My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0006479
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
Y
>
YOSEMITE
>
1257
>
3500 - Local Oversight Program
>
PR0545949
>
ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0006479
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/29/2020 10:14:28 PM
Creation date
8/6/2020 10:05:46 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
3500 - Local Oversight Program
File Section
ARCHIVED REPORTS
FileName_PostFix
XR0006479
RECORD_ID
PR0545949
PE
3528
FACILITY_ID
FA0003707
FACILITY_NAME
AHMEDS SONS INC
STREET_NUMBER
1257
Direction
W
STREET_NAME
YOSEMITE
STREET_TYPE
AVE
City
MANTECA
Zip
95336
APN
20015015
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
1257 W YOSEMITE AVE
P_LOCATION
04
P_DISTRICT
003
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
LSauers
Tags
EHD - Public
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
i I <br /> S E C O R <br /> Mr Ray Von Flue <br /> January 14, 2005 <br /> Page 2 <br /> were analyzed by direct Injection Into the GC and the results were evaluated by comparison <br /> to an analytical standard Whenever the tracer was detected in the subsurface samples, <br /> blanks were run to validate the tracer detection This procedure provides a leak sensitivity <br /> of 0 005 gallons per hour (gph) and complies to all State Water Resources Control Board <br /> Water Quality (SWRCB) standards as outlined in Local Guidance (LG) Letter 113 <br /> TRACER TIGHT TEST RESULTS NOVEMBER 2004 <br /> On November 4, 2004, the probes were installed and a different tracer was added to each <br /> tank of the UST system The probes were collected on November 12, 2004 and the vapor <br /> analyzed on November 17, 2004 The analytical results show that the only system to pass <br /> the ELD test is the Tank 3 system The remaining two tank systems, Tank 1 and Tank 2, <br /> failed the ELD test Assessment of the Tank 1 system indicates a failure within the fill <br /> sump piping assembly and the turbine sump (Attachment 1, Figure 1a) Failures within the <br /> Tank 2 system point toward a failure within the fill sump piping assembly and vapor sump <br /> manifold (Attachment 1, Figure 1b) According to Shirley, the amounts of tracer detected <br /> are commonly indicative of a spillage during tank filling or bucketffill riser leakage at the fill <br /> and vapor sump piping assemblies (Dan Green, personal communication, 1111105) The <br /> table below presents the results of the ELD testing <br /> Tank Product Size Tracer System Fill Riser/ <br /> (Oct) (gal) Status Spill Bucket <br /> 1 91 12,000 G FAIL PASS <br /> 2 89 12,000 R FAIL PASS <br /> 3 87* 12,000 H PASS PASS <br /> EXPLANATION: <br /> oct = Octane Rating <br /> gal = Gallons <br /> * Note Tank 3 octane rating is incorrectly stated as 97 in Attachment 1 figures It is <br /> correctly stated as 87 in the Attachment 1 tables and text <br /> All tanks contain detectable concentrations of total volatile hydrocarbons (TVHC) The <br /> TVHC values presented in Attachment 1 (Figure 1c) merely indicate that there was liquid <br /> present in the system at the time of sampling The presence of TVHC does not indicate a <br /> failure of the ELD test <br /> N%FileslProiectslChevron\RetaiM9-1848\91848_Results Tracer Test doc <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.