CF-Pump Station-SY 900122 LIMITED SITE ASSESSMENT
AND
UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK TESTING
CITY OF COPPEr.L
Coppell, Texas
Project Number:
2330-02
Prepared for:
CITY OF COPPETW.
Coppell, Texas
Prepared by:
MAXIM ENGINEERS, INC.
Environmental and Engineering Consultants
2342 Fabens/P.O. Box 59902
Dallas, Texas
(214) 247-7575
(800) 526-2946
January 22, 1990
MAXIM ENGINEERS, INC. Engineering and Environmental Consultants
LIMITED SITE ASSESSMENT
AND
UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK TESTING
CITY OF COPPELL
Coppell, Texas
Project Number:
2330-02
Prepared for:
CITY OF COPPELL
Coppell, Texas
Prepared by:
MAXIM ENGINEERS, INC.
Environmental and Engineering Consultants
2342 Fabens/P.O. Box 59902
Dallas, Texas
(214) 247-7575
(800) 526-2946
- i1~[~ (~ !--~ 0~"1~i January 22 1990
Maxim Engineers. inc ....................................................................................
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION I
1.0 Executive S~mmary
Table 1 - Summary of Tank Test, Line Test, and
- Risk Rating Results
Table 2 - National Fire Protection Association
Pamphlet 329, Precision Test Criterion
_ Table 3 - Limited Risk Assessment, UST Rating Scale
SECTION II
-" 2.0 UST Regulatory Requirements
SECTION III
3.0 Coppell Service Center
3.1 UST Testing
3.2 UST Line Testing
- 3.3 Site Assessment
3.4 Physical Characteristics of System
3.5 Product Management
- 3.6 Possible Contamination Scenario
3.7 UST Ranking
3.8 Recommendations
SECTION IV
4.0 Coppell Fire Department
- 4.1 UST Testing
4.2 UST Line Testing
4.3 Site Assessment
- 4.4 Physical Characteristics of System
4.5 Product Management
4.6 Possible Contamination Scenario
4.7 UST Ranking
4.8 Recommendations
SECTION V
5.0 Coppell West Service Center
5.1 UST Testing
_ 5.2 UST Line Testing
5.3 Site Assessment
5.4 Physical Characteristics of System
5.5 Product Management
- 5.6 Possible Contamination Scenario
5.7 UST Ranking
5.8 Recommendations
Maxim Engineers. Inc .............................................................................
1.0 EXECUTIVE
Maxim Engineers, Inc. was retained by the City of Coppell to
perform (UST) testing and limited site assessments at three (3)
facilities. Initial testing and assessment of the city's tanks
occurred on January 4, 5 and 8, 1990. Site specific discussions
of field activities are included in remaining sections of this
report. A summary of test results is presented as Table 1 on the
following page.
Four (4) USTs were tested and passed the National Fire Protection
Association (NFPA) Pamphlet 329 standard of 0.05 gallons per hour
for leak detection. The 1987 revision of Pamphlet 329
incrementally increases the standard in relation to increased UST
- capacity. Table 2 lists these criterion.
In addition to precision tank testing, testing of delivery/return
lines was conducted on the four (4) UST systems; all were
determined to be tight.
A limited site assessment was conducted at each facility. Data
from interviews with site personnel and Maxim's field
observations were compiled. Information was gathered pertaining
to surrounding land usage, other nearby petroleum storage
facilities, physical characteristics of the City's UST systems,
product management practices, site hydrogeology, and possible
- contamination receptors/pathways. Following this compilation,
USTs were prioritized using Maxim's Limited Risk Assessment, UST
Maxim Engineers. Inc ......................................................
Rating Scale from i to 5 (good to very poor). This risk
assessment model is presented as Table 3. A summary of risk
ratings is presented in Table 1. Results on a site by site basis
are included in remaining sections of this report.
Maxim Engineers. Inc ................................................................................................
SUMMARY OF TANK TEST, LINE TEST,
AND RISK RATING RESULTS
Table I
Facility Tank Test Line Test Risk
Name Tank # (gph) (gph) Rating
Service Center 1 -0.042 -0.001 3.4
2 -0.042 -0.011 3.2
Fire Dept. 3 -0.002 -0.026 4.1
West Serv. Ctr. 4 -0.036 -0.001 3.0
Maxim Engineers. Inc ............................................................
NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION
PAMPHLET 329, PRECISION TEST CRITERION
Table 2
Tanks Greater Than and Up to and Including Criterion
(gallons) (gallons) (gallons per hour)
0 12,500 0.050
12,500 17,500 0.063
17,500 22,500 0.075
22,500 27,500 0.088
27,500 32,500 0.100
32,500 37,500 0.113
37,500 42,500 0.125
42,500 47,500 0.138
47,500 52,500 0.150
Tanks larger than 52,500 gallons require special consideration on
a site-specific basis.
Maxim Engineers. Inc ..................................................................................
~'~ I ~-el-,-.I ~ -el -~ -,-I ~ "~ I I
t~E~ m
I
I -
0 ~ ·
~ ~--~ 0 U t:: ~ (I) ~1
(i) ~4 ~ rD -,~--~ -~ ~ ~ *~ :~ -~--~
~ 4d ~0 · m .~ ~ 0 · ~4 0,-~ 43
O I~ ~ ~ 0 ,~,-I .Id ~ ~ O
0-,-~ CJ ~ :~ 40 ~ m -,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o -
~ ~0 ~ ~0 ~ 0~0 o o
m O · ~ · 0 m
o fl~ ~ ~ ~
Maxim Engineers, !nc ................................................
Ill
--I
Z
2.0 UST REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
Recently promulgated federal and state legislation requires the
removal or upgrading of existing USTs to new installation
standards. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations 40
CFR 280.21 through 280.44 outline the following requirements:
1) Existing bare steel tanks must be retrofitted with
cathodic protection no later than December 22, 1998.
2) According to federal legislation, spill and overfill
protection must be installed no later than December 22,
1998. However, this requirement has been more
stringently legislated at the state level; 31 TAC, Part
334.51 requires this upgrade no later than December 22,
1994.
3) Permanent release detection for existing tanks is to be
installed according to the following schedule:
Existing Tank (Age) Release Detection Installed
25+ or unknown age December 22, 1989
20 - 24 years December 22, 1990
15 - 19 years December 22, 1991
10 - 14 years December 22, 1992
Under 10 years December 22, 1993
4) Permanent release detection for pressurized piping is
required no later than December 22, 1990.
Maxim Engineers. thc .............................................................................................
5) Suction piping and gravity-flow piping are required to
have permanent release detection no later than the
release detection date for the tank which the piping is
servicing.
Tank tightness tests, automatic tank gauging, automatic leak
detectors (piping), and piping tightness tests are required
to meet specific criterion after December 22, 1990. These
criterion are:
1) Testing methods must be able to detect a particular
release rate such that the probability of detection is
at least 95%;
2) The probability of false alarm is no greater than 5%.
Release detection compliance can be accomplished by a
variety of methods. Specific requirements apply to the
following allowable methods:
1) Combination of annual tank tightness testing and
inventory control (only allowed until December 22,
1998);
2) Automatic tank gauging and inventory control;
3) Vapor monitoring;
4) Groundwater monitoring;
5) Interstitial monitoring;
Maxim Engineers. Inc ........................................................................
6) Equipment designed to monitor UST systems with
_ secondary containment barriers; or
7) Alternative methods if approved by the executive
director.
Maxim Engineers. Inc .................................................................................
0
-I
0
Z
3.0 SERVICE CENTER
Maxim Engineers conducted field activities at the Coppell Service
Center, located 732 Deforest on January 4, 1990. Two (2) USTs
are located at this facility. (Refer to Site Plan, next page.)
The following information was gathered from site personnel
interviews and Maxim's field observations:
Capacity Material of Age
Tank # (gallons) Product Construction (years)
1 4,000 unleaded unprotected 2
gasoline steel
2 2,000 diesel unprotected 2
steel
3.1 UST Testing
Petro Tite precision tank tests were performed on Tanks 1
and 2. Compensation was made for temperature fluctuation,
tank end deflection, and coefficient of expansion of the
product types.
A leak rate of -0.042 gallons per hour (gph) was obtained
for Tanks 1 and 2. This rate falls within the National Fire
Protection Association (NFPA) Pamphlet 329 (1987 revision)
leak rate standard of 0.05 gph. According to this criteria,
these tanks appear to be tight.
Maxim Engineers. Inc ......................................................................................................
COPPELL
MUNICIPAL
SERVICE
CENTER
SITE PLAN ~U~ H~O(B EN[;llf..ERS, 1~.
FCR: CITY OF C, OPPELL IvtUNICIPAL SERVICE CENTER L~,2 FA~NS
732 DE FOREST
SCALE, II=RO,.ECT NO. DRAWING NO. IDATE: F~-V.
1'= 30' I ~2 3 11-16-90
3.2 UST Line Testing
A pressurized line test was performed on the delivery and
return lines of Tank 1 and 2, resulting in leak rates of
-0.001 and -0.011 gph, respectively. These results also
pass the NFPA standard of 0.05 gph.
3.3 Site Assessment
Surrounding land use is comprised of open land and
residential areas. Specifically, open land is located to
the north and east, with residential areas to the south and
west.
According to information provided by the client, no repairs
to the tanks or piping have been made. Monitoring wells
have been previously installed at this facility.
Shallow strata at the site are composed of light brown silty
clays to a depth of ten (10) feet below land surface. These
silty clays typically are characterized by moderate
hydraulic conductivity. Local topographic gradient is to
the northeast. The nearest body of surface water is North
Lake, which is approximately two (2) miles away.
Depth to groundwater is approximately ten (10) feet
according to measurements in an existing monitoring well.
No other known wells exist within 1000 feet of the facility.
Max~m Engineers. Inc ....................................
3.4 Physical Characteristics of UST Systems
Both tanks at this facility are of steel construction.
However, the piping material is unknown. Neither tank
system has cathodic protection, overfill/spill protection,
or release detection.
3.5 Product Management
Product inventory records for both tanks are maintained by a
card access system, input into a computer system, and
ultimately reconciled by facility personnel. The tanks are
also stuck to verify levels obtained.
3.6 Possible Contamination Scenario
Tanks 1 and 2 are located in a highly sensitive area.
Moderate to high conductivity of the soil and relatively
shallow groundwater add to the risk of hydrocarbon migration
if a release were to occur. Nearby sensitive receptors
include City offices (high public usage) and adjacent
residential areas.
~.a~:im Engineers, IRC. . ......................................................
3.7 UST Ranking
Ranking of USTs according to site characteristics and a
rating scale of 1 to 5 (good to very poor) is used to
determine the sensitivity of UST systems in relation to
their surroundings. Using the City of Coppell survey data
pertaining to physical characteristics of Tanks 1 and 2,
ranking is as follows:
Tank 1 Tank 2
Tank & Piping 5 5
Characteristics
Tank Age 1
Release Detection 5 5
Product 5 3
Product Management 1 1
Nearby Land Usage 3 3
Soil Properties 3 3
Nearby Receptors 3 3
Groundwater Depth 5 5
TOTAL 31 29
AVERAGE 3.4 3.2
3.8 Recommendations
Regarding product inventory, Maxim recommends consistent,
daily gauging of tanks in conjunction with monthly
reconciling of these figures. This practice, when combined
with annual tank and line test will meet regulatory
requirements for the short-term.
Maxim Engineers. Inc. . .................................
Although these tanks are only two years old, Maxim also
recommends retrofitting them with cathodic protection,
permanent release detection, and overfill/spill protection
as soon as it is economically feasible, rather than delaying
until the required regulatory dates.
Maxim Engineers. In¢ ........................................................
4.0 FIRE DEPARTNRNT
Maxim Engineers conducted field activities at the Poli~c
Department, located at 616 Coppell Road on January 5, 1990. One
(1) UST is located at this facility. (Refer to Site Plan, next
page.) The following information was gathered from site
personnel interviews and Maxim's field observations:
Capacity Material of Age
Tank # (gallons) Product Construction (years)
3 1,000 unleaded unprotected 16
gasoline steel
4.1 UST Testing
One (1) drive point well was installed for water table
calculations and compensation of this factor during testing
procedures. A Petro Tite precision tank test was performed
on Tank 3. Compensation was made for temperature
fluctuation, tank end deflection, and coefficient of
expansion of the product types.
A leak rate of -0.002 gallons per hour (gph) was obtained
for Tank 3. This rate falls within the National Fire
Protection Association (NFPA) Pamphlet 329 (1987 revision)
- leak rate standard of 0.05 gph. According to this criteria,
this tank appears to be tight.
Maxim Engineers. Inc .....................................................................................
"J'x- WATER
PEI:IvlITS L J LII',E .............
II
" II SE~ . WATER 'WELL
II
II
LII'~--.-...~IIII -~ FILL
DRIVEWAY
FIRE STATION
SEWER
LII'~
--- CB,,ITER
WATER LII,~
GAS LII'~
I
I
I
I
I
I 8~mWER
I LII'~
I
I
I
I
I
I COPPELL RD.
I
I
I
SITE PLAN MAXIM ENGINEERS, ]NC,
FOR: CITY OF COPPELL. FIRE STATION ~ 2342 FA3ENS
616 COPPELL RD. ~
1 ' = 30' 2230-02 2 J 1-16-90
4.2 UST Line Testing
A pressurized line test was performed on the delivery and
return lines of Tank 3, resulting in a leak rate of -0.026
gph. This result also passes the NFPA standard of 0.05 gph.
4.3 Site Assessment
- Immediate land usage at the site is for the officing of
Coppell's Fire Department. Surrounding land use is
residential. Specifically, open land and a creek are
_ located to the north; residences are located to the east,
south and west. In addition, the Coppell Senior Center is
to the south; the Bethel Baptist Church is to the west. A
Texaco service station is located approximately 130 yards to
the South.
According to information provided by the client, no previous
repairs have been made on Tank 3, and no known releases have
occurred from this system. No monitoring wells have been
previously installed at this facility.
Shallow strata at the site are composed of light brown silty
clays with moderate hydraulic conductivity. Local
topographic gradient is to the north. The nearest body of
surface water is North Lake, which is approximately two (2)
miles away.
Maxim EngJneer~. !nc ................................................................................................
Depth to groundwater is greater than seven (7) feet
according to measurements in the drive point well. }~o
~ c~ wells exist within 1000 feet of the facility.
4.4 Physical Characteristics of UST Systems
_ The tank at this facility is of bare steel construction.
The piping material is unknown. The tank system does not
- have cathodic protection, overfill/spill protection, or
release detection.
_ 4.5 Product Management
Product inventory records for Tank 3 are maintained by site
- personnel by sticking the tank before and after filling
which are then reconciled with a key-access system on a
semi-regular basis.
4.6 Possible Contamination Scenario
Tank 3 is located in a moderately sensitive area. Moderate
conductivity of the soil adds to the risk of hydrocarbon
migration if a release were to occur. Nearby sensitive
receptors include the fire department facility itself and
nearby residences.
4.7 UST Ranking
Ranking of USTs according to site characteristics and a
rating scale of 1 to 5 (good to very poor) is used to
Maxim Engineers, Inc. ...........................................................................
determine the sensitivity of UST systems in relation to
- their surroundings. Using the City of Coppell survey data
pertaining to physical characteristics of Tank 3, ranking is
as follows:
Tank 1
_ Tank & Piping 5
Characteristics
TankAge 3
Release Detection 5
Product 5
Product Management 3
Nearby Land Usage 5
- Soil Properties 3
Nearby Receptors 3
Groundwater Depth 5
TOTAL 37
AVERAGE 4.1
_ 4.8 Recommendations
Since this is the oldest tank owned by the City of Coppell,
- it is the most likely candidate for removal/replacement.
Permanent release detection is required to be installed no
later than December 22, 1991. If it is determined to keep
this tank in service, Maxim recommends retrofitting the tank
with cathodic protection and overfill/spill protection at
that time.
Maxim Engineers, Inc ...................................................
m
-I
Z
·
5.0 WEST SERVICE CENTER
Maxim Engineers conducted field activities at the West Service
Center, located at 1515 W. Bethel Road on January 8, 1990. One
(1) UST is located at this facility. The tank is no longer in
use and has been abandoned. The tank was filled with water for
the Petro Tite test. Apparently, the City of Coppell plans to
bring the tank back into service. (Refer to Site Plan, next
page.) The following information was gathered from site
personnel interviews and Maxim's field observations:
Capacity Material of Age
Tank # (gallons) Product Construction (years)
4 2,000 unleaded unprotected 9
gasoline steel
(previously)
5.1 UST Testing
One (1) drive point well was installed for water table
calculations and compensation of this factor during testing
procedures.
A Petro Tite precision tank test was performed on Tank 4.
Compensation was made for temperature fluctuation, tank end
deflection, and coefficient of expansion of the product
types.
A leak rate of -0.036 gallons per hour (gph) was obtained
for Tank 4. This rate falls within the National Fire
Protection Association (NFPA) Pamphlet 329 (1987 revision)
leak rate standard of 0.05 gph. According to this criteria,
Maxim Engineers, Inc .......................................
×
VENT. VENT LI~E,
DISPENSER -- ...... TRENCH X
DELIVERY ../ ,,,.,-
X
SITE PLAN .~ ~X]14 ENGINE,S, INC.
FO~ CITY OF ~L WEST SERVICE STATION 2342 FABENS
L515 ~ RD.
1'=10'
this tank appears to be tight.
5.2 UST Line Testing
A pressurized line test was performed on the delivery and
return lines of Tank 4, resulting in a leak rate of -0.001
gph. This result also passes the NFPA standard of 0.05 gph.
5.3 Site Assessment
Immediate and surrounding land at this site is open and
unoccupied. No known nearby property stores petroleum
products underground.
The fill pipe on Tank 4 was found to be crushed by Maxim
personnel and was replaced by a temporary drop tube in order
to perform the Petro Tite Test. A new fill pipe was
installed on January 18. No monitoring wells have been
previously installed at this facility.
Shallow strata at the site are composed of stiff black
clays. These clays typically are characterized by low
hydraulic conductivity. Local topographic gradient is to
the east. The nearest body of surface water is North Lake
which is approximately two (2) miles away.
Depth to groundwater is greater than ten (10) feet according
to measurements in the drive point well. No known wells
exist within 1000 feet of the facility.
I~,axim. Er~gineers. Inc ..........................................................................
5.4 Physical Characteristics of UST Systems
The tank at this facility is of bare steel construction.
The piping material is unknown. The tank system does not
have cathodic protection, overfill/spill protection, or
release detection.
5.5 Product Management
There are no product management practices in place at this
point as the tank has been abandoned.
5.6 Possible Contamination Scenario
Tank 4 is located in a low sensitivity area. Low
conductivity of the soil reduces the risk of hydrocarbon
migration if a release were to occur. Also, there does not
appear to be nearby sensitive receptors in the immediate
area.
5.7 UST Ranking
Ranking of USTs according to site characteristics and a
rating scale of 1 to 5 (good to very poor) is used to
determine the sensitivity of UST systems in relation to
their surroundings. Using the City of Coppell survey data
pertaining to physical characteristics of Tank 4, ranking is
as follows:
Maxim Engineers. Inc ..................... : ..........................................
Tank 1
Tank & Piping 5
Characteristics
Tank Age 1
Release Detection 5
Product 5
- Product Management 5
Nearby Land Usage 1
Soil Properties 1
Nearby Receptors 1
TOTAL 24
- AVERAGE 3.0
5.8 Recommendations
If this tank is put into service, proper inventory
procedures need to be followed. This practice, when
combined with annual tank and line testing will meet
regulatory requirements for the short-term. Maxim also
recommends retrofitting this tank with cathodic protection,
permanent release detection, and overfill/spill protection
as soon as it is economically feasible, rather than delaying
until the required regulatory dates.
Maxim Er~gineers Inc ..............................................................................................