, submit detailed geologic logs. Describe
sample collection methods and devices used for obtaining groundwater samples. Include
the number of casing volumes purged prior to sample collection.
111. Include Chain-of-Custody documentation for all samples collected.
1v. The analytical detection levels should be sufficiently low in order to detect constituents
at or below their applicable maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) or reference levels.
f. Submit a detailed site map, at an appropriate scale showing the following information:
1. Locations of present or former UST(s), including ancillary piping and dispensers.
11. Extent of any excavations and the location of the associated soil stockpile.
111. Location(s) of the release.
1v. Locations of all soil and groundwater samples collected during any phase of the
investigation; include soil boring and monitor well locations, if applicable. All sample
identification numbers shown on the site map should be consistent with the identification
numbers used on the Chain-of-Custody forms and the laboratory analysis reports.
g. Determine if there is any free product in the ground, utility lines, sewers, basements, or other
pathways of contaminant migration, and begin removal of the free product as soon as feasible.
h. Identify depth to groundwater beneath the site.
1. Describe the disposition of the excavated soil. Soils that are stockpiled on-site should be
underlain by an impermeable liner.
J. If contaminated soils are over-excavated, confirmation soil samples must be taken in order
to document that all contaminated soils have been removed.
7. [X] Initial Site Characterization--Information on the site and the nature of the release must he
reported, in writing, within 45 days after receiving this Remediation Schedule. In addition to the
information contained in the Abatement and Site Check Report, you must include:
a. Nature of the release. including a description of the known or suspected release location in
the UST system.
b. Quantity of the release and type of regulated substance released.
c. Identification of surrounding populations potentially effected by the release.
d. Local land use and population density.
e. Approximate locations of wells in the local area of where the release occurred; include well
use and well construction.
2
f. Distance to surface \vater.
g. Local groundwater quality.
h. Subsurface soil conditions and native soil types.
1. Climatological conditions (annual precipitation).
J. General location map, at an appropriate scale, showing the following features:
1. Site location.
11. Streets, labeled.
111. Location of \\'ells potentially affected by the release.
iv. Regional and local direction of groundwater flow. ~ ~
k. Detailed site map, at an appropriate scale, showing the following properly labeled features:
1. Adjacent land use surrounding the facility that could affect or be affected by the release
(include irrigation canals, drainage channels, and other relevant features).
11. Fences and property boundaries.
111. Type of on-site groundcover, such as asphalt, concrete, grass.
1v. Locations of present or former UST(s), including ancillary piping and dispensers.
v. Extent of any excavations and the location of the associated soil stockpile.
v1. Location(s) of the release.
vn. Locations of all soil and groundwater samples collected during any phase of the
investigation; include soil boring and monitor well locations, if applicable.
viii. Location of any significant subsurface features and utility conduits that could provide a
pathway for the migration of contaminants, such as sewer lines, utility lines, production
wells, dry wells, septic systems, and trenches.
ix. Location of overhead structures that may limit the access of drilling equipment.
1. Results of the sampling performed in the site check; include the laboratory analytical results
and Chain-of-Custody documentation.
m. Results of the check for free product.
n. Conclusions and recommendations concerning the site.
8. [X] Free Product Removal--Prior to a Corrective Action Plan free product, if present, must be
removed to the maximum possible extent. A report on free product recovery is required within
45 days after receiving this Remediation Schedule.
Free product removal must be conducted for the purpose of minimizing the spread of
contamination. The design of removal plans must address, at a minimum, the abatement of free
product migration. Flammable materials must be handled in a safe and competent manner.
The Free Product Removal Report must contain, but not be limited to, the following minimum
information:
a. Identity of person(s) removing the free product.
b. Estimate of the quantity, type and thickness of product observed or measured in wells,
boreholes or excavations.
c. Type of free product recovery system to be used.
d. Disposition of the recovered free product and water discharges. Discharges shall not be
disposed of in such a manner that they are placed in direct contact with the environment.
e. Effluent (water) quality from the recovery system.
f. Steps taken to obtain necessary permits (water discharge, air emission, construction, etc.).
g. Method and location of product disposal.
,.,,
.)
9. [X] Investigation for Soil and Groundwater Clean-up Report--The release site and any area possibly
affected by the release must be investigated for soil and groundwater contamination. The
investigation must address the potential effects of contaminated soil or groundwater on nearby
surface or groundwater resources. A report on this investigation must be submitted to the
Executive Secretary within 60 days after receiving this Remediation Schedule. This investigation
and report will be required if any of the following conditions exist:
a. If groundwater wells in the area have been affected by the release.
b. Free product is present.
c. Contaminated soils are in contact with the groundwater.
10. [X] Corrective Action Plan (CAP)--The Executive Secretary may require that you submit a CAP for
responding to contaminated soils and groundwater at any time after submittal of any information
concerning the site. The CAP must provide for adequate protection of human health and the
environment as determined by the Executive Secretary, Solid and Hazardous Wastes Committee.
The Executive Secretary must approve the plan which considers and addresses the following
factors:
a. Physical and chemical characteristics of the regulated substance released, including it's
toxicity, persistence, and potential for migration.
b. Hydrogeologic characteristics in the immediate vicinity and area surrounding the facility
including the following information:
1. The known or recorded depth to groundwater beneath the site using information
obtained from the Utah Division of Water Rights, U.S. Geological Survey, or other
relevant sources.
11. Direction and magnitude of groundwater flow.
m. Lithology of the subsurface as determined through excavations, soil borings, or other
sources.
iv. Local groundwater quality.
c. Proximity of nearby surface and groundwater, quality of those waters, and current and future
uses of the water resource.
d. The potential effects of residual contamination on nearby surface and ground waters.
e. An exposure assessment.
f. Any information assembled in compliance with these cleanup requirements.
Shw\ust\cc\Rcmrcv.28
4
SALT LAKE ,;~ ,1 CITY-COUNTY
HEALTH~! DEPARTMENT ti II
/\/ •f1, ZI. ,_'
L'I~" -1,:j/1 \
610 South 2nd East, Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
Phone: [phone]
TERRY D. SADLER, DIRECTOR
Division of Environmental Health
December 6, 1990
Bryan Whitaker, Manager ~
Underground Storage Tank Branch
Utah Department of Health
288 North 1460 West
Salt Lake City, Utah 84116-0690
Dear Mr. Whitaker:
.;OARD OF HEALTH
Cindy Gust-Jenson
Chairperson
Paul McClure
Vice Chairman
Dick Bollard
Joe Duke-Rosatt1
Ann Ford
Kirk Gilmore, M.D.
Quinn McKay
Neil K. Nixon, D.D.S
Rhoda Ramsey
Rulon Simmons, M.D.
D. Michael Stewart
Roy Turner
Lee Wanless
Milton Weilenmann
Sandra Ercanbrack
Secretary
Dt~ 1 1 1990
This letter summarizes the decisions and agreements made in a meeting held
m our office on December 4, 1990. The meeting was held to discuss the P.I.E. site
at 55 South Redwood Road and was attended by you, Robin Jenkins, Kent Miner,
Ron Hansen, and Garth Miner. Those agreements were as follows:
1. Since the release was discovered before UST regulations were adopted and
since the Salt Lake City-County Health Department issued a notice of
vioiation and order of compliance from which P.I.E has not been released, it
was agreed that Salt Lake City-County Health Department would take the
lead in overseeing remediation.
2. All regulatory decisions about the site will be made jointly by the Bureau of
Environmental Response and Remediation and the Salt Lake City-County
Health Department. The final decision, if requirements are in conflict, will
be the most strict of the two requirements. In any case, decisions will
comply with State regulation R450-101.
3. All communications from and to the owner/operator of the site, or their
contractors, will also be communicated to the other agency by way of copies
of documents, memos, phone calls, or meetings which ever is the most
appropriate.
If anything listed here is in error, please let me know.
KRM/gcm
Sincerely,
Kent R. Miner, Director
Bureau of Water Quality &
Hazardous Waste
Norman H Banp;r>rter
(ifJ\t'fl\()f
Suzanne Dandoy, M [),MPH
1:-:v't utn·t• Ihr, 1 tor
KennPth L Alkema
D1rr•1 tor
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Bureau of Solid & Hazardous Waste
288 North 1 460 West PO Box 16690
Salt Lake City, Utah 84116-0690
[phone]
MEMORANDUM
,.
Bryan Whitaker, Manager t=rl L
Underground Storage Tank Branch
-
Robin D. Jenkins, Enviromnental Health Scientis(j};:;s-
Underground Storage Tank Branch
November 23, 1990
Release Site APFQ, P.l.E Nationwide, Inc., 55 South Redwood
Road, Salt Lake City
Facility Identification #4001342
Mr. Garth Miner of the Salt Lake City/County Health Department has informed me that he has
been designated as the Project Manager for the above-referenced facility. The Health
Deprutment's involvement in the case began prior to the inception of federal UST regulations.
However, the Bureau of Environmental Response and Remediation has the legislative authority
to regulate underground storage tanks (USTs) pursuant to the federal regulations. While I agree
that Gruth maintain the lead on this case, only this Bureau has the legislative authority to approve
Corrective Action Plans (CAPs) and detennine appropriate cleanup levels. Moreover, it has come
to the attention of this Bureau that the referenced owner/operator (P.I.E.) has filed for
reorganization under Chapter 11. This action results in a legal responsibility on the part of this
Bureau to ensure that all corrective action measures are implemented and achieved in accordance
with the requirements of the federal UST regulations.
A Reporting and Remediation Schedule was never sent to the owner/operator because the release
predated federal regulations, and the Salt Lake City/County Health Department was the
designated lead on the case at that time. In June I qq()_ T inherited this case file from a fom1er
employee. Because this Bureau is legaJly bound to confo1mi.ng to the federal UST reporting
requirements, it is necessary the owner/operator be issued a Repo1ting ru1d Remediation Schedule.
The case file assigned to me did not contain the infonnation generated at the referenced site.
-
2
Garth requested that I review his file and provide guidance for determining further necessary
work and appropriate cleanup levels for the soils and groundwater at the site.
The file includes the following reports prepared by Blymyer Engjneers, Inc.: "Subsurface
Contamination Assessment, Phase II," dated October 3, 1988; "Subsurface Contamination
Investigation, Phase II-A," dated May 5, 1989, and; "Subsurface Contamination Investigation,
Phase 11-B," <lated August 30, 1989. The following comments and recommendations are based
on this review.
BACKGROUND
The referenced site is an operating facility that dispenses diesel and gasoline from USTs. An
inventory reconciliation revealed that approximately 4000 gallons, or more, of diesel was released
from a failed product line in April 1988. The release was repo1ted to this Bureau on April 26,
1988.
The schedule of USTs at the referenced facility, as indicated on the facility's Notification of
USTs fonn, and the State's database, is shown below:
Tank Size
Tank# (gallons) Substance Stored Use
1 10,000 diesel m use
2 10,000 diesel in use
3 10,000 diesel in use
4 J 2,000 diesel in use
5 12,000 diesel in use
6 12,000 diesel in use
7 J 2,000 diesel ill use
8 10,000 antifreeze ill use
9 3,000 used oil ill use
10 8,000 new oil in use
11 10,000 gasolilte m use
12 J 2,000 diesel closed in place, 1959
13 12,000 diesel closed in place, 1959
14 5,000 gasoline closed in place, 1959
October 3, 1988 Blymyer Rep011
-
3
In June 1988, F.W. Jones retrofitted and repaired the faulty p1pmg, and ERT Resource
Engineering emplaced four soil borings (Bl-B4); B2 was converted to a groundwater monitor
well. The soil borings were backfiJle<l and abandoned, and the monitor well left intact. Gross
soil contamination was observed in all of the borings and free product was observed while
(killing B2. Water samples withdrawn from B-1 through B-4 exhibited the following
concentrations of the constituents analyzed:
Boring TPH B T E X i!!gfil
Bl 6000* 60 <l0 <10 25
B2 free product
B3 30,000* 47 2 7 18
B4 70,000* na na na na
B4 5900** na na na na
* analytical method 8015 (modified California OHS)
** analytical method 418.l
na= not analyzed
The Repo1t describes that in August 1988, under the <lirection of Hunter ESE, eight groundwater
monitor wells were installed. Depth to groundwater reportedly occurred at approximately nine
feet below lm1d surface (bls). Soil contamination was observed to a depth of approximately nine
feet bis in wells #1 through #7. Free phase hydrocarbons were measured in wells #I through #6,
m1d a sheen was reported on the water in #7. Because the Repo1t does not indude chemical
water quality data for the seven wells, it is assumed that water samples were not collected from
those wells.
On May 6, 1988, Chen and Associates measured 3.8 feet of total free phase hydrocarbon
thickness in B2.
May 1989 Blymyer Report
The Report states that on November 7, 1988, Hunter ESE installed 13 more wells (#9 through
#21 ), resulting i11 a total of 21 wells at that time. An approximately 1101thwest hych aulic gt adient
was asce1tained.
Soil s~unples were collected from the borings ,md TPH contmnination was observed in# l 0. # 11,
#12, #18, #19, #20, and #21. Water samples were collected from the wells with no free product,
and were analyzed for TPH as diesel. Wells #11 and #18 exhibited 6500 ug/1 and 21.000 ug/l,
respectively.
-
4
Free product thickness was measured in the wells between November 2 and 16, 1988, and is
reported below:
Well# Free Product thickness (feet)
1 6.4
2 J .3
3 0.2
4 4.7
5 6.6
6 5.1
7 film (sheen)
8 not recorded
9 0.75
19 0.6
20 1.65
21 6.6
On November 29, 1988, free product recovery was jnitiated. and the wells exhibiting the greatest
product thickness were pumped. As of February J 989, approximately 2200 gallons of diesel fuel
had been recovered. 111e recovered fuel is reporteclly being stored on-site in USTs, and used to
fuel tractors.
The Report also mentions that a leak was discovered in an on-site gasoline UST.
August 30, 1989 Report
The Repott states that Dames and Moore emplaced seven groundwater monitor wells (#22
through #28) outside of the prope1ty boundaries in order to detennine off site migration of the
petroleum contaminants.
The soil samples that were collected from the borings, and the analytical results of those samples
are tabulated below:
Well#
Soil Sample
Depth (ft)
TPH
(mg/kg)
...... -
5
22 11-J 1.5 <3.0
22 unknown <3.0
22 20-20.5 <to
23 6-6.5 <3.0
23 ll.5-12 <3.0
23 15.5-16 <3.0
24 5.5-6 <3.0
24 11.5-12 2000
24 15.5-16 <3.0
The Report states (page 7) that a soil sample collected from Well #22 from a depth of 10 feet
exhibited TPH concentrations of 2400 mg/kg, but there are no analytical results confirming that.
There were no free phase hydrocarbons observed in Wells #22 through #28. Groundwater
samples were collected from the wells and submitted to a laboratory for the analysis of TPH as
diesel. The analytical results did not detect the presence of diesel-related TPH above the 50 ug/l
laboratory detection limit.
RECOMMENDATIONS
General Reconunendatiuns
The following general recommendations are ba-,ed on a review limited to the infonnation
provided:
1. Continue to monitor groundwater elevations on a regular schedule, preferably
at the time of free product measurement and groundwater sampling. This must he
conducted during non-pumping periods.
2. Measure all wells for the presence of free phase hyd.rucrulions on a regular
schedule.
3. Collect groundwater samples from the wells with no free phase hydrocarbons
on a regular schedule. Because gasoline-and diesel-related constituents have been
documented in the stiil and g.round"vater at this site, it is necessary that all
samples he analyzed for the presence of TPH as gasoline. BTEX. organoleacl,
oaphthalene. ,md benzo( a )pyrene. The analytical detection 1 imits must be
sufficiently low in order to detect conbstituents at or below their maximum
contaminant levels (MCLs) or reference levels.
6
4. Collect samples of the free phase product from all wells and determine the
product type.
5. The USTs that ru·e used for storing the recovered free product are regulated
systems and must meet all pertinent requirements for UST systems. The locations
of all USTs must identified on a detailed and appropriately scaled site map. The
integrity of those USTs must be detennined to ensure that they are not leaking or
have the potential for leaking.
6. Resolve conflicting infonnation of all analytical results and statements made
in the Repotts, specifically with respect to the contamination reported in Well
#22.
7. Require that owner/operator (or environmental consult.mt) submit detailed maps
and info1mation regarding. the schedule of pumping and product recovery. as well
as appropriately scaled, detailed site maps showing the locations of recovery wells
and the effective radii of influence of the recovery wells.
8. It is recommended that the full extent and degree of soil cont.uni.nation be
defined and remediated. Appropriate soil clemrnp levels can be estimated using
the Underground Storage Tank Branch's guidance document entitled "Guidelines
for Estimating Numeric Cleanup Levels for Petroleum-Contaminated Soil at
Underground Storage Tank Release Sites."
9. It is recommended that groundwater be cleru1ed up to levels of constituent
concentrations consistent with federal drinking water MCLs and proposed MCLs,
as adopted by the Utah Bureau of Water Pollution Control's Groundwater Quality
Protection Standards.
Reconunendations for Role Designation and Agency Responsibilities
In light of the owner/operators' declaration of fit ing Chapter 11, the involvement and
responsibility of this Bureau is inevitable and unavoidable. It is therefore necessary that rolt's
be defined for this Bureau and the Salt Lake City/County Health Department. The suggested
roles are outlined below. The responsibilites of this Bureau are dictated by the the legislative
mandate requiring that this Bure;:iu ensure compliance with the federal requirements co11ce111i11g
USTs.
Suggested ResponsihHities for the Salt Lake City/County
Health Department
1. Oversee abatement and investigative activities.
-
7
2. Review reports generated by the owner/operator and assist in detenuining compliance,
and make recommedations for further work, if necessary.
3. Establish monitoring schedule for items #1, #2, an<l #3 in the General
Recommendations section cited above.
4. Review an<l evaluate analytical results of infonnation generated from items #3, #4, and
#7 in the General Reconunendations section cited above.
5. Ensure that all onsite USTs meet federal requirements for USTs.
Suggested Responsibilities for the Bureau of Environmental
Response and Remediation
l. Review CAP and ensure that corrective action will meet the federal requirements.
2. Ensure that required reports are submitted by their applicable due dates.
3. Ensure that appropriate deanup levels are attained.
4. Issue compliance orders if necessary.
Joint Responsibilities
l. Issue Reporting and Remediation Schedule to owner/operator.
2. Ensure that the owner/operator and environmental consultant knows that both agencies
must receive copies of all pertinent information, data, and reports generated.
cc: Kent Miner
Salt Lake City/County Health Department
Garth Miner
Salt Lake City/County Health Department
JlERR-Af7FQ PIE
I l/2Jt'}O
T0•
R F A Jl r; ....:.
Utah D~v~a~oo env~roameot•1 Hea1th
~88 North 146U We ■t
P.O. Bos :i.ee~o
Sa1t Lake c~ty, UT 84:Lie-oego
AGENCY / l"%RM1 SL< Hc:'s:eL.Wld-Qcet= C:tT'".C1 STATlll1
CONF~aMATXON NUMBER• .S::? '--I-9.S-c;:J...:::L.
NUNDER OF l?AGSS TO FOLLOW, 2
SUB.JECT r /2 ff'2.:«:!S: S:C-.-._s-_, rM:= 8:t'-:e:G>
FROM1 R.:::.@toc ::::S:-en-t:,< C n-£ S
<1z=
Jl"AX ·•
l!ll!lMA.RKS •
<DOl> §iJB-CiP10
PHONS 111
CONF%RMATXCIN NVMBERI < BP:L.> 53ft-Olr2l.
LOGGED•
SENTI
C'~FYRMA.T:J:ON s
TRANSMISSION
THIS DOCUMENT
WAS SENT
** #
COUNT**
8
<REDUCED
REPORT
SAMPLE ABOVE)
***SEND*~
NO REMOTE STATION I. D. START TIME DURATION #PAGES COMMENT
1 8015344502 11-2B-90 4:29PM 4' 07" B
TOTAL 0:04·07" B
XEROX TELECOPIER 7021
TO:
TELE C™O PIER RE OU EST
Utah Division Environmental Health
288 North 1460 West
P.O. Box 16690
Salt Lake City, UT 84116-0690
GA&7: I± /l,J,Nc'7~ PHONE #:
AGENCY / FIRM: SLC /-{l-";AL'T)rf oeer CITY: STATE:
TELEFAX MACHINE NUMBER: CONFIRMATION NUMBER:
NUMBER OF PAGES TO FOLLOW: 7
FROM:
()Y------
FAX #: ( 801) 538-6016
REMARKS:
CONFIRMATION NUMBER: [phone]
LOGGED:
SENT:
CONFIRMATION:
. ,
Suzanne f>andm 11 D I! PH
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMEt\'.TAL HEALTH
BureaJ er Sclrd & Hazar::!cus VVas1e
288 North 1460 Wesl P CJ Bo, 16690
Salt La<e Co1v Ulan 84116-0690
,sot 1 538-6110
MEMORANDUM
r,
Bryan Whitaker, Manager ~t-·
Underground Storage Tank Branch
I -Robin D. Jenkins, Environmental Health Scientist ,~
Underground Storage Tank Branch
November 23, 1990
Release Site AFFQ, P.l.E Nationwide, Inc., 55 South Redwood
Road, Salt Lake City
Facility Identification #4001342
Mr. Garth Miner of the Salt Lake City/County Health Department has informed me that he has
been designated as the Project Manager for the above-referenced facility. The Health
Department's involvement in the case began prior to the inception of federal UST regulations.
However, the Bureau of Environmental Response and Remediation has the legislative authority
to regulate underground storage tanks (USTs) pursuant to the federal regulations. While I agree
that Garth maintain the lead on this case, only this Bureau has the legislative authority to approve
Corrective Action Plans (CAPs) and detennine appropriate cleanup levels. Moreover, it has come
to the attention of this Bureau that the referenced owner/operator (P.l.E.) has filed for
reorganization under Chapter 11. This action results in a legal responsibility on the part of this
Bureau to ensure that all corrective action measures are implemented and achieved in accordance
with the requirements of the federal UST regulations.
A Reporting and Remediation Schedule was never sent to the owner/operator because the release
predated federal regulations, and the Salt Lake City/County Health Department was the
designated lead on the case at th~t ti.me. In June i <;90. f ;,,-u'ic1it~d thh case file from a fom1er
employee. Because this Bureau is legally bound to conforming to the federal UST repo1ting
requirements. it is necessary the owner/operator be issued a Repmting and Remediation Schedule.
The case file assigned to me did not contain the infonnation generated at the referenced site.
✓ ,~ ',
:/\
~'
/ '· \
I
2
Garth requested that I review his file and provide guidance for <letennining fur.her necessary
work and appropriate cleanup levels for the soils and grow1dwater at the site.
The file includes the following reports prepared by Blymyer Engineers, Inc.: "Subsurface
Contamination Assessment, Phase II," <lated October 3, 1988; "Subsurface Contamination
Investigation, Phase II-A," dated May 5, 1989, and; "Subsurface Contamination Investigation,
Phase 11-B," dated August 30, 1989. 1l1e following comments an<l recommendations are based
on this review.
BACKGROUND
The referenced site is an operating facility that dispenses diesel and gasoline from USTs. An
inventory reconciliation revealed that approximately 4000 gallons, or more, of diesel was released
from a failed product line in April 1988. 1l1e release was reported to this Bureau on April 26.
1988.
The schedule of USTs at the referenced facility, as indicated on the facility's Notification of
USTs fonn, and the State's database, is shown below:
Tank Size
Tank# (gallons) Substance Stored Use
l 10,000 diesel m use
2 10,000 diesel in use
3 10,000 diesel in USC
,•4 12.000 diesel muse
" ,c,--') 5 12,000 diesel in use
\ _cv.'\\ ( 6 12.000 diesel in use
,-,,'' ) ,7 12.000 diesel in use
~~
',,.., ( 8 10,000 antifreeze in use
'~9 3,000 used oil in use
10 8,000 new oil m use
11 10,000 gasoline in use
12 12,000 diesel closed in place, 1959
13 12,000 diesel dosed in place, 1959
14 5,000 gasoline dosed in place, 1959
October 3, 1988 Blymyer Report
3
In June 1988, F.W. Jones retrofitted and repaired the faulty p1pmg, and ERT Resource
Engineering emplaced four soil borings (Bl-B4); B2 was converted to a groundwater monitor
well. The soil borings were backfiJled and abandoned, and the monitor well left intact. Gross
soil contamination was observed in all of the borings :md free product was observed while
drilling B 2. Water samples withdrawn from B-1 through B-4 exhibited the followir -
concentrations of the constituents analyzed:
Boring TPH B T
Bl 6000* 60 <LO
B2 free product
B3 30.000* 47 2
B4 70.000* na na
B4 5900** na na
* analytical method 8015 (modified California OHS)
** analytical method 418.l
na= not analyzed
E X i!!&ll
<10 25
7 18
na na
na na
The Report describes that in August l 988, under the direction of Hunter ESE, eight groundwater
monitor wellc; were installed. Depth to groundwater reportedly occurred at approximately nine
feet below land surface (bis). Soil contamination was observed to a depth of approximately nine
feet bis in wells #1 through #7. Free phase hydrocarbons were measured in wells #1 through #6,
and a sheen was reported on the water in #7. Because the Report does not include chemical
water quality data for the seven wells, it is assumed that water samples were not collected from
those wells.
On May 6, 1988, Chen and Associates measured 3.8 feet of total free phase hydrocarbon
thickness in B2.
May 1989 Blymyer Report
The Report states that on November 7. 1988, Hunter ESE installed 13 more wells (#9 through
#21 ), resulting in a total of 21 wells at that time. An approximately no11hwest hydraulic gradient
was ascertained.
Soil samples were collected from the borings and TPH contamination was observed in # l 0. # 11.
#12. #18. #19. #20, and #21. Water samples were collected from the wells with no free product.
and were analyzed for TPH as diesel. Wells #11 and #18 exhibited 6500 ug/1 and 21.000 ug/1,
respectively.
4
Free product thickness was measured in the wells between November 2 and 16, J 988, and is
reported below:
Well#
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
19
20
21
Free Product thickness (feet)
6.4
1.3
0.2
4.7
6.6
5.1
film (sheen)
not recorded
0.75
0.6
1.65
6.6
On November 29, 1988, free product recovery wac; initiated, and the wells exhibiting the greatest
product thickness were pumped. As of February 1989, approximately 2200 gallons of diesel fuel
had been recovered. 1be recovered fuel is reponeclly being stored on-site in USTs, and used to
fuel tractors.
The Repon also mentions that a leak was discovered in an on-site gasoline UST.
August 30, 1989 Report
The Repon states that Dames and Moore emplaced seven grow1dwater monitor wells (#22
through #28) outside of the property boundaries in order to determine offsite migration of the
petroleUD1 contaminants.
The soil samples that were collected from the borings, and the analytical results of those samples
are tabulated below:
Well#
Soil Sample
Depth (ft)
TPH
(mg/kg)
5
22 11-11.5 <3.0
22 unknown <3.0
22 20-20.5 <3.0
23 6-6.5 <J.0
23 ll.5-12 <3.0
23 15.5-16 <3.0
24 5.5-6 <J.0
24 11.5-12 2000
24 15.5-16 <3.0
The Report states (page 7) that a soil sample collected from Well #22 from a depth of 10 feet
exhibited TPH concentrations of 2400 mg/kg, but there are no analytical results confinning that.
There were no free phase hydrocarbons observed in Wells #22 through #28. Groundwater
samples were collected from the wells and submitted to a laboratory for the analysis of TPH as
diesel. The analytical results did not detect the presence of diesel-related TPH above the 50 ug/1
laboratory detection limit.
RECOMMENDATIONS
General Recommendations
111e following general recommendations are ba.c;ed on a review limited to the infonnation
provided:
1. Continue to monitor groundwater elevations on a regular schedule, preferably
at the time of free product measurement and groundwater sampling. 11lis must be
conducted during non-pumping periods.
2. Measure all wells for the presence of free phase hydrocarbons on a regular
schedule.
3. Collect groundwater samples from the wells with no free phase hydrocarbons
on a regular schedule. Because gaso)jne-and diesel-related constituents have been
documented in the soil m1d grn•_mdwater at this site. it is necessary that all
samples he mrnlyzed for the presence of TPH as gasoline. BTEX, orgm10lead.
naphthalene. and benzo( a)pyrene. TI1e analytical detection limits must be
sufficiently low in order to <letect con~stituents at or below their maximwn
contaminant levels (MCLs) or reference levels.
6
4. Collect samples of the free phac;e product from all wells and detennine the
product type.
5. 1l1e USTs that are used for storing the recovered free product are regulated
systems and must meet all pertinent requirements for UST systems. 1l1e locations
of all USTs must identified on a detailed and appropriately scaled site map. The
integrity of those USTs must be detennined to ensure that they are not leaking or
have the potential for leaking.
6. Resolve conflicting infonnation of all analytical results and statements made
in the Reports, specifically with respect to the contamination reported in Well
#22.
7. Require that owner/operator ( or environmental consultant) submit detailed maps
and infomiation regarding the schedule of pumping and product recovery, as wen
as appropriately scaled, detailed site maps showing the locations of recovery wells
and the effective radii of influence of the recovery wells.
8. It is recommended that the full extent and degree of soil contamination be
defmed and remediated. Appropriate soil cleanup levels can be estimated using
the Underground Storage Tank Branch's guidance document entitled "Guidelines
for Estimating Numeric Cleanup Levels for Petroleum-Contmninated Soil at
Underground Storage Tank Release Sites."
9. It is recommended that groundwater be cleaned up to levels of constituent
concentrations consistent with federal drinking water MCLs and proposed MCLs,
as adopted by the Utah Bureau of Water Pollution Control's Groundwater Quality
Protection Standards.
Recommendations for Role Designation and Agency Responsibilities
In light of the owner/operators' declaration of filing Chapter 11, the involvement and
responsibility of this Bureau is inevitable and unavoidable. It is therefore necessary that roles
be defined for this Bureau and the Salt Lake City/County Health Department. The suggested
roles are outlined below. The responsibilites of this Bureau are dictated by the the legislative
mandate requiring that this Bureau ensure compliance with the federal requirements concerning
USTs.
Suggested Responsibilities for the Salt Lake City/County
Health Department
1. Oversee abatement and investigative activities.
7
2. Review reports generated by the owner/operator and assist in detenuining compliance,
and make recommedations for further work, if necessary.
3. Establish monitoring schedule for items #1, #2, and #3 in the General
Recommendations section cited above.
4. Review and evaluate analyticuJ results of information generated from items #3, #4, and
#7 in the General Recommendations section cited above.
5. Ensure that all onsite USTs meet federal requirements for USTs.
Suggested Responsibilities for the Bureau of Environmental
Response and Remediation
1. Review CAP and ensure that corrective action will meet the federal requirements.
2. Ensure that required reports are submitted by their applicable due dates.
3. Ensure that appropriate cleanup levels are attained.
4. Issue compliance orders if necessary.
Joint Responsibilities
1. Issue Reporting and Remediation Schedule to owner/operator.
2. Ensure that the owner/operator and environmental consultant knows that both agencies
must receive copies of all pertinent information, data, and reports generated.
cc: Kent Miner
Salt Lake City/County Health Department
Garth Miner
Salt Lake City/County Health Department
llERR-AFFQ.l'IB
11/23/90
I
I
!
I
BL YMYER ENGINEERS, INC.
1829 C!,~,,,ent Ave.
ALAMEDA, CALIFORNIA 94501
(4 Hi) 521-3773
TO NATIONAL WAREHOUSE INVESTMENT CO.
Four Embarcadero Center, Suite 3150
San Francisco, California 94111
GENTLEMEN:
DATE i J0887 3 October 4, 1990
,._TTENTION
Marc Malardino
RE
PIE NATIONWIDE
35 Redwood Road, Salt Lake City
t--·
'·
WE ARE SENDING YOU GC Attached D Under separate cover via __________ the following items:
u Shop drawings D Prints D Plans □ Samples □ Specifications
0 Copy of letter C Change order □---·---------------------
COPIES ! DATE NO DESCRIPTION
1 10/3/88 SUBSURFACE CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENT, PHASE II
1 .5/5/89 I SUBSURFACE CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION, PHASE II-A
1 Section 15480 SPECIAL PIPING SYSTEMS
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
D For approval
fJ For your use
[J As requesterl
0 For review and comment
C FOR BIDS DUE
REMARKS
i:J Approved as submitted
!-J Approved as noted
D Returned for corrections
0
19
D Resubmit __ copies for approval
D Submit __ copies for distribution
D Return __ corrected prints
D PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US
COPY TO _____________________ _
SIGNED· Chris Falbo
If enclosure, are not as noted, k1ndfy not.fy us .at once.
/err
FIGCKE 2
11
S371,t
----: :-,,
' i .,.,. --
~-___J
ll--~-!l"'"""il~
~,._--1--~~
,
Ol "•
~! I
~
·~ \
L·
·i
NOl.lv'~07 31.IS -~ 3HnE>l.::f
A.ii~ 3>1V7 1.7VS 31d
'D
·1::'
~----'--------+ --------4:-------
,t?->
<-~ -'"' ' ·-
~~
I
I
,: . . ,,
"' '-
z f _,,
"' ti,
APPENDIX A
I'
./ y
lELECOPIER COVER LETlER
LJI\IE 1i~r;1 21 t I 1938 T I ME_.....1 ...... 1 .....i: 1~s-a~ro----
PLEASE LJELIVER lHE FOLLOWING PAGES TO:
NAME Chris Falbo
FIRM B/S
FROM:
HnME Mike Pounders/Peggy Pitts
WE ARE lRANSMITTING 21 PAGES <JHCLUUING COVER SHEET) FROM A
SIIAl1P FO -200
[phone]
El.JASE CALL US BACK A[ l904> 396-5>00 Jf PROBL~S OCCUR OR IE
ALL PAGES ARE NU[ RECEIVED,
MESSAGE
This is t~e copy of the Phase II testing for Salt Lake City, ~T.
BLYMYER
ENGINEERS, INC.
?HASE II
·,'onducted nt:
J. I.=. :r ATIO:-nHJE
:. : ?.EDFOOD :'.\C -~::'
~~L7 LAYE CITY, UTAH
.?or:
".I.E. i·lATIO:~'.HDE
2oso ::r:r.;s ~O:\'
:ACXSO~VILLS, 7l0~I~A 32203
'.;ctober 3, 1988
i
i:
I'
BLYMYER rr------i(BF~-ENGINEERs. INC. ~
SUBSURFACE CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENT
PHASE II
Conducted at:
P.I.E. NATIONWIDE
55 REDWOOD ROAD
SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
For:
P.I.E. NATIONWIDE
2050 KINGS ROAD
JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA J22C3
October 3, 1988
#8873
I
i I
l
I
: f
' ' I I
' : ·: -1
I •.
I ' I l :1
I , :, I
11 1
11 I
SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Background and Scope of Work
Site Conditions
DATA ACQUISITION
Precision Tank Testing
Piping Retrofit
Initial Monitoring Well Sampling
Monitoring Well Installation
Monitoring Well Development
Soil Sample Collection And Analysis
Ground~ater Sample Collection And Analysis
Site Survey And Gauging
DATA ANALYSIS
Site Stratigraphy
Direction of Groundwater Flow
Extent of Contamination
CONCLUSIONS
RECOMMENDATIONS
PAGE
1
2
3
5
6
7
7
7
8
8
8
9
9
9
11
12
I,
FIGURE 1:
FIGURE 2:
APPENDIX A:
APPENDIX B:
APPENDIX C:
APPENDIX D:
APPENDIX E:
APPENDIX F:
LIST OF FIGURES
Site Location Map
Site Map
APPENDICIES
Limited Phase II Subsurface
Investigation at the Salt Lake City, Utah
PIE Truck Terminal Site
Precision Tank Testing Results
Monitoring Well Sampling Report
Monitoring Well And Soil Boring Logs
Soil Sample Analytical Results
Monitoring Well Top of Casing, Gauging Data, And
Free Product Thickness Data
SUMMARY
Inc. was retained by P.I.E. Nation1'ide on
Blymyer
April
Engineers,
2 5,
1988 to investigate a possible release of diesel fuel
facility operated by
P.I.E.
to the environment at a Salt Lake City
and owned by National Warehouse Investment Corporation.
BEI reviewed existing site conditions and all previous reports
made available.
sampling.
monitoring wells,
BEI then arranged for precision tank testing,
product line testing,
product line repair,
installation of groundwater monitoring wells and groundwater
Free phase hydrocarbons have been observed in all
Based on the above work,
soil sampling,
BEI has prepared the
following report and recommendations for further work.
-1 -
i i
I N':'RODUCTION
Background And Scope of Work
On March 7,
ERT, Inc.
1988, National Warehouse Investment Company retained
to conduct a subsurface investigation at a National
Warehouse Investment Corporation owned facility located at 55
Salt Lake City, Utah, operated by P.I.E. Redwood Road,
Nationwide. The purpose of the subsurface investigation was to
determine an order of magnitude cost estimate for, future
remediation. The details of the investigation are presented in a
report, titled "Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation, at
the Salt Lake City,
ERT (Appendix A).
Utah PIE Truck Terminal Site", prepared by
Included in the assessment were the performance of chemical
analyses on both groundwater and soil samples. Four groundwater
sa;nples collected from groundwater monitoring wells installed
on-site were analyzed for total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) and
Benzer1e 1 Toluene Ethyl Benzene and Xylene (BTEX). One soil
sample w'as collected from each soil boring at a depth of 10-
11. 5 feet and was analyzed for TPH and BTEX. The results of
these ana.1.yses indicated the presence of all suspected
contaminants in the soil and groundwater.
After presentation of the Phase II report by ERT, shop personnel
at the Salt Lake City Facility reported inventory discrepancies
observed during the use of the diesel fuel underground storage
tank system. During the previous month, inventory reconciliation
records indicated a discrepancy of 4,000 gallons lost from the
tank system. P.I.E. immediately discontinued use of the fueling
-2 -
I
j
:l
;/
' l
I
i
!
l 1 _.
system until an investigation could be conducted to identify the
location of the apparent leak.
Blymyer Engineers was retained to identify the location of the
fuel system leak, arrange for any needed repairs, and to conduct
further subsurface investigative W'ork to define the extent of
hydrocarbon contamination. Based on the further subsurface
investigative W'ork, remedial action plans W'ould theh be
evaluated. The additional subsurface investigation consisted of:
1) The installation of eight groundW'ater monitoring W'ells; and
2) The analysis of soil and W'ater samples for total petroleum
hydrocarbons as diesel.
P.I.E. authorized BEI to perform the above scope of W'ork on
July 20, 1988.
Site Conditions
The site is located in a combined industrial and commercial area
at 55 RedW'ood Road, Salt Lake City, Utah (Figure 11). The
buildings on-site are presently used as a freight transfer
terminal, maintenance shop, and fueling building, while the
yard is used for the parking of trucks and trailers. The yard is
surfaced W'ith asphalt and concrete.
The schedule of tanks on the property is as follows (Figure 2):
a) Seven ( 7 ) 12,000 gallon diesel tanks;
b) One ( 1 ) 10,000 gallon gasoline tanks;
c) One (1 ) 10,000 gallon anti-freeze tank;
d ) One (1) 8,000 gallon motor oil tank; and
e) One (1) 3,000 gallon waste oil tank
-3 -
I
; 1
ij
li'
I
I
I
I
/i
I f·
f:
l
I
I , I
': I
I
I· , I
Four 12,000 gallon diesel tanks are manifolded in two sets of
two, at the southeast corner of the fueling building. Three
12,000 gallon diesel tanks are manifolded directly east of the
fueling building. The seven diesel tanks were originally plumbed
to a single fuel distribution line inside the fueling building,
which then distributed fuel to three dispensing lanes. In
addition, 3 underground storage tanks have been filled with
sand and abandoned on the property. These tanks lie under the
fuel building.
-4 -
I
I·
I
I
I.
I •
l I
' I 11
: 1
i : ,:
I'
'
It
';
i:
! '
11
IJ
,I ,,
I
-DATA ACQUISITION
Precision Tank T~sting
Precision underground storage tank testing and product line
testing were conducted in order to identify the source of the
fuel leak. Air testing of the diesel fuel product line was
conducted on April 26, 1988, by F. W. Jones Company. The product
line was tested from both diesel storage areas to the pain~ where
the common distribution line inside the shop building rose above
grade. This test indicated that the product line would not hold
air pressure and that the line was leaking.
Precision testing of one 10,000 gallon gasoline tank (T-8 on
Figure 2) was conducted on May 5, 1988 by Hunter Environmental
Services. The tank was filled with diesel fuel for testing. This
test indicated that at a test level of 124 inches above the
bottom of the tank, the tank was tight with a leak rate of +.033.
At a test level of 151 inches above the bottom of the tank, the
tank indicated a leak rate of -.423 (Appendix B). An apparent
leak exists in either the suction product delivery line, vent
line, fill port, or fitting on top of T-8. P.I.E. has
discontinued the use of this fueling system pending further in-
vestigation.
Precision testing of the three 12,000 gallon diesel tanks to the
east of the fueling building (T-13, T-14, and T-15 on Figure 2)
was conducted on May 6, 1988. Precision testing of the four
12,000 gallon diesel tanks to the southeast of the fueling
building (T-3, T-4, T-5 and T-6) was conducted on May 25, 1988.
-5 -
i '
Both tests were conducted by Hunter Environmental Services. Both
systems were tested at low levels, because all product lines had
been disconnected as a result of the previous air check. The May
6th testing indicated that at a test level of 102 inches above
tank bottom T-13, T-14, and T-15 were tight, with a leak rate of
+.032 gph (Appendix B). The testing conducted on May 25, 1988
revealed that at a test level of 96 inches above tank bottom T-3
and T-4 were tight, with a leak rate of -.009 gph (Appendix B). A
leak rate of -.240 was observed on T-5 and of -.300 on T-6,
at a test level of 93 inches and 92-1/2 inches respectively.
Based on the tank results for T-5 and T-6, further investigation
was planned to determined the location of the leaks on both
tanks.
The two suspect tanks were uncovered and precision tested on June
1, 1988. During excavation the siphon between the two tanks was
noted to be corroded. The siphon pipe was replaced and the tank
retested by F. W. Jones and Company. As noted in the precision
tank testing results, both tanks tested tight, with a leak rate
of -.020 on the east tank (T-6) and a leak rate of -.017 on the
iest tank (see Appendix B).
Piping Retrofit
lased on the results of the precision tank testing, it was
iecided that new product delivery piping should be designed and
installed. The new piping was designed to run above grade, to
1inimize the threat to the environment. The first phase of the
retrofit was completed in June of 1988 by F. W. Jones and
ompany. The fueling system passed the Salt Lake City Fire
-6 -
"
Ii
,,
! l
~ I
·11 I. r:
i <
r ~l ;,., ld
'fl I ',I
'1, • ri:
:Hi \j,
• I ~i!
I I
1/
!ji i ' t .,
•I :it
'" i: ii .,
1-
I
,
I
ii .,.,
,i
•ij
• I ,d
'' ,1 ! :1
I :I I l1
·' ~ I
'.i
~ !
,1
:I
•i ·,
:i
•I
ii
Marshal Final inspection on July 8,
using the new fueling system.
Initial Monitoring Well Sampling
1988. P.I.E. is currently
On May 6, 1988, Chen and Associates performed groundwater
monitoring well sampling at one existing well at the facility
(Appendix C). The well had been installed by ERT during their
Phase I investigation and is located as shown on Figure 2. During
this sampling, groundwater was not encountered. Free product was
observed from 9.6 feet below grade to 16.5 feet below grade, the
depth of the well.
Monitoring Well Installation
Eight monitoring wells were installed in order to define the
extent of contamination. The drilling was performed during the
period from August 1st to August 3rd, 1988 by Environmental
Science and Engineering, Inc. (ESE). The locations of the newly
installed monitoring wells, as well as locations of the original
four soil borings completed by ERT, are indicated on Figure #2.
The well constructions are presented in Appendix D.
Monitoring Well Development
The eight monitoring wells were developed by ESE on August 4th,
1988. Each well was alternately surged and pumped until the water
contained in the well was free of visible silt particles. All
water pumped from the wells was stored on-site in sealed 55-
gallon drums.
-7 -
' '
I
l
' 'I
Ii
Soil Sample Collection And Analysis
Soil samples were collected at 5-foot intervals from all eight
bores with a California split spoon sampler. Each sample was
described on-site by an ESE geologist and then packaged for
shipment to ~ET Pacific, Inc., a California State-certified
laboratory, for analysis for total petroleum hydrocarbons as
1iesel. The geologic logs of the newly installed monitoring wells
are presented in Appendix D.
presented in Appendix E.
The analytical results are
Groundwater Sample Collection And Analysis
Groundwater samples were attempted from each of the eight
monitoring wells for analysis for dissolved hydrocarbons as
diesel. Three well volumes were removed from each well prior to
sampling. In attempting to obtain groundwater samples for
laboratory analysis, it was noted that all wells contained free
product on top of the water table. Product thickness was gauged
in each well and indicated that product apparently runs in a
north/south direction at the site. Product thickness data are
presented in Appendix F.
Site Survey And Gauging
The locations of the newly installed monitoring wells were
surveyed relative to the building located on-site. In addition,
the top of casing elevations of the monitoring wells were
surveyed relative to an arbitrary datum of 100.00 feet. (An
existing bench mark was designated as 100.00 feet). The depth to
water in each well was also gauged in order to determine the
water-table elevation across the site. The top of casing and
gauging data are presented in Appendix F.
-8 -
I 1
i
I
DATA ANALYSIS
Site Stratigraphy
Soils data collected during the monitoring well and soil boring
installation indicate that the site is underlain primarily with
sands and silts with varying amounts of clay. No obvious pattern
associated with soil heterogeneities is apparent.
Direction of Groundwater Flow
On August 5, 1988 the depth to fluid ranged from approximately 7
to 10 feet across the site. Based on the August 5, 1988 gauging
data adjusted for the presence of free product, a groundwater
head contour map was attempted. However, the amount of free
product prevented the accurate gauging of water levels so that a
groundwater contour map cannot be derived from the present data.
At this time groundwater flow cannot be determined.
Extent of Contamination
The results of soil analyses and groundwater sampling confirms
that free phase hydrocarbons as diesel exists in the subsurface
at this site. The thickness of product in each well suggests that
the free product plume runs in a north-south direction from the
leak source. Significant thickness of product were observed in
MW-1 and MW-6, the most northerly and southerly located wells
respectively, as well as MW-4 and MW-5 close to the leak source.
Wells MW-2, MW-3, MW-7 and MW-8 all have less than six inches of
product, suggesting that product has migrated much less to the
east and west than to the north and south.
-9 -
: i ' i
Laboratory results of soil samples indicate that soil
contamination at this point is confined primarily to the soils at
the vadose/groundwater interface. Samples of soils obtained below
the water table indicate no presence of hydrocarbons. The highest
levels of hydrocarbon contamination in soils observed in MW-1 and
~W-2, farthest to the north and northeast of the leak source. The
remaining samples contained lesser amounts of contamination in
MW-4 and MW-5, MW-6 and MW-7. Minor amounts of contamination were
observed in MW-3 and MW-8. Contamination was observed at the 7.5-
9 foot level of almost all bores. In addition, contamination was
observed at the 15-16.5 foot level in MW-1.
-10 -
. I
Ii
'!'
i
.1
Ii
1
I
j
CONCLUSIONS
Based upon the observations and analytical results presented
above, Blymyer Engineers concludes the following:
o Free phase hydrocarbon contamination exists at the site.
o The source of the leak has been determined and has been
remedied.
Fueling system components are not currently releasing
diesel into the environment.
o A high level leak exists on the gasoline storage system.
This system is not in use pending further investigation.
o Free product contamination apparently is centered near the
area between the fuel building and the dock office and
apparently trends in a north-south direction.
o The amount of product has distorted groundwater levels so
that a true groundwater gradient cannot be obtained from
the present information.
o Soil contamination at the site is confined to the vadose
zone/groundwater interface.
-11 -
Ii
RECOMMENDATIONS
Blymyer Engineers recommends that thirteen groundwater monitoring
~ells be installed on the perimeter of the contaminated area. The
purpose of these wells is to define the extent of free product
contamination on the property and to obtain information for the
design of a free product recovery system. This work should
commence as soon as possible. In addition, the gasoline storage
system needs to be investigated to determine the location of the
high level leak and to remedy the· leak. Once free product
contamination is defined, a free product recovery system should
be implemented.
-12 -
r
i'
I
',\ I
' ' ' !
I ,:
FIGURE 1
----
I-.... ....
"' I-
"' ..
J ..
I .,
I-
r
I-
:,
0
,fl
~
n
11
u
-.
II
II
,~I I
II
II
,-----
~ a
~ ..... ------· ------·-----
w
-
a...
.J
' u .. = z "t
~l <~ z
.J"' C -I-.. ;::. ~, ..... .. =-.. I .. ... .,
I.:> •. <:, !: .. , "'" "' I. .. f-I ► I
:I ' ► ii~ .. .. • .. ~ I,~ .,
Cl I I II
.. . ._, -
~t-~7
Ci~]j~clJ
:twr~ 'S l
MAR a 1· FraJ C,r, '/
A RESOURCE ENG1NEERl~JG COMPANY
Mr. Mark Whiting
National Warehouse
Invostment Company
Four E~barcadero Center
Suite 3150
San Francisco, CA 94111
tnt1 zronmo1tal and engineering tx.ctllena
March 17, 1988
File: 4885-001-516
RE: Lirui ted Phase I I Subsur!ac• Investigation at the Salt
Ldke City, Utah P.I.E. Truck Terminal Site
Dear Mark:
1.0 INTRODUCTION
on March 7, 1988 ERT conducted a subsurtace investigation at
the P.I.E Truck Tenuinal, located at 55 South Redwood Road,
Salt ~ke City, Utah.
Four (4) soil boring$ and one (1) monitoring ~ell were
installed at the request ot. National Warehouse Investment
Company (NWIC). Data generated during this investigation
~111 be used to determine a rough-order-ct-magnitude (ROH)
cost e5timate !or !uture remediation. The tenninal manager,
Mike Bock, was contacted prior to drilling to approve boring
locations. All underground utilities in the vicinity ot the
proposed soil borings w&r• located, and drilling began
following a brier site inspection.
This report includes a location map (Figure 1), and a site
map showing soil boring locations (Figure 2). A briet sits
description follows in Ssction 2. The methodology of the
investigation is described in Section 3. A description o!
ambient temperature head-space (ATH) analysis procedures is
included in Section 4. A briet discu95ion regarding th•
laboratory data tallows in Section 5. Recomi:iendations tor
site remediation are pr~sented in SQction 6, and the
projected remedial cost estimate is given in Section 7. The
analytical testing results tor soil and water samples are
pr~sented in Appendix A. Survey data, including lithologic
logs and chain-or-custody forms are included in Appendix B.
--.... · -. . ,, -::
Mr. Mark Whiting
National Warehouse Investment Company
2.0 SITE DESCRIPl'ION
J
March 17, 1988
Page 2
Th• P.I.E. Truck Terminal is located approximately 5,500 feet
east-southeast of the Salt Lake City International Airport,
in north Salt Lake City, Utah. Groundwater was encountered
at approximately 12 to 13 teet below the ground surface
during this investigation.
ThQ Salt Lake City P.I.E. truck terminal has eleven (11)
underground storage tanks currently in service which ha·,e a
cornbined storage capacity ot 10 ◄,000 gallons. 'Ihree (l)
10,000-gallon tanks and !our (4) 12,000-gallon tanks contain
diosel fuQl1 a 10,000-gallon tank· holds antifreeze; another
10,000-gallon tank contains gasoline: a J,000-gallon tank
holds fresh motor oil; and another J,000-gallon tank contains
used motor oil. Al 1 seven ( 7) ot the di!!se l tanks ara
constructed of fiberglass, and the rest ot the tanks are
apparently constructed of steel. The diesel and antifreeze
tanks are locat~d south and west ot the office building, and
the oil and gasoline tanks are located north and northeast ot
th• maintenance shop ( Figure 2) . All the tanks are buried
below concrete pads with th• exception o! the gasoline tank
which is buried beneath asphalt pavement.
3. 0 DRILLING AND SAMPLING PROCEDURES
The soil boring; were co~pleted using a truck-mounted hollow
stem auger drill rig, and the soil sampling was acco~plished
with a 1.5-foot, 2-inch diameter split spoon sampler. soil
borings were located at predetermined sites based on th•
result5 of the soil-vapor gurvey performed by ERT in November
1987. Where accessible to the drill rig, borings were made
near the points showing the highest hydrocarbon values during
th• soil vapor survey. Split spoon samples .were collected
every !ive feet.
The soil g~mples were logged by an ERT geologist, and samples
were r-etained for ATH analysis and analytical testing !or
total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) and volatile organic
compounds, including benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and
total xylenes (BTEX). Samples were collected at 5 foot
intervals, to a total depth or 20 to 2.5 !eet. Betw-een
samples, all sampling equipment was w-ashed with a trisodium
phosphatQ (TSP) solution and rinsed with tap water and
distilled water. Atter the last soil sainpl• was collected
lrom the bottom of borings B-1, B-3, and B-4, the water
table was allowed to equilibrate and water samples were
collected !rom inside the hollow-stem auger. These samples
w-ere submitted to an analytical laboratory !or TPH ~nd BTEX
analyses. After sampling was completed, all holes were
backfilled.
I ;
: '
I
l I
1· 1 11
' ' 'I
I, i. ·1
• I
Mr. Mark Whiting
National Warehouse Investment Company
March 17, 1988
Pa1e l
D1e=ol fuel floating on th• water table was enccuntered
while drilling boring B·2. In order to monitor the thickness
ot product and, perhaps, to extract product at a later date,
a four-inch diameter, PVC monitoring well wag installed in
the boring. The construction details tor this 1iell are
illustrated in FigurQ 3.
4.0 AMBIENT TEMPERATURE HEAD-SPACE ANALYSIS
~mbient temperature head-space analysis was perfonned on soil
sampl~5 to screen the .samples for volatile organic compou~d
conc•ntrations. Samples vera placed in glass jars, sealed,
and allowed to equilibrata to ambient temperatures prior to
testing tho vapor within the jar. A photoionization detecto=
(PIO), calibrat~d to a benzene standard, was used to
detgrmine the relative concentration of hydrocarbons. Soil
samples with the highest hydrocarbon concentrations were
cho~en for laboratory analysis.
5.0 ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Significant concentrations of TPH were encountered in soils
in all four soil borings. Moreover, significant
concentrat1on5 o! benzene ware encountered in water 5amples
from B-1 and B-3. Although Utah has not established action
levels on these compounds, these sample results are well
above action level3 for states that have set such standards.
6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
Because significant concentrations ot TPH ver• identified in
soil samples, and because significant concentrations of
benzene were encountered in water samples, it i• recommended
that all eleven (11) underground storage tanks at this site
b• removed. Th• tanks will be triple rinsed and removed by a
licensed subcontractor. Any soils exhibiting visual signs or
odors re5ulting trom hydrocarbon contamination will be
removed at this time. At least two samples will be collected
beneath the tank tollowing removal ot the obvious
hydrocarbon-stained soil. The samples will be shipped to a
certitied laboratory and analyzed for TPH, BTEX and organic
lead. All soil evaluated to be contaminated on th• basis of
analytical results will be removed. Continnation samples
'Wi 11 bs col l~cted to document the removal of contaminated
soil. The area occupied by the underground storage tanks is
presumed to contain a body ot contaminated soil, based on th•
analytical results obtained from the borings. Assuming
contamination extends approximately twQnty feet beyond the
borings, and assuming contamination is continuous between the
borings, at least 1,500 cubic yards will need to be removed. ' -.. -. .... .
' ,, ,,
', \
1 i .
I: I
I' : , I:
Mr. Mark Whiting
National Warehouse Investment Company
)
March 17, 1988
Page 4
A s~ries ot soil 5amples will be taken around ths perimeter
or the resulting pits to con!irn that the majority of the
contamination has been removed. The pits will be backfilled
with imported clean fill. Th• area occupied by the
und~rground storage tanks also exhibits contaminated
groundwater, based on field observation~. It is recommended
that two groundwater 110n 1 tor ing we 11 s be 1,nsta l led
downgradient (west) ot the borings and one monitoring well be
installed upgradient (east) ot borings. Additionally, one
well 15 recommended tor the center or the contaminated area,
in the center ot the tank cluster. After th• wells are
installed and developed, water samples -will be taken and
analyzed for TPH and BTX to establish baseline water quality
data. Thereafter, the wells will be sampled periodically to
document changes in the groundwater quality.
7.0 PROJECTED REMEDIAL COST ESTIMATE
A projected remediation cost estimate has been prepared per
your verba 1 request on this property. The purpos~ ot this
estimate is to: l) provide a budgetary projection ot cost tor
site remediation purposes, given the limited amount of
technical data which has been gathered to date, on subsurface
soil and groundwater contamination due to petroleum
hydrocarbon release(s}; 2) to provide useful, worst case
information for your risk management decision-making process;
and J) to provide the assumptions necessarily made by ERT in
developing the basis tor the rough-order-of-magnitude (ROH)
cost estimate,
This remediation estimate represents a conservatively high
rcugh-order-9f-magnitude projection intended tor
infonnational purposes only, and is not to bo misconstrued as
a firm fixed price bid !or site remediation at this time. It
so requested, ERT will refine and proffer a more accurate
remediation bid estimate, based upon Time and Materials
rates, after further review ot the data and upon physical
inspection ot the site by specialized remediation estimators.
In 1 ight or the findings, it should be noted that a more
definitive remediation estimate cannot be made without
further investigative site characterization (Phase III work)
being conducted.
P.O~ .l l
1;
'(
! '\
1;
"ii
,,
q
l
i
l,
I, i
Ii
1'
l l
I I
l.l
Mr. Mark Whiting
National Warehouse Investment Company
March 17, 1988
Page 5
ROM REMEDIATIOH PROJECTION
Tank Removal
Soil Removal/Disposal
Groundwater Remediation
Total ROH Projection
Disclaimer
$100,000
$360,000
$200,000
$660,000
Du• to the limited extent ot tachnical information availab·.a
in characterizing th8 total amount ot soil and/or groundwat~~
requiring remedial actions, ERT would require furth2r
guidance, direction and in!onnation from National Warehous~
conc•rning business concerns and dacisions relevant to sit"
cleanup and restoration. Such decisions involve acceptable
cost and schedule considerations, intended use or disposition
ot the 5ite, and anticipated investment return information.
Assumptions Employed
The above ROM cost estimate reflects ths following site
assumptions:
1. Tank Removal -The projection assumes that all tanks
are to be re?:1oved. It is well understood that tank
integrity (particularly the fiberglass tanks) may not
be compromised, but that line leakage i• accounting
for contaminant readings. Nevertheless, a highly
conservative estimate o! $10,000/tank removal was
used.
2. Soil Removal Contaminated soil volumes were
estimated by a~suming all reported site locations
di5playing recorded soil contamination above state
action levels (it applicable} Yould require excavation
and disposal, o!ten to the depth or shallow
groundwater. It is well understood that several
methods other than soil excavation n,ay be utilized
onsite, depending upon local regulatory procedure~ and
approvals. Nevertheless, a highly conservative
estimate o! $200/cubic yard for excavation and
disposal was used.
3. Groundwater Remediation Contaminated groundwater
requiring remediation was estimated by assuming all
reported site drilling locations displaying recorded
I
I ·)
I I r;
i ' •
Mr. Mark Whiting March 17, 1988
Page 6 National Warehouse Investment Company
By:
Title:
Date:
groundwater contaMination readings above state action
levels (it applicablQ) would require removal by
pumping and treatment by air stripping mGthods. Only
capital costs associated with the equipment
cons:truction vere presented. No attempt was ma.de to
estimate the cleanup time, operation , maintenance
cost, or unit cost per gallon to treat groundw~ter.
It is well recognized that several methods other than
air stripping may be applicable or appropriate onsit•
depending upon contaminant composition, concentration,
targeted cleanup level9 or time schedules, or any
other variable. Nevertheless, for the sake of
unitonnity, a minimum estimate of at least $200,000
was used via this cleanup technique.
l I
QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW
By: ~ 'i1 ~ cJt~
Title: Manager, Environcantal Programs
Date:
AA0007.DCO
0)/17/88
P.07
' I!
= •
f
I
-,,
16 ' -·
R!FH..EN;:£ I lJSGS 7. ~ HI SLT.: SEIUES
SALT LAU Cl!Y NOR:H Q~A:IRA.~GL?
SC>.Ll
~
.... ~::. • • -. • ·,l::i:' ·1-, ~ ,• f
• • •• ~-"~\~ . ,\ ',:t • • • I
·-~"~-1 • .. ~
. .
: .. ~~~-"" ~
'
#
0
V
'<
•
.:a
I .1 ,
'-#¥.
• ' I I·!
I :1
,. : 'j
I 1· 1
j I j'
11, •
ii'
,: I /t
,,
t
11
..,_--:---0--0,.-0,da/J _,._~I '
ERT
A IIIE50URC[ [NOINE.ERINQ COMl'ANY
SITE LOCATION MAP
P. I.E. TER.'liINAL
SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
i '
I ! I I ii 1 ,,
488~•00l•Sl6 ', i
PA/1..A,CT NOc i
-, !
I
r
11 c::J
WAST!
rtMCt
SB-4 •
010
OtL TA>-'Y.~
..
n
a
S!-3 0
• ~S TAlft
' ~JAJfn'.::11£1) 1!Ltro T~KS
( IILU:O lt'lnt SAJfD) s HOP
OI£S£t
IAllKS
l [:=J11o • ... CJ ll SB-2 2 012
.,....
?
SUV!Cl $i. X OTTI l.AJ'ES -FR!EZ!
ct ooa.s
IAtlK.5 o~
'
• D DiD o~
DllSlL t.ANX.5
CAPACtTT CONITH!S ITPE
*
!
N
l-ll 1000 CAL TILUO sru:1.
l·U,000 CAL FILL[~ SUEL
J-12,000 CAL DIESEL Tt&(~CUSS I
ii-12 ,000 CAL ou:sn. n11ncuss
~-12, 000 CAI. OICS£L TiaHCUH
WOI IO Sc.AU
6·12,000 CAL DI[SEL TllltlGU.SS
7• 7 1 000 CAL TrlU:O $!!:tL
8·10,000 CAL CASOLINE IIlltRGUSS
,
4 10,000 CAL Al'l!l-fliEEZ!: S!Ut ERT
A RESOURCE INQINl'UIIHQ COUPANY
10· 8,000 CAL liiASTE OIL S!t:E:t
11• 3,000 CAL USED OIL ST!Et. SIT! PLAN ~ i
l2-l2,000 CAL oie:srt P"l~!'.IICUSS .. P. I.E. TERMINAL I
I
U-12,000 CAL Dit:SEL J'I!ERCUSS SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
1i.-12, 000 CAL ou::sn FI&ER.GLASS ~88S-001•5l6,
I
I
i
I
i
~
'I '.' ,,
I I I I
I
I
I
: l
I
'
.
' '
; I
I\
j
! :
: l
; i
: I '!
'i i ''
; ! 1''
'I
I
i .,'
l,':;Ll<. I.:IG WEL:.. CAP
21'
TOTAL OEPTH
2'
•••-.I
,..,J .. ,-
·•"" .,, ....... . '-•.~ .. ,::~
--..... .
~ , ...... .
':""'':..:
' -~ ~:
•--i,c-4■~ --· ..;):~ . ~;:.,
t1•--• -· ~y=' ---;:.; --,.~~ ----:::..;: .... ,,. ......
.. :~.;.T
~ ..... , ....... .,,. .... ...... "
.... ~~:
__ ,..,,
. -. . , ..
, ... -
-:-:":~ .. ... -... ..... , ...
=~2f"
:i:_':.;.:
a"~I
~ 10,. --►
CR.Ot:ND SURFACE
4INCH (ID)
·scHEDULt 40 PVC WELL CASINC
CONCRETE
iENTONITE SEAL
TOP OF SAND PAC[
TOP OF SCREEN
0. 02 INCH SLOT
SLOT!ED WELL SCREEN
#3 SAND PAC~
ERT
,.
A RESOURCE [MQINEEAIMQ C01,CPANY
GENERALIZED MONITORING
WELL CONSTRUCTION
I
I !
i
I,
APPENDIX A
-• ( -'--· l ,., :-. I.·· -. I I ,, ' r •• 1, i • 1 •
I
I
I
I
.. t .... .... --'
LABORATORY REPORT
tRT
19782 r.acArthur Blvd.,
Irvine, CA 92715
ATTN1 Daniel C. Oliver
Suite 365
AllALYSIS NO.: 806802-001/008
AllALYSES: EPA Method 8020, 8015
DATE SAMPLED: 03/07/88
DATE SAMPLE REC'D: 0J/08/88
DATE ANALYZED: OJ/10/88
SAMPLE TYP!: Solid
PROJECT: 4885-001-516 NWIC/Phase II
Assessment/ P.I.E. Salt Lake City, UT'
6IX E;f.!. MetbQ~ ~o,Q. !mgLkgt TOTAL PETROLEUM
HYDROCAP.BONS
ETHYL TOTAL EPA METHOD 8015
SbJ:1PLE ID BENZENt TO LUE NF,; EE~ZENE XYLENE~ (mg/kg)
Bl-10-11.5 ND (. 1) ND ( . 1) 0.2 0.3 870.11
82-10-11. 5 NO (. 1) O,J 2. 5. 18,000.•
BJ-10-11.5 ND (. 1) ND ( . l) ND ( . l) ND ( . 1) 330.*
84-10-11 ND(. l) ND ( . 1) l. 2 .
•Quantitation based upon the diesel standard.
LABORATORY REPORT
ERT
19782 M~cArthur Blvd., Suite J65
Ir1ine, CA 9271~
ATTN: Daniel C. Oliver
AN~LYSIS NO.: 806802-002/010
Al'fALYSES: EPA Method 418.1, 8015
DATE SAMPLED: 03/07/88
DATE SAMPLl REC'D: 03/08/88
DATE ANALYZED: 03/10-11/88
SAMPLE TYPE: Solid/Liquid
I t I! !t
'
PROJECT: 4885-001-516 NWIC/Phase .II
Assessment/ P.I.E. Salt Lake City, UT'.
SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION
Bl-A
BJ-A
~ B4-10-11
B4-8
TO'I'~L PETROLEUM
HYDROCARBONS
EPA METHOD 418.1
Cmg/kgl
5,900.
•Quantitation ~as based upon the diesel standard.
TOT).L PETROLEUM
HYDROCARBONS
PENTANE EXTRACTION
EPA METHOD 8015
lug/Ll
6,000.t
30,000.•
70,000.*
l ~ •
I , I
LABORATORY REPORT
ERT
19782 MacArthur Blvd., Suite 365
Irvine, CA 92715
ArTN: Daniel C. Oliv~r
ANALYSIS NO.: 806802-00J/007
ANALYSES: EPA Method 602
DATE SAMPLED: OJ/07/88
DATE SAMPL! REC'D: 03/08/88
DATE ANALYZED: 03/i'l/88
SAMPL! TYPE: Liquid
If • I
I
i
i
PROJECT: 4885-001-516 NWIC/Phase II
Assessment/ P. I.E. Salt Lake City, UT·
l3IX, EPA METHOD 602. Cug/Ll
ETHYL TOTAL
S.!,."1PLE ID BENZENE :IOLUE~E BENZENf; XYLENES
Bl-B 60. ND ( l O.) ND(lO.) 25.
83-B 47. 2. 7. 18.
, ..... ·•oOf'I D.,.., ....... Oif'lly •or~ 14,.....Ctl•' .,.. •• :1,119.>liNI a"""d' •ot1 "GI "'-t!Cf11••..., •OO'• ,o o,,.,.,., ~.a•■'lifT •d•l'IIIC.11 01 1•m11a, ..... , ........ TP\411 ,1100,1 ,, 1,,i,C,tft,.UH 1C"1 ,.... ,,,('h,, ......
1111•• •' •"11 ,._,., 16 -~ ,1 ,1 •da•'1'1,,ce: A.,.., ••o~iOO~'"°" of"""' ·•00,,1 o• uw o 1 "'••~•no•.-,~•'"•-•,_••-·•·-----· .... _ •••
' I
APPENDIX B
\IN CU' ,DY, ........ C:OPn
t/Proiect Name Protect Loc•t1on
A,(iC,_~~l~
ct No.
Ctuin of Custody hpe No.
,_ / I
,nquished by: (Signarure)
nple Disposal Method:
:ou
,,
"'
LabSamp,e
Number
MPLE COLLE~R /")
"'1Tr /V: 'J/· tC.. r_,,./4 ""''-n::_
Environmental Research end Technology. Inc.
J
--496 1t1ag1f'ie Read-19782 MacArthur Blvd.
• Co1111c.erd1 MA 91142 Suite 365 •
617 J6~ 891Q Irvin•• C4llifomia
714-476--0)21 9271.5
" "'I ••
-r-. ... ... _,,,__.._ ___ ... -....... -
Date
Date
Type of
Sample
Tim■
1,1:15
Time
Time
Received by. (S,gn•rw•t
Rec .. v9d by: (Signature)
Disposed of by; (Sign•tur•)
ANALYTICAL LABORATORY
-;
l.
REMARKS
,_.,,..,Arc__
o.,. Time
Date Time
Time
,., l/:hlJ/1
Time
ERT
-
N'? 8828
ProJeCl N•me
No.
-
e No./
1cation Date Tim.
CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD
Pro~ct ~,ion
::r, ~ .,-s "t,/ 1-L~k_ C
F1oki Lo(Jbook No.
Chain of Cu$tody Tapo No.
Lab Sa~•
Numb«
Type of
Sample
" I
I J
-I
I
u.1
([J
r
(Tl
C,
...
REMARKS I " "
c-11..~ f .r
g
N✓/V4r". -• .. -~~~-J1~x~i.-x~t1 -1-1 -fl-'rf:r/L/..fl_w..tP~---,,, II'' 1--1:.L ~-:_tlJJ.--L~W~-ilfL-~I I~-~-~o+l----7~W"rR.
J_ I, "
C'-1!,;-/I 12.-~11 S,,'-
" ,,
,' 3, "
" , \ ••
o .. ,. Time Received by. tSig~tura)
!/S-
Date Time Received by: (Signacw-•I
shed by: (Si9natur11) Dalo limo . (Sign•tur•J
Disposal Method: Disposed of by: (S,gnature)
~ COLLECTOR ANALYTICAL lA80RATORY
Environmentat Research and Technology. Inc.
-696't-"irg1P11 ■ Road 19782 MacArthur Blvd.
OoAGa.d, MA Or742 Suit.• 36S
~ Irvine. California
714-476-0)21 92715
I
Date Tim.
o.,. Time
Time
Tim
ER.T
N~ 8827
z
I>
-i
r
r
l)
I
v)
M
z
<
1J
I
tJ ...
.. _.._. ..... ____ . -·-
4 _ = 7 t.:Jl\.i ED
1 • : \ NATL P. 1 6
111 .. , ..l. ., .l.
LITHOlOGIC lOG ANO CONSTRUCTION
OF MW·
A RESOURCE [NCIP4Ef,.l"G COLIPANY
I:
~ -ea It.Ill# f ,Oot .. ..
1,
...,.,.er nn.u10•
011111,.1.llifO AN() SA.-,_r,.o *'CAIi.A TIO,,. 0,,, ~,,,, .. JI'{" 011, e ... ,.,u }'' lU
... If\ •• IS,SA te,11 o. ... .'."'2 .. s ... m.-.. x ___ _
W(lL C~f Tl()lil '"°""" f!Ott Scrtt• Oia. ______ _
.... Site--------
cu .. , 1)4,e. -------
., ... _ ~
ILl•Uao-• I .,..,
Ltflt•~--------1,et
lt"t'" --------
r I I --• • ~ • • i; • • 0 ! ~
' ... • • ! • .
J ~ • -· -~AS,.ILAL!IC COffCUit (AC) ~ I I -
:r\_l~ 5A.'40l CU'ltL • <cr>nu ~ -0.UX (;IU1' CUYU SIL? (t'Q.),P«x:O.UI1.I nu,, IC)tn, -. ~•In , rua or cuvn ti. -... , s-ss 11 -,.o ----C.lU GMT SILn CUT (CL)' son' l'l)ts? -a. ---10-: LIClfT Q..\T UJU>T SUI on.), ~tUrtLT STIH, 10-lU
. -YUT l«HST, St.IGMl ttnout14 llr.>ltCC.U.!011 (HC) 000l 11., lS Ht. -~ -----lICM! CUT s.uo (SP), ~U.ArtLT CU.St, un:u~, -
1.5.:::: fllilt CUilfE::>, !t0 RC OOOl -u--u )0 -u.s SP -----. -20-SA."'.I, t.:X)S[ 20· -~ s --LICHI CRAY CUY (CU' sorr, SATI.."U":.tD, NO RC OOOll 21., --CL ---SA.'1?, CONH.ISS nn~ (L!SS !KA .. o.~ n:n) SA~D L.DfSE$ -25 --JORilte T?~!~n:D AI 25 flt!. ~TU WA.S 2,-u l4 --[!'CC.Oln':Uro AI 12 THI WIU: ~U.Il'C. 2'.S -.
IOliltC J.lCX 111.l.!D OtC l/2/81. ----30-: --------JS-: ' --------.. 0-. ------~---45-. -------. -50-.:. . . --------~c _:
., RE~OURCE EHljlNEERING CO~PAHY
z ... .. . .. . x;
LITHOL-.. ..ilC LOO MW CONSTRUCTION
OF MW-
• g I i ~ ., ... ,.,.. ► • J .. J .. fllYAHClf • • e l ii , .. '"' ! i ,..
• I • g
J • • • ~ • ., ..
C
' 0---+--------------------------+----+---+--4---i--..---..--{ DHX M~'M AHO UCH! CRAY CU'!EY Sil.I (Mt), mDElUTI:1.Y
s
10
l5
10
)0
!IIrr, ~151, CW:AINS A IIIJ.Ct cr,CRAvtt, SLIGH!
P!:UOUl,'11 KYDROCAll!OH ( HC) OOOll
I
SAJ-1! S:Jr.ONG KC ODO~
LICH! CRAY SA~D (SP), t1JOEIUIELY DENSE, SA~ttD,
1-'l::)l:.,'1 GRAI!'lED, MOOElUIT HC ODOR
J.IQiI ~y Ct.AT (Cl), son, SA:t:UTI:D, StICfil' ltC OOOR
IY)'-HtC TE'R.'1llfAT£D AT 21 r!f:!.
GRO'JNt\.lAI!Jl c.:ia:,uu:ER.EO A! l'-I \IH!U: DRitLI~.
&0"1:-IC COOVERJO 10 A 110fll!1JRI~ lorl:LL OM J/7 /!!. '
10-SS 1200
ll.5
lS-SS l41t
1'.S
,.~ SS lal
21
: r-8:3 WED 1 -4 :
~~Kl.
A AE'SOURCE E~G1"4E(RING COUPANY
' .. .. J
I,.
I!
Mtc••'tO•
lvM•'I llf'l'A,T,011
0 -~ AS P1W.I1C COW'" ..Ar.t (.AC) --r -
INV <
·------···-·-
fl>• 1 9
111 .. , ..l ., .1.
LITHOLOG1C LOO ANO CONSTRUCTION
OF MW-
~ll 1,INQ AH() S u.i•lllfG 1MJ()IIWA r1~
0••• 11 1,1u J/7 (,S 0111 t.,.,.i,,,., H7 /ll§
.,, '"•" 11 SA r.,,, 0 .. ,111 lo m.:r
WELt. COM~fTIO'f Mo,tlUT~ -----
l""tn. ,, .. --------lcree,i O'a. ______ _
... , Ille ______ _
C ■•'"t 0.1 h"flll _______ _
f f I I J . ,..,_ • 4 r ti -
·~·"· 1,0• -•
'~ f ..
1 •HU I • • i ..
~ 4
" •
Uf. t I
-r:.u, la<:1w'1C CUTEY SILI (NL) 11Cti(IUULT snr,. ll)IS? • ---COt<rAllfS A TlACl or c;uvn -s--,. .,. "
,. ,a. . -• ----LJQIT <;MT AI I ft[? ---0 ~U G.Ut SANO (SP), KlOf:.UUI.l' COSE, l'ClSI, Vt.RT
,.,. ss '" --1 IHE· SP --C~ INa>, Snct'tC HUOUI.M KlDflOCAual (MC) OOG~ ------s-Lit;>a CJ.AT, t'701tli·C:UI:il:l, SLIGH"! ~ OOGR --B· IS 206 --u., U' --... -----S.A."7 -io-.
ss 17 .--
:~LICHT C1.AT CUT (Ct). ~ITT. SAn~n:o
,., ~ 11 --~l~ tn.•Hlf.AITO AI 20 rut. ---C~Vl-'A:tlt [.'CCOUM!f:ut> A! 1l rttl' lr'MIU Olt.ILI.!IC. n---BOit.INC MCXJ'!L.UD af l/1/U. -------1-----------• ---------40-. ---------~· -. ----------I . --------
i
I !
!
I
I
I
I
1 -4 : NMTL WRH5 INV C
SIie
A AESOUAC! ENGINEERING COMPANY LITHOLOGIC LOO ANO CONSTRt
OF MW-
z• ►-O(lc1111,T10"' I,. z; -
lvfl'ACf flfYATIO,.
OAILLl"4Q A~O SAMlll.,J.,,Q 1Mr~MATIOH
O••· s11,1d ,n ,,, 0111 Col"C)l•11• )/7,
t.1,1110• HSA Tt1a1 Oocll 2.0 ®=
wU~ C0""LlltON ~,OIIIMATION
Scree11 011. ______ _
$let Siu _______ _ ""''"' -------T10• Cum, 0,1. ______ _ le"''"--------
i • I i J .. r ITl,ITIIW t • 4
4 .. • 11.1 ,,,. rao .. • iCII I f i J
I • •• 'IIT .. ... • .. • • t ..
I C • • u I ---o -0 ~S~!iALIIC CONCRE!E (AC) -~ I I --DAU I~ CUY~Y SIL! (1-!l.), HODERAI!.LT STIFT, ---K>ISI, COffTAIHS A n.Act 01 CP..A'.'£L
' --s-.. ,-S$ ,.5 !1L ' --' -------10-: S~'1?:, LIGHT C-UY, SUCH! Pr!/I.0Ut.,11 HY:JROCU1,Qlf (HC) OCOJI 10-ss )08
11..S ~ ---l)' -LICHT ClUY SANO (SP), ct~st, SArt;RAn:D, SUCH? HC OOO!t ►----l.S-. -15-ss 22 s, --u.s ------20 _ --LICH: GR.AT Cl.A Y (CU, sorr' SA!UiU.H.J' p,() HC OOOJI ~9.5 ss 2l ~ -21 -!OH.NC I1:Rl-1INATID AI 20 rrrr. ~•.)UNO<JA!U. tNCOUN!1JtrD ---A! ll ITIT WHIL! D~ILLI~C. --&ORlltC BACXFILUO OH 'J/7/~. 25 -. -----.----JO----------H-: . --------1,Q-. ---------1,5-: .
------• -so-= --------
S5-= . -~
APPENDIX B
''
!
\
t
I
I
l
i
!
I
I
I
rnR E>N1ROf6Tlt.. ~ICES, nc.
m KT. 1Mlll STREIT, SJITE !01
I UN 'Oil.IT, CA 9'l7ffi
~~•7-~14 ElD-247-2186
~ 0: PIE ~TIOMIII UIATIOOIIIXTIFICATIO. NJ. :
RESS: 55 nITH RmilD l{W)
s.at.T L»:I CI'TY, UT
TN« SIZE ~n:R
lEST RE9.1. TS ~
I.DK LOOTCR ~TS
IIYE1. .llR SYSTD4
m:l.CT Gill.IR; DINJ«rt HOES DO£S ~ ClJ0.15I~ IElJitfJaTICJ6
DIE!:Il 1cxm 961ST 0 151 -.-423 ~
~ +.an TIGIT
ER I>fT.Ri'ATI04: NmJXn..Ta Y 10 ,2W ~ .t:P£ mD 10 T>H( AT TM CF TEST.
Fml.CT LI>ES -HYIROSTATIC PR£5S.RE 1EST !DJ.. TS
YSTIM
.lal.CT
TIP£ CF PtH' Pa.KS Po.IDS MINJTES PRal..CT PRID.CT COQ.USIO.
IVu IE s.t II~ N>A..IED lflD lflD LOSS a:• s LOSS ~ /RE.9.l T
~= Qi su:tioo systats, ~ IJ.lt rore tran 15 psi oo arr, ~ systan.
OCTAil. CF TEST ~ TS
TEST mE LEI«. RATE IDFERATIRE ~
rsID4 TEST l.£fU tlllX OCRAflt.W COPEMSATI~ W.C RATE
m..cr ~-(IN.) STATE (~IN) cc,mrv CC;li(IN [Il TA Cf a:;liUN ~N Gll-t
~1~ 1 151 11:3) :17 .7f:fJ -~.460 -.W -71. 764 -26.676 -.423
2 124 3:3) :68 1.212 -6.COO -.OV -8.176 +2.078 +.033
fl -Irctes frcn T crt fk:>ttaa tD Test l.eYe 1
-lbsolute Le~ P.ate (~asured Leak P.ate -T61lEratllre ~nsat1oo) 1n GallCJlS Per tar
Cu.lSI~ -~A 329 criterion of +/-O.C!i '1'A is used to certify ti~
CERTIFICATI~ CERl\flED
Q£O(
1EST
y,,,.
N
N
; to certify that tte aboYe tanc system; ~re tested, usirg tte lt.NTER OOIRCHOT,.,_ ~ICES, OC. l..ENC
T : acca-d1 rg to a 11 staooard ~rati rg proceciJres. loose 1 rrllcated as t1 git at fu 11 ~tel aeet ttE a1 terl a,
)1 isred by tte Natiooal Fire Protectioo Associatioo Palµllet 329 for Precisioo Testirg.
1.
I
I
If ..
! .. _IT_KM __ ,.._ ___ T_ANC __ aaz_1 __ __. . WATUI
IOUCT Q,&1 & ONa C)UVMAT\. INCHCS
' _ '•t=>·<,-:.-.•.,,~~:, /.:.,•.-,.., .. , ..• ·---?~i 1. ·~1~;,t,4..-,;-,-4,.: :><>':~~Ji~i,i~;:;,)~i;,>,Jfti;j;>
~ DtroOf()ITA. SERYICES, DC.
~ MT. IJIG.£f STREIT, ~ 101
h ,,UM VIU.EY, C-' !1l7CB
..Z47~4 lm-247-2186
TOER: PIE "'TI~UI
n: 55~EWXDUO
~T ~ CilY, UT
1~1:'.J 15 • M~r '~(.,,] ( r~;E:R·. ;;.·LJ
& SCtJS ~
.j£eI
lIST REll TS ~
f-L~~~~";-
~,. t I 1EST ~l[: 5/6/8J ; /11: <& . -
L~
UIATICW/IlDTIFIOOIOi 11).:
lDIC ~TCR RES!. TS
~ TN« Sm: ll'TER IDEl. 1lR ~-mer G'iUKi DLIJ'M'll lt0£S IJQ£S 6PH aHl.lSICW ~CNS
-1En lIDl) 91/fG 1
12(D) 91/fG 2 ~ +.032 noo
12(D) 91/FG 1
Am.CT LIJES -HYIROSTATIC PRESS.RE TEST RE9.l. TS
SIDI
i.J'.D.CT
TYPE CF PlM> Pa.NlS PruOS MIMJT'ES PRCll.CT Pim.CT COOl.6ICJf
tikliE 9.tllti ,lffl.IED tE.D .ru l.05.S CC's LOSS~ /RES.LT
I ESa
I:$.
DI~
N..1. PR!D.CT LDES !ERE Dlmm:TED
. Cil su:tioo systms, hE\'ER pit rore thvl 15 psi oo ~ Pl.11" systm.
C£TAn. CF TEST Pal.TS
TEST TH I.EA( RATE TDffRAn.RE
SYSID4 TEST LEm.. a.IlX tlRA f IO. ~TI04
P-'ll.CT NJ. (IN.) STATE O~N} CC/DIV ct,,14IN CE.TA Cf' cr.,,,uN
JaSn.1JTE
I.IN( RATE
~N ~
JIOO 1 1~ 8:40 =~ 8.654 ~-846 -.004 -29.9 +2.040 +.032
-Irdles mn T crt fklttcm to Test l..eYe 1
->bsolute leak P.ate (~ I.eat Rate -T~rature ~t1<11) in Gall<J1S Per~
.USICH -tf'PA 329 crlterfoo of +/-O.(!; (;A f s used to certify t1~
CERTIFICATICW CERnf\ED
om
TEST
Y/11
N
~ to certify that the aboYe tat ~ llere tested, using the KJmR ElNifOfEHtll SERVIaS, DC. I.EMC
R accontf iYJ to all standard (ferating procecires. loose irdicated as t1gtt at full ~ ll!et tne attl!rfon
1-'-ed by tte ~t1onal Fire Protect1oo Asscx:1at1oo Paqjllet 329 fer Prec:1sioo Testing.
Cmtcted aoo r.ert1 fted By: Test Van tt>. 3l
Ten fll!nager: D. BCl3ER
Tart Testing Sped al i st C. OOWI0
•
,..
~,,,111!:J; 1 ~~-
l 0INIWTALSHiCa,~ DAHOl'T~T ,,.. •
,UAJIEM.}E.N.W TEST I .• l, ... ( ·1 " IOO RESULTS COHTIIACT NUllle&•
i, OH..,.102
t--0 ~ . ' • R (.I I -~ /v <• I I ./ <...' .. , ....... , I.,
ION -10!:NTlf'ICATION NUM9!:II NAM-.
L C:ITY t
(·,·' -1 (A
......
-C. ., I [,.,.,. / j,, t / r,fe • , ;,,1f) . ' , I I f •. •• ~"'' I -~ -TEST RESULTS SUMMARY µAA-ONL.,,--. -· -lST!:M TANK StZE WATER LEAK LOKATOR RESULTS• CQNI;~ cooa
PIIODUCT GALLONS 01A/MATL INCHES Lll:VlL ALII CONCLUSION llllCOMMCNDATIONS TUY,._ , .... oMt"Ht:S G~
I,.' -<. .:i, .,,,'li_· I
) I __ .J.L~ !L:'!s ,.L.:. --·. I I ' ,.)~ ' /,-1J,, ~
I ! ("' 'J k_ 10· /J..... ,,/{ I I I I '
-
-
I 'OAMATION -
-
-
PRODUCT LINES -HYDROSTATIC PRESSURE TUT IIEIULTS .
SYSTEM TYPE OF PUMP PRODUCT PIIOOUCT
-~-...;!.USION/ • MINUTES 'LOSS LOSS
PRODUCT REMOTE SUCTION APPLIED APPLIED CC'S GPH RESULT .
_),..\,._ I ~\/t, .,,.._ e. ;v /.~ I, ) ..,.J,, I ,-· J, e· ,., , ·-
• ) "(--I
, L L V I
Iv /,n, -·· ,../
tVIIJt-\.:'.. i } ( (' , ,,..,, .-r ·/~· --.,( -
)
I ,
I )1 fW'•c f 1 v:, ·1,-: ,'V Ii.\ ; . -
, --
Poor Qua/Uy Odginal
!i
~ ! r-, ,
..
j.
!
j
' I I ,.
!,
ft:
,,
!-
I~
'· ('.
:1 ,,
:•
t
; ~
i
-i
I
, I
~\\I\~\~:~:•,:\, 1'>1\\\ ,, . , ) . . I . , ' , ,':
. '-{ ,, t Isl, . , . I;•~ . '• ,• , I_ 1 , f •\·~,! .:.1., h'lil-1}1,\_,. ,11, ..
,,. -• ,. 11 ·' TAN_.. ..,.__._-_L-.A.'TION ....... I~--,: I,: 6 .... ft, I\~~ """' . .., ~s . . , > , !:, .. t•in.-J .... ·,/·/· •."'· .. ; t:·i; .--;,,,r,~i~~: ..
~. . J: • • "}?{ j~~:~:~~s1~+=·~1 ~
"' '
TANK AND LOCATION DATA ! . L. Page~
DATE: _____________ _
USTOMER: CITY: ., , ' ;_ ·' • ,, -.
J1.o. *---------------STATE: ------=-------------
l WEATHER TIME TEMPERATURE COMMENTS
BEFORE TEST -t-/ ; I' . ' I I -
J ,FTER TEST -~-.' ' I ,, ;i l l I '( I J SCHEMATIC: ' !
i I·, I <
I >
J
I ,, I I ... _J '
i -I .. '' _..,, LI I . -~/
i r, :r:--: I.E.
1-I ,.! ,
~ ,,/!-., r .• l j. IC L· ,./ I
: _~J • •'yJ-· --]•! 1 "',._,
I ,
I :
1.1,t ;\ I.. ' -)
j i !
-
j
-
,l
PRODUCT/TANK NO. i I I.,/, ,• • I I . I ., ,, .-I I ' I ,• , I -
I.
_J >-Fill Gauge Fill Gauge Fill Gauge Fill Gauge Fill Gauge w a: LEVEL ( I ' I t a: w . I , , . 0> GALLONS l
LL -w...l
,iJt~ "_rm~ WATER
1; ( I• I ' I J .i I 11:~-.-}I TOP OF RISER 'I )
-GRADE 1 Jr· : ·, ("· I ' :,
' I
DROP TUBE ,,. , ,l. I . I J .• .. ' I
\ /< ·-CAPACITY GALLONS I_., t, I " I 2
L
l
l
I
I DIAMETER, INCHES . I I I I I I
MATERIAL {', /,.' ,. ' ,. I ! . J /., '. I I,·,. •'••' I I
I PUMP TYPE ~ 111., If f . . ,, .. .'( ,. . '.
TYPE OF COVER I ' '
! . , ' , 'r 1 I .
AGE OF TANK . I ; 1 ' I ~-.,. f
' ' , I• I',
I SIPHON '·/ f ·, ' I / -\
TANK OPENINGS I ,, l .,. ' ' EXTRACTORS '
, .
' ~ \)
TYPE 1,.,, :.; .\. ( ·-· ' ... :,\1,,. I\ ,_\.._ '-
l >-
\ I /v ') i..,,,.,_ ~~ I "\ ., .. !, -•• \. 1 •• ,(•·· a: a: VENT CONFIGURATION -ow . a. > P-V VENT VALVE TYPE c(O ' I
>u
1 w cc
-REPLACEMENT PARTS: DESCRIPTION QUANTITY PRICE
ADDITIONAL CHARGES: (pumpovers, overtime, etc.) _____ .,'-a..·./_' ____ . _,,_-___ \J.._ _________ _
\ 1, l f , )
"Data obtained from oefa~i~n □ LL Charts □ Other -----------~
l"t'S.-~l~/'-,1
TER EhVIRc»ENf Pl SERVICES, nc.
:j) MT. 1.NG.EY STREET, SUl1E 101
'lTAIN VPll..EY, r.A 9'2700
FI~RESU.TS
lEST MlE: 5/25/88
-247-~14 8Cl>-247-2186
TOER: PIE LOCATICW/IIDTIFICATI~ tll. :
~: 55 S. l6WlD RD.
SN.T Lt.KE CI1Y, UT
TEST RE:il.TS ~y
L£AI< LCJ<A~ REilTS
SYSID1 TAN< SIZE WATER L£vEL .Arn
PRax.cT lAlrnS □Wft'ATL ItU£S I~ (1"ri COCLL5I~ RECO+EtO\TIOL5
DIE!:n. 12WJ 91/FG 1-1/4 96 -.cm TIGIT DIESEL l2CXX) 91/FG 1
DIE!:n. l2CXX) 91/FG 2.5 93 -.240 . l.L'K
DIESEL 12W) 91/FG 3 9'l.5 -.lX) l.L'K
PRal.CT LitES -HYrnOSTATIC PR£SSl.R: TEST RESlJ. TS
SYSID1
PRax.cT
TYPE a= Plff> POlNlS POlNlS MIMJTES PRCD.CT PRalCT aHl.USIOO
Rl:MJIE S.ClltN APPLIED Hfl.D ~ LOSS CC 1 s LOSS~ /RESU.T
DIESEL TO<HEIM
DIESEL RED JAO<IT
E: Qi soctioo systens, NEVER put rrore than 15 psi on aey PllJ1) systan.
CETAIL a= TEST RESll.TS
TEST TM LE/iK RATE IDPEF.ATI.RE NlSQIJTE OECJ<
SYSTEM 1EST Lrnl CLOCK ruootrn CCM'ENS4.TIOJ LEA'< RA1E TEST
PRro..cT ~-(IN.) STATE (HR-MIN) CC/DIV CC/MIN [11 TA ~ CC/MIN CC/MIN ~ YIN
DIESEL 1 96 12:10 :30 3.504 -22.429 -.029 -21.ro:J -.629 -.cm N
-.035
DIESEL 1 93 10:20 :30 12.5 -14.166 +.010 +1.021 -15.187 -.240 y
2 92.5 10:30 :33 13.043 -13.478 -.CJJ7 +5.449 -18.9'27 -.Dl N
+.cm
VEL -Irctes fran Tri Botton to Test Level
-Pbsolute Leak Rate (r.'easured Leak Rate -TE!)ferature ~nsatioo} in Gallons Per ftlur
1.lfiirn -tf'PA 329 criterion of+/-O.CE GIA fs used fXl certify tightness t.~\t\\.\J
CERTIFIC'.ATI~ ~~
.s is t.o certify that the above tart systens \Ere tested, using tre l1tNTER ENYIRCJffNT.3L ~VICES, IN:. LEAK
1.arrn accordirg t.o all standard ~ratirg procectJres. Those indicated as tigit at full systsn neet the criterion
• >l iste:i by t:te National Fire Protecti<J1 Association Pc11V1let 329 for Precisi<J1 Testing.
ts Con<U:ted and r.ertified By: Test Van t-b. 31
Tean Manager: M. ~
Taric Testing ~alist: E. EVAAS
, iTOMER.
n # __
--WEATHER
EFORE TEST -·
fER TEST -
CHEMATIC:
-
.
-
~ /,
,J
---l.
PRODUCT/TANK NO.
>-~ a: LEVEL w > GALLONS
.J
cow
0 WATER
TOP OF RISER
GRADE
DROP TUBE
CAPACITY GALLONS
DIAMETER, INCHES
MATERIAL
PUMP TYPE
TYPE OF COVER
AGE OF TANK
SIPHON
TANK OPENINGS
-
EXTRACTORS
TYPE
Poor Quamy Ung1na# 1
TANK AND LOCATION DATA
DATE;
Page 2
• -·-·-------CITY: ~(T_LE__J{_l __ --------
STATE; l JT~J f
TIME TEMPERATURE COMMENTS
~ -
,C ~~
Jo ~,, ~-~-----
0
l
~ □ ,J
C
·---. ---•-··-..
~~_:J
~;~~---~
h·s.H, 1:1, f); f ~ll l:! .J b.'Hu 03 D,'f <.,, Qq
Fill Gauge Fill Gauge Fill Gauge Fill Gauge Fill Gauge
)1/<f I ~ 'I.J.. s ,,, 11 \-IIS-, , "
I Ix-I I I II$< J I 'j
Vh""I JI i"\ ,,,. .. o j,'t 0
I ,J .. ,\ ,) /d ,1r) .:> /.:) .,n~ I:) cl'-'J
9, (; / 9, c; I
c; ( .;, <;c_ r,{
-r-l'.)ru1-:_ ,I -s-
(' A ..,,r f~A,-,r (' """"'" (-r,.., hl
t .&,!\I,( ( ., .,, k. I ~ VI IC. {-" .. ,I(' . -
41~ ~ < c., fJ l,, \ / ~ '-,f >
I-<I I -l/ /-4 1-C/
I...-, / I ,> ,A ...... h .-<,
ill ( ,A l, I ... t, I 4 . __.. I ,.,
' '
' I
I
l
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
:
I
I
i
I
I
' I
1
I
I
I
I
I ' 1
i
!
I
I
' 1
4
l
I
I
I
i
I
I ; I
I
I
I ·,
!
1 ! !
I
j
j
i
I
I
I
i I
I
I ~I
I
I
I
I :
Poor Quality Original
lea_kJ;,okalon ..
M·. WOMIENTALSEJMCES,INC. DATE OF=;,· EST f -,I <-:' .) \-f<;{-116 Dt....vALT AVENUE, N. W. ' TEST
~400
lffl)N, OH 44702 RESULTS CONTRACT NUMBER
"453-1800 800-523-4370
~USTOMER
l ~-F ~• I _j_ t \
~ATION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER NAME
I -
M>DRESS
Q f I\ ( • \ () r) f\
CITY I STATE ..J.',.-~ S. ~~ ~~ '-1-i(T lA kt (A 114 • .. TEST RESULTS SUMMARY LEAK LOKATO" USE
ONLV
SYSTEM TANK SIZE WATER LEAK LOKATOR RESULTS• CONCL. CODE
' PRODUCT GALLONS DIA/MATL INCHES ,';.~i\1 ALR CONCLUSION RECOMMENDATIONS ' QPH Tl!ST TANK svs
J t)·,,~(. I), (\L\V ti /c, ( I .J-"' (· {, ~
~ 71 /c,/ r -1 ,' '1>-1, DIHfl /;), uc.)0 I -, ~ _....I I 'I) -,
~ t\ ;u,u I~ ,1 de) ~I /4 { '1.1-~ 3. ,, -.J1.,o l tA~ ,-,1~
i b • t \1 L / :1 ,,,,,., (iVs-.1 .\ (1:J ½ -3 ()() /1,,i'<.
:1,\
.i.;1 I· I· i
tl
~i
J'HER INFORMATION
"
\:l
1,.,
!
i":· ; .. -
PRODUCT LINES -HYDROSTATIC PRESSURE TEST RESULTS
• PRODUCT PRODUCT i'.j SYSTEM TYPE OF PUMP CONCLUSION/
.i:.:. # MINUTES LOSS LOSS o. PRODUCT REMOTE SUCTION APPLIED APPLIED cc·s GPH RESULT
f \ -.. ~ b:!Si( ~1./..J/r:-r ,. ..
\(\\ 1lr ' t');,Sf I ~r-~
~
.• ~ \ V
,·
! .,
~~OTE: On suction systems, NEVER put more than 16 psi on any pump system .
..THEA CONTRACTORS, OFFICIALS, CUSTOMER REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT ,·,
l)_~,
I
I DETAIL OF TEST RESULTS ..
~ TEST TIME LEAK RATE TEMP£AATURE tn,~';.U,..\\ C_HIEC~ §V§TEM TEST LEVEL COM~NSATION TEST
l"'K.I, .-t<UUU'-1 NO, (INCHES) CLOCK DURATION CC/DIV CC/MIN fl •F CC/MIN ·cc/MIN GPH ......
START HRS.-MIN.
I" 1-J... j_ I 7~·· 1 :1-, t 1 • 5,.) >~ ', V•I -J..i. ~,;s -"'..1!,, /-..,1:i -::JI.~<.> -,6d-', -, .. ,, ...... ·-, IA..
~t D.'iv l
r ~ ,3--4-
I '--il. lcJ.:J..c, ~o u.,--I lJ I&< (,, +. 010,1.. ,,,."') -4-I. o). I -IC-1y1 -,J'♦t) y
I : D<./ :J 9J.J5 /{)•~,, -1 I I?. O•/f -1 5,(,.., .~ -'.Ju)4, ..f # ~. '-1'1 ~ -I\.' <,~) -, ?"(' "-f\: C (.c {
-
'11...
...
:.I \,., E PR?NT
...dta Chart for Tank Syst-...,iJightness Test
. I • • t f>, e / P 'E-I 8 ( e.
PoorQualilyOdginal ~;,,,~ ~ J ~~?'13 :i ,.J ,,,. ~ L Lc"o,;~ .....
I
1. OWNER ..._,.o
T .... ia,D --------· 1 ...... -...._ ----T..,_
2 OPERATOR --T..,._ -
J_ ~EASON FOR
TEST
lupialft Fuil1) -
i.. WHO REQUESTED -111111 ............... 0-TEST AND WHEN ' -T..,_ --.u1yi,,01r-~ ~ Cir.-
----·
......,_.....
s: TANK INVOLVED C,Hf I 1-tJtJt1 -0,'~5£/ rr'J~H>il-i; .
i...1111111ona1w,.,.
1111'-rlfllllle!:I-
I.00ll01 c-,_ --.,_.,. .....
INSTALLATION o~°' J [JJllu.fc ti'' t" 'f'6S f6JJdi'i= DATA p,'s~4{
--dr-ay, Concnca . .._ Top, Size. Tilallll ......_ 0rclll lucllDft.lW.-.
-al--.lllC.. e..i.ac.
____ Alie
Slza.~ Whldl-1 .... ..,_ .., -
I. UNDERGROUND f'( II ·-----, WATER l)o,gUl!ON--. Ov. 11--
T..,._!0De ___ 11t. ca. Arrane-Df ~-F-ILL-UP ._ T..,_
ARRANGEMENTS E.alra ~ ID "lop r,tr -Ml lalll -· HIM --Kl ~1 ~ NO I.Nil
Terrnonel o, -0Clfl,..,.
1or,_ .. ._.,
Comll'l'lr ---r-.-
1. CONTRACTOR,
l.1ECHANICS,
"'Y---
~
-
10. OTHER
INFORMATION
OR REMARKS
--"'-""'""""Y--Offlclalao,-IDDe----..•"'ll'oar-W_,...,,\llellono,~~ .... ----
T ... _._.an .. aboN '-"',,.,_,.In __ .,.,. ... .,......~-
11. TEST RESULTS a-...on ....... lllldla1'wlll,_.a----=
T--.1111ca1ion TIQftl ~lnOlcall C11Se r-,
/:isl -,,.,,.r -,dlO l/1/fff .
-
12. SENSOR 13.Tllll ■looartly._.._._..,...__....__ .. ..._)--.n... ..... a-na,ir ...... ~ed 17 _..., ..
CERTIFICATION ....._Fin.,.: 1, ,.,, rs ,....,_a
!dftf'£Z T-
#l'eM4UNU;P L~lt Oe.[IEcTl,fl df [t ,. JTt=ve lv~IJ~
to. ~ft • ~• JL"(~ II 1J ... 2 T-.ae~•"-'t• II,: ..-
ller1-IN<>Q(TllaftW f. c# rtt(L
z. ________ _
~·------
Data Chart for Tank System Tightness Test
·n..EASE PRINT
1. OWNER n
,.,_,.,LJ
T.,,.111 □ --.......,_ T..,,_ -....... --........ tat ... T..,,_
2. OPERATOR --·-T..,,_
3. REASON FOR
TEST
(ui,la,n Fully)
--,.
4. WHO REQUESTED
TEST AND WHEN ... ,.. r~ie Company or AIIU!IIIOn ~
Adar-T....,,_.
.,..nfy i,y Otrecnon Capac,ly 9rana/Suppl,-ar-Ai>l)rOa.AQ,I Stal/FlmrglMI
5. TANK :t~'.'OLVED
UN llddltlonal H,,_
tor rnandolded tanU
'---""' eo.. FIiia Yenla Stphorw Planpe
6. INSTALLATION
DATA
--dr-i,. c:oncr.r.. Blacll T 00. Size. TllllflH make. 0roo Suction.--.
-ol-10n,elC. Eann. •c. w-.-•Fllla SID. Mlnltolded Whldl-?
__ ,_
7. UNDERGROUND ..... __ .,,._?
WATER o.i,m to Ille -• -
. Dv. □No
·-
8. FILL-UP Tana to lie lilied ___ Iv Dal• Arnngeclby ....... T..,._
ARRANGEMENTS Ema -ID "'IDD otr" -run lank --and who Ill prooidlt? ~ NO ..__
Term1nat ~ orr-.-contact
tor nonce or lnQIJWY
Company ....... TMl)IIOM
9. CONTRACTOR,
MECHANICS,
any Olher contractor
lrwo"'9d
---
10. OTHER
INFORMATICN
OR REMARKS
-A<kl"IOMI ,,,_.,,, on any lleffle --0!11Clal1 or athen IO DI! ----"'9 ■ lfl prog .... or--· Ylldor■ or_,.~ dur1fl0 --.ic.
T..tll _.. m«M on the abaft tank~ In accoidliiCi wtth 11111 pn)CIIClrra prw:rtbed lor 11. TEST RESULTS • datalled on attacl'led INt char19 wf1h ,_.,.. • blowl:
Tant ioenn11ca1.,,, Tlghl I.Mk-lndk:alecl Dat•T-
12. SENSOR 13. n. 1a 1o oert1ty ... ._tar.:.,.._._._.., on 11e --<•> .,__ nw ........ -nglll" ....... Clll■ll■edutll ltid .., ..
CERTIFICATION Nlllana!Ar.P, I • '1 A■■odadcn Parnphl■I m.
ttJ{/'1{_11 T--■ _/ff{ I
Del•
lO(.'f ,.
TM!lng ~ or Company. lly: Slgnalln •
s.natNo.otn-...., Cettiftcatlonl
2. __________ _
E. E PRINT -
1 OWNER __,,,o
r_,_,O
-
2. OPERATOR
-
3 JEASON FOR
TEST
(Ul)IAln Fully)
-
4~VHO REQUESTED
TEST AND WHEN
-
5 -TANK INVOLVED
.. lld(lltlonal u ...
11 man<fOlo«I l&nka -
5. ~ST ALLA TION
LJATA
-7. UNDERGROUND
WATER
-
8 rill-UP
ARRANGEMENTS
. -
9 :ON TRACTOR.
.AECHANICS.
any 011..., contrectc,,
ln"°""9d
-
1,o OTHER
INFORMATION
OR REMARKS
--
11. TEST RESULTS
1. SENSOR
CERTIFICATION
ra{J,/17 • Oa1o
to,'f -,n■fNo DI 1l>e<ma,
Data Chart for Tank System Tightness Test
--,_.._mi .... TellDl'leln9 ,.._ --"-"-... ""' T----y..,,_
-Tdle Cornl)any a< Alllllat..,., .. Dale
Adel,_ T-
,-,01y t,y Olrect,on ~c:ny Brand/SuppU. a,-Appn,,,. Age StaellRbargi#o
i.DCltlOrt eo-Alli -SlplolWI "'-
--"""'-· Conawie. 111-TOIi. Size. Tltwtln malt•. Droo Suc:liaft. ---
-.011m1,on ... c. e.m. elC. U.0..-•Atll Sin. ..,,110_ Whlcll lanU? -~-
ll the ---ffla tank?
0eptn ID 11W Weter -. Ov. ONO
Tanu to De rni.c, ___ hr Del• Arrenged i,,, -TMPIIOM
u1r ■ proch..c:1 ID ,op off"" .-id run 1-111: tiNts How end_,., ID -do? C<,no,-NO LNd
Tarminai or otnef" contact
tor no!ICI DI ,nqu,ry
Company -y....,,_.
AdddlONI .,,_.,,, on .,..,, --· Ollk:lail DI OINn ID De ----,ng II .. prav-... -•!Id Vlltton ... -~ dla1n9 --ele.
Tata -made on the IID0ft tank aywt-In IICCClrdaice with 1Nt proc:eclHa pr91Cftbed tor
• daUhd on .rtached INt dlartl wllh rwultl • followa:
Tank t<tentlfrcalion T1Qhl ,.__ tncllcallld Dot•T-
13. na. II ID C9f1lfy !hat.__,..,..._ ... llatedon .. dllla(a) ._, 11-~• "Tlgllr'fflNt lw~.....,_11¥ ..
Nallarlal Fin Plowclklh Alu Wier fWnpfllal m.
T_,.. ,!~;r~ ,,../'! ~ ,.
Teeting Contractor o, Company. By: StgnaluN
CetUllcaflon •
;t ___________ _
p.
i
<j
APPENDIX C
_-.J
Chen & Associates
Consulting Geotechnical Engineers
Blymyer & Sons Engineers Inc.
1829 Clement Avenue
Alameda, California 94501-1396
Attn: Mr. Chris Falvo
Gentlemen:
401 Ironwood Drive
SJII Lake C,ty Utah 84115 '
80 I -187 ]661
May 13, 1988
Subject: Water Sampling
P.I.E. Nationwide
55 South Redwood Rd.
Salt Lake City, Utah
Job No. 511688A
Chen and Associates Inc. performed monitoring well sampling
at the P. I.E. Nationwide facility located at 55 South Redwood
Road in Salt Lake City, Utah. This work was conducted in
accordance with your letter dated April 28, 1988. The purpose of
our observation was to measure the free water level, product
level and obtain water samples if no free product was observed
from two existing monitoring wells at the site.
Site Description
At the time of our site visit, the P.I.E. Nationwide truck
facility consisted of two truck shops with a driveway, oriented
north/south, between the shops. An off ice was located south of
the east shop. Loading docks were observed east of the off ice.
The area surrounding the buildings is paved with some small areas
of landscaping.
Two monitoring wells were to be sampled at the site. One is
located immediately west of the off ice in the driveway between
the two shops. The other well is located south of the west shop.
On May 6 1 1988, a representative of Chen and Associates
visited the site to sample the two monitoring wells, as requested
in your letter. We met at the site with Mr. Len Klimink of P.I.E.
Nationwide. Mr. Klimink indicated that one of the monitoring
wells had been backfilled. The well backfilled is located south
of the west shop in an asphalt paved area. The other well, which
was located immediately west of the existing offices, was
monitored.
Blymyer & Sons Engineers
May 13, 1988
Page 2
Free Product Levels
On May 6, 1988, the head space within the monitoring well
adjacent the off ice was measured using a GasTech explosimeter
calibrated to measure hexane vapor concentration in both parts
per million and percent LEL (lower explosive limit) ranges. The
following gas scope measurements were obtained from'the well head
space; one thousand plus parts per million and one hundred
percent LEL. Free floating product was encountered in the
monitoring well at a depth of 9.6 feet below the top of the steel
well cover (approximate ground surface elevation). Total depth of
the monitoring well was measured to be 16.5 feet below the top of
the steel well cover. The length of bailer used to sample the
well was 11 inches. Sampling of the monitoring well encountered
at least 11 inches of free floating product. After initial
sampling of the well, the bailer was dropped to the bottom of the
well and retrieved. No water was observed for the full length of
the sampler. On May 13, 1988, we returned to the site to measure
the thickness of the free floating product using water finding
paste. The top of the water surface was found to be 13.4' below
the top of the steel well cover. Total thickness of the free
floating product was measured to be 3.8 feet.
If you have any questions, or if we can be of further
service, please call.
~;~--~--...:
..-: r: c::-<:: --'--~,~1-,
, -".c=-.o-:::__~,,1~-1<
~ '
I O \
-I ' -
Sincerely,
Chen and Associates, Inc.
o+ ~4--~t, -
_::_ __ ,31/ Douglas R. Hawkes
DRH/cs
Rev. by JEN,
Chen & Associates
i
C
APPENDIX D
ESE
--------------------------------Alill RJl,,f/ ':'.QMl'AHY~
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE
ANO ENGINEERING, INC.
Mr. Chris Falto
Blymyer Engineers
1829 Clerrent Avenue
Alameda, CA 94501
August 12, 1988
Re: Surrrrary of Field Activities arxi Data Presentation -
P.I.E. Truck Terminal, Salt La.ke City, utah
Gentlerren:
EnvirorutEntal Science & Engineering (ESE) was retained by Blymyer Engineers
to corduct torehole drilling arxi rronitor well installations at the P.l.E.
truck terminal located on South Terrple and Red.weed Road in Salt Lake City,
Utah. The requested services were ~rforrred as specified in the June 6,
1988 letter to Chris Falto of Blymyer Engineers fran Ro~t Ressler of ESE.
/)
The activities conducted for the P.I.E. project by ESE were ccrrp~sed of:
o Well location verification
o Well ~rmits ard notifications
o Borehole drilling arxi 5a!T1)le collection
o Monitor well installation
o Fluid level arxi prcxl.uct thickness measurements
o Relative elevation survey
o Brief data swrrrary report
This data sullTTB.ry report descrites the data collection procedures, lists the
collected ~ta arxi presents the drafted coring logs arxi well carpletion
diagrams. No interpretations, conclusions or recomrenda.tions have teen
provjdt:<l.
1 .O INTRODUCTION
On Fr ida.y, July 2 9, 1 988, Robert Ressler of ESE conducted a sj te
reconnaissance an:i field verification of the prOPJSed rronitor well locations
at the P.I.E. truck terminal. The initial well locations were providaj by
Blymyer Engineers and the final well locations are irdicated on the attached
site plan.
Blymyer Engineers
August 12, 1988
Page 2
Request for permission to drill arrl install eight grourrl water rronitor wells
at the P.I.E. site was filoo on July 21, 1988 with the State of Utah,
Departrrent of Natural Resources, Division of Water Rights, arrl permission to
drill was grantoo August 1, 1988.
2. 0 OORHC/SOIL SAMPLING
On Morx:l.ay, August 1 through Wednesday, August 3, 1988, ESE arrl our drilling
sutx::ontractor, Mountain States Drilling, drilloo eight rorings arrl carpletoo
eight rronitor wells at the P.I.E. truck terminal. Craig Scola, an ESE field
geologist was on site to rronitor the drilling and to log and collect the
soil sarrples.
The drill rig usoo during the field activities was a 01E-55 hollow stern
auger rig. The 7-1/4" diarreter hollow stern augers penetratoo the su.tsurface
and allowoo the collection of 18-inch long split S{X)On sarrples by driving
the sarrpler into the grourrl with a 140-p::)l.llXl. drop hanrner.
The 2-inch inside diarreter sarrpler was linoo with 4-inch long brass liners
and sarrples were collectoo every 5 feet. The sarrples were examinoo for
lithology, rroni toroo with a Tip II Photovac Ionization Detector (TIP) for
the presence of hydrcx::arrons, and recordoo on l~ing forms. One 4-inch
brass liner was selectoo from each sarrple:1 interval for lat::oratory analysis.
The erds of the brass sleeves were wrapped in aluminum foil and covere:1 with
plastic erd caps. The sarrple:1 interval, roring lithology arrl the location
of the sarrples selecte:1 for lat::oratory analysis is irrlicate:1 on the attachoo
bJring arrl well carpletion diagrams (Figure 1 through 8).
The sarrples save:1 for lat::oratory analysis were placoo in a cooler with ice,
logge:1 on chain-of-custooy forms arrl seale:1 with evidence tape. The sarrple
cooler was sh;i.pped to N. E.T. Pacific Lat::oratories on Thursday, August 4,
1988. Copies of the chain-of-custooy forms are attached to this report.
All activities were corducte:1 urder Health ard Safety Stardards of Personal
Protection Level D. Dual cartridge respirators were available for emergency
use. The Tip II Photovac Ionization Detector was utilized on site to
monitor the presence of any volatile organics encounteroo during the
activities. The TIP was calibrate:1 daily with 100 ppn isobJtylene gas arrl
readings were pericdically checke:1 during activities.
Decontamination of all m3.terials used to drill, SafTl)le, corrplete the wells,
and measllre product thicknesses was completed at the job site.
Decontamination was accomplished by steam cleaning or scrubbing with
Alconox, rinsing with tap water, followed by a distille:1 water rinse.
(t
PoorQua111y Orig/no·
Blymyer Engineers
August 12, :988
Page 3
3.0 MONITOR WELL INSTALLATION AND DEVELO™ENI'
All eight rronitor wells were construct.Erl of Sche:iule 80 PVC casings arrl
screens. The well casings arx:l screens are generally carprised of five feet
of unslotted casing, fifteen feet of 0.01 inch factory slotted-'screen with a
flush threaded bottcm cap O. 5 feet long arrl water tight lockable cap. The
raterial used to construct the filter pack was 16/ 40 Colorado silica sarrl,
\rt'hich \rt'as packed along the well l:xJre annulus frcm the hole oottcm to
approximately 3 feet below the ground surface. Benseal, a crushed
tentonite, was placerl in the well l:xJre annulus atove the filter pack to
\rt'ithin two feet of the ground surface. Two feet of cement was place::i around
a road-rated locking well cover over the well head a.rrl flush with the
asphalt or concrete surface. Well coopletion diagram; for each we~l are
presente:i in Figures 1 through 8.
This rrethcd of well design arx:l construction allows sufficient ground water
flow to the well for sarrpling, prohibits the passage of formation naterials
into the wells, arrl ensures sufficient structural integrity to prevent the
collapse of the well structure.
Upon ccrrpletion of the rronitor wells, each well was developed using a two-
inch diam:ter four-foot long PVC tailer. Each well was taile:i until at
least three colUims of water arx:l any extraneous fine-grained naterials that
may have t:een dislcd.ge:i during drilling, left on the screen, or suspeooed in
the water were rerroved. The developrrent water was placed in 55 gallon drums
and storerl on site.
The well ccrrpletion arrl develq:J'l'ent activities were ~leted without any
unusual incidents and no problems were encountered. While drilling the
wells, saturated sand was intercepted and the inflow of fine to medium I
grained sand and water into the l:xJre hole arrl arourd the well screen nade .,r,,_. v' "'1
inserting the 16/40 sarrl pack .LJTt)()Ssible to depths greater than 15 feet. ,",,~·/ r.-.,;-,1
~ r. I._, ' /1r./r~1 1
lvke'1 ;.~,,.. ,,, . .,,,,, 4.0 F11JID LEVElS AND PRODUCr THICKNESSES
~•( lce,,11
Upon corrpletion ard developrrent of rronitoring wells, static fluid levels and ·, """"' ''
prcduct thickness measurerrents were taken and recorde:i in each well. An
electronic water level indicator was used to neasure the depth to fluid.
All fluid level rreasurerrents were taken from the north side of the PVC well
head. Each measurement was taken to the nearest 0.01 foot. Table 1 lists
the fluid measurenents collected on August. 5, 1988.
On August 5, the arrount of petroleum prcduct present on the grourrl water was
measured using a COLIWASA-type sanpler. The sanpler is constructe:i of rigid
acrylic tubing with a l:xJttom sealing stopper that enables the collection of (lllt(r(,f
urrlistur.ced free prcduct and grourrl water interface sanples. An accurate ?1./r r,,,, ,,. Sri
measurem:mt of the anount of free floating prcduct on top of the grourrl ; t.. "'"''.'"' ¥'
{I ,'(qL(. TfA
1,v4' ·,, fr
\ l,,f OV./ "" ( 1 ," C ( ,
Blymyer Engineers
August 1 2, 1 988
Page 4
water within the well can then te recorded. Mcdifications to the COLIWASA-
type saIJl)ler were necessary to accorrrrcdate the extreme product thicknesses
measured at the site. Two sections of tubing were bourxi arrl clarrped
together to allow product thickness ITEasurements greater than six feet. The
difficulty in handling and operating the ten-foot long saJTt)ler .. made product
thickness rreasurement greater than six feet accurate to within 2 inches.
The product thickness rreasurerrents were acxiitionally confirrrei with the use
of the water level 1.rrlicator to indicate a range in depth of the water-
product interface in the well collecting the interface in the COLIWASA-type
sarrl)ler, rreasuring the depth of the interface arrl subtracting the rreasured
depth to fluid level. Table 1 lists the rreasured prcx:iuct thicknesses
recorded. on August 5, 1988.
After the wells were installed., their locations were surveyed for relative
elevations to the nearest 0.01 foot (see attached site plan). The transects
were resed tram the finished concrete surface inside the shop area ( see
attached. site plan). Table 1 lists the relative elevations for each rronitor
well, and the control _p:,int. The surveyor's level notes are also attached
to this report.
TABLE 1
P.I.E. '!'ROCK Tl:lU1INAL -COI.UCTfD D1ll'A
Lccation Relative Depth to Fluid Measured Product
Ident. Elevation Level (8/5/88) Thickness (8/5/88)
Wl 98.88' 9.40' 5.80'
W2 99. 51 I 9.05' .04'
W3 99.29' 8.85' • 01 I
W4 99.69' 8.45' 8.00' *
W5 99.45' 8.05' 9.00' *
W6 98 .81' 7.95' 9.00' *
W7 99.05' 6.65' • 0] I
ws 99.23 9.75 0.03
EM 100.00' N/A N/A
* Measurement accurate to+ 0.17 feet.
Blymyer Engineers
August 1 2, 1 988
Page 5
ESE is available to continue to provide you with environmental consulting
services at any function and looks forward to working with Blymyer Engineers
on this project or any others with which you may b:!come involved.
If you have any questions, concerns or desire ad:iitional infonnation, please
do not hesitate to call.
RFR:pw
Enclosures
Sincerely,
~=~
Rotert F. Ressler
Hydro:;1eologist
& EH:iINEERIM:;
MONITOR WELL
W-1
5
10
15
20
W1-4
5
6
g
5
17
28
7
14
17
1
0
0
~ Cement
W&J Bentonite
Asphalt
Fill: Gray/bm gravel to silt.
SM: Gray silty sand; fine grained; black
silt with plant material.
Tip: 5.9 ppm
SM-ML: Light gray silt; petroteum procluct
oclor; partially solidified nodules.
Tip: 138.5 ppm
~=~ ~~__...:-~
"'=,.,_,;i....~~ :!:. Fluid level@ 13 Feet
:ii:ia.~~--= ~~ CL-ML: Medium gray silty clay (from cut1ings).
Tip: 120.8 ppm
TD 21.5 ft.
SP: Medium gray micaceous fine to medium
grained sand; petroleum odor.
Tip: 122.5 ppm
CL: Medium gray lean clay.
Tip: 120.9 ppm
EXPLANATION
140 Split spoon sample
23 interval with
11 blow counts per 6"
I PVC well screen
.01 slotted
2" diameter I I Natural sand pack I W1-1 I 4" Brass liner sample
, .. ,,,,,,,..,1:·::··1
••. :::-:{:-·"\~~---1 6/40 Sand pack
HUNTER/ESE INC.
collected for lab analysis
::!. Fluid level
Figure 1
MONITOR WELL W-1 BORING LOG
AND WELL COMPLETION DIAGRAM
MONITOR WELL
15
20
W-2
5
7
10
4
5
6
8
9
10
1
0
Asphalt
Fill: Brown gravel to silt.
ML-CL: Light to dark gray silt with clay;
dark with plant material.
. SM-ML: Light gray sandy silt: petroleum
-~":=-~;~ odor; partially solidified nodules.
SP: Gray micaceous coarse grained sand.
Tip: 5.6 ppm
CL: Medium gray lean clay.
Tip: 5.9 ppm
TD 21.5 ft.
~ Cement
~ Bentonite
LJ Natural sand pack
I }~:-~:\:':.j 16/40 Sand pack
HUNTER/ESE INC.
EXPLANATION
140
23
11
Split spoon sample
interval with
blow counts per s·
PVC well screen
.01 slotted
2N diameter
I w2_1 I 4· Brass liner sample
collected for lab analysis
Fluid level
Figure 2
MONITOR WELL W-2 BORING LOG
AND WELL COMPLETION DIAGRAM
MONITOR WELL
W-3
5
W3-2
10
15
6
16
20
7
g
9
10
10
11
-----
-
Asphalt
Fill: Dark brown silt and gravel.
SM-ML: Black silt with sand; plant
material present.
Tip: 20.2 ppm
SM: Green to gray silty sand:
minor clay (from cuttings)
:Y. Fluid level @ 9.5 Feet
SM-ML: Medium gray silt with sand; yellow to
It. brown staining; petroleum odor.
Tip: 32.1 ppm
SP: Medium gray micaceous sand; fine
to medium grained.
Tip: 5.8 ppm
20
W3-4
... '• ...
CL: Medium gray lean clay.
Tip: 1.1 ppm
TD 21.5 ft.
EXPLANATION
~ Cement
~ Bentonrte
D Natural sand pack
• 16/40 Sand pack
HUNTER/ESE INC.
'--------------------··-.
140
23
11
I
Split spoon sample
interval with
blow counts per 6"
PVC well screen
.01 slotted
2" diameter
I w3 _1 I 4" Brass liner sample
collected for lab analysis
Y. Fluid level
Figure 3
MONITOR WELL W-3 BORING LOG
AND WELL COMPLETION DIAGRAM
ir
, ,
: I I I
I
I
: 1
i
MONITOR WELL
W-4
2
2
6
ii ,1 ... I w-~-0-2_!---:
6
8
9
."}\\:
20
W4-4
5
11
16
0
0
Fill: Dark brown gravel and silt.
CL-ML: Dark to medium gray; silt with
clay.
Tip: 20.2 ppm.
Fluid level@ 9 Feet
CL-ML: Black to dark gray silt with clay;
partially solidfied nodules;
petroleum odor.
SP: Medium gray sand; fine to
coarse grained.
CL: Medium gray lean clay.
Tip: 5.1 ppm
TD 21.5 ft.
~ Cement
~ Bentonite
D Natural sand pack
::~\i}(i;,i. 16/40 Sand pack
HUNTER/ESE INC.
EXPLANATION
140 Split spoon sample
23 interval with
11 blow counts per 6"
I PVC well screen
.01 slotted
2· diameter
j W4-1 I 4-Brass liner sample
collected for lab analysis
~ Fluid level
Figure 4
MONITOR WELL W-4 BORING LOG
AND WELL COMPLETION DIAGRAM
...__ ____________ __. L------------~-
~
~
D
1~l}?tftt~-
MONITOR WELL
W-6
3
3
3
5
6
g
4
1 1
14
1
0
0
Asphalt
Fill: Dark brown gravel and silt.
SM-ML: Dark gray silt with micaecous
sand.
Tip: 7.8 ppm
Fluid level @ 9 Feet
CL-ML: Medium gray silt with clay; some
hard silt nodules; petroleum odor.
Tip 949 ppm
SP: Medium gray sand; fine to
medium grained.
Tip: 3.3 ppm
CL: Lean clay (from cuttings).
CL-ML:
TD 21.5 ft.
Medium gray clay with silt.
Tip 14.3 ppm
EXPLANATION
Cement 140 Split spoon sample
23 interval with
11 blow counts per s·
Bentonite I PVC well screen
.01 slotted
2· diameter
Natural sand pack 4• Brass liner sample I W6-1 I
collected for lab analysis
16/40 Sand pack ~ Fluid level
Figure 6
HUNTER/ESE INC. MONITOR WELL W-6 BORING LOG
AND WELL COMPLETION DIAGRAM
MONITOR WELL
W-8
Asphalt
Fill: Dark gray to black gravel and silt.
CL-ML: dark gray to black, clay with sitt;
gravel layer (from cuttings).
Tip 1.5 ppm
CL-ML: Dark gray to black clay with sitt; large
cobbles; fill material, (10% recovery).
SM-ML: Black sandy silt (from cuttings).
Tip: 105.?ppm
Fluid level@ 9.5 Feet
SP: Black sand: fine to coarse grained;
occasional gravel clasts: petroleum odor.
Tip: 137.8 ppm
SP: Dark gray sand; fine to coarse
grained; no gravel.
Tip: 5.6 ppm
·:. ··, :-..::
••. ··:-:.·· ..• -_ •·.
20
TD 20.0 ft.
EXPLANATION
~ Cement
~ Bentonite
D Natural sarr'.l pack
1->~~'~i~\--·I 16/40 Sane ;:iack
HUNTER/ESE INC.
140
23
11
Split spoon sample
interval with
blow counts per 6"
PVC well screen
.01 slotted
2· diameter
I ws-1 ! 4" Brass liner sample
collected for lab analysis
Fluid level
Figure 8
MONITOR WELL W-8 BORING LOG
AND WELL COMPLETION DIAGRAM
Pr(Jject:
I
Crew IC:= A ;z.L-' ,:z_, . //~:~ :::::,,!
Station I H.I ---I
,=: .'.,.1
.d... ~; lc,.:J,.. C:,/ --z_.. S. IO -
.:.J._
I ;;_73 -
~ B ~ -::::
-::::= 7 r::::: c; t-,
-_:;, I . ~ d-C?
-A-::=,.~ I o1-c;=;
-/ ':. -,a---~ .__.
/, -:, 5". z. ----",
-d::: /1 d. 94--c;-S.IC ---
1P 4--~~
6-~ /04--~
L.d--9
Elev.
/00.00
= s:I
,:J'? .28'
14C1..,--:, . -
~ 'J ~ ,:,--
qe1_1'1,,
'.:I?.'!. I
Q,:, .'7~
:::i.:, .C, I
=n. a.-5
F,9,gq
loo.oo
Poge:_I I ..... ! __ _
I
J;;e, i-.la.G6 {;J
NOTES PoorQua/ily Originat
Wecther s· ... a&:J--Date 4-9 g I I i~
Remarks Elev. C/F
Fi,r;iSh ,C-/,,,o,-O~r-u:e::,
.0/afa. "w ,_,,,,-,..d,,.,~ • .J.,, /..,t,..,/
J
.J. .
. 1/o. £,..;,,..,,,., C. ci1' Ind ,Ot:,
I I
II
' ,, ..
I)
,{/o. .=-___ ,.,,..,,;,.. I ~==-l".""J < ,' l"J."'-1
I I
//
,,
/ I
Fi/J;~l, Roo>-
C la&i a 0~
,.
~
.,
i
-f
I
-·· • .. ,v1uoll, ... 14 A I\L ;,l,ALhL.L:. J\UU i:.UuHH:l:.IIINli
CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD Sall lake City, Uhh Olllce
Jj e cl Project Name
rnber ..
£) V rv-e v-er P·r~£
Ho. r
,pl~••~~· of
Poor Quality Odginai Remark•
Con-J1~7'ctl~ fr (hd~ ~/J, Dale (/1me . lain er ■ ''-fj•11:;½i ll. .0 ~' Te:5h-• E " '
0 .. Station Location
•"" u CJ ~ :
1h/~ ~
t a,,fl 2.T-l/1 J R.'h,
o I ilt?8
_.J ---,
( 2.. 7. F-? r;-/ ~f.
----1-
I 3 t<C -lt.,C
t/zle,:;. --
l Lf 20-z_/,g-
"th/~ ----------
1 I -z,s-y
<flz_/g,t ---------
( 2. 7. .')-2
~2/r,:
,
3 tt:f:"-It_ t-
1/zlt-<
1-
r 2,,-fli= m I ---3-t,s-
'1'!1/~~"'
------
I '2. cy -lo,5=
d~le,
I------------
I ) ,rz.:r-t(,t
1!Jg_ ------~ -,
I L/ cc> -2Z,S:
I --------
\ --------\.
--,_ ----._
1ul ■hed By: Dale Time Received .Dy: nellnquhh•d Dy: Dale Time necelwed By:
1lure) ~
~ty{~ ( SI gnat ur •> ( Slgnatur •> kSlgnalure)
::., ,A~ IC(: 37
1tMshed By: -Dale Time necelved By: nellnqul1hed Dy: Dale Time necelved Dy:
alure) (Signature) (Slgnalure) (Signature)·
1ul1hed Dy:
1 lure)
Dale Time necelv•d for Laboratory
by: (Signature) u,.'. Tim• nemark•
'
---... ---J.... __
--··-·····-····· ... <J ................... nUU Llil.llUt:.t:.IUUu
CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD Salt lake City, Ut ■h Olllce
oJ e cl ProJ• cl Name
mber
6l\fkv,,A/ r~r-E . ..
Ho.
mplera (Slg1nelA-<4·L•J of ~~--PoorQualily Origlnal Remark•
-~.,,., Con-l.•~
V
l alnen f'f'> Dal• Time D. .a
E II Slallon Loc ■llon l 0 ..
u CJ ~
11hk
,
/ fr,kt r llA "?-</,,
~!Jiff? ,., ' • I'
I '2.. 7, ~er D
:?/1/<i.g 1 3 I
1-Z, ~-fl/ A
'OJ )/f:f I Lf 2" --z.l, s--/
I ---'i )-i/8J" I \ 2,5'-y'
~/2/tt--74r-1 1 1.. dz/'t'l~ 1 "3 1r-1,.r
~/-t/rt } 4 zo-2..l.r
r/,/~,; I i '?.~ .... <;
~, t('ii ----
I '2.. 7 s---z
'o"/ r/ "ff; I 2 IS---l(.r-
i ,/ai
,~
1
l( to-2-r.r
I -I
--
qulahed By: Dale Tim• Received By: Rellnqul ■h ■d By: Date Tim• Received Br:
;bture) I
J/q/~
( Slgnatur •> (Signature) Signature
~.A¼ /f(JJ
1qulk'hed By: Date Time Received By: Rellnqul1h1d By: Dal• Tim• Received By:
nature) (Slgnatur •> (Signature) K Signature)
1qul1hed By:
1ature) D at• Time Received for Laboratory
by: (Signature)
Dal• Tim• nem ■rk•
........ _ ............. -...., ..... ,.,._ r111u a..;.11u1111.:1.:111rtu
CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD Sall lake Clly, Uleh Olllce
Je cl ProJecl Nam ■
1ber
6[ y Vvw'{~'I
~".
·1q 3 2 P<EE No.
pier ■ (Slgnalure)
Lt~ ol ~ Poor Quality Original nemark•
Con-~f\p
Dale Tim• I • lain er ■ F"' Q. .a
E " Slallon Location o" 0 ..
0 " ~
1;r, /'fl .,
et/krfl Z:: 7,£-~0 I
'' l B,¾
r , flit
-----
I 2-/,~-q
~ I I '(ff I .3 ,~-lh r
11,1~ I \ ((, /)
/
2 .. s--
g-l, 181( l z._ ,~-1,. _s-, --
-
.
--
--,.._ -----
---· ---
" ---,---
------
ulshed By: Dale Tim• R ■c•lv•.d .Dy: nellnqul ■h•d By: Dale Tim• Received By:
lure~ (Signature) (Slgnalur ■) ~Slgnalure)
~ { t!vli~ Jy.•-~ 2
ult:hed By: Dale Time n ■celved By: nellnqul ■hed Dy: Dal• Time Received By:
1ture) (Slgnalure) (Slgnalure) (Signature)·
ul1hed By:
t ur e)
Dale Time n ■c ■lv ■d for Laboratory
by: (Slgnalur ■) U ,i l • Tim• n ■mark ■
I.--' ------·-----~ ---
SALT LAKE
CEMENT CUTTING
Concrete Sawing • Dnll1ng Contractor
852 East Bryan Avenue• Salt Lake City, Utan 84105
Business Phone. [phone] Pagene No "82-6188
I
L
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND ENG.
4455 SOUTH 700 EAST
SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84107
PURCHASE ORDER NO. ____ _
WORK ORDER NO. _____ _
ARRIVE __ g _: 3_0 __ _
DEPART __ lO_:o_o __
OPERA TOR __ T_IM __ _
_J
#50 SOUTH REDWOOD ROAD, PIE TRUCK YARD JOB LOCATION __________________________ _ INVOICE DATE
INVOICE NO
8-4-88
BOB RESSLER ORDERED BY __________________________ _ 8-1565
ITEM DESCRIPTION PRICE
FLATSAW (CONCRETE)
16 II X 16 11 X 611 CONCRETE OPEN ING CUT MIN. $75.00
WET VACUUM USED NIC
.
---------,.
c ~v•, -
e,\\~~G"" ~--~ Q -----r."?•\1l-"i"~, .---
~(;. /
-,-r ,
\.-,' ',,,
TRAVEL CHG.
DOWNTIME CHG HRS
% SALES TAX
PLEASE PAY INVOICE· THANK YOU. TOTAL $75.00
U nd~1Qned •Qrffs Iha! payment for :uK1 m ■tenal shall be made on or be fora !he 10th day ar toe month following delivery and that 11 sucil payment 1s not so made and
tl'lia account 11 Placed in tha hands of an attorney or collect,on agency for collect1on, unCler-3,gned agrees 10 pay, ,n add1t1on 10 the amount due hereunder a reasonable
■mount u attornay lau and/or collect1on tees and costs 1 'h."lt MONTHLY FINANCE CHARGE WHICH IS AN ANNUAL PERCENTAGE RATE OF 11"1',
WILL BE APPLIED ON THE FIRST $1,500 ANO 1-,,. PER MONTH (12'/o) ON ANY EXCESS OVER $1,500 ON PAST BALANCES. Wa will not be held
,...n,\,..., ..... ,_ ....
1
1 ><
,..
.. :'·
'.:>Cr BACK
:1, ,,
.•·.
. =:.··
,,.,, .
;,;
/J1 p/2/tJ;_,·:,i);:,·1/ ltju:rho; ~ i -l/l'l/lky/E-5E •
• ·-rf/f3}iis,·-<•,: •. :;• y"IG, .... • ·(1'1,,·,-1 .. I,},\\ \pu.,i:,"
, .. ·.'.-;., ~ _· ~;~--~~-~~>·:,. :..__'. e, ll11 Sv~~'? L.~~--1 .. p''."~~ ~ :-:: -_-__ -____ ~---
' •,, ( <:' .'• • <:! 1_'_,; • ,' ' '•••< I ..••. -. . -• _ __:_~.:
, ..
i __ ,
APPENDIX E
·-.. _
' -----··--··
~;J~ye~ ::;~~e~rs,
:329 C1 err.e~: /l'1e
l-~~eca, '.::A 3~~01
NATIONAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
TESTING. INC.
:3-23-38
Ser~es No:
~ ET P1c1t,c: ~"'l'i:
.. 1:35 To=,scon, 1;,rcie
Sari:a 4 osa. CA-~JG ~-
re, ~o;-';.:'":-·2,:0
Fax ?'Fl ';.:'€·)1323
~'.Jg II.Jc:
495/0:7
(l-29)
:::1 ~en: Ref: ('./) Fai~c
1~~3 1 ;:ical ?.es_.;:s -=er 29 Sc
"3'.y~eyer/P.I.~." ~ecei,,ej:
axc:es Iaen:ifiea as
~ -38.
Jra!ys'.s of :~e samples referenced above nas :een cc~oletec. ~his resort is
~r;tte~ ir c8nfir~ation cf results trans~i::ed veroal;y on Augus: 22, 1988.
;esults are ~resented on :~e fol lcwing ~a;es.
J1ease feel ~elc:~e to ccntact JS snou;c you nave q~est~ons regarding
~r:cec~res er results.
~a;~y ~jKur-s:.cn
JrJ~ec: '.::~e::1~ St
1c: Scmo~e Custody Ooc~ments
,'.m :1=.nsarc
Jro~ e·:::: \lanager
.r
NET.
mg/Kg (ppm)
mg/L
mL/Uhr
MPN/100 ml
NA
NO
NR
NTU
ug/Kg (ppb)
ug/L
umhos/cm
'l 495/017 LOG NO 3886 -2 -August 23, 1988
KEY TO ABBREVIATIONS
Concentration in units of milligrams of analyte per
kilogram of sample, wet-weight basis (parts per million).
Concentration in units of milligrams of analyte per
1 it er of s amp 1 e .
Mi i 1 i 1 i ter~ per l i Ler per hour.
Most probable number of bacteria per one hundred milliliters
of sample.
Not analyzed; see cover letter for details.
Not detected: the analyte concentration is less than the listed
reporting 1 imi t.
Not requested.
Nephelometric turbidity units.
Concentration in units of micrograms·of analyte per
kilogram of sample, wet-weight basis (parts per billion).
Concentration in units of micrograms of analyte per
l it er of s amp l e .
Micromhos per centimeter.
See cover letter for details.
THE COVER LETTER ANO KEY TO ABBREVIATIONS ARE AN INTEGRAL PART OF THIS REPORT
495/0:~ LOG NO 3886 -3 -
ANALYTE;
Lab No. Descriptc~
-13522
-13523
-13524
-13525
-13526
-13527
-13528
-13529
-13530
-13531
-13532
-13533
-13534
-13535
-13536
-13537
-13538
-13539
-13540
-13541
-13542
-13543
-13544
-13545
-½3546
-13547
-13548
-13549
-13550
W-1 2.5-4'
W-1 7.5-9'
W-1 15-16.S'
W-1 20-2i..:'
W-2 2.5-4'
W-2 7.5-9'
W-2 15-16.S'
W-2 20-21. 5'
W-3 3-4.5'
W-3 9-10.5'
W-3 12.5-14'
W-3 20-22.5'
W-4 3-4.5'
W-4 7.5-9'
W-4 12.5-14'
W-4 20-21. 5'
W-5 2.5-4'
W-5 7.5-9'
W-5 15-16.5'
W-5 20-21.5'
W-6 2.5-4'
W-6 7.5-9'
W-6 15-16.5'
W-6 20-21.5'
W-7 2.5-4'
W-7 7.5-9'
W-7 15-16.5'
W-8 2.5-4'
W-8 15-16.5'
PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS
Extractable,
as Diesel Fuel
10 (mg/ Kg)
08-02-88
08-02-88
03-02-88
08-02-68
08-02-88
08-02-88
08-02-88
08-02-88
08-03-88
08-03-88
08-03-88
08-03-88
08-03-88
08-03-88
08-03-88
08-03-88
08-02-88
08-02-88
08-02-88
08-02-88
08-01-88
08-0~-88
08-01-88
08-01-88
08-01-88
08-01-88
08-01-88
08-01-88
08-01-88
Results
16
3,900
11,000
ND
ND
llAOOO
56
ND
ND
200
ND
ND
'.'JD
4,700
i~O
NO
ND
3,000
NO
ND
ND
2,2G8
NO
ND
NO
3,100
ND
ND
ND
August 23, 1988
Units
mg/,Kg
mg/Kg
mg/Kg
mg/Kg
mg/Kg
mg/Kg
mg/Kg
mg/Kg
mg/Kg
mg/Kg
mg/Kg
mg/Kg
mg/Kg
mg/Kg
mg/Kg
mg/Kg
mg/Kg
mg/Kg
mg/Kg
mg/Kg
mg/Kg
m .... 1 v ......
Ill~/ 1,~
mg/Kg
mg/Kg
mg/Kg
mg/Kg
mg/Kg
mg/Kg
mg/Kg
aThis sample contained high-boiling hydrocarbons in addition to the
medium-to-high boiling hydrocarbons.
THE COVER LETTER ANO KEY TO ABBREVIATIONS ARE AN INTEGRAL PART OF THIS REPORT
~ All. -,_ .. _, -.~------~-·--···~~~~~----~~NVIHONMENi'.~Ls~iENC~ ~~~ ·~~~:~~:::~~ ., 4ZMC b □ ,. ass L ·-jf -~ ~ g l9
CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD Sall Lake City, Ulah Office
ProJecl Project Name I Number
6f y ~y~,-f·EE l.1 \'·1 ~1q-37_ rl \' No.
\,_\,
Semple r a (Signature)
~/4
of t ~ • ~ I U~~ Poor Quality Original -~ Remarks t ' (_. C"'"P Con-• '-I) '\ r, . f\.
Tim• I lalnen ~\' I el Dal• .
[{~ \:·-Q. .0
lo. E " S t-• ti O n L O C a ti On
,
t!{'
0 ..
u CJ • " \, ~
"7 ~I I /tt ) l?.1\..
' -~4-/kifl z;. 7,S--~/j I
✓---, ~,,,~(' I 2-7.,~-q -
'5/f/f5 v-/ I ~ ,~-It: r
It° ilil~ I \ </c, / 2,S-
11<{ '6l1 /gl( I , L. I~ -I~. S-•
-
hllnqulshed By: Dale Time Received By: Relinquished By: Dale Time Received By:
Signal ure) An ( SI gn11tur •> ( SI gn11lur •> ,Slgn11ture)
c~r~:( -• ~ lliflif 1Y ~ 7
l~llnqulUu,d By: Dale Tim• Received By: Rellnqulahed By: Dal• Time Received By:
Signature) (Slgflalure) (Signature) ( Signature)
Rellnqulsh•d By: Dal• Tim•
(Signature)
Received for laboratory
by: (Signature)
Dal• Tim• Rem11rka
-. .
.. ' (, f v ,
•~ r~. ,· I
/,__ ' • • I c ', , "1--r I -------, ' ,,
~ --·-\
APPENDIX F
:-r ... • -:
\1'.. ~ .. ~ --
\f. • ) .. N-,
,r,,· -.'.i
TO? ;) F"
C.\.3I~G
l)0.1JO
100.1-3
L)0.24
99.65
ALL ~EASURS~E'.'lTS I~ FEET
TO
:o/.\ TER
9. ')6
q_22
9. -J 6
:3. 0 5
GROC~Dw.\T!:R
ELEVATI0'.1
90.94
9().96
91 . 13
91. 60
SUBSURFACE CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION
PHASE II-A
SUBMITTED TO:
P.I.E. NATIONWIDE
2050 KINGS ROAD
JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA 32203
FOR:
55 REDWOOD ROAD
SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
MAY 5, 1989
BEI #8873
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
I. SUMMARY........................................ 1
II. INTRODUCTION
Background and Scope of Work ................... 2
Site Conditions................................ 4
III. DATA ACQUISITIONS
Monitoring Well Installation ................... 5
Monitoring Well Development .................... 5
Soil Sample Collection and Analysis ............ 5
Groundwater Sample Collection and Analysis ..... 6
Site Survey and Monitoring Well Gauging ........ 6
IV. DATA ANALYSIS
Site Stratigraphy .............................. 7
Direction of Groundwater Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Extent of Contamination ........................ 7
V. TEMPORARY FUEL RECOVERY PROGRAM ................ 9
VI. CONCLUSIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
VII. RECOMMENDATIONS............................... 11
TABLES
TABLE I: Temporary Product Recovery Chart
FIGURE 1:
FIGURE 2:
FIGURE 3:
FIGURE 4:
APPENDIX A:
APPENDIX B:
APPENDIX C:
APPENDIX D:
LIST OF FIGURES
Site Location Map
Area Plan
Site Map
Groundwater Contour Map
APPENDICES
Monitoring Well and Soil Boring Logs
Soil Sample Analytical Results
Water Sample Analytical Results
Monitoring Well Top of Casing Elevations,
Gauging Data, and Free Product Thickness Data
I. SUMMARY
Blymyer Engineers, Inc. was retained by P.I.E. Nationwide on
April 25, 1988 to investigate a possible release of diesel fuel
to the subsurface at a Salt Lake City facility operated by
P.I.E. and owned by National Warehouse Investment Corporation.
BEI has reviewed existing site conditions and previous reports,
completed precision tank testing, directed repairs to leaking
product lines, and conducted several soil sampling and
groundwater sampling phases in order to define the extent of
contamination on the subject property. During the most recent
series of well installations, the on-site portion of the free
product plume was defined. Another portion of the plume is
located off-site to the northwest of the facility. BE! has
prepared the following report and recommendations for further
work based upon the information gathered to date.
Blymyer Engineers' report dated October 3, 1988, and titled
"Subsurface Contamination Assessment -Phase II'' has been
previously filed with the Salt Lake County Health Department, and
is referenced in this report as BEI Phase II report.
-1 -
II. INTRODUCTION
Background and Scope of Work
On March 7, 1988, National Warehouse Investment Company retained
ERT, Inc. (ERT) to conduct a subsurface investigation at a
National Warehouse Investment Corporation (NWC) owned facility
located at 55 Redwood Road, Salt Lake City, Utah. The facility is
operated by P.I.E. Nationwide (PIE). The purpose of the
subsurface investigation was to define the extent of
contamination as well as determine an order of magnitude cost
estimate for future remediation. The details of the investigation
are presented in a report, titled "Limited Phase II Subsurface
Investigation, at the Salt Lake City, Utah PIE Truck Terminal
Site", prepared by ERT (Appendix A in BEI Phase II report).
Included in the ERT assessment were the performance of chemical
analyses on both groundwater and soil samples. Four water samples
collected from groundwater monitoring wells installed on-site
were analyzed for total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) and Benzene,
Toluene Ethyl Benzene and Xylene (BTXE). In addition, one soil
sample was collected from each soil boring at a depth of 10-11.5
feet and was analyzed for TPH and BTXE. The results of these
analyses indicated the presence of all suspected contaminants in
the soil and groundwater.
After preparation of the report by ERT, shop personnel at the
Salt Lake City facility reported inventory discrepancies observed
during the use of the diesel fuel underground storage tank
system. During the previous month, inventory reconciliation
records indicated that 4,000 gallons of fuel were lost from the
-2 -
tank system. PIE immediately discontinued use of the fueling
system until an investigation could be conducted to identify the
location of the apparent leak.
On April 25, 1988, Blymyer Engineers, Inc. (BEI) was retained by
PIE to identify the location of the fuel system leak, arrange
for any needed repairs, and to conduct further subsurface
investigation work required to define the extent of hydrocarbon
contamination. Based on the additional subsurface investigative
work, remedial action plans would then be evaluated. The
additional subsurface investigation consisted of:
1) The installation of eight groundwater monitoring wells; and
2) The analysis of soil and water samples for total petroleum
hydrocarbons as diesel.
The results of this investigation are included in the BEI Phase
II report for the subject facility. In summary, all groundwater
monitoring wells contained free product. Chemical analysis of
soil samples indicated that high levels of diesel hydrocarbons
(over 1,000 ppm) were generally detected at the 9 foot to 10 foot
level in all soils bores. In addition, high levels of absorbed
diesel in the soil were observed at the 15 foot level in bore 1.
Based on the results of the Phase II investigation, BEI
recommended that an additional subsurface investigation be
completed to define the extent of free product contamination. The
recommended additional work consisted of:
1) The installation of 13 groundwater monitoring wells
(wells W-9 through W-21); and
-3 -
2) The analysis of soil and water samples for total
petroleum hydrocarbons as diesel.
PIE authorized BEI to perform the above scope of work on
October 26, 1988.
Site Conditions
The site is located in a combined industrial and commercial area
at 55 Redwood Road, Salt Lake City, Utah (Figure 1 and Figure
2). The buildings on-site are presently used as a freight
transfer terminal, maintenance shop and fueling building, while
the yard is used for the parking of trucks and trailers. The yard
is surfaced with asphalt and concrete.
The schedule of underground storage tanks at the property is as
follows:
a) Seven (7) 12,000 gallon diesel tanks;
b) One (1) 10,000 gallon gasoline tank;
c) One (1 ) 10,000 gallon anti-freeze tank;
d) One (1 ) 8,000 gallon motor oil tank; and
e) One ( 1) 3,000 gallon waste oil tank
The location of the tanks are indicated on Figure 3. Three
additional underground storage tanks located underneath the
fueling building were filled with sand when abandoned in 1980.
The 7 -12,000 gallon diesel tanks were originally connected to a
single fuel-distribution line, which delivered fuel to three
overhead fuel dispensing lines inside the fueling building. The
single fuel-distribution line is in the process of being
replaced. As a result, the 4 -12,000 gallon diesel tanks located
at the southeast corner of the fueling building are currently
out-of-service.
-4 -
III. DATA ACQUISITION
Monitoring Well Installation
Thirteen monitoring wells (wells W-9 through W-21) were installed
in order to define the extent of contamination on the subject
property. The drilling was performed during the period from
November 7, 1988 to November 10, 1988 by Environmental Science
and Engineering, Inc. (ESE). The locations of the newly installed
monitoring wells, as well as locations of the twelve previously
installed soil borings and monitoring wells, are indicated on
Figure 3. Monitoring well construction data are presented in
Appendix A.
Monitoring Well Development
The 13 monitoring wells were developed by ESE on November 17,
1988 and November 18, 1988. Each well was alternately surged and
pumped until the water contained in the well was free of visible
suspended sediment. All water pumped from the wells was stored
on-site in sealed 55-gallon drums.
Soil Sample Collection and Analysis
Soil samples were collected at 5-foot intervals from all 13 bores
with a California split-spoon sampler. Each sample was described
on-site by an ESE geologist and then packaged for shipment to
Trace Analysis Laboratory, Inc., a California State-certified
laboratory, for analysis for total petroleum hydrocarbons as
diesel. The geologic logs of the newly installed monitoring wells
are presented in Appendix A. The soil analytical results are
presented in Appendix B.
-5 -
Groundwater Sample Collection and Analysis
Groundwater samples were collected from each of nine new
monitoring wells for analysis for total petroleum hydrocarbons as
diesel fuel. The four additional wells -installed each contained
thicknesses of free product, which prevented the sampling of
groundwater in those wells. Three well volumes of groundwater
were removed from each well sampled prior to sample collection to
insure that the samples were representative of the groundwater
contained in the aquifer. The samples were sent to Trace Analysis
Laboratory, Inc., a California State certified laboratory, for
analysis. The analytical results are presented in Appendix C.
Site Survey and Gauging
The locations of the newly installed monitoring wells were
surveyed relative to the fueling building located on-site. In
addition, the top-of-casing elevations of the monitoring wells
were surveyed relative to an arbitrary datum of 100.00 feet. (An
existing bench mark was designated as 100.00 feet). The depth to
water in all wells on-site also was gauged in order to determine
the water-table elevation across the site. The top-of-casing and
gauging data are presented in Appendix D.
-6 -
IV. DATA ANALYSIS
Site Stratigraphy
Soils data collected during the monitoring well installation
indicate that the site is underlain by alternating layers of
silt and sand with a base layer of clay. The soils in W-9
through W-21 indicate that the sand and silt layers vary in
thickness but are continuous across the site.
Direction of Groundwater Flow
On November 30, 1988, the depth to fluid ranged from
approximately 7 to 10 feet across the site. Based on the November
30, 1988, gauging data (adjusted for the presence of free
product), a groundwater head contour map was produced (Figure
4). The general direction of groundwater flow appears to be to
the northwest, toward the Great Salt Lake.
Extent of Contamination
The gauging data indicate that free product is present in
monitoring wells W-1 through W-9 and W-19 through W-21. The
product thicknesses are greatest in the northwest quarter of the
site. These observations, in conjunction with the inferred
direction of groundwater flow, indicate that the free product
plume is migrating off-site to the northwest.
Laboratory
contamination
soil. These
Samples of
results of soil samples indicate that soil
is confined primarily to the upper 10 feet of
soils are located above the groundwater table.
soils obtained below the groundwater table do not
-7 -
-
-
-
-
indicate the
groundwater wells (W-11
hydrocarbons in groundwater.
and W-18) contain dissolved
-8 -
V. TEMPORARY FUEL RECOVERY PROGRAM
Because a large amount of free product was noted in several of
the groundwater monitoring wells, limited product recovery was
initiated. This process began on November 29, 1988. Product is
removed from those wells that contain the greatest petroleum
thicknesses with a portable pump on a weekly basis. The recovered
product is stored in a set of unused underground storage tanks,
located on-site. The recovered fuel will be tested and used to
fuel PIE tractors.
As of February, the wells had been pumped for nine successive
weeks. Approximately 2,200 gallons of diesel have been recovered.
Table I summarizes the weekly recovered volumes.
This recovery scheme will be used until a permanent recovery
system is designed and installed.
-9 -
VI. CONCLUSIONS
Based upon the observations and analytical results presented
above, as well as those presented in the previous BEI report,
Blymyer Engineers, Inc. concludes the following:
o Free floating petroleum contamination exists at the site.
o The source of the petroleum has been determined and the leak
has been repaired.
o The free product plume has been defined in the north, east,
and south directions.
o Free product has apparently migrated off site to the north-
west.
o Soil contamination at the site is confined to soils located
above the groundwater table.
o A high level leak exists on the gasoline storage system.
This system is not in use pending further investigation.
-10 -
VII. RECOMMENDATION
Based on the above monitored results and conclusions, BEI
recommends the following:
o Increase the scope and effectiveness of the temporary fuel
recovery program by installing a submersible petroleum
recovery pump on the 4 inch diameter well previously
installed by ERT. The submersible recovery pump is already
owned by P.I.E. and is presently on-site.
o Install a series of groundwater monitoring wells to
the vest and northwest of the site in order to define the
extent of off-site free product contamination. It is anti-
cipated that eight to ten wells will be required.
o Conduct a series of slug tests in order to determine the
hydraulic properties of the saturated soils.
o Based on the results of the slug tests, design a free
product recovery system to remove free product from the
subsurface.
o Investigate the gasoline storage system to determine the
location of the high level leak. Once the leak location is
determined, the leak should be repaired.
-11 -
MARCH 9, 1989
BEI JOB NO. 8873
TABLE I
PIE NATIONWIDE
SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
TEMPORARY PRODUCT RECOVERY CHART
1988 1989
li/29-30 12/7 12/14 12/20 12/30 1/5 1/12 1/19-20 2/17 TOTAL
W-1 30 25 30 25 30 30 30 25 35 260
W-2 25 25 25 40 20 25 25 15 NP 200
W-3 25 20 30 40 30 30 25 35 25 260
W-4 85 40 40 40 40 40 30 30 30 375
W-5 25 20 25 30 25 30 30 25 NP 210
W-6 55 25 25 30 25 25 20 25 15 245
W-8 -------20 10 30
W-9 25 30 20 30 30 25 30 20 30 240
W-16 --------NP
W-19 25 30 25 25 30 25 25 25 NP 210
W-20 25 25 25 30 NP 25 20 30 NP 180
W-21 25 25 35 25 25 25 20 20 30 230
------------------
345 265 280 315 255 280 255 270 175 2,440
FIGURE 1
PIE SALT LAKE CITY
C
FIGURE 1: SITE LOCATION --
I
2 -MILES
FIGURE 2
.ALT LAXE CITY, UT
BLYMYER & SONS
TIiIt CLEM€NT 9TiCET
tNc.
a CA
t' r t26'WIDE
CHE(]XED
APPROVED AREA PLAN
LI
g
0
tr
o
op
o
o
o
r=
o
".
1+
tr
jC
o
o
B
E
tr
I gl lt
oo0
ooql
ENtr
E
B
[ [[[
l-l
l-l ilI
trn
r
Btr ao
tr
cl
tr
tr
tr
tr o tr
,lr r'\ Y l
B n
o
Dtrtrtro8
e ;
ooEo
o o o
o
'
uCItr
CItr
B
tt 7gJ0b
NO,RBl*'*o o-101J
FIGURE 2: AREA PLAN
FIGURE 3
I
i
P E
SLYUYER t SOx!. tHC
TTR !*
5etT
TR
L^( (I
II
t
nrinO Tn 1t
5 ovr f r{
c: lrle2l ttt
t2 TsE::C:J
oI
'T
RYIC
';t-oG
2
T1
o
.l
:l
O 12I
a8 l
TC
?
tt
r
rlo
t:la
1tiiili:!i.
IftililILILJ LJL,T8 Tro
3I
o6
r48
I.J
I
I
1 6I
l
I tto
Orltt
9rrarttaa
tl
I
LEGTNO
o Btl 6517Pg'.ri ftLL
f err Hcilrlotlh6 ttLL
il rA$l(
l?altoxrl ncl.l:lrnc VELL
a
17
r15
EtlrttFtE 6
)tf/ PLrN
FIGURE 4
il
l
lI
l_
J
I
P E
g LYMYER & SONS, INC
llTR.CK R^{
i"385
9trr PLAN
5elr LAKE
:tt gglt
sz
0n I I 90'
3 cU I F{ ?PL TRETT
1,,
a
o'
a.,
il':
I - ! i:i |rD
o(
o
o
o)
6
cL
at o
, c(r<
O 3r. l'iliiiCRlNG \rlFLL
+- iKr Y0NII0RING WtLL
lltl
I
rANT
l,.r ADDltloiJAL iloilnoRtNG'r/E[L
a l'l
IJ LJ
c t ;"'
II
I
I t
5 Ho?
c Lok.
o,llca
tt
c
i'rfr, tt il
o(
c-
ot
1r
LJ
f-l.rrlil
U
ot
at tl::r-i::
ft
- -'l
=io_I,
t€i.ltr-i
? Lo.:'
t,
90
l! 'c
FIGURE 4
APPENDIX A
!!JJJJ~IJ I ESE
4455 South 700 East. Suite 200
Salt Lake City Utah 841 0 7
Phone [phone]
FAX [phone]
Mr. Chris Falto
BLYMYER EN:;INEERS
1829 Clement Avenue
Alameda, c.A 94501
·-,. ,·>
\;_
\ -', .. -.
·,:
January 7, 1989
RE: Swmary of Field Activities and Data Presentation -
r ~71.-.0
L ~.:-f7 +'O
Jo~ \o .. 1k
P.I.E Truck Terminal, Salt Lake City, utah, August -Decemrer, 1988
Gentlemen:
Hunter Environmental Science & Engineering (HUNTER/ESE) was retained by
Blymyer Engineers to conduct borehole drilling and monitor well
installations at the P.I.E. truck terminal located on South Terrple and
Redwocd Road in Salt lake City, utah. The requested services were perfonred
as specified in the August 12, 1988 letter to Chris Falto of Blymyer
Engineers frcm Rotert Ressler of HUNTER/ESE.
The activities corrlucted for the P.I.E project by HUNI'ER/ESE were corrprised
of:
o Well location verification
o Well permits and notification
o Borehole drilling and sanple collection
o Monitor well installation
o Fluid level and. prcxiuct thickness rreasurerrents
o Relative elevation survey
o Interrrediate fuel recovery
o Brief data surmary refX)rt
This data surmary refX)rt descril:es the data collection procedures, lists the
collected data and presents the drafted roring l~s and. well corrpletion
diagrams.
provided.
No interpretations, conclusions or recormend.ations have l:een
1.0 OORI.t-l;/SOIL SAMPLitl;
On Morrlay, November 7 through Tuesday, Nov~r 16, 1988, HUNTER/ESE
arrl our drilling sul::contractor, Mountain States Drilling, drilled 1 3
b:>rings arrl carpleted 13 rronitor wells at the P.I.E. truck tenninal
( the well locations are depicted on Figure 1 ) . Craig Scola, a
HUN'l'm/ESE field geologist was on site to rronitor the drilling arrl to
log arrl collect the soil arrl water sanples.
The drill rig used during the field activities was a CME-55 hollow stem
auger rig. The 7-1/4" diameter hollow stem augers penetrated the
subsurface and allowed the collection of 18-inch long split spcx:,n
sanples by driving the sanpler into the grourrl with a 140-pourrl drop
hamrer.
The 2-inch inside diameter sarrpler was lined with 4-inch long brass
liners a.rd sa.rrples were collected every 5 feet. The sarrples were
examined for lithology, rronitored with a Tip II Photovac Ionization
Detector (TIP) for the presence of hydrocaroons, and recorded on
logging forms. One 4-inch brass liner was selected from each sarrpled
interval for la.toratory analysis. The errls of the brass sleeves were
wrapped in aluminum foil arrl covered with plastic errl caps. The
sanpled interval, b:>ring lithology arrl the location of the samples
selected for la.toratory analysis is irrlicated on the attached b:>ring
arrl well corrpletion diagrams (Figure 2 through 14).
The sa.rrples saved for la.toratory analysis were placed in coolers with
ice, logged on chain-of-custcrly forms arrl sealed with evidence tape.
The sample coolers were shipped to Trace Analysis Labs on Friday
November 11, arrl Wednesday November 16, 1988. Copies of the chain-of-
custcrly forms are attached to this report.
2
All activities were corrlucted urrler Health and Safety Starrlards of
Personal Protection Level D. Dual cartridge respirators were available
for emergency use. The Tip II Photovac Ionization Detector was
utilized on site to rronitor the presence of any volatile organics
encountered during the activities. The TIP was calibrated daily with
1 00 wn isob.ltylene gas arrl readings were pericrlically checked during
activities.
Decontamination of all materials used to drill, sarrple, carplete the
wells, arrl measure prcrluct thicknesses was carpleted at the job site.
Decontamination was accorrplished by steam cleaning or scrul::bing with
Alconox, rinsing with tap water, followed by a distilled water rinse.
2.0 MCNI'IDR WEIL INSTALLATION AND DEVELOPMENI'
All 13 rronitor wells were constructed of schedule 40 PVC casings arrl
screens. The well casings arrl screens are generally catprised of five
feet of unslotted casing, fifteen feet of 0.01 inch factory slotted
screen with a flush threaded tottom cap 0. 5 feet long arrl water tight
lockable cap. The material used to construct the filter pack was 16/40
Colorado silica sand, which was packed along the well lx>re annulus from
the hole lx>ttom to approximately two feet below the grourrl surface.
Benseal, a crushed bentonite, was placed in the well lx>re annulus al:XJve
the filter pack to within one foot of the grourrl surface. One foot of
cement was placed arourrl a road-rated locking well cover over the well
head arrl flush with the asphalt or concrete surface.
This rrethcrl of well design and construction allows sufficient grourrl
water flow to the well for sarrpling, prohibits the passage of formation
materials into the wells, and ensures sufficient structural integrity
to prevent the collapse of the well structure.
Upon conpletion of the monitor wells, each well was developed using a
two-inch diarreter four-foot long PVC bailer or a two-inch diameter
four-foot long Stainless Steel Bailer. Each well was bailed until at
3
least three colwms of water and any extraneous fine-grained materials
that may have been dislcrlged during drilling, left on the screen, or
suspended in the water were renoved. The develop-rent water was placed
in 55 gallon drums stored on site. The well corrpletion arrl developnent
activities were corrpleted without any unusual incidents arrl no problems
were encountered.
3.0 FLUID LEVELS AND PRODOCT THICKNESSES
Upon carpletion arrl developrent of the rronitoring wells, static fluid
levels arrl prcduct thickness measurerrents were taken arrl recorded in
each well. An electronic water level irrlicator was used to measure the
depth to fluid. All fluid level measurerrents were taken fran the north
side of the P\lC well head. F.ach measurerrent was taken to the nearest
0.01 foot.
On Noveml::er 9, 10, 14 and 16th the arrount of petroleum prcduct present
on the water table was measured using a SOS Interface Sarrpler (Bailer).
The bailer is a transparent cy lirrler with a flap -type check valve
b.lilt into the rottom of the bailer which allows fluid to enter, b.lt
not to escape. The bailer enables the collect.ion of urrlisturbed free
prcduct arrl grourrl water interface sanples. An accurate measurement of
the arrount of free floating prcduct on top of the grourrl water within
the well can then be recorded.
The prcrluct thickness measurerrents were additionally confirna:i with the
use of the water level irrlicator to irrlicate a range in depth of the
water-prcrluct interface in the well, collecting the interface with the
SOS Interface Sarrpler, measuring the depth of the interface and
subtracting the measured depth to fluid level.
After the wells were installed, their locations were surveyed for
relative elevations to the nearest 0.01 foot (see attached site plan).
The transects were based from the finished concrete surface inside the
shop area (see attached site plan).
4
-
-
-
-
~ 1,
7. {~\0
C ~\._/},. ~ ·o(
~ '-''I \V,,"':::i ( ,{~
Table 1 lists the relative elevations, depths to fluid level, measured
prcduct thicknesses, arrl the dates the levels were measured.
TABLE 1
P.I.E TRUCKING TERMINAL
WJI'~
\('\<:JI'
WELL RELATIVE ~ MEASURED
LOCATION ELEVATION FWID LEVEL PRODUCT 'lliICI<NESS DATE MEASURED
(feet) (feet) {feet) '~ Wl 98.88 9.6 I\,, I 6.4 11/02/88
W2 99.51 9.5 1 . 3 11/02/88
W3 99.29 9.4 0.2 11/02/88
W4 99.69 9.3 4.7 11/02/88
W5 99.45 8.9 6.6 11/02/88
W6 98.81 8.4 5. 1 11/02/88
W7 99.05 6.3 FIIM 11/02/88
we 99.23 N/R* N/R* N/R*
W9 98.41 9.4 o.75 11/10/88
W10 98.50 8.3 NONE 11/09/88
Wl 1 98.74 9.2 NONE 11/09/88
W12 98.91 9.3 NONE 11/09/88
W13 99.37 a.a NONE 11/16/88
W14 98. 71 8.3 NONE 11/14/88
W15 98.34 7.9 NONE 11/14/88
W16 98.27 0.0 NONE 11/14/88
W17 98.29 8.4 NONE 11/14/88
W18 98.56 8.9 NONE 11/16/88
W19 99.07 9. 1 0.6 11/14/88
W20 98.79 9.8 1.65' 11/16/88
W21 98.44 9.4 6.6 11/14/88
* N/R -Not Recorded
5
4.0 GROUN™ATER SAMPLING
Between Friday Novemt.er 1 8 through Wednesday Novemt.er 21 , the rroni tor
wells without measurable proouct were sarrpled using a two-inch dianeter
four foot long stainless steel bailer or a two-inch Dianeter four foot
long PVC tailer. The nine wells sarrpled were bailed until at least
three colllllllls of fluid were rerroved prior to actual sarcple collection.
The sampling equipment was decontaminated between each sample
collection with an Alconox soap solution arrl steam clean rinse.
The sarrples saverl for laroratory analysis were placed in a cooler with
ice, logged on chain-of-custooy form.5 arrl sealerl with evidence tape.
The sarrple cooler was shippej to Trace Analysis I.aroratory Wednesday
Novemter 21, 1988. Copies of the chain-of-custooy forms are attacherl
to this report.
5.0 TEMPORARY FUEL REX:OVERY
On Novemt.er 29, 1988 HUNTER/ESE as direct.Erl by Blymyer Engineering
began a terrporary fuel recovery program. HUNTER/ESE assembled a
pun-ping system CCT!l)rised of a 10 horsepower two stage gas carpressor
arrl a Warren Rupp Sarrl Piper air-powererl double diaphragm pl.lJll) rrounterl
on a P.I.E van. This rrobile purrping system is used to extract floating
proouct from the rronitor wells on a weekly tasis. A one inch inside
dianeter oil suction hose equipped with a foot valve is lowererl into
the well arrl serves as the intake line. Approxima.tely 25 gallons of
mixed proouct arrl water are purrp:rl from each well containing measurable
prcduct and stored in 55 gallon drums until eventually errptied into an
underground storage tank on site. This methcd of terrporary fuel
recovery from the water table will te conducted until additional site
characterization and permanent remediation plans are corrpleted.
6
Wl
W2
W3
W4
W5
W6
W9
W19
W20
W21
TABLE 2
TEMPORARY FUEL REX:OVERY
P.I.E. TERMINAL: SALT LAKE CITY, UI'AH
N-K){.JNT OF FUEL PUMPED FORM FArn MOOI'IDR WELL (GALS)
Nov. 29/30 Dec 7 Dec. 14 Dec 20 Dec 30 Jan 5 Currulative
30
25
25
85
25
55
25
25
25
25
25
25
20
40
20
25
30
30
25
25
30
25
30
40
25
25
20
25
25
35
25
40
40
40
30
30
30
25
30
25
30
20
30
40
25
25
30
30
NP
25
30
25
30
40
30
25
25
25
25
25
170
160
175
285
130
185
160
160
130
160
1715 Gals
NP= Not Purrped
HUNTER/ESE is available to continue to provide you with environnental
consulting services at any function arrl looks forward to working with
Blymyer Engineers on this project or any others with which you may becorre
involved.
If you have any questions, concerns or desire ad::iitional information, please
do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
~ ENVIR9"AL SCIENCE & ENGINEERING
·if!~C/4~-
Rotert F. Ressler
Hydrogeolr· t
c~~ -
Craig ~o a
Geologist
RFR/te
Enclosures
South Temple
~
Holiday Inn
~
.w-21 .w-s .w-10 • W-11
i
W-1 •
•w.~20
Shop
Bldg. W-2 • . • • w-12 .
-,:, >-
'
~ i
C C • 0 ~ -w-a Service Office: Loading Dock 0::: G, '
-,:, > Bldg. ·-0 ...
• I 0 0
-3 .w-19 W-4 -0 '
L.
• Q) • • 0::: W-7
W-13 W-3 .
~
• W-:18 W-6 • •
W-14
W-17 W-16 W-15 • • • .
1-80
Figure 1 HUNTER/ESE INC. P.I.E. SITE PLAN
;.....
. I'
MONITOR WELL
W-9
5 3
7
12
-----~---:-~~ ----~,._ .,,-.:..&1.fl~"":-....
,-.p~~--
-~~~
:...-;~
~~: .... :;.;. _...,. __
~
Asphalt
Fill: Gravel and silt; brown.
ML-SM: Clayey to sandy clayey silt; dark-It. gray.
~;..;.
-:--§--: White shell fragments.
s~
6
7
----~.;.~--... ____ ..,
~ .... ~ ...... --~ -·•..a.--• .,._ . ...,...-!.~ _,......., __ ,._
.,:...-:..---..:-=-
5=:ft;; · :-::-;;~~ Y. Fluid level @ 9.5 Feet
.-:1
7
11
16
SP: Med-coarse grained sand, sub angular-sub
rounded with some pebbles, 114• clasts;
dark gray.
20
W9-D
6
6
6
TD 21.5 ft.
EXPLANATION
~ Cement
~ Bentonite
LJ Natural sand pack
LJ 16/40 Sand pack
HUNTER/ESE INC.
140 Split spoon sample
23 interval with
11 blow counts per s·
Ii PVC well screen
.01 slotted
2" diameter
I wg-A I 6" Brass liner sample
collected for lab analysis
Fluid level
Figure 2
MONITOR WELL W-9 BORING LOG
AND WELL COMPLETION DIAGRAM
..
I
\
......
-~
.• ..... . ......
MONITOR WELL
W-10
15
5 ,o
10
3
5
6
~ ,----,-::t~ lw, o-cl
1
1
3 ~' :·ff_
j'-~
::,,;.;. .. :·,~: .
.;J
_ .. :
. ... • ..
Asphalt
Fill: Gravel and silt; brown.
ML-CL: Clayey silt; black to It. gray.
Fluid level @ 8' 3 3/4"
SP: Med-coarse grained sand; dark gray.
sank
a
foot
1
CL: Clay, strong organinc odor; med. gray.
TD 21.5 ft.
EXPLANATION
~ Cement
~ Bentonite
f :-}:-;:--::··-. : I Natural sand pack
i/}('.{>: .. j 16/40 Sand pack
HUNTER/ESE INC.
140
23
11
Split spoon sample
interval with
blow counts per 6"
PVC well screen
.01 slotted
2" diameter
1w, O-AI 6" Brass liner sample
collected for lab analysis
Fluid level
Figure 3
MONITOR WELL W-10 BORING LOG
AND WELL COMPLETION DIAGRAM
,'•\ •
MONITOR WELL
W-11
4
7
6
3
3
2
4
11
17
1
1
1
Asphalt
Fill: Gravel and silt; gray.
ML-CL: Clayey silt, dark gray.
ML-CL: Clayey silt, w/shell fragments, strong
odor of product; dark gray.
Fluid level@9'23/4"
ML-CL: Clay w/silt, slight odor of product; med. to
It. gray.
SP: Med-coarse grained sand, sub
angular-sub rounded grains; med gray.
CL: Clay w/silt; med-It. gray.
TD 21.5 ft.
EXPLANATION
~ Cement
~ Bentonite
I::·);\)·=.}_ I Natural sand pack
fl:;t=;;fL::;.\:::I 16/40 Sand pack
HUNTER/ESE INC.
140
23
11
ii
Split spoon sample
interval with
blow counts per 6"
PVC well screen
.01 slotted
2" diameter
I w11 _4 6" Brass liner sample
collected for lab analysis
Fluid level
Figure 4
MONITOR WELL W-11 BORING LOG
AND WELL COMPLETION DIAGRAM
.. I
...
-
...
-. \
\
MONITOR WELL
W-12
3
7
8
3
3
3
5
8
7
One
push
for 1.5'
Asphalt
Fill: Gravel and silt; It brown-tan.
Shell fragments.
ML: Clayey silt; It. gray to dar1< gray.
Fluid level @ 9' 4'"
SP: Sand, med-cogrse grained, sub
angular-sub rounded clasts; It. gray.
CL: Lean clay w/strong organic odor, It. gray. ..
TD 21.5 ft. * Rings collected for ESE to hold, marktd as• on rings
EXPLANATION
~ Cement
~ Bentonite
[:TI Natural sand pack
EJ 16/40 Sand pack
HUNTER/ESE INC.
140 Split spoon sample
23 interval with
11 blow counts per 6"
i PVC well screen
.01 slotted
2'" diameter
6" Brass liner sample lw12-Aj collected for lab analysis
::r. Fluid level
Figure 5
MONITOR WELL W-12 BORING LOG
AND WELL COMPLETION DIAGRAM
-
.'. , •.. ::I .. • .
MONITOR WELL
W-13
5
• Wi3-A ·~1 ~❖ q; ~=
w .... <
'•:« ::j
;'j 10 :1~ 45 __ _
;; lwi3-B!
•❖ .. ~
• <·
~-=~=
·'.
15
~ lwi3-C!
::-~-
=~X:
=-":."'
~
·,c,;
.. ~-:: ,,:-<
20
;~ IW13-D!
::.~.
~ Cement
6
a
10
6
s
9
3
4
15
1
push
for 1'
~ Bentonite
TD 21.5 ft.
, ..
Asphalt
Fill: Gravel and silt; brown.
• SM-SP: Silty sand, fine grained; It. tan
SM-SP: Silty sand, coarsening downward to a
coarse-grained sub angular-sub rounded
sand; dark gray.
•
CL: lean clay; dark gray.
EXPLANATION
140 Split spoon sample
23 interval with
11 blow counts per 6"
I PVC well screen
.01 slotted
2" diameter
IT] Natural sand pack
!W13·AI 6" Brass liner sample
bZJ 16/40 Sand pack
HUNTER/ESE INC.
collected for lab analysis
~ Fluid level
Figure 6
MONITOR WELL W-13 BORING LOG
AND WELL COMPLETION DIAGRAM
·-
.....
•• ....... I I. • ..... , ......
MONITOR WELL
W-14
~ Cement
4
6
8
8
8
9
s·
sank
3
2
1
1
1
~ Bentonite
Asphalt
Fill: Silty sand w/gravel and cobbles; brown.
,-:-:-:-:-:-:-: -------~.:=:=:::=.:=?-SM-CL: Silty clay; brown.
TO 21.5 ft.
SM-SP: Silty sand, med-coarse grained;
brown-gray.
CL: lean clay, strong organic odor; It. gray.
EXPLANATION
140
23
11
Split spoon sample
interval with
blow counts per s·
PVC well screen
.01 slotted
2· diameter
F°'.:\\/':_:·· ::.I Natural sand pack
f?):ii:[:;;;!i:;;/j 16/40 Sand pack
lw, 4-A! s· Brass liner sample
-· collected for lab analysis
Fluid level
HUNTER/ESE INC.
Figure 7
MONITOR WELL W-14 BORING LOG
ANO WELL COMPLETION DIAGRAM
...
-.
\
\
. •• -1 ,1
MONITOR WELL
W-15
3
3
4
5
10
2
4
1
8 .•
2
for
1a·
:=-:• ~
Asphalt
Fill: Silt w/sand and gravel with 1 • dia.
clasts; brown.
ML-CL: Clayey silt; dark gray-black.
Fluid level @ 8'
.......
SP: Sand, med-coarse grained; dark gray-tan.
CL: Lean clay, strong organic odor; It. gray.
TD 21.5 ft.
EXPLANATION
~ Cement
~ Bentonite
LJ Natural sand pack
12·:~~ .~/;'.·. d 16/40 Sand pack
HUNTER/ESE INC.
140
23
11
Split spoon sample
interval with
blow counts per 6"
PVC well screen
.01 slotted
2" diameter
lw 1 S-AI 6" Brass liner sample
· collected for lab analysis
Fluid level
Figure 8
MONITOR WELL W-15 BORING LOG
AND WELL COMPLETION DIAGRAM
\
·-
I
-1 .. • J
MONITOR WELL
W-16
7 ~~~ ML-CL: Clayey silt; dark gray-brown.
7
10
6
7
9
6
6
8
Push
2
taps
-.:.-/-~
.,_::,;;;,...=or· Fluid level @ a·
SP: Sand, med-coarse grained, sub
angular-sub rounded grains, petroleum
odor; gray-dark gray.
CL: Lean clay, strong organic odor; It. gray.
TD 21.5 ft.
EXPLANATION
~ Cement
~ Bentonite
I ;.:· --;-\:,_., I Natural sand pack
F:7T7 16/40 Sand pack L±±2J
HUNTER/ESE INC.
140
23
11
I
Split spoon sample
interval with
blow counts per s·
PVC well screen
.01 slotted
2" diameter
l w, 6_~ 6" Brass liner sample
collected for lab analysis
Fluid level
Figure 9
MONITOR WELL W-16 BORING LOG
AND WELL COMPLETION DIAGRAM
,.
MONITOR WELL
W-17
.> .. ?
1t ❖~-
-~-=--=-•
j 10
··:: jw,1-sl
-·~--= --~
.;::
<
~i -~
.;.. ~-~x -, ....
• 20
-~ jw11-ol
.. ::;.:
~ Cement
9
15
15
5
6
7
7
10
19
1
1
1,
~ Bentonite
·::
}}L ..
·-..:-~
TD 21.5 ft.
Asphalt
Fill: Silt and gravel; brown.
ML-CL: Clayey silt, white concretions; dark to med.
gray.
Fluid level @ 8' ~
SP: Sand, med-coarse grained, sub
angular-sub r~unded grains; med. gray.
CL: Lean clay; It. gray .
EXPLANATION
140
23
11
Split spoon sample
interval with
blow counts per 6"
PVC well screen
.01 slotted
2· diameter
It.>>·:: =I Natural sand pack
t·:· .. y;:<.1 16/40 Sand pack
!w 17 _~ 6" Brass liner sample
collected for lab analysis
Fluid level
HUNTER/ESE INC.
Figure 10
MONITOR WELL W-17 BORING LOG
AND WELL COMPLETION DIAGRAM
.,..
MONITOR WELL
W-18
11
17
17
7
10
14
1
2
3
1
1
3
Asphalt
Fill: Silt and gravel; brown.
ML-CL: Silt to clayey silt, product odor w/organic
grass and plants; dark to It. gray.
Fluid level @ 8' 1 0 1 /2"
SP: Micaceous sand, slightly silty, fine-medium
grained, sub angular-sub rounded grains;
med. gray.
CL: Lean clay, strong organic odor; medium
gray.
TD 21.5 ft.
EXPLANATION
~ Cement
~ Bentonite
LJ Natural sand pack
I=:==:::::/::·,_.: I 16/40 Sand pack
HUNTER/ESE INC.
140
23
11
Split spoon sample
interval with
blow counts per s·
PVC well screen
.01 slotted
2· diameter
I w1 S-~ 6" Brass liner sample
--collected for lab analysis
Fluid level
Figure 11
MONITOR WELL W-18 BORING LOG
AND WELL COMPLETION DIAGRAM
..
\
MONITOR WELL
W-19
3
5
8
... ·. · . ... ... . . . . . . . ·-~ . . . • ..... . ···.
6
6
6 ..,.-...--; iZ.,:1c,..::_g-r.f::
~~J,.;"~,;;_f'-·!:·.·
.d1~f
12
17
24
:•.:_:.· :·.
TD 21.5 ft.
Asphalt
FiU: Silt and gravel with some sand; brown .
ML: Clayey-slightly sandy silt; lt.-dark gray.
Fluid level@ 9' 112•
SP: Sand, medium-coarse grained, sub
angular-sub rounded grains; black-dark gray.
CL: Lean clay, It. gray.
EXPLANATION
~ Cement
~ Bentonite
I·:/·{·.::··.: I Natural sand pack
L~tE:,:; . .-::j 16/40 Sand pack
HUNTER/ESE INC.
140
23
11
I
Split spoon sample
interval with
blow counts per 6"
PVC well screen
.01 slotted
2" diameter
lw 19 -AI 6" Brass liner sample
• • collected for lab analysis
Fluid level
Figure 12
MONITOR WELL W-19 BORING LOG
AND WELL COMPLETION DIAGRAM
.. . ·.
-~
...:.
-
-
.,
MONITOR WELL
W-20
<«
{f
. := ,o
~:':: l W20-8
·,.
,:,.•::
•.:
2
4
8
5
6
12
1
1
0 {~ftfJ.fl}
15
20
TO 21.5 ft.
Asphalt
Fill: Silt and gravel; brown-gray.
ML: Clayey silt w/shell fragments; med-dark
gray.
Fluid level@ 9' 9 1/4N
SP: Sand, medium-coarse grained, sub
angular-sub rounded grains; strong odor of
product.
No sample collected due to sand heaving.
EXPLANATION
~ Cement
~ Bentonite
~ Natural sand pack
~ 16/40 Sand pack
HUNTER/ESE INC.
140 Split spoon sample
23 interval with
11 blow counts per 6"
I PVC well screen
.01 slotted
2N diameter
lw20-Aj 6N Brass liner sample
collected for lab analysis
:'.!: Fluid level
Figure 13
MONITOR WELL W-20 BORING LOG
AND WELL COMPLETION DIAGRAM
\
MONITOR WELL
W-21
»' :-· ..
~~
:%;
❖
5
21·A!
ij 20
J
~ Cement
2
4
5
3
5
6
2
6
10
~ Bentonite
;\}(::·.~ ......... --
TD 21.5 ft.
l •
Asphalt
Fill: Silt and gravel; brown-gray.
ML-CL: Clayey silt w/shell fragments; lt.·dark gray.
Fluid level @ 9' 4 3/4"
SP: Sand, medium-coarse grained, sub
angular-rounde_d grains; strong odor of
product; dark gray.
No sample collected due to sand heaving.
EXPLANATION
140
23
11
Split spoon sample
interval with
blow counts per 6"
PVC well screen
.01 slotted
2" diameter
1-·::'·:·_:.-:>I Natural sand pack
l':_:''':>:·:-:<·'·''I 16/40 Sand pack
jw 21 _Al 6" Brass liner sample
• collected for lab analysis
Fluid level
HUNTER/ESE INC.
Figure 14
MONITOR WELL W-21 BORING LOG
AND WELL COMPLETION DIAGRAM
·-
r ! . '
Project: P.IE. 'vv'E1..1..,. t_e;,~ .A: r 10/.-1:.,
~oo $,=,. 12.d wood 12.dLEV EL (._ .f ~ S:: s E )
Crew _J ice: AtZ.L-~ ;; J/ :::-,=-c --Station + .H.I. -Elev.
MM /oc.c>e
, 4.. ~ I lod..'6I
:# -z_. 5.10 CJ&!.s-/
.µ..
~ I b.73 '1828
.J+ -6 i::::_-.,..R.; ~-Z::!
-d:::: 7 e:::-r;;~ 'fl7,05
TP 5 d-'/ qi:i,,1.--
5.€ , o4-. c;:;
~ (., 5.id-qi,! I .
::!::.6 5'.~ G!~.2_9
d: a.. 4..'14-C/'? .(. I
;;:;s-s·.10 f,Cf. 4S
tP 4. l,.(, t=t9.t!I
4-,t,,,,o /04--~
.,d..._4-9 /00.00
To~ 'Ja.~e 1a1
NOTES
Remarks ..
Fi /71 't:,h I=°/ oo,... 0 ~f It:<::
PI d,-, 0 ~ ,,,/-~,d .,,..,,. ,. -/-_,. ba.J
I
AIP. /:;",,../,,..; ~ fc:,c,
.
c.c1~1nd
I . .
JI
-,,
IJ
f./o. F~--"~ -f?, ~ • ~-<il'Jd.
I I ,,
,,
,,
Fi/J;~·t R-oo>-•
(!, /.a'lsu u. 0~
,
'
--
··Page:~/ ! __ 1 __ _
... J
Elev ... t/F .
..
. _:.
.. ·· ... ..
'·
-;.,:, • : f'•
. .. ...... .. .. .
.. .
-..
Project: D, ! . !=
Crew . --
Station +
~.~
1-; q?;,
'' °i --,,
2.' --
II ---,.., -------
•I . --! ··' --,, -::::::: ' ,...
-✓•
-ro
5, o;·
~ 1-i
.:;t. /Ce,
.
,,. ~ ,i;-
::±. J .d..
"TD
Jo.o7
,-
~ I 3> -t--r-
.,
I "'2---.-., ' ' -::.
1P
r;.,o
.J.J.-10 -
I
~ ,-
Ir--
H.I.
I
1~.t:10
,~_-,...,
IC'kA1
I
I l'X1-. c_ e,
~ OLS:,.<., Page: ____ _
LEVEL NOTES
Date /1 !"?o 1 ~g -Elev. Remarks Elev. C/F
,.._ -C,;, , 4!J,r::, d l=!oor-('J o! ... ~\ ~Q--~nT ff Ll + 1(" ~
'
5".4-l? t11i.4/
C::.¼ r18.44-
:; .\ I '9i.---n .
.,.. . i:..?, :::,1.07 .
~.~..1 ~t. '5l. ..
c::::: ~-:.
-I ---q~, l,1
I
..
~.b.=-:-;, . 'Z:1
'
S:. 45" -=,'g. 'Z1
I
-#3 a .:!3 :.p, ':9 I ,==:.:,_-:r-!lot... E:.
' 4 .Gt I iC/8.Bf ,, II .Jt-(,..
S.3e 111. ':J,d-
S'.01 -=n.71
.-
4,9,7_ 1<7.,10
1.~,,o 97.37 .· .
10.0'.:, .:}~.9 I -
/o.7..3 ~,i-.74
lo-ol ~ '$ ,'7(,
&. ''° fn',sc,
l'i~ -~ \
5.11 I._G;.T J-/OLl:E.
,,
-::;=.. I .
4-,(.'7 9r.'=t1 _E,..~~h~d Pln~r r-ri'. ... ~ ld q 12.n, ,,,. ,..
£ I-I-Of-
I
-e;>,00
l
:
. l
I
Lit~ 1uUiih1LH, 1\1.. .,~,,_,.,.,L. 1\UU Lu1..111u. .. 1-.11111..:
CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD -Sall l11ke Clly, Ut11h Office
-
Prol•cl I Projecl Ham•
Humber
(-1/ )' "" t, r E "5 ,,,_o 48-q 'i 1 ·i-{':I:£ 'Tnrd·,·,~
Ho. Q.;_l)
Semplera (Signature)
.--~'t;
ol t.'-
t~c•~ 1 ~( nemark•
con-'4;
S\al Dale Time . hlnen rj ~ .a
Uo. E " Slallon Location 0 ..
u CJ 0,/)✓1,
,,,~,rf« l l<-i11!J
. l/-
,
!d_ -------s--.e._·-(. __ )/
,,,,1" . I ld I C: lf-:t1-I(·.) ----
lJ-1 11/1/11 I () 2£':c' -2 I. S-/
I ---
,1-tc dlffi_ l A-.')iC7 -(, ) -----
~' -IC 11/7/6( I (? II,{' ·-I/. S-/ ---,_ -----
ll-h m 2-c__J."r;;,... t>-f' -1Ls-/ -------\v'-ll ~ } () Z/1,c' -2 I, S-/ ----t,.,,,1-U I A~ .),{1-6, )/ ,( ---
ll-i't 1,J1,/ 6r I f, /r), ~ -//, 5/
1-------
~{-l( ~fitJ/lJS [ c. /'>. I --/&, ),, '• -----
\-1-, I "hlM I A: ),('--If': t,, )/ ----
11'7/t1(
..
Is ~--1.1 I /1',I' -;/,s/ -------h" -1 / 11/7/~t I (__ 1.570-tC. 5-/ --------
--'------
~
nellnquls~htd Br: . Dale Time necelv•d ny: n ellnqulsh• d Bys Dah Time n ecelv ttd or:
(Slgnalur •> l91gnalure) ~Signature
t~ l{ -1I-r., /(2('
11 'llnqulshed By: Dale lime necelv•d Dy: nellnquhhed Dys Dale Time necelved Dy:
(Sign a lure) (Slgnalure) (Slgnalure) (Slgnalu,e) •
nellnquhhed lir:
(StvnalureJ
Dale Tim• Received for l ■boralory
by: (Slgnalure)
D11h Tim• nemuk•
ProJecl ProJecl Hante
Number
i'fl;·i r r. e, 1n\LL;1,~
Samplen (Slgnalure)
--j{. Av\Mitv
Slal Dale Time ci. .a
Ho. E ..
0 ..
u "
W''° IHl-~l 11~~
Wlb 11-q-Jl A-M
w It, U-11-1, kM.
Wlb li-11-&1 k-1\
\vt5 I I -11--M {n"\
~\.1'7 ft-'1&3 A(I,\
u,i;-1,-,,-i, k,1.t,
tv fl; u-1•-u A)'tll -IIJ 1tJ ll-11-'iZ rAtt
iv,1 11-,,~' r~
IVll{ ~I-II ,JJ pie,,\
\\:I~ 11-11-,a \1 Al
Rellnqulahed Dyl . Dale
~
SI lu~e)
'A I £fU, '1 L-
//-{l-g-g
fellnqulthe\i By1
,Slgnalure)
Dale
• I
neHnqulahed By:
(Slgnalure)
Dale
ENVlllONMENTAL SCIENCE AND EUGINEEIIING
CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD
\;\~,H~,-Gt1
Ho.
ol
Con-
lain en
Sl ■llon Location
•
/ l?.,11 '
/ ,e,;,,
I 1?.,11!J
:;, ~1111
I R1f\ '\
\ e., t\~
l e_."~
I e.,iJ">
I I t,n 'l
.,
I e."'"
' I (ln-c,
l r<,'5 -
-----
Time Received JJy:
( Slgnalur •> Rellnqulahed By:
(Slgnalure)
·/
Lft.)
Time n•c•h•d Ry: nellnqulahed By:
(Slgnalure) (Slgnalure)
-
-Sall Lake City, Utah Orrlce
Remark•
I"' /\. ~1,\-L <:, ,o\ -G:,,l.;, I
14' {1J Dtp\L lo ,01 -f (.s 1
I lo c. ~p\l I<; .o\ -llo.S. I
I~ D \JtfM'--U) ,01 -2 1,t; 1
IS Pr ~\k_ c;,u\ -(:;..s'
Is i3 ~ IO ;~J -I \ .S'
(SC b~tv (c;.~' -l~·s'
(SD ~pt\.... 20,0 1 ~ 1.\ .C-;, I
I l\ ,.., D'ti~L <;.o' -loh'
14 B l)t(l\\--,0.0 1 -\l,S'
l'f C-\)l\~ \S.o'-11.,.S \
\ '\-\) f),r.N, 20,0 1 -D-1-t;.'
Date Time necelv11d By:
,Slgnalure)
Dale Time necelved By:
Kstgnalun) •
Tim• necelvtd for Laboratory
by: (Slgnalure) D•I• Tim• Remark•
Lit~ IIIUUl,ILU I Hl. JI..U .. IH,L. l\ltLJ L1tu1HLL11111u
CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD -Sall Lake Clly, Ul11h Office .
rroJecl ProJecl N ■m• 0. '-, Humber
P'I-· E. 7rlfckih> fi[ ~ H-tf e,-E,.1, I.,
, ~'/132-tlo. ~-!)
1 Sampler• (Slgnalure)
~J(,, f ol / • CA-,t;~.
nemuk•
Con-J I l ■lnen Stat D ■I• Tim• .
ti\)
Q. .a
Ho. E " Sl ■llon Loc ■llon 0 ..
0 C,
--~
~w g_/t,,;lw Jt1 I R;.,j I· 11· (1 ,,,,. ~(.' -(. • ':, I .-, ----I ,,,7 11b;.hvr dll l I ---a lrJ (! -/1,,S-
~ ,h,L,i At/ I L (_ ,r,,, -/t5 • ---
\ill_ ,,J,4.,t Ad I ? 0 1-(' ,t7 -2/ .. ~ ---
~ 11[,f/M Ctl C A-')-. 0 •-C. I ,J
1(/1/'lg
------
\v/1 ft/ I C 1<:: tJ ~ IC-. S-----.m dJ/!!_ fH I n ?11,0 --z I .. $-----
~,,-i ,,/1/?i! AtL I /1-~(' -(,-S------
\vtZ ,if JI f& dt/ I ---15 IC',C' -I/, r -·--
11/t/1( rf t/ ..
I Jul: C /5"": C' -IC-, S -----11/r/,i dtl
,,
h·1t-I ---D 2(', C7 -Z/, -~ '
,,/1/j,r
1-
i-1-11 At/ -I 11-s-,,, -{.,') --h·-lf 111-t/r, )ti I fl l~.o -ct .. s:= ------
h-/1 !J/J/Ji_ -1liL I { /<,. (} --1(,5 ------w-11 t/fi iX 11,1 I 0 7 i", c' -z,/, 5"' /
nallnqulahed Dyz Dale Tim• nec•l••d .ny: nellnquhh•d Dy: Dale Time necelved Dr:
(Signature) ( Slgnalur •l l Slgnalura) ,Slgnalur•
Jl ellnqulshed Dy: Dale lime necelved ny: nellnqul1hed Dy: Date Tim• necalved Dy:
(Slgnalure) (Slgnalur•l (Signature) K Signature) • .
, nellnquhhad By: Del• Time neceh•d for l•bor ■lory Dal• Tim• namark•
, (i~lgnj 1
1
ur~~•l. ·.
by: (Signature) •
Ct,. ..Vt,o-(/-{{~ tt(
•
, I I. I ..
\..
\.:
\.
\
\.
l.
I
\..,
r
(
I
• I
_,., • •••-•••••--•,., 1,._ \JV•"-'''-'L. ,,,,u ~•1u1•1&...1...•11,1u
CHAIN OF CUST.ODY RECORD .
ProJecl Project Ham•
Numb er
Tr'<c.~ihf lS' 'I '132-f:CG Ho. -h -~
S ■mplou&tt I ~'
.. ol .r
~A ,rf,t,,, ~
Con· J-~
I al Dale Tl~, . laln•n
0. .a ~ ~o. E .. Slallon Locallon Ii 0 ..
0
..... 1J II/,,;/<! 4M
_, I? ,,lcr/.H A-11
I IJ 11/ 6{~ 0-t{
/ f} 11/,.,/w ~'~ --
-,//"I 11J, .. tw
~'" ,,lt,J.wi n t1.
vi, ~ * --
"''' ~
t-
--
,ellnquhhed By:
Slgnalura)
11llnqul1hed By:
Signature)
'l•llnqul•h•d Dy:
~lgnalure,
1
) I
c,,,..,~ , . <.A --v4. •
u
I
CJ
--I .
I
I
}
I
-l
-I
I
•
Dale Tim• Received .Dy: -·. ( SI gnalur •>
D ala Time necelved Dy:
( Sign alur •>
Dale Time necelved lor Laboralory
by: (Slgn ■lure) • .
11/1/r~ )J:tJ~
---·-11---
fl. --
1-------{
() --------~ ---------a --------
C. ----{)
--------
--------
·-------
------------
------------
-----·---
nellnqulahed Dy:
(Slgnalura)
Dale
nellnqulahed Dy: Dal•
(Signature)
Dale Tim• nemuk•
-Sall Lake City, Ulah orrlce
nemark1
f2 pJ-1,
I
.e;-./J -L \I
//J./J -J/. ,rl
15"",tJ -It. t'
?tJ () -? J,_11
\, {) -,,s-'
1nn-JJ.r-
1
1r -1l.~'
?r) --2. /,s-'
Time necelved Dy:
(Slgnalure)
Time necelved By:
KSlgnalure) •
'
_,I__.--·
1411~111u"l,iLHIJ\L ..,1.,1L111.,L l\i1u Ll1u111LL11111-....
... CIIAIN OF CUSTODY nEcono .Soll Loke Clly, Uloh Olllce
..
~ I
ProJecl ProJecl H•m•'
flumber
P.-:>LY1\I~ /r1e: ..
II o •
s empl • r • (Slgnalur e) • I
ol
·--J\ fik'LlMV f~,-~._ f J-~✓(, nemllfkl
Con-
•'
l ■ l Dal• Time . V taln•n .. D. . .a
to. E " Station Location 0 ..
( l1(1·s r., l bo ~( Tes{s u CJ : S4<'<" -
14~
---. ------
,~-it/,d•-; \\llL( I Lt . 1::.(,l, I-Gr". ----------
\G 1}13/J~ \~lb ~\)J_lf I~ J'.,6{., \ lit:· ---·-------------
11 11 l I\ j1A l'>O.S .... VJtlt 11 c·f<, !Qr -------------I •J-Ujil Ill IL JfC WU1 I'(-U'> 1D1 ------------
1 ·:z. •I (u {,(J If 20 .llJUl ,-:s t:,~L, IRC· ------
JI J/(11/"i( \l,.01> ·\)Jjj_Q ( r--~ \ c;,r; ---------
10 1if z1(~~ ,1~5" --uM-:tl lO · k6v I or. ------------
l~ \du!H l/'31-LlJLLf I~ cPS IQT --------------
1-i. II lt1IJJ ; z.rl, l\J ill 11-Ge~ -I G l ------------
---------------..
------------
----~r"-: IS~ct.~ \C11t~"l--,i0\.t-i.'tHk w-v..l.
----C'''' )11 ~.1. ... c» .
------~ ----------
nollnqulshed Dy: .. Pal• Tim• n • c • 1 v • d 11 y : llellnqul1h•d Dy: Dale Time necelved ay:
lSlgnolur1)
11/zt
(Signature) ( Slgnnlur •> ~Signature)
{1 7,u: _.)_~, (-.,. 111:10
,·.;.lnq11ls'11!d Dy: Dale Tim• f1ecelv1d ny: n11lnquhh1d Dy: Dal• Tim• nec1lved ny:
l Slynalure) (Slgnatur•) (Slunolure) , Signature) •
nellnriul1h1d ciy: Dale Time
(Slgrulure)
nc,celved for Laboratory
b)I (Slgnalure) • . D II l • Tim• nemerk1
. .
• I
APPENDIX B
Trc.:t :\1t4/yJ1s Laboratory, l"c.
:.423 lnvtstmmt &ul~vard. •If • Hayward. ulifom111 94545
....,.._ --_.... ....... ---·--------......... ..::. .:=: =
DATE:
LOG NO.:
12/12/88
6651
DATE SAMPLED: 11/7 /88, 11/8/88, 11/ 9/88,
11/10/88, and 11/11/88
DATE RECEIVED: 11/14/88
CUS;QMER: PIE Nationwide
c/o Blymyer Engineers, Inc.
REGUESTER: Chris Falbo
PROJECT: No. 8873, PIE Trucking
Sample Type: Soil
W-9A W-9C W-9D
Method and Concen-Detection Concen-Detection Concen-Detection
Constituent Units tration limit tration limit tration Limit
OHS Method:
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel ug/kg < 3,000 3,000 < 3,000 3,000 < 3,000 3,000
W-IOA W-10B W-lOCl
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel ug/kg 390,000 3,000 230,000 3,000 < 3,000 3,000
W-10C2 W-100 W-llA
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel ug/kg 4,600 3,000 < 3,000 3,000 1,500,000 3,000
\.J-118 W-llC W-110
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel ug/kg 190,000 3,000 < 3,000 3,000 < 3,000 3,000
0.A. TE: 12/12/88
LOG NO.: 6651
DATE SAMPLED: 11/7/88, 11/8/88, 11/9/88,
11/10/88, and 11/11/88
DATE RECEIVED: 11/ 14/88
PAGE: Two
Sample Type: Soil
W-12A W-128 W-12C
Method and Concen-Detection Concen-Detection Concen-Detection
Constituent Units tration Limit tration Limit tration limit
OHS Method:
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel ug/kg 990.000 3,000 170.000 3,000 < 3,000 3,000
W-12D W-17A W-178
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel ug/kg < 3,000 3,000 < 3,000 3,000 < 3,000 3,000
W-17C W-17D W-19A
fatal Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel ug/kg < 3,000 3,000 < 3,000 3,000 180,000 3,000
W-19C W-19D W-20A
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel ug/kg < 3,000 3,000 < 3,000 3,000 < 3,000 3,000
W-208 W-20C W-21A
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel ug/kg 740,000 3,000 700,000 3,000 < 3,000 3,000
W-218 W-210 14A
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel ug/ kg 4,500,000 30,000 < 3,000 3,000 < 3,000 3,000
148 14C 14D
Total Petroleum Hydro--carbons as Diesel ug/kg < 3,000 3,000 < 3,000 3,000 < 3,000 3,000
Method and
Constituent
OHS Method:
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel
HRM:
Units
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
DATE:
LOG NO.:
DATE SAMPLED:
DATE RECEIVED:
PAGE:
12/ 12/88
6651
11/7 /88, 11/8/88, 11/9/88,
11/10/88, and 11/11/88
11/14/88
Three
Sample Type: Soil
W-15A 158 15C
Concen-Detection Concen-Detection Concen-Detection
tration Limit tration Limit tration L;mit
6,700 3,000 < 3,000 3,000 < 3,000 3,000
150 16A 168
< 3,000 3,000 < 3,000 3,000 < 3,000 3,000
16C 160
< 3,000 3,000 < 3,000 3,000
~IR.h~
Hugh R. Mclean
Supervisory Chemist
~~7~,._;
Tract Analysis Laboratory. Inc.
3423 lnvtstmtnt Boultvard. "8 • Hayward, Gilifomua 94545 ~ ~ ( (4 J 5) 783-6960 ------·------------... ------------
CuSTOMER: PIE Nationwide
DATE: 12/13/38
LOG NO.: 6668
DATE SAMPLED: 11/15/88
DATE RECEIVED: 11/17/88
c/o Blymyer Engineers, Inc.
REQUESTER: Chris Falbo
PROJECT: No. 8873, PIE Trucking
Method and
Constituent
OHS Method:
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel
OHS Method:
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel
OHS Method:
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel
Sample Type: Soil
Wl3A Wl38
Concen-Detection Concen-Detection
Units tration Limit tration Limit
ug/kg < 6,000 6,000 < 6,000 6,000
Wl3D WlBA
ug/kg < 6,000 6,000 < 6,000 6,000
WlBC W18D
ug/kg < 6,000 6,000 < 6,000 6,000
Wl3C
Concen-Detection
tration Limit
< 6,000 6,000
WIBB
72,000 6,000
~J..~~
Hugh R. Mclean
Supervisory Chemist
HRM:mln
APPENDIX C
---+----
Trace t\nalys1s Laboratory. Inc.
3423 lnvtstmt"t Boultvard. •8 • Hayward, California 9.C5.C5
• <.~1-::S,-~
(415) 7•3-6960 ------------------.... ---====
CUSTOMER: PIE Nationwide
c/o Blymyer Engineers, Inc.
REQUESTER: Chris Falbo
PROJECT: No. 8873
Method and Concen-
Constituent Units tration
OHS Method:
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel ug/1 < 90
OHS Method:
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel ug/1 < 90
OHS Method:
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel ug/1 < 90
HRM:mln
DATE: 12/12/88
LOG NO. : 6693
DATE.SAMPLED: 11/18/88 and 11/21/88
DATE RECEIVED: 11/22/88
Samp 1 e Type: Water
WlO Wll
Detection Concen-Detection Concen-
Limit tration Limit tration
90 6,500 90 < 90
Wl3 Wl4
90 < 90 90 < 90
Wl6 Wl 7
90 < 90 90 21,000
Wl2
Detection
Limit
90
Wl5
90
Wl8
90
~/fe, !me~
Supervisory Chemist
APPENDIX D
-
-
RELATIVE DEPTH TO MEASURED
WELL FLUID PRODUCT DATE
LOCATION ELEVATION LEVEL THICINESS MEASURED
(FEET) (FEET) (FEET)
W-1 98.88 9.6 6.4 11/02/88
W-2 99.51 9.5 1.3 11/02/88
W-3 99.29 9.4 0.2 11/02/88
W-4 99.69 9.3 4.7 11/02/88
W-5 99.45 8.9 6.6 11/02/88
W-6 98.81 8.4 5.1 11/02/88
W-7 99.05 6.3 FILM 11/02/88
W-8 99.23 N/R* N/R* N/R*
W-9 98.41 9.4 0.75 11/10/88
W-10 98.50 8.3 NONE 11/09/88
W-11 98.74 9.2 NONE 11/09/88
W-12 98.91 9.3 NONE 11/09/88
W-13 99.37 8.8 NONE 11/16/88
W-14 98.71 8.3 NONE 11/14/88
W-15 98.34 7.9 NONE 11/14/88
W-16 98.27 8.0 NONE 11/14/88
W-17 98.29 8.4 NONE 11/14/88
W-18 98.56 8.9 NONE 11/16/88
W-19 99.07 9.1 0.6 11/14/88
W-20 98.79 9.8 1.65' 11/16/88
W-21 98.44 9.4 6.6 11/14/88
*N/R -NOT RECORDED
-BLYMYER ENGINEERS, INC
BLYMYER
ENGINEERS, INC.
Mr. Ron Hansen
SALT LAKE CITY & COUNTY
HEALTH DEPARTMENT
610 South 200 East
Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
September 6, 1989
BEI Job No. 8873
SUBJECT: CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION
PIE NATIONWIDE
55 REDWOOD ROAD
SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
Dear Ron:
Enclosed please find Blymyer Engineers' report dated August 30,
1989, regarding the subject work. Please note that the extent of
product contamination has been defined. BEI is now soliciting
bids for site remediation.
If you have any questions, please call.
JCF/ds
Attachment
cc: Ms. Sylvia Lee
Mr. Len Klimiuk
Cordially yours,
BLYMYER ENGINEERS, INC.
{7\I /1
L' LL-c-'-<~ -:-t7-c1__,,,l. /
James C. Falbo
Environmental Specialist
[phone] • 1829 Clement Avenue, Alameda, California 94501-1395 • FAX [phone]
SUBSURFACE CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION
PHASE II-B
SUBMITTED TO:
P.I.E. NATIONWIDE
2050 KINGS ROAD
JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA 32203
FOR:
55 REDWOOD ROAD
SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
AUGUST 30, 1989
#8873
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
I. SUMMARY........................................... 1
I I. INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Background and Scope of Work •• !·•·•··········· 2
Site Conditions.................... . . . . . . . . . . . 3
III. DATA ACQUISITION
Monitoring Well Installation .................. 5
Monitoring Well Development ................... 5
Soil Sample Collection and Analysis ........... 5
Groundwater Sample Collection and Analysis .... 6
Site Survey and Monitoring Well Gauging ....... 6
IV. DATA ANALYSIS
Site Stratigraphy............................. 7
Extent of Contamination ....................... 7
V. CONCLUSION........... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
VI. RECOMMENDATIONS........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
FIGURE 1:
FIGURE 2:
APPENDIX A:
APPENDIX B:
APPENDIX C:
APPENDIX D:
FIGURES
Site Map
Groundwater Level Contour Map
APPENDICES
Well Logs
Soil Analytical Results
Water Quality Data
Top-of-Casing and Gauging Data
I. SUMMARY
Blymyer Engineers, Inc. was retained by P.I.E. Nationwide on
April 28, 1989, to investigate the extent of diesel fuel
contamination at a Salt Lake City facility operated by P.I.E. and
owned by National Warehouse Investment Corporation.
In previous phases of investigation, BEI reviewed existing site
conditions, previous reports and then arranged for precision tank
testing, product line testing, product line repair, soil
sampling, installation of groundwater monitoring wells and
groundwater sampling. Free phase hydrocarbons had been observed
in all monitoring wells installed prior to this report. In the
current phase of investigation, BEI has arranged for the
installation of groundwater monitoring wells, the obtainment of
soil and water samples, and the laboratory analyses of all
samples. Neither free floating product nor dissolved contaminants
were detected in the groundwater. Only one soil sample obtained
contained a detectable level of hydrocarbons. Based on the above
work, BEI has prepared the following report and recommendations
for further work.
-1 -
II. INTRODUCTION
Background and Scope of Work
On March 7,
ERT, Inc.
'1988, National Warehouse Investment Company retained
Warehouse
Redwood
to conduct a subsurface investigation at a
Investment Corporation owned facility located
National
at 55
Road, Salt Lake City, Utah, operated by P.I.E.
Nationwide. The ·details of the investigation are presented in a
report, titled "Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation, at the
Salt Lake City, Utah P.I.E. Truck Terminal Site", prepared by
ERT. After presentation of the Phase II report by ERT, shop
personnel at the Salt Lake City Facility reported inventory
discrepancies of 4,000 gallons.
Blymyer Engineers was retained on July 20, 1988, to identify the
location of the fuel system leak, arrange for any needed repairs,
and to conduct further subsurface investigative work to define
the extent of hydrocarbon contamination. The additional
subsurface investigation consisted of:
1) The installation of eight groundwater monitoring wells; and
2) The analysis of soil and water samples for total petroleum
hydrocarbons as diesel.
BEI conducted the additional subsurface investigation on August 1
through August 3, 1988. Soil and groundwater contamination,
including free product, was noted in various bores, including
some located at the perimeter of the property. The results of
this investigation are reported in BEI's
"Subsurface Contamination Assessment-Phase II",
report entitled
dated October 3,
1988. This report has been previously filed with the Salt Lake
-2 -
County Health Department.
BEI was then retained to conduct further subsurface investigation
at the subject site. The purpose of the work was to attempt to
define the extent of free product,
contamination in groundwater. The
investigation consisted of:
soil, and
additional
dissolved
subsurface
1) The installation of eight groundwater monitoring wells; and
2) The analysis of soil and water samples for total petroleum
hydrocarbons as diesel.
P.I.E. authorized BEI to perform the above scope of work on
March 27, 1989.
Site Conditions
The site is located in a combined industrial and commercial area
at 55 Redwood Road, Salt Lake City, Utah (Figure 1). The
buildings on-site are presently used as a freight transfer
terminal, maintenance shop, and fueling building, while the yard
is used for the parking of trucks and trailers. The yard is
surfaced with asphalt and concrete.
The schedule of tanks on the property is as follows (Figure 2 ) :
a) Seven (7) 12,000 gallon diesel tanks;
b) One ( 1) 10,000 gallon gasoline tanks;
c) One (1) 10,000 gallon antifreeze tank;
d) One (1) 8,000 gallon motor oil tank; and
e) One ( 1) 3,000 gallon waste oil tank
-3 -
Four 12,000 gallon diesel tanks are manifolded in two sets of
two, at the southeast corner of the fueling building. Three
12,000 gallon diesel tanks are manifolded directly east of the
fueling building. The seven diesel tanks were originally plumbed
to a single fuel distribution line inside the fueling
which then distributed fuel to three dispensing
building,
lanes. In
addition, three underground storage tanks have been filled with
sand and abandoned on the property. These tanks lie under the
fuel building.
-4 -
III. DATA ACQUISITION
Monitoring Well Installation
Seven ~of eight planned groundwater monitoring wells (MW-22
through MW-28) were installed to the north and west of the site
in order to determine the extent of off-site contamination.
Problems associated with property access precluded the
installation of the eighth well. The installation of wells was
performed during the period from June 13, 1989, to June 15, 1989,
by Dames and Moore. The locations of the newly installed
monitoring wells, as well as those of the previously installed
twenty-one wells, are indicated on Figure 1. The well
construction details appear on the well logs in Appendix A.
Monitoring Well Development
The seven monitoring wells were developed by Dames and Moore on
June 16, 1989. Each well was alternately surged and pumped until
the water contained in the well was free of visible suspended
solids. All water pumped from the wells was stored on-site in
sealed 55-gallon drums.
Soil Sample Collection and Analysis
Soil samples were collected at 5-foot intervals from all seven
bores with a California split-spoon sampler. In a few instances
no soil samples were retrieved. Each retrieved sample was
described on-site by a Dames and Moore geologist and then
packaged for shipment to Trace Analysis Laboratory, a California
State-certified laboratory, for analysis for total petroleum
hydrocarbons as diesel (TPH-d) using Modified EPA Method #8015.
-5 -
The geologic logs of the seven new bores are presented in
Appendix A. The Soil Analytical results are presented in
·-
App e~ di x B.
Groundwater Sample Collection and Analysis
Groundwater samples were collected from each of the seven new
monitoring wells for analysis for TPH-d. Three well volumes of
groundwater were removed from each well prior to sample
collection to insure that the samples were representative of the
groundwater contained in the aquifer. The samples were also sent
to Trace Analysis Laboratory for analysis. The water quality
results are presented in Appendix C.
Site Survey and Gauging
The locations of the newly installed monitoring wells were
surveyed on June 20, 1989, and June 22, 1989, relative to the
fueling building located on-site. In addition, the monitoring
well top-of-casing elevations were surveyed relative to an
arbitrary datum of 100.00 feet. (An existing bench mark was
designated at 100.00 feet). The fluid level in all wells on-site
also were gauged in order to determine water-table elevations and
free-floating petroleum thicknesses across the site. The top-
of-casing and gauging data are presented in Appendix D. The
groundwater
northwest.
flow direction is generally towards the west,
-6 -
IV. DATA ANALYSIS
Site Stratigraphy
Soils data collected during this phase of well installation tend
to corroborate previous stratigraphic interpretation (BEI's
October 3, 1988 report). The site-is underlain by alternating
layers of silt and sand with a basal layer of clay. The sand and
silt layers vary in thickness but appear to be continuous across
the site.
On June 22, 1989, the depth to fluid ranged from approximately 8
to 12 feet across the site. Based on the gauging data (adjusted
for the presence of free product), a groundwater level contour
map was produced (Figure 2).
Extent of Contamination
Based upon data collected from the seven off-site wells no free-
floating petroleum or dissolved contamination is in the seven new
wells. However, the presence of 2,400 mg/kg of TPH-d in the 10
foot soil sample collected from MW-22 suggests that off-site
contamination may exist between the site and MW-22. In addition,
appreciable thicknesses of free floating petroleum continue to
exist at the site.
-7 -
V. CONCLUSIONS
Based upon the above-mentioned observations and
results, Blymyer Engineers concludes the following:
analytical
o Minimal off-site contamination exists at the present time.
o Appreciable on-site contamination exists in the forms of
free-floating petroleum, petroleum adsorbed to the soil,
and hydrocarbons dissolved in the groundwater.
o The contamination problem has been adequately characterized
so that bids for performance of the remedial action stage
of this project may be sought.
-8 -
VI. RECOMMENDATIONS
In accordance with the previously stated conclusions, Blymyer
Engineers .recommends the following:
o Bids for the performance of remedial action stage of the
project should be sought.
o The automated petroleum recovery system presently stored
on-site should be installed in an existing well in order
to begin continuous petroleum recovery while the bid
process proceeds.
-9 -
r qf,LEGEND
EP
.lgrlcg.
NEERS, INC.BLYMYER ENGI
SALT LAKE
TRUCK TERMINALF'T RR
'f7 l1Ar6A
SITE PLAN
FIGURE 1
.h .DAuE8 I MooREY UONITORINO WELL
O aer uexrontNo *sLL
$'enr uonrronrxs wEtt
r'-1
I I uNDEFoFouNo iToFAoE TANI(
LJ
) fl ADDrrloilAL MoNlronlllo WELL f; Bg73
\rr
or rp+t26+'zl 22 23 RR TFACKS
SOUTH TEMPLE STREET
noro icctss
2l PIL.-6--e
r-iL-J TI It
o t2
L--J L
T3
_J
tr
20 o 2
72+!26
to lr4o
o
G
ooo
3o
trjc
-J T6
TO
r
I
6o
1rr
I
U 1ot97oT8 TIO
ililililcttllltll
LJLJ LJLI
'tc
T9 TI
oc
D1t t.1
+lza
l_tf !t6
B
OATE
SHOP ELDO
OFFICE J DOCK,
--Lr
SERVICE
ELOG
H.^-,*o--ES
.YLEGEND
a EP
L
BLYMYER ENGI NEERS, INC.
SAL
TRUCK
T LAKE
TERMINA
NONE
'* qRoUNDwATEF
conrofh MrP
.h .t)AMEB I uooBEY MONITORINO WELL
O set uoxtroRrilo wELL
-f e nr MoltroRttc wELL
f"1I I uNDERoFouNo 6ToRAcE TANK
LJ
c] ADDtrtoltAL MoNtroRlNO WELL # 88zg tr'* FIGURE 2
\rr or rer+
'28
.a'
o\",/I+'zt 2 28 1 Rn TFACXS
noeo icceec
2l ?IL c {:-l427h-ll
FEI{CE '
o f2-J r _t s
J
o2 o
1220
s'zs
6o .lr.lrEItoo
o
E
ooo
=o
ul
TE
at
I
1
o
F
t
3A
to
l'1Tz
LJ 1o
'le T8
!-1ll
lt
lt
LI
Tro
ilililclrllil
LJ I.J LJ
Te Tli
E'r3,f
or
o
cl'14
t8
/,lfi"
/*
/*
ta l6'i7 o
01 /o'L OATE
MEASURED ELEVATION AT TOP OF FLU ID LEVEL
w:1 '-'
w-2
w-3
w-4
w-5
w-6
w-7
w-8
w-9
w- 10
w-11
w^L2
w- 13
w- 14
42L2.52
NO DATA
42L4.69
42r4.7 2
42r4.73
NO DATA
NO DATA
42L2 .05
42L2.98
4213.99
42L3.64
NO DATA
4?7.4.n7
42L3 - 07
w- 15
w- 16
w- 17
w-LB
w- 19
w-20
w-27
w-22
w-23
w-24
w-25
r{-26
w-27
42t3.93
42t3 .59
4212.9 4
42L2 -84
42L2.60
42L2.78
4212.64
42LL -98
42L2.2I
4213 .30
42LL.65
4212 .02
42rr.63
OUTH TEMPLE STREET
SHOP BLDO
DOCKOFFICE '
APPENDIX A
Dames & Moore Job No. 19051-001-031
Salt Lake City, Utah
July 10, 1989
PHASE III FIELD INVESTIGATION
PIE NATIONWIDE TRUCK TERMINAL
NEAR 55 SOUTH REDWOOD ROAD
SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
FOR PIE NATIONWIDE
Dames&Moore
fft ,.,
DAMES & MOORE APROFESSIONALLIMJTEDPARTNERSHIP
250 EAST BROADWAY, SUITE 200, SALT LAKE ClTY, UTAH 84111-2480 [phone]
Blymyer Engineers
1829 Clement Avenue
Alameda, Californi~ 94501
Gentlemen:
July 10, 1989
INTRODUCTION
Phase III Field Investigation
PIE Nationwide Truck Terminal
Near 55 South Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
For PIE Nationwide
This letter summarizes our activities and the results of the Phase III
field investigation of the diesel fuel leak at PIE Nationwide's Salt Lake City
Truck Terminal near Redwood Road and North Temple Street in Salt Lake City,
Utah. The general location of the site is shown on Plate 1, Vicinity Map. A
more detailed map showing the terminal and surrounding area including monitor
well locations is presented on Plate 2, Fluid Level Map.
PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The purpose and scope of our study were outlined in our proposal dated
April 4, 1989. The purpose of our study was to install and sample eight
shallow monitor wells near the PIE Truck Terminal's west boundary to investi-
gate whether diesel-related contaminants are present in the ground water.
OFFICES WORLDWIDE
DAMES & MOORE -\ PRL~FE5SIONALLl\1!TE[)P-\RTNER5HIP
Blymyer Engineers
July 10, 1989
Page -2-
In accomplishing this purpose, the scope of our study consisted of:
1. Drilling, logging, sampling and completion of seven shallow monitor
wells. The last planned well could not be completed because per-
mission from the landowner could not be obtained by Blymyer.
Samples of soils and water were shipped to Trace Analysis Labs as
directed by Blymyer Engineers for laboratory analysis of possible
diesel-related contaminants. Locations for the wells were cleared
by Blue Stake and other utilities under the direction of Dames &
Moore. Application for and permits from the State Engineer for the
drilling were also obtained.
2. Measuring water levels and product (hydrocarbon) thickness in all 28
monitor wells built during Phase I, Phase II and Phase III investi-
gations.
3. Subcontracting the surveying of the elevation of the Phase III wells
to Ensign Engineering and Land Surveying, Inc.
4. Preparation of this summary report which includes log of borings,
well construction details, depth to ground water measurements and
product thickness measurements.
RESULTS
The PIE Nationwide Trucking Terminal in Salt Lake City, Utah is located
on 55 South Redwood Road (Plate 1). The trucking terminal, monitor wells from
Phase I and II (Monitor wells 1-21) and Phase III off-site monitor wells (MW
23-28) are shown on Plate 2. Fluid levels and oil thicknesses measured in all
wells in June 1989 are summarized on Table 1. Fluid level elevations are
plotted on the sketch map on Plate 2. Apparent oil thicknesses are contoured
on the sketch map on Plate 3. Please note that oil thicknesses measured in
wells are usually greater than the actual oil thickness in the formation.
Plates 4-A through 4-C show boring logs and well completion information.
• DAMES & MOORE A PROFESSIONAL LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
Blymyer Engineers
July 10, 1989
Page -3-
BORING AND MONITOR WELL COMPLETION
During the week of June 12, Dames & Moore and our drilling subcontractor,
Mountain States Dr_il ling, drilled seven borings and completed seven monitor
wells to the north and west of the PIE Nationwide Trucking Terminal (Plate 2).
The field program was supervised by an experienced geologist from Dames &
Moore's staff who logged the boring, performed field testing and measurements
and directed the well completions.
The purpose of installing the seven wells in these locations was to aid
in defining the extent of contamination by diesel fuel which appears to be
moving in a northwesterly direction.
A Central Mining Equipment-55 hollow-stem auger drill rig was used during
the field activities. The 7-1/4-inch diameter hollow-stem augers penetrated
the subsurface and allowed the collection of 18-inch long split-spoon samples
by driving the sampler into the ground with a 14O-pound drop hammer.
The 2-inch inside diameter soil sampler was lined with 6-inch long brass
liners and samples were collected every 5 feet. The samples were examined for
lithology, monitored with a HNU Photovac Ionization Detector for the presence
of hydrocarbons, and recorded on logging forms. One 6-inch brass liner was
selected from each sampled interval for laboratory analysis. The ends of the
brass sleeves were wrapped in aluminum foil and covered with plastic end caps.
The soils were classified by visual and textural examination in the
field. These classifications were later reviewed by reexamination of the soil
samples in our laboratory. Graphical representations of the subsurface con-
ditions and well completions are given on Plates 4A through 4C, Logs of Bor-
ings. The soils were classified in accordance with the nomenclature described
on Plate 5, Unified Soil Classification System.
DAMES & MOORE ArROFESSIONALLl\1ITEDPART~ERsH1r
Blymyer Engineers
July 10, 1989
Page -4-
The samples saved for laboratory analy.sis were placed in coolers with
ice, logged on chain-of-custody forms and sealed with evidence tape. The
sample coolers were shipped to Trace Analysis Labs via next day courier.
All activities were conducted under Dames & Moore I s Health and Safety
Plan. Only Protection Level D was used. Dual cartridge respirators were
available for use, if necessary. The HNU Photovac Ionization Detector was
utilized on-site to monitor the presence of any volatile organics encountered
during field activities. The HNU was calibrated daily and readings were
periodically checked during activities.
Decontamination of all materials used to drill, sample, complete the
wells and measure product thicknesses was completed at the job site. Decon-
tamination was accomplished by steam-cleaning or scrubbing with Alconox, fol-
lowed by a tap water rinse.
MONITOR WELL INSTALLATION AND DEVELOPMENT
The seven wells installed were constructed with 2-inch diameter, Schedule
40 PVC casings and screens. The well casings and screens are generally
comprised of five feet of unslotted casing, 15 feet of 0.01-inch factory-
slotted screen with a flush threaded bottom cap 0.5 feet long and water tight
lockable cap. The material used to construct the filter pack was :/F16-40
Colorado silica sand, which was placed in the well bore annulus from the hole
bottom to approximately three feet below the ground surface. Enviroseal, a
crushed bentonite, was placed in the well bore annulus above the filter pack
to within one foot of the ground surface. One foot of cement was placed
around a road-rated steel well cover to protect the PVC well head. The steel
well cover was set flush with the asphalt or ground surface.
DAMES & MOORE .. PROFESSIONAL Ll\lITH' P-\RT~ER~HlP
Blymyer Engineers
July 10, 1989
Page -5-
Upon completion of the monitor wells, ·each well was developed using a
two-inch diameter three-foot long PVC bailer. Each well was bailed until at
least three casing volumes of water and any extraneous fine-grained materials
that may have been dislodged during drilling left on the screen, or suspended
in the water were removed. The we 11 completion and development activities
were completed without any unusual incidents or problems.
FLUID LEVELS AND PRODUCT THICKNESSES
Upon completion and development of the monitoring wells, static fluid
levels and product thickness measurements were taken and recorded in each new
well and the 21 wells from earlier work. Fluid levels were measured using a
steel tape measure and flashlight since electronic water level meters respond-
ed inconsistently with the product found in the wells. All fluid level mea-
surements were taken from the north side of the PVC well head. Each measure-
ment was taken to the nearest 0.01 foot.
During the week of June 20th the amount of petroleum product present on
the water table was measured using a SOS Interface Sampler (bailer). The
bailer is a transparent cylinder with a flap-type check valve built into the
bottom of the bailer which allows fluid to enter, but not to escape. The
bailer enables the collection of undisturbed free product and ground water
interface samples. An accurate measurement of the amount of free floating
product on top of the ground water within the well can then be recorded.
After the wells were installed, their locations were surveyed for rela-
tive elevations to the nearest 0.01 foot. A relative elevation datum based on
the finished concrete surface inside the shop area (see Plate 2) was initially
used. True elevations were then calculated based on a County bench mark
located near the Redwood Road and North Temple intersection.
DAMES & MOORE APROFESSlONALLIMITEDPART:--.:ERSHIP
Blymyer Engineers
July 10, 1989
Page -6-
GROUND WATER SAMPLING
During the week of June 20th the seven new monitor wells were sampled
using a two-inch diameter three-foot long teflon bailer. The seven wells
sampled were bailed until at least three casing volumes of fluid were removed
prior to actual sample collection. The sampling equipment was decontaminated
between each sample collection with an Alconox soap solution and steam-clean
rinse.
The samples saved for laboratory analysis were placed in a cooler with
ice, logged on chain-of-custody forms and sealed vi th evidence tape. The
sample cooler was shipped to Trace Analysis Laboratory Thursday June 22, 1989.
oOo
DAMES & MOORE A PROFESSIO~AL LIMITED PA.RT:--:ERSHIP
Blymyer Engineers
July 10, 1989
Page -7-
We appreciate the opportunity to perform this aerv1.ce for you.
have any questions, please do not hesitate to call.
GWC/CPS: fl
Yours very truly,
DAMES & MOORE
George W. Condrat
?;te1 ~
Craig P. Scola
Hydrogeologist
2 copies submitted
Attachments:
Table 1 -
Plate 1 -
Plate 2 -
Plate 3 -
Plates 4A
Plate 5 -
Fluid Levels and Product Thicknesses
Vicinity Map
Fluid Level Map
Apparent Product Thickness Map
-4C -Logs of Borings
Unified Soil Classification System
If you
TABLE 1
FLUID LEVELS AND PRODUCT THICKNESSES
Depth to Fluid Level
(TOC north)
Well Number (ft)
MW-1 9.54
MW-2 N/R
MW-3 7.88
MW-4 8.25
MW-5 8.0
MW-6 N/R
MW-7 N/R
MW-8 10.46
MW-9 8.71
MW-10 7.79
MW-ll 8.38
MW-12 8.60
MW-13 8.58
MW-14 8.92
MW-15 7.79
MW-16 7.96
MW-17 8.63
MW-18 9.0
MW-19 9.75
MW-20 9.29
MW-21 9.08
MW-22 10.71
MW-23 10.19
MW-24 8.94
MW-25 11.0
MW-26 11. 79
MW-27 10.50
MW-28 8.75
Note:
MW 1-21 Measured June 20, 1989
MW 22-28 Measured June 22, 1989
Well Casing Fluid
Elevation Elevation
(ft) (ft)
4222.06 4212.52
4222.79 N/R
4222.57 4214.69
4222.97 4214.72
4222.73 4214.73
4222.09 N/R
4222.33 N/R
4222.51 4212.05
4221.69 4212.98
4221.78 4213.99
4222.02 4213.64
4222.19 4213.59
4222.65 4214.07
4221.99 4213.07
4221. 62 4213. 83
4221. 55 4213. 59
4221. 57 4212.94
4221.84 4212.84
4222.35 4212.60
4222.07 4212.78
4221. 72 4212.64
4222.69 4211. 98
4222.40 4212.21
4222.24 4213.30
4222.65 4211. 65
4223.81 4212.02
4222.13 4211. 63
4220.79 4212.04
Product
Thickness
(ft)
6.13
N/R
4 .1
3.46
6.75
N/R
N/R
0.71
7.42
0.0
1.02
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.19
0.0
2.17
4.36
6.36
5.79
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
o.o
0.0
w
L.
~
J
r
(D
a
-.J
:r::
J
.J r u
.J -LL
N
5-~f-
' I
I
I
J
I
I
I ~------
,
REFERENCE-
U.S.G.S. QUADRANGLE ENTITLED
"SALT LAKE CITY NORTH, UTAH" •
1963, PHOTOREVISED 1969 & 1975.
SCALE IN FEET
1000 0 1000 2000
5-.--I I
VICINITY MAP
Dames & Moore
"
LIi :r u
ci
'-
J...
-.)
::i
IL
EBw-2a
421204
EBw-21
4211.63
W-25
EB
4211.65
I
I
v/-2~
I
~ 421202
~
EB
•
4211.98
0
<(
0 a:
HOLIDAY INN ©
EB 22
SOUTH/
W-23$ / EBW-24
421221 4213.30
TEMPL7'
• W-21 •
/
421264 W-9
(x--x--x-421298
><
/ j
wJ2•:2f1•
I l~
I
w-a.
w-1.
421252
/ O >< 421205 / ~
00 421~60 / ffi~ eW-19 cT:fm ~ ,c
W I / W~7
a: ><~
Ii I
W-18 • .. ,
0
\
421284 >< \.
• W-6
I
I
•w-10
4213..99
W-2 •
•w-11
4213.64
STREET
W-12 •
LOADING DOCK
4214.72
.w-3
4214.69
------
.w-13
4214.07
---4214
•W-14
4213.07
I • ' • ,. ___ W-17 ~ W-16 ---•W-15 ------------
421294 " 421359 4213.93
MONITOR WELL INSTALLED
IN CONJUNCTION WITH
PRESENT STUDY
EXISTING WELL LOCATION
MEASURED ELEVATION AT
TOP OF FLUID LEVEL
NOT TO SCALE
'1~7a
INTERSTATE 80
FLUID LEVEL MAP
JUNE 1989
Dames & Moore
PLATE 2
---1,11
-C
l
~ m
J
~
' J
oil
:c
-0
-►
II
,II
.J
--,,.
EBw.2s
0.0
EBw-21
0.0
W-25
EB o.o
W-26
EB
0.0
EB
•
3.46
HOLIDAY INN ©
w-2/ • N/M
EBW-24 o.o
STREET
/
•w-1] 1.02
I
/
W-13
• 0.0
W-14
• 0.0
W-12
• 0.0
INTERSTATE 80
MONITOR WELL INSTALLED
IN CONJUNCTION WITH
PRESENT STUDY
EXISTING WELL LOCATION
APPARENT PRODUCT THICKNESS
MEASURED IN FEET (M/N =
NOT MEASURED)
NOT TO SCALE
APPARENT
PRODUCT THICKNESS
JUNE 1989
Dames & Moore
~~
~ ~
-01
; I I ~ ► ~ ...
BORING MW-22
WEl.l.
CONSTRUCTION
6
8
ro
.:;
:i: >-a. i!s \2
\4
16
18
20
wl28
3 NCHES ASPHALT • • • ML , 3 NCHES OF GRAVEL (ROAD BASE FU)
SM. \.BROWN SANDY GRAVELLY SLT (FU)
(FILL
I
ML
CONCRETE SLAB· 2 FEET THCK
. BLACK SAl'VY SlJ (NATIJ'IAL ORGANIC
OOOR)
BLACK TO DARK GRAY IJEDUM SAl'O
GRAY SI.TY CLAY
WATER LEVa AT 1071 FEET ON 6-22-89
BLACK TO DARK GRAY FNE TO MEDIUM
SANO (DESEL OOOR)
BLACK Sa..T
GRAY FINE TO MEDIUM OUARTOSE SAND
(NO ODOR)
...., ..... '-'M-==La.1 BLACK TO DARK GRAY FNE TO IJEDUM SAND
22-----
CONTAr-JS ROTTEN REDWOOD (NO OOOR)
BORING COMPLETED AT 21 5 FEET
ON 6-13-89
KEY TO
MONITOR WELL
CONSTRUCTION
BENTOtflE
SEAL
1 5' DIA. PVC P'PE
1 5' DIA SLOTTED PVC
PPE • .01' SCREEN
GEi.ENT
16-40 SLJCA SAl'O
NATUIAL SLlFF
{F PRESENT)
BORING MW-23
waL.
CONSTRUCTION
6
12
18
~ 6 [50]
ML
(FU)
2 -3 NCHES OF ASPHALJ
BROWN GRAVELLY SANDY SlJ (FU)
GP,.AY SlJY QAY WITH SI-EU.
FRAGI.ENTS (NO OOOR)
GRADES LIGHT GRAY N COLOR
.VO TO SlJGHl1Y SANDY SlJ
WATER LEVE. AT 10 19 FEET ON 6-22-89
r::P,.AY SANDY SlJ (NO OOOR)
GRAY SIJY FNE TO !.EDUM IJICACEOUS
SA~ (NO OOOA)
BORNG COt,.f>LETEO AT 20 0 FEET
ON 6-13-89
'-+-+---~ DEPTl-1 AT WHCH lNJISlUl8ED SPLIT
SPOON SAl.'PLE W>,S OBTANED
D DEPTl-1 OF SAJ.Pl.NG Ana-PT WITH
NO RECOVERY
'--+----BLOWS REOLl'lED TO DRIVE SPLIT SPOON
S>J,f'U:R 01-E FOOT WITH A 140 F'OU'O
HAt.'NER DAClPPN3 30 NCl-£5
I-NJ READNG N PARTS PER WJ.J0N
LOG OF BORINGS
Dames & Moore
Pl lff~ ,1!;.
].
.-~ 01
I I I ~
... ► ► ..J -·.
u j j ·-u~ ~
-u
► .
wru
CONSmUCTlON
t;j 10-
~
;:;
::c
I-
0..
~ 12-
:::
18-~~~
---
---
---
20-i~l
0
22
BORING MW-24
I
' ,
ML
(FU
3 NCI-ES OF ASPHAIJ"
LIGHT BROWN GRAVEi.LY SAJICIY SU (Fll)
SM GP.AV Ff,E TO M:DU,l 5At,[) (NO OOOR)
CAAi< GRAY SUV CLAY (NO OOOR)
WATER LEVa AT 8.94 FEET ON 6-22-89
(STRONG DESa ODOR)
GP.AV FtE TO t.EOLM SAN) (NO ODOR)
M
CL GP.AV CLAY (STRONG NATU'lAL ORGANC
ODOR)
wru
CONSTRJCTlON
O· ..
2·
t;j 10·
~
;:;
::c I-
0..
~ 12 •
14·
16·
18
20·
22
BORING MW-25
ML BROWN GRAVEi.LY SAJICIY SU (Fll)
(FU.)
BROWN SUV CLAY WITH StEll FRAGI.ENTS
(NOOOOR)
<:RAY FN: TO M:DU,i SUV SAN)
WATER LEVa AT 11.0 FEET ON 6-22-89
DARK GP.AV CLAYEY SU (NO OOOR)
GRAY FN: TO t.EOLM SAflO {NO ODOR)
GRAY SUV CLAY
BORN3 COM'lETED AT 215 FEET
ON 6-14-89.
LOG OF BORINGS
Dames & Moore
j j -<
0
i j ! ...... -.
ll
BORING MW-26
WEl.l.
CONSTilUC11ClN
O·r:r-r.;---,lfflTITTT':-::"""T"------------
'.! ML
FLL)
2· •
8·
tu 10-
U.J u.
&
I ...
Cl.
i:'j 12·
,..
CL
BROWN GRAVEI.J.Y SAJO( SU (FU)
DARK GRAY SlJY CLAY WITH SI-Ell
FRAGI-.ENTS (NO OOOA)
GRADES GRAY N COLOR
Af'O TO CLAYEY SAI-OY SU
(NOOOOA)
WATER LEVa AT 11.79 FEET ON 6-22-89
GRAY SUY FIN= SAl-0 (NO OOOA)
GRAY CLAY (STRONG ORGANC ODOR.
NO PROOUCT OOOA)
BORNG COM'lETED AT 21.5 FEET
ON 6-14-a9.
BORING MW-27
WEl.l.
CONSTRJCllON
O·~-r.~---l:i!:::!ZZ!!i:::::::=r:;;:;;,:;:;~nc"..;";;::;-:-;-;--------1:, • 2 NCI-ES OF ASPHAIJ ;, ML BROWN GRAVEI.J.Y SAJO( SU (FLL)
(FU.)
: l r-□-7_(_o_o_]i:i-+++,f+t-M...,.,...L-f LIGHT BROWN SUGHT1Y SANJY
'-'CAREOUSSIJ
t;j 10·
w u.
&
I ...
Cl.
~11 (0.0J
i:'j 12· -
~ ~=~
:: ':.:
14 ·" :: l-----1 t
16· .r~: ~1 (0.0)
,]
18· ·=:: 1---.--
-· '
,_ :::..; ·.
;..:: :~
20·-·==-·-1-----1'
--
-".:'. ,t ~ 2/ 18" ""l'n"?"n-:C:-L::--t
·.,:,. (0.0)
:JC>,
22-----
WATER L.£V8. AT 10.5 FEET ON 6-22-89
GRAY FN: TO '-'EillJM SAl'O
GRAY CLAY
BORNG COt.f'I..ETED AT 21.5 FEET
ON 6-15-89.
LOG OF BORINGS
Dames & Moore
I
I
,"-
L
.....
BORING MW-28 wru
CONSTRUCTION
22-----
•• • 6 NQES OF ASPHAlJ
ML BROWN GRAVB.lY SAKJf SU' (FU)
FILL)
CL LIGHT BROWN SUY 0.AY WITH OC-
CASIONAL SH:lL FRAG.'.ENTS
WATER lEV8. AT 8.75 FEET ON 6-22-89
GIAY SU'Y FN: SA1'0
SP GIAY FN: TO I.EDl.M GIAVEill' SAN)
CL GIAY SUY Q.AY • VERY SOFT
BORNG COt.l'lETEO AT 20.0 FEET
ON 6-15-89
LOG OF BORINGS
Dames & Moore
Pl ATI= t1n
>-CD
Q
ill
:i:
-U
ill
:r u
>-CD
7
)
1
)
MAJOR DIVISIONS GRAPH
SYMBOL LETTER TYPICAL DESCRIPTIONS SYMBOL
COARS(
GRAINED
SOILS
MOR( THAN sax
or MAT CR I .lL Is
~ TH.AN NO,
200 SICVC SIZC
FINE
GRAINED
SOILS
MOR( THAN so,;
or UAT[RIAl IS
~ THAN NO.
2QQ SICVC SIZE
GRAVEL
AND
GRAVELLY
SOILS
MOR C THAN sax
or COARSC r•Ac•
TION R(TAINCD
ON N0.4 SICVC
SAND
AND
SANDY
SOILS
MOR( THAN 50\
or COAR!.,[ fRAC-
T I ON~
NO, 4 SI [V[
SILTS
AND
CLAYS
SILTS
~D
CLAYS
CLEAN GRAVELS
( L I TTL C OR NO
r11,cs)
GRAVELS WI TH fl NES
':·=~;:==:::: . ,•· GW
GP
GM
WU,.L-GRAOCD GllAVCLS, GRAV[L-
SANO MIXTUR[S, LITTLE OR
NO FINES
POORLY-GRkDCD GRAVCLS,GllAVCL-
SANO WIXTURCS, LITTLE Oil
NO r I N(S
SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVCL•SANO-
SILT WIXTURCS
(APPR(C I ABLC AMOUN TIH'~H-,~~ ... ------,t----------------"1
or r INCS)
LIQUID LIMIT
\._f.g; TH AN 50
LIQUID LIMIT
GREATER THAN 50
GC
SW
SP
SM
SC
ML
CL
OL
MH
CH
OH
CLAYEY GRAV(LS, GRAVCL•SANO-
CLAY tr.llXTURCS
W[LL•GRAO(O SANOS, GRAVELLY
SANOS, LITTLE OR NO FINCS
POOllLY-GRAUCO SANDS, GRAVELLY
SANDS, LITTLC Ok NO flNCS
SILTY SANOS, SAND-SILT MIXTURES
CLAY[Y SANOS, SANO-CLAY WIXTUR[S
INORGANIC SILTS ANO V[RY flh[
SANDS, ROCK rLOUK, SILTY OR
CLAY[Y flN[ SANOS OR CLAY(Y
SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY
INORGANIC CLAYS or LOW TO U(OIUM
PLASTICITY, GRAV[LLY CLAYS,
SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LCAN
CLAYS
ORGANIC SILTS ANO ORGANIC
SILTY CLAYS or LOW PLASTICITY
l140R~ANIC SILTS, MIC~C[OUS OR
DIATQMAC(OUS flN[ SANO OR
SILTY SOILS
INORGANIC CLAYS Of HIGl-1
PLASTICITY, fAT CLAYS
ORGANIC CLAYS Of MEDIUM TO HIGH
PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS
H IG11L Y CRGt.N IC SOI LS PT P[,H, HUMUS, $WA.tr.IP SOILS
WITH HIGH O~GANIC CONT[~T\
NOTE: DUAL SYMBOLS AR( USED TO INDICATE 60kDL~LINl SOIL CLASSlrtcATIONS.
SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
Dames & Moore
PLATE 5
APPENDIX B
Trace Analysis Laboratory, Inc.
3423 Investment Boulevard, #8 • Hayward, California 94545 [phone]
--------------------------------
CUSTOMER: PIE Nationwide
DATE: 7/6/89
LOG NO.: 7520
DATE SAMPLED: 6/13/89 and 6/14/89
DATE RECEIVED: 6/16/89
c/o Blymyer Engineers, Inc.
REQUESTER: Chris Falbo
PROJECT: No. 8873, PIE Nationwide, Salt Lake City, Utah
Method and
Constituent
OHS Method:
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel
OHS Method:
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel
OHS Method:
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel
Sam~le T,z'.~e: Soil
22B 11.0-11.5 22C 220 20.0-20.5
Concen-Detection Concen-Detection Concen-Detection
Units tration Limit tration Limit tration Limit
ug/kg < 3,000 3,000 < 3,000 3,000 < 3,000 3,000
23A 6.0-6.5 23B 11.5-12.0 23C 15.5-16.0
ug/kg < 3,000 3,000 < 3,000 3,000 < 3,000 3,000
24A 5.5-6.0 24B 11.5-12.0 24C 15.5-16.0
ug/kg < 3,000 3,000 2,000,000 9,000 < 3,000 3,000
Method and
Constituent
OHS Method:
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel
OHS Method:
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel
OHS Method:
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel
DF:vs
DATE:
LOG NO.:
DATE SAMPLED:
DATE RECEIVED:
PAGE:
7/6/89
7520
6/13/89 and 6/14/89
6/16/89
Two
Sample Type: Soil
240 21.0-21.5 25A 6.0-6.5 25B 10.5-11.0
Concen-Detection Concen-Detection Concen-Detection
Units tration Limit tration Limit tration Limit
ug/kg < 3,000 3,000 < 3,000 3,000 < 3,000 3,000
25C 15.5-16.0 26A 5.0-5.5 26B 10.5-11.0
ug/kg < 3,000 3,000 < 3,000 3,000 < 3,000
26C 15.5-16.0 260 20.5-21.0
ug/kg < 3,000 3,000 < 3,000
Dan Farah, Ph.D.
Supervisory Chemist
3,000
3,000
Trace Analysis Laboratory, Inc.
3423 Investment Boulevard, II 8 • Hayward, California 94545
--------------------------------
DATE: 6/30/89
LOG NO.: 7519
DATE SAMPLED: 6/15/89
DATE RECEIVED: 6/16/89
PIE Nationwide
CUSTOMER: c/o Blymyer Engineers, Inc
REQUESTER: Chris Falbo
PROJECT: No. 8873, PIE Nationwide, Salt Lake City, Utah
Method and
Constituent
OHS Method:
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel
Units
Sample Type: Soil
27B 11.0-11-11.5 -,,--~2"'--7C"'-=-l-'-=5.c-=-5--1~6~_
Concen-Detection Concen-Detection
tration Limit tration Limit
ug/kg < 4,000 4,000 < 4,000 4,000
( 4 I 5) 783-6960
270 20.5-21
Concen-Detection
tration Limit
< 4,000 4,000
Method and
Constituent
OHS Method:
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel
OHS Method:
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel
DF:slr
DATE:
LOG NO.:
DATE SAMPLED:
DATE RECEIVED:
PAGE:
6/30/89
7519
6/15/89
6/16/89
Two
Sample Type: Soil
28A 5.5-6
Concen-Detection
Units tration Limit
ug/kg < 4,000 4,000
28D 20.5-21
ug/kg < 4,000 4,000
Dan Farah, Ph.D.
Supervisory Chemist
28C 15.5-16
Concen-Detection
tration Limit
< 4,000 4,000
APPENDIX C
-
'lM15 783 1512 TRACE ANALYSIS ...... BL YMYER Eng. I nc 14! 002
Tract Analy,ia Laboratory, Inc. g~11--l1J
342.3 lnvtstmtnt Boulevard, 118 • Hayward, Calif omia 94545 (4 IS} 783-6960 ---------.,_ .. ... .... ------.., -... -~-_ ._.,..........., -~-~
, . . . ..
CUSTOMER:
REQUESTER:
PIE Nationwide
c/o Blymyer Engineers,
Chris Falbo
. DATE: 7/6/89
LOG NO.: 7551
DATE SAMPLED: 6/21/89
DATE RECEIVED: 6/23/89
Inc.
PROJECT: No. 8873, PIE Nationwide, Salt Lake City, Utah
Samp 1 e Type: Water
MW-22 MW-23
Method and Concen-Detection Concen-Detection
Constituent Units tration Limit tration Limit
OHS Method:
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel ug/1 < 50 50 < 50 50
MW-25 MW-26
OHS Method:
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel ug/1 < 50 50 < 50 50
MW-28
OHS Method:
Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Diesel ug/l < 50 50
.
µ,rd,\. Jx:u,-..
Dan Farah, Ph.D.
Supervisory Chemist
DF:vs
MW-24
Concen-Detection
tration Limit
< 50 50
MW-27
< 50 50
APPENDIX D
BLYMYER
ENGINEERS, INC.
APPENDIX D
PIE NATIONWIDE
SALT LAKE CifY, UTAH
FLUID LEVELS AND PRODUCT tHICKNESSES
DEPTH TO
FLUID wELL
LEVEL CASING FLUID
WELL (TOC NORTH) ELEVATION ELEVATION
NUMBER (FT) (FT) (FT)
MW-1 9.54 4222.06 4212.52
MW-2 N/R 4222.79 N/R
MW-3 7.88 4222.57 4214.69
MW-4 8.25 4222.97 4214.72
MW-5 8.0 4222.73 4214.73
MW-6 N/R 4222.09 N/R
MW-7 N/R 4222.33 N/R
MW-8 10.46 4222.51 4212.05
MW-9 8.71 4221.69 4212.98
MW-10 7.79 4221.78 4213.99
MW-11 8.38 4222.02 4213.64
MW-12 8.60 4222.19 4213.59
MW-13 8.58 4222.65 4214.07
MW-14 8.92 4221.99 4213.07
MW-15 7.79 4221.62 4213.83
MW-16 7.96 4221.55 4213.59
MW-17 8.63 4221.57 4212.94
MW-18 9.0 4221.'34 4212.84
MW-19 9.75 4222.35 4212.60
MW-20 9.29 4222.07 4212.78
MW-21 9.08 4221.72 4212.64
MW-22 10.71 4222.69 4211. 98
MW-23 10.19 4222.40 4212.21
MW-24 8.94 4222.24 4213.30
MW-25 11. 0 4222.65 4211.65
MW-26 11. 79 4223.81 4212.02
MW-27 10.50 4222.13 4211.63
MW-28 8.75 4220.79 4212.04
Note:
MW 1-21 Measured June 20, 1989
MW 22-28 Measured June 22, 1989
PRODUCT
THICKNESS
(FT)
6.13
N/R
4.1
3.46
6.75
N/R
N/R
0.71
7.42
o.o
1.02
o.o
o.o
0.0
o.o
1.19
0.0
2.17
4.36
6.36
5.79
o.o
o.o
o.o
o.o
o.o
o.o
o.o
.... .,-
□□~ GROUNDWATER □□□ TECHNOLOGY
October 9, 1992
043107159.030823
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
National Warehouse Investment Company
10199 South Side Blvd.
Suite #104
Jacksonville, FL 32256
Subject:
Dear Ms. Chitty:
September 1992 Monthly Project Update
Utah Facility 4001342
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
Summary of September 1992 Monitoring Results
t4~~
"-,,.,
~(~[Plf7
Groundwater Technology, Inc.
275 East South Temple, Suite 321, Salt Lake City, UT 84ID
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]
The five well recovery system was not operating during the following time periods: September 1 through
8, and September 1 O through 15, 1992. There was a 15 gallon decrease in total fluid volume in the
recovery tank during the period from August 24, 1992 to September 22, 1992. The maximum product
thickness documented during the August 1992 period was 7.07 feet in monitor well W-9 on September
22, 1992.
Background of Site
This letter presents an update on activities at your site in Salt Lake City, Utah. A product recovery
system was installed in late February /early March 1991 by Westech Fuel. Applied Geotechnology began
product recovery operations in mid-March 1991. Groundwater Technology took over biweekly well and
system monitoring on October 15, 1991. This is the twelfth project update letter since Groundwater
Technology took over site monitoring operations.
71590992.MON
UiAH DEf'"-"tMeilt ~~
!NVI ROMMENi AL QUALITY
OC"t \ ~ 1992 ~~-
01v. Or tiN\J\RONMENTAL
RESH.>NSE AND P.f:~1'1:'.0IAilON
Offices throughout the US., Canada and Overseas
--
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
National Warehouse Investment Co.
October 9, 1992
Method of Site Monitoring
'--
One biweekly site monitoring visit was made during this eleventh period on September 22, 1992. During
the September 22, 1992 visit, a total of twenty-six monitoring wells and three recovery wells were gauged
using an INTERFACE PROBE™(EIP) Well Monitoring System to determine depth to product, and depth to
groundwater. Of the twenty-nine wells that were gauged during the September 1992 monitoring visit,
twenty wells contained measurable product thickness. This compares to twenty-two wells containing
measurable product thickness during the last August 1992 visit. Comparing the wells that contained
measurable product thickness during the last visits in August and September 1992, eleven wells had
increased and nine wells had decreased in product thickness since the last August 1992 visit. Water
level and product thickness measurements collected during the September 1992 gauging visit are shown
on the attached well monitoring forms.
After gauging the monitoring wells and inspection of the recovery system during the September 1992
biweekly visit, the EIP was used to measure the thickness of product and water in the recovery tank.
The recovery tank dimensions are assumed to be six feet in diameter by fourteen feet long, with a 3,000
gallon liquid capacity.
On September 22, 1992, • recovery tank gauging measured 11.16 inches of water, and 38.04 inches of
product. These measurements equate to 291 gallons of water, and 1,879 gallons of product, totaling
approximately 2,170 gallons of liquid contained within the recovery tank. Table 1 documents the tank
gauging data since Groundwater Technology took over system monitoring in October 1991.
System Monitoring and Maintenance
The site was visited on September 8, 11 and 15 for recovery system compressor maintenance. On
September 8, 1992 the compressor head gasket was leaking. The gasket was replaced and recovery
system brought on line. On September 1 o, 1992 the compressor was again found with a leaking head
gasket and shut-down. On September 15, 1992 a service representative from Cate Industries, was on-
site for a full service check. The head gasket was replaced, the discharge tank check valve was
checked. The on pressure was set to 115 PSI and the shut off pressure was set to 150 PSI. It was
recommended to vent the shed to prevent room temperatures reaching 100 degrees F.
On September 22, 1992 a torn vent valve diaphragm was removed from RW-A, and the well was turned
off. The rubber diaphragm replacement was ordered and will be installed during the next visit.
71590992.MON 2
i-if7~i GROUNDWATER
._ 1~:7i TECHNOLOGY
1-~=:-==
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
Nao.::,nal Warehouse lnvestrr.._-Co.
October 9, 1992
TABLE 1
TANK SIZE:
TANK DATA
72" X 168"
3000 GALLONS
STAND PIPE: 26"
DEPTH TO BOTTOM OF TANK
'--.
FROM TOP OF STAND PIPE: 8.45' MEASURED WITH EIP = 101.4"
8.50' MEASURED WITH STICK
DATE TANK EIP EIP TOTAL GALLONS GALLONS CHANGE
MEASURE DEPTH DEPTH GALLONS OF OF IN
WITH TO TO OF FLUID WATER PRODUCT PRODUCT
STICK PRODUCT WATER IN TANK IN TANK RECOVERED VOLUME
INCHES INCHES INCHES GALLONS
10/15/91 34.00 NA NA 1376.0 NA NA NA
10/29/91 39.00 71.90 87.00 1638.0 420.80 1217.20 NA
11/19/91 41.50 60.00 87.30 1767.0 408.20 1358.80 141.60
12/4/91 41.75 60.24 87.12 1780.0 415.76 1364.24 5.44
12/17/91 42.50 59.28 86.76 1819.0 430.88 1388.12 23.88
1/2/92 43.75 58.08 84.96 1882.5 508.92 1373.58 -14.54
1/14/92 44.00 57.60 84.72 1895.0 519.24 1375.76 2.18
1/28/92 44.50 57.24 84.12 1921.0 545.60 1375.40 -0.36
2/11/92 44.625 57.12 84.24 1927.5 540.20 1387.30 11.90
2/25/92 44.50 57.00 83.94 1921.0 553.70 1367.30 -20.00
3/10/92 44.625 57.24 83.84 1927.5 553.70 1373.80 6.5
3/24/92 46.00 56.16 82.84 1997.00 605.60 1391.40 18.1
4/6/92 46.25 55.56 83.04 2009.25 594.56 1414.69 23.29
4/21/92 48.00 55.00 82.22 2097.0 632.05 1464.95 50.26
5/5/92 29.00 72.60 91.68 1115.00 239.20 875.80 NA
5/19/92 29.25 72.60 92.76 1128.00 201.40 929.60 50.80
6/17/92 29.375 72.48 92.52 1133.98 209.80 924.18 -2.42
6/30/92 29.28 72.12 91.44 1129.56 247.60 881.96 -42.22
7/14/92 32.80 69.84 92.16 1312.60 257.40 1055.20 173.24
7/31/92 35.50 66.12 91.50 1453.50 263.28 1190.22 135.02
8/24/92 49.625 52.20 90.48 2176.63 282.12 1894.51 704.29
9/22/92 49.5 52.20 90.24 2170.50 291.24 1879.26 -15.25
1:-11--' -1:-Ll:-G I HlJI\IIC 11'111 t:Mr-Al,t: t-'HUJ-ll:-
NA = NOT APPLICABLE :JO~ GROUNDWATER '--~-7r~
~C-_ 1:~_J TECHNOLOGY
71590992.MON 3
---
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
National Warehouse Investment Co.
October 9, 1992
""-
We are continuing to monitor the system biweekly and the liquid levels in the monitoring wells monthly.
The next visit is for system maintenance and will be conducted October 12, 1992, after receipt of the
replacement diaphragm for RW-A.
If you have any questions or comments, please call our office at {801) 523-1003.
Sincerely,
Groundwater Technology, Inc. a ~~-t111Jv-,
Eileen Brennan
Geologist
Salt Lake Project Manager
For:
David W. Daniels
District Manager
Attachments
c: Mr. Garth Miner, Salt Lake County Bureau of Water Quality and Hazardous Waste
Ms. Robin Jenkins, Utah Division of Environmental Response and Remediation
71590992.MON 4
1
_ -
71---l~! GROUNDWATER
---~--,I
-~-~ _J TECHNOLOGY
----GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATA
FACILITY: SHIDLER/ REDWOOD
LOCATION: SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
DATE: 22-Sep-92
FIELD PERSONNEL: CHRIS LOTTI
METHOD: ORS EIP
EQUIPMENT#: 22455
PROJECT: 7159.030842
WElt; ··':WELL [',:::::,:-:-·,;-:-. ·::-,,:. -·:\:', • ..:::, ::: •. =: • ,• :,:,:-: -.:,:_::,·-:::c:::t :ADJ>
.:':::~::::::
••• -: .){ ',:._-··. ::_::.:·-:., • :--·.'/ .. -: .. ,: ·:,•:,:••·· .:-;::: -·pr,,,_. · 10 / :OEPn-1 ·ETc:,r -orw·
W-1 NA 4222.06 14.26
W-2 NA 4222.79 10.13
W-3 NA 4222.57 13.05
W-4 NA 4222.97 11.57
W-5 NA 4222.73 11.24
W-6 NA 4222.09 15.43
W-7 NA 4222.33 12.90
W-8 NA 4222.51 14.36
W-9 NA 4221.69 16.13
W-10 NA 4221.64 8.56
W-11 NA 4222.02 9.22
W-12 NA 4222.19 0.00
W-13 NA 4222.40 9.37
W-14 NA 4221.99 0.00
W-15 NA 4221.51 8.83
W-16 NA 4221.55 10.12
W-17 NA 4221.57 9.46
W-18 NA 4221.70 11.08
W-19 NA 4222.19 14.41
W-20 NA 4221.94 10.70
W-21 NA 4221.58 13.99
W-22 NA 4222.50 10.95
W-23 NA 4222.40 10.57
W-24 NA 4222.24 9.51
W-25 NA 4222.65 11.12
W-26 NA 4223.81 11.96
W-27 NA 4222.13 10.80
W-28 NA 4220.79 9.08
SB-2 NA NA 11.02
RW-A NA NA
RW-B NA NA 8.93
RW-C NA NA
RW-D NA NA 9.51
RW-E NA NA
ETC= ELEVATION TOP OF CASING
DTW = DEPTH TO WATER
DTP = DEPTH TO PETROLEUM
HYDROCARBONS
PT= MEASURED PETROLEUM
THICKNESS
.-DiP {{ :: :,:::=· • Ol'W> ·::-$p,,_,, :, : COMMENT.$ .,,,_.,
9.62 4.64 10.08 4211.98 4212.44
9.26 0.87 9.35 4213.44 4213.53
8.64 4.41 9.08 4213.49 4213.93
9.32 2.25 9.55 4213.43 4213.65
9.28 1.96 9.48 4213.25 4213.45
8.51 6.92 9.20 4212.89 4213.58
10.09 2.81 10.37 4211.96 4212.24
10.13 4.23 10.55 4211.96 4212.38
9.06 7.07 9.77 4211.92 4212.63
NA 0.00 8.56 4213.08 NA
8.02 1.20 8.14 4213.88 4214.00
NA 0.00 0.00 NA NA
NA 0.00 9.37 4213.03 NA
NA 0.00 0.00 NA NA
8.71 0.12 8.72 4212.79 4212.80
8.64 1.48 8.79 4212.76 4212.91
9.06 0.40 9.10 4212.47 4212.51
9.17 1.91 9.36 4212.34 4212.53
9.70 4.71 10.17 4212.02 4212.49
10.23 0.47 10.28 4211.66 4211.71
9.32 4.67 9.79 4211.79 4212.26
NA 0.00 10.95 4211.55 NA
NA 0.00 10.57 4211.83 NA
NA 0.00 9.51 4212.73 NA
NA 0.00 11.12 4211.53 NA
NA 0.00 11.96 4211.85 NA
NA 0.00 10.80 4211.33 NA
NA 0.00 9.08 4211.71 NA
9.37 1.65 9.53 NA NA
NA NA EIP Malfunctioning
8.55 0.38 8.59 NA NA
NA NA EIP Malfunctioning
9.44 0.07 9.45 NA NA
NA NA EIP Malfunctioning
ADJ.DTW = ADJUSTED DEPTH TO WATER
WTE = WATERTABLE ELEVATION
ETP = ELEVATION TOP OF PETROLEUM
NA= NOT AVAILABLE
*NOTE: New ETC numbers forW-10,W-13,W-15,W-18,W-19,W-20,W-21,W-22
LL060592.WK1
·::_ : -._ -:•,
Black topped over
Black topped over
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
Holmon/Shidler Corporot~opitol
10199 Southside H,,ulPvmd Suite 104
Jacksonv,lle. FlowJn J/2:i6-0757
004-363 1172 • ! 1, • 'II i.J-',(, ', 1.'(11 I
'-_), Ali 0EPARTMENT OF
.:''1\':RONMENTAL QUALITY
AUG 2 4 19~c. I,
>-·\
OIV. OF ENVIRONMENT/:.'
1-'l~f)JJONSE AND REMEDIAL ...
August 21, 1992
Mr. Kent P. Gray
Executive Secretary (UST)
Division of Environmental Response and Remediation
Department of Environmental Quality
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4840
!THE SHIDLER GROUP'
RE: Release Site EFFQ, Former P.I.E. Trucking Terminal, 55 South Redwood
Road, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Facility Identification No. 4001342.
Phase II, Reporting and Remediation Schedule Requirements.
Dear Mr. Gray:
This is to inform you that The Shidler Group has retained Groundwater Technology,
Inc. to assist us in meeting the requirements for the above referenced facility outlined
in your letters (ERRL 0707-92 and ERRL 0708-92) to us dated June 26, 1992.
Groundwater Technology is in the process of finalizing the Subsurface Investigation
Report. We request an extension of the original 60 day due date, August 26, 1992, to
September 15, 1992. For the Corrective Action Plan Report we request an extension
of the original 90 day due date, September 26, 1992, to December 1, 1992.
If you require additional information please contact either me in Jacksonville, Florida
11, •., ,, or Jim Goetz with Groundwater Technology in Denver, Colorado at [phone].
,:::,r1,· 'Jr_J,
,-,,, f-'r1Jf-1P,
_, H c,,_ir
>·•·;----1:,
~ 't 1,:»='f I I>
DenvPr
M1ri:1e1Jf--,,)l1·
I '~'ti, ,1•
:r,,1,1,-J1"'f r
§_~erel_y,
( \ I ' I---:-::-;--__). \ 1·4r, ;I~ " \ / r r r ·f/ _i ,.. ---;.,_ ·V'-t____J:l/C -, --· .:.
. 1v
JP ,Ann Chi tty
'{ice President
Asset Management
UNDERGROUt\ 3TORAGE TANK CLOSURE NOTICE (h ,sed 01/15/92)
Facility ID# 'foo/3 L/'J..
Date Processed _______ .=--i.... _____ ----1
Date Mailed to LHD __ ---,,.----,-. ___ __,....,....,.... __ --P_--1
Samples in LUST File # _ ___.____..a_ __ ----'-"--__;_--'--'------1
Samples to LUST Review __________ ---1
SITE INFORMATION
Tank Owner NATIONAL WAREHOUSE INVESTMENT
1";~r l I '12-
Phone# (904 ) 48-6758
( ] dba (individual doing business as)
Adrlress 7 400 BAY MEADOWS WAY
] sole proprietorship ] partnership [x] corporation
City JACKSONVI~LE State FL Zip 32256
Site Name ABF TERMINAL, FORMER PIE TERMINAL
Address 55 S. REDWOOD ROAD City SALT LAKE • State UT Zip 8 4 1 11
Contact person DALE BUSER Phone # ( 4 14) 2 41-31 3 3
TANKS CLOSED r(
Tank# 8 9 ] 0
Age of tank 13 YR 13 YR 13 YR
. Capacity 10 K 10 K 10 ~
,--'11. \
Subs. stored* GAS ~NT-ERZ QIL
Date last used
* Indicate the specific substance stored in the tanks closed (regular, unleaded, diesel, waste oil, etc.)
TANK HANDLER/REMOVER Name --=G=R-=E-=G---=D..,;...___._,K-=E_._.H-=L'---__________ Cert.# TRO 112
Address 3856 w. 5400 s. City SALT LAKE State UT Zip 84118 GS _
SOIL/GROUNDWATER SAMPLER Name _D~A~V~I=D~T~A=F~F ___________ Cert. # GS-0500 /97
~
State UT Zip 841 l 8 ~oe-
.,,,.---E_
Address 3856 w. 5400 s, City SALT LAKE
TYPE OF CLOSURE [X] Permanent [ ] Temporary [ ] Change-In-Service
Permanent or Change-in-Service Date Closed __,_.S_-...... l ..... 9'---9 .... 2~----be ] Removed [ ] In-place
kl Fuel was emptied [x:] Sludge was removed [x:] Tank was cleaned.
Tank was: [ ] Purged [ xi lnerted. Method Used: BIO SOLV -~--~---------------
LocationofClosureRecords 3856 W. 5400 S. SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84118
For in-place closure: tanks filled with __________________________ _
Substance to be stored for Change-In-Service ------------------------
Temporary
Date of Closure _________ _ [ ] Fuel was emptied.
Residue depth remaining in tank ____ or, % by weight of total capacity of UST: ____ _
[ ] Corrosion protection equipment is operating. [ ] Release detection equipment is operating .. --
3 months: [ ] Vent lines open Cap/Secure: [ ] lines ] pumps [ ] manways
12 months: [ ] Permanently closed [ ] New/Upgraded r l Extension reauest
□□~ GROUNDWATER □□□TECHNOLOGY Groundwater Technology, Inc.
August 19, 1992
275 East South Temple, Suite 321, Salt Lake City, UT 84lll
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]
Mr. Trevor Burborough
Salt Lake City-County Health Department
61 O South 200 East
Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
Subject: Modifications to Tank Closure Plan
Former P*l*E Terminal
55 South Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
Groundwater Technology Project 043107118
Dear Mr. Burborough:
Groundwater Technology, The Shidler Group's environmental consultant for this site, requests the following
changes to the Tank Closure Plan approved by.your office:
■ David Taff (GS-0500) will be the certified soil and groundwater sampler.
■ Utah-certified GTEL Environmental Laboratories (GTEL) will provide chemical sample analyses, with
one possible exception (listed below).
■ Unified soil classification (USC) will be performed by CTC Geotek of Salt Lake City, Utah.
■ The following laboratory samples will be collected and analyzed:
■ Tank 8 (gasoline) excavation: 1) one groundwater/product sample analyzed for benzene,
toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes, naphthalene (BTEXN), and total petroleum hydrocarbons
(TPH) as gasoline and diesel by EPA Methods 8020 and 8015 modified using purge and
trap; 2) one USC soil sample.
■ Tank 8 dispenser: 1) one soil sample from Oto 2 feet below the native soil interface under
the dispenser for BTEXN and TPH as gasoline and diesel.
■ Tank 9 (antifreeze) excavation: 1) one groundwater/product sample analyzed for BTEXN
and TPH as gasoline and diesel; 2) one groundwater sample analyzed for ethylene glycol
and propylene glycol by modified EPA Method 8015 (by American West Analytical) or one
product sample analyzed for ethylene glycol by a direct injection modified EPA Method
8270 (by GTEL); and 3) one USC soil sample.
■ Tank 1 O (used oil) excavation: 1) one groundwater /product sample analyzed for BTEXN
and TPH as gasoline and diesel; 2) one groundwater /product sample analyzed for total
hydrocarbons by EPA Method 418.1; 3) one groundwater /product sample analyzed for
chlorinated hydrocarbons by EPA Method 8010; and 4) one USC soil sample.
The changes are necessary because Groundwater Technology's information and sampling parameters were
not included in the Tank Closure Plan.
7118TCP.LTR
Offices thmunhnul lhP ff _c;_ r.nrinnn nn,I n11t>r<On< '
~....---... ·-----------· •-· ·-----·-·----
I. ·cHAIN-oi=-cusroor ilEcoRo
-------
-~-.~.!!~ 4080 PIKE LANE, SUITE C 24272 CONCORD, CA 94520 AND ANALYSIS REQUEST
... L"IOIIAIOIIII, INC. ~
510~ 685-7852
800 423-7143
~ompany Name: Phone#:· ft1 (-S-J .:2--1 t?O 3
~"~('<,,,er f t:r-T-e C/~ ( ' 8'(1/ -5'J2,-l(JY-6 □ FAX II: D C:
'!: e .i I,', I•' I ';-(= ~: s.: Site location: ,s-.; /{ ea/ 1-P 0 _, q A ~ UJ t!!
-::..1"s-~-.::.r~T S~7c.n/'/(' ~ ~
.~n/l·L-1.cr.,T;: //J s,,IT 1-llltlt Ct(~ IIT D
1 D
..,
'reject Manager: I / ' Client Project ID: (#) o '-/]I() ? // :?_. D m ~
::E
,lr-e.~ fire/tnct"/
w D gi
sA,dl~r I A <j~t?t? ✓ !i ~ i5 D
en
<NAME! D
attest that the proper fleld sampling Sampler Name (Print): I • i Q D en C'! ..,
rocedurea were used during the collecllon a. -; D/1 tlt/J T/J-rr "' ::I ~
f these samples. ' C: C, -D D -e o e ....
Method ~ B ~ ~ eoi
Matrix Sampling ....
( ~ Preserved m { '; £ .,.
• Field GTEL G) G)
' C: i i j j I Sample Lab# "jg t; I C: w J~ C,
ID (Lab use only) ~ ~ (!l ::, a: "C C cw ~ 0 fa ..J a: ::, 0~ w §§-g,-g, 5 0 ~ w ~~ < :::E :: -..J IE o g 5 (/) < (/) :c :c O!!!.C I= DJDJ:C::I:
,.,,.,_
-( TAT Special Handling SPECIAL DETECTION LIMITS
0 rlorlly (2◄ hr) [l GTEL Contact _________ _
:: xpedlled (◄8 hr) □--ciu~;/Contract I ' ••• ---· ,. .,
7 Buslnesa Daya O Conllrmallon I ___ ) ______ _
01her f fatfdnc{ • PO 11 ____________ SPECIAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
Juslness Da I /Jf.rd, /l-tttlc. r~J<-To~ /3,:c./t ~tJ-t_
:.!LUE □ CLP □
CUSTODY
RECORD
QA I QC L!;VEL • 6 T / ( ,,1 /~ U/t?" .(
D_ate Time
'I Jlr/rz 13 :~q
Date Time
Relinquished by: Date Time
/ f?rY9-?I if'>_' I
J -□
~ □ :c ! D D ·□ 0 □ D gJ £ g In lij" "C D .... ·u D + .:!:. ~ D ~ -~ fil en :c c5 D DJ D D z z D >, D D ~ ~ D D :!I ·! i C: 0
D D 0 ~ ~ "C ~ ~ ~ ~-i D □ DJ ·u ~ (.) ~ □ a. 0 i a. ~ ~ en □
ii ~ ·E □ r--::E ~ D D ;: fu m D 0 ~ ~ D 0 fu fu ~ D D 0 ·c:
D ~ I D a. ..... D m ..J ..J "' ' "' D "2 aci ~ D D D a. a. □ I j ; ..... ~ ~ ::IE ~ ~ ~ ~ fi! 0 a: ~ § ~ -X :!E :E K1 .!:! co ~ == ~ DJ fu fu fu fu fu < ~ ~ "C Iii
m fu 111 ei ~ @ .lb lb ~ (.) !l 0
REMARKS,
Cd,< -f-,,..,.,_a/
Ir/I .sa.111,tJ/e.$ Cl/,rntlt.,,.,.e( 'fHgr'J
Lab Use Only Lot II -oc.... t~
Work Order H
Received by:
Received by:
Ra=»~
waZ ?..3~~7-ldJ)Z.3
J)

~
5·

.c

C:

ii
i
"

::
r

(D

C.

CT

-:
-
;

,_
_

J)

(D

0
(D
<
(D
C.

Ul

r C m □
0
r "t
i
□
J)

:E

(D

0
0
..
.

(D

"
:.
:
·
o

~
0.

CT

<D

'<

..
.

••

:I
I
,

□
□□
□

r Pl

CT

C
en

(D

0
::
,

'<

Ii

=I
I
:

ff
!

ii
l

co

(D
b
0
!!
l
.

er

?.

..

..

,\

BT
E
X
/
6
0
2

D
80
2
0

D
wi
t
h

MT
B
E

D
·-
.

BT
E
X
/
G
a
s

Hy
d
r
o
c
a
r
b
o
n
s

PI
D
/
F
I
D

D
wi
t
h

MT
B
E

D
Hy
d
r
o
c
a
r
b
o
n
s

GC
/
F
I
D

Ga
s

D
Di
e
s
e
l

D
Sc
r
e
e
n

D
Hy
d
r
o
c
a
r
b
o
n

Pr
o
f
i
l
e

(S
I
M
D
I
S
)

D
:t
.
o

~$
;

:t
,
,

::
E

~6

r-
-
1
1

Oi
l

an
d

Gr
e
a
s
e

41
3
.
1

□
41
3
.
2

□
SM

50
3

□
~
~
t.

TP
H
/
I
R

41
8
.
1

□
SM

50
3

□
(i
i

Cl
)

J:
J

•
•
'
·;

•
ED
B

by

50
4

□
DB
C
P

by

50
4

□
::
0

~
~~
+
-
4
-
-
+
-
,
.
~

..

~+
-
4
-
-
-
-
l
-
-
"
-
+
-
-
-
l
-
~
.
4
-
-
_
:
_
-
-
-
-
=
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
W
-
•
~
~
~

l>

~-
•
.~
-
-
~
.

_
.
-:

EP
A

50
3
.
1

DE
P
A

50
2
.
2

□
~
~
~
~
~:
x
:
i

en

_.

:·

/·

EP
A

60
1

□
EP
A

80
1
0

□
lJ
!
I

~
~
••

..

•
f·

';
"
;
·

EP
A

60
2

D
EP
A

80
2
0

D
~
..

0
~~
-
-
-
4
-
'

--
1
-
·

--
-
l
-
-
+
-
-
t
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
l
l
l
l
;
;
:
r
a
i
,

;!
!

• .
._
.

••

EP
A

60
8

D
80
8
0

D
PC
B

on
l
y

D
!!
I
E

'-
'

EP
A

62
4
/
P
P
L

D
82
4
0
/
T
A
L

D
NB
S

( +
15
)

D
.
..

EP
A

62
5
/
P
P
L

D
82
7
0
/
T
A
L

D
NB
~

(
+2
5
)

D
~:
.

EP
A

61
0

D
83
1
0

D
-.
·:

•
EP

TO
X

Me
t
a
l
s

D
Pe
s
t
i
c
i
d
e
s

D
He
r
b
i
c
i
d
e
s

D
-~

•
TC
L
P

Me
t
a
l
s

D
VO
A

□
Se
m
i
-
V
O
A

D
Pe
s
t

□
He
r
b

□
:
EP
A

Me
t
a
l
s

-
Pr
i
o
r
i
t
y

Po
l
l
u
t
a
n
t

D
TA
L

D
RC
R
A

□
·;

:~

CA
M

Me
t
a
l
s

me

D
ST
L
C

D
..

•.

Le
a
d

23
9
.
2

□
20
0
.
7

□
74
2
0

□
74
2
1

□
60
1
0

D
•
Or
g
a
n
i
c

Le
a
d

D
Co
r
r
o
s
i
v
i
t
y

D
Fl
a
s
h

Po
i
n
t

D
Re
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

D
·O

,
I
-
Client Number: 043107118
Project ID: 55 Redwood Rd.
Salt Lake City, UT
Work Order Number: C2-08-534
Table 1
ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Water
by Infrared Spectrometry
EPA Method 418.11 (SM 5520 FC2)
1. Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes, EPA 600/4-79-202, Revised March 1983, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency.
2. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 17th ed., 1898, American Public Health Associ-
ation.
GTEL Sample Number
Client Identification
Date Sampled
Date Prepared
Date Analyzed
Analyte
Total petroleum hydrocarbons
Detection Limit Multiplier
Note: Custody seal intact.
GTEL Concord, CA
C208534.DOC
01
VOWfR-3
08/19/92
08/27/92
08/31/92
Detection
Limit, mg/L Concentration, mg/L
1 49
1
Page 2 of 2 ■~.!~,~
-LABORATORIES, INC.
-
Client Number: 043107118
Project ID: 55 Redwood Rd.
Salt Lake City, UT
Work Order Number: C2-08-537
Table 1
ANALYTICAL RES UL TS
Aromatic Volatile Organics and
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Gasoline in Soil
EPA Methods 5030, 8020, and Modified 8015a
GTEL Sample Number 01
Client Identification GDSOIL-1
Date Sampled 08/19/92
Date Extracted 09/01/92
Date Analyzed 09/01/92
Detection
Analyte Limit, mg/Kg Concentration, mg/Kg
Benzene 0.005 0.025
Toluene 0.005 0.049
Ethyl benzene 0.005 0.07
Xylene, total 0.015 0.23
BTEX, total --0.37
Gasoline 1 47
Diesel 0.200 390
Naphthalene 0.020 0.63
Detection Limit Multiplier 1
Percent solids 84
a. Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, SW-846, Third Edition, Revision 0, US EPA November 1986. Modification for TPH as
gasoline as per California State Water Resources Control Board LUFT Manual protocols, May 1988 revision. Results reported
on a wet weight basis.
Note: Custody seal intact.
GTEL Concord, CA
C208537.DOC
Page 2 of 2
-~R!~N~
..., LABORATORIES. INC.
GTEL Sample Number
Client Identification
Date Sampled
Date Analyzed
-
Client Number:
Project ID:
Work Order Number:
Table 1
ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Purgeable Halocarbons in Water
EPA Method 501a
01*
VOWTR-2
08/19/92
08/31/92
Detection
043107118
55 Redwood Rd.
Salt Lake City, UT
C2-08-536
Analyte Limit, ug/L Concentration, ug/L
Chloromethane 0.5
Bromomethane 0.5
Vinyl chloride 1
Chloroethane 0.5
Methylene chloride 0.5
1, 1-Dichloroethene 0.2
1, 1-Dichloroethane 0.5
1,2-Dichloroethene 0.5
Chloroform 0.5
1,2-Dichloroethane 0.5
1, 1, 1-Trichloroethane 0.5
Carbon tetrach:uride 0.5
Bromodichloromethane 0.5
1,2-Dichloropropane 0.5
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 0.5
Trichloroethene 0.5
Dichlorodifluoromethane 0.5
Dibromochloromethane 0.5
1, 1,2-Trichloroethane 0.5
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 0.5
2-Chloroethylvinyl ether 1
Bromoform 0.5
Tetrachloroethene 0.5
1, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 0.5
Chlorobenzene 0.5
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 0.5
1,3-Dichlorobenzene 0.5
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 0.5
Trichlorofluoromethane 0.5
Detection Limit Multiplier
a. Federal Register, Vol. 49, October 26, 1984.
* Detection limit raised due to high level of gasoline.
Note: Custody seal intact.
GTEL Concord, CA
C208536. DOC
<5
<5
<10
<5
<5
<2
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<10
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
10
Page 2 of 2 -~.!~,!
-LABORATORIES, INC.
Client Number: 043107118
Project ID: 55 Redwood Rd.
Salt Lake City, UT
Work Order Number: C2-08-535
Table 1
ANALYTICAL RES UL TS
Aromatic Volatile Organics and
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Gasoline in Water
EPA Methods 5030, 8020, and Modified 8015a
GTEL Sample Number 01 02 03
Client Identification GlWTR-1 AFWTR-1 VOWfR-1
Date Sampled 08/19/92 08/19/92 08/19/92
Date Analyzed 08/26/92 08/26/92 08/26/92
Detection
Analyte Limit, ug/L Concentration, ug/L
Benzene 0.3 100 81 110
Toluene 0.3 120 37 4
Ethyl benzene 0.3 59 8 50
Xylene, total 0.5 720 850 41
BTEX, total --1000 980 210
Gasoline 10 3500 3500 1400
Diesel 200 22000 1700 1300
Naphthalene 20 590 370 460
Detection Limit Multiplier 1 1 1
a. Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, SW-846, Third Edition, Revision O, US EPA November 1986. Modification for TPH as
gasoline as per California State Water Resources Control Board LUFT Manual protocols, May 1988 revision.
Note: Custody seal intact.
GTEL Concord, CA
C208535.DOC
Page 2 of 2 -~.!~ .. ~
-LABORATORIES, INC.
A
AMERICAN
WEST
ANALYTICAL
LABORATORIES
463 West 3600 South
Salt Lake City, Utah
84115
[phone]
Fax [phone]
ORGANIC ANALYSIS REPORT
Client: Groundwater Technologies
Date Sampled: August 19, 1992
Date Received: August 19, 1992
Set Description: One Water Sample
Set Identification #: 11278
Contact: Eileen Brennan
Received By: Jennifer Habel
Analysis Requested:
Ethylene Glycol
Propylene Glycol
Lab Sample ID. Number:
11278-Method Blank
Analytical Results
Units = µg/ml (ppm)
Compound:
Ethylene Glycol
Propylene Glycol
Method Ref. Number:
Direct Injection GC/FID
(Extraction)
Field Sample ID. Numoer:
Method Blank
Detection
Limit:
SO.
SO.
Date Analyzed:
August 31, 1992
Amount
Detected:
<50.
<50.
<Value= None detected above the s·pe.cified method detection limit, or a value that reflects a reasonable limit due
to interferences.
T Trace. Detectable amount is lower than the practical quantitation limit for this compound.
Released by: ~ (~
Laboratrysupeisor
Report Date 9/8/92 1 of 1
TIIIS REPORT IS PROVIDED FOR nm EXU.USIVE USE OF TIIE ADDIUlSSEll. PRIVILEGES OF SUBSl!QUEt-.T USE OF Till! NAMI! OF rn1s COMPANY OR ANY
MEMBER OF ITS STAFF, OR REPRODUCTION OF nns REPORT IN CONNECTION WITT( TIii! ADVllRTISEMENT. PROMOTION OR SALi! OF ANY PRODUCT OR
PROCESS OR IN CONNECTION WITI-I nm RE-PUBLICATION OFTIIIS RllPORT FOR ANY PURPOSE TIIAN FOR THI! ADDRESSEE WILL BB GRANTED ONLY ON
,.....,,r"TTI ._ l""T' ~••.-,.,..,.na "'"" • ,,,..,..nr,,r,. .,.,..,, ri.,,.. .. ...,...,..,.,nn ....,.._, ro,u,,_..,,... , • .,...., -r■•ro ...,.,,,,.. .,r..,,,...... ..... • • "'"'"° ,,..,..,.. ..... ...,.,_........,,....,.., • ........ _.., • ... • • ••60 •• ••• ..-.-.-.--· •-• • --
A
AMERICAN
WEST
ANALYTICAL
LABORATORIES
463 West 3600 South
Salt Lake City, Utah
84115
[phone]
Fax [phone]
ORGANIC ANALYSIS REPORT
Client: Groundwater Technologies
Date Sampled: August 19, 1992
Date Received: August 19, 1992
Set Description: One Water Sample
Set Identification#: 11278
Contact: Eileen Brennan
Received By: Jennifer Habel
Analysis Requested:
Ethylene Glycol
Propylene Glycol
Lab Sample ID. Number:
11278-01
Analytical Results
Units= µg/ml (ppm)
Compound:
Ethylene Glycol
Propylene Glycol
Method Ref. Number:
Direct Injection GC/FID
(Extraction)
Field Sample ID. Number:
AFWTA-2
Detection
Limit:
50.
50.
Date Analyzed:
August 31, 1992
Amount
Detected:
<50.
<50.
<Value= None detected above the specified method detection limit, or a value that reflects a reasonable limit due
to interferences.
T Trace. Detectable amount is lower than the practical quantitation limit for this compound.
Released by: ~ ~ 1.aborat supeisor
Report Date 9/8/92 l of l
nus REPORT IS PROVIDED FOR TH6 EXU.USIVE USE OF THE ADDRf:.SSEE. PRIVILEGES 01' SUBSEQUE1'T US!! OP nm. NAM!! OP 11!1S COMPANY OR ANY
MEMBER OP ITS STAFF. OR REPRODUCTION OP 1111S REPORT IN CONNECTION WITH TIIB ADVllRTISEMENT, PROMOTION OR SALi! OP ANY PRODUCT OR
PROCESS OR IN CONNECTION Wm-I TIii! RE-PUBLICATION OP TIIIS RllPORT FOR ANY PURPOSE TIIAN FOR TH6 ADDRESSEE WILL BB GRANTED ONLY ON
CONTP ACT nnc COMPANY ACCFP:[S NO RFSPQNSIBII O:Y EXCEPT POR ,,m DIJU PERroRMANCE OP l~SPECTION AND/OR ANALYSIS IN GOOD PAITH AXD
N
~
w
rri .a
0....
,_, ..,...
;:::j
Q
l-o w
r.D
I
(
~ ·~ ~l 'f o.ff ·
CTC-Geotek Soil Classification & Identification !:i~-
Test Hole# Test Hole# Test Hole# T&St Hole#
~ -
Sample# AF-/ S~pie#
Vo-
Sampte #
&,-
Sample#
Sample Deptti Sample Depth Sampte Depth Sample Depth
~ --
Description _ . . _ ~ _ I D~oription Oaeription
~ I ~'!,. 'ti:! !!!~ "!,,...,-P::+ vw -, --r ... --~= ., • ,. n• .. " rr•~· !-' I! 7xf" r-:'? '~ : 1----------1 u • _ _ -L • .,,, • :t A 1 t
-i
G:J ,:-, r-(
LD
CD
,:1-
.....,
,:;:,
a:,
c-~
-<
-< -<
,,
r:n ~-,.._
-<
"(Tl
G:l
Q Gravel
% Sand
Fines
l-3:
q;,
use Classiffcation
G L,.
Moisture Content _.,
Other Comments
Gravel
% Sand
Fines
USC Classification
t:2
qS.4 ~,,
SP
Molstura Content
Other Comments
i. ~ ]Dq:;;, B1.0 l1¼ ptw!; 2<32; 4, i c/0
() Gravel
% Sand
Fines
J J t--
q8/3
USC Classification
GL-
Moisture Content
Other Comments
¾ ~ ~::; g~t~
Gravel
% Sand
Fines
use Classification
Moisture Content
Other Comm ants
□□~ GROUNDWATER □□□ TECHNOLOGY
June 11, 1992
043106533.030823
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
The Shidler Group
7400 Baymeadows Way
Suite #305
Jacksonville, FL 32256
Subject:
Dear Ms. Chitty:
May 1992 Monthly Project Update
Utah Facility 4001342
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
Summary of May 1992 Monitoring Results
-
Groundwater Technology, Inc.
275 East South Temple, Suite 321, Salt Lake City, UT 84lil
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]
UTAH DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
JUN 2 6 1992 "ia1
DIV. OF ENVIRONMENTAL
RESPONSE AND REMEDIATION
The current five-well product recovery system is not operating. Multiple efforts to restart the system
following the late April in-place tank closure have been unsuccessful. The system will be fully serviced
and tested again in June in an effort to restart recovery operations. The maximum product thickness
documented during the May 1992 period was 6.21 feet in monitor well W-9 on May 19, 1992.
Background of Site
This letter presents an update on activities at your site in Salt Lake City, Utah. A product recovery
system was installed in late February/early March 1991 by Westech Fuel. Applied Geotechnology began
product recovery operations in mid-March 1991. Groundwater Technology took over biweekly wel! and
system monitoring on October 15, 1991. This is the eighth project update letter since Groundwater
Technology took over site monitoring operations.
65330592.MON
Offices throughout the U.S., Canada and Overseas
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
The Shidler Group
June 11, 1992
Method of Site Monitoring
Two biweekly site monitoring visits were made during this eighth period: May 5 and 19, 1992. During
each visit a total of thirty-two site monitoring and recovery wells were gauged using an ORS Electronic
Interface Probe (EIP) to determine depth to product, and depth to groundwater. Of the thirty-two wells
gauged during the last May 1992 monitoring visit, twenty wells contained measurable product thickness.
This compares to eighteen wells containing measurable product thickness during the last April 1992 visit.
Of the twenty wells that did contain measurable product thickness, sixteen wells had increased and, four
wells had decreased in product thickness since the April 24, 1992 visit. Water level and product
thickness measurements collected during the two May 1992 gauging visits are shown on the attached
well monitoring forms.
After gauging the monitoring wells and inspection of the recovery system during the April 1992 biweekly
visits, the EIP was used to measure the thickness of product and water in the recovery tank. The
recovery tank dimensions are assumed to be six feet in diameter by fourteen feet long, with a 3,000
gallon liquid capacity. Water was removed from the tank in May 1992 by National General and
approximately 1900 gallons of product recovered during the in-place tank closure was placed in the
tank.
On May 19, 1992 recovery tank gauging measured 8.64 inches of water, and 20.16 inches of product.
These measurements equate to 201 .40 gallons of water, and 926.60 gallons of product, totaling 1,128
gallons of liquid contained within the recovery tank. Table 1 documents the tank gauging data since
Groundwater Technology took over system monitoring in October 1991.
Well Maintenance
On May 5, 1992 monitor wells W-10, W-13, W-15, W-18, W-19, W-20, W-21, and W-22 had their PVC
casing trimmed down to facilitate the installation of locking gripper caps. Top-of-casing values on the
well monitoring forms have been adjusted to reflect the amount of casing removed.
65330592.MON 2
~7G~I GROUNDWATER
=~~ TECHNOLOGY
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
The Shidler Group
June 11, 1992
TABLE 1
TANK SIZE:
TANK DATA
72" X 168"
3000 GALLONS
STAND PIPE: 26"
DEPTH TO BOTTOM OF TANK
FROM TOP OF STAND PIPE: 8.45' MEASURED WITH EIP = 101.4"
8.50' MEASURED WITH STICK
DATE TANK
MEASURE
WITH
STICK
INCHES
10/15/91 34.00
10/29/91 39.00
11/19/91 41.50
12/4/91 41.75
12/17/91 42.50
1/2/92 43.75
1/14/92 44.00
1/28/92 44.50
2/11/92 44.625
2/25/92 44.50
3/10/92 44.625
3/24/92 46.00
4/6/92 46.25
4/21/92 48.00
5/5/92 29.00
5/19/92 29.25
65330592.MON
EIP EIP TOTAL
DEPTH DEPTH GALLONS
TO TO OF FLUID
PRODUCT WATER IN TANK
INCHES INCHES
NA NA 1376.0
71.90 87.00 1638.0
60.00 87.30 1767.0
60.24 87.12 1780.0
59.28 86.76 1819.0
58.08 84.96 1882.5
57.60 84.72 1895.0
57.24 84.12 1921.0
57.12 84.24 1927.5
57.00 83.94 1921.0
57.24 83.84 1927.5
56.16 82.84 1997.00
55.56 83.04 2009.25
55.00 82.22 2097.0
72.60 91.68 1115.00
72.60 92.76 1128.00
EIP = ELECTRONIC INTERFACE PROBE
NA = NOT APPLICABLE
3
GALLONS
OF
WATER
IN TANK
NA
420.80
408.20
415.76
430.88
508.92
519.24
545.60
540.20
553.70
553.70
605.60
594.56
632.05
239.20
201.40
GALLONS CHANGE
OF IN
PRODUCT PRODUCT
RECOVERED VOLUME
GALLONS
NA NA
1217.20 NA
1358.80 141.60
1364.24 5.44
1388.12 23.88
1373.58 -14.54
1375.76 2.18
1375.40 -0.36
1387.30 11.90
1367.30 -20.00
1373.80 6.5
1391.40 18.1
1414.69 23.29
1464.95 50.26
875.80 NA
926.60 50.80
-• :~! GROUNDWATER
=-~~ TECHNOLOGY
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
The Shidler Group
June11,1992
We are continuing to monitor groundwater elevations and, product thickness on a biweekly basis. The
most recent monitoring visit was made on June 4, 1992.
If you have any questions or comments, please call our office at [phone].
Sincerely,
Groundwater Technology, Inc.
DavidT9~ ~
Project Geologist
For:
David W. Daniels
District Manager
Attachments
Eileen Brennan
Geologist
Salt Lake Territory Manager
c: Mr. Garth Miner, Salt Lake County Bureau of Water Quality and Hazardous Waste
Ms. Robin Jenkins, Utah Division of Environmental Response and Remediation
65330592.MON 4
·~ 7·~ I~ GROUNDWATER
:_]!1 1] TECHNOLOGY
Wal
GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATA
FACILl1Y: SHIDLER/ REDWOOD
LOCATION: SALT LAKE Cl1Y, UTAH
DATE: 05-May-92
FIELD PERSONNEL: BRENT COX
WELL ADJ.
METHOD: ORS EIP
EQUIPMENT#: 1176
PROJECT: 1227.04
ID DEPTH ETC 01W DTP PT DTW WTE ETP COMMENTS
W-1 NA 4222.06 14.24
W-2 NA 4222.79 8.27
W-3 NA 4222.57 9.55
W-4 NA 4222.97 11.34
W-5 NA 4222.73 9.31
W-6 NA 4222.09 8.57
W-7 NA 4222.33 14.65
W-8 NA 4222.51 12.43
W-9 NA 4221.69 14.90
W-10 NA 4221.78 7.35
W-11 NA 4222.02 7.90
W-12 NA 4222.19 0.00
W-13 NA 4222.65 8.17
W-14 NA 4221.99 0.00
W-15 NA 4221.62 7.19
W-16 NA 4221.55 7.67
W-17 NA 4221.57 8.02
W-18 NA 4221.84 9.00
W-19 NA 4222.35 14.45
W-20 NA 4222.07 10.11
W-21 NA 4221.72 14.18
W-22 NA 4222.69 10.56
W-23 NA 4222.40 10.07
W-24 NA 4222.24 8.61
W-25 NA 4222.65 NA
W-26 NA 4223.81 11.46
W-27 NA 4222.13 10.47
W-28 NA 4220.79 8.77
SB-2 NA NA NA
RW-A NA NA 8.52
RW-B NA NA 7.63
RW-C NA NA 7.00
RW-D NA NA 9.25
RW-E NA NA 9.03
ETC= ELEVATION TOP OF CASING
DTW = DEPTH TO WATER
DTP = DEPTH TO PETROLEUM
HYDROCARBONS
PT= MEASURED PETROLEUM
THICKNESS
9.17 5.07 9.68 4212.38 4212.89
8.09 0.18 8.11 4214.68 4214.70
7.67 1.88 7.86 4214.71 4214.90
7.80 3.54 8.15 4214.82 4215.17
8.05 1.26 8.18 4214.55 4214.68
8.09 0.48 8.14 4213.95 4214.00
8.90 5.75 9.48 4212.86 4213.43
9.95 2.48 10.20 4212.31 4212.56
8.80 6.10 9.41 4212.28 4212.89
NA 0.00 7.35 4214.43 NA
7.72 0.18 7.74 4214.28 4214.30
NA 0.00 0.00 NA NA
NA 0.00 8.17 4214.48 NA
NA 0.00 0.00 NA NA
NA 0.00 7.19 4214.43 NA
7.44 0.23 7.46 4214.09 4214.11
NA 0.00 8.02 4213.55 NA
8.71 0.29 8.74 4213.10 4213.13
9.38 5.07 9.89 4212.46 4212.97
10.01 0.10 10.02 4212.05 4212.06
9.05 5.13 9.56 4212.16 4212.67
NA 0.00 10.56 4212.13 NA
NA 0.00 10.07 4212.33 NA
NA 0.00 8.61 4213.63 NA
NA 0.00 0.00 NA NA
NA 0.00 11.46 4212.35 NA
NA 0.00 10.47 4211 .66 NA
NA 0.00 8.77 4212.02 NA
NA 0.00 0.00 NA NA
8.47 0.05 8.48 NA NA
7.51 0.12 7.52 NA NA
NA 0.00 7.00 NA NA
9.07 0.18 9.09 NA NA
8.97 0.06 8.98 NA NA
ADJ.DTW = ADJUSTED DEPTH TO WATER
WTE = WATERTABLE ELEVATION
ETP = ELEVATION TOP OF PETROLEUM
NA= NOT AVAILABLE
Black topped over
Black topped over
NOT MEASURED
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
□-□~I GROUNDWATER :'l:IJ TECHNOLOGY
WELL
-
GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATA
FACILITY: SHIDLER/ REDWOOD
LOCATION: SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
DATE: 19-May-92
FIELD PERSONNEL: DAVID TAFF
WELL ADJ.
METHOD: ORS EIP
EQUIPMENT#: 1176
PROJECT: 6533.030842
ID DEPTH ETC DTW DTP PT DTW WTE ETP COMMENTS
W-1 NA 4222.06 14.23
W-2 NA 4222.79 8.24
W-3 NA 4222.57 9.59
W-4 NA 4222.97 11.38
W-5 NA 4222.73 9.31
W-6 NA 4222.09 8.92
W-7 NA 4222.33 14.80
W-8 NA 4222.51 12.38
W-9 NA 4221.69 14.97
W-10 NA 4221.64 7.18
W-11 NA 4222.02 7.85
W-12 NA 4222.19 0.00
W-13 NA 4222.40 8.01
W-14 NA 4221.99 0.00
W-15 NA 4221.51 7.10
W-16 NA 4221.55 7.65
W-17 NA 4221.57 8.03
W-18 NA 4221.70 8.87
W-19 NA 4222.19 14.36
W-20 NA 4221.94 10.05
W-21 NA 4221.58 14.09
W-22 NA 4222.50 10.55
W-23 NA 4222.40 10.04
W-24 NA 4222.24 8.53
W-25 NA 4222.65 10.78
W-26 NA 4223.81 11.45
W-27 NA 4222.13 10.43
W-28 NA 4220.79 8.65
SB-2 NA NA 10.73
RW-A NA NA 8.49
RW-B NA NA 7.63
RW-C NA NA 7.01
RW-D NA NA 9.42
RW-E NA NA 9.07
ETC= ELEVATION TOP OF CASING
DTW = DEPTH TO WATER
DTP = DEPTH TO PETROLEUM
HYDROCARBONS
PT= MEASURED PETROLEUM
THICKNESS
9.14 5.09 9.65 4212.41 4212.92
8.00 0.24 8.02 4214.77 4214.79
7.62 1.97 7.82 4214.75 4214.95
7.73 3.65 8.10 4214.88 4215.24
7.95 1.36 8.09 4214.64 4214.78
8.04 0.88 8.13 4213.96 4214.05
8.86 5.94 9.45 4212.88 4213.47
9.95 2.43 10.19 4212.32 4212.56
8.76 6.21 9.38 4212.31 4212.93
NA 0.00 7.18 4214.46 NA
7.63 0.22 7.65 4214.37 4214.39
NA 0.00 0.00 NA NA Black topped over
NA 0.00 8.01 4214.39 NA
NA 0.00 0.00 NA NA Black topped over
NA 0.00 7.10 4214.41 NA
7.45 0.20 7.47 4214.08 4214.10
NA 0.00 8.03 4213.54 NA
8.59 0.28 8.62 4213.08 4213.11
8.22 6.14 8.83 4213.36 4213.97
9.87 0.18 9.89 4212.05 4212.07
8.90 5.19 9.42 4212.16 4212.68
NA 0.00 10.55 4211.95 NA
NA 0.00 10.04 4212.36 NA
NA 0.00 8.53 4213.71 NA
NA 0.00 10.78 4211.87 NA Sodded over. Under 8" of dirt & grass.
NA 0.00 11.45 4212.36 NA
NA 0.00 10.43 4211.70 NA
NA 0.00 8.65 4212.14 NA
7.97 2.76 8.25 NA NA
8.43 0.06 8.44 NA NA
7.52 0.11 7.53 NA NA
NA 0.00 7.01 NA NA
9.03 0.39 9.07 NA NA
8.95 0.12 8.96 NA NA
ADJ.DTW = ADJUSTED DEPTH TO WATER
WTE = WATERTABLE ELEVATION
ETP = ELEVATION TOP OF PETROLEUM
NA= NOT AVAILABLE
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
* NOTE: New ETC numbers for W-10,W-13,W-15,W-18,W-19,W-20,W-21,W-22
~_]i~! GROUNDWATER --,~,~,,
_ -~~~ TECHNOLOGY
UNDERGROUND~TORAGE TANK CLOSURE NOTICE (Re~ed 01/15/92)
Facility ID#_~;....:,.__,,_".._,,_· __
State Use Onlv
Date Processed S-/ J. -'1 ::z__ bv -;K/.6
Date Mailed to LHD
Samples in LUST File # ~CLT C 'i(B rr-r~:
Samples to LUST Review
SITE INFORMATION
Tank Owner_N_AT_I_O_N_AL_W_A_RE_H_O_US_E_I _NV_E_S_TM_E_N_T _________ Phone # ( 904 } 448 _ 6? 58
[ ] dba (individual doing business as) [ ] sole proprietorship ] partnership [X] corporation
Address 7400 BAY MEADO\'JS HAY City JACKSONVILLE State FL Zip_3_2_2_56 __ _
Site Name ABF TERNUBAK/F0RMER PIE TERMINAL ______ ___;_ ____________________________ _
Address 55 SOUTH REDWOOD ROAD City SALT LAKE CITY • State UT Zip 841 04
Contact person DALE BUSER Phone#( 414)241-3133
TANKS CLOSED
12 13 14 UTAH DEF1\Ri·f,1trff OF
Tank# ENVIP.ClW>'lf'~:T,\t. OUJl,I ITY
Age of tank 13 yr. 13 yr. 13 yr.
12 K 12 K 12 K /\ 1-1.,· ') 7 1992 n! Capacity k .. ,_
Subs. stored* DIESEL DIESEL DIESEL DIV Of ~N\J!RO~,iivi\:rJTAl
Date last used 1980 1980 1980 RESPO~F''" !'.•1r~ o;7 ~:s..~!.AJION
.. Indicate the specific substance stored in the tanks closed (regular, unleaded, diesel, waste oil, etc.)
TANK HANDLER/REMOVER Name -'-"GR'-'-'E"""G-'----"'-D-=-. -'I-'-'(E=-=-H=L _____________ C~r.. : TH-0184
Address __ 38_5_6_IJ_. _5_4 _oo_s_. ________ City SALT LAKE CITY State UT Zip_8_4_1_18 __ _
SOIUGROUNDWATER SAMPLER Name __ N-'--/A ______________ Cert.# _____ _
• Address _________________ City ________ State __ Zip ____ _
TYPE OF CLOSURE [ X] Permanent [ ] Temporary [ ] Change-In-Service
Permanent or Change-in-Service Date Closed -__--:,r • )t -ti)... [ ) Removed t4'.1n-place
~] Fuel was emptied [X] Sludge was removed [ X] Tank was cleaned.
Tank was: [ ] Purged ) lnerted. Method Used: ___________________ _
Location of Closure Records --'-N-"--A--'--T_IO_N_A_L_GE_N_E_R_A_L _B_U_I_L_DE_R_S_38_5_6_W_. _5_4_0_0_S _. _S_L_C..:..., _U_T_8_4_1_1_8 ___ _
For in-place closure: tanks filled with __ P_E_A_G_RA_V_E_L _____________________ _
Substance to be stored for Change-In-Service ______________________ _
Temporary
Date of Closure __________ [ ] Fuel was emptied.
Residue depth remaining in tank ____ or, % by weight of total capacity of UST: ___ _
[ ) Corrosion protection equipment is operating. [ ] Release detection equipment is operating.
3 months: [ ] Vent lines open Cap/Secure: [ ] lines ) pumps [ ] manways
12 months: [ ] Permanently closed [ ] New/Upgraded [ ] Extension request
□□~ GROUNDWATER □□□ TECHNOLOGY
May 14, 1992
043106533.030823
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
The Shidler Group
7400 Baymeadows Way
Suite #305
Jacksonville, FL 32256
Subject:
Dear Ms. Chitty:
April 1992 Monthly Project Update
Utah Facility 4001342
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
Summary of April 1992 Monitoring Results
Groundwater Technology, Inc.
275 E. South Temple, Suite 321, Salt Lake City, UT 84ill
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]
UTAH t;.:.:-1?.~i~l'f,,.:NT OF
ENVIRC1NMFNTAL QUALITY
[!IV. or d{/iRC}~t;;OHAL
RESPON~•t: All\": r.,c:;,;. ·:ulf\T!DN
The current five-well product recovery system recorded a 88 gallon increase in total fluid volume in the
recovery tank during the period from March 24, 1992 through April 21, 1992. The maximum product
thickness documented during the April 1992 period was 5.15 feet in monitor well W-1 on April 6, 1992.
Background of Site
This letter presents an update on activities at your site in Salt Lake City, Utah. A product recovery
system was installed in late February/early March 1991 by Westech Fuel. Applied Geotechnology began
product recovery operations in mid-March 1991. Groundwater Technology took over biweekly well and
system monitoring on October 15, 1991. This is the seventh project update letter since Groundwater
Technology took over site monitoring operations.
Method of Site Monitoring
Two biweekly site monitoring visits were made during this seventh period: April 6 and 21, 1992. During
each visit a total of thirty-two site monitoring and recovery wells were gauged using an ORS Electronic
Interface Probe (EIP) to determine depth to product, and depth to groundwater. In addition to the two
biweekly monitoring visits, a Groundwater Technology technician was on site April 6 and 7, 1992
supervising the cleaning and development of the five recovery wells. Of the thirty-two wells gauged
during the last April 1992 monitoring visit, eighteen wells contained measurable product thickness. This
65330492.MON 1
Offices throughout the U.S., Canada and Overseas
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
National Warehouse Investment Company
May 14, 1992
compares to nineteen wells containing measurable product thickness during the last March 1992 visit.
Of the eighteen wells that did contain measurable product thickness, eleven wells had increased, six
wells had decreased, and one well had no change in product thicknesses since the March 24, 1992 visit.
Water level and product thickness measurements collected during the two April 1992 gauging visits are
shown on the attached well monitoring forms.
After gauging the monitoring wells and inspection of the recovery system during the April 1992 biweekly
visits, the EIP was used to measure the thickness of product and water in the recovery tank. The
recovery tank dimensions are assumed to be six feet in diameter by fourteen feet long, with a 3,000
gallon liquid capacity.
On April 21, 1992 recovery tank gauging measured 19.18 inches of water, and 27.22 inches of product.
These measurements equate to 632.05 gallons of water, and 1,464.95 gallons of product, totaling 2,097
gallons of liquid contained within the recovery tank. Table 1 documents the tank gauging data since
Groundwater Technology took over system monitoring in October 1991.
Recovery Well Maintenance
On April 6 and 7, 1992 a Groundwater Technology technician was on site to supervise the treatment and
cleaning of the five recovery wells. PC Exploration of Woods Cross, Utah was retained by Groundwater
Technology to perform the cleaning and development of the recovery wells.
After disconnecting and pulling the ejector pump out of the recovery well, an 11-inch disk was used to
surge the well 1 o to 15 times. This was done to dislodge particles from the slotted polyvinyl chloride
(PVC) screen. Approximately 40 gallons of water was then bailed from the well and transferred to one of
two 550-gallon tank trailers. Following the bailing of surged well water, 1 O gallons of Chris-Well product
(CHRIS-TOL CLEAN well cleaning product) was mixed at the surface and added to the recovery well.
CHRIS-TOL CLEAN is an organic, non-corrosive acid designed to break down the hydrocarbon "gook
and slime" that has been observed clogging the ejector pump intake ports. Once the cleaning product
was added to the well a two-inch hollow steel rod with holes drilled along the bottom two foot portion
was lowered down the well, hooked to an air compressor and blown against the screen at approximately
100 PSI for approximately five minutes. This procedure was repeated for all five recovery wells and the
cleaning product was left to sit overnight.
On April 7, 1992 a Groundwater Technology technician along with PC Exploration personnel were on site
to complete the cleaning procedure. Recovery wells were first air surged for approximately five minutes.
Then, a submersible pump was lowered into the well and approximately 120 gallons of fluid removed
65330492.MON 2
1□□~1 GRouNowATER
[]Q TECHNOLOGY
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
National Warehouse Investment Company
May 14, 1992
TANK SIZE: 72" X 168"
3000 GALLONS
STAND PIPE: 26"
TABLE 1
TANK DATA
SHIDLER/REDWOOD
043101227.04
DEPTH TO BOTTOM OF TANK
-
FROM TOP OF STAND PIPE: 8.45' MEASURED WITH EIP = 101.4"
8.50' MEASURED WITH STICK
DATE TANK
MEASURE
WITH
STICK
INCHES
10/15/91 34.00
10/29/91 39.00
11/19/91 41.50
12/4/91 41.75
12/17/91 42.50
1/2/92 43.75
1/14/92 44.00
1/28/92 44.50
2/11/92 44.625
2/25/92 44.50
3/10/92 44.625
3/24/92 46.00
4/6/92 46.25
4/21/92 48.00
65330492.MON
EIP EIP TOTAL
DEPTH DEPTH GALLONS
TO TO OF FLUID
PRODUCT WATER IN TANK
INCHES INCHES
NA NA 1376.0
71.90 87.00 1638.0
60.00 87.30 1767.0
60.24 87.12 1780.0
59.28 86.76 1819.0
58.08 84.96 1882.5
57.60 84.72 1895.0
57.24 84.12 1921.0
57.12 84.24 1927.5
57.00 83.94 1921.0
57.24 83.84 1927.5
56.16 82.84 1997.00
55.56 83.04 2009.25
55.00 82.22 2097.0
EIP = ELECTRONIC INTERFACE PROBE
NA = NOT APPLICABLE
3
GALLONS
OF
WATER
IN TANK
NA
420.80
408.20
415.76
430.88
508.92
519.24
545.60
540.20
553.70
553.70
605.60
594.56
632.05
GALLONS CHANGE
OF IN
PRODUCT PRODUCT
RECOVERED VOLUME
GALLONS
NA NA
1217.20 NA
1358.80 141.60
1364.24 5.44
1388.12 23.88
1373.58 -14.54
1375.76 2.18
1375.40 -0.36
1387.30 11.90
1367.30 -20.00
1373.80 6.5
1391.40 18.1
1414.69 23.29
1464.95 50.26
1'7 □~: GROUNDWATER ~-----,□I L.JLJ.l_j TECHNOLOGY
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
National Warehouse Investment Company
May 14, 1992
-
and transferred to the tank trailer. This air surging and development procedure was followed for all
recovery wells. After development of all five recovery wells the ejector pumps were reconnected, placed
back in their respective recovery wells and the recovery system turned back on.
On April 23, 1992, Advanced Petroleum Recycling Inc. of West Valley City, Utah, removed approximately
800 gallons of recovery well development water from the two water tank trailers and disposed of it at
their facility. The tank trailers were then removed from the site by PC Exploration.
We are continuing to monitor groundwater elevations, product thickness, and current recovery system
on a biweekly basis. The most recent monitoring visit was made on May 5, 1992.
If you have any questions or comments, please call our office at [phone].
Sincerely,
o::;c7nc.
David Taff
Project Geologist
For:
David W. Daniels
District Manager
Attachments
Eileen Brennan
Geologist
Salt Lake Territory Manager
c: Mr. Garth Miner, Salt Lake County Bureau of Water Quality and Hazardous Waste
Ms. Robin Jenkins, Utah Division of Environmental Response and Remediation
65330492.MON 4
~ GROUNDWATER ODD TECHNOLOGY
WEL'_
ID
W-1
W-2
W-3
W-4
W-5
W-6
W-7
W-8
W-9
W-10
W-11
W-12
W-13
W-14
W-15
W-16
W-17
W-18
W-1S
W-20
W-21
W-22
W-23
W-24
W-25
W-26
W-27
W-28
SB-2
RW-A
RW-B
RW-C
RW-D
RW-E
-
GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATA
FACILITY: SHIDLER/ REDWOOD
LOCATION: SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
DATE: 06-Apr-92
FIELD PERSONNEL: DAVID TAFF
WELL ADJ.
DEPTH ETC OlW DTP PT DTW
NA 4222.06 14.28 9.13 5.15 9.65
NA 4222.79 8.07 7.92 0.15 7.94
NA 4222.57 9.00 7.61 1.39 7.75
NA 4222.97 11.66 7.76 3.90 8.15
NA 4222.73 10.07 8.15 1.92 8.34
NA 4222.09 8.20 7.95 0.25 7.98
NA 4222.33 13.57 8.95 4.62 9.41
NA 4222.51 12.08 9.96 2.12 10.17
NA 4221.69 14.26 8.85 5.41 9.39
NA 4221.78 7.24 NA 0.00 7.24
NA 4222.02 7.88 7.62 0.26 7.65
NA 4222.19 0.00 NA 0.00 0.00
NA 4222.65 8.01 NA 0.00 8.01
NA 4221.99 0.00 NA 0.00 0.00
NA 4221.62 6.96 NA 0.00 6.96
NA 4221.55 7.52 7.24 0.28 7.27
NA 4221.57 7.89 NA 0.00 7.89
NA 4221.84 8.90 8.59 0.31 8.62
NA 4222.35 14.47 9.33 5.14 9.84
NA 4222.07 10.03 9.98 0.05 9.99
NA 4221.72 14.27 9.01 5.26 9.54
NA 4222.69 10.62 NA 0.00 10.62
NA 4222.40 10.03 NA 0.00 10.03
NA 4222.24 8.59 NA 0.00 8.59
NA 4222.65 10.76 NA 0.00 10.76
NA 4223.81 11.41 NA 0.00 11.41
NA 4222.13 10.44 NA 0.00 10.44
NA 4220.79 8.88 NA 0.00 8.88
NA NA 10.91 7.89 3.02 8.19
NA NA 8.45 8.40 0.05 8.41
NA NA 7.39 7.38 0.01 7.38
NA NA 6.85 NA 0.00 6.85
NA NA 9.13 9.03 0.10 9.04
NA NA 9.00 8.90 0.10 8.91
METHOD: ORS EIP
EQUIPMENT#: 1176
PROJECT: 1227.04
WTE ET?
4212.42 4212.93
4214.86 4214.87
4214.82 4214.96
4214.82 4215.21
4214.39 4214.58
4214.12 4214.14
4212.92 4213.38
4212.34 4212.55
4212.30 4212.84
4214.54 NA
4214.37 4214.40
NA NA
4214.64 NA
NA NA
4214.66 NA
4214.28 4214.31
4213.68 NA
4213.22 4213.25
4212.51 4213.02
4212.09 4212.09
4212.18 4212.71
4212.07 NA
4212.37 NA
4213.65 NA
4211.89 NA
4212.40 NA
4211.69 NA
4211.91 NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
ETC= ELEVATION TOP OF CASING
DTW = DEPTH TO WATER
ADJ.DTW = ADJUSTED DEPTH TO WATER
WTE = WATERTABLE ELEVATION
COMMENTS
DTP = DEPTH TO PETROLEUM
HYDROCARBONS
ETP = ELEVATION TOP OF PETROLEUM
NA= NOT AVAILABLE
PT= MEASURED PETROLEUM
THICKNESS
Black topped over
Black topped over
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
WELL
ID
W-1
W-2
W-3
W-4
W-5
W-6
W-7
W-8
W-9
W-10
W-11
W-12
W-13
W-14
W-15
W-16
W-17
W-18
W-19
W-20
W-21
W-22
W-23
W-24
W-25
W-26
W-27
W-28
SB-2
RW-A
RW-B
RW-C
RW-D
RW-E
GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATA
FACILITY: SHIDLER/ REDWOOD
LOCATION: SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
DATE: 21-Apr-92
FIELD PERSONNEL: BRENT COX
WRL ADJ.
DEPTH ETC OTW DTP PT DlW
NA 4222.06 14.21 9.06 5.15 9.58
NA 4222.79 8.17 NA 0.00 8.17
NA 4222.57 9.63 7.80 1.83 7.98
NA 4222.97 11.42 7.96 3.46 8.31
NA 4222.73 6.85 4.54 2.31 4.77
NA 4222.09 8.35 8.00 0.35 8.04
NA 4222.33 14.17 8.88 5.29 9.41
NA 4222.51 11.89 9.97 1.92 10.16
NA 4221.69 14.40 8.79 5.61 9.35
NA 4221.78 7.38 NA 0.00 7.38
NA 4222.02 7.77 7.72 0.05 7.73
NA 4222.19 0.00 NA 0.00 0.00
NA 4222.65 8.20 NA 0.00 8.20
NA 4221.99 0.00 NA 0.00 0.00
NA 4221.62 7.05 NA 0.00 7.05
NA 4221.55 7.51 7.32 0.19 7.34
NA 4221.57 7.92 NA 0.00 7.92
NA 4221.84 8.86 8.63 0.23 8.65
NA 4222.35 14.50 9.31 5.19 9.83
NA 4222.07 9.97 NA 0.00 9.97
NA 4221.72 14.23 8.97 5.26 9.50
NA 4222.69 10.58 NA 0.00 10.58
NA 4222.40 9.98 NA 0.00 9.98
NA 4222.24 8.55 NA 0.00 8.55
NA 4222.65 10.74 NA 0.00 10.74
NA 4223.81 11.41 NA 0.00 11.41
NA 4222.13 10.42 NA 0.00 10.42
NA 4220.79 8.75 NA 0.00 8.75
NA NA NA NA 0.00 0.00
NA NA 8.38 8.37 0.01 8.37
NA NA 7.49 7.43 0.06 7.44
NA NA 6.89 NA 0.00 6.89
NA NA 9.06 9.02 0.04 9.02
NA NA 8.91 8.90 0.01 8.90
METHOD: ORS EIP
EQUIPMENT#: 1176
PROJECT: 1227.04
WfE ETP
4212.49 4213.00
4214.62 NA
4214.59 4214.77
4214.66 4215.01
4217.96 4218.19
4214.06 4214.09
4212.92 4213.45
4212.35 4212.54
4212.34 4212.90
4214.40 NA
4214.30 4214.30
NA NA
4214.45 NA
NA NA
4214.57 NA
4214.21 4214.23
4213.65 NA
4213.19 4213.21
4212.52 4213.04
4212.10 NA
4212.22 4212.75
4212.11 NA
4212.42 NA
4213.69 NA
4211.91 NA
4212.40 NA
4211.71 NA
4212.04 NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
ETC= ELEVATION TOP OF CASING
DTW = DEPTH TO WATER
ADJ.DTW = ADJUSTED DEPTH TO WATER
WTE = WATERTABLE ELEVATION
COMMENTS
DTP = DEPTH TO PETROLEUM
HYDROCARBONS
ETP = ELEVATION TOP OF PETROLEUM
NA= NOT AVAILABLE
PT= MEASURED PETROLEUM
THICKNESS
Black topped over
Black topped over
NOT MEASURED
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
□□~ GROUNDWATER □□□ TECHNOLOGY
April 15, 1992
043106533
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
The Shidler Group
7400 Baymeadows Way
Suite #305
Jacksonville, FL 32256
Subject:
Dear Ms. Chitty:
March 1992 Monthly Project Update
Utah Facility 4001342
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
Groundwater Technology, Inc.
275 E. South Temple, Suite 321, Salt Lake City, UT 84lli
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]
UTAH DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
APR 1 7 1992 1vp/
DIV. OF ENVIRONMENTAL
RESPONSE AND Q1;\1ED!ATION
Attached is the March 1992 monthly project update for The Shidler Group site in Salt Lake City, Utah.
Should you have any questions or comments, please contact your office at [phone].
Sincerely.
Grounc/;::;gy~
David Taff
Project Geologist
Attachments
Eileen Brennan
Geologist
Salt Lake Territory Manager
c: Mr. Garth Miner, Salt Lake County Bureau of Water Quality and Hazardous Waste
Ms. Robin Jenkins, Utah Division of Environmental Response and Remediation
6533.COV
Offices throughout the U.S., Canada and Overseas
□□~ GROUNDWATER □□□ TECHNOLOGY
April 15, 1992
043106533
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
The Shidler Group
7 400 Baymeadows Way
Suite #305
Jacksonville, FL 32256
Subject:
Dear Ms. Chitty:
March 1992 Monthly Project Update
Utah Facility 4001342
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
Summary of March 1992 Monitoring Results
Groundwater Technology, Inc.
275 E. South Temple, Suite 321, Salt Lake City, UT 84ID
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]
The current five-well product recovery system recorded a 76 gallon increase in total fluid volume in the
recovery tank in the 30 days since the February 25, 1992 monitoring visit. The maximum product
thickness documented during the March 1992 period was 6.11 feet in monitor well W-1 on
March 1 o, 1992.
Background of Site
This letter presents an update on activities at your site in Salt Lake City, Utah. A product recovery
system was installed in late February/early March 1991 by Westech Fuel. Applied Geotechnology began
product recovery operations in mid-March 1991. Groundwater Technology took over biweekly well and
system monitoring on October 15, 1991. This is the sixth project update letter since Groundwater
Technology took over site monitoring operations.
Method of Site Monitoring
Two biweekly site monitoring visits were made during this sixth period: March 1 O and 24, 1992. During
each visit a total of thirty-two site monitoring and recovery wells were gauged using an ORS Electronic
Interface Probe (EIP) to determine depth to product, and depth to groundwater. In addition to the two
biweekly monitoring visits, a Groundwater Technology technician was on site March 18, 19 and 20, 1992
servicing the recovery system. Of the thirty-two wells gauged during the last March 1992 monitoring
65330392.MON
Offices throughout the U.S., Canada and Overseas
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
National Warehouse Investment Company
April 15, 1992
visit, nineteen wells contained measurable product thickness. There were also nineteen wells containing
measurable product thickness during the last February 1992 visit. Of the nineteen wells that did contain
measurable product thickness, seven wells had increased, eleven wells had decreased, and two wells
had no change in product thicknesses since the February 25, 1992 visit. Water level and product
thickness measurements collected during the two March 1992 gauging visits are shown on the attached
well monitoring forms.
After gauging the monitoring wells and inspection of the recovery system during the March 1992
biweekly visits, the EIP was used to measure the thickness of product and water in the recovery tank.
The recovery tank dimensions are assumed to be six feet in diameter by fourteen feet long, with a 3,000
gallon liquid capacity.
On March 24, 1992 recovery tank gauging measured 18.60 inches of water, and 26.64 inches of product.
These measurements equate to 605.50 gallons of water, and 1,361.40 gallons of product, totaling 1,997
gallons of liquid contained within the recovery tank. Table 1 documents the tank gauging data since
Groundwater Technology took over system monitoring in October 1991.
On March 18, 19 and 20, 1992 a Groundwater Technology technician was on site for recovery system
maintenance and product totalizer installation. Ejector systems pump maintenance consisted of pulling
and cleaning each ejector pump, re-calibration of pressures on both the control and ejector regulators,
and setting timers for proper fill and empty cycles. Also, Tokheim model 727 product totalizers were
installed in the discharge line of each well at this time.
Recovery System Maintenance
Each time an ejector pump was pulled to surface the inlet check valve screen was plugged with PVC
shavings from the original well installation, and a slick, viscous hydrocarbon "scum" from fluid inside the
well. When the inlet screen is so completely plugged, fluid can not enter through the screen and the
ejector discharges only air. An attempt to free the well of screen plugging material was made by bailing
fluid from well RW-E, and swabbing the fluid surface with hydrocarbon adsorbent material. Recovery
well RW-D and RW-A were found to have leaks in their bubbler lines, which were repaired. Also,
recovery well RW-A empty cycle adjustment was erratic and difficult to adjust. This problem causes
excess air to be cycled through the discharge line. The high tank shut off valve for the recovery tank
was tested and is reported to be fully operational. Recovery well RW-C appears to be outside the
product plume with little contribution to the recovery efforts.
Currently the recovery system is set to a product only recovery setting. This setting skims product off
the surface of the water leaving only minimal amounts of product in the well to be recovered by the
65330392.MON 2
IT□-~ GROUNDWATER 00_0 TECHNOLOGY
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
National Warehouse Investment Company
April 15, 1992
TANK SIZE: 72" X 168"
3000 GALLONS
STAND PIPE: 26"
TABLE 1
TANK DATA
SHIDLER/REDWOOD
043101227.04
DEPTH TO BOTTOM OF TANK
-
FROM TOP OF STAND PIPE: 8.45' MEASURED WITH EIP = 101.4"
8.50' MEASURED WITH STICK
DATE TANK
MEASURE
WITH
STICK
INCHES
10/15/91 34.00
10/29/91 39.00
11/19/91 41.50
12/4/91 41.75
12/17/91 42.50
1/2/92 43.75
1/14/92 44.00
1/28/92 44.50
2/11/92 44.625
2/25/92 44.50
3/10/92 44.625
3/24/92 46.00
65330392.MON
EIP EIP TOTAL
DEPTH DEPTH GALLONS
TO TO OF FLUID
PRODUCT WATER IN TANK
INCHES INCHES
NA NA 1376.0
71.90 87.00 1638.0
60.00 87.30 1767.0
60.24 87.12 1780.0
59.28 86.76 1819.0
58.08 84.96 1882.5
57.60 84.72 1895.0
57.24 84.12 1921.0
57.12 84.24 1927.5
57.00 83.94 1921.0
57.24 83.84 1927.5
56.16 82.84 1997.0
EIP = ELECTRONIC INTERFACE PROBE
NA = NOT APPLICABLE
3
GALLONS
OF
WATER
IN TANK
NA
420.80
408.20
415.76
430.88
508.92
519.24
545.60
540.20
553.70
553.70
605.60
GALLONS CHANGE
OF IN
PRODUCT PRODUCT
RECOVERED VOLUME
GALLONS
NA NA
1217.20 NA
1358.80 141.60
1364.24 5.44
1388.12 23.88
1373.58 -14.54
1375.76 2.18
1375.40 -0.36
1387.30 11.90
1367.30 -20.00
1373.80 6.5
1391.40 18.1
iDD~ GROUNDWATER
□□□I TECHNOLOGY
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
National Warehouse Investment Company
April 15, 1992
ejector. By allowing the ejector to skim the product off the surface of the water, the water table
elevation rises with in the area influenced by each recovery well. The water table elevation rise makes it
more difficult for the product to enter the recovery well for collection. The in-place ejectors are
equipped to pump total fluids (both water and product). A change to total fluids recovery would create
a cone of depression around each recovery well allowing product to flow toward the recovery well
collection points. For purposes of experimentation, recovery well RW-E was switched to a total fluids
setting, and a barrel placed under a open port in the discharge line to the recovery tank. After
approximately five minutes, approximately 25 gallons of mixed water and product were recovered in the
barrel. This exercise proves that the ejectors are working, that the lines to the tank are intact, and that a
total fluids setting will recover product and water to the recovery tank. If the system was converted to a
total fluid recovery system an oil/water separator and a water filter system would have to be installed
before conversion.
In order to alleviate the plugging of the ejector intake screen and to improve fluid flow path to the
ejector collection point, P.C. Exploration of Centerville, Utah will be on site April 6, 1992 to chemically
treat, surge, develop and clean the well bore and casing screen interval of each well.
We are continuing to monitor groundwater elevations, product thickness, and current recovery system
on a biweekly basis. The most recent monitoring visits were made on March 24, 1992, and April 6, 1992.
If you have any questions or comments, please call our office at [phone].
Sincerely,
Groundwater Technology, 'J/
o ,..~ I
David Taff
Project Geologist
For:
David W. Daniels
District Manager
Attachments
Eileen Brennan
Geologist
Salt Lake Territory Manager
c: Mr. Garth Miner, Salt Lake County Bureau of Water Quality and Hazardous Waste
Ms. Robin Jenkins, Utah Division of Environmental Response and Remediation
65330392.MON 4
:□□~ GROUNDWATER CJQ~JI TECHNOLOGY
GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATA
FACILITY: SHIDLER/ REDWOOD METHOD: ORS EIP
LOCATION: SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH EQUIPMENT#: 1176
DATE: 10-Mar-92 PROJECT: 1227.04
FIELD PERSONNEL: WES THOMPSON, DAVID TAFF
wa.. __ ·'•;o· l o'· e't'PT)::LH __ J _ _. -,:-_. __ ET____ c.: _ :: ,.-,,,·o·· =_ -_·H.--c:::,-• ,,,--
1 --, 1 n :;_ OT~> A-Ri~ . ,,-------. ·n.·" 01W .· WTE ' -.EfP •
W-1 NA 4222.06 14.30 8.19 6.11
0.12
1.00
3.89
1.92
0.14
3.14
2.05
4.91
0.00
0.20
0.00
0.00
8.80 4213.26 4213.87
7.80 4214.99 4215.00
7.62 4214.95 4215.05
7.88 4215.09 4215.48
7.91 4214.82 4215.01
7.84 4214.25 4214.26
9.40 4212.93 4213.24
W-2
W-3
W-4
W-5
W-6
W-7
W-8
W-9
W-10
W-11
W-12
W-13
W-14
W-15
W-16
W-17
W-18
W-19
W-20
W-21
W-22
W-23
W-24
W-25
W-26
W-27
W-28
SB-2
RW-A
RW-B
RW-C
RW-D
RW-E
NA 4222.79 7.91
NA 4222.57 8.52
NA 4222.97 11.38
NA 4222.73 9.64
NA 4222.09 7.97
NA 4222.33 12.23
NA 4222.51 12.03
NA 4221.69 13.93
NA 4221.78 7.11
NA 4222.02 7.83
NA 4222.19 0.00
NA 4222.65 7.86
NA 4221.99 0.00
NA 4221.62 6. 76
NA 4221.55 7.31
NA 4221.57 7.76
NA 4221.84 8.80
NA 4222.35 14.39
NA 4222.07 10.14
NA 4221.72 14.29
NA 4222.69 10. 75
NA 4222.40 10. 18
NA 4222.24 8.54
NA 4222.65 10.80
NA 4223.81 11.36
NA 4222.13 10.51
NA 4220.79 8.93
NA NA 10.83
NA NA 8.58
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA 7.62
NA 6.75
NA 9.60
NA 9.16
ETC= ELEVATION TOP OF CASING
DTW = DEPTH TO WATER
DTP = DEPTH TO PETROLEUM
HYDROCARBONS
PT= MEASURED PETROLEUM
7.79
7.52
7.49
7.72
7.83
9.09
9.98
9.02
NA
7.63
NA
NA
NA 0.00
NA 0.00
7.08 0.23
NA 0.00
8.50 0.30
9.33 5.06
10.03
9.09
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.11
5.20
0;00
0.00
0.00
0.00
10.19 4212.33 4212.53
9.51 4212.18 4212.67
7.11 4214.67 NA
7.65 4214.37 4214.39
QOO NA NA
7.86 4214.79
0.00 NA
6.76 4214.86
NA
NA
NA
7.10 4214.45 4214.47
7.76 4213.81 NA
8.53 4213.31 4213.34
9.84 4212.51 4213.02
10.04 4212.03 4212.04
9.61 4212.11 4212.63
10.75 4211.94
10.18 4212.22
8.54 4213. 70
10.80 4211.85
NA 0.00 11.36 4212.45
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
7.75
8.53
7.23
NA
8.94
8.85
0.00
0.00
3.08
0.05
10.51 4211.62
8.93 4211.86
8.06 NA
8.54
0.39 7.27
0.00 6.75
0.66 9.01
0.31 8.88
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ADJ.DTW = ADJUSTED DEPTH TO WATER
WTE = WATERTABLE ELEVATION
ETP = ELEVATION TOP OF PETROLEUM
NA= NOT AVAILABLE
.. •.
: -•. :.
Black topped over
Black topped over
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
p □~1 GROUNDWATER ILJ □□ TECHNOLOGY
WElt
GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATA
FACILITY: SHIDLER/ REDWOOD
LOCATION: SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
DATE: 24-Mar-92
FIELD PERSONNEL: DAVID TAFF
. W;LL ADJ •.
METHOD: ORS EIP
EQUIPMENT#: 1176
PROJECT: 1227.04
.: ..... :tr·Erc< ,.,-1D.-,.< DEPTH ·.01W,:,_:. OTP .:\ .-·:: pt) .• -:· :dtw:• -wtE·, ·.: ETP-,,'i .. ..
COMMENTS ··<'.· , .•. :.: :'··. .<-·-· ..
W-1 NA 4222.06 14.27
W-2 NA 4222.79 7.79
W-3 NA 4222.57 8.43
W-4 NA 4222.97 11.35
W-5 NA 4222.73 9.57
W-6 NA 4222.09 7.53
W-7 NA 4222.33 12.30
W-8 NA 4222.51 11.13
W-9 NA 4221.69 14.00
W-10 NA 4221.78 6.98
W-11 NA 4222.02 7.58
W-12 NA 4222.19 0.00
W-13 NA 4222.65 7.72
W-14 NA 4221.99 0.00
W-15 NA 4221.62 6.41
W-16 NA 4221.55 6.78
W-17 NA 4221.57 7.45
W-18 NA 4221.84 8.50
W-19 NA 4222.35 14.37
W-20 NA 4222.07 9.50
W-21 NA 4221.72 14.24
W-22 NA 4222.69 10.64
W-23 NA 4222.40 10.03
W-24 NA 4222.24 8.13
W-25 NA 4222.65 11.72
W-26 NA 4223.81 11.26
W-27 NA 4222.13 10.30
W-28 NA 4220.79 8.91
SB-2 NA NA 10.73
RW-A NA NA 8.35
RW-B NA NA 6.93
RW-C NA NA 6.13
RW-D NA NA 8.99
RW-E NA NA 8.88
ETC= ELEVATION TOP OF CASING
DTW = DEPTH TO WATER
DTP = DEPTH TO PETROLEUM
HYDROCARBONS
PT = MEASURED PETROLEUM
THICKNESS
9.02 5.25 9.55 4212.52 4213.04
7.70 0.09 7.71 4215.08 4215.09
7.41 1.02 7.51 4215.06 4215.16
7.36 3.99 7.76 4215.21 4215.61
7.59 1.98 7.79 4214.94 4215.14
7.46 0.07 7.47 4214.62 4214.63
8.82 3.48 9.17 4213.16 4213.51
9.95 1.18 10.07 4212.44 4212.56
8.85 5.15 9.37 4212.33 4212.84
NA 0.00 6.98 4214.80 NA
7.45 0.13 7.46 4214.56 4214.57
NA 0.00 0.00 NA NA
NA 0.00 7.72 4214.93 NA
NA 0.00 0.00 NA NA
NA 0.00 6.41 4215.21 NA
6.69 0.09 6.70 4214.85 4214.86
NA 0.00 7.45 4214.12 NA
8.31 0.19 8.33 4213.51 4213.53
9.17 5.20 9.69 4212.66 4213.18
9.49 0.01 9.49 4212.58 4212.58
8.95 5.29 9.48 4212.24 4212.77
NA 0.00 10.64 4212.05 NA
NA 0.00 10.03 4212.37 NA
NA 0.00 8.13 4214.11 NA
NA 0.00 11.72 4210.93 NA
NA 0.00 11.26 4212.55 NA
NA 0.00 10.30 4211.83 NA
NA 0.00 8.91 4211.88 NA
7.68 3.05 7.98 NA NA
NA 0.00 8.35 NA NA
6.92 0.01 6.92 NA NA
NA 0.00 6.13 NA NA
8.98 0.01 8.98 NA NA
8.74 0.14 8.75 NA NA
ADJ.DTW = ADJUSTED DEPTH TO WATER
WTE = WATERTABLE ELEVATION
ETP = ELEVATION TOP OF PETROLEUM
NA= NOT AVAILABLE
Black topped over
Black topped over
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
□□~I GROUNDWATER
CO:Ji TECHNOLOGY
□□~ GROUNDWATER □□□ TECHNOLOGY
March 24, 1992
043101227.0401
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
The Shidler Group
7 400 Baymeadows Way
Suite #305
Jacksonville, FL 32256
Subject:
Dear Ms. Chitty:
February 1992 Monthly Project Update
Utah Facility 4001342
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
Summary of February 1992 Monitoring Results
Groundwater Technology, Inc.
275 E. South Temple, Suite 321, Salt Lake City, UT 84lli
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]
UTAH DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
MAR 2 5 1992 ,-,)
DIV. OF ENVIRONMENTAL
RESPONSF AND REMEDIATION
The current five-well product recovery system recorded no change in total fluid volume in the recovery
tank in the 28 days since the January 28, 1992 monitoring visit. The maximum product thickness
documented during the February 1992 period was 5.31 feet in monitor well W-19 on February 25, 1992.
Background of Site
This letter presents an update on activities at your site in Salt Lake City, Utah. A product recovery
system was installed in late February /early March 1991 by Westech Fuel. Applied Geotechnology began
product recovery operations in mid-March 1991. Groundwater Technology took over biweekly well and
system monitoring on October 15, 1991. This is the fifth project update letter since Groundwater
Technology took over site monitoring operations.
Method of Site Monitoring
Two site visits were made during this fifth period: February 11 and 25, 1992. During each
thirty-two site monitoring and recovery wells were gauged using an ORS Electronic Interface Probe (EIP)
to determine depth to product, and depth to groundwater. Of the
thirty-two wells gauged during the last February 1992 monitoring visit, nineteen wells contained
measurable product thickness. This compares with seventeen wells containing measurable product
thickness during the last January 1992 visit. Of the nineteen wells that did contain measurable product
12270292. MON 1
Offices throughout the U.S., Canada and Overseas
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
National Warehouse Investment Company
March 24, 1992
thickness, twelve wells had increased, and seven wells had decreased product thicknesses since the
January 28, 1992 visit. Water level and product thickness measurements collected during the two
February 1992 gauging visits are shown on the attached well monitoring forms.
During the February 1992 monitoring visits RW-A and RW-E ESI® product recovery pumps were
removed, disassembled, cleaned and inspected. The product-only canister from the RW-A pump
contained a piece on paper which appeared to be a equipment identification label. The paper was
removed, the pump re-assembled, and replaced at the proper depth within the recovery well. After
cleaning, and inspection of the RW-E pump, it appeared to be in good working condition and was
replaced at the proper depth within the recovery well. The product discharge line for the RW-E pump
was then disconnected and three pump cycles were observed. The emptying cycle unloaded
approximately four gallons of product with a very minor amount of water in a 90 second period. The fill
up cycle took approximately 20 minutes to fill the product-only canister. After confirmation that the
pump was working, the discharge line was reconnected and surface lid replaced. The RW-D recovery
well system seemed to be stuck on the emptying cycle. The cycling was adjusted to a approximately 15
minute fill cycle and one minute emptying cycle.
After gauging the monitoring wells and inspection of the recovery system, the EIP was used to measure
the thickness of product and water in the recovery tank. The recovery tank dimensions are assumed to
be six feet in diameter by fourteen feet long, with a 3,000 gallon liquid capacity.
On February 25, 1992 recovery tank gauging measured 17.46 inches of water, and 26.94 inches of
product. These measurements equate to 553. 70 gallons of water, and 1367.30 gallons of product,
totaling 1,921 gallons of liquid contained within the recovery tank. Table 1 documents the tank gauging
data since Groundwater Technology took over system monitoring in October 1991.
During the February 1992 site monitoring visits, recovery tank gauging results indicated no change in
total liquid recovered since the January 28, 1992 monitoring visit. The volume of product recorded in
the recovery tank since the November 19, 1991 monitoring visit is minimal compared to the potential
recovery offered by the five recovery wells. The total fluid recovered between each two week monitoring
event also exhibits minimal increases between each gauging event. To diagnosis the recovery systems
apparent deficiency, Groundwater Technology will be installing fluid totalizer units at each well head
discharge line, and in the total discharge line from the five recovery wells to the recovery tank. This
installation process will take place during the week of March 16, 1992. Readings from these fluid
totalizer units will record the fluid volumes discharged to the tank from each recovery well, providing
more quantifiable answers to the poor recovery rate experienced since November 1991. Future site
visits will continue to make every effort to document fluid volumes associated with the recovery tank,
and other portions of the recovery system.
12270292.MON 2
CJ~~! GROUNDWATER
',77:] TECHNOLOGY
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
National Warehouse Investment Company
March 24, 1992
TANK SIZE: 72" X 168"
3000 GALLONS
STAND PIPE: 26"
TABLE 1
TANK DATA
SHIDLER/REDWOOD
043101227.04
DEPTH TO BOTTOM OF TANK
FROM TOP OF STAND PIPE: 8.45' MEASURED WITH EIP = 101.4"
8.50' MEASURED WITH STICK
DATE TANK
MEASURE
WITH
STICK
INCHES
10/15/91 34.00
10/29/91 39.00
11/19/91 41.50
12/4/91 41.75
12/17/91 42.50
1/2/92 43.75
1/14/92 44.00
1/28/92 44.50
2/11/92 44.625
2/25/92 44.50
12270292.MON
EIP EIP TOTAL
DEPTH DEPTH GALLONS
TO TO OF FLUID
PRODUCT WATER IN TANK
INCHES INCHES
NA NA 1376.0
71.90 87.00 1638.0
60.00 87.30 1767.0
60.24 87.12 1780.0
59.28 86.76 1819.0
58.08 84.96 1882.5
57.60 84.72 1895.0
57.24 84.12 1921.0
57.12 84.24 1927.5
57.00 83.94 1921.0
EIP = ELECTRONIC INTERFACE PROBE
NA = NOT APPLICABLE
3
GALLONS GALLONS CHANGE
OF OF IN
WATER PRODUCT PRODUCT
IN TANK RECOVERED VOLUME
GALLONS
NA NA NA
420.80 1217.20 NA
408.20 1358.80 141.60
415.76 1364.24 5.44
430.88 1388.12 23.88
508.92 1373.58 -14.54
519.24 1375.76 2.18
545.60 1375.40 -0.36
540.20 1387.30 11.90
553.70 1367.30 -20.00
~-,~,
~__J~ GROUNDWATER
:7 □C] TECHNOLOGY
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
National Warehouse Investment Company
March 24, 1992
-
During the installation of the five well recovery system by Applied Geotechnology in April of 1991,
approximately 200 cubic yards of soil were excavated. Approximately 1 DO cubic yards of this soil was
hydrocarbon-affected and was stockpiled in the southeast corner of the property {Applied
Geotechnology, October 1991). Groundwater technology recommends that the stockpiled soil be
sampled to determine its waste classification, and that it be transported to an appropriate disposal site
following profiling and characterization.
We are continuing to monitor groundwater elevations, product thickness, and current recovery system
on a biweekly basis. The most recent monitoring visits were made on February 11, 1992, and visit
February 25, 1992.
If you have any questions or comments, please call our office at {801) 523-1003.
Sincerely,
Groundwater Technology, Inc.
DavkJT9 4 Tff
Project Geologist
For:
Michael R. Brenoel
Vice President
Regional Manager
Attachments
{b._~
Eileen Brennan
Geologist
Salt Lake Territory Manager
cc: Mr. Garth Miner, Salt Lake County Bureau of Water Quality and Hazardous Waste
Ms. Robin Jenkins, Utah Division of Environmental Response and Remediation
12270292.MON 4
:no~ GROUNDWATER --,,~,c,
' ' _J TECHNOLOGY
GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATA
FACILITY: SHIDLER/ REDWOOD
LOCATION: SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
DATE: 25-Feb-92
METHOD: ORS EIP
EQUIPMENT#: 1176
PROJECT: 1227.04
FIELD PERSONNEL: WES THOMPSON, DAVID TAFF
W-2
W-3
W-4
W-5
W-6
W-7
W-8
W-9
W-10
W-11
W-12
W-13
W-14
W-15
W-16
W-17
W-18
W-19
W-20
W-21
W-22
W-23
W-24
W-25
W-26
W-27
W-28
SB-2
RW-A
RW-B
RW-C
RW-D
RW-E
NA 4222.79 7.74
NA 4222.57 8.25
NA 4222.97 11.39
NA 4222. 73 9.10
NA 4222.09 7.42
NA 4222.33 10.55
NA 4222.51 10.83
NA 4221.69 14.21
NA 4221.78 6.89
NA 4222.02 7.54
NA 4222.19 0.00
NA 4222.65 7.63
NA 4221.99 0.00
NA 4221.62 6.18
NA 4221.55 6. 70
NA 4221.57 7.33
NA 4221.84 8.37
NA 4222.35 14.34
NA 4222.07 9.90
NA 4221.72 14.13
NA 4222.69 10.52
NA 4222.40 9.86
NA 4222.24 8.17
NA 4222.65 10.62
NA 4223.81 11.12
NA 4222.13 10.29
NA 4220.79 8.63
NA NA 10.73
NA NA 8.24
NA NA 7.15
NA NA 6.28
NA NA 9.86
NA NA 8.93
ETC= ELEVATION TOP OF CASING
DTW = DEPTH TO WATER
DTP = DEPTH TO PETROLEUM
HYDROCARBONS
PT = MEASURED PETROLEUM
THICKNESS
7.65 0.09 7.66 4215.13 4215.14
7.38 0.87 7.47 4215.10 4215.19
7.30 4.09 7.71 4215.26 4215.67
7.61 1.49 7.76 4214.97 4215.12
7.4 0.02 7.40 4214.69 4214.69
8.96 1.59 9.12 4213.21 4213.37
9.90 0.93 9.99 4212.52 4212.61
8.95 5.26
NA 0.00
7.40 0.14
NA 0.00
NA 0.00
NA 0.00
NA 0.00
6.6 0.10
NA 0.00
8.18 0.19
9.03 5.31
9.80 0.10
8.87
NA
NA
5.26
0.00
0.00
9.48 4212.21 4212.74
6.89 4214.89 NA
7.41 4214.61 4214.62
0.00 NA NA
7.63 4215.02
0.00 NA
6.18 4215.44
NA
NA
NA
6.61 4214.94 4214.95
7.33 4214.24 NA
8.20 4213.64 4213.66
9.56 4212.79 4213.32
9.81 4212.26 4212.27
9.40 4212.32 4212.85
10.52 4212.17
9.86 4212.54
NA 0.00 8.17 4214.07
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA 0.00 10.62 4212.03
NA 0.00 11.12 4212.69
NA
NA
7.58
8.16
6.81
NA
8.75
8.57
0.00
0.00
3.15
0.08
0.34
0.00
1.11
0.36
10.29 4211.84
8.63 4212.16
7.90 NA
8.17
6.84
6.28
8.86
8.61
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ADJ.DTW = ADJUSTED DEPTH TO WATER
WTE = WATERTABLE ELEVATION
ETP = ELEVATION TOP OF PETROLEUM
NA= NOT AVAILABLE
Black topped over
Black topped over
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
[]□~: GROUNDWATER
'1 n □• TECHNOLOGY =-"==--------
GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATA
FACILITY: SHIDLER/ REDWOOD METHOD: ORS EIP
LOCATION: SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH EQUIPMENT#: 1176
DATE: 11-Feb-92 PROJECT: 1227.04
FIELD PERSONNEL: WES THOMPSON, DAVID TAFF
WELL /?U.§;;t;
::i:!1:l:1::
1~!!111!:i:i ;1::::i1:::::: :!ti>oli1
illll:l!iii!: :1111:1::,:~::::::::::. ::::1:ii:111:1 it:l!:/i:1: :!::::::!::~:;::l:lii!::::;; ic!:~::1:es~!~f :<:::::!:,::::::::::,:::\:·:. ::/:i.};l: '} •'
\:10< · DEPTH} .,
W-1 NA 4222.06 14.38
W-2 NA 4222.79 8.64
W-3 NA 4222.57 10.00
W-4 NA 4222.97 11.65
W-5 NA 4222.73 9.80
W-6 NA 4222.09 10.35
W-7 NA 4222.33 10.90
W-8 NA 4222.51 12.90
W-9 NA 4221.69 14.55
W-10 NA 4221.78 7.83
W-11 NA 4222.02 8.64
W-12 NA 4222.19 0.00
W-13 NA 4222.65 8.60
W-14 NA 4221.99 0.00
W-15 NA 4221.62 7.56
W-16 NA 4221.55 7.73
W-17 NA 4221.57 8.24
W-18 NA 4221.84 9.45
W-19 NA 4222.35 14.45
W-20 NA 4222.07 10.39
W-21 NA 4221.72 14.50
W-22 NA 4222.69 11.15
W-23 NA 4222.40 10.64
W-24 NA 4222.24 9.05
W-25 NA 4222.65 11.06
W-26 NA 4223.81 11.73
W-27 NA 4222.13 10.84
W-28 NA 4220.79 9.45
SB-2 NA NA 11.16
RW-A NA NA 8.99
RW-B NA NA 8.23
RW-C NA NA 6.79
RW-D NA NA 9.36
RW-E NA NA 9.49
ETC= ELEVATION TOP OF CASING
DlW = DEPTH TO WATER
DTP = DEPTH TO PETROLEUM
HYDROCARBONS
PT= MEASURED PETROLEUM
THICKNESS
9.64 4.74 10.11 4211.95 4212.42
NA 0.00 8.64 4214.15 NA
8.17 1.83 8.35 4214.22 4214.40
8.32 3.33 8.65 4214.32 4214.65
8.54 1.26 8.67 4214.06 4214.19
8.18 2.17 8.40 4213.69 4213.91
9.80 1.10 9.91 4212.42 4212.53
10.26 2.64 10.52 4211.99 4212.25
9.42 5.13 9.93 4211.76 4212.27
NA 0.00 7.83 4213.95 NA
8.40 0.24 8.42 4213.60 4213.62
NA 0.00 0.00 NA NA
NA 0.00 8.60 4214.05 NA
NA 0.00 0.00 NA NA
NA 0.00 7.56 4214.06 NA
NA 0.00 7.73 4213.82 NA
NA 0.00 8.24 4213.33 NA
8.94 0.51 8.99 4212.85 4212.90
9.73 4.72 10.20 4212.15 4212.62
NA 0.00 10.39 4211.68 NA
9.45 5.05 9.96 4211.77 4212.27
NA 0.00 11.15 4211.54 NA
NA 0.00 10.64 4211.76 NA
NA 0.00 9.05 4213.19 NA
NA 0.00 11.06 4211.59 NA
NA 0.00 11.73 4212.08 NA
NA 0.00 10.84 4211.29 NA
NA 0.00 9.45 4211.34 NA
8.58 2.58 8.84 NA NA
8.95 0.04 8.95 NA NA
7.84 0.39 7.88 NA NA
NA 0.00 6.79 NA NA
NA 0.00 9.36 NA NA
9.20 0.29 9.23 NA NA
ADJ.DlW = ADJUSTED DEPTH TO WATER
WTE = WATERTABLE ELEVATION
ETP = ELEVATION TOP OF PETROLEUM
NA= NOT AVAILABLE
Could not locate, covered with ice
Black topped over
Black topped over
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
I' f 7 ~ GROUNDWATER
l~=:J~] TECHNOLOGY
ABF FREIGHT SYSTEM, INC.
P. 0. Box 48
FORT SMITH, AR 72902
[phone]
January 20, 1992
Ms. Robin Jenkins
Utah Department of Environmental Quality
Environmental Response and Remediation
1950 West North Temple
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4840
RE: Facility I.D. # 4001342
55 South Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, UT 84116
Dear Ms. Jen kins:
-
.,·-""At\i\'i1tNi OF
: i~i:~~NTAl OU~l\'T'I
JAN 2 3 '&;2 Rf~
Thank you for the copies of the notification forms you allowed me for
the above referenced facility. Attached you will find an amended
notification form indicating ABF as the current lessee/operator at this
facility.
As we discussed on the telephone last week, my knowledge of the
tanks and any petroleum releases that occurred prior to ABF's
occupancy of the facility is very limited. Also as we discussed, ABF
has no responsibility for prior releases or resulting necessary remedial
activities. Additionally, it is my understanding that ABF should take
no action on the Reporting and Remediation Schedule issued in the
Utah DER letter of December 24, 1991. Instead we are waiting to here
from you what, if any, action is required by us.
The only tanks remaining at this facility, to the best of my knowledge,
are the four indicated on the amended notification. New product lines
associated with these tanks were installed and tightness tested in 1991.
The tanks passed tightness tests as well. Based on the most recent
notification submitted by National Warehouse Investment Co., owner of
the facility, I assume the four tanks we currently utilize were
previously designated tanks 4, 5, 6, and 7. As I told you on the
telephone, I can offer no insight on the closure/removal of the other
tanks previously located at the site.
If I can provide any further help or information, please let me know.
Sincerely,
M~~
Project Engineer
Equipment & Maintenance
Attachment
@) A SUBSIDIARY OF ARKANSAS BEST CORPORATION
~---~--
,i-Nblification for Underg nd Storage Tanks 6~tBMNi~~~~9
APPROVAL EXPIRES 6-30-88
STATE USE ONLY
ID Number
Date Received
GENERAL INFORMATION
Notification is required by Federal law for all undercround tanks that have been
used to store regulated substances since January I, 1974, that are in the cround as of
May 8, 1986, or that are brought into use after May 8, 1986. The information requested
is required by Section 9002 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act,(RCRA),
as amended.
The pnmari purpo,e of th1, not1f1cat1on program 1, to locate and e\aluate under-
ground tank, that ,tore or ha\e ,tored petroleum or ha,ardous substances. It 1,
expected that the 1nlormat1on iou pro\tde will be ba,ed on reasonably available
record,. or. 1n the ab,ence of ,uch record,. your knowledge. behef. or recollecuon.
Who Must 1'otify? Section 9002 of RCRA. a, amended. re4u1re, that. unless
exempted. ov.ners of underground tank, that store regulated ,ub,tances mu,t notify
designated State or local agenc1e, of the existence of their tanks. Owner means-
(a) in the ca,e of an underground storage tank m use on November 8. 1984. or
brought into use after that date. an) person who ov.ns an underground storage tank
used for the storage. use. or dispensing of regulated substances. and
(u) in the case of any underground storage tank in use before November 8. 1984.
but no longer in use on that date. any person who owned such tank 1mmcd1atc1y before
the d!~co11tmuat1ori of 1t~ use
What Tanks Are Included? U ndcrground storage tank 1, defined a, any one or
combmauon of tanks that (I) 1, u,ed to contain an accumulation of ~regulated ,ub-
stance,." and (2) who,e \ olume (including connected underground ptpmg) 1s IOo/c or
more beneath the ground Some examples arc underground tanks storing: I. gasoline.
used 01I. or diesel fuel. and 2. mdu,tnal ,ol\Cnts. pcst1c1dcs. herbicides or fumigants
What Tanks Are Excluded? Tanks remo\ed from the ground are not subject to
nmificat1on Other tank, excluded from no11fica11on arc:
I. farm or res1den11al tank, of 1.100 gallons or less capacity used for storing motor fuel
for noncommercial purpo,es.
2. tanks used for stonng heat mg otl tor consumptt\e u,e on the prem1;cs where ,torcd:
3. septic tanks.
4. pipeline facih11c, (mcludmg gathcnng lme,) regulated under the Natural Ga,
Pipeline Safety Act of 1968. or the Ha,ardou, L14u1d P1pehne Safet) Act of 1979. or
which 1, an intrastate p1pchne fac1ht) regulated under State lav.,.
5. ,urface impoundments. pu,. pond,. or lagoon,.
6. Morm water or wa,te water collection ,y,tem,.
7. now-through procc,s tanks:
I. h4u1d trap; or associated gathering Imes d1rectl) related to 011 or ga, production and
gathering operations:
9. ,torage tank!> situated m an underground area (,uch a, a ba-cment. cellar.
mmeworkmg. drift. ,haft. or tunnel) 1f the storage tank 1, '1tuated upon or abo\e the
surface of the noor.
What Subltances Are Covered? The no11ficat1on re4u1remen1, apply to under-
ground storage tanks that contain regulated ,ubstance,. Thi, include, an) ,ub,tance
defined as ha1ardous in section IOI ( 14) of the Comprehcn,1ve Em1ronmental
Response. Compensation and Liability Act of 1980(CERCLA). wtth the exception of
those substances regulated as huardou, waste under Subrnle C of RCRA It abo
includes petroleum. e.g .. crude oil or any fraction thereof which 1, liquid at ,tandard
conditions of temperature and pres,ure (60 degree, Fahrenheit and 14 7 pound, per
square mch absolute).
Where To Notify? Completed no11f1cat1on form, ,hould be -cnt to the addre"
given at the top of this page.
When To Notify! I. Owner, of underground storage tank, m u-c or that ha,e been
taken out of operation after Januar} I. 1974. but ,ttll 1n the ground. mu,t notify by
May 8. 1986. 2. Owners who bnng underground ~torage 1ank, mto u~ after May!!.
1986. must notify wnhm 30 day~ of bnnging the tanks mto w,e.
Pfflaltla: Any owner who knowincly fails to notify or submits rue information
shall be subject to a civil penahy not to exceed S10,000 for each tank for which
notification ii not pven or for which false information is submitted.
I INSTRUCTIONS
Please type or print in mk all items except Ms1gnature~ in Section V. This form must by completed for
each location containing underground storage tanks. If more than 5 tanks are owned at this locauon.
photocopy the re\erse side. and staple continuation sheets to this form.
Indicate number of ~
continuation sheets a
attached
.. I. OWNERSHIP OF TANK(S) II LOCATION OF TANK(S)
Owner Name (Corporation, lnd1v1dual, Publtc Agency, or Other Entity)
N"·n~NJ.'-\N~'""t:)Js, lNvE:sr~!:::tt ~-
Street Address
1400 ~~1ii.AJ:t~S WA&-< J S>l"Te. ~DS:
County
bv ✓i..L
City State
,JAc ""s.c>N v, u..e FL
Area Code Phone Number
9D4-44~ blSB
Type of Owner (Marie all that apply ril J
,8 Current
D Former
D State or Local Gov't
D Federal Gov't
(GSA facility I.D no.
ZIP Code
322S'-.
!vi Privateor
JOI. Corporate D Ownership
uncertain
(If same as Section 1, mark box here D )
Facility Name or Company Site Identifier. as applicable
/::-J;$f' F:&e.,c.~ ~':i":Sre..~ I ,~.
Street Address or State Road. as applicable
s S'" CScv·n-\ Rct>\IJro)> :K..~~
.,.-Eiunty
~LT Lt,.'t('E City (nearest)
SA.\.. T \_.l)i,.~ (!_ \ State\),-ZIP Code
Indicate
number of
tanks at this
location
84 l \t:,
Mark box here if tank(s)
are located on land within
an Indian reservation or
on other Indian trust lands
□
1 certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this and all attached
documents, and that based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe that the
submitted information is true, ac urate, and complete.
EPA Form 7530-1111-85)
□□~ GROUNDWATER
000 TECHNOLOGY
January 29, 1992
043101227.0401
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
National Warehouse Investment Company
7400 Baymeadows Way
Suite #305
Jacksonville, FL 32256
Subject:
Dear Ms. Chitty:
December 1991 Monthly Project Update
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
Summary of December Site Monitoring Results
Groundwater Technology, Inc.
275 E. South Temple, Suite 321, Salt Lake City, UT 84lli
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]
UfAH BEf>ARiMENf OF
INVIRONMf NTAL QUALITY
FEB -4 1992 :_:·;
Div 0 --• .. r·-·v·,
• t ·_,. • ,r....,~;wENTAL
RESPONSE AND REMEDIATION
The current five well product recovery system recovered approximately 51 gallons of product in the 28
days since the November 19, 1991 monitoring visit. This represents a recovery rate approximately equal
to 1.8 gallons of product recovered per day. The maximum product thickness documented during this
period was 5.41 feet in monitor well W-19 on December 17, 1991.
Background of Site
This letter presents an update on activities at your site in Salt Lake City, Utah. A product recovery
system was installed in late February/early March 1991 by Westech Fuel. Applied Geotechnology began
product recovery operations in mid-March 1991. Groundwater Technology took over biweekly well and
system monitoring on October 15, 1991. This is the third project update letter since Groundwater
Technology took over site monitoring operations. The eighth (and final) contracted monitoring visit took
place on January 28, 1992.
Method of Site Monitoring
Three site visits were made during this third period: December 4, 5, and 17, 1991. During the last visit
on December 17, 1991, thirty-one site monitoring and recovery wells were gauged using an ORS
Electronic Interface Probe (EIP) to determine depth to product, and depth to groundwater. Well W-2
was iced over and was not accessible for gauging. Of the thirty-one wells gauged, eleven had
increased, and ten had decreased product thickness since the November 1991 visit. Two of the ten
wells which had decreased in product thickness recorded zero product thickness. Of the 19 wells
12271291.MON
Offices throughout the U.S.. Canada and Overseas
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
National Warehouse Investment Company
January 29, 1992
-
Of the 19 wells containing product, 13 wells were bailed to recover product from the top of the
groundwater table (YV-1, W-3, W-4, W-5, W-6, W-7, W-8, W-9, W-16, W-18, W-19, W-21, SB-2). The bailed
product was transferred from the wells to an on-site 55 gallon barrel. After emptying the bailed fluid
from the barrel into the recovery tank, the EIP was used to measure the thickness of product and water
in the recovery tank. The recovery tank dimensions are assumed to be six feet in diameter by fourteen
feet long, with a 3,000 gallon liquid capacity.
On December 17, 1991 recovery tank gauging measured 14.64 inches of water, and 27.48 inches of
product. These measurements equate to 431 gallons of water, and 1,388 gallons of product, totaling
1,741 gallons of liquid contained within the recovery tank. Approximately 51 gallons of product were
calculated to be recovered in the 28 day period since the November 19, 1991 monitoring visit. Water
level and product thickness measurements collected during the two December 1991 gauging and
product bailing visits are shown on the attached well monitoring forms.
On December 5, 1991 two Groundwater Technology geologists visited the site to conduct a product
baildown test. Product baildown tests are performed to obtain a measurement of product thickness in
formation. Baildown tests were run on monitoring wells W-1, W-19, and W-21. The test wells were
bailed using both the on-site diaphragm pump, and disposable hand bailers. It became apparent after
testing these three wells that a instantaneous product recharge, due to a high permeability subsurface,
would not provide the desired data to measure product thickness in formation. Attached is a graph for
well W-1 showing the depth to water and product measured after bailing.
We are continuing to monitor groundwater elevations, product thickness, and current recovery system
on a biweekly basis. The final three monitoring visits were made on January 2 , 14, and 28, 1992.
12271291.MON 2
-'.=:~J GROUNDWATER
, __ ': 1~'. TECHNOLOGY
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
National Warehouse Investment Company
January 29, 1992
If you have any questions or comments, please call our office at [phone].
Sincerely,
Groundwater Technology, Inc.
David Taff O a-,( r ~
Project Geologist
For:
Michael R. Brenoel
Vice President
Regional Manager
Attachments
Eileen Brennan
Geologist
Salt Lake Territory Manager
cc: Mr. Garth Miner, Salt Lake County Bureau of Water Quality and Hazardous Waste
Ms. Robin Jenkins, Utah Division of Environmental Response and Remediation
12271291.MON 3
7i-i~} GROUNDWATER
~~,_J TECHNOLOGY
GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATA
FACILITY: SHIDLER/ REDWOOD METHOD: ORS EIP
LOCATION: SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH EOUIPM 1176.00
DATE: 17-Dec-91 PROJECT: 1227.04
FIELD PERSONNEL: WES THOMPSON, ERIC SIMMONS
WELL WELL . .... .. ADJ.··_• .
ID DEPTH ETc•:_-··otw·• .. ,-:• PT'. D1W. ·WT£', ·-· DTP ·ETP. • COMMENTS
W-1 NA 4222.06 14.30 9.20 5.10 9.71 4212.35 4212.86
W-2 NA 4222.79 NA NA 0.00 0.00 NA NA Roadbox frozen
W-3 NA 4222.57 9.52 7.50 2.02 7.70 4214.87 4215.07
W-4 NA 4222.97 11.62 7.55 4.07 7.96 4215.01 4215.42
W-5 NA 4222.73 9.54 7.89 1.65 8.06 4214.67 4214.84
W-6 NA 4222.09 8.28 7.99 0.29 8.02 4214.07 4214.10
W-7 NA 4222.33 11. 75 9.27 2.48 9.52 4212.81 4213.06
W-8 NA 4222.51 12.61 9.94 2.67 10.21 4212.30 4212.57
W-9 NA 4221.69 13.69 9.01 4.68 9.48 4212.21 4212.68
W-10 NA 4221.78 7.19 NA 0.00 7.19 4214.59 NA
W-11 NA 4222.02 7.84 7.60 0.24 7.62 4214.40 4214.42
W-12 NA 4222.19 NA NA 0.00 0.00 NA NA Black topped over
W-13 NA 4222.65 8.00 NA 0.00 8.00 4214.65 NA
W-14 NA 4221.99 NA NA 0.00 0.00 NA NA Black topped over
W-15 NA 4221.62 7.00 NA 0.00 7.00 4214.62 NA
W-16 NA 4221.55 7.68 7.27 0.41 7.31 4214.24 4214.28
W-17 NA 4221.57 7.93 NA 0.00 7.93 4213.64 NA
W-18 NA 4221.84 9.21 8.61 0.60 8.67 4213.17 4213.23
W-19 NA 4222.35 14.51 9.10 5.41 9.64 4212.71 4213.25
W-20 NA 4222.07 10.15 10.09 0.06 10.10 4211.97 4211.98
W-21 NA 4221.72 14.34 9.09 5.25 9.62 4212.11 4212.63
W-22 NA 4222.69 10.73 NA 0.00 10.73 4211.96 NA
W-23 NA 4222.40 10.15 NA 0.00 10.15 4212.25 NA
W-24 NA 4222.24 8.51 NA 0.00 8.51 4213.73 NA
W-25 NA 4222.65 10.85 NA 0.00 10.85 4211.80 NA
W-26 NA 4223.81 11.45 NA 0.00 11.45 4212.36 NA
W-27 NA 4222.13 10.57 NA 0.00 10.57 4211.56 NA
W-28 NA 4220.79 8.84 NA 0.00 8.84 4211.95 NA
SB-2 NA NA 10.90 7.81 3.09 8.12 NA NA
RW-A NA NA 8.62 8.51 0.11 8.52 NA NA Measured at top of 1.5" tube
RW-B NA NA 7.75 7.36 0.39 7.40 NA NA Measured at top of 1.5" tube
RW-C NA NA 6.92 NA 0.00 6.92 NA NA Pump not working; measured at top of 1.5" tube
RW-D NA NA 9.30 9.13 0.17 9.15 NA NA Measured at top of 1.5" tube
RW-E NA NA 9.20 9.02 0.18 9.04 NA NA Measured at top of 1.5" tube
ETC= ELEVATION TOP OF CASING
DlW = DEPTH TO WATER
ADJ.DlW = ADJUSTED DEPTH TO WATER
WTE = WATERTABLE ELEVATION
DTP = DEPTH TO PETROLEUM
HYDROCARBONS
PT= MEASURED PETROLEUM
THICKNESS
ETP = ELEVATION TOP OF PETROLEUM
NA= NOT AVAILABLE
r_j~~ GROUNDWATER
C ~~1=:li TECHNOLOGY
-
GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATA
FACILITY: SHIDLER/ REDWOOD METHOD: ORS EIP
LOCATION: SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH EQUIPMENT#: 1901
DATE: 04-Dec-91 PROJECT: 1227.04
FIELD PERSONNEL: DAVID TAFF, JEFF LEETY
WELL ·WELL ADJ.
ID DEPTH ETC DTW DTP PT DTW VITE ETP COMMENTS
W-1 NA 4222.06 14.30
W-2 NA 4222.79 7.82
W-3 NA 4222.57 9.89
W-4 NA 4222.97 11.60
W-5 NA 4222.73 9.81
W-6 NA 4222.09 7.89
W-7 NA 4222.33 11.28
W-8 NA 4222.51 11.77
W-9 NA 4221.69 13.49
W-10 NA 4221.78 6.96
W-11 NA 4222.02 7.50
W-12 NA 4222.19 0.00
W-13 NA 4222.65 7.80
W-14 NA 4221.99 0.00
W-15 NA 4221.62 6.74
W-16 NA 4221.55 7.42
W-17 NA 4221.57 7.74
W-18 NA 4221.84 9.27
W-19 NA 4222.35 14.48
W-20 NA 4222.07 9.91
W-21 NA 4221.72 14.26
W-22 NA 4222.69 10.54
W-23 NA 4222.40 9.89
W-24 NA 4222.24 8.20
W-25 NA 4222.65 10.66
W-26 NA 4223.81 11.28
W-27 NA 4222.13 10.33
W-28 NA 4220.79 8.59
SB-2 NA NA 10.8
RW-A NA NA 8.22
RW-B NA NA 7.49
RW-C NA NA 6.64
RW-D NA NA 8.91
RW-E NA NA 8.98
ETC= ELEVATION TOP OF CASING
DTW = DEPTH TO WATER
DTP = DEPTH TO PETROLEUM
HYDROCARBONS
PT= MEASURED PETROLEUM
THICKNESS
8.93 5.37 9.47 4212.59 4213.13
7.73 0.09 7.74 4215.05 4215.06
7.32 2.57 7.58 4214.99 4215.25
7.28 4.32 7.71 4215.26 4215.69
7.61 2.20 7.83 4214.90 4215.12
7.76 0.13 7.77 4214.32 4214.33
9.1 2.18 9.32 4213.01 4213.23
9.85 1.92 10.04 4212.47 4212.66
8.80 4.69 9.27 4212.42 4212.89
NA 0.00 6.96 4214.82 NA
7.28 0.22 7.30 4214.72 4214.74
NA 0.00 0.00 NA NA Black topped over
NA 0.00 7.80 4214.85 NA
NA 0.00 0.00 NA NA Black topped over
NA 0.00 6.74 4214.88 NA
7.02 0.40 7.06 4214.49 4214.53
0.00 7.74 4213.83 NA
8.38 0.89 8.47 4213.37 4213.46
9.17 5.31 9.70 4212.65 4213.18
9.90 0.01 9.90 4212.17 4212.17
8.86 5.40 9.40 4212.32 4212.86
NA 0.00 10.54 4212.15 NA
NA 0.00 9.89 4212.51 NA
NA 0.00 8.20 4214.04 NA
NA 0.00 10.66 4211.99 NA
NA 0.00 11.28 4212.53 NA
NA 0.00 10.33 4211.80 NA
NA 0.00 8.59 4212.20 NA
7.57 3.23
8.20 0.02 8.20 -8.20 -8.20 Measured at top of 1.5" tube
7.10 0.39 7.14 -7.14 -7.10 Pump not working
NA 0.00 6.64 -6.64 NA Pump not working; surface water draining to well
8.84 0.07 8.85 -8.85 -8.84
8.84 0.14 8.85 -8.85 J -8.84
ADJ.DTW = ADJUSTED DEPTH TO WATER
WTE = WATERTABLE ELEVATION
ETP = ELEVATION TOP OF PETROLEUM
NA= NOT AVAILABLE
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
--, -~ GROUNDWATER
:~7[7=] TECHNOLOGY
we Ls:~~ z a: WO '
(/) co ' w we 6£: ~ ~
<X: a: ' I-.
0 I<X: ' <I: a_ () weeG:~~
<{ 60 ~ -a: we £G: ~ ~ 0,-::J 0
0>-cc ~ _JI we oi:~~
LD
O' wen:~~
0~ we v ~: ~ ~ 0 r-
50? we ~ ~: ~ ~
0W co we eo: ~ ~ UJ w r-0 ~ a: z I
-we so:~~ I-'s,....t'-cc I C\J we io: ~ ~ wos~
.JO.JO we es:o~
0...J...J,-we gg:o~ --w01
I<{ Sq-(/)
z
W CO 0 0 we Gs:o~ en a:
<C (.)
0 we 6v:o~ a:
0 >-I
(/) we gp:o~ a: I
w 9-
I-0 <C C, 3: _J we £v:o~ ·~
we ov:o~ co 0) 0 ~ (\J M otj-LO
T"" T"" T"" T"" T"" T""
(133.:1) a1n1.:1 01 Hld30
·□□~ GROUNDWATER □□□ TECHNOLOGY
February 27, 1992
043101227.0401
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
National Warehouse Investment Company
7400 Baymeadows Way
Suite #305
Jacksonville, FL 32256
Subject:
Dear Ms. Chitty:
January 1992 Monthly Project Update
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
Summary of January 1992 Monitoring Results
1'.i . : IJ~l\e1AlMENTOF
~;~ ~1:ijNMfNTAL QUALITY
MAR021992 ~
DjV. OF ENVUWNMENT4~
REIMBFAMl~MW'
The current five-well product recovery system recovered approximately 102 gallons of fluid in the 41
days since the December 17, 1991 monitoring visit. This represents a recovery rate approximately equal
to 2.4 gal~ of fluid recovered per day. The maximum product thickness documented during the -January 1992 period was 5.84 feet in monitor well W-1 on January 2, 1992.
Background of Site
This letter presents an update on activities at your site in Salt Lake City, Utah. A product recovery
system was installed In late February /early March 1991 by Westech Fuel. Applied Geotechnology began
product recovery operations in mid-March 1991. Groundwater Technology took over biweekly well and
system monitoring on October 15, 1991. This is the fourth project update letter since Groundwater
Technology took over site monitoring operations.
Method of Site Monitoring
Three site visits were made during this fourth period: January 2, 14, and 28, 1992. During the
January 28, 1992 visit, thirty-one site monitoring and recovery wells were gauged using an ORS
Electronic Interface Probe (EIP) to determine depth to product, and depth to groundwater. Well W-2
was iced over and was not accessible for gauging. Of the thirty-one wells gauged during the last
January 1992 monitoring visit, seventeen wells contained measurable product thickness. This compares
12270192.MON
Offices throughout the U.S., Canada and Overseas
..
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
National Warehouse Investment Company
February 27, 1992
with nineteen wells containing measurable product thickness during the last December 1991 visit. Of the
seventeen wells that did contain measurable product thickness, five wells had increased, and twelve
wells had decreased product thickness since the December 1991 visit.
Of the 17 wells containing product, 13 wells were bailed to recover product from the top of the
groundwater table (:N-1, W-3, W-4, W-5, W-6, W-7, W-8, W-9, W-16, W-18, W-19, W-21, SB-2). The bailed
product was transferred from the wells to an on site 55-gallon barrel. After emptying the bailed fluid
from the barrel into the recovery tank, the EIP was used to measure the thickness of product and water
in the recovery tank. The recovery tank dimensions are assumed to be six feet in diameter by fourteen
feet long, with a 3,000 gallon liquid capacity.
On January 28, 1992 recovery tank gauging measured 17.28 inches of water, and 26.88 inches of
product. These measurements equate to 562 gallons of water, and 1,359 gallons of product, totaling
1,921 gallons of liquid contained within the recovery tank. Water level and product thickness
measurements collected during the three January 1992 gauging and product bailing visits are shown on
the attached well monitoring forms.
During the January 1992 site monitoring visits, recovery tank gauging results indicated inconsistent liquid
levels in the recovery tank. Table 1 documents the tank gauging data recorded since Groundwater
Technology took over system monitoring in October 1991. The volume of product recorded in the
recovery tank since the November 19, 1991 monitoring visit is minimal compared to the potential
recovery offered by the five recovery wells. The total fluid recovered between each two week monitoring
event also exhibits minimal increases between each gauging event. To diagnosis the recovery systems
apparent deficiency, Groundwater Technology recommends fluid totalizer units be installed at each well
head discharge line, and in the total discharge line from the five recovery wells to the recovery tank.
Readings from these fluid totalizer units will record the fluid volumes discharged to the tank from each
recovery well, providing more quantifiable answers to the poor recovery rate experienced since
November 1991. Future site visits will continue to make every effort to document fluid volumes
associated with the recovery tank, and other portions of the recovery system.
12270192.MON
ILi~J~I GROUNDWATER
70[] TECHNOLOGY
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
National Warehouse Investment Company
February 27, 1992
TANK SIZE: 72" X 168"
3000 GALLONS
STAND PIPE: 26"
TABLE 1
TANK DATA
SHIDLER/REDWOOD
043101227.04
DEPTH TO BOTTOM OF TANK
FROM TOP OF STAND PIPE: 8.45' MEASURED WITH EIP = 101.4"
8.50' MEASURED WITH STICK
DATE TANK
MEASURE
WITH
STICK
INCHES
10/15/91 34.00
10/29/91 39.00
11/19/91 41.50
12/4/91 41.75
12/17/91 42.50
1/2/92 43.75
1/14/92 44.00
1/28/92 44.50
12270192.MON
EIP EIP TOTAL
DEPTH DEPTH GALLONS
TO TO OF FLUID
PRODUCT WATER IN TANK
INCHES INCHES
NA NA 1376.0
71.90 87.00 1638.0
60.00 87.30 1767.0
60.24 87.12 1780.0
59.28 86.76 1819.0
58.08 84.96 1882.5
57.60 84.72 1895.0
57.24 84.12 192fo
EIP = ELECTRONIC INTERFACE PROBE
NA = NOT APPLICABLE
GALLONS
OF
WATER
IN TANK
NA
420.80
408.20
415.76
430.88
508.92
519.24
561.80
GALLONS CHANGE
OF IN
PRODUCT PRODUCT
RECOVERED VOLUME
GALLONS
NA NA
1217.20 NA
1358.80 141.60
1364.24 5.44
1388.12 23.88
1373.58 -14.54
1375.76 2.18
1359.20 -16.56
1 □□~1 GROUNDWATER LJ □~] TECHNOLOGY
-
. Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
National Warehouse Investment Company
February 27, 1992
We are continuing to monitor groundwater elevations, product thickness, and current recovery system
on a biweekly basis. The most recent monitoring visits were made on February 11, 1992, and visit
February 25, 1992.
If you have any questions or comments, please call our office at [phone].
Sincerely,
Groundwater Technology, Inc.
DavidQ cz--~ },~
Project Geologist
For:
Michael R. Brenoel
Vice President
Regional Manager
Attachments
·£};_ ~ttn/)11-1
Eileen Brennan
Geologist
Salt Lake Territory Manager
cc: Mr. Garth Miner, Salt Lake County Bureau of Water Quality and Hazardous Waste
Ms. Robin Jenkins, Utah Division of Environmental Response and Remediation
12270192.MON
~JD~ GROUNDWATER ,:=J[lO TECHNOLOGY
iDD~ GROUNDWATER 1 0D □ TECHNOLOGY
January 6, 1992
043101227.0401
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
National Warehouse Investment Company
7400 Baymeadows Way
Suite #305
Jacksonville, FL 32256
Subject:
Dear Ms. Chitty:
Second Monthly Project Update (November)
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
-
Groundwater Technology, Inc.
275 E. South Temple, Suite 321, Salt Lake City, UT 84lli
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]
UTAH DEPARTMENT OF
l:NVutnMAAS:NTAt OIIAUTY
JAN O 7 1!1:~ Ra_
DIV. Of ENVIRONMENTAL
RESPONS~ ANO Rf:Mi:n,ATrON
Attached is the November 1991 monthly project update for the National Warehouse Investment Company
site in Salt Lake City, Utah.
Should you have any questions or comments, please contact your office at [phone].
Sincerely.
Groundwater Technology, Inc.
David Taff
Project Geologist
Attachments
cc: Mr. Garth Miner, Salt Lake County Bureau of Water Quality and Hazardous Waste
Ms. Robin Jenkins, Utah Division of Environmental Response and Remediation
1227.COV
Offices throughout the U.S., Canada and Overseas
i □□~ GROUNDWATER
000 TECHNOLOGY
January 6, 1992
043101227.0401
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
National Warehouse Investment Company
7400 Baymeadows Way
Suite #305
Jacksonville, FL 32256
Subject:
Dear Ms. Chitty:
Second Monthly Project Update (November 1991)
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
Summary Of November Site Monitoring Results
-
Groundwater Technology, Inc.
275 E. South Temple, Suite 321, Salt Lake City, UT 84lll
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]
The current five well product recovery system recovered approximately 91 gallons of product in the
twenty-one days since the October 29, 1991 monitoring visit. This represents a recovery rate
approximately equal to 4.3 gallons of product recovered per day. The maximum product thickness
documented during this period was 5.18 feet in monitor well W-1 on November 19, 1991.
Background of Site
This letter presents an update on activities at your site in Salt Lake City, Utah. A product recovery
system was installed in late February/early March 1991 by Westech Fuel. Applied Geotechnology began
product recovery operations in mid-March 1991. Groundwater Technology took over biweekly well and
system monitoring on October 15, 1991. This is the second project update letter since Groundwater
Technology took over site monitoring operations.
Method of Site Monitoring
During the November 19, 1991 site monitoring visit, thirty-two site monitoring and recovery wells on-and
off-site were gauged using an ORS Electronic Interface Probe (EIP) to determine depth to product, and
depth to groundwater. Of the thirty-two wells gauged, ten had decreased, ten had increased, and two
had no change in product thickness since the last October 1991 monitoring visit. Of the twenty-two
w~lls containing product, fourteen wells were bailed to recover product from the top of the water table
12271191.MON
Offices throughout the U.S., Canada and Overseas
-
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
National Warehouse Investment Company
January 6, 1992
-
0/v-1, W-4, W-5, W-6, W-7, W-8, W-9, W-11, W-16, W-18, W-19, W-21, RW-B, SB-2). The bailed product
was transferred from the wells to an on-site 55 gallon barrel. An EIP was used to measure the thickness
of product within the barrel. November 1991 bailing yielded approximately 12.3 gallons of product
recovered from fourteen wells. After emptying the bailed fluid from the barrel into the recovery tank, the
EIP was used to measure the thickness of product and water in the recovery tank. The recovery tank
dimensions are assumed to be six feet in diameter by fourteen feet long, with a 3,000 gallon liquid
capacity.
Fourteen inches of water, and twenty-seven inches of product were measured. These measurements
equate to 404 gallons of water, and 1,337 gallons of product, totaling 1,741 gallons of liquid contained
within the recovery tank. After subtracting the amount of product bailed (12.3 gallon) from the amount
of product gauged within the tank, approximately 90.7 gallons of product were calculated to be
recovered in the twenty-one day period since the October 29, 1991 monitoring visit. Water level and
product thickness measurements collected during the November 1991 monitoring are shown on the
attached well monitoring forms.
We are continuing to monitor groundwater elevations, product thickness, and current recovery system
on a biweekly basis.
If you have any questions or comments, please call our office at [phone].
Sincerely,
Groundwater Technology, Inc.
O~Tc#
David Taff ~ MA bU£J11t'#1
Project Geologist
Eileen Brennan
Geologist
Salt Lake Territory Manager
For:
Michael R. Brenoel
Vice President
Regional Manager
Attachments
cc: Mr. Garth Miner, Salt Lake County Bureau of Water Quality and Hazardous Waste
Ms. Robin Jenkins, Utah Division of Environmental Response and Remediation
12271191.MON 2
Copyright ,, Groundwater Technology, Inc. 1991 All Rights Reserved This document contains CONFIDENTIAL Informat1on
No part of It may be reproduced or transmitted In any form or by any means without written permIssIon from the Company
Any v1olat,on of this copyright Is strictly proh1b1ted and constitutes mIsappropriatIon of Company property
[?□~i GROUNDWATER ~n~ TECHNOLOGY
--...
GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATA
FACILITY: SHIDLER/ REDWOOD METHOD: ORS EIP
LOCATION: SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH EQUIPMENT#: 1901
DATE: 04-Dec-91 PROJECT: 1227.04
FIELD PERSONNEL: DAVID TAFF, JEFF LEETY
NA 4222.06 14.30
NA 4222.79 7.82
NA 4222.57 9.89
NA 4222.97 11.60
NA 4222.73 9.81
NA 4222.09
NA 4222.33
NA 4222.51
NA 4221.69
NA 4221.78
NA 4222.02
NA 4222.19
NA 4222.65
NA 4221.99
NA 4221.62
NA 4221.55
NA 4221.57
NA 4221.84
NA 4222.35
NA 4222.07
NA 4221.72
NA 4222.69
NA 4222.40
7.89
11.28
11.77
13.49
6.96
7.50
0.00
7.80
0.00
6.74
7.42
7.74
9.27
14.48
9.91
14.26
10.54
9.89
NA 4222.24 8.20
NA 4222.65 10.66
NA 4223.81 11.28
NA 4222.13 10. 33
NA 4220. 79 8.59
NA NA 10.8
NA NA 8.22
8.93
7.73
7.32
7.28
7.61
7.76
9.1
9.85
8.80
NA
7.28
NA
NA
NA
NA
7.02
NA
8.38
9.17
9.90
8.86
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
5.37
0.09
2.57
4.32
2.20
9.47 4212.59 4213.13
7.74 4215.05 4215.06
7.58 4214.99 4215.25
7.71 4215.26 4215.69
7.83 4214.90 4215.12
0.13 7.77 4214.32 4214.33
2.18 9.32 4213.01 4213.23
1.92 10.04 4212.47 4212.66
4.69 9.27 4212.42 4212.89
0.00 6.96 4214.82 NA
0.22 7.30 4214.72 4214.74
@i.i"'o.oo NA NA
0.00 7.80 4214.85 NA
~~,~ 0.00 NA NA
0.00 6.74 4214.88 NA
0.40 7.06 4214.49 4214.53
0.00 7. 74 4213.83 NA
0.89 8.47 4213.37 4213.46
5.31 9.70 4212.65 4213.18
0.01 9.90 4212.17 4212.17
5.40 9.40 4212.32 4212.86
0.00 10.54 4212.15
0.00 9.89 4212.51
0.00 8.20 4214.04
0.00 10.66 4211.99
0.00 11.28 4212.53
0.00 10.33 4211.80
0.00 8.59 4212.20
3.23 7.89 NA
0.02 8.20 NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-
Black topped over
Black topped over
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
W-1
W-2
W-3
W-4
W-5
W-6
W-7
W-8
W-9
W-10
W-11
W-12
W-13
W-14
W-15
W-16
W-17
W-18
W-19
W-20
W-21
W-22
W-23
W-24
W-25
W-26
W-27
W-28
SB-2
RW-A
RW-B
RW-C
RW-D
RW-E
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
7.49
6.64
8.91
8.98
7.57
8.20
7.10
NA
8.84
8.84
0.39
0.00
0.07
0.14
7.14
6.64
8.85
8.85
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA Pump not working
NA Pump not working; surface water draining to well
NA Measured at top of 1.5" tube
NA Measured at top of 1.5" tube
ETC= ELEVATION TOP OF CASING
DTW = DEPTH TO WATER
DTP = DEPTH TO PETROLEUM
HYDROCARBONS
PT= MEASURED PETROLEUM
THICKNESS
ADJ.DTW = ADJUSTED DEPTH TO WATER
WTE = WATERTABLE ELEVATION
ETP = ELEVATION TOP OF PETROLEUM
NA= NOT AVAILABLE
Copyright@ Groundwater Technology, Inc , 1991 All Rights Reserved This document contains CONFIDENTIAL information
No part of It may be reproduced or transmitted In any form or by any means without written permIssIon from the Company
Any v1olat1on of this copyright Is strictly proh1b1ted and constitutes m1sappropnatIon of Company property
1□□~ GROUNDWATER □□DJ TECHNOLOGY
-
i □□~ GROUNDWATER
□□□TECHNOLOGY
November 19, 1991
043101227.0401
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
National Warehouse Investment Company
7400 Baymeadows Way
Suite #305
Jacksonville, Florida
Subject: First Monthly Project Update (October 1991)
Freight Terminal
'-'
(s@)[;)L(
Groundwater Technology, Inc.
275 E. South Temple, Suite 321, Salt Lake City, UT 84ill
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]
-wh~+ i's '5{8-2,?
-IJ..:;> ~e..~ a..--t. Rw.A,--13
/ .J
-C ch .. Z
I ,
55 Redwood Road :: t 0G I ~)Lt-)....._
Salt Lake City, Utah
Dear Ms. Chitty:
This letter presents an update on activities at your site in Salt Lake City, Utah. A product recovery
system was installed in late February/early March 1991 by Westech Fuel, and Applied Geotechnology's
product recovery operations began in mid-March 1991. Groundwater Technology took over biweekly
well and system monitoring on October 15, 1991.
Site Monitoring
The recovery tank dimensions are assumed to be 6 feet in diameter by 14 feet long, with a 3,000 gallon
liquid capacity. Applied Ge9technology last gauged the total liquid volume during the first week of
September 1991. At that time the total liquid volume was determined to be 1,325 gallons. All previous
tank gauging was done under the assumption that product was the only liquid in the recovery tank.
During Groundwater Technology's October 29, 1991 visit to the site an ORS Electronic Interface Probe
(EIP) was used to measure the thickness of product, and possible water in the recovery tank. Fourteen
inches of water and twenty-five inches of product were measured. These measurements equate to 404
gallons of water, and 1,234 gallons cf product, totaling 1,638 gallons of liquid contained within the
recovery tank.
The maximum product thickness documented during this period was 7.11 feet in monitor well W-9 on
Octob_er 15, 1991. Water level and product thickness measurements collected during the two
October 1991 monitoring dates are shown on the attached well monitoring forms.
12271091.MON
U1 AH OEPAR1MENT OF
~N\IIQOMUl=~\TAI nllAI \TV
NOV 2 '1 ~
ow. OF EtlQ!ktNW RES~nN~f ANO Q~ur-!'ltt1Tinfl'
Offices throughout the l'.S.. Canada and 01•erseas
-
Jo Ann Chitty
National Warehouse Investment Company
November 19, 1991
'-
Fourteen of the seventeen wells monitored during both October 1991 visits had decreases in measurable
product thickness. Over the same period, two wells had increasing product thickness, and one well had
no change in product thickness.
The discovery of water inside the product recovery tank implies that all product recovery estimates could
be in error. With Groundwater Technology's current gauging method it will be possible to give an
accurate product recovery rate during the November 1991 reporting period. Groundwater Technology
will continue to monitor groundwater elevations, product thickness, and the recovery system on a
biweekly basis.
If you have any questions or comments, please call our office at [phone].
Sincerely,
Groundwater Technology, Inc.
O~T# f/k_~JfMCW]
David Taff
Project Geologist
Eileen Brennan
Geologist
Salt Lake Territory Manager
For:
Michael R. Brenoel
Vice President
Regional Manager
Attachments
cc: Mr. Garth Miner, Salt 4i,ke County Bureau of Water Quality and Hazardous Waste
Ms. Robin Jenkins, Utah Division of Environmental Response and Remediation
12271091.MON
2
Copyright :c Groundwater Technology, Inc , 1991 All Rights Reserved This document contains CONFIDENTIAL 1nlormat1on
No part ol 1t may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without written permIssIon from the Company
Any v1olat1on of this copyright Is strictly prohIb1ted and constitutes mIsappropnatIon ol Company property
::~~-~ GROUNDWATER
: ___JLILJ, TECHNOLOGY
WELL MONITORING FORM -
FACILITY: SHIDLER/ REDWOOD
LOCATION: SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
DATE: 15-0ct-91
METHOD: ORS EIP
EQUIPMENT#: 2174
PROJECT: 1227.04
FIELD PERSONNEL: JEFF LEETY,WES THOMPSON
WEU; .:weu. :::::rtifrar!:iit ::=tfflfir :iit/Iri,:1r:,:;i1=:, ::;;::;i:1ij:;:i::I:: ::,:;~:i;: :,!!!lil~:i::::::: :::::::::':~f~:::1i1:::, :::::(:::::;~~;iJi<,i::i,::w::i;::;:,j:::i:. -: -·:: • -·, :.·-hf?\= ofpm-"J
W-1 NA 4222.06 0.00
W-2 NA 4222.79 0.00
W-3 NA 4222.57 11.75
W-4 NA 4222.97 11.79
W-5 NA 4222.73 13.21
W-6 NA 4222.09 0.00
W-7 NA 4222.33 0.00
W-8 NA 4222.51 14.43
W-9 NA 4221.69 16.32
W-10 NA 4221.78 0.00
W-11 NA 4222.02 8.89
W-12 NA 4222.19 0.00
W-13 NA 4222.65 8.80
W-14 NA 4221.99 0.00
W-15 NA 4221.62 8.09
W-16 NA 4221.55 9.90
W-17 NA 4221.57 8.93
W-18 NA 4221.84 10.70
W-19 NA 4222.35 14.63
W-20 NA 4222.07 11.54
W-21 NA 4221.72 14.54
W-22 NA 4222.69 11.24
W-23 NA 4222.40 10.67
W-24 NA 4222.24 9.10
W-25 NA 4222.65 11.31
W-26 NA 4223.81 12.03
W-27 NA 4222.13 11.02
W-28 NA 4220.79 9.40
RW-A NA NA 9.12
RW-8 NA NA 8.69
RW-C NA NA 7.84
RW-D NA NA 10.18
RW-E NA NA 9.75
ETC= ELEVATION TOP OF CASING
DTW= DEPTHTOWATER
DTP = DEPTH TO PETROLEUM
HYDROCARBONS
PT= MEASURED PETROLEUM
THICKNESS
NA 0.00 0.00 NA NA Not gauged-key unavailable
NA 0.00 0.00 NA NA Not gauged-key unavailable
8.05 3.70 8.42 4214.15 4214.52
8.46 3.33 8.79 4214.18 4214.51
8.23 4.98 8.73 4214.00 4214.50
NA 0.00 0.00 NA NA Not gauged-key unavailable
NA 0.00 0.00 NA NA Not gauged-key unavailable
10.26 4.17 10.68 4211.83 4212.25
9.21 7.11 9.92 4211.77 4212.48
NA 0.00 0.00 NA NA Not gauged-key unavailable
8.28 0.61 8.34 4213.68 4213.74
NA 0.00 0.00 NA NA B!ack topped over
NA 0.00 8.80 4213.85 NA
NA 0.00 0.00 NA NA Black topped over
NA 0.00 8.09 4213.53 NA
8.02 1.88 8.21 4213.34 4213.53
8.76 0.17 8.78 4212.79 4212.81
9.21 1.49 9.36 4212.48 4212.63
10.00 4.63 10.46 4211.89 4212.35
10.43 1.11 10.54 4211.53 4211.64
9.61 4.93 10.10 4211.62 4212.11
NA 0.00 11.24 4211.45 NA
NA 0.00 10.67 4211.73 NA
NA 0.00 9.10 4213.14 NA
NA 0.00 11.31 4211.34 NA
NA 0.00 12.03 4211.78 NA
NA 0.00 11.02 4211.11 NA ~
NA 0.00 9.40 4211.39 NA
9.06 0.06 9.07 -9.07 -9.06 Measured at top of 1.5" tube
8.25 0.44 8.29 -8.29 -8.25
7.83 0.01 7.83 -7.83 -7.83 Measured @ east side of casing
9.53 0.65 9.60 -9.60 -9.53 Measured at top of 1.5" tube
9.58 0.17 9.60 -9.60 -9.58 Measured at top of 1.5" tube
ADJ.DTW = ADJUSTED DEPTH TO WATER
WTE = WATERTABLE ELEVATION
ETP = ELEVATION TOP OF PETROLEUM
NA= NOT AVAILABLE
Copyright <s_, Groundwater Technology, Inc , 1991 All Rights Reserved This document contains CONFIDENTIAL ,nforma~on
No part of 11 may be reproduced or transm1ned In any form or by any means without wrinen permission from the Company
Any v1olat1on of this copyright Is strictly proh1b1ted and constitutes mIsappropnatIon of Company property.
:Du~: GRouNowATER
[]001 TECHNOLOGY
v-;,~C,,~
(
,' ~ .i,-l.._;5
) oc.« "\"'tck,?
WELL lwNITORING FORM -FACILITY: SHIDLER/ REDWOOD METHOD: ORS EIP
LOCATION: SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH EQUIPMENT#: 2174
DATE: 29-0ct-91 PROJECT: 1227.04
FIELD PERSONNEL: JEFF LEETY,WES THOMPSON
!11asi ii~. )1I\ii;;11ii;i1!i; ,:irmli:: :;:;ftiiij;irvr :t:::::::::~itII:!:: j::~i;:t 1::1;i;l~:::;::::. ·,::::11:i$111::::::11;;;{:l:::2&MAA~~i::::;;:;;;;ri; ,,.,,:
1 W-1 NA 4222.06 14.52 8.98 5.54 9.53 4212.53 4213.08
W-2 NA 4222.79 7.98 7.97 0.01 7.97 4214.82 4214.82
W-3 NA 4222.57 8.96
W-4 NA 4222.97 11.54
W-5 NA 4222.73 10.48
W-6 NA 4222.09 7.74
W-7 NA 4222.33' 11.27
W-8 NA 4222.51 11.03
W-9 NA 4221.69 13.64
W-10 NA 4221.78 7.13
W-11 NA 4222.02 8.03
W-12 NA 4222.19 NA
W-13 NA 4222.65 7.95
W-14 NA 4221.99 NA
W-15 NA 4221.62 6.32
W-16 NA 4221.55 7.42
W-17 NA 4221.57 7.71
W-18 NA 4221.84 9.64
W-19 NA 4222.35 14.43
W-20 NA 4222.07 10.36
W-21 NA 4221.72 14.16
W-22 NA 4222.69 10.65
W-23 NA 4222.40 9.92
W-24 NA 4222.24 8.19
W-25 NA 4222.65 10.80
W-26 NA 4223.81 11.40
W-27 NA 4222.13 10.43
W-28 NA 4220.79 8.67
SB-2 NA 10.76
RW-A NA NA 8.2G
RW-B NA NA 7.31
RW-C NA NA 6.64
RW-D NA NA 9.18
RW-E NA NA 9.03
ETC= ELEVATION TOP OF CASING
DTW = DEPTH TO WATER
DTP = DEPTH TO PETROLEUM
HYDROCARBONS
PT= MEASURED PETROLEUM
THICKNESS
7.60 1.36 7.74 4214.83 4214.97
7.59 3.95 7.99 4214.99 4215.38
7.69 2.79 7.97
7.60
9.14
10.09
8.87
NA
7.68
NA
NA
NA
0.14 7.61
2.13 9.35
0.94 10.18
4.77 9.35
0.00 7.13
0.35 7.72
0.00 o.oo
0.00 7.95
0.00 0.00
NA 0.00 6.32
6.77 0.65 6.84
7.70 0.01 7.70
8.33 1.31 8.46
9.25 5.18 9.77
9.93 0.43 9.97
8.97 5.19 9.49
NA 0.00 10.65
NA 0.00 9.92
NA 0.00 8.19
NA 0.00 10.80
NA 0.00 11.40
NA
NA
7.90
8.19
7.01
6.63
0.00 10.43
0.00 8.67
2.86 8.19
0.04 8.19
0.30 7.04
0.01 6.63
4214.76 4215.04
4214.48 4214.49
4212.98 4213.19
4212.33 4212.42
4212.34 4212.82
4214.65 . NA
4214.31 4214.34
NA NA
4214.70 NA
NA NA
4215.30 NA
4214.72 4214.78
4213.87 4213.87
4213.38 4213.51
4212.58 4213.10
4212.10 4212.14
4212.23 4212.75
4212.04 NA
4212.48 NA
4214.05 NA
4211.85 NA
4212.41 NA
4211.70 NA
4212.12 NA
-8.19 -7.90
-8.19 -8.19
-7.04 -7.01
-6.63 -6.63
Black topped over
Black topped over
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
Measured at top of 1.5" tube
9.04, 0.14
8.91 0.12
9.05 I -9.05 I -9.041 Measured at top of 1.5" tube
8.92 -8.92 -8.91 Measured at top of 1.5" tube
ADJ.DTW=
WTE=
ETP=
NA=
ADJUSTED DEPTH TO WATER
WATERTABLE ELEVATION
ELEVATION TOP OF PETROLEUM
NOT AVAILABLE
Copyright© Groundwater Technology, Inc , 1991 All Rights Reserved This document contains CONFIDENTIAL 1nformahon
No part of 1t may be reproduced or 1ransm1tted in any form or by any means without written permIssmn from the Company
Any violation of this copynghl Is slnclly proh1b1 led and conshlutes mIsappropnatIon of Company property
l □IT~GROUNDWATER DOD TECHNOLOGY
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
September 17, 1991
eJJ,~"JJ&:Nr5iIB~
SEP30 mt
15,489.003 Rei~f t~N,yb,W~.¥ENTAL r:M~lJIATION
Mr. Garth Miner
Bureau of Water Quality and Hazardous Waste
Salt Lake City-County Health Department
610 South 2nd East
Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
Dear Garth:
Project Update No. 6
Freight Terminal_
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah \
This letter presents an update on activities at the referenced site. A
product recovery system was installed in late February/early March, and
recovery operations began in mid-March 1991.
Recovery System Monitoring
Approximately 1,325 gallons of diesel have been recovered to date. Water
level and product thickness measurements collected during system monitoring
are shown on Tables 1 through 13. The product recovery rate is shown on
Figure 1.
Anticipated Further Actions
The monitoring wells with product have fluctuating amounts of product, and the
product recovery rate has stabilized. Converting the recovery system to total
fluids remains a consideration, however we are continuing product recovery and
monitoring at this time.
If you have any questions or comments, please give me a call.
Sincerely,
APPLIED GEOTECHNOLOGY INC.
~/d'c
Peter P. Barry/
Hydrogeologist
PPB/tag
attachments
cc: Ms. Jo Ann Chitty; National Warehouse Investment Company
Ms. Robin D. Jenkins; Utah Bureau of Environmental
Response and Remediation
P 0. Box 3885 Bellevue, WA 98009 FAX 206/646·9523 relephone :;,_o l, ::-:y38c-
,. Table 1
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
March 15, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
...
.. a.
Depth to-
Well Time LNAPL(ft) .
W-1 --NM
W-2 --NM
W-3 --NM
W-4 1250 8.30
W-5 1245 8.26
W-6 --NM
. -
W-7 --NM
W-8 --NM
W-9 1310 9.46
W-10 1305 --
W-11 1300 8.18
W-12 1302 --
W-13 1212 --
W-14 1200 --
W-15 1210 --
W-16 1215 8.16
W-17 1220 8.53
W-18 1328 9.29
W-19 1325 9.96
W-20 1322 10.25
W-21 1317 9.41
W-22 1347 --
W-23 1353 --
W-24 1351 --
W-25 1403 --
W-26 --NM
W-27 1407 --
W-28 1413 --
Notes:
a) LNAPL=Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
. .·.t·:::: ··::=::' ·,. .. ' •·. •• • I' -••'
•, -,:::· ·--.•, •,• ..
·•.-,
-·Depth to•· Product
Water(ft): • llricicness (ft) •
NM NM
NM NM
NM NM
12.28 3.98
15.24 6.98
NM NM
NM NM
NM NM
14.67 5.21
7.86 0.00
10.85 2.67
8.65 0.00
8.85 0.00
8.08 0.00
8.15 0.00
9.39 1.23
10.57 2.04
10.92 1.63
14.44 4.48
11.94 1.69
15.44 6.03
11.20 0.00
10.63 0.00
8.98 0.00
11.17 0.00
NM NM
10.26 0.00
9.51 0.00
b) Corrected Depth to Water=-measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
. b:-..
. Cocredecf • -•
Depth to .. ·.
• Water (tt}·
NM
NM
NM
8.70\
8.96 \
NM
NM
NM
9.98
7.86
8.45
8.65
8.85
8.08
8.15
8.28
8.73
9.45
10.41
10.42
10.01
11.20
10.63
8.98
11.17
NM
10.26
9.51
-
Table 2
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
April 2, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
a
Depth to.
Well Time. LNAPl.(ft) ·
W-1 1604 9.83
W-2 1612 9.92
W-3 1513 • 8.11
W-4 1728 8.32
W-5 1710 8.11
W-6 1531 8.46
W-7 1543 9.90
W-8 1552 10.88
W-9 1557 9.65
W-10 1621 --
W-11 1618 8.21
W-12 1616 --
W-13 1503 --
W-14 1500 --
W-15 1506 --
W-16 --NM
W-17 1536 8.64
W-18 1641 9.46
W-19 1635 10.07
W-20 1652 10.36
W-21 1627 9.55
W-22 1048 --
W-23 1041 --
W-24 1038 --
W-25 1059 --
W-26 1102 --
W-27 1056 --
W-28 1052 --
Notes:
Depth_to=:°i
Water (ft)=.
14.55
9.93
10.56
12.16
. 15.16
12.45
12.99
11.06
15.15
7.93
10.20
8.60
8.80
9.85
8.26
NM
10.66
11.00
14.25
12.00
15.20
9.83
10.83
9.06
11.30
12.01
11.10
9.67
a) LNAPL=Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
b) Delta = Thickness this period -Thickness last period
.. ..
·.•
.. b
Pr~':: .. :.:::·:/:_· Delta .• _.
. . . •. ·>i
Thiclmess-(ft)•:: . (ft). . . .•
4.72
0.01
2.45
3.84 -0.14
7.05 0.07
3.99
3.09
0.18
5.50 0.29
0.00
1.99 -0.68
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NM
2.02 -0.02
1.54 -0.09
4.18 -0.30
1.64 -0.05
5.65 -0.38
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
c) Corrected Depth to Water = measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Cieotechnology Inc.
C
Corrected
:: Oej)th_to •.
iWater. (ft)·
10.30
9.92
8.35
8.io ,,
8.82
8.86
10.21
10.90
10.20
7.93
8.41
8.60
8.80
9.85
8.26
NM
8.84
9.61
10.49
10.52
10.12
9.83
10.83
9.06
11.30
12.01
11.10
9.67
Table 3
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
April 16, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
a-
Well.-Time
Deptltto-
lNAPL(ft)
· · • Depth to·::_:... •
. Watei(ft) :· :
W-1
W-2
W-3
W-4
W-5
W-6
W-7
W-8
W-9
W-10
W-11
W-12
W-13
W-14
W-15
W-16
W-17
W-18
W-19
W-20
W-21
W-22
W-23
W-24
W-25
W-26
W-27
W-28
Notes:
1150
1305
1315
1320
1250
1240
1225
1135
1100
1020
1520
1600
1610
1640
1655
1710
1730
1210
1930
1925
1920
1855
1905
1840
1830
9.60
NM
8.00
7.96
7.87
8.41
10.06
9.61
NM
NM
7.88
7.99
8.69
9.34
9.95
10.39
9.40
a) LNAPL=Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
14.87
NM
9.61
12.35
14.68
10.91
11.05
10.84
13.25
7.57
NM
8.45
8.48
NM
7.96
9.49
9.68
10.n
14.63
11.30
15.15
11.14
10.56
8.71
11.12
11.84
10.89
9.40
b) Delta = Thickness this period -Thickness last period
-'"· ·:::····,:/::". • .:"-. b.
Prododi\L: __ :-: : Delta/:·
ThicJcness(it):-:::;.:-.• . . (ft)= . : ,·. .
5.27
NM
1.61
4.39
6.81
2.50
0.99
0.00
3.64
0.00
NM
0.00
0.00
NM
0.08
1.50
0.99
1.43
4.68
0.91
5.75
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.55
-0.84
0.55
-0.24
-1.49
-2.10
-0.18
-1.86
0.08
-1.03
-0.11
0.50
-0.73
0.10
c) Corrected Depth to Water= measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
10.13
NM
8.16
,'. 8.40
'l
1 8.55
8.66
10.16
10.84
9.97
7.57
NM
8.45
8.48
NM
7.89
8.14
8.79
9.48
10.42
10.48
9.98
11.14
10.56
8.71
11.12
11.84
10.89
9.40
Table 4
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
May 4, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City. Utah
--a
: .. --
...
·.• .. .. .. b-,: •:-.:-·. .. -· ··,•··
Depth·to· -
•, .·.
Product-: •. _\:. ,: Delta:: -· • .. Depth·to
Well lime LNAPL (ft} Water(ft) . Tolcicness· (ft)· {ft}
W-1 1140 8.85 14.87 6.02 0.75
W-2 1103 7.39 7.45 0.06
W-3 1231 .7.98 8.93 0.95 -0.66
W-4 1311 6.86 11.94 5.08 0.69
W-5 1307 6.82 11.89. 5.07 -1.74
W-6 1218 7.38 7.45 0.07 -2.43
W-7 1253 9.18 9.76 0.58 -0.41
W-8 1300 9.91 11.35 1.44 1.44
W-9 1126 9.05 12.14 3.09 -0.55
W-10 --NM NM NM
W-11 --NM NM NM
W-12 --NM NM NM
W-13 --NM NM NM
W-14 --NM NM NM
W-15 1220 5.94 5.97 0.03 -0.05
W-16 --NM NM NM
W-17 --NM NM NM
W-18 1351 8.25 9.80 1.55 0.12
W-19 1354 9.14 14.34 5.20 0.52
W-20 1359 8.80 10.26 1.46 0.55
W-21 1558 8.87 14.71 5.84 0.09
W-22 1332 --10.74 0.00
W-23 1234 --10.00 0.00
W-24 1140 --7.58 0.00
W-25 1505 --18.80 0.00
W-26 1430 --11.34 0.00
W-27 1623 --10.52 0.00
W-28 --NM NM NM
Notes:
a) LNAPL=Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
b) Delta = Thickness this period -Thickness last period
c) Corrected Depth to Water= measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
·-· ·c
Corrected ..•
,, Oepttr.ta .•
'water {ft}·
9.45
7.40
8.08
-'-7.37 ,1
'7.33
7.39
9.24
10.05
9.36
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
5.94
NM
NM
8.41
9.66
8.95
9.45
10.74
10.00
7.58
18.80
11.34
10.52
NM
-
Table 5
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
May 15, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
. . .. a
.. Depth. _to·:: -
Well Time LNAPL(ft)•
W-1 1614 8.80
W-2 1545 7.1
W-3 1644 6.80
W-4 1208 6.43
W-5 1212 6.62
W-6 1640 7.05
W-7 1628 9.01
W-8 1622 9.87
W-9 1608 9.00
W-10 1553 --
W-11 1550 6.53
W-12 --NM
W-13 --NM
W-14 --NM
W-15 1648 --
W-16 --NM
W-17 1636 --
W-18 1652 8.05
W-19 1654 8.95
W-20 1658 9.66
W-21 1701 8.73
W-22 1708 --
W-23 1710 --
W-24 1713 --
W-25 1718 --
W-26 1726 --
W-27 1724 --
W-28 1720 --
Notes:
·,• .. .. -..
Deptnto·
: Water-(ftF •
14.60
7.16
7.61
11.85
11.21
7.18
9.42
10.71
11.82
6.32
6.88
NM
NM
NM
5.62
NM
7.24
9.31
14.40
9.96
14.62
10.55
9.72
6.83
11.04
10.60
10.25
8.40
a) .LNAPL=Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
b) Delta = Thickness this period -Thickness last period
. . -:•.:::;.· .. .-. .. . ·-· '. b :·: : :_:":-·· ._.
Product:·'':. · Delta-.
•• Thickness-(ftf ·; (ft}/·:·
5.80 -0.22
0.06 0.00
0.81 -0.14
5.42 0.34
4.59 -0.48
0.13 0.06
0.41 -0.17
0.84 -0.60
2.82 -0.27
0.00
0.35
NM
NM
NM
0.00 -0.03
NM
0.00
1.26 -0.29
5.45 0.25
0.30 -1.16
5.89 0.05
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
c) Corrected Depth to Water= measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
.. C:
; : Corrected .
,· .• :_ Depth·to
-Water (ft)-
9.38
7.11
6.88
,\ 6.97 ' 1 7.08
7.06
9.05
9.95
9.28
6.32
6.57
NM
NM
NM
5.62
NM
7.24
8.18
9.50
9.69
9.32
10.55
9.72
6.83
11.04
10.60
10.25
8.40
Table 6 Applied Geotechnology Inc.
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
May 29, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
Well-
W-1
W-2
W-3
W-4
W-5
W-6
W-7
W-8
W-9
W-10
W-11
W-12
W-13
W-14
W-15
W-16
W-17
W-18
W-19
W-20
W-21
W-22
W-23
W-24
W-25
W-26
W-27
W-28
Notes:
Time---
1522
1518
1525
1602
1628
1514
1532
1535
1451
1626
1624
1622
1608
1552
1539
1612
1626
1630
1634
1638
1634
1636
1638
1645
1649
Depthto--,
LNAPt. (ft)= -
8.88
7.14
6.80
6.52
6.76
7.24
9.03
9.93
9.04
6.60
NM
NM
NM
6.50
8.20
9.12
9.69
8.90
a ·.:···
, ~th-to---
Water-{ft)--
14.57
7.18
7.75
11.80
11.24
7.27
9.65
10.98
12.45
6.38
6.92
NM
NM
NM
5.67
6.94
7.20
9.38
14.45
10.22
14.69
10.62
9.74
6.87
11.07
10.64
10.29
8.43
a) LNAPL=Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
b) Delta = Thickness this period -Thickness last period
--Product:_,, __ ---,:-._.:-----
Thiclcriess(ft)-' :-, -
5.69
0.04
0.95
5.28
4.48
0.03
0.62
1.05
3.41
0.00
0.32
NM
NM
NM
0.00
0.44
0.00
1.18
5.33
0.53
5.79
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
---::-:-_ .t:i"---'.---Corrected
Oeita\:-•--:Depth-to -
(ft):_--.---_ ' -water (tt)
-0.11
-0.02
0.14
0.69
-0.11
-0.10
0.21
0.21
0.59
-0.03
-0.08
-0.12
0.23
-0. 10
9.45
7.14
6.90
\ 7.05
' 7.21
7.24
9.09
10.04
9.38
6.38
6.63
NM
NM
NM
5.67
6.54
7.20
8.32
9.65
9.74
9.48
10.62
9.74
6.87
11.07
10.64
10.29
8.43
c) Corrected Depth to Water= measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
C
-
Table7
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
June 12, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
Well
W-1
W-2
W-3
W-4
W-5
W-6
W-7
W-8
W-9
W-10
W-11
W-12
W-13
W-14
W-15
W-16
W-17
W-18
W-19
W-20
W-21
W-22
W-23
W-24
W-25
W-26
W-27
W-28
Notes:
lime,.:.
1640
1500
1606
1653
1650
1609
1607
1640
1520
1510
1506
1601
1552
1550
1549
1545
1542
1539
1527
1525
1524
1522
1721
1725
1732
1740
.. . _.,._.. a
Depth to:
LNAPt(tt)
8.85
6.88
6.54
6.24
6.55
7.30
9.07
9.79
8.88
6.55
NM
NM
6.53
8.10
9.15
9.79
8.83
.-.. :.·.•·
Depth)o:ii:: =· •
Water(ft)i' ·.-·
14.69
6.89
7.59
11.71
10.57
7.70
10.21
11.74
12.70
6.16
6.75
NM
6.83
NM
6.09
7.27
7.43
9.48
14.50
10.50
14.52
10.47
9.80
7.60
11.01
10.59
10.27
8.47
a) LNAPL=Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
b) Delta = Thickness this period -Thickness last period
5.84
0.01
1.05
5.47
4.02
0.40
1.14
1.95
3.82
0.00
0.20
NM
0.00
NM
0.00
0.74
0.00
1.38
5.35
0.71
5.69
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.15
-0.03
0.10
0.19
-0.46
0.37
0.52
0.90
0.41
-0.12
0.30
0.20
0.02
0.18
-0.10
c) Corrected Depth to Water = measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
c .
b ·: Cooected .
:-Depth to··
• Water(ft}
9.43
6.88
6.65
~\ 6.79
\ 6.95
7.34
9.18
9.99
9.26
6.16
6.57
NM
6.83
NM
6.09
6.60
7.43
8.24
9.69
9.86
9.40
10.47
9.80
7.60
11.01
10.59
10.27
8.47
Table 8
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
June 'n, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
·wen
W-1
W-2
W-3
W-4
W-5
W-6
W-7
W-8
W-9
W-10
W-11
W-12
W-13
W-14
W-15
W-16
W-17
W-18
W-19
W-20
W-21
W-22
W-23
W-24
W-25
W-26
W-27
W-28
Notes:
1452
1422
1529
1536
1541
1532
1548
1447
1433
1427
1522
1525
1520
1510
1507
1500
1458
1455
1558
1555
1552
1620
1615
1612
1607
.. ·a: ··-·.:)·
. Depth to:.::,,·
LNAPt·(tt) ..•
9.17
7.25
6.93
6.70
6.85
7.80
9.40
NM
9.07
6.96
NM
NM
6.71
7.06
7.87
8.48
9.44
9.96
9.05
a) LNAPL=Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
14.54
7.31
8.17
11.75
11. is
8.52
10.93
NM
13.45
6.54
7.15
NM
7.29
NM
6.78
8.01
7.88
9.94
14.51
10.78
14.64
10.72
10.10
7.94
10.90
11.50
10.50
8.63
b) Delta = Thickness this period -Thickness last period
5.37
0.06
1.24
5.05
4.30
0.72
1.53
NM
4.38
0.00
0.19
NM
0.00
NM
0.07
0.95
0.01
1.46
5.07
0.82
5.59
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-0.47
0.05
0.19
-0.42
0.28
0.32
0.39
0.56
-0.01
0.07
0.21
0.01
0.08
-0.28
0.11
-0.10
c) Corrected Depth to Water = measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
•• Corrected"'
: ·\ Deptfl:to: .
• Water {ft)'
9.71
7.26
7.05
' 7.21 ~-\ 7.28
7.87
9.55
NM
9.51
6.54
6.98
NM
7.29
NM
6.72
7.16
7.87
8.63
9.95
10.04
9.61
10.72
10.10
7.94
10.90
11.50
10.50
8.63
C. .
Table 9
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
July 10, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
. ,·. --..
..
••,•: -·a·. ...
Depth.to:
Well Trme LNAPL(ft)'
W-1 1629 9.02
W-2 1615 7.29
W-3 1728 6.99
W-4 1745 6.92
W-5 1751 6.99
W-6 1733 7.92
W-7 1755 9.51
W-8 1758 10.29
W-9 1634 9.12
W-10 1623 --
W-11 1620 7.04
W-12 --NM
W-13 1725 --
W-14 --NM
W-15 1721 6.80
W-16 1718 7.14
W-17 1705 7.89
W-18 1701 8.55
W-19 1653 9.56
W-20 1650 10.07
W-21 1637 9.17
W-22 1803 --
W-23 1806 --
W-24 1812 --
W-25 1826 --
W-26 1822 --
W-27 1820 --
W-28 1818 --
Notes:
--
-·-. . ; ..
·-Depthto-· ----
: Water (ft).-_,
14.50
7.36
8.21
11.80
11.21
8.56
11.01
11.23
13.49
6.59
7.19
NM
7.34
NM
6.83
8.06
7.91
9.96
14.55
10.81
14.69
10.76
10.14
7.97
10.93
11.55
10.56
8.65
a) LNAPL=Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
b) Delta = Thickness this period -Thickness last period
--. _.-------...
• ;_. -·~---.~: : • ··._ . : ..
·-:·_::· ... _-:·=-.· --.. -·::: b·· ..
Th::t:]:= Delta/ _-_
(ft):/\:··
5.48 0.11
0.07 0.01
1.22 -0.02
4.88 -0.17
4.22 -0.83
0.64 -0.08
1.50 -0.03
0.94
4.37 -0.01
0.00
0.15 -0.04
NM
0.00
NM
0.03 -0.04
0.92 -0.03
0.02 0.01
1.41 -0.05
4.99 -0.08
0.74 -0.08
5.52 -0.07
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
c) Corrected Depth to Water = measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
· .. · C: • ..
_,:}ti;::·
.. Watet(ft)
9.57
7.30
7.11
,, 7.41 \'.
'7.41
7.98
9.66
10.38
9.56
6.59
7.06
NM
7.34
NM
6.80
7.23
7.89
8.69
10.06
10.14
9.72
10.76
10.14
7.97
10.93
11.55
10.56
8.65
Table 10
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
July 24, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
a
Depth to·
. Well Time LNAPL(ft)
W-1 1626 9.50
W-2 1430 7.91
W-3 1552 7.35
W-4 1608 7.46
W-5 1613 7.48
W-6 1548 8.36
W-7 1618 9.81
W-8 1622 10.24
W-9 1447 9.25
W-10 1442 --
W-11 1436 7.47
W-12 --NM
W-13 1545 --
W-14 --NM
W-15 1542 7.60
W-16 1535 7.76
W-17 1528 8.46
W-18 1519 9.10
W-19 1515 9.81
W-20 1511 10.24
W-21 1507 9.36
W-22 1503 --
W-23 1458 --
W-24 1455 --
W-25 1736 --
W-26 1741 --
W-27 1748 --
W-28 1755 --
Notes:
Depth to·
Water (ft) .
11.49
8.00
10.23
11.83
' 11.98
10.06
11.64
13.40
14.48
7.16
8.33
NM
8.95
NM
7.63
8.86
8.58
9.95
14.59
11. 11
14.66
11.00
10.39
8.35
11.13
11.83
10.80
9.03
a) LNAPL=Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
b) Delta = Thickness this period -Thickness last period
. . b
Produ~,:;:: Deltai :
Thickness (ftY.. (ft) . :. •
1.99 -3.49
0.09 0.02
2.88 1.66
4.37 -0.51
4.50 0.28
1.70 1.06
1.83 0.33
3.16 2.22
5.23 0.86
0.00
0.86 · 0.71
NM
0.00
NM
0.03 0.00
1.10 0.18
0.12 0.10
0.85 -0.56
4.78 -0.21
0.87 0.13
5.30 -0.22
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
c) Corrected Depth to Water= measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
C:
Corrected·· .
Depth to·
• Water(ft) .
..
9.70
7.92
7.54
\ 7.90 \
' 7.93
8.53
9.99
10.56
9.77
7.16
7.56
NM
8.95
NM
7.60
7.87
8.47
9.18
10.29
10.33
9.89
11.00
10.39
8.35
11.13
11.83
10.80
9.03
Table 11
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
August 7, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
,, a
Depth to·
Weir Time: LNAPt(ft)
W-1 1151 9.65
W-2 1104 8.16
W-3 1119 7.56
W-4 1111 7.82
W-5 1145 7.68
W-6 1125 8.48
W-7 1131 9.89
W-8 1138 10.28
W-9 1201 9.26
W-10 1010 --
W-11 1014 7.62
W-12 --NM
W-13 1020 --
W-14 --NM
W-15 1027 7.87
W-16 1032 7.96
W-17 1039 8.66
W-18 1045 9.17
W-19 1051 8.92
W-20 1056 10.34
W-21 1205 9.47
W-22 956 --
W-23 937 --
W-24 933 --
W-25 949 --
W-26 952 --
W-27 944 --
W-28 940 --
Notes:
Depth to
Water (ft}
14.54
8.33
10.88
11 .84
12.81
10.92
11.87
13.78
15.55
7.43
8.67
NM
8.23
NM
7.92
9.28
8.87
10.37
14.59
11.33
14.68
11.11
10.55
8.57
11.20
11.96
10.90
9.05
a) LNAPL=Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
b) Delta = Thickness this period -Thickness last period
..
Product .. Delta.-
Thickness (ft) • (ft)':-.
4.89 2.90
0.17 0.08
3.32 0.44
4.02 -0.35
5.13 0.63
2.44 0.74
1.98 0.15
3.50 0.34
6.29 1.06
0.00
1.05 0.19
NM
0.00
NM
0.05 0.02
1.32 0.22
0.21 0.09
1.20 0.35
5.67 0.89
0.99 0.12
5.21 -0.09
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
c) Corrected Depth to Water = measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
C:
b • Corrected • :
• Depth. to :._ .
: .. Water (It) • •
10.14
8.18
7.89
' 8.22 ·,
I 8.19
8.72
10.09
10.63
9.89
7.43
7.73
NM
8.23
NM
7.88
8.09
8.68
9.29
9.49
10.44
9.99
11.11
10.55
8.57
11.20
11.96
10.90
9.05
Table 12
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
August 20, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
: •.
·_::a-
.. _::.·b--
:
Depth to • . Depth to Product.· .. Delta•:_:
Well Time LNAPL(ft) Water (ft}
... •• Thickness (ft)-• (ft)·
W-1 1113 9.70 14.57 4.87 -0.02
W-2 948 8.50 8.58 0.08 -0.09
W-3 1053 7.99 10.39 2.40 -0.92
W-4 1044 8.15 11.89 3.74 -0.28
I
W-5 1049 8.30 11.28 2.98 -2.15
W-6 1040 8.59 11.65 3.06 0.62
W-7 1107 10.13 11.07 0.94 -1.04
W-8 1111 10.65 12.10 1.45 -2.05
W-9 956 9.57 13.79 4.22 -2.07
W-10 --NM NM NM
W-11 952 --7.97 0.00 -1.05
W-12 --NM NM NM
W-13 1020 --8.23 0.00
W-14 --NM NM NM
W-15 1034 8.14 8.16 0.02 -0.03
W-16 1032 8.12 9.32 1.20 -0.12
W-17 1027 8.80 9.10 0.30 0.09
W-18 1025 9.84 10.26 0.42 -0.78
W-19 1018 10.03 14.52 4.49 -1.18
W-20 1015 10.40 11.23 0.83 -0.16
W-21 1012 9.52 14.60 5.08 -0.13
W-22 1009 --11.15 0.00
W-23 1006 --10.60 0.00
W-24 1004 --8.82 0.00
W-25 --NM NM NM
W-26 --NM NM NM
W-27 --NM NM NM
W-28 --NM NM NM
Notes:
a) LNAPL=Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
b) Delta = Thickness this period -Thickness last period
c) Corrected Depth to Water = measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
:
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
.. .i{. c: ..
=--:· Corrected·
_. __ ,: · Deptti"° to
·water(ft)
10.19
8.51
8.23
'. 8.52 \
8.60
8.90
10.22
10.80
9.99
NM
7.97
NM
8.23
NM
8.14
8.24
8.83
9.88
10.48
10.48
10.03
11.15
10.60
8.82
NM
NM
NM
NM
Table 13
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
September 4, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
a
•·
• • Depth:to
Well Time LNAPL(ft)
W-1 1125 9.72
W-2 946 8.53
W-3 1050 8.14
W-4 1054 8.24
W-5 1106 8.37
W-6 1113 8.63
W-7 1117 10.15
W-8 1121 10.67
W-9 1007 9.40
W-10 --NM
W-11 952 --
W-12 --NM
W-13 1020 --
W-14 --NM
W-15 1045 8.20
W-16 1042 8.18
W-17 1030 8.91
W-18 1018 9.87
W-19 1016 10.06
W-20 1013 10.38
W-21 1011 9.56
W-22 1136 --
W-23 1140 --
W-24 1144 --
W-25 1156 --
W-26 1202 --
W-27 1210 --
W-28 1214 --
Notes:
_· __ beptti to .
Water (ft)
14.63
8.62
11.33
11.97
111.36
11.72
11.21
12.51
15.18
NM
7.99
NM
8.80
NM
8.21
9.43
9.32
10.32
14.60
11.27
14.71
11.18
10.66
8.93
11.29
12.09
11.00
9.35
a) LNAPL=Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
b) Delta = Thickness this period -Thickness last period
_.-.
. .
.. ..
Product --··· Delta -,·:::
Thickness (ft} : • (ft)
4.91 0.04
0.09 0.01
3.19 0.79
3.73 -0.01
2.99 0.01
3.09 0.03
1.06 0.12
1.84 0.39
5.78 1.56
NM
0.00
NM
0.00
NM
0.01 -0.01
1.25 0.05
0.41 0.41
0.45 0.03
4.54 0.05
0.89 0.06
5.15 0.07
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
c) Corrected Depth to Water "' measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
.. c: ..
b • Corrected .·,
·.-. .. ... : Oepth10:-..
·• Water(ft)
10.21
8.54
8.46
'. 8.61
\
8.67
8.94
10.26
10.85
9.98
NM
7.99
NM
8.80
NM
8.20
8.31
8.95
9.92
10.51
10.47
10.08
11.18
10.66
8.93
11.29
12.09
11.00
9.35
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1
V)
C:
0 0.9 _,.......
0 V)
C> -0
C:
Q.) 0 0.8 > V) ·-::, °ti 0
'S I= 0.7 E.._..
::,
L>
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
04/02/91 05/12/91 06/21/91
Dale
~ Applled Geolechnology Inc.
Geotechnil:rtl Engmce11ng
Geology I!. 1 lyllroyeology
JOO NIJMUEII llllAWN
07/31/91 09/09/91
Product Recovery Rate
55 South Redwood Road
Sall lake City, Utah
Al'PllOVEIJ DATE
L~-------~ ~~
FIGUIIE
1
IIEVISl:O DAlE
)
\~
I
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
August 16, 1991
15,489.003
Mr. Garth Miner
Bureau of Water Quality and Hazardous Waste
Salt Lake City-County Health Department
610 South 2nd East
Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
Dear Garth:
Project Update No. 5
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
UTAH DEPARTMENT OF
'"''1'iRm.1MENTAL QUALITY
AUG 2 1 1991
This letter presents an update on activities at the referenced site. A
product recovery system was installed in late February/early March, and
recovery operations began in mid-March 1991.
Recovery System Monitoring
Approximately 1,125 gallons of diesel have been recovered to date. Water
level and product thickness measurements collected during system monitoring
are shown on Tables l through 11. The product recovery rate is shown on
Figure 1.
Anticipated Further Actions
The monitoring wells with product have fluctuating amounts of product, and the
product recovery rate has stabilized. Converting the recovery system to total.
fluids remains a consideration, however we are continuing product recovery and
monitoring at this time.
If you have any questions or comments, please give me a call.
Sincerely,
APPLIED GEOTECHNOLOGY INC.
:!:: .. 1.!/
Hydrogeologist
PPB/cgl
attachments
cc: Ms. Jo Ann Chitty; National Warehouse Investment Company
Ms. Robin D. Jenkins; Utah Bureau of Environmental
Response and Remediation
P.O. Box 3885 Bellevue, WA 98009 FAX [phone] Telephone [phone]
Table 1
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
March 15, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
W-1
W-2
W-3
W-4
W-5
W-6
W-7
W-8
W-9
W-10
W-11
W-12
W-13
W-14
W-15
W-16
W-17
W-18
W-19
W-20
W-21
W-22
W-23
W-24
W-25
W-26
W-27
W-28
Notes:
1250
1245
1310
1305
1300
1302
1212
1200
1210
1215
1220
1328
1325
1322
1317
1347
1353
1351
1403
1407
1413
NM
NM
NM
8.30
8.26
NM
NM
NM
9.46
8.18
8.16
8.53
9.29
9.96
10.25
9.41
NM
a) LNAPLslight Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
NM NM
NM NM
NM NM
12.28 3.98
15.24 6.98
NM NM
NM NM
NM NM
14.67 5.21
7.86 0.00
,a.as 2.67
8.65 0.00
8.85 0.00
8.08 0.00
8. ,s 0.00
9.39 1.23
10.57 2.04
10.92 1.63
14.44 4.48
11.94 1.69
15.44 6.03
11.20 0.00
10.63 0.00
8.98 0.00
11.17 0.00
NM NM
10.26 0.00
9.51 0.00
b) Corrected Depth to Water • measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
NM
NM
NM
8.70
8.96
NM
NM
NM
9.98
7.86
8.45
8.65
8.85
8.08
8.15
8.28
8.73
9.45
10.41
10.42
10.0,
11.20
10.63
8.98
11.17
NM
10.26
9.51
Table2
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
April 2, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City. Utah
• Weir
W-1
W-2
W-3
W-4
W-5
W-6
W-7
W-8
W-9
W-10
W-11
W-12
W-13
W-14
W-15
W-16
W-17
W-18
W-19
W-20
W-21
W-22
W-23
W-24
W-25
W-26
W-27
W-28
Notes:
1604
1612
1513
1728
1710
1531
1543
1552
1557
1621
1618
1616
1503
1500
1506
1536
1641
1635
1652
1627
1048
1041
1038
1059
1102
1056
1052
9.83
9.92
8.11
a32
8. 11
8.46
9.90
10.88
9.65
8.21
NM
8.64
9.46
10.07
10.36
9.55
a) LNAPL,.Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
14.55
9.93
10.56
12.16
15.16
12.45
12.99
11.06
15.15
7.93
10.20
8.60
8.80
9.85
8.26
NM
10.66
11.00
14.25
12.00
15.20
9.83
10.83
9.06
11.30
12.01
11.10
9.67
b) Delta,. Thickness this period -Thickness last period
•.n
0.01
2.45
3.84
7.05
3.99
3.09
0.18
5.50
0.00
1.99
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NM
2.02
1.54
4.18
1.64
5.65
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-0.14
0.07
0.29
-0.68
-0.02
-0.09
-0.30
-0.05
-0.38
c) Corrected Depth to Water • measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
10.30
9.92
8.35
8.70
8.82
8.86
10.21
10.90
10.20
7.93
8.41
8.60
8.80
9.85
8.26
NM
8.84
9.61
10.49
10.52
10.12
9.83
10.83
9.06
11.30
12.0,
11.10
9.67
Table3
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
April 16, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
.. •,:-
.. ·,:.,. ._:a-,-
_ [)epttl,~i: ·.
Well·· Tlme,,-·--=--. • •· LNApt·(ft)::·
W-1 1150 9.60
W-2 NM
W-3 1305 8.00
W-4 1315 7.96
W-5 1320 7.87
W-6 1250 8.41
W-7 1240 10.06
W-8 1225
W-9 1135 9.61
W-10 1100
W-11 NM
W-12 1020
W-13 1520
W-14 NM
W-15 1600 7.88
W-16 1610 7.99
W-17 1640 8.69
W-18 1655 9.34
W-19 1710 9.95
W-20 1730 10.39
W-21 1210 9.40
W-22 1930
W-23 1925
W-24 1920
W-25 1855
W-26 1905
W-27 1840
W-28 1830
Notes:
a) LNAPL,alight Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
14.87
NM
9.61
12.35
14.68
10.91
11.05
10.84
13.25
7.57
NM
8.45
8.48
NM
7.96
9.49
9.68
10.n
14.63
11.30
15.15
11.14
10.56
8.71
11.12
11.84
10.89
9.40
b) Delta ,a Thickness this period -Thickness last period
5.27
NM
1.6'1
4.39
6.81
2.50
0.99
0.00
3.64
0.00
NM
0.00
0.00
NM
0.08
1.50
0.99
1.43
4.68
0.91
5.75
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.55
-0.84
0.55
-0.24
• -1.49
-2.10
-0.18
-1.86
0.08
-1.03
-0. 11
0.50
-0.73
0.10
c) Corrected Depth to Water• measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
10.13
NM
8.16
8.40
8.55
8.66
10.16
10.84
9.97
7.57
NM
8.45
8.48
NM
7.89
8.14
8.79
9.48
10.42
10.48
9.98
11.14
10.56
8.71
11.12
11.84
10.89
9.40
Table4
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
May 4, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
Welt
W-1
W-2
W-3
W-4
W-5
W-6
W-7
W-8
W-9
W-10
W-11
W-12
W-13
W-14
W-15
W-16
W-17
W-18
W-19
W-20
W-21
W-22
W-23
W-24
W-25
W-26
W-27
W-28
Notes:
1140
1103
1231
1311
1307
1218
1253
1300
1126
1220
1351
1354
1359
1558
1332
1234
1140
1505
1430
1623
8.85
7.39
7.98
6.86
6.82
7.38
9.18
9.91
9.05
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
5.94
NM
NM
8.25
9.14
8.80
8.87
NM
a) LNAPL,.Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
14.87
7.45
8.93
11.94
11.89
7.45
9.76
11.35
12.14
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
5.97
NM
NM
9.80
14.34
10.26
14.71
10.74
10.00
7.58
18.80
11.34
10.52
NM
b) Delta = Thickness this period -Thickness last period
6.02
0.06
0.95
5.08
5.07
0.07
0.58
1.44
3.09
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
0.03
NM
NM
1.55
5.20
1.46
5.84
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NM
-
0.75
-0.66
0.69
-1.74
·-2.43
-0.41
1.44
-0.55
-0.05
0.12
0.52
0.55
0.09
c) Corrected Depth to Water ,. measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
9.45
7.40
8.08
7.37
7.33
7.39
9.24
10.05
9.36
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
5.94
NM
NM
8.41
9.66
8.95
9.45
10.74
10.00
7.58
18.80
11.34
10.52
NM
\
Tables
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
May 15, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
Well=
W-1
W-2
W-3
W-4
W-5
W-6
W-7
W-8
W-9
W-10
W-11
W-12
W-13
W-14
W-15
W-16
W-17
W-18
W-19
W-20
W-21
W-22
W-23
W-24
W-25
W-26
W-27
W-28
Notes:
1614
1545
1644
1208
1212
1640
1628
1622
1608
1553
1550
1648
1636
1652
1654
1658
1701
1708
1710
1713
1718
1726
1724
1720
8.80
7.1
6.80
6.43
6.62
7.05
9.01
9.87
9.00
6.53
NM
NM
NM
NM
8.05
8.95
9.66
8.73
a) LNAPL=-Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
14.60
7.16
7.61
11.85
11.21
7.18
9.42
10.71
11.82
6.32
6.88
NM
NM
NM
5.62
NM
7.24
9.31
14.40
9.96
14.62
10.55
9.72
6.83
11.04
10.60
10.25
8.40
b) Delta "' Thickness this period -Thickness last period
5.80
0.06
0.81
s.~
4.59
0.13
0.41
0.84
2.82
0.00
0.35
NM
NM
NM
0.00
NM
0.00
1.26
5.45
0.30
5.89
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-0.22
0.00
-0.14
0.34
-0.48
0.06
-0.17
-0.60
-0.27
-0.03
-0.29
0.25
-1.16
a.as
c) Corrected Depth to Water .. measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
9.38
7.11
6.88
6.97
7.08
7.06
9.05
9.95
9.28
6.32
6.57
NM
NM
NM
5.62
NM
7.24
8.18
9.50
9.69
9.32
10.55
9.72
6.83
11.04
10.60
10.25
8.40
Table 6
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
May 29, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
'. Well
W-1
W-2
W-3
W-4
W-5
W-6
W-7
W-8
W-9
W-10
W-11
W-12
W-13
W-14
W-15
W-16
W-17
W-18
W-19
W-20
W-21
W-22
W-23
W-24
W-25
W-26
W-27
W-28
Notes:
1522
1518
1525
1602
1628
1514
1532
1535
1451
1626
1624
1622
1608
1552
1539
1612
1626
1630
1634
1638
1634
1636
1638
1645
1649
8.88
7.14
6.80
6.52
6.76
7.24
9.03
9.93
9.04
6.60
NM
NM
NM
6.50
8.20
9.12
9.69
8.90
a) LNAPL=-Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
14.57
7.18
7.75
11.80
11.24
7.27
9.65
10.98
12.45
6.38
6.92
NM
NM
NM
5.67
6.94
7.20
9.38
14.45
10.22
14.69
10.62
9.74
6.87
11.07
10.64
10.29
8.43
b) Delta,. Thickness this period -Thickness last period
5.69
0.04
0.95
5.28
4.48
0.03
0.62
1.05
3.41
0.00
0.32
NM
NM
NM
0.00
0.44
0.00
1.18
5.33
0.53
5.79
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-0.11
-0.02
0.14
0.69
-0.11
·-0.10
0.21
0.21
0.59
-0.03
-0.08
-0.12
0.23
-0.10
c) Corrected Depth to Water • measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
9.45
7.14
6.90
7.05
7.21
7.24
9.09
10.04
9.38
6.38
6.63
NM
NM
NM
5.67
6.54
7.20
8.32
9.65
9.74
9.48
10.62
9.74
6.87
11.07
10.64
10.29
8.43
Table 7
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
June 12, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
•.•
a.. -::J,_.-, .... ·
:=~-(~;:>:_ -·::·:::<::\:::( __ :·:t~l:::::,::: wen
W-1
W-2
W-3
W-4
W-5
W-6
W-7
W-8
W-9
W-10
W-11
W-12
W-13
W-14
W-15
W-16
W-17
W-18
W-19
W-20
W-21
W-22
W-23
W-24
W-25
W-26
W-27
W-28
Notes:
Time,,
1640
1500
1606
1653
1650
1609
1607
1640
1520
1510
1506
1601
1552
1550
1549
1545
1542
1539
1527
1525
1524
1522
1721
1725
1732
1740
8.85
6.88
6.54
6.24
6.55
7.30
9.07
9.79
8.88
6.55
NM
NM
6.53
8.10
9.15
9.79
8.83
a) LNAPL=-Light Non-Aqueous Phase Uquid
14.69
6.89
7.59
11.71
10.57
7.70
10.21
11.74
12.70
6.16
6.75
NM
6.83
NM
6.09
7.27
7.43
9.48
14.50
10.50
14.52
10.47
9.80
7.60
11.01
10.59
10.27
8.47
b) Delta =-Thickness this period -Thickness last period
5.84
0.01
1.05
5.47
4.02
0.40
1.14
1.95
3.82
0.00
0.20
NM
0.00
NM
0.00
0.74
0.00
1.38
5.35
0.71
5.69
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.15
-0.03
0.10
0.19
-0.46
• 0.37
0.52
0.90
0.41
-0.12
0.30
0.20
0.02
0.18
-0.10
c) Corrected Depth to Water .. measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
9.43
6.88
6.65
6.79
6.95
7.34
9.18
9.99
9.26
6.16
6.57
NM
6.83
NM
6.09
6.60
7.43
8.24
9.69
9.86
9.40
10.47
9.80
7.60
11.01
10.59
10.27
8.47
Table8
Wi/ttl C.... and Product Thickness Data
Jime 27, 1991
Fr991t Terminat
55 Redwood Road
Sall Lake Qty, tA1h
W-1 U52 9.17
W-2 1~ 7.25
W-3 1529 6.93
W-4 1536 6.70
W-5 1541 6.85
W-6 1532 7.80
W-7 1548 9.40
W-8 NM
W-9 1447 9.07
W-10 1~
W-11 1427 6.96
W-12 NM
W-13 1522
W-14 NM
W-15 1525 6.71
W-16 1520 7.06
W-17 1510 7.87
W-18 1507 8.48
W-19 1500 9.44
W-20 1458 9.96
W-21 1455 9.05
W-22 1558
W-23 1555
W-24 1552
W-25 1620
W-26 1615
W-27 1612
W-26 1607
Notes:
a) LNAPLaalight Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
14.54
7.31
8.17
11.75
11.15
8.52
10.93
NM
13.45
6.54
7.15
NM
7.29
NM
6.78
8.01
7.88
9.94
14.51
10.78
14.64
10.72
10.10
7.94
10.90
11.50
10.50
8.63
t:) Oe1ta • Thickness this period -Thickness last perioc
5.37 -0.47
0.06 0.05
1.24 0.19
5.05 -0.42
4.30 0.28
0.72 • 0.32
1.53 0.39
NM
4.38 0.56
0.00
0.19 -0.01
NM
0.00
NM
0.07 0.07
0.95 0.21
0.01 0.01
1.46 0.08
5.07 -0.28
0.82 0.11
5.59 -0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
c) C1rrected Depth to Water • measured Depth to Water -(Product Toi~kr,ess x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
9.71
7.26
7.05
7.21
7.28
7.'ol
9.55
NM
9.51
6.54
6.98
NM
7.29
NM
6.72
7.16
7.87
8.63
9.95
10.04
9.61
10.72
10.10
7.94
10.90
11.50
10.50
8.63
Table 9
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
July 10, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
...
-··welt • llme=-·-::. •.
W-1 1629 9.02
W-2 1615 7.29
W-3 1728 6.99
W-4 1745 6.92
W-5 1751 6.99
W-6 1733 7.92
W-7 1755 9.51
W-8 1758 10.29
W-9 1634 9.12
W-10 1623
W-11 1620 7.04
W-12 NM
W-13 1725
W-14 NM
W-15 1721 6.80
W-16 1718 7.14
W-17 1705 7.89
W-18 1701 8.55
W-19 1653 9.56
W-20 1650 10.07
W-21 1637 9.17
W-22 1803
W-23 1806
W-24 1812
W-25 1826
W-26 1822
W-27 1820
W-28 1818
Notes:
a) LNAPL 2 light Non-Aqueous Pt:asa Liquid
14.50
7.36
8.21
11.80
11.21
8.56
11.01
11.23
13.49
6.59
7.19
NM
7.34
NM
6.83
8.06
7.91
9.96
14.55
10.81
14.69
10.76
10.14
7.97
10.93
11.55
10.56
8.65
b) Delta .. Thickness this period -Thickness last period
5.48
0.07
1.22
4.88
4.22
0.64
1.50
0.94
4.37
0.00
0.15
NM
0.00
NM
0.03
0.92
0.02
1.41
4.99
0.74
5.52
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.11
0.01
-0.02
-0.17
-0.83
• -0.08
-0.03
-0.01
-0.04
-0.04
-0.03
0.01
-0.05
-0.08
-0.08
-0.07
c) Corrected Depth to Water ,. measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
9.57
7.30
7.11
7.41
7.41
7.98
9.66
10.38
9.56
6.59
7.06
NM
7.34
NM
6.80
7.23
7.89
8.69
10.06
10.14
9.72
10.76
10.14
7.97
10.93
11.55
10.56
8.65
Table 10
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
July 24, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
Well.
W-1
W-2
W-3
W-4
W-5
W-6
W-7
W-8
W-9
W-10
W-11
W-12
W-13
W-14
W-15
W-16
W-17
W-18
W-19
W-20
W-21
W-22
W-23
W-24
W-25
W-26
W-27
W-28
Notes:
.. --··
llme,·
1626
1430
1552
1608
1613
1548
1618
1622
1447
1442
1436
1545
1542
1535
1528
1519
1515
1511
1507
1503
1458
1455
1736
1741
1748
1755
.-·-:
Depth to,::':·
LNApt"(ft):::
9.50
7.91
7.35
7.46
7.48
8.36
9.81
10.24
9.25
7.47
NM
NM
7.60
7.76
8.46
9.10
9.81
10.24
9.36
Depth to·,,_::"·
Wat.er: (ft),,.: • '.
11.49
8.00
10.23
11.83
11.98
10.06
11.64
13.40
14.48
7.16
8.33
NM
8.95
NM
7.63
8.86
8.58
9.95
14.59
11.11
14.66
11.00
10.39
8.35
11.13
11 .83
10.80
9.03
a) LNAPL=Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
b) Delta = Thickness this period -Thickness last period
Product :-_-·: -/-:-:
Thickness (ft):-, ... ' ·
1.99
0.09
2.88
4.37
4.50
1.70
1.83
3.16
5.23
0.00
0.86
NM
0.00
NM
0.03
1.10
0.12
0.85
4.78
0.87
5.30
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-3.49
0.02
1.66
-0.51
0.28
1.06
0.33
2.22
0.86
0.71
0.00
0.18
0.10
-0.56
-0.21
0.13
-0.22
c) Cor;acted Depth to Water • maasured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
9.70
7.92
7.64
7.90
7.93
8.53
9.99
10.56
9.77
7.16
7.56
NM
8.95
NM
7.60
7.87
8.47
9.18
10.29
10.33
9.89
11.00
10.39
8.35
11.13
11.83
10.80
9.03
Table 11
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
August 7, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
a
. . ·,::
''. Well Time-,··
Depth.to-.
LNAPt(rtl·
•• .•. Depth to: .. :
• • :-watar(ft}·.
W-1
W-2
W-3
W-4
W-5
W-6
W-7
W-8
W-9
W-10
W-11
W-12
W-13
W-14
W-15
W-16
W-17
W-18
W-19
W-20
W-21
W-22
W-23
W-24
W-25
W-26
W-27
W-28
Notes:
1151
1104
1119
1111
1145
1125
1131
1138
1201
1010
1014
1020
1027
1032
1039
1045
1051
1056
1205
956
937
933
949
952
944
940
9.65
8.16
7.56
7.82
7.68
8.48
9.89
10.28
9.26
7.62
NM
NM
7.87
7.96
8.66
9.17
8.92
10.34
9.47
a) LNAPLc:Ught Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
14.54
8.33
10.88
11.84
12.81
10.92
11.87
13.78
15.55
7.43
8.67
NM
8.23
NM
7.92
9.28
8.87
10.37
14.59
11.33
14.68
11.11
10.55
8.57
11.20
11.96
10.90
9.05
b) Delta = Thickness this period -Thickness last period
·.·
.·.
Product.: ..
Thickness(ft):·
4.89
0.17
3.32
4.02
5.13
2.44
1.98
3.50
6.29
0.00
1.05
NM
0.00
NM
0.05
1.32
0.21
1.20
5.67
0.99
5.21
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
: ... , .. tJ--:
• Oettat(·. • .:
(ft)··:···· :
2.90
0.08
o.«
-0.35
0.63
0.74
0.15
0.34
1.06
0.19
0.02
0.22
0.09
0.35
0.89
0.12
-0.09
c) Corrected Depth to Water • measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
10.14
8.18
7.89
8.22
8.19
8.72
10.09
10.63
9.89
7.43
7.73
NM
8.23
NM
7.88
8.09
8.68
9.29
9.49
10.44
9.99
11.11
10.55
8.57
11.20
11.96
10.90
S.05
1.2 r----------------------------.
1.1 •-
1 •-
0.9 •-
Ill
C g__ 0.8 •-
o Ill u-n C
G> 0
:~ ~ 0 7 DO •
1t d 0.6
0.5 •-
0.4 •-
0.3 •-
0.2
04/02/91 04/22/91 0~/12/91 06/01/91 06/21/91 07/11/91 07/31/g1
Do~
~ Applled Geotechnology Inc.
Geolechnical Engineering
Geology & Hydrogeology
JOB NUMBER DRAWN
Product Recovery Rate
55 South Redwood Road
Salt Lake Clly, Utah
APPflOVE{t , ... ~ ....
' ✓ ,(,
PATE
)
f10UR£
1
REVISED DATE
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
July 23, 1991
15,489.003
Mr. Garth Miner
UTAH DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
AUG O 7 b:11
DIV. OF ENVIRO~MENTAL
RESPONSE AND REMErJ:ATION
Bureau of Water Quality and Hazardous Waste
Salt Lake City-County Health Department
610 South 2nd East
Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
Dear Garth:
Project Update No. 4
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
This letter presents an update on activities at the referenced site. A
product recovery system was installed in late February/early March, and
recovery operations began in mid-March 1991.
Recovery System Monitoring
Approximately 740 gallons of diesel have been recovered to date. Water level
and product thickness measurements collected during system monitoring are
shown on Tables 1 through 9. The product recovery rate has increased, as
shown on Figure 1.
Anticipated Further Actions
Many of the monitoring wells with product have decreasing product thicknesses,
and the product recovery rate has increased. Converting the recovery system
to total fluids is still under consideration, however we are continuing
product recovery and monitoring at this time.
If you have any questions or comments, please give me a call.
Sincerely,
APPLIED GEOTECHNOLOGY INC.
:!!.. ~c:57/
Hydrogeologist
PPB/cgl
attachments
cc: Ms. Jo Ann Chitty; National Warehouse Investment Company
Ms. Robin D. Jenkins; Utah Bureau of Environmental
Response and Remediation
P.O. Box 3885 Bellevue. WA 98009 FAX [phone] Telephone [phone]
Table 1
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
March 15, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
Depth to
Well Time LNAPL(ft)
W-1 --NM
W-2 --NM
W-3 --NM
W-4 1250 8.30
W-5 1245 8.26
W-6 --NM
W-7 --NM
W-8 --NM
W-9 1310 9.46
W-10 1305 --
W-11 1300 8.18
W-12 1302 --
W-13 1212 --
W-14 1200 --
W-15 1210 --
W-16 1215 8.16
W-17 1220 8.53
W-18 1328 9.29
W-19 1325 9.96
W-20 1322 10.25
W-21 1317 9.41
W-22 1347 --
W-23 1353 --
W-24 1351 --
W-25 1403 --
W-26 --NM
W-27 1407 --
W-28 1413 --
Notes:
a
a) LNAPL=Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
-
Depth to Product
Water(ft) • Thickness (ft)
NM NM
NM NM
NM NM
12.28 3.98
15.24 6.98
NM NM
NM NM
NM NM
14.67 5.21
7.86 0.00
10.85 2.67
8.65 0.00
8.85 0.00
8.08 0.00
8.15 0.00
9.39 1.23
10.57 2.04
10.92 1.63
14.44 4.48
11.94 1.69
15.44 6.03
11.20 0.00
10.63 0.00
8.98 0.00
11.17 0.00
NM NM
10.26 0.00
9.51 0.00
b) Corrected Depth to Water"' measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
b
Corrected
Depth to
Water(ft)
NM
NM
NM
8.70
8.96
NM
NM
NM
9.98
7.86
8.45
8.65
8.85
8.08
8.15
8.28
8.73
9.45
10.41
10.42
10.01
11.20
10.63
8.98
11.17
NM
10.26
9.51
Table 2
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
April 2, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
a
Depth to
Well Time LNAPL (ft)
W-1 1604 9.83
W-2 1612 9.92
W-3 1513 8.11
W-4 1728 8.32
W-5 1710 8.11
W-6 1531 8.46
W-7 1543 9.90
W-8 1552 10.88
W-9 1557 9.65
W-10 1621 --
W-11 1618 8.21
W-12 1616 --
W-13 1503 --
W-14 1500 --
W-15 1506 --
W-16 --NM
W-17 1536 8.64
W-18 1641 9.46
W-19 1635 10.07
W-20 1652 10.36
W-21 1627 9.55
W-22 1048 --
W-23 1041 --
W-24 1038 --
W-25 1059 --
W-26 1102 --
W-27 1056 --
W-28 1052 --
Notes:
Depth to
Water (ft)
14.55
9.93
10.56
1216
15.16
1245
1299
11.06
15.15
7.93
10.20
8.60
8.80
9.85
8.26
NM
10.66
11.00
14.25
12.00
15.20
9.83
10.83
9.06
11.30
12.01
11.10
9.67
a) LNAPL=Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
b) Delta = Thickness this period -Thickness last period
-
b
Product Delta
Thickness (ft) (ft)
4.72
0.01
2.45
3.84 -0.14
7.05 0.07
3.99
3.09
0.18
5.50 0.29
0.00
1.99 -0.68
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NM
2.02 -0.02
1.54 -0.09
4.18 -0.30
1.64 -0.05
5.65 -0.38
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
c) Corrected Depth to Water • measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
C
COrrected
Oepthto
Wate,(ft)
10.30
9.92
8.35
8.70
8.82
8.86
10.21
10.90
10.20
7.93
8.41
8.60
8.80
9.85
8.26
NM
8.84
9.61
10.49
10.52
10.12
9.83
10.83
9.06
11.30
12.01
11.10
9.67
Table 3
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
April 16, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
a
Depth to
Well Time LNAPL(ft)
W-1 1150 9.60
W-2 --NM
W-3 1305 8.00
W-4 1315 7.96
W-5 1320 7.87
W-6 1250 8.41
W-7 1240 10.06
W-8 1225 --
W-9 1135 9.61
W-10 1100 --
W-11 --NM
W-12 1020 --
W-13 1520 --
W-14 --NM
W-15 1600 7.88
W-16 1610 7.99
W-17 1640 8.69
W-18 1655 9.34
W-19 1710 9.95
W-20 1730 10.39
W-21 1210 9.40
W-22 1930 --
W-23 1925 --
W-24 1920 --
W-25 1855 --
W-26 1905 --
W-27 1840 --
W-28 1830 --
Notes:
Depth to
Water (ft)
14.87
NM
9.61
12.35
14.68
10.91
11.05
10.84
13.25
7.57
NM
8.45
8.48
NM
7.96
9.49
9.68
10.TT
14.63
11.30
15.15
11.14
10.56
8.71
11.12
11.84
10.89
9.40
a) LNAPL=Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
b) Delta"' Thickness this period -Thickness last period
-
Product
..
Delta
Thickness (ft) (ft)
5.27 0.55
NM
1.61 -0.84
4.39 0.55
6.81 -0.24
2.50 -1.49
0.99 -2.10
0.00 -0.18
3.64 -1.86
0.00
NM
0.00
0.00
NM
0.08 0.08
1.50
0.99 -1.03
1.43 -0.11
4.68 0.50
0.91 -0.73
5.75 0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
c) Corrected Depth to Water = measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
C
b Corrected
Depth to
Water (ft)
10.13
NM
8.16
8.40
8.55
8.66
10.16
10.84
9.97
7.57
NM
8.45
8.48
NM
7.89
8.14
8.79
9.48
10.42
10.48
9.98
11.14
10.56
8.71
11.12
11.84
10.89
9.40
Table4
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
May 4, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
a
Depth to
Well Time LNAPL (ft)
W-1 1140 8.85
W-2 1103 7.39
W-3 1231 7.98
W-4 1311 6.86
W-5 1307 6.82
W-6 1218 7.38
W-7 1253 9.18
W-8 1300 9.91
W-9 1126 9.05
W-10 --NM
W-11 --NM
W-12 --NM
W-13 --NM
W-14 --NM
W-15 1220 5.94
W-16 --NM
W-17 --NM
W-18 1351 8.25
W-19 1354 9.14
W-20 1359 8.80
W-21 1558 8.87
W-22 1332 --
W-23 1234 --
W-24 1140 --
W-25 1505 --
W-26 1430 --
W-27 1623 --
W-28 --NM
Notes:
Depinto
Water(ft)
14.87
7.45
8.93
11.94
11.89
7.45
9.76
11.35
12.14
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
5.97
NM
NM
9.80
14.34
10.26
14.71
10.74
10.00
7.58
18.80
11.34
10.52
NM
a) LNAPL=Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
b) Delta .. Thickness this period -Thickness last period
-
Product Delta
Thickness (ft) (ft)
6.02 0.75
0.06
0.95 -0.66
5.08 0.69
5.07 -1.74
0.07 -2.43
0.58 -0.41
1.44 1.44
3.09 -0.55
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
0.03 -0.05
NM
NM
1.55 0.12
5.20 0.52
1.46 0.55
5.84 0.09
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NM
c) Corrected Depth to Water .. measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
C
b Corrected·
Oeptnto
Water(ft)
9.45
7.40
8.08
7.37
7.33
7.39
9.24
10.05
9.36
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
5.94
NM
NM
8.41
9.66
8.95
9.45
10.74
10.00
7.58
18.80
11.34
10.52
NM
Tables
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
May 15, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
a
Depth to
Well Time LNAPL(ft)
W-1 1614 8.80
W-2 1545 7.1
W-3 1644 6.80
W-4 1208 6.43
W-5 1212 6.62
W-6 1640 7.05
W-7 1628 9.01
W-8 1622 9.87
W-9 1608 9.00
W-10 1553 --
W-11 1550 6.53
W-12 --NM
W-13 --NM
W-14 --NM
W-15 1648 --
W-16 --NM
W-17 1636 --
W-18 1652 8.05
W-19 1654 8.95
W-20 1658 9.66
W-21 1701 8.73
W-22 1708 --
W-23 1710 --
W-24 1713 --
W-25 1718 --
W-26 1726 --
W-27 1724 --
W-28 1720 --
Notes:
Depth to
Water (ft)
14.60
7.16
7.61
11.85
11.21
7.18
9.42
10.71
11.82
6.32
6.88
NM
NM
NM
5.62
NM
7.24
9.31
14.40
9.96
14.62
10.55
9.72
6.83
11.04
10.60
10.25
8.40
a) LNAPL=Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
b) Delta = Thickness this period -Thickness last period
-
Product Delta
Thickness (ft) en>
5.80 -0.22
0.06 0.00
0.81 -0.14
5.42 0.34
4.59 -0.48
0.13 0.06
0.41 -0.17
0.84 -0.60
2.82 -0.27
0.00
0.35
NM
NM
NM
0.00 -0.03
NM
0.00
1.26 -0.29
5.45 0.25
0.30 -1.16
5.89 0.05
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
c) Corrected Depth to Water =-measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
C
b Corrected
Depth to
Water (ft)
9.38
7.11
6.88
6.97
7.08
7.06
9.05
9.95
9.28
6.32
6.57
NM
NM
NM
5.62
NM
7.24
8.18
9.50
9.69
9.32
10.55
9.72
6.83
11.04
10.60
10.25
8.40
Table 6
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
May 29, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
a
Depth to
Well Time LNAPL(ft)
W-1 1522 8.88
W-2 1518 7.14
W-3 1525 6.80
W-4 1602 6.52
W-5 1628 6.76
W-6 1514 7.24
W-7 1532 9.03
W-8 1535 9.93
W-9 1451 9.04
W-10 1626 --
W-11 1624 6.60
W-12 --NM
W-13 --NM
W-14 --NM
W-15 1622 --
W-16 1608 6.50
W-17 1552 --
W-18 1539 8.20
W-19 1612 9.12
W-20 1626 9.69
W-21 1630 8.90
W-22 1634 --
W-23 1638 --
W-24 1634 --
W-25 1636 --
W-26 1638 --
W-27 1645 --
W-28 1649 --
Notes:
Depthto
Water(ft)
14.57
7.18
7.75
11.80
11.24
7.27
9.65
10.98
12.45
6.38
6.92
NM
NM
NM
5.67
6.94
7.20
9.38
14.45
10.22
14.69
10.62
9.74
6.87
11.07
10.64
10.29
8.43
a) LNAPL=-Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
b) Delta,. Thickness this period -Thickness last period
-
Product Delta·
Thickness (ft) (ft)
5.69 -0.11
0.04 -0.02
0.95 0.14
5.28 0.69
4.48 -0.11
0.03 -0.10
0.62 0.21
1.05 0.21
3.41 0.59
0.00
0.32 -0.03
NM
NM
NM
0.00
0.44
0.00
1.18 -0.08
5.33 -0.12
0.53 0.23
5.79 -0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
c) Corrected Depth to Water =-measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotec:hnology Inc:.
C
b Corrected
Depth to
Water(ft)
9.45
7.14
6.90
7.05
7.21
7.24
9.09
10.04
9.38
6.38
6.63
NM
NM
NM
5.67
6.54
7.20
8.32
9.65
9.74
9.48
10.62
9.74
6.87
11.07
10.64
10.29
8.43
Table 7
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
June 12, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
a
Depth to
Well Time LNAPL(ft)
W-1 1640 8.85
W-2 1500 6.88
W-3 1606 6.54
W-4 1653 6.24
W-5 1650 6.55
W-6 1609 7.30
W-7 1607 9.07
W-8 1640 9.79
W-9 1520 8.88
W-10 1510 --
W-11 1506 6.55
W-12 --NM
W-13 1601 --
W-14 --NM
W-15 1552 --
W-16 1550 6.53
W-17 1549 --
W-18 1545 8.10
W-19 1542 9.15
W-20 1539 9.79
W-21 1527 8.83
W-22 1525 --
W-23 1524 --
W-24 1522 --
W-25 1721 --
W-26 1725 --
W-27 1732 --
W-28 1740 --
Notes:
Depth to
Water (ft)
14.69
6.89
7.59
11.71
10.57
7.70
10.21
11.74
12.70
6.16
6.75
NM
6.83
NM
6.09
7.27
7.43
9.48
14.50
10.50
14.52
10.47
9.80
7.60
11.01
10.59
10.27
8.47
a) LNAPL=Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
b) Delta = Thickness this period -Thickness last period
-
Product Delta
Thickness (ft) {ft)
5.84 0.15
0.01 -0.03
1.05 0.10
5.47 0.19
4.02 -0.46
0.40 0.37
1.14 0.52
1.95 0.90
3.82 0.41
0.00
0.20 -0.12
NM
0.00
NM
0.00
0.74 0.30
0.00
1.38 0.20
5.35 0.02
0.71 0.18
5.69 -0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
c) Corrected Depth to Water .. measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
C
b Corrected
. Depthto
Water(ft)
9.43
6.88
6.65
6.79
6.95
7.34
9.18
9.99
9.26
6.16
6.57
NM
6.83
NM
6.09
6.60
7.43
8.24
9.69
9.86
9.40
10.47
9.80
7.60
11.01
10.59
10.27
8.47
Tables
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
June 27, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
a
Oepthto
Well Time LNAPL(ft)
W-1 1452 9.17
W-2 1422 7.25
W-3 1529 6.93
W-4 1536 6.70
W-5 1541 6.85
W-6 1532 7.80
W-7 1548 9.40
W-8 --NM
W-9 1447 9.07
W-10 1433 --
W-11 1427 6.96
W-12 --NM
W-13 1522 --
W-14 --NM
W-15 1525 6.71
W-16 1520 7.06
W-17 1510 7.87
W-18 1507 8.48
W-19 1500 9.44
W-20 1458 9.96
W-21 1455 9.05
W-22 1558 --
W-23 1555 --
W-24 1552 --
W-25 1620 --
W-26 1615 --
W-27 1612 --
W-28 1607 --
Notes:
Oepthto
Water(ft)
14.54
7.31
8.17
11.75
11.15
8.52
10.93
NM
13.45
6.54
7.15
NM
7.29
NM
6.78
8.01
7.88
9.94
14.51
10.78
14.64
10.72
10.10
7.94
10.90
11.50
10.50
8.63
a) LNAPLalight Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
b) Delta "' Thickness this period -Thickness last period
-
· Product Delta
Thlckness (ft) (ft)
5.37 -0.47
0.06 0.05
1.24 0.19
5.05 -0.42
4.30 0.28
0.72 0.32
1.53 0.39
NM
4.38 0.56
0.00
0.19 -0.01
NM
0.00
NM
0.07 0.07
0.95 0.21
0.01 0.01
1.46 0.08
5.07 -0.28
0.82 o.11
5.59 -0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
o.oo
c) Corrected Depth to Water • measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
C
b COO-acted
Depth(O
Water (ft)
9.71
7.26
7.05
7.21
7.28
7.87
9.55
NM
9.51
6.54
6.98
NM
7.29
NM
6.72
7.16
7.87
8.63
9.95
10.04
9.61
10.72
10.10
7.94
10.90
11.50
10.50
8.63
Table9
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
July 10, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City' Utah
.· a
Oept~to· ...
Well 11me LNAPL(ft) ••
W-1 1629 9.02
W-2 1615 7.29
W-3 1728 6.99
W-4 1745 6.92
W-5 1751 6.99
W-6 1733 7.92
W-7 1755 9.51
W-8 1758 10.29
W-9 1634 9.12
W-10 1623 --
W-11 1620 7.04
W-12 --NM
W-13 1725 --
W-14 --NM
W-15 1721 6.80
W-16 1718 7.14
W-17 1705 7.89
W-18 1701 8.55
W-19 1653 9.56
W-20 1650 10.07
W-21 1637 9.17
W-22 1803 --
W-23 1806 --
W-24 1812 --
W-25 1826 --
W-26 1822 --
W-27 1820 --
W-28 1818 --
Notes:
Oepthto ·
Water(ft)
14.50
7.36
8.21
11.80
11.21
8.56
11.01
11.23
13.49
6.59
7.19
NM
7.34
NM
6.83
8.06
7.91
9.96
14.55
10.81
14.69
10.76
10.14
7.97
10.93
11.55
10.56
8.65
a) LNAPL=Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
b) Delta = Thickness this period -Thickness last period
-
Product: • Delta.
Thtckness·(ft) . (ft}
5.48 0.11
0.07 0.01
1.22 -0.02
4.88 -0.17
4.22 -0.83
0.64 -0.08
1.50 -0.03
0.94
4.37 -0.01
0.00
0.15 -0.04
NM
0.00
NM
0.03 -0.04
0.92 -0.03
0.02 0.01
1.41 -0.05
4.99 -0.08
0.74 -0.08
5.52 -0.07
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
c) Corrected Depth to Water • measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
C
b Corrected
Depth to
Water(ft)
9.57
7.30
7.11
7.41
7.41
7.98
9.66
10.38
9.56
6.59
7.06
NM
7.34
NM
6.80
7.23
7.89
8.69
10.06
10.14
9.72
10.76
10.14
7.97
10.93
11.55
10.56
8.65
"' C
0
0
~ ...,
~
0
::,
E
::, u
800 .-----------------------------------------,
700
I I I
I I I 600
500
400
300
200 ~----'Et=----'----..,__ __ __,_ ___ .__ __ ~ __ _,_ ___ ..J_ __ ---'----L---....1....-_J
04/02/91 04/22/91 05/12/91
Date
~ Applied Geotechnology Inc.
Geotechnical Engineering
Geology & Hydrogeology
JOB NUMBER DRAWN
06/01/91 06/21/91 07/11/91
Product Recovery Rate
55 South Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
APP~OVED ~ ,p Q?
DATE
I
)
I
I
FIGURE
1
REVISED DATE
-
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
June 18, 1991
15,489.003
Mr. Garth
Bureau of
Salt Lake
610 South
Miner
Water Quality and Hazardous Waste
City-County Health Department
2nd East
Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
Dear Garth:
Project Update No. 3
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
This letter presents an update on activities at the referenced site. A
product recovery system was inst al led in late February/ early March, and
recovery operations began in mid-March 1991.
Recovery System Monitoring
Approximately 490 gallons of diesel have been recovered to date. Water level
and product thickness measurements collected during system monitoring are
shown on Tables 1 through 7.
Anticipated Further Actions
Product recovery is not progressing as rapidly as anticipated.
considering changing the recovery system to recover total fluids, in
depress the water table and draw in more product. Recovered fluids
processed in an oil/water separator. Product would be transferred
product storage tank, and water would be discharged to the sanitary
accordance with a discharge permit.
If you have any questions or comments, please give me a call.
Sincerely,
APPLIED GEOTECHNOLOGY INC.
/$/!&
Peter P. Barry ~
Hydrogeologist /
PPB/cgl
attachments
cc: Ms. Robin D. Jenkins; Utah Bureau of Environmental
Response and Remediation
We are
order to
would be
into the
sewer in
P.O. Box 3885 Bellevue, WA 98009 FAX [phone] Telephone 206/453·8383
-
Table 1
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
March 15, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
Depth to
Well Time LNAPL(ft)
W-1 --NM
W-2 --NM
W-3 --NM
W-4 1250 8.30
W-5 1245 8.26
W-6 --NM
W-7 --NM
W-8 --NM
W-9 1310 9.46
W-10 1305 --
W-11 1300 8.18
W-12 1302 --
W-13 1212 --
W-14 1200 --
W-15 1210 --
W-16 1215 8.16
W-17 1220 8.53
W-18 1328 9.29
W-19 1325 9.96
W-20 1322 10.25
W-21 1317 9.41
W-22 1347 --
W-23 1353 --
W-24 1351 --
W-25 1403 --
W-26 --NM
W-27 1407 --
W-28 1413 --
Notes:
a
a) LNAPL .. Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
Depth to Product
Water (ft) Thickness (ft)
NM NM
NM NM
NM NM
12.28 3.98
15.24 6.98
NM NM
NM NM
NM NM
14.67 5.21
7.86 0.00
10.85 2.67
8.65 0.00
8.85 0.00
8.08 0.00
8.15 0.00
9.39 1.23
10.57 2.04
10.92 1.63
14.44 4.48
11.94 1.69
15.44 6.03
11.20 0.00
10.63 0.00
8.98 0.00
11.17 0.00
NM NM
10.26 0.00
9.51 0.00
b) Corrected Depth to Water .. measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
b
Corrected
Depth to
Water (ft)
NM
NM
NM
8.70
8.96
NM
NM
NM
9.98
7.86
8.45
8.65
8.85
8.08
8.15
8.28
8.73
9.45
10.41
10.42
10.01
11.20
10.63
8.98
11.17
NM
10.26
9.51
Table 2
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
April 2, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
a
Depth to
Well Time LNAPL (ft)
W-1 1604 9.83
W-2 1612 9.92
W-3 1513 8.11
W-4 1728 8.32
W-5 1710 8.11
W-6 1531 8.46
W-7 1543 9.90
W-8 1552 10.88
W-9 1557 9.65
W-10 1621 --
W-11 1618 8.21
W-12 1616 --
W-13 1503 --
W-14 1500 --
W-15 1506 --
W-16 --NM
W-17 1536 8.64
W-18 1641 9.46
W-19 1635 10.07
W-20 1652 10.36
W-21 1627 9.55
W-22 1048 --
W-23 1041 --
W-24 1038 --
W-25 1059 --
W-26 1102 --
W-27 1056 --
W-28 1052 --
Notes:
Depth to
Water (ft)
14.55
9.93
10.56
12.16
15.16
12.45
12.99
11.06
15.15
7.93
10.20
8.60
8.80
9.85
8.26
NM
10.66
11.00
14.25
12.00
15.20
9.83
10.83
9.06
11.30
12.01
11.10
9.67
a) LNAPL=Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
b) Delta = Thickness this period -Thickness last period
b
Product Delta
Thickness (ft) (ft)
4.72
0.01
2.45
3.84 -0.14
7.05 0.07
3.99
3.09
0.18
5.50 0.29
0.00
1.99 -0.68
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NM
2.02 -0.02
1.54 -0.09
4.18 -0.30
1.64 -0.05
5.65 -0.38
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
c) Corrected Depth to Water = measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
C
Corrected
Depth to
Water (ft)
10.30
9.92
8.35
8.70
8.82
8.86
10.21
10.90
10.20
7.93
8.41
8.60
8.80
9.85
8.26
NM
8.84
9.61
10.49
10.52
10.12
9.83
10.83
9.06
11.30
12.01
11.10
9.67
Table3
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
April 16, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
a
Depth to
Well lime LNAPL(ft)
W-1 1150 9.60
W-2 --NM
W-3 1305 8.00
W-4 1315 7.96
W-5 1320 7.87
W-6 1250 8.41
W-7 1240 10.06
W-8 1225 --
W-9 1135 9.61
W-10 1100 --
W-11 --NM
W-12 1020 --
W-13 1520 --
W-14 --NM
W-15 1600 7.88
W-16 1610 7.99
W-17 1640 8.69
W-18 1655 9.34
W-19 1710 9.95
W-20 1730 10.39
W-21 1210 9.40
W-22 1930 --
W-23 1925 --
W-24 1920 --
W-25 1855 --
W-26 1905 --
W-27 1840 --
W-28 1830 --
Notes:
Depth to
Water (ft)
14.87
NM
9.61
12.35
14.68
10.91
11.05
10.84
13.25
7.57
NM
8.45
8.48
NM
7.96
9.49
9.68
10.77
14.63
11.30
15.15
11.14
10.56
8.71
11.12
11.84
10.89
9.40
a) LNAPL=Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
b) Delta = Thickness this period -Thickness last period
-
Product Delta
Thickness (ft) (ft)
5.27 0.55
NM
1.61 -0.84
4.39 0.55
6.81 -0.24
2.50 -1.49
0.99 -2.10
0.00 -0.18
3.64 -1.86
0.00
NM
0.00
0.00
NM
0.08 0.08
1.50
0.99 -1.03
1.43 -0.11
4.68 0.50
0.91 -0.73
5.75 0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
c) Corrected Depth to Water = measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
C
b Corrected
Depth to
Water (ft)
10.13
NM
8.16
8.40
8.55
8.66
10.16
10.84
9.97
7.57
NM
8.45
8.48
NM
7.89
8.14
8.79
9.48
10.42
10.48
9.98
11.14
10.56
8.71
11.12
11.84
10.89
9.40
Table4
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
May 4, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
a
Depth to
Well llme LNAPL (ft)
W-1 1140 8.85
W-2 1103 7.39
W-3 1231 7.98
W-4 1311 6.86
W-5 1307 6.82
W-6 1218 7.38
W-7 1253 9.18
W-8 1300 9.91
W-9 1126 9.05
W-10 --NM
W-11 --NM
W-12 --NM
W-13 --NM
W-14 --NM
W-15 1220 5.94
W-16 --NM
W-17 --NM
W-18 1351 8.25
W-19 1354 9.14
W-20 1359 8.80
W-21 1558 8.87
W-22 1332 --
W-23 1234 --
W-24 1140 --
W-25 1505 --
W-26 1430 --
W-27 1623 --
W-28 --NM
Notes:
Depth to
Water (ft)
14.87
7.45
8.93
11.94
11.89
7.45
9.76
11.35
12.14
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
5.97
NM
NM
9.80
14.34
10.26
14.71
10.74
10.00
7.58
18.80
11.34
10.52
NM
a) LNAPL=-light Non-Aqueous Phase liquid
b) Delta =-Thickness this period -Thickness last period
-
Product Delta
Thickness (ft} (ft)
6.02 0.75
0.06
0.95 -0.66
5.08 0.69
5.07 -1.74
0.07 -2.43
0.58 -0.41
1.44 1.44
3.09 -0.55
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
0.03 -0.05
NM
NM
1.55 0.12
5.20 0.52
1.46 0.55
5.84 0.09
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NM
c) Corrected Depth to Water= measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
C
b Corrected
Depth to
Water (ft)
9.45
7.40
8.08
7.37
7.33
7.39
9.24
10.05
9.36
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
5.94
NM
NM
8.41
9.66
8.95
9.45
10.74
10.00
7.58
18.80
11.34
10.52
NM
Tables
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
May 15, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
a
Depth to
Well lime LNAPL(ft)
W-1 1614 8.80
W-2 1545 7. 1
W-3 1644 6.80
W-4 1208 6.43
W-5 1212 6.62
W-6 1640 7.05
W-7 1628 9.01
W-8 1622 9.87
W-9 1608 9.00
W-10 1553 --
W-11 1550 6.53
W-12 --NM
W-13 --NM
W-14 --NM
W-15 1648 --
W-16 --NM
W-17 1636 --
W-18 1652 8.05
W-19 1654 8.95
W-20 1658 9.66
W-21 1701 8.73
W-22 1708 --
W-23 1710 --
W-24 1713 --
W-25 1718 --
W-26 1726 --
W-27 1724 --
W-28 1720 --
Notes:
Depth to
Water(ft)
14.60
7.16
7.61
11.85
11.21
7.18
9.42
10.71
11.82
6.32
6.88
NM
NM
NM
5.62
NM
7.24
9.31
14.40
9.96
14.62
10.55
9.72
6.83
11.04
10.60
10.25
8.40
a) LNAPL2 light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
b) Delta .. Thickness this period -Thickness last period
--
Product Delta
Thickness (ft) (ft)
5.80 -0.22
0.06 0.00
0.81 -0.14
5.42 0.34
4.59 -0.48
0.13 0.06
0.41 -0. 17
0.84 -0.60
2.82 -0.27
0.00
0.35
NM
NM
NM
0.00 -0.03
NM
0.00
1.26 -0.29
5.45 0.25
0.30 -1.16
5.89 0.05
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
c) Corrected Depth to Water= measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
C
b Corrected
Depth to
Water (ft)
9.38
7.11
6.88
6.97
7.08
7.06
9.05
9.95
9.28
6.32
6.57
NM
NM
NM
5.62
NM
7.24
8.18
9.50
9.69
9.32
10.55
9.72
6.83
11.04
10.60
10.25
8.40
Table 6
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
May 29, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
a
Depth to
Well Time LNAPL(ft)
W-1 1522 8.88
W-2 1518 7.14
W-3 1525 6.80
W-4 1602 6.52
W-5 1628 6.76
W-6 1514 7.24
W-7 1532 9.03
W-8 1535 9.93
W-9 1451 9.04
W-10 1626 --
W-11 1624 6.60
W-12 --NM
W-13 --NM
W-14 --NM
W-15 1622 --
W-16 1608 6.50
W-17 1552 --
W-18 1539 8.20
W-19 1612 9.12
W-20 1626 9.69
W-21 1630 8.90
W-22 1634 --
W-23 1638 --
W-24 1634 --
W-25 1636 --
W-26 1638 --
W-27 1645 --
W-28 1649 --
Notes:
Depth to
Water (ft)
14.57
7.18
7.75
11.80
11.24
7.27
9.65
10.98
12.45
6.38
6.92
NM
NM
NM
5.67
6.94
7.20
9.38
14.45
10.22
14.69
10.62
9.74
6.87
11.07
10.64
10.29
8.43
a) LNAPL=-Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
b) Delta -Thickness this period -Thickness last period
-
Product Delta
Thickness (ft) (ft)
5.69 -0.11
0.04 -0.02
0.95 0.14
5.28 0.69
4.48 -0.11
0.03 -0.10
0.62 0.21
1.05 0.21
3.41 0.59
0.00
0.32 -0.03
NM
NM
NM
0.00
0.44
0.00
1 .18 -0.08
5.33 -0.12
0.53 0.23
5.79 -0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
c) Corrected Depth to Water = measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
C
b Corrected
Depth to
Water (ft)
9.45
7.14
6.90
7.05
7.21
7.24
9.09
10.04
9.38
6.38
6.63
NM
NM
NM
5.67
6.54
7.20
8.32
9.65
9.74
9.48
10.62
9.74
6.87
11.07
10.64
10.29
8.43
Table 7
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
June 12, 1991
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
a
Depth to
Well Time LNAPL(ft)
W-1 1640 8.85
W-2 1500 6.88
W-3 1606 6.54
W-4 1653 6.24
W-5 1650 6.55
W-6 1609 7.30
W-7 1607 9.07
W-8 1640 9.79
W-9 1520 8.88
W-10 1510 --
W-11 1506 6.55
W-12 --NM
W-13 1601 --
W-14 --NM
W-15 1552 --
W-16 1550 6.53
W-17 1549 --
W-18 1545 8.10
W-19 1542 9.15
W-20 1539 9.79
W-21 1527 8.83
W-22 1525 --
W-23 1524 --
W-24 1522 --
W-25 1721 --
W-26 1725 --
W-27 1732 --
W-28 1740 --
Notes:
Depth to
Water (ft)
14.69
6.89
7.59
11. 71
10.57
7.70
10.21
11.74
12.70
6.16
6.75
NM
6.83
NM
6.09
7.27
7.43
9.48
14.50
10.50
14.52
10.47
9.80
7.60
11.01
10.59
10.27
8.47
a) LNAPL=Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
b) Delta .. Thickness this period -Thickness last period
-
Product Delta
Thickness (ft) (ft)
5.84 0.15
0.01 -0.03
1.05 0.10
5.47 0.19
4.02 -0.46
0.40 0.37
1.14 0.52
1.95 0.90
3.82 0.41 • 0.00
0.20 -0.12
NM
0.00
NM
0.00
0.74 0.30
0.00
1.38 0.20
5.35 0.02
0.71 0.18
5.69 -0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
c) Corrected Depth to Water=-measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
C
b Corrected
Depth to
Water (ft)
9.43
6.88
6.65
6.79
6.95
7.34
9.18
9.99
9.26
6.16
6.57
NM
6.83
NM
6.09
6.60
7.43
8.24
9.69
9.86
9.40
10.47
9.80
7.60
11.01
10.59
10.27
8.47
-
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
April 18, 1991
15,489.003
Mr. Garth Miner
Bureau of Water Quality and Hazardous Waste
Salt Lake City-County Health Department
610 South 2nd East
Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
Dear Garth:
Project Update No. 1
Freight Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
-
This letter presents an update on activities at the referenced site. A
product recovery system was installed in late February/early March, and
recovery operations began in mid-March 1991.
Product Recovery system Installation and Startup
~Five product recovery wells were installed in February 1991 (see Figure l for
locations). The 12-inch-diameter wells were completed to a depth of
approximately 20 feet. The filter pack surrounding the well casing consists
of pea gravel, with a bentonite seal between the gravel pack and the surface-
mounted traffic-rated vaults. Product recovery piping was installed from the
wells to the former used oil underground storage tank.
The used oil tank was tightness tested in early March in anticipation of its
use as a product storage tank. Test results indicated the tank is tight. A
high fluid shut-off valve was installed in the tank, which will turn off the
product recovery pumps when the tank has filled. Product in the storage tank
will be removed by a Utah registered product handler and recycled or disposed
of in accordance with applicable regulations. Details of product removal
dates, quantities, handlers, and disposal/recycling locations will be included
in future progress reports.
Air supply piping was also installed from the wells to an air compressor. The
air compressor provides the power for the product recovery pumps.
Recovery System Monitoring
Approximately 200 gallons of diesel have been recovered to date. Water level
and product thickness measurements are performed during system monitoring.
Table l shows data collected on March 15, 1991.
P.O. Box 3885 Bellevue. WA 98009 FAX [phone] Telephone [phone]
.. .
Mr. Garth Miner
Salt Lake City-County Health Department
April 18, 1991
Page 2
Anticipated Further Actions
-
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
Water samples will be collected from Wells W-22, -23, -24, -25, -26, and -27
in late April or early May. Samples will be analyzed for TPH and BETX by a
Utah certified laboratory. Groundwater quality data will assist in the
development of a corrective action plan for the site.
If you have any questions or comments, please give me a call.
Sincerely,
APPLIED GEOTECHNOLOGY INC.
~/,~7
Peter P. Barry
Hydrogeologist
PPB/cgl
attachments
cc: Ms. Robin D. Jenkins; Utah Bureau of Environmental
Response and Remediation
.
.
W-28
North Temple Street
s
-
Hollday Inn
-s
W-27
s w-22 sW-23
South Temple Street
-· -
sW-21 SW-9 sW-10
EB
RW-5
EB PrO<iJct RW-4 W-1 / storage tan< s .
D
w 20 s Shop Bldg. W-2
SW 25 -c, s
Ill
0 a: >, ,
Ill -c, 3: I 0 a, s I 0 > 3: -;: W-8 Service W-5 Office : -c, 0 a, RW-3 Bldg. ~ a: EB I
w ·19 s I
s W-4
s
W-7 s
EB W-3
RW-2
s
W-18 W-6
s
s W-17 W-16 W-15
W-26 s EBRW-1 s s
LEGEND
s W-2 Number and approximate-Well location
EB RW-2 Pro<iJct recovery wel
JOB NUMBER
15,489.003
Applled Geotechnology Inc.
Geotechmcal Engineering
Geology & Hydrogeology
DRAWN
OFF
APPROVED
/'/'8
1-80
Site Plan
Shidler Group
Salt Lake, Utah
DATE
2 Jan. 91
-
sW-24
sW-11
s W-12
Loading Dock
sW-13
s W-14
~
Not ■: Not To Scale
FIGURE
1
REVISED DATE
MCT 15 Apr. 91
-
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
Table 1
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
Shidler Group/Salt Lake City
March 15, 1991
b
. ··a ·•·.· :-·-.•.•:-.. .Correcteck .. .. . .
Deptbto: ~bto·. ·Product':'. . Depttl:~-.•
Weil :Tune . t.NAPL(lt) .Water(ft)•. ~{ft) Water (ft)-,•
W-1 NM NM NM NM
W-2 NM NM NM NM
W-3 NM NM NM NM
W-4 1250 a30 12.28 3.98 a10
W-5 1245 8.26 15.24 6.98 8.95
W-6 NM NM NM NM
W-7 NM NM NM NM
W-8 NM NM NM NM
W-9 1310 9.46 14.67 5.21 9.98
W-10 1305 7.86 0 7.86
W-11 1300 8.18 10.85 2.67 8.48
W-12 1302 8.65 0 8.65
W-13 1212 8.85 0 8.85
W-14 1200 8.08 0 8.08
W-15 1210 8.15 0 8.15
W-16 1215 8.16 9.39 1.23 8.28
W-17 1220 8.53 10.57 2.04 8.73
W-18 1328 9.29 10.92 1.63 9.45
W-19 1325 9.96 14.44 4.48 10.41
W-20 1322 10.25 11.94 1.69 10.42
W-21 1317 9.41 15.44 6.03 10.01
W-22 1347 11.20 0 11.20
W-23 1353 10.63 0 10.63
W-24 1351 8.98 0 8.98
W-25 1403 11.17 0 11.17
W-26 NM NM NM NM
W-27 1407 10.26 0 10.26
W-28 1413 9.51 0 9.51
Notes:
a) LNAPLalight Non-Aqueous Phase liquid
b) Corrected Depth to Water • measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
NM -Not measured.
-,
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
April 11, 1991
15,489.003
Ms. Robin D. Jenkins
Environmental Health Scientist
Department of Health
RECEIVED
APR 1 5 9J1
UTAH DEPT. Of-Ht:ALTH
BUREAU OF ENVIRONMENTAL • -\ · ... r·-..·
Bureau of Environmental Response and Remediation
228 North 1460 West
P.O. Box 16690
Salt Lake City, Utah 84116-0690
Dear Robin:
Recommended Soil Cleanup Levels
Freight Terminal
55 South Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
This letter presents our evaluation of the criteria for determination of a
Sensitivity Level for the referenced site. The evaluation follows the
outline in the Utah Department of Health document entitled "Guidelines for
Estimating Numeric Cleanup Levels for Petroleum-Contaminated Soil at
Underground Storage Tank Release Sites," dated December 11, 1990.
EVALUATION RANKING CRITERIA
The following sections
Cleanup Levels document.
necessary.
directly parallel section 3. 3 .1 from the Numeric
A brief explanation of the ranking is provided where
1. Distance from Contamination to Groundwater
The distance from contamination to groundwater is less than 10 feet. The
corresponding ranking score is 20.
2. Native Soil Type
The predominant site lithology and native soil type as determined according to
the Unified Soil Classification System is clayey silt (ML), silty clay (CL),
and sandy silt (ML), as well as fine to medium sand (SP). The combination of
low and high permeability soil types would yield an average ranking score of
10.
3. Annual Precipitation
The average annual precipitation in Salt Lake City in the period from 1951 to
1980 is 15.31 inches, according to the National Agricultural Statistics
Center. This yields a ranking score of 5.
P.O, Box 3885 Bellevue, WA 98009 FAX [phone] Telephone [phone]
Ms. Robin D. Jenkins
Bureau of Environmental Response and Remediation
April 11, 1991
Page 2
4. Distance to Nearest Municipal Water Production Well
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
According to Ed Feld, of the Division of Water Rights in the Department of
Natural Resources, no municipal water production wells exist within a one-mile
radius of the site. This yields a ranking score of 0.
5. Distance to Other Wells
No other wells are in use within a one-quarter mile radius of the site. The
corresponding ranking score is 0.
6. Distance to Surface Water
The nearest surface water body is the Jordan River, approximately 3000 feet to
the east of the site. The ranking score corresponding to no surface bodies
within 1000 feet is 0.
7. Potentially Affected Populations
Populations within a three-mile radius number in excess of 3000. Populations
potentially affected by contaminants travelling in groundwater or along
utility conduits could consist of utility trench repairmen or construction
workers. These populations are likely considerably less than 3000, and
probably less than 100. The ranking score corresponding to populations below
100 is 0.
8. Presence of Onsite or Adjacent Utility Conduits or Wells
Utility conduits are known to be present at the site.
ranking score is 15.
The corresponding
9. Summation of Ranking Criteria to Determine Environmental Sensitivity and
Cleanup Levels
The sum of the above ranking scores is 50. The corresponding cleanup level,
for scores totalling 40 to 65, is Level II.
According to Table 11 in section 4.3.2, the Recommended Cleanup Levels (RCLs)
for TPH and other diesel-related compounds in soil are:
• Note:
measured.
TPH 300 . ppm
Benzene 0.300 ppm l,-
Toluene 600 ppm
Ethylbenzene 200 ppm
Xylenes 3000 ppm
Naphthalene 3000 ppm
Benzo(a)pyrene 60 ppm
If TPH values are exceeded, the additional compounds listed are
Ms. Robin D. Jenkins
Bureau of Environmental Response and Remediation
April 11, 1991
Page 3
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
If you have any questions or comments, please give me a call.
Sincerely,
APPLIED GEOTECHNOLOGY INC.
~/Lf:_
Peter P. Barry/
Hydrogeologist
PPB/cgl
cc: Mr. Garth Miner, Salt Lake City-County Health Department
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
April 11, 1991
15,489.003
Ms. Robin D. Jenkins
Environmental Health Scientist
Department of Health
Bureau of Environmental Response and Remediation
228 North 1460 West
P.O. Box 16690
Salt Lake City, Utah 84116-0690
Dear Robin:
Recommended Soil Cleanup Levels
Preight Terminal
55 South Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
This letter presents our evaluation of the criteria for determination of a
Sensitivity Level for the referenced site. The evaluation follows the
outline in the Utah Department of Health document entitled "Guidelines for
Estimating Numeric Cleanup Levels for Petroleum-Contaminated Soil at
Underground Storage Tank Release Sites," dated December 11, 1990.
EVALUATION RANKIHG CRITERIA
The following sections
Cleanup Levels document.
necessary.
directly parallel section 3. 3 .1 from the Numeric
A brief explanation of the ranking is provided where
1. Distance from Contamination to Groundwater
The distance from contamination to groundwater is less than 10 feet. The
corresponding ranking score is 20.
2. Native Soil Type
The predominant site lithology and native soil type as determined according to
the Unified Soil Classification System is clayey silt (ML), silty clay (CL),
and sandy silt (ML), as well as fine to medium sand (SP). The combination of
low and high permeability soil types would yield an average ranking score of
10.
3. Annual Precipitation
The average annual precipitation in Salt Lake City in the period from 1951 to
1980 is 15. 31 inches, according to the National Agricultural Statistics
Center. This yields a ranking score of 5.
P.O. Box 3885 Bellevue, WA 98009 FAX 206/646·9523 Telephone [phone]
Ms. Robin D. Jenkins
Bureau of Environmental Response and Remediation
April 11, 1991
Page 2
4. Distance to Hearest Municipal Water Production Well
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
According to Ed Feld, of the Division of Water Rights in the Department of
Natural Resources, no municipal water production wells exist within a one-mile
radius of the site. This yields a ranking score of O.
5. Distance to other Wells
No other wells are in use within a one-quarter mile radius of the site. The
corresponding ranking score is O.
6. Distance to Surface Water
The nearest surface water body is the Jordan River, approximately 3000 feet to
the east of the site. The ranking score corresponding to no surface bodies
within 1000 feet is O.
7. Potentially Affected Populations
Populations within a three-mile radius number in excess of 3000. Populations
potentially affected by contaminants travelling in groundwater or along
utility conduits could consist of utility trench repairmen or construction
workers. These populations are likely considerably less than 3000, and
probably less than 100. The ranking score corresponding to populations below
100 is o.
8. Presence of Onsite or Adjacent Utility Conduits or Wells
Utility conduits are known to be present at the site.
ranking score is 15.
The corresponding
9. Summation of Ranking Criteria to Determine Environmental Sensitivity and
Cleanup Levels
The sum of the above ranking scores is SO. The corresponding cleanup level,
for scores totalling 40 to 65, is Level II.
According to Table 11 in section 4.3.2, the Recommended Cleanup Levels (RCLs)
for TPH and other diesel-related compounds in soil are:
• Note:
measured.
TPH 300 . ppm
Benzene 0.300 ppm
Toluene 600 ppm
Ethylbenzene 200 ppm
Xylenes 3000 ppm
Naphthalene 3000 ppm
Benzo(a)pyrene 60 ppm
If TPH values are exceeded, the additional compounds listed are
-
Ms. Robin D. Jenkins
Bureau of Environmental Response and Remediation
April 11, 1991
Page 3
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
If you have any questions or comments, please give me a call.
Sincerely,
APPLIED GEOTECHNOLOGY INC.
PPB/cgl
cc: Mr. Garth Miner, Salt Lake City-county Health Department
....._
CITY-COUNTY
HEAL ARTMENT
610 South 2nd East, Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
Phone: [phone]
TERRY D. SADLER, DIRECTOR
Division of Environmental Health
January 31, 1991
Peter P. Berry
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
3001 120th Avenue N.E.
Bellevue, Washington 98005
Dear Mr. Berry:
----~RD OF HEALTH
Cindy Gust-Jenson
Chairperson
Paul McClure
Vice Chairman
Dick Bollard
Joe Duke-Rosatti
Ann Ford
Kirk Gilmore, M.D.
Quinn McKay
Neil K. Nixon, D.D.S.
Rhoda Ramsey
Rulon Simmons, M.D.
D. Michael Stewart
Roy Turner
Lee Wanless
Milton Weilenmann
Sandra Ercanbrack
Secretary
' J
•. ,1, .....
.,_. , ... ,, r, ~ !,,.,,,(-.~
.;, t, 1
After reviewing the documents which you submitted reporting
findings of your site visit to 55 South Redwood Road and the
proposal for product recovery, I have discussed pertinent issues
about the site with Robin Jenkins of the Utah Bureau of
Environmental Response and Remediation. An outline of those
discussions are listed below:
1. A considerable amount of time has elapsed since water
samples were collected from monitoring wells. It is our
concern that the extent of ground water contamination was
not clearly delineated and that the plume may have changed
since the wells were evaluated. There may no longer be
exterior monitoring points (wells which consistently show no
impact from the site) to define the extent of the plume. A
minimum sized database of analyses from interior monitoring
points are also needed to define the plume. We think that
water samples from all of the wells should be taken
quarterly for a period of time sufficient for ascertaining
data reproducibility without impeding cleanup. Plume
delineation is a requirement of 40 CFR §280.65.
2. A site plan showing groundwater surface contours was not
submitted. We need that drawing to complete a review of
your recovery plan.
_-_-:_-.:....:.:....-:::.~_~. ___ ------A. ... ~~--~-----------. -~-=--~:. -•-· ---------·-
UOOH/FS-BGS ef{~ 219&•
MARTHA H. CANNON\HEALTH BUILDING
288 North 1460 W()st
<
OFFICE OF AOftINISTRATI~ SERVICES ( ) OAS 01rector's Sta -•
'
( ) BB Budget
() BEDP Electronic Data Processing
() BHRM H1111an Resource Management
( ) BOD&E Or9anizational Development & EvaL
() BVR&HS V1tal Records & Health Statistics
DIVISION OF <DIUIITY HEALTH SERVICES
() OCH 01rector•s Staff
C ) BCDC Chronic Disease Control
() BENS Emer9ency Medical Services
() BE Epide1111ology
() BHPRR Health Pranotion & Risk Reduction
() BHFL Health Facility Licensure
DIVISION OF ENVIRONPENTAL HEALTH
() OEH Director's Staff
() BAQ Air Quality
() Bl:MS Drinking Water & Sanitation
~ BRC Radiatron Control
BS!-W Solid and Hazardous waste
( BWP Water Pollution •
OFFICE~ THE EXEaJTIVE DIRECTOR
l) OEOxecut1ve Director"s Staff
() ODO Deputy Director's Staff
() OGCR Gov't & can Relations
() BLRHS Local & Rural Health Systems
() BPI Public Infonnation Officer
-----------~-~ _· _·
!j,\ f11.
,.
OFFICE ri FINANCIAL SERVICES
< ) BF 1nanc:e -~ ..
() BFA Financi•l Audit
() BGS General Services
DMSION OF HEAL TH CARE FINANCING
() bAcF 01rector's Staff
( ) CBS Cann.mity Based Services Unit
{) BFR Facility Review
() BFS Financial Services
( ) Bfll PIUS Operations
() BMS Management Services
C) BMHC Managed Health care
() BPP Policy & Planning
() BUHAP Utah Medical Assistance Progrc1111
OllERS AT CANNON HEALTH BUILDING
() Bu1ld1ng Ma1ntenance (DFCM)
C ) oa~ care center
() Ma1l and General Receiving
() Quick Copy center
( ) cafeteria
() Fitness Center
( ) Hotor Pool
C ) Securhy
Attn: Rd>J,.,f. ~ ~~ Date:
1
/ 3 / ( ? (
Fran: ~-l l A~c...0 Phone: ---
D/0: • .,<., Bureau, ____________ _
OIVISl<JI OF FMILY HEALTH SERVICES ~,. ,,.;:;..,,,.,0 -, -< ,._.... ( ) OFHS 01rector 1 s Staff Connents: -~-· .:..··..;· ~~>;.;;.""~'•..i:'};._ ___ _,;, ____________ _
( ) BCH Child Health ,. ·· ··~ ;,· .). • () BCSHS Children's Special Health Services • ,.,..... .,.
() BCD Comalnicative Disorders
'() BOHS Dental Health Services
,,., , ..
~ ' -~ ·"' ~.:,,
..,..,,,, -'.-;., .~
~r-
TO: Robin Jenkins
FROM: Garth Miner
DATE: January 9, 1991
ME1"'.IC>RA.NDUM
RECEIVED
.JAN 1 0 1991
UTAH DEPT. OF HEAL T
BUREAU 0:: ENVIRON -H
RESPONSE AND fi€ME~~~T~~
RE: Meeting with P.I.E site owner and contractor (this date).
I met today with Jo Ann Chitty of Shidler Group (property
owner) and Peter Barry regarding the site at 55 South Redwood
Road. A summary of the meeting follows:
1. I gave them a copy of the recommendations you wrote 1n your
memo of Nov. 23, 1990 slightly altered to fit the
circumstances (copy enclosed).
2. They gave me a copies of the results of their latest site
visit report, sample results, and proposed product recovery
plan (copies enclosed).
3. We reviewed the regulatory roles of BERR and SLCCHD and how
sr,bmi ttals, communications, approvals, etc. would be
handled.
4. Peter questioned the requirement to analyze the product in
all of the wells with free product. As stated in their
report, they did analysis of product in four wells. He
didn't expect that there would be much difference in the
other wells.
5. We discussed the disposition of the USTs on the site. They
are planning to keep four fiberglass tanks (adding to them
monitoring, spill & overfill equipment etc. to meet
standards) for diesel and to remove all the rest. They
want, however, to keep one tank in the ground to store
recovered product. They didn't know the reguJatory status
of their tanks (nor did I) and what they would need to do to
use one of them for that purpose.
6. Peter showed some concern about being able to determine the
radii of influence of the recovery wells, but after talking
about some more, he decided he probably could.
7. Peter felt that the full extent of the soil contamination
had been determined and wants to know what else needs to be
done.
8. Peter wanted to know about well construction requirements.
I let him look at the Administrative Rules for Water Well
Drillers and told him where the Division of Water Rights was
(he was staying in the Holiday Inn just across the street).
I didn't know if BERR has additional requirements but didn't
tell him that.
9. I gave them copies of the tables 10 & 11 of the cleanup
document.
10. Peter wanted to know if certain analytes could be targeted
in certain wells rather than doing all analyses in all
wells.
11. Peter wanted to know if the site scored a level I, would all
of the required cleanup levels have to be those assigned to
level I. I told him cleanup levels are still determined on
a case by case basis.
12. We discussed the criteria used to determine a site's
ranking. (I haven't seen any response to a remediation
schedule yet. Has a schedule been sent to Jo Ann yet?)
13. I asked Jo Ann if she would like me to communicate through
her or directly with Peter. She said to work directly with
Peter.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The following is a recommended general course of action to be taken at the
LUST site at 55 South Redwood Road. The course of action is a joint
recommendation of both the Utah Bureau of Environmental Response and
Remediation and the Salt Lake City-County Health Department.
1. Continue to monitor groundwater elevations on a regular schedule,
preferably at the time of free product measurement and groundwater
sampling. This must be conducted during non-pumping periods.
2. Measure all wells for the presence of free phase hydrocarbons on a
regular schedule.
3. Collect groundwater samples from the wells with no free phase
hydrocarbons on a regular schedule. Because gasoline and diesel-
related constituents have been documented in the soil and groundwater
at this site, it is necessary that all samples be analyzed for the
presence of TPH as gasoline, BTEX, organolead, naphthalene, and
benzo(a)pyrene. The analytical detection limits must be sufficiently low
in order to detect constituents at or below their maximum contaminant
levels (MCLs) or reference levels.
4. Collect samples of the free phase product from all wells and determine
the product type.
5. The USTs that are used for storing the recovered free product are
regulated systems and must meet all pertinent requirements for UST
systems. The locations of .all USTs must be identified on a detailed
and appropriately scaled site map. The integrity of those USTs must
be determined to ensure that they are not leaking or have the
potential for leaking.
6. Resolve conflicting information of all analytical results and statements
made in the reports, specifically with respect to the contamination
reported in Well #22.
7. The owner/operator (or environmental consultant) must submit detailed
maps and information regarding the schedule of pumping and product
recovery, as well as appropriately scaled and detailed site maps
showing the locations of recovery wells and the effective radii of
influence of the recovery wells.
8. It is recommended that the full extent and degree of soil
contamination be defined and remediated. Appropriate soil cleanup
levels can be estimated using the Underground Storage Tank Branch's
guidance document entitled "Guidelines for Estimating Numeric Cleanup
Levels for Petroleum-Contaminated Soil at Underground Storage Tank
Release Sites."
9. It is recommended that groundwater be cleaned up to levels of
constituent concentrations consistent with federal drinking water MCLs
and proposed MCLs as adopted by the Utah Bureau of Water
Pollution Control's Groundwater Quality Protection Standards.
•.
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
January 3, 1991
15,489.003
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
The Shidler Group
7400 Bay Meadows Way,
Jacksonville, Florida
Dear Jo Ann:
Status Report
Suite 305
32256
P.I.E. Trucking Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah
This letter presents the information obtained during a site visit in early
December, 1990. This work was performed under your verbal authorization
pursuant to our telephone conversation on November 28, 1990. The purpose of
the work was to evaluate present conditions at the site and determine appro-
priate product recovery methods. Petroleum hydrocarbon contamination at the
above-referenced site has been documented in several previous reports. The
information contained therein is dated and not sufficient for cleanup plan
development.
SCOPE OF SER.VICES
The purpose of the visit was to obtain current information concerning the
distribution of floating product in groundwater monitoring wells at the site
in order to develop a product recovery plan. In order to gain a greater
understanding of the distribution of floating product at the site, the
following items were performed:
o Review available previous reports regarding the environmental conditions
at the site.
o Visit the site and measure product thickness in existing wells.
o Collect a sample of product in wells for fuel fingerprinting.
o Perform preliminary product recovery tests to evaluate the recovery
rates of wells distributed across the site.
o Obtain schematic diagrams for the site to assist in locating buried
utilities to evaluate their potential as conduits for product migration.
o Analyze the information obtained in order to develop a product recovery
plan.
P.O. Box 3885 Bellevue. WA 98009 FAX [phone] Telephone [phone]
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
The Shidler Group
January 3, 1991
Page 2
BACKGROUND
General
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
The P.I.E. terminal is located in an industrial area approximately one mile
from the airport. Freight operations at the site have occurred for at least
30 years. Two buildings are located in the central portion of the site.
Fourteen underground storage tanks (USTs) are present at the site. Three
USTs located below the service building have been abandoned ( filled with
sand), four USTs ( 12, 000-gallon to contain diesel) are undergoing renova-
tions, and seven are apparently in use (three 12,000-gallon containing die-
sel, one 10,000-gallon gasoline, one 10,000-gallon anti-freeze, one 8,000-
gallon motor oil, and one 3,000-gallon used motor oil tank).
The ground surface at the site is mostly covered by asphalt concrete pave-
ment. Subsurface geology has been described as fill to depths of 1 to 3
feet, underlain by clayey to sandy silt from to depths of 4 to 16 feet,
underlain by medium-to coarse-grained sand to depths of 11 to 21 feet.
Clay was encountered in some areas at depths of 16 to 20 feet below ground
surface. Groundwater at the site typically occurs between 8 and 12 feet
below ground, and groundwater level data indicate the flow is towards the
northwest.
Previous Reports
ERT performed a soil vapor survey in 1987, as documented in their November
19, 1987 report entitled "Draft Report, Soil Vapor Survey." The field
apparatus consisted of a 1/4-inch-diameter stainless steel tube, driven
approximately 3 feet into the subsurface. Vapors were then collected
through the tube and analyzed by a gas chromatograph with a photoionization
detector. The conclusions were that of the 20 locations sampled, 8 con-
tained detectable hydrocarbons. Further assessment was recommended.
ERT performed a contamination assessment in March, 1988, as described in
their March 17, 1988 report entitled "Limited Phase II Subsurface Investiga-
tion." Four soil borings were installed using a truck-mounted drill rig
equipped with hollow-stem augers. Soil samples were collected at 5-foot
intervals using a split-spoon sampler. One boring was completed as a
groundwater monitoring well. Water samples were collected through the
augers from the three borings not completed as wells. Floating product
within the monitoring well precluded the collection of a water sample.
Analyses of soil and water samples indicated the presence of petroleum
hydrocarbons. ERT recommended removing the USTs and installing additional
groundwater monitoring wells.
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
The Shidler Group
January 3, 1991
Page 3
.......
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
Blymyer Engineers, Incorporated performed a contamination assessment in
1988, as described in their October 3, 1988 report entitled "Subsurface
Contamination Assessment Phase II." This report was not available to us at
the time of report preparation, however a summary of their findings is
presented in their August 30, 1989 report. The investigation included the
installation of eight groundwater monitoring wells and the analysis of soil
samples for total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) as diesel. Analysis of the
soil samples indicated the presence of TPH concentrations above 1,000 parts
per million (ppm), and floating product was found in the monitoring wells.
Further investigation was recommended.
Blymyer Engineers performed another assessment in 1989, as described in
their May 5, 1989 report entitled "Subsurface Contamination Investigation
Phase II-A." Thirteen additional groundwater monitoring wells were in-
stalled, and soil and groundwater samples were analyzed for TPH as diesel.
The report concluded diesel contamination in soil was primarily confined to
soil above the water table, and floating product may have migrated off-site.
Temporary product recovery operations were begun. Evaluation of off-site
impacts and design and installation of a product recovery system were recom-
mended.
Blymyer Engineers performed another assessment in 1989, as described in
their August 30, 1989 report entitled "Subsurface Contamination Investiga-
tion Phase II-B." Seven additional groundwater monitoring wells were
installed adjacent to the site, and soil and water samples were collected
and analyzed for TPH. Petroleum hydrocarbon contamination was not detected
in the water samples, nor the soil samples with the exception of the sample
collected from W-22 at a depth of 10 feet. Blymyer Engineers concluded that
minimal off-site contamination existed, floating product recovery should be
continued, and site remediation should begin.
CURRENT SITE CONDITIONS
Product Thickness Measurements
An AGI representative visited the site to collect groundwater level and
product thickness measurements from existing groundwater monitoring wells on
December 12, 1990. The measurements were made from the north edge of each
2-inch diameter well casing. Table 1 summarizes the data. Schematic dia-
grams of buried utilities at the site were obtained in order to examine the
possibility of floating product migration along underground conduits. Ap-
proximate locations of buried utilities are shown on Figure 1, Site Plan.
Fuel Fingerprinting
Samples of floating product were collected from the diesel tank nest area
(W-4), the hydraulically downgradient direction (W-21), and across the
hydraulic gradient (W-11). Samples were analyzed by EPA Method 8015
Modified for fuel hydrocarbons. The analysis indicated all the samples
were diesel in nature. A copy of the complete laboratory report is
attached.
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
The Shidler Group
January 3, 1991
Page 4
Product Recovery Testing
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
Preliminary product recovery testing was performed on six monitoring wells
containing floating product. Product was evacuated from wells W-4, -5, -8,
-9, -16 and -21, and time and amount of recovery was measured. Approximately
eighteen gallons of diesel were removed from wells W-4, -5, and -21. The
product thickness recovered to 90 percent of initial thickness within 3 to 6
hours. Product thicknesses in wells W-8, -9, and -16 recovered to 20
percent of initial thicknesses in approximately 4 hours.
Regulatory Interaction
The Utah State Bureau of Environmental Response and Remediation (Bureau) was
contacted regarding a cleanup level for petroleum hydrocarbon-contaminated
soil at the site. Robin Jenkins (Bureau) indicated cleanup levels are
established on a site specific basis, and had not yet been determined for
this site. Ms. Jenkins indicated the Salt Lake City-County Health Depart-
ment (SLCCHD) had been the lead agency supervising cleanup activities at the
site. Garth Miner, SLCCHD, is the contact for the site, and the SLCCHD will
remain the lead agency.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Product recovery in monitoring wells was most rapid in the proximity of the
diesel tank nest area, as well as locations adjacent to buried utilities on
the site. Product recovery was relatively slow at wells away from the tank
nest area and away from buried utilities. This may indicate product
migration has occurred primarily along utility conduits, and secondarily
within the native materials at the site. Product appears to have
accumulated in the tank nest area, as well as migrated along buried
utilities. Product recovery operations will likely be most efficient in the
diesel tank nest area and along underground utility conduits.
If you have any questions or comments, please give us a call.
Sincerely,
APPLIED GEOTECHNOLOGY INC.
Services Manager
Attachments
cc: Mr. Garth Miner; Salt Lake City-County Health Department
Table 1
Water Level and Product Thickness Data
Shidler Group/Salt Lake City
December 12, 1990
Depthto. Depthto
Well. · lime . Product (ft) Water{ft)
W-1 0810, 10.43 14.28
W-2 0935 9.75 10.41
W-3 0829 9.38 13.39
W-4 0838 9.56 12.48
W-5 1255 9.24 13.20
W-6 0825 9.18 14.04
W-7 0817 10.38 13.58
W-8 0813 11.30 11.58
W-9 1244 10.49 13.25
W-10 1150 --9.10
W-11 1249 9.38 11.85
W-12 1145 --9.67
W-13 1130 --9.92
W-14 1134 --9.24
W-15 1145 8.86 9.54
W-16 1143 9.10 9.98
W-17 1140 9.38 10.72
W-18 1105 9.80 11.99
W-19 1100 10.56 14.44
W-20 1053 10.89 12.69
W-21 1028 10.02 14.93
W-22 1024 11.69 11.88
W-23 0955 --11.49
W-24 0957 --10.18
W-25 1003 --11.80
W-26 1001 --12.62
W-27 1006 --12.60
Notes:
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
a
. COrrected· •
Product. Depth to·.·
lbickenss (ft) Water(ft) ·• •
3.85 10.82
0.66 9.82
4.01 9.78
2.92 9.85
3.96 9.64
4.86 9.67
3.20 10.70
0.28 11.33
2.76 10.n
0 9.10
2.47 9.63
0 9.67
0 9.92
0 9.24
0.68 8.93
0.88 9.19
1.34 9.51
2.)9 10.02
3.88 10.95
1.80 11.07
4.88 10.54
0.19 11.71
0 11.49
0 10.18
0 11.80
0 12.62
0 12.60
a) Corrected Depth to Water -measured Depth to Water -(Product Thickness x 0.9).
W-28
s
s
W-27
SW 25 "t]
Ill
0 a:
"t]
0
0
:I:
North Temple Streat
Hollday Inn
s w-22
South Temple StrHt
··•·•• .. ~ S W-21 SW-9
•.Is-,,
(• •• ~ .. ----~,,
•••••... W-1 .. s
OIi/Water Se iirator Dlscha e Line
Shop Bldg.
>, . .
Ill
:I:
0 s ~
sW-10
W-2
s
I
sW-24
sW-11
w-12 s
w-e Service Office : "t] 0 Loading Dock 0 Bldg.
s
W-26
a:
W-18
W 19 s
s
LEGEND
W-17 s
s
s
W-4
W-6
W-18
s
S W-2 Number and approxlmat• Well location
J09 NUM8Eft
15.~119.003
Apptled Geotechnology Inc.
Geoteetmical EnginNring
Geology & Hydrogeology
I
s
W-3
• W-15 s
1-80
Site Plan
Shidler Group
Salt Lake City, Utah
Oo\11:
2 Jan. 91
sW-13
W-14 s
Note Not To Seal•
AEYISED DAff
)h AnalyticolTechnologies,lnc.
December 20, 1990
Applied Geotechnology, Inc.
P.O. Box 3885
Bellevue, WA 98009
Attention: Peter Barry
Project Number: 15489.003
-
560 Naches Avenue. S.W .. Suite 101. Renton. WA 98055. [phone]
ATI I.D. # 9012-094
RECEIVED
DEC 2 41SSO
APPf.JEDGEQ
TEcHNOLOGY INC.
Project Name: Salt Lake City, Pie Terminal
On December 11, 1990, Analytical Technologies, Inc., received three
product samples for analysis. The samples were analyzed with EPA
methodology or equivalent methods as specified in the attached
analytical schedule. The results, sample cross reference, and
quality control data are enclosed.
Bob A. Olsiewski
Project Manager
FWG/tc
Frederick w. Grothkopp
Technical Manager
• tih A~olyticalTechnologies,lnc.
1
CLIENT
PROJECT #
PROJECT NAME
SAMPLE CROSS REFERENCE SHEET
: APPLIED GEOTECHNOLOGY, INC.
: 15489.003
: SALT LAKE CITY, PIE TERMINAL
ATI I.D. # 9012-094
------------------------------------------------------------------ATI t CLIENT DESCRIPrION DATE SAMPLED MATRIX -------------------------------------------------------
9012-094-1
9012-094-2
9012-094-3
MATRIX
PRODUCT
W-21-12/10/90
W-11-12/10/90
W-4-12/10/90
12/10/90
12/10/90
12/10/90
----TOTAI.S ----
i SAMPLES
3
ATI STANDARD DISPOSAL PRACTICE
PRODUCT
PRODUCT
PRODUCT
The samples from this project will be disposed of in thirty~ (30) days
from the date of this report. If an extended storage period is
required, please contact our sample control departlD.ent before the
scheduled disposal date.
------• A A~alyt,colTechnologies,lnc.
2
ANALYTICAL SCHEDULE
CLIENT
PROJECT#
PROJECT NAME
: APPLIED GEOTECHNOLOGY, INC.
: 15489.003
: SALT LAKE CITY, PIE TERMINAL
ANALYSIS
FUEL HYDROCARBONS
R a ATI -Renton
SD = ATI -San Diego
T a ATI -Tempe
PNR a ATI -Pensacola
FC a ATI -Fort Collins
SUB a Subcontract
TECHNIQUE
GC/FID
ATI I.D. # 9012-094
REFERENCE LAB
EPA 8015 MODIFIED R
• th ;nalyticalTechnologies,inc.
3
ATI I.O. # 9012-094
FUEL HYDROCARBONS ANALYSIS
DATA SUMMARY
CLIENT . APPLIED GEOTECHNOLOGY INC. .
PROJECT # . 15489.003 .
PROJECT NAME . SALT LAKE CITY, .
CLIENT I.D. . REAGENT BLANK .
SAMPLE MATRIX . PRODUCT .
EPA METHOD . 8015 MODIFIED .
COMPOUND
FUEL HYDROCARBONS
HYDROCARBON RANGE
HYDROCARBONS QUANTITATED USING
FUEL HYDROCARBONS
HYDROCARBON RANGE
HYDROCARBONS QUANTITATED USING
PIE TERM.
DATE SAMPLED
DATE RECEIVED
DATE EXTRACTED
DATE ANALYZED
UNITS
DILUTION FACTOR
RESULT
<S
GASOLINE
<S
DIESEL
. N/A . . N/A . . 12/11/90 . . 12/11/90 . . mg/Kg . . 1 .
iA A~alyt1ca!Technol,;gies,lnc
4
ATI I.D. # 9012-094-1
FUEL HYDROCARBONS ANALYSIS
DATA SUMMARY
CLIENT . APPLIED GEOTECHNOLOGY INC. .
PROJECT# . 15489.003 .
PROJECT NAME . SALT I.AKE CITY, .
CLIENT I.O. . W-21-12/10/90 .
SAMPLE MATRIX . PRODUCT ..
EPA METHOD . 8015 MODIFIED .
COMPOUND
FUEL HYDROCARBONS
HYDROCARBON RANGE
HYDROCARBONS QUANTITATED USING
FUEL HYDROCARBONS
HYDROCARBON RANGE
HYDROCARBONS QUANTITATED USING
PIE TERM.
DATE SAMPLED
DATE RECEIVED
DATE EXTRACTED
DATE ANALYZED
UNITS
DILUTION FACTOR
RESULT
<10000
GASOLINE
* CS -C22
DIESEL
. 12/10/90 . . 12/11/90 . . 12/11/90 . . 12/12/90 . . mg/Kg . . 2000 .
* The sample chromatogram indicates the presence of a diesel-like
contamination.
---
. A AnalyticalTechnologies,lnc. •
5
ATI I.D. # 9012-094-2
CLIENT . .
PROJECT# . .
PROJECT NAME . .
CLIENT I.D. . .
SAMPLE MATRIX . .
EPA METHOD . .
COMPOUND
FUEL HYDROCARBONS ANALYSIS
DATA SUMMARY
APPLIED GEOTECHNOLOGY INC. DATE SAMPLED
15489.003 DATE RECEIVED
SALT LAKE CITY, PIE TERM. DATE EXTRACTED
W-11-12/10/90 DATE ANALYZED
PRODUCT UNITS
8015 MODIFIED DILUTION FACTOR
RESULT
. 12/10/90 . . 12/11/90 . . 12/11/90 . . 12/12/90 . . mg/Kg . . 2000 .
--------------------------------------------------------------------
FUEL HYDROCARBONS
HYDROCARBON RANGE
HYDROCARBONS QUANTITATED USING
FUEL HYDROCARBONS
HYDROCARBON RANGE
HYDROCARBONS QUANTITATED USING
<10000
GASOLINE
*
CS -C24
DIESEL
* The sample chromatogram indicates the presence of a diesel-like
contamination.
• A Anolyt1colTechnologies,l~c.
6
ATI I.D. # 9012-094-3
FUEL HYDROCARBONS ANALYSIS
DATA SUMMARY
CLIENT . APPLIED GEOTECHNOLOGY INC. .
PROJECT# . 15489.003 .
PROJECT NAME . SALT LAKE CITY, .
CLIENT I.D. . W-4-12/10/90 .
SAMPLE MATRIX . PRODUCT .
EPA METHOD . 8015 MODIFIED .
COMPOUND
FUEL HYDROCARBONS
HYDROCARBON RANGE
HYDROCARBONS QUANTITATED USING
FUEL HYDROCARBONS
HYDROCARBON RANGE
HYDROCARBONS QUANTITATED USING
PIE TERM .
DATE SAMPLED
DATE RECEIVED
DATE EXTRACTED
DATE ANALYZED
UNITS
DILUTION FACTOR
RESULT
<10000
GASOLINE
* ca -c22
DIESEL
. 12/10/90 . . 12/11/90 . . 12/11/90 . . 12/12/90 . . mg/Kg . . 2000 .
* The sample chromatogram .indicates the presence of a diesel-like
contamination.
. /"\ .. ....
. A A~olyticalTechnologies,lnc
7
ATI I.D. # 9012-094
CLIENT
PROJECT#
PROJECT NAME
EPA METHOD
COMPOUND
. . . . . . . .
FUEL HYDROCARBONS
QUALITY CONTROL DATA
APPLIED GEOTECHNOLOGY INC. SAMPLE I.D.
15489.003 DATE EXTRACTED
SALT LAKE CITY, PIE TERM. DATE ANALYZED
8015 MODIFIED MATRIX
UNITS
SAMPLE CONC SPIKED %
RESULT SPIKED SAMPLE REC
DUP
SPIKED
SAMPLE
FUEL
HYDROCARBONS <1 100 67 67 75
% Recovery=-(Spike Sample Result -Sample Result)
. 9012-087-3 . . 12/11/90 . . 12/11/90 . . WATER . . .
DUP
%
mg/L
RECOVERY RPD
75 11
~-----------------------------X 100 Spike Concentration
RPO (Relative t Difference)=-(Sample Result -Duplicate Result)
----· , ••• , --------------X 100
Average Result
)( ...
C ...
3 ....
~
!::
~
l'D
1/1
0 .
c.n
0
... .
0
0
... -c.n
C
N
0
0
t\l .
UT
0
(,rJ .
0
0
S•1pl1: 9012-03 ◄-l Chinn1l1 DENITRI
Acquired: 12-DEC-90 J:34 "•thod1 N:\IIAXDATA\SER6E-D\fUat211
InJ Vol: 1.00
0
U1
0
I
x ..lO-..l vol ts
I-.
0
0
17.4-4 DIESB.
....
CJ1
C
Fll1111111 12115D16
Dp11.dor: BRE
S11pl11 9012-094-2 Ch111n1l1 DEl!ITRI fll1n1u1 1211S017
Acquirtd: 12-DEC-90 4:1B N1thod1 M:\MIDATA\SER6E-D\fllal211 Dp1nton BRE
InJ Yol: I. 00
X .10-.l volts
0 I-I-.
LJI 0 CJ1
0 0 0
L
0 L-. l c.n
0
~ ;,.
I-
'
. o-
0
r~:
I-.i~ .
c.n
)( 0 if= i-,.
0
I-
1~ 1B.65 DIESa 3 tu J ,E=-....
~ .
.If ,-0 ,.. 0 ~
l'D J 1/1
N r . c.n
0 I
w .
0
0
X
i-
0
I-
3 .... -.... = o!+
i'D
"'
0
c.n
0
i-.
0
0
I-.
CJ1
0
t\l .
0
0
N .
CJ1
0
CJ .
0
0
Si1pl11 1012-014-3 Ch111n1l1 DEJIITRI
Acquir1d: 12-0EC-90 5:02 N1thod1 ft:\ltAIDATA\SER6E-D\flla1211
Inj Vol: 1.00
0
LJl
0
~
x 10-.1. vol ts
l-
o
0
:::==------------
II
If 17.38 DIESa
if
1-
ut
0
Fll1ai111 1211SDIS
-Op1ntor: BRE
\ i,..,. .,•---,.....n•ll f
I' J :~
.··.-. ..-1=~.--·
; , . ··, ..
. .
. ~ Applled Geotechnology Inc.
Poof-Qualify Original
'i CHAIN OF CUSTODY' .
•i Geotechnlcal Engineering
• Geology & Hydrogeology
Oats 12-10-'Jo -.:-=--~-'------Page I ol L
Project Manager: &r~·rl. /14n. Rt/
ProjectName: yl//Ai<f-' tlv , Pl~ 7J,zM,-n~
I '
Project Number: ,L£fr:'F4i::8'T / 5'-1-!J:I. oo.:,
Site Location: 5:; 5o..., I~ R~ow"O/.,J ,,.p;
Phone: 415 .]-818'3 Sampled By: U. 8re/~er,1,n
----. -------
~-_ §~t.1PLE DISPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS
ab Disposal') O Return □ Pickup (will call)
SAMPLE ID DATE TIME MATRIX LAB ID
I ,,
'901_~ -a9~ Laboratory Number:
ANALYSIS REQUEST
~ "' ·"' ..
8 ~ m ; ~ u .!! 9 ii .. IL u -i IL ~ a ~ .. .. i 0 a > ii 2 I-w .! I "' • ,c
g i " a ~ i.c :I IL 3: a i: ~ I • > a ,c • .. -; .!! I i i \: z i i :i:: .!! ! ;i > IL i ~ = j !I .!t • • ► Cl) ► A .!! • • "' E .., u .., :i:: a a a 2 i IL I f ! 2 ii IL z .., z ,c IL > ii !! u IL u 0 • IL • >< 2 >< 0 2 ,., >< 0 ~ . :i:: ,c " :i:: 0 IL :i:: w -E 0 IL >< ..
I-IL 0 0 0 0 0 ill 0 0 0 .., a I-.., .., ;; N I-• ,. g .. • "' 0 u i IL IL u IL u 0 w N 0 u -.; 3: I-w w I-w I-.. .. m .. .. .. IL Ill
"' a: w e z
e < 0-
0 .. z
"' 0 .. C u ..:
i' .. ... • ii .. 0 • IL ! :, 0 0 3 t:. II. "' N a: CJ 0 0 .. w :Ii en en ci ! I N "' .. ..; u >< 2 -:; ;; 0 0 ... .. .. t-t-
,;-,
l , b.1-z.1-12/4"/,., f,2,~0 -1~ lt//O f P,::;;::,~e:--1 -I V •; . -:r-
/J J-/1 -l2,/,o/I~~ L f (// 1<; I f I -:J. iv .' ,
f Jl_-'f_-l~/4°/'/l:> I ' I// ,o I ~ I -~ 'I ,¥ ., .. . ..,
'
LAB INFORMATION SAMPLE RECEIPT "RELINQUISHED BY: 1.1 RELINQUISHED BY: 2. I RELINQUISHED BY: 3.
Lab Name: /) ·1 I Total Number ol Containers: /_ T~•: /rp () '.)
Slgnalura: Time· I Slgna1u1a Tumt·
LabAddrS&&: •,{,() /._.\-i,1/~J f)1 ►t iW ChalnolCustodySsals: YIN/NA oa1a:
1'0, I ri--, ~.J t-:\ 'iJt,t:;\.., Intact?: Y/N/N 'c,7,•E~· ,;,) ,.;,.,, •• -.:1
Via: (1 i!J.tJ.lL c.,_~ Received In Good Cond. 6 C
·------
Prinl•d Nam•: Dale I Prinlad Name: Date:
Company: Co1npi.111y
TAT: 0 24hr. 0 48 hr. 0 72 hr. 0 1 wk. •W2 wks. (norma~ I RECEIVED BY: 1. I RECEIVED BY: 2. I RECEIVED BY: 3.
..
PRIOR AUTHORIZATION IS REQUIRED FOR RUSH DATA '-___,.-,,_,.. J.11:
Al I 5 n_ ,: I• ,:)_J
Special Instructions: -,-, A /Jf/J, ~J ~ ~ o ~II,,.,,, ro 'ti~ ·" 0 1 p 1n1 d N O P • I ' /V r.• . _,;..--___ a e: r • ame: ale: nnlod N,1111•: Oa10·
/A.Pre e:1~e Ncr t,v.;;r /~~ _r.r,~/q:5 ,.;.. "'--.. OIi S ,~-/✓-'lo
I • Sfl,Q ( 5 ) Compan1: /i -, ~ "J ~-Companr:
Signalur•: T 1111• I Slgna1u1 u T11110:
Company:
AGI OFFICES: Bellevue: [phone] Tacoma: [phone] Portland: [phone] DISTRIBUTION: Whits, Canary = Analytical Laboratory; Pink = AGI Flies
)
)-
\
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
January 4, 1991
15,489.003
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
The Shidler Group
7400 Bay Meadows Way,
Jacksonville, Florida
Dear Jo Ann:
Proposal
Suite 305
32256
Hydrocarbon Product Recovery
P.I.E. Trucking Terminal
55 Redwood Road
Salt Lake City. Utah
This letter presents Applied Geotechnology Inc.'s (AGI) proposed scope of
work and cost estimate for the installation and operation of a hydrocarbon
product recovery system at the referenced site. Background information used
to design this proposal is contained in our January 3, 1991 Status Report
for this site.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
The purpose of our proposed services will be to install and operate a system
to recover diesel fuel from the subsurface. Our scope of services will be
as follows:
o Install five product recovery wells.
o Install five product recovery pumps in the wells.
o Install subsurface piping associated with the recovery pumps.
o Operate and maintain (0 & M) the product recovery system for a period of
six months.
o Submit monthly progress reports to the Salt Lake City-County Heal th
Department.
PRODUCT RECOVERY SYSTEM
Product Recovery Well Location and Installation
Product recovery wells will be located in the underground diesel storage
tank nest area and in areas adjacent to buried utility trenches where prod-
uct has accumulated. Proposed well locations shown on Figure 1. Five
recovery wells will be installed using a truck-mounted hollow-stem auger
drill rig. Wells will be constructed of 6-inch-dlameter PVC, and the
screened interval will contain 0.020-inch slots. The wells will be com-
pleted at the surface with 2-foot square traffic rated vaults to provide
access to recovery equipment.
P.O. Box 3885 Bellevue, WA 98009 FAX [phone] Telephone [phone]
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
The Shidler Group
January 4, 1991
Page 2
Product Recovery Pumps and Controllers
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
Pneumatically operated product recovery pumps will be installed in the
recovery wells. The explosion proof pumps will remove product from the
wells and pump it to a product holding tank. Individual pump controllers
will be housed in the vaults at the wall heads. The compressor will be
located adjacent to the main building on the property, and will be housed in
a weather-proof structure.
Product Recovery Piping
Approximately 1,800 lineal feet of piping between the wells and the product
holding tank will be buried in trenches deeper than the mean annual freezing
depth. The U.S. Soil Conservation Service has been contacted regarding the
depth of freezing, and is currently researching the answer. The trenches
will be backfilled and compacted following piping installation.
Product Recovery System
Operation and Maintenance
O & M will be performed approximately twice monthly. Pumping equipment will
be serviced and inspected for damage or excessive wear. Groundwater level
and product thickness in existing monitor wells will be measured monthly.
Coordination with an authorized product disposal or recycling contractor
will be arranged to periodically remove and dispose recovered diesel fuel.
REPORTING
Monthly reports wi 11 document product recovery quantities, product
thicknesses and product disposal locations and quantities. Reports will be
submitted to the Salt Lake City-County Health Department no later than the
fifteenth day of the month following the reporting period.
COST ESTIMATE
The estimated cost to complete the scope of services described above is as
follows:
0
0
0
0
0
Product recovery well installation
Purchase and installation of product recovery pumps
Recovery pump piping installation
Six-month O & M of the product recovery system
Monthly reports
Total Cost Estimate
$13,300
35,800
14,600
21,600
3,000
$88.600
Ms. Jo Ann Chitty
The Shidler Group
January 4, 1991
Page 3
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
This estimate does not include the cost of product disposal, asphalt place-
ment over backfilled trenches, or the a product holding tank. Product dis-
posal costs will be addressed as-necessary, and product holding will likely
be accommodated by one of the existing on-site underground storage tanks.
FEE BASIS
We propose that the scope of services described herein be provided on a time
and expense fee basis in accordance with our General Conditions and Standard
Schedule of Charges, which are attached and form a part of this proposal.
For the scope of services described herein, we estimate our fee will be
$88,600. You may authorize our services by returning one signed copy of the
attached Service Agreement or by your preferred method.
We appreciate the opportunity to submit this proposal and look forward to
assisting you on this project. If you have any questions regarding the con-
tents of this letter or require additional information, please call.
Sincerely,
APPLIED GEOTECHNOLOGY INC.
ff!:i!;
Haeologist,
Vin~.
Associate Engineer
PPB/VPL/cgl
Attachments
W-28
s
s
W-27
SW 25 "ti as
0 a: >,
Ill
"ti ~ 0 cD
0 ~ ~
North Temple Street
Holiday Inn
S W-22
South Temple Street
Shop Bldg.
sW-10
W-2 s
sW-24
sW-11
W-12 s
"ti
cD
0
s
W-8 Service
Bldg.
W-5
I
Office : Loading Dock
s
W-26
a:
W-18 s
LEGEND
W-17 s
s
EBs
W-4
W-6
W-16 s EB
S W-2 Number and approximate-Well location
JOB NUMBER
15,489.003
EB Proposed Recovery Wetl Locations
Applied Geotechnology Inc.
Geotechnical Engineering
Geology & Hydrogeology
ORAWN
OFF
I-BO
I
W-15 s
Site Plan
Shidler Group
Salt Lake City, Utah
DATE
2 Jan. 91
sW-13
W-14 s
Not•: Not To Seal•
REVISED OATE
FIGURE
1
TO: Robin Jenkins
FROM: Garth Miner
DATE: December 20, 1990
MEMORANDUM
RE: Phone conversation about P.I.E. site
---------------------------------------------------------------
I had a phone conversation today with Peter Berry of Applied
Geotech about the P.I.E. site at 50 North Redwood Road. The main
points of the conversation were the following:
1. Representatives of Applied Geotech visited the site two
weeks ago to collect data. A report of their findings and a
preliminary plan of remediation are expected to be sent to
me in the first week of January (I will forward a copy to
you as soon as I receive the report).
2. P.I.E. will be moved out of the facility by the end of next
week. A new tenant will move in early in January.
3. The property owner is planning to test tanks on the site for
tightness early in the year and to remove many of the tanks.
4. A representative of the company which owns the site is
planning to be in Salt Lake City in the second week of
January and would like to meet with us and applied Geotech
to discuss the site. January 8 at 10:30 has been suggested
for the meeting. Your presence or the presence of someone
from your Bureau at that meeting, I think, is really
important.
5. Peter asked about clean-up levels for that site. He
admitted that it was probably really early to talk about
them since they still had free product, but he would like to
have a goal for planning purposes. I told him I'd work on
coming up with some. You and I will have to discuss this
issue.
6. They want to start very soon to remove free product. I
advised him that if he anticipated needing to get rid of
much extracted water, to begin as soon a possible to find a
way to do it (UPDES permit, underground injection permit, or
arrangements with Salt Lake City Sewer District) since that
problem could eat up a lot of time.
That's pretty much it. If you have questions call 534-
4542.
SALT LAKE J: CITY-COUNTY
HEALTH !J; DEPARTMENT
!_l r,
_I~ ''I·
,,, •1111,
610 South 2nd East, Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
Phone: [phone]
TERRY D. SADLER, DIRECTOR
Division of Environmental Health
December 7, 1990
JoAnn Chitty
National Warehouse Investment Co.
7400 Bay Meadowsway, suite 305
Jacksonville, Florida 32256
'O OF HEALTH
Cinoy Gust-Jenson
Chairperson
Paul McClure
Vice Chairman
Dick Bollard
Joe Duke-Rosatti
Ann Ford
Kirk Gilmore, M.D.
Quinn McKay
Neil K. Nixon, D.D.S.
Rhoda Ramsey
Rulon Simmons, M.D.
D. Michael Stewart
Roy Turner
Lee Wanless
Milton Weilenmann
Sandra Ercanbrack
Secretary
RECEI\/ED
Dear Ms. Chitty: UTAHD~T.OFHEAi..TH BUREM i c,-:: tr,1H,p~:;P.•V.f.NTAL
We are writing regarding the National i::~tot~-~.:, £~z;~~it~~~
Company owned property at 55 South Redwood Road, Salt Lake City,
Utah. On April 4, 1988, a Notice of Violation and Order of
Compliance was issued by this Department for the release of
petroleum from an underground storage tank (UST) system on that
property. April 4, 1988 predated the enactment of Federal or
State underground storage tank regulations. However, at the
present time, the Utah State Bureau of Environmental Response and
Remediation has legislative authority to direct corrective
action, ensure that the State Clean-up Policy (R450-101) is
adhered to, and that Federal regulations for USTs (40 CFR 280) be
enforced.
In order to simplify your interaction with regulatory
agencies, this Department and the Utah State Bureau of
Environmental Response and Remediation have agreed that this
Department will continue to take the lead in the supervision of
the remediation project. This will mean that all submittals,
questions, and communications will be directed to this office.
Anything what will need State approval will be forwarded to them.
The State has recently sent you a remediation schedule for the
site and in the future will issue other communications directly
to you (with a copy to us) to save time.
The contact person for this Department will be Garth Miner
(phone [phone]). Written communications should be addressed
BOARD OF HEALTH
L. Jed Morrison, M.D.
Chairman
Richard Bollard
Vice Chairman
Ann Ford
Kirk Gilmore, M.D.
Cindy Gust-Jenson
Linda Hamilton
Paul W McClure
Quinn McKay
R. Todd Neilson
D ~c Rulon Simmons, M.D.
610 South 2nd East, s_alt Lake City, Utah 841 fll C ~, v o. Michael Stewart
Phone. [phone] C f:Qoy Turner
ee Wanlass
TERRY D. SADLER, DIRECTOR APR 2 8 ]9i:_,,, Tamara Wharton
Division of Environmental Health Ut ud Sandra Ercanbrack
In the Matter of:
John Ster
B ah Depr Secretary
ureau o; S lie1 • of Health
---00800&.lfjzardou 1A, s rvastr
---00000---
NOTICE OF VIOLATION
and
ORDER OF COMPLIANCE
#HDWQR7/04-26-88
This NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND ORDER is issued by the Salt
Lake City-County Health Department pursuant to Salt Lake
City-County Health Regulations #13. The Salt Lake City-County
Health Department is given authority to adopt and enforce
regulations by 26-24-20 of the Utah Code.
FINDINGS
1. John Ster is manager of properties and real estate for P-I-E
Nationwide.
2. P-I-E owns a truck fueling operation (which includes an
underground fuel stora.e;e system) at 55 South Redwood Road
Salt Lake City, Utah.
3. A representative of P-I-E Nationwide has notified the Salt
Lake City-County Health Department that a diesel release of
approximately 4,000 to 9,000 gallons has occurred at that
facility.
DETERMINATION OF VIOLATIONS
Based on the foregoing information, John Ster has violated a
provision of The Revised Ordinances of S~lt Lake City. The
specific violation follows:
Creating a public health nuisance by allowing the pollution
of an aquifer as prohibited by section 17-1-5.
ORDER
Based upon the foregoing findings and violation,
is hereby:
ORDERED TO:
1. Within 10 days of the receipt of this Order, submit to the
Salt Lake City-County Health Department Bureau of Water
Quality and Hazardous Waste a plan and timetable for the
determination of the extent and magnitude of the spill
plume.
2. Within 30 days of the receipt of this Order, submit to the
Salt Lake City-County Health Department Bure~u of Water
Quality and Hazardous Waste a plan and timetable for the
remediation of the spill.
COMPLIANCE, OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING
This Order shall become final, without further notice,
unless John Ster requests a hearing within ten (10} calendar days
of the receipt of this Notice and Order. Failure to comply with
this Order may result in a civil action and/or criminal sanctions
as provided for in Salt Lake City-County Health Department
Regulations.
By~-Z=--..:....::~,___/.,,,.._~~:,r;----"-e((~---
Ron Hlnsen
Assistant Director
Bureau of Water Quality &
Hazardous Waste