HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 - Appendix D Part 1APPENDIX D
SITE REMEDIATION
AND
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Prepared for
Newport Banning Ranch LLC
3030 Saturn Street
Brea, California 92821
DRAFT REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN
(FOR INFORMATION AND PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY)
NEWPORT BANNING RANCH
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Prepared by
Geosyntec D
consultants
engineers I scientists I innovators
2100 Main Street, Suite 150
Huntington Beach, California 92648
Telephone: (714) 969-0800
Fax (714) 969 -0820
www.geosyntec.com
Project Number HR1018
August 2009
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Ge os yntec D
T
Page
1. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE ...................................... ..............................1
2. SITE BACKGROUND AND HISTORICAL USES ............ ............................... 3
3. REGULATORY OVERSIGHT FRAMEWORK ................ ............................... 6
3.1 Existing Regulatory Oversight ..................................... ............................... 6
3.2 Wetland and Habitat Considerations ............................ ............................... 6
4. SITE ASSESSMENTS AND INVESTIGATIONS .............. ............................... 8
4.1
Overview .......................................................................
............................... 8
4.2
Phase II Site EA Investigation ......................................
............................... 8
4.3
Updated Phase I ESA ..................................................
............................... 10
4.4
Past Soil Cleanup Activity ..........................................
............................... I 1
5. PROPOSED REMEDIATION SCOPE AND PROCESS ... .............................12
5.1
General .......................................................................... .............................12
5.2
Expected Environmental Impacts and Volumes — Soils, Asphalt
andConcrete ............................................................... ...............................
12
5.3
Expected Environmental Impacts — Methane and VOCs ..........................
13
5.4
Remediation Process Approach .................................. ...............................
13
5.43 General ........................................................... .............................13
5.4.2 Methane and VOC Mitigation ..................... ...............................
14
5.4.3 Clean -Up Levels and Re -Use of Materials .. ...............................
15
5.4.4 Remediation Areas and Methods ................. ...............................
16
5.4.5 Verification and Documentation .................. ...............................
18
6. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ..................................... .............................19
REFERENCES
APPENDIX
A: ORANGE COUNTY FIRE AUTHORITY GUIDELINE C -08
Combustible Soil Gas Hazard Mitigation, January 1, 2008
HR101&7VBA09 -07 RPT 1 8/21/2009
Ge os yntec D
T
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
TABLES
Table 1: Summary of Environmental Sampling/Testing /Assessment History
Table 2: Potential Environmental Conditions
Table 3 (within the text): Range of Soil Sample Results — EA 2001
Table 4 (within the text): Range of Groundwater Sample Results — EA 2001
Table 5: Summary of Historic Cleanup Levels
FIGURES
Figure 1:
Site Location
Figure 2:
Topographic Areas and Features Map
Figure 3:
Historical Oilfield Impacts
Figure 4:
Oil Consolidation Areas
Figure 5:
PEC Location Map
Figure 6:
Estimated Remedial Excavation Areas
HR101&7VBA09 -07 RPT ii 8/21/2009
Ge os yntec D
T
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS
ASTM — American Society for Testing and Materials
BMP — Best Management Practice
BTEX — Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, and Xylenes
CAO — Cleanup and Abatement Order
CCA — California Coast Act
CCC — California Coastal Commission
DFG — Department of Fish and Game
DOGGR — Division of Gas and Geothermal Resources
dRAP — Draft Remedial Action Plan
EA — Environmental Assessment
EPA — Environmental Protection Agency
ESA— Environmental Site Assessment
FWS — US Fish and Wildlife Service
HDLLC — Horizontal Drilling, LLC
MCL — Maximum Contaminant Level
NBR — Newport Banning Ranch
NBRLLC — Newport Banning Ranch, LLC
OCHCA — Orange County Health Care Agency
PEC — Potential Environmental Condition
RAP — Remedial Action Plan
REC — Recognized Environmental Condition
RSL — Regional Screening Level
RWQCB -SA — Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region
SVOC — Semi - Volatile Organic Compound
SWPPP — Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
TPH — Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons
TRPH — Total Recoverable Petroleum Hydrocarbons
TTLC — Total Threshold Limit Concentration
USACE — US Army Corps of Engineers
VFH— Volatile Fuel Hydrocarbons
VOC — Volatile Organic Compound
WNOC — West Newport Oil Company
HR101&7VBA09 -07 RPT 111 8/21 12009
Ge os yntec D
T
1. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
This document presents a draft Remedial Action Plan (dRAP) for the approximately
400 ac Newport Banning Ranch property (the Site, Figure 1). The purpose of this
document is to:
• Describe the scope of the oil field remediation project and the processes and
methods that are anticipated to be used at the Site if the proposed development
project is approved; and
• Describe the regulatory framework for approval of a final Remedial Action
Plan (to be submitted at a later date) and the monitoring and approval process
to be followed during field remediation work.
Environmental investigations and some limited restoration/remediation work have been
performed at various times over the past 20 years at the Site. The Site landowner has
proposed a development plan for the Site that includes a mix of residential, commercial,
and open space. On 6 November 2006, the City of Newport Beach adopted its updated
General Plan and listed two designations for the Site:
• Priority Alternative — Site to be made available for purchase as open space,
• Second Alternative — Site to have at least 50% preserved as open space,
limited development to be permitted on the upper portion of the Site
(residential, resort, commercial, and community parks).
The topographic area and features of the site and vicinity are shown in Figure 2 which
highlights the division of the property between a near sea level lowland area and higher
elevation uplands areas. One of the significant benefits of an approved Site
development project would be the consolidation of current active oil production
operations (which currently effectively utilize the entire 400 -acre Site) into two
interconnected oil consolidation areas totaling approximately 20 acres (Figure 3). This
consolidation would free up the remainder of the Site for restoration, development, and
public use. The dRAP will apply to those areas outside of the two oil consolidation
areas and the interconnecting pipeline and access areas.
As is the normal process, a final Remedial Action Plan will be submitted to the Site
environmental oversight agencies at a later date once the permitting and development
planning process is further along and there is a better understanding of the potential of
the oil field consolidation actually occurring in a specified timeframe. If the
HR101&7VBA09 -07 RPT 1 8/21/2009
Ge os yntec D
T
development project does not move forward the current oil field operations are expected
to continue as -is pushing abandonment and remediation work out potentially 30 to 40
years. This early dRAP is presented for informational and scoping purposes only. A
key assumption in all development planning is that any residential construction will be
contingent upon the completion of the remediation work and agency closure of each
residential planning area.
HR701817VBA09 -07 RPT 2 8/21/2009
Ge os yntec D
T
2. SITE BACKGROUND AND HISTORICAL USES
The Site is approximately 400 acres in extent and is located east of the mouth of the
Santa Ana River near the Huntington Beach — Newport Beach city boundary in Orange
County, California. A map showing the location of the Site is presented in Figure 1.
The Site is currently operated as a crude oil and gas production facility. The Site oil
and gas production operations are being managed by Horizontal Drilling, LLC
(HDLLC) and their operating affiliate, West Newport Oil Company (WNOC). The
surface estate is managed by NBRLLC, a partnership including Aera Energy LLC,
Cherokee Investment Partners, LLC, and Brooks Street.
Oil operations including exploration, development, and production have been conducted
continuously within the boundaries of the Site since 1944. Most of the Site has been
heavily impacted by these historic oil operations and the related access roads and work
areas. The majority of the Site is still used today in active oil and gas production
operations. There are currently over 470 producing /potentially producing and
abandoned oil wells at the Site, together with related roads, transport pipeline networks,
above - ground crude oil storage tanks and processing equipment, service buildings and
other facilities (see Figure 3). Other historical Site uses have included: agriculture,
military coast watch station, equipment storage and maintenance, and miscellaneous
peripheral operations (including areas leased to welders, pipe storage, and equipment
operators).
The oilfield operator, WNOC, has approximately 90 active /idle wells available for oil
operations with approximately 50 operating at any one time. The City of Newport
Beach operates approximately 16 wells and an oil processing facility located at the
West Coast Highway entrance area (located at the southern oil operations site shown in
Figure 4).
Figure 3 provides a composite picture as to the extent of the Site that has been impacted
by both historic and current oil wells, pipelines, utility poles, and related facilities, as
well as oilfield operation work areas like graded roads and equipment areas surfaced
with gravel, asphalt, crude oil, or crude oil tank sediments, and historic sumps which
held produced oil and fluids within in- ground surface impoundments. This map was
assembled from a variety of in -field evaluations, technical maps, aerial photography,
and other sources, and illustrates that the over 65 years of oil producing operations have
resulted in substantial impacts to the Site. Additional small impacts, currently
unknown, may be encountered during the facility abandonment, remediation, and
grading programs. This is typical of remediation of oilfields of this size. These oil field
use areas will be the focus of Site remediation efforts and both known and potential
HR101817VBA09 -07 RPT 3 8/21/2009
Ge os yntec D
consulumts
impacts have been accounted for in the scope and schedule of the remediation effort,
and in the biological technical and mitigation evaluations.
As shown on Figure 3, over 470 individual well -site pads have been cleared, cut, and
leveled as part of oilfield operations; miles of supporting service roads between the well
sites and facilities have been constructed; and numerous power poles and facility and
equipment areas required in oil and gas operations have been cleared and constructed.
There currently remains over 40 miles of pipelines throughout the Site for the
conveyance of oil, water, and gas produced from the wells to various separation and
treatment facilities on the Site.
Figure 3 shows that these operations are spread across both the upland and lowland
areas of the Site. These oil field operations areas will be the primary focus of the
remediation program and can be generally described as follows:
• Oil Wells and Pads — The surface locations of the existing or abandoned oil
wells. A typical oil well pad generally includes an area of 10 to 30 feet around
each oil well that contains pipelines, concrete pads, pumping and power
equipment, and the work area for large workover rigs, trucks, and tanks.
• Oil Pipeline Corridors — Areas where one or more pipelines exist, or existed,
to convey oil, water, and gas from each well to larger group lines, and then on
to each processing facility. Most lines are above ground with some sitting on
pipeline support structures that are cemented into the ground to raise the actual
pipeline above the ground surface. Some older fines may still exist below the
surface.
• Utility Poles — Power poles to support the electrical system throughout the
field. These treated wood poles support transformers, power lines, electrical
panels, and other equipment to serve the oil operations. Poles were often left
in place (even at abandoned well locations) to support potential future drilling.
• Oilfield Operations Areas — All areas historically used in the oil- and gas -
producing operations. This includes roads, wells, and surrounding wellpads,
tanks and facilities, pipeline and utility corridors and general staging and work
areas. These areas have generally been graded and may be surfaced with
gravel, asphalt, crude oil, crude oil tank sediments, or other materials. There
are numerous facility areas throughout the Site. These vary from large facility
areas that include extensive piping, oil separation and processing tanks, power
facilities, mechanics and workshops, and other equipment, to smaller
HRI0I&7VBA09 -07 RPT 4 8/21/2009
Ge os yntec D
T
individual tanks, vessels, equipment storage yards, sheds, and staging areas.
In some cases vegetation has grown around or amongst these facilities and
surface materials. These same areas are typically targeted for demolition and
removal during an oilfield abandonment process and may require additional
soil work as part of the remediation process.
• Historic Oil Sumps — In- ground produced oil and fluids storage locations
identified from a 1947 aerial photograph (also included in Figure 3). This
photograph showed the widest extent of sumps identified during a review of
site aerial photographs.
• Continuing Oil Operations Areas — Areas containing oil tanks piping and
processing equipment. These include two oil consolidation sites, and a related
access road and utility corridor, which are proposed to become the only on-
going oil production areas with the Site, prior to the remediation, restoration,
and /or development of the other areas within the Site (Figure 4).
Because the oil operations predated the establishment of the California Coastal Act
(CCA) and other related regulatory definitions and codes, oilfield operations at Newport
Banning Ranch were granted a permit exemption by the California Coastal Commission
(CCC) in 1973 that covers ongoing and future oil production operations and also
includes abandonments and equipment/pipeline removals and cleanup as exempt
activities.
• portion of the original oilfield has already undergone abandonment and remediation.
• parcel of the original lowland oilfield property (92 acres along the westerly edge
adjacent to the Santa Ana River) was purchased by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) in the late 1980s as part of the USACE Santa Ana River Flood Control
Project [Mitech, 1988; USACE, 1988]. The parcel was converted to a tidally -
influenced coastal wetland habitat by the USACE by the early 1990s as a wetland off-
set or mitigation measure for work completed elsewhere along their project corridor.
This conversion involved similar abandonment and remediation activities that are
outlined in this dRAP.
HR701817VBA09 -07 RPT 5 8/21/2009
Ge os yntec 0
T
3. REGULATORY OVERSIGHT FRAMEWORK
3.1 Existing Regulatory Oversight
The actual oil field operations are governed by regulations of the California Department
of Conservation, Department of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources ( DOGGR). The
DOGGR has specific guidelines for the abandonment, or reabandonment if necessary,
of oil wells. DOGGR also has a process called the Construction Site Review that must
be followed for oilfields that are abandoned for future development purposes.
The Site has a history of environmental oversight by both the state Regional Water
Quality Control Board - Santa Ana Region (RWQCB) and the Orange County Health
Care Agency (OCHCA). Since about 1992 both agencies have been involved with
oversight of certain aspects of cleanup activities and site operations. Currently, the lead
regulatory agency for the site (RWQCB) has approved a Remedial Action Plan
[Geosyntec, 2002c; RWQCB, 2003] and is overseeing remediation efforts to recover an
isolated pocket of crude oil located on top of the shallow brackish groundwater in the
main drillsite area (northern portion of the consolidation areas identified on Figure 4).
No other area of the Site currently requires remediation under its present use as an
operating oilfield. The nature and extent of future remediation for this and other areas
of the Site will depend on the ultimate reuse of the property.
This existing oversight structure is expected to continue through field abandonment and
remediation activity as both agencies have the most experience of any agencies with
oilfield -to- development type projects. There have been many such projects in Orange
County over the years and these agencies have had the lead for environmental resource
and human health matters. In the case of the NBR Site where there are no hazardous
wastes or levels of contaminants, and where the groundwater levels in the lowlands are
shallow and of prime importance to the State, it is expected that the RWQCB will
continue to be the lead agency until the Site receives closure.
3.2 Wetland and Habitat Considerations
Since the late 1980s when the USACE was involved in the restoration of the parcel
between the Santa Ana River and the current Site area, biological resource agencies,
specifically the California Department of Fish & Game (DFG) and the United States
Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) have been involved in wetlands, sensitive habitat and
species determinations.
HR701817VBA09 -07 RPT 6 8/21/2009
Ge os yntec D
T
As part of the project, biologists have conducted general biological surveys for the
property, recording flora and fauna observed on Site, as well as recording sensitive
species/habitat locations, and mapping Site vegetation [Glenn Lukos, 2009a]. Impacts
from the abandonment and remediation of existing, and potentially encountered
environmental impacts, were considered in these studies. Biologists have also
conducted habitat assessments for special- status animals and plants, including species
listed or proposed for listing as endangered or threatened by the federal or state
government [Glenn Lukos, 2009b].
The resource agencies actively provide input on sensitive areas not to be disturbed
during specific times of the year. These agencies will be consulted for similar
determinations prior to and during the site -wide abandonment and remediation, when it
occurs.
HR701&7VBA09 -07 RPT 7 8/21/2009
Ge os yntec D
T
4. SITE ASSESSMENTS AND INVESTIGATIONS
4.1 Overview
Numerous environmental sampling and testing events occurred as part of the historic oil
and gas production activities between 1986 and 2000 providing basic field assessment
information. In late 2000, the landowners commissioned a comprehensive, site -wide
Phase II Environmental Assessment (EA) [Geosyntec, 2001] with field sampling
conducted between May and August 2001. This study was a comprehensive field
investigation of the impacts from the historic oil operations. The final report was
submitted to the Regional Water Quality Control Board — Santa Ana Region in
November 2001. More recently an updated Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
(ESA) Report [Geosyntec, 2008] was completed as part of the development proposal
studies. Table 1 provides a brief history of environmental sampling activities
performed at the Site.
4.2 Phase II Site EA Investigation
In 2000, the overall Site Environmental Assessment (EA) work plan was developed.
The objective of the EA was to characterize the nature and extent of potential impacts to
soil and groundwater at areas determined to be a potential environmental concern
(PECs), and to evaluate location and potential volumes of impacted materials that may
require remediation (Figure 5). The EA fieldwork was then completed in phases during
2001 and consisted of collecting and evaluating over 550 samples from 222 test
pits/borings, 10 ground water monitoring wells, surface water, and soil gas sampling
points [Geosyntec, 2001]. The excavated test pits also allowed for visual observations
of hydrocarbon impacts, as well as soils that did not appear to be impacted by
hydrocarbons. The EA incorporated results of the previous sampling events, providing a
more comprehensive Phase lI characterization in key areas.
Twenty three (23) areas were identified as PECs. As anticipated, the Site is impacted
primarily by petroleum hydrocarbons. Only 7 of the 23 PECs investigated showed any
significant hydrocarbon impacts beyond surface areas. During the soil evaluation, soil
gas was observed (i.e., bubbling) in a lowland pond near PEC #02 — Main Site
Tank Farm. Samples were collected using Tedlar bags. Analytical results indicated
elevated methane concentrations (up to 73.2 percent). No hydrogen sulfide was
detected. This area is adjacent to the future Main Drillsite and not within the
development area. There were no indications of soil gas observed in the upland areas
(e.g., odors indicating a release from soils or abandoned wells).
HR701&7VBA09 -07 RPT 8 8/21/2009
Ge os yntec D
T
At each of the areas tested, no contaminant levels were found to exceed the hazardous
waste criteria (i.e., concentration levels defined by state and federal guidelines). The
state Hazardous waste levels are provided in the California Code of Regulations (CCR),
Title 22. Table 3 provides a summary of the soil sample analytical results from the
Phase II Environmental Assessment [Geosyntec, 2001]. The hydrocarbon impacts
observed were generally confined to the upper soil layers (i.e., within approximately
6 feet of the surface). These types of impacts are consistent with other oil fields of this
age and similar to other oil fields that have been remediated for residential
development. Aera has engaged in clean -up operations at other oil fields in Southern
California, including Yorba Linda, Brea, and Bolsa Chica.
TABLE 3
RANGE OF SOIL SAMPLE RESULTS — EA (2001)
Contaminant
Range
Comments
TPH
0 — 6,000 ppm
Typically weathered crude oil, limited
areas of high saturation
SVOCs
0 — 3 ppb
No SVOCs detected above residential
or industrial soil RSLs
VOCs
0 —1,700 ppb
No VOCs detected above residential or
industrial soil RSLs
Pesticides
0 — 11 ppb
No pesticides detected above residential
or industrial soil RSLs or residential or
industrial soil CHHSLs
PCBs
0 — 290 ppb
PCBs were detected in two samples at
concentrations above the residential, but
below the industrial soil RSL and
industrial soil CHHSL
Metals
No Metals detected above TTLC
The groundwater beneath the site is a shallow (in the lowland area), non - potable
brackish zone that is tidally influenced. Table 4 provides a summary of the
groundwater sample analytical results from the Phase H Environmental Assessment.
One area, at the existing oil operations tank farm (northern extent of the future oil
consolidation area — Figure 4), encountered crude oil as free - product on the shallow
groundwater in one monitoring well. The free- product well is bounded by other wells
thus the impact is contained and isolated.
HR1018/NBA09 -07 RPT 9 8/21/2009
Ge os yntec 0
T
TABLE 4
RANGE OF GROUNDWATER SAMPLE RESULTS — EA (2001)
Area (PEC No.)
Contaminant
Range
Comment
Main Site Tank Farm,
TPH
N/A — Free
Wells within former sump
(PECO2)
product
area
Main Site Tank Farm,
TPH
0 — 26 ppm
Perimeter Wells
(PECO2)
Methylene
0 — 91 ppb
Methylene Chloride
Chloride
detected above MCL
Maintenance Shop /
Benzene
0 — 1.1 ppb
Benzene, Methylene
Warehouse (PEC01)
Chloride, and Vinyl
Methylene
0 — 100 ppb
Chloride detected above
Chloride
MCLs
Vinyl Chloride
0 — 15 ppb
Former Sump /
Methylene
0 — 25 ppb
Methylene Chloride
Clarifier (PEC08)
Chloride
detected above MCL
This impact area has since been submitted into the RWQCB -SA voluntary cleanup
program and after approval of an initial area - focused free - product Remedial Action
Plan [Geosyntec, 2002c] has been undergoing free - product removal and monitoring
since 2001. Additional free - product recovery wells and monitoring wells have been
installed in that interim time and the pumping system has been upgraded to two solar
powered skim pumps. The second phase of the free- product Remedial Action Plan
includes removal of the deeper crude oil impacted soils once the adjacent operating
facilities are abandoned and demolished. While this site is located within one of the oil
consolidation areas and is not directly associated with the development project, it is
anticipated that additional work would be done here at the same time as the field
consolidation abandonment and remediation program upon the development approval.
4.3 Updated Phase I ESA
The most recent Phase I ESA [Geosyntec, 2008] served to update the EA with issues,
testing and cleanups that were conducted between 2001 and 2008. Based on
modifications to the process by which Phase I environmental site assessments are
performed as well as evaluating areas on Site that were subleased, the number of
identified Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) included a total of 27 on -site
HR70I&7VBA09 -07 RPT 10 8/21/2009
Ge os yntec 0
consulumts
RECs, three historical RECs, and four off -site facilities as RECs. The on -site RECs are
shown on Figure 5 (for the purposes of this draft RAP they are identified as Potential
Environmental Conditions — PECs) and additional background information on the
identified RECs is presented in Table 2. The total number of PECs has been adjusted
slightly over the years due the changing methods used to define PEC. For example, the
list of RECs (per the definition of Recognized Environmental Conditions by the
American Society for Testing and Materials, ASTM, classification in standard Phase I
ESA guidance) identified in the Phase I ESA included the 21 PECs (Potential
Environmental Conditions) and three additional "historical RECs" per the updated
ASTM guidance. The three historical RECs include the Cement Return Area, Wetland
Fill Area, and Storm water /surface water quality issues. These historical RECs have
been addressed and closed by the current Site owner and operator.
4.4 Past Soil Cleanup Activity
During the low oil price environment of the 1990's and in conjunction with earlier
development planning, the oil operator, WNOC, embarked on a program to abandon the
least productive wells of the time. As part of this effort, and based on results of the
early 1986 to 2000 site testing, a basic hydrocarbon cleanup plan (initially referred to as
the Environmental Restoration Plan) was developed to cleanup soils associated with
abandoned oil wells. The plan outlined basic hydrocarbon cleanup levels (Table 5) and
a bio- remediation pilot scale treatment area to remediate impacted soils. The plan was
initially submitted to the OCHCA who approved it in October 1992. The plan was also
submitted to and reviewed by the RWQCB and other agencies including the DFG and
the FWS. The plan was updated in 1994 and was used to excavate and manage well
abandonment soils from 1994 to about 2001 [Geosyntec, 2001].
As outlined in previous sections, the 2008 Phase I EA Update discusses additional
focused areas of the Site (or issues) that were remediated and closed. These efforts
were under the direction of the RWQCB who recommended cleanup levels similar to
those used in the Yorba Linda Oil Field which was also converted to residential
development (Table 5).
HRI0I&7VBA09 -07 RPT 11 8/21/2009
Ge os yntec 0
T
5. PROPOSED REMEDIATION SCOPE AND PROCESS
5.1 General
Comprehensive oil facilities consolidation, abandonment, and remediation at the Site
will be a multiple -step process that will likely span a period of approximately two to
three years. The remediation portion of this process is expected to take the bulk of that
time, however remedial efforts will actually occur in all of the three major early phases
of the approved development project. These include oil field facility demolition, full
field remediation, and development area grading. The discussion in this dRAP assumes
that the oil field facility demolition phase has been completed. The impacted areas
outlined in the Phase II EA report, along with estimated depths and volumes, will
provide the basis and scope of the Remediation cleanup plan. Figure 6 shows the
expected remedial excavation areas of the Site.
In addition to the PEC areas it is expected that additional impacted soils will be
identified during the oilfield facility demolition phase. The removal of all pipelines,
facilities, power poles, and other structures will be monitored by third party
environmental consultants to identify and document further indications of impacts for
the remediation phase. Also, as development area grading is the most comprehensive
type of visual confirmation possible, environmental monitoring will be present at that
time also to address signs of smaller impacts. An estimate of these expected impacts
from these phases is included in the total volume numbers.
5.2 Expected Environmental Impacts and Volumes — Soils, Asphalt and
Concrete
Investigations and testing indicate the Site is predominantly impacted by petroleum
hydrocarbons, specifically degraded and weathered crude oil. No hazardous levels of
any materials were found during the sampling events and assessments. The Site also
includes road materials made up of varying amounts of gravel, asphalt, crude oil, or
crude oil tank sediments, and large amounts of concrete used in oil field operations and
facilities. These materials are expected to be addressed during the remediation phase.
Table 2 shows a summary of the types of impacts that were found at the PECs and the
estimated remediation volumes at those sites. The table also includes current estimates
of additional soils at oil wells, pipelines and the free- product site. The current estimate
is that approximately 246,000 cubic yards of materials will be addressed during the
remediation. Of this, approximately 138,000 cubic yards are hydrocarbon impacted
soils and an additional 108,000 cubic yards are surface road materials and concrete. As
HR1018/NBA09 -07 RPT 12 8/21/2009
Ge os yntec D
T
with all remediation projects these estimates can vary substantially when actual
removals begin.
5.3 Expected Environmental Impacts — Methane and VOCs
The crude oil produced in the Site oil operations is a heavy, high gravity oil that has
very little associated methane gas. Though no indications of soil gas in the uplands
were observed, one site in a lowland wetland pond was observed to have small amounts
of soil gas emanating from the water. That site was not near an oil well and is assumed
to be a natural occurrence in the wetlands.
There were no VOCs detected in soil samples above residential RSLs. Very low levels
of VOCs were detected in subsurface water in isolated locations in the lowlands.
Though no significant areas of VOC impacted soil or groundwater exists at the site, all
the low -level detections are associated with facility areas that are targeted for
remediation thus will have full verification sampling conducted to confirm health based
levels are attained.
5.4 Remediation Process Approach
5.4.1 General
Abandonment and Remediation of the historic oil field operations areas will be a
tremendously complex and costly undertaking. Upon initiation of the consolidation
process, plugging and abandoning of the approximately 90 remaining active /potentially
active lowland and upland wells will commence, together with demolishing and
removing the pipelines, utility poles, and other related production equipment, buildings,
and road surface materials. These activities will not only clear the Site for the
remediation phase but they may also expose, identify, and verify the existence of
additional smaller impacts requiring remediation. It is expected that the remediation
program will follow shortly after the well and facility demolition and abandonment
process.
Significant efforts will be made at the Site to recognize the "big picture" impacts of
such operations in order to minimize impacts to resources, especially potential Special
Status Habitats, both within the Site and in surrounding areas. These efforts will
include such things as minimizing what is disposed of in landfills, which, in turn, will
minimize both traffic impacts and the resulting emissions from large transportation
truck usage. Impact avoidance and potential mitigation efforts for the development
related project work is addressed in the project biological studies.
HR101817VBA09 -07 RPT 13 8/21/2009
Ge os yntec 0
T
The following are guiding strategies for both the oilfield abandonment and remediation
effort:
Recycle or reuse all salvageable materials.
2. Remediate soils on -site, whenever feasible, using natural bio-
remediation processes.
3. Remove heavy hydrocarbons from the site and recycle into offsite
roadway materials.
4. Reuse remediated soils and restored materials in development fills
whenever possible.
5. Minimize off -site traffic, hauling, and disposal.
6. Work in collaboration with appropriate regulatory stakeholders and
resource agencies to limit disturbance to desirable on -site vegetation
whenever possible.
In addition, as described earlier, the oil field abandonment activities are managed in
accordance with DOGGR regulations, and the potential for combustible gases in the
subsurface will be evaluated and mitigated according to OCFA Guideline C -03.
5.4.2 Methane and VOC Mitigation
Both methane and VOC impacts, at levels of significance, could pose vapor intrusion
concerns for overlying developments. The two accepted approaches to these concerns
are source remediation and engineering controls. Though no significant levels of either
methane or VOCs have been detected at the Site, both source remediation and
engineering controls are proposed to be used for added measures of safety.
In the uplands, all the detected low -level impacts and potential sources are targeted for
remediation. These include facility areas and all immediate well sites. There are no
indications that groundwater underlying the upland future development area is impacted
by VOCs. Similarly, in the lowlands, all the detected low -level impacts and potential
sources are targeted for remediation. This includes facility areas, well sites, and the
isolated water impacts. There were no significant levels detected in groundwater and
those areas with low -level impacts are isolated, contained, and do not extend under the
upland area.
HR701817VBA09 -07 RPT 14 8/21/2009
Ge os yntec 0
T
Engineering controls, or mitigation, for both methane and VOCs are essentially
identical for structures. Though no indications of soil gas or significant VOC impacts
by the oil field operations were observed in the upland area, full mitigation measures, as
defined in the Orange County Fire Authority Guideline C -03 [OCFA, 2008] —
Combustible Soil Gas Hazard Mitigation document will be implemented throughout the
development area. This well - established guidance (Appendix A) provides detailed
designs for mitigation of potential impacts due to methane and vapor intrusion in and
around developments and has been implemented in most Orange County developments
with former oil field operations. These designs include subsurface oil well venting
systems, structure sub -slab barriers, structure vent guidelines, and surface vent
guidelines. As part of the OCFA Guideline, a hazard gas assessment must be conducted
at the beginning of the process. This assessment will be conducted once the potential
sources are remediated and will include a screening of VOC components.
5.4.3 Clean -Up Levels and Re -Use of Materials
Previous cleanups have established RWQCB and OCHCA regulatory- approved clean-
up levels for each constituent of concern or Site area (Table 5). The established TRPH
clean-up levels vary based on a multi -depth approach considering depth below final
grade and final site use (commercial or residential or open space). The currently
applicable levels are those provided in the first page of Table 5 (based on 2001
correspondence with RWQCB). The final RAP will propose clean -up levels for the full
field remediation and development and may include additional levels for other non-
TRPH constituents of concern at the site. Proposed clean-up levels in the final RAP
will consider:
• historic and regulatory suggested levels;
• approved clean -up levels from other oil field development sites;
• risk -based calculations; and
• EPA Regional Screening Levels.
Certain, agency- approved materials may be re -used as part of Site development. For
specific materials that result from the demolition and remediation activities, such as
treated soil and concrete, these materials may be used as fill. The materials will meet
clean up criteria similar to approved standards for this project, based on depth of
placement below grade. For example treated soils may be used 10 feet below final
grade, and crushed concrete below 15 feet. These materials will also be subject to
appropriate geotechnical criteria needed for development.
HR7018/NBA09 -07 RPT 15 8/21/2009
Ge os yntec D
T
5.4.4 Remediation Areas and Methods
The remediation process consists of two distinct components: remediation of known
areas of impact, and remediation of areas encountered during the consolidation and
grading of the Site.
In the known areas of impact, it is estimated that over 138,000 cubic yards of soil will
require some degree of remediation due to non - hazardous hydrocarbon (i.e., crude oil)
impacts. These are the known impacts (Table 3). The majority of these soils are lightly
impacted from the crude oil operations. Some areas will have an older, heavier
accumulation of weathered crude oil from historical operations. Removals and
excavation sites will be tested and verified to meet the RAP criteria by third party State -
approved laboratories.
No hazardous levels (per state and federal concentration criteria) of any materials were
found at the Site in the EA. The potential for soil gas impacts will be addressed
primarily through the application of the OCFA Guideline C -03. Based on the
groundwater assessments performed at the site, there were no historical groundwater
impacts detected under or in the immediate vicinity of the development area. Table 4
provides a summary of the groundwater sample analytical results compiled from the
Phase II Environmental Assessment [Geosyntec, 2001]. Groundwater impacts were
noted in the following areas of the site: the mechanics shop, the Main Site Tank Farm
(also referred to as the Main Drill Site), and a former sump location to the south of the
Main Drill Site. Groundwater impacts detected near the Main Drill Site area are
currently being remediated through the implementation of an agency- approved
Remedial Action Plan [Geosyntec, 2002c]. The low level groundwater impacts in the
other areas will be addressed in the final RAP.
Under the past approved cleanups, hydrocarbon impacted soils have been successfully
bioremediated in a pilot -scale bioremediation cell (i.e., biocell). Thus, a continuation of
the soil bioremediation method to treat and clean hydrocarbon impacted soils is
appropriate. The bioremediation of hydrocarbon containing materials generally consists
of: siting and layout of large treatment areas, construction of containment and handling
areas, and operation of the treatment area. The actual bioremediation process involves
the control of moisture in the soils as they are periodically mixed and turned. This
process aerates the soils and encourages the growth of the indigenous hydrocarbon
reducing bacteria. The process is monitored by periodic sampling of the treated soil,
until the agency- approved clean -up levels are achieved. Upon approval of the oversight
agencies, the treated soils are removed and re -used. Details of this process including
location of the on -site treatment areas, stormwater control and design details, as well as
HR701817VBA09 -07 RPT 16 8/21/2009
Ge os yntec D
T
maintenance and closure specifications will be provided in the final RAP for these
impacts.
The PECs where some remediation is likely to be required are listed in Table 2. In
general, the remediation process will consist of:
1. Sampling materials within known areas of impact to evaluate the extent of
removal needed in each area (note that this may conducted simultaneously with
remedial excavation operations).
2. Impacted materials will be removed and stockpiled in specified areas of the site.
Materials will be stockpiled with respect to their potential for re -use as fill on
site, or potential for haul off (dependent on concentration and nature of impacts,
i.e., ability to be bioremediated on- site). Areas will be contained to limit erosion
and runoff issues from stockpiling operations.
3. For materials that are not likely to be effectively treated by on -site
bioremediation (e.g., highly weathered crude oil), these materials will be
segregated near transportation access points for recycling at an approved off -site
facility. Materials identified that have constituents exceeding hazardous criteria
will be stockpiled and handled separately (note that no materials having
concentrations exceeding hazardous criteria have yet been identified).
4. The stockpiles will be adjacent to treatment locations (i.e., biocells). Materials
will be spread and handled to enhance natural biodegradation of petroleum
hydrocarbons.
5. Confirmation sampling will occur within the biocell areas. Samples of soil will
be collected at a specified frequency and agency - approved treatment batch
volume. These samples will be subjected to laboratory analysis. Based on the
results, materials will either continue to be treated, or moved to re -use areas if
sample results indicate that agency- approved criteria have been achieved.
As described previously, this will be a time - intensive and complex process. For
example, soils with very heavy hydrocarbon impacts may be isolated for longer tern,
more intense bioremediation, may be taken off -site to acceptable recycling units, or may
be treated on -site by thermal methods to the appropriate cleanup level. These options
recognize the overall goal to remediate and/or recycle impacted materials onsite to the
greatest extent possible, thus reducing overall regional impacts such as the
transportation burden to local streets and the associated air emissions that would be
HR701817VBA09 -07 RPT 17 8/21/2009
Ge os yntec D
T
experienced with mass soil export, or the use of landfill capacity for otherwise
recyclable resources. Material export options would be used sparingly as appropriate.
Development of portions of the Site will require substantial grading for road
infrastructure, geotechnical stability work, and for general site improvements. In the
event that some impacts are encountered during development, similar remediation
procedures will be enacted pursuant to contaminants found. In some of the open space
and road areas requiring backfill, treated and lightly impacted soils may be recycled into
the substructure. The abandoned oil wells in the development areas will be managed
per DOGGR regulations, and the potential for combustible gases in the subsurface will
be mitigated in the development areas according to OCFA Guideline C -03.
5.4.5 Verification and Documentation
As remediation and restoration activities are concluded in each area, a verification
sampling program will be performed. This sampling program is designed to verify that
the area meets the agency- approved criteria for environmental closure. This will
involve collection of samples from appropriate environmental media (e.g., soil,
groundwater, surface water) in each area, laboratory analysis of specified constituents,
and evaluation of the results. This will likely be an iterative process, whereby
additional targeted remediation and verification sampling may need to be performed
until verification samples meet agency - approved criteria.
In addition, the remediation activities will be monitored to evaluate compliance with
appropriate Site dust, odor and emission control requirements. Following approval of
the development project, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP) will be
prepared prior to initiating site -wide remediation activities. The SWPPP will document
best management practices (BMPs) that will be in place and monitored during the
course of remediation activities.
The results of the verification process will be documented and submitted to the agencies
in a Cleanup and Closure Report for their review and approval. Each area will be
deemed complete when the environmental Oversight Agencies approve the Report and
grant closure or No Further Action.
HR701817VBA09 -07 RPT 18 8/21/2009
Ge os yntec D
T
6. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Since actual remediation activities are dependent on the final approved development
alternative, this dRAP is for informational and planning purposes only. As is the
normal procedure, a formal and detailed RAP will be finalized and submitted to the
environmental oversight agencies at a later date when:
1. there is a better understanding of the potential of the development permitting
and of the oil field consolidation actually occurring, and
2. there is a better understanding of the timeframe in which the oil field
consolidation and remediation may actually happen after approvals are
granted.
HR1018/NBA09 -07 RPT 19 8/21/2009
Ge os yntec D
T
ASTM E 1527 - 05, Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment Process, American Society for Testing and
Materials, Philadelphia, PA, November 2005.
California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal
Resources, "Abandonment /Reabandonment Guidelines," undated.
California Department of Water Resources, "Progress Report on Ground Water
Geology of The Coastal Plain of Orange County," July 1967.
California Department of Water Resources, "Sea -Water Intrusion: Balsa Sunset Area,
Orange County," 1968.
California Regional Water Quality Control Board (Santa Ana Region), Letter from Ms.
Dixie Lass to Mr. Leonard Anderson, dated 28 September, 1995.
California Regional Water Quality Control Board (Santa Ana Region), Letter to
Leonard Anderson, West Newport Oil Company, "Leachability Study and Proposed
Environmental Plan for Asphalt -Like Materials," 28 September 1995.
California Regional Water Quality Control Board (Santa Ana Region), Letter from
Gerard J. Thibeault, Executive Office to Mr. Robert Armstrong (Armstrong
Petroleum) and Mr. George Bayse (Aera Energy, LLC) transmitting Clean -Up and
Abatement Order No. 07 -77, dated 12 July 2001.
California Regional Water Quality Control Board (Santa Ana Region), Clean -Up and
Abatement Order No. 01 -77 for West Newport Oil Company, Armstrong Petroleum
Corporation, Aera Energy, LLC, and Rancho Santiago Partnership, Newport Beach,
California, 12 July 2001.
California Regional Water Quality Control Board (Santa Ana Region), Clean-Up and
Abatement Order No. 01 -77 Status Letter. 15 October 2003.
Department of Conservation Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources, excerpts
from A Study of Abandoned Oil and Gas Wells and Methane and Other Hazardous
Gas Accumulations," 10 October 1986.
Department of Water Resources, Santa Ana Gap Salinity Barrier, Orange County:
Bulletin No. 147 -1, 178 pp., 1966.
HR101&7VBA09 -07 RPT 20 8/21/2009
Ge os yntec D
consulumts
GeoScience Analytical, Inc., A Study of Abandoned Oil and Gas Wells and Methane
and Other Hazardous Gas Accumulations, Department of Conservation, Division of
Oil and Gas, Roberti Bill, SB 1458, Methane Gas Study, Contract Number 2 -5098,
10 October 1986.
Geosyntec Consultants (formerly GSI Environmental), "Santa Ana River Marsh
Environmental and Geotechnical Sampling and Study Report," prepared for U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles, California, Sept. 1989.
Geosyntec Consultants, "Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Newport Banning
Ranch, West Newport Oil Company, Orange County, California," 10 October 1993.
Geosyntec Consultants, "Draft Summary Report, Environmental Restoration, Newport
Banning Ranch, West Newport Oil Company, Newport Banning Ranch, Orange
County California," prepared for West Newport Oil Company, Costa Mesa,
California, 31 January 1996.
Geosyntec Consultants, "Draft Report, Phase I Description, Environmental Restoration,
Newport Banning Ranch, West Newport Oil Company, Orange County California,"
prepared for West Newport Oil Company, Costa Mesa, California, 31 January 1996.
Geosyntec Consultants, "Summary Report, Environmental Restoration Project (SRER),
Newport Banning Ranch, Orange County, California," 31 January 1996.
Geosyntec Consultants, "Environmental Assessment, Newport Banning Ranch, Orange
County, California," prepared for West Newport Oil Company, Costa Mesa,
California, Vol. 1 and 2, November 2001.
Geosyntec Consultants, "Environmental Assessment Summary and Remedial Action
Plan, Cement Returns Area, Newport Banning Ranch, Orange County, California,"
prepared for West Newport Oil Company, Costa Mesa, California,) July 2002a.
Geosyntec Consultants, "Lowland Stockpile Assessment and Remedial Action Plan,
Newport Banning Ranch, Orange County, California," Report prepared for West
Newport Oil Company, prepared by GeoSyntec Consultants and Glenn Lukos
Associates, dated 2 December 2002b, transmitted to RWQCB -SA under cover letter
dated 26 November 2002 by West Newport Oil Company.
Geosyntec Consultants, "Environmental Assessment Summary, Remedial Action Plan,
Free Product Area, Newport Banning Ranch, Orange County, California," prepared
for West Newport Oil Company, Costa Mesa, California, 2 December 2002c.
HR701817VBA09 -07 RPT 21 8/21/2009
Ge os yntec D
T
Geosyntec Consultants, "Remedial Action Progress, Cement Returns Area, Newport
Banning Ranch, Orange County, California," Letter to Mr. Leonard Anderson of
West Newport Oil Company, 4 December 2002d.
Geosyntec Consultants, "Table 1, Summary of Analytical Results, Surface Water
Sampling and Laboratory Data — Surface Water," Transmittal to the California
Regional Water Quality Control Board dated 3 March 2003.
Glenn Lukos and Associates, "Biotechnical Report for the Newport Banning Ranch," 22
April 2009a.
Glenn Lukos and Associates, "Habitat Restoration Plan for the Newport Banning
Ranch," 22 April 2009b.
Mitech, "Sampling and Chemical Analysis Study on Material to be Excavated and
Disposed of from the Santa Ana River Marsh, Lower Santa Ana River Channel
Area, California," prepared by Mitech, Santa Ana, California, for the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles, California, dated February 1988.
Orange County Health Care Agency, letter from Mr. Luis Lodrigueza to Mr. Leonard
Anderson, dated 20 December 1993.
Orange County Health Care Agency, letter from Mr. Luis Lodrigueza to Mr. Leonard
Anderson, dated 21 April 1994.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Design Memorandum No. 1, "Phase II GDM on the
Santa Ana River Mainstream, Including Santiago Creek," 1988.
HR101817VBA09 -07 RPT 22 8/21/2009
Ge os yntec D
consukants
Tables
HRIOI&7VBA09 -07 RPT 8/21/2009
Geosyntee Consultants
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING /TESTING /ASSESSMENT HISTORY
NEWPORT BANNING RANCH
ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
APPROXIMATE
SUBJECT /SCOPE
COMMENTS
SAMPLING DATE
March 1986
Soil and Surface Water
Up to 14% petroleum hydrocarbons in soil samples. Low metals concentrations in soil and
Assessment (lowland
surface water samples. Low to non - detectable hydrocarbons concentrations in surface water
western portion of the site)
samples. Low detection of VOC in surface water. No detection of polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs).
June 1986
Surface Water and Shallow
No VOC detected in surface water samples. One chlorinated compound, vinyl chloride detected
Ground Water Assessment
at 40 µg/1 in a groundwater sample collected from the vicinity of the maintenance building sump.
(lowland western portion of
Several aromatic compounds (ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylenes) detected in three groundwater
the site)
samples at concentrations below I ppm near the Maintenance Shop.
August 1990
Tank Bottom Materials and
Up to 32% hydrocarbons in samples, BTEX detected in some soil samples, though when
Asphalt -Like Materials
hydrocarbon concentrations were below 1000 ppm, BTEX concentrations were below 0.1 ppm.
Assessment (lowland
western portion of the site)
July 1991
Tank Bottom Materials
Tank Bottom Materials do not exhibit the properties of a hazardous waste
Assessment (lowland
western portion of the site)
HR 1018INBA09 -07 TI.DOC 1 of 4 7/15/2009
Geosyntee Consultants
TABLE 1 (continued)
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING /TESTING /ASSESSMENT HISTORY
NEWPORT BANNING RANCH
ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
APPROXIMATE
SUBJECT /SCOPE
COMMENTS
SAMPLING DATE
October 1993
Phase I Environmental Site
The following recognized or potentially - recognized environmental conditions: petroleum -
(Geosyntec Consultants)
Assessment
impacted soils, solid waste and debris, above ground- storage tanks, underground storage tanks,
parts - cleaning troughs, oil- production wells, empty 55 gallon drums, non - operative motor
vehicles, construction debris, surplus equipment, a sewer main, and septic tanks.
November 1993
Soil Gas Survey (various
Organic vapors in oil well sumps and in storage tanks.
site locations)
December 1994
Baseline Ground Water and
Up to 2,000 ppm hydrocarbon concentration in soil samples, metals concentrations were within
Soil Study (lowland western
the typical range of metals concentrations in soils, benzene detected at a concentration of 0.6 µg/1
portion of the site)
(0.1 µg /1 above the laboratory detection limit) in one of four groundwater samples.
May 1995
Leachability of Asphalt-
No VOC, SVOC, or hydrocarbon detected in the extract from the leached asphalt -like material.
Like Materials
Barium was detected at a concentration of 0.8 ppm.
June 1995
Drilling Mud Pit Evaluation
Metals concentrations were within the typical range of metals concentrations in soils, VOC and
(limited locations)
SVOC not detected, hydrocarbons concentrations below 1,000 ppm.
September 1995
Soils beneath NBR
Statistical sampling indicated that VOCs were not detected below natural gas pipelines, sulfite
Pipelines (primarily
not detected below steam pipelines, metals concentrations were within the typical range of metals
southern portion of the site)
concentrations in soils.
HR1018INBA09 -07 TI.DOC 2 of 4 7/15/2009
Geosyntee Consultants
TABLE 1 (continued)
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING /TESTING /ASSESSMENT HISTORY
NEWPORT BANNING RANCH
ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
APPROXIMATE
SUBJECT /SCOPE
COMMENTS
SAMPLING DATE
July 1996
Soils Below Drill Site
Vertical extent of impact below the tank footprints is generally less than 8 ft (2 m). The average
Tank Farm Area (adjacent
TRPH detected ranged from approximately 12 ppm to 41,000 ppm. VOC and SVOC not
to tank footprints)
detected and metals were representative of typical background concentrations
November 2001
Environmental Assessment
This report includes a description of the comprehensive site investigation activities conducted
(Geosyntec Consultants)
May through August 2001. The report presents the nature and extent of potential impacts to soil
and groundwater at each of the PEC areas. Earlier VOC detections in groundwater (1986)
confirmed. Also identified a free- product area on top of groundwater at the Drill Site Tank Farm
and soil gas bubbling to the surface near the Tank Farm.
July 2002
Site Assessment of Cement
Performed in response to the CAO issued by the RWQCB -SA. Based on the results of this
(Geosyntec Consultants)
Return Area (near Drill Site
preliminary evaluation, approximately 750 yd' of stained soil requiring mitigation was present in
Tank Farm)
the cement return area. Area was mitigated and closed per RWQCB -SA.
December 2002
Lowland Stockpile
Performed in response to the CAO issued by the RWQCB -SA. A total of 2.87 acres may have
(Geosyntec Consultants)
Assessment
been disturbed at the Site by either concrete debris or soils, or clearing areas of vegetation. Area
was mitigated and closed per RWQCB -SA.
December 2002
Environmental Assessment
Summarizes the status of investigation in the Drill Site Tank Farm Area and proposes a remedy
(Geosyntec Consultants)
Summary, Remedial Action
to address the presence of free product floating on top of groundwater. Area currently being
Plan, Free Product Area
mitigated in accordance with RWQCB-SA- approved plan.
HR1018INBA09 -07 TI.DOC 3 of 4 7/15/2009
Geosyntec Consultants
TABLE 1 (continued)
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING /TESTING /ASSESSMENT HISTORY
NEWPORT BANNING RANCH
ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
APPROXIMATE
SUBJECT /SCOPE
COMMENTS
SAMPLING DATE
March 2003
Surface Water Sampling
performed in response to the CAO issued by the RWQCB -SA. This transmittal documents that
(Geosyntec Consultants)
and Laboratory Data
surface water quality is within acceptable standards. Issue is closed per RWQCB -SA.
March 2008
Environmental Site
Report for the owner /developer partnership for the purpose of updating historical
(Geosyntec Consultants)
Assessment Update
information and listing Site activities occurring between 2005 through early 2008.
Notes: Certain of the sampling events or data compilation activities were not documented in a formal report or study; highlights of selected sampling events are provided herein.
VOC = Volatile Organic Compound
SVOC = Semi - Volatile. Organic Compounds
ppm = parts per million
mg /1= milligrams per liter
ug /I = micrograms per liter
yd' = cubic yards
BTEX = Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, and Xylenes
RWQCB -SA = Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region
HR1018INBA09 -07 TI.DOC 4 of 4 7/15/2009
Geosyntee Consultaats
TABLE 2
POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
IDENTIFIED IN PHASE TI EA AND PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT UPDATE
NEWPORT BANNING RANCH
ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
(March 2008)
PEC
DESIGNATION
ORIGINAL RATIONALE FOR PEC LISTING
ESTIMATED SOIL TO BE
MANAGED (cubic yards)
01
Maintenance Shop / Warehouse
• waste oil sump
• 5,500
• stockpiled transformers
• hazardous chemicals and petroleum hydrocarbons in use
• abandoned vehicles
• 2001 testing program results indicated localized areas of
soil impacts and the presence of low concentrations of
VOCs in groundwater
02
Drill Site Tank Farm
• above ground storage tanks
• 44,500
• oil and gas dewatering operations
• natural gas treatment
• underground sump
• 2001 testing program results indicated areas of deep soil
impacts (to groundwater) and the presence of free
product in groundwater
HRIO18INBA09 -07 T2.DOC 1 Of 9 7/l5/2009
Geosyntee Consultants
TABLE 2 (continued)
POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
IDENTIFIED IN PHASE II EA AND PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
NEWPORT BANNING RANCH
ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
(March 2008)
PEC
DESIGNATION
ORIGINAL RATIONALE FOR PEC LISTING
ESTIMATED SOIL TO BE
MANAGED (cubic yards)
03
Air Compression Plant (currently
above ground storage tanks
• 2,000
inactive)
• vehicle fueling area (near)
• parts cleaning trough
• underground sump
• 2001 testing program results indicated localized areas of
soil impacts
04
Steam Generation Plant (currently
. possible chemical spills and /or leaks from past
• 1,000
inactive)
operations
• 2001 testing program results indicated localized areas of
soil impacts
05
Water Softening Plant (currently
• above ground storage tanks
• 0
inactive)
• possible chemical spills and /or leaks from past
operations
• 2001 testing program results did not indicate impacts at
this location
HR101817VBA09 -07 72.DOC 2 of 9 7/15/2009
Geosyntee Consultants
TABLE 2 (continued)
POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
IDENTIFIED IN PHASE II EA AND PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
NEWPORT BANNING RANCH
ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
(March 2008)
PEC
DESIGNATION
ORIGINAL RATIONALE FOR PEC LISTING
ESTIMATED SOIL TO BE
MANAGED (cubic yards)
06
Secondary Tank Farm (currently out-
above ground storage tanks
• 1,500
of- service)
• oil and gas dewatering operations
• natural gas treatment
• underground sump
• 2001 testing program results indicated localized areas of
soil impacts and no groundwater impacts
07
Pilot -Scale Bioremediation Cell
• bio- treatment cell area
• 5,000
• stockpiled, unlined, impacted soil
• treated soil stockpile canyons (near)
• 2001 testing program results indicated localized areas of
soil impacts
08
Former Sumps and Clarifiers (south of
• possible leaching of crude oil from the sumps /clarifiers
• 19,500
the Drill Site Tank Farm)
to the ground
• 2001 testing program results indicated areas of soil
impacts and no groundwater impacts
HR101817VBA09 -07 72.DOC 3 of 9 7/15/2009
Geosyntee Consultants
TABLE 2 (continued)
POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
IDENTIFIED IN PHASE II EA AND PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
NEWPORT BANNING RANCH
ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
(March 2008)
PEC
DESIGNATION
ORIGINAL RATIONALE FOR PEC LISTING
ESTIMATED SOIL TO BE
MANAGED (cubic yards)
09
Electrical and Transformer Storage
possible PCB leaks from electrical transformers
50
• 2001 testing program results indicated localized areas of
hydrocarbon soil impacts - PCBs were not detected
10
Transformer Mounts
• possible PCB leaks from electrical transformers
• <2
• 2001 testing program results indicated localized areas of
hydrocarbon soil impacts - PCBs were detected at
levels exceeding residential preliminary remediation
goals (PRGs) at this location
I 1
Offices / Changing Rooms
• septic wastes
• 0
• possible solid waste disposal areas (near)
• 2001 testing program results did not indicate impacts at
this location
HR101817VBA09 -07 72.DOC 4 of 9 7/15/2009
Geosyntee Consultants
TABLE 2 (continued)
POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
IDENTIFIED IN PHASE II EA AND PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
NEWPORT BANNING RANCH
ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
(March 2008)
PEC
DESIGNATION
ORIGINAL RATIONALE FOR PEC LISTING
ESTIMATED SOIL TO BE
MANAGED (cubic yards)
12
Area immediately adjacent to City of
above ground storage tanks
• <2
Newport Beach Tank Farm (boundary
. oil and gas dewatering operations
conditions)
. natural gas treatment
• underground sump
• 2001 testing program results indicated localized areas of
soil impacts
13
Not Applicable
a this PEC was grouped with another PEC
• NA
14
Not Applicable
. this PEC was grouped with another PEC
• NA
15
Underground Storage Tanks and Fuel
. possible gasoline leaks from UST, however UST was
• <2
Pump
closed per regulations
• 2001 testing program results indicated a localized area of
soil impacts
16
Coast Watch Station
• miscellaneous debris and municipal solid waste,
• 0
although no evidence of this material currently exists
2001 testing program results did not indicate impacts at
this location
HR101817VBA09 -07 72.DOC 5 of 9 7/15/2009
Geosyntee Consultants
TABLE 2 (continued)
POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
IDENTIFIED IN PHASE II EA AND PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
NEWPORT BANNING RANCH
ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
(March 2008)
PEC
DESIGNATION
ORIGINAL RATIONALE FOR PEC LISTING
ESTIMATED SOIL TO BE
MANAGED (cubic yards)
17
Oil and Gas Production Equipment
possible teaching of materials from the equipment to the
• 0
Storage
ground
• 2001 testing program results did not indicate impacts at
this location
18
Concrete Cellar Stockpile and
. possible leaching of materials from the debris to the
• 0 (petroleum impacts)
Miscellaneous Debris Stockpiles
ground
. 15,000 (concrete)
• 2001 testing program results indicated that additional
testing would be needed in this area following concrete
debris removal
19
Abandoned Shack
• possible chemical spills and /or leaks from past
• 0
operations
2001 testing program results did not indicate impacts at
this location
HR101817VBA09 -07 72.DOC 6 of 9 7/15/2009
Geosyntee Consultants
TABLE 2 (continued)
POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
IDENTIFIED IN PHASE II EA AND PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
NEWPORT BANNING RANCH
ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
(March 2008)
PEC
DESIGNATION
ORIGINAL RATIONALE FOR PEC LISTING
ESTIMATED SOIL TO BE
MANAGED (cubic yards)
20
Miscellaneous Debris and Soil
possible leaching of materials from the equipment and
• 2,000
Stockpiles
debris to the ground
• 2001 testing program results indicated impacts to
stockpiled soils awaiting treatment
21
Miscellaneous Debris Stockpiles
. possible leaching of materials from the equipment and
• 0
debris to the ground
• 2001 testing program results indicated that additional
testing would be needed in this area following debris
removal
22
Soil Stockpiles
• possible leaching of materials from the soil to the ground
• 0
• 2001 testing program results did not indicate impacts at
this location
HRI018/NBA09 -07 T2.DOC 7 of 9 7/15/2009
Geosyntee Consultants
TABLE 2 (continued)
POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
IDENTIFIED IN PHASE II EA AND PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
NEWPORT BANNING RANCH
ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
(March 2008)
PEC
DESIGNATION
ORIGINAL RATIONALE FOR PEC LISTING
ESTIMATED SOIL TO BE
MANAGED (cubic yards)
23
Equipment Storage
possible leaching of materials from the equipment to the
• 0
ground
• potential oil leaks
• 2001 testing program results indicated that additional
testing would be needed in this area following
equipment removal
24
Main Office
• septic wastes
• 0
• possible solid waste disposal areas (near)
• 2001 testing program results did not indicate impacts at
this location
25
Oil Well Pads and Linear Features
• tank bottom materials
• 52,500 (petroleum soils)
(roadways and pipelines)
• ail- impacted soil
• 93,000 (asphalt /roads)
• concrete cellar
• debris
• Previous testing program results indicated localized soil
impacts along these features
HR101817VBA09 -07 72.DOC 8 of 9 7/15/2009
Geosyntee Consultants
TABLE 2 (continued)
POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
IDENTIFIED IN PHASE II EA AND PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
NEWPORT BANNING RANCH
ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
(March 2008)
PEC
DESIGNATION
ORIGINAL RATIONALE FOR PEC LISTING
ESTIMATED SOIL TO BE
MANAGED (cubic yards)
26
Drilling Mud Sumps / Oil Well Sumps
oil - impacted soil
• 4,500
• drilling mud
• debris
• Previous testing program results indicated localized soil
impacts
27
Sublease Areas
• impacted soil
• unknown
• 2001 testing program results did not focus on sublease
areas
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF MATERIAL QUANTITIES TO BE REMEDIATED (approximate)
138,000 (petroleum soils)
108,000 (concrete,
asphalt/road material
246,000 Total
HR101817VBA09 -07 72.DOC 9 of 9 7/15/2009
Geosyntec Consultants
TABLE 5
SUMMARY OF HISTORIC CLEANUP LEVELS
NEWPORT BANNING RANCH
ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
LAND USE
DEPTH FROM
CHEMICAL CONSTITUENT
ALLOWABLE
FINAL GRADE
AND EPA METHOD USED TO
CONCENTRATION
(below ground
VERIFY CONCENTRATION*
(mg/kg)
surface)
2001 RWQCB
-SA
Residential
0 -15 feet
TRPH (EPA 418.1)
100 (screening tool only)
TPH (EPA 8015M w/ carbon chain
100 /1,000 * **
(Impacted &
Remediated
identification from C13 -C23 inclusive)
Soil)
BTEX (EPA 8021b) **
B =ND, T =0.1, E =0.68, X =1.75
VFH (EPA 8015M)
ND
> 15 feet
TRPH (EPA 418.1)
5,000
TPH (EPA 8015M w/ carbon chain
5,000
identification from C13 -C23 inclusive)
BTEX (EPA 8021b) **
B =0.10, T =10, E =681 X =175
VFH (EPA 8015M)
100
Non —
0 —15 feet
TRPH (EPA 418.1)
1,000 (screening tool only)
Residential
TPH (EPA 8015M w/ carbon chain
1,000
(Impacted &
identification from C13 -C23 inclusive)
Remediated
BTEX (EPA 8021b) **
B =ND, T =0.1, E =0.68, X =1.75
Soil)
VFH (EPA 8015M)
100
> 15 feet
TRPH (EPA 418.1)
15,000
TPH (EPA 8015M w/ carbon chain
5,000
identification from C13 -C23 inclusive)
BTEX (EPA 8021b) **
EPA Residential PRGs
B =0.65, T =520, E =230, X =210
VFH (EPA 8015M)
500
Notes: Based on the type of hydrocarbon impact encountered one or more of these analyses may be required
** Positive results confirmed with EPA Method 8260)
**" 1,000 mg/kg allowed if the soil has no apparent hydrocarbon odor or stain; if odor or staining is apparent, 100 mg/kg will be used
TRPH = Total Recoverable Petroleum Hydrocarbons
TPH = Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons
BTEX = Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, and Xylenes
VFH = Volatile Fuel Hydrocarbons
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram
ND = Non - detect
PRG = Preliminary Remediation Goal (EPA Region IX)
C13 -C23 = Carbon Chain length (numbers indicative of number of carbon atoms in the hydrocarbon chain)
Asphaltic Fill Materials and Remediated Soil will be placed at least 15 feet below Final Grade
Greater than 25 feet below Final Grade — concentrations shall meet EPA Residential PRGs, TRPHrrPH up to on -site concentrations,
VFH not to exceed 500 mg/kg
HRI018INBA09 -07 TS.DOC 1 of 2 7/15/2009
Geosymee Consultants
TABLE 5 (continued)
SUMMARY OF HISTORIC CLEANUP LEVELS
NEWPORT BANNING RANCH
ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
LAND USE
DEPTH FROM
CHEMICAL CONSTITUENT
ALLOWABLE
FINAL GRADE
AND EPA METHOD USED TO
CONCENTRATION
(below ground
VERIFY CONCENTRATION*
(mg/kg)
surface)
1996 Agency — Approved
Residential
0— 10 feet
TPH (method not specified)
100
> 10 feet
TPH (method not specified)
10,000 (OCHCA Review
Required)
TPH (method not specified)
10,000 - 20,000 (RWQCB -SA
Review Required)
TPH (method not specified)
>20,000"' (OCHCA &
RWQCB -SA, Review Required)
Commercial
0— 3.5 feet
TPH (method not specified)
1,000
or Open
Space
>3.5 feet
TPH (method not specified)
10,000 (OCHCA Review
Required)
TPH (method not specified)
10,000 — 20,000 (RWQCB -SA
Review Required)
TPH (method not specified)
>20,000") (OCHCA &
RWQCB -SA, Review Required)
Notes: OCHCA = Orange County Health Care Agency
RWQCB -SA = Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region
(l) Areas having values of soil TPH > 20,000 mg/kg would require gas monitoring with methane ¢5% Lower Explosive Limit to remain in -place
HRIO18INBA09 -07 T5.D0C 2 Of 2 7/15/2009
Ge os yntec D
consukants
Figures
HRIOI&7VBA09 -07 RPT 8/20/2009
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
SEAL
IlBQJNT➢NG7EIDN
]B]EACII3[
NEWPORT
BEACH
NEWPORT
BANNING
RANCH
N.13F
III h
urs ��I•
Mils �nl.11
IIAGUNNA "K,,
]BEACH
P A C I F I C
0 C E A N
22
h'y SUNSET
<D5
l/ APARKIC
a
ti
aII
BEACH
COASTAL
SUNSET BEACH
ZONE
BOUNDARY
COSTA
HUNTINvIIO14 1>1 UTZA
BEACH HUNTINGTON
BEACH PIER
NEWPORT
PACIFIC BANNING OC
OCEAN RANCH
NEWPORT
BEACH
COUNTY OF
SAN BERNARDINO
ORANGE COUNTY
CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
Clevelnnd
NotjoY,M
Forest
\
LAKE �'C
P�OII$07 x
4
SAN DQJAN
CAMSTRANO
COUNTY OF
SAN DIEGO
SAN
C]LEME,N7E
EWPORT
DUNES
Figure 1
NEWPORT BANNING RANCH Site Location Map
REMEDIAL ACTION PROGRAM I I ® G2OSjRltCC� OFUSCOE
City of Newport Beach - California D OCT
mmultmts ...I.....
r-'N� Figure 2
NEWPORT BANNING RANCH Topographic Areas and Features Map
REMEDIAL ACTION PROGRAM I I I 1 GOOSjTtBC D FUSC i j1
City of Newport Beach - California r
.. 900 consultants .. .. .. 07 -14-2009
SWImn%moks stre lRg \lR9001b8yis�pmd=sS p x�VOpo Bk11 NOP1914mxd
�j
1d
C
o
0
c�
0
0
VWM�N I 6,
•r,
Z • — o,-1lw�
i�71 °aro .� to o`e� �•
or.iMlr�j� /I o j%i•i IN
to o•_. �K -'r
• o� Cam• •�I.� ,,
�• • oo, r
Ahern
o�• - -� _
, iF-
LEGEND
Plan Boundary
®
Abandoned Oil Wells
Active I Potentially Active Oil Wells
Utility Poles
Oil Pipeline Corridors
1947 Oil Sumps
_
Offield Operation Areas
t
R
:.Am
r -TI
,
L
Figure 3
NEWPORT BANNING RANCH Historic Oilfield Impacts Map
REMEDIAL ACTION PROGRAM n1 GeOSyIAWC(� fomv�
City of Newport Beach - California o soo t,2oo cnnsuita,ns FUSCOE 07• 1a•zoos
s,a'j_Wa M—t M0714 -m
---------- - - - - -- 9 — — - - - - - --
Street
it it
a j ji
�.' ,etnnraat
–..------------------
`
,a
e
3
—Oil Consolidation Site ti „
_ t s t
rea
- --
ACOe t
Wetlands _-[I,. NewM1all Straet
Restoration
Area
16 M Street —. -_
Oil Access Road — —
V tr_
"r
'�traat
-Oil Operation Site
hr I Sunset Ridge
Park
9
C
H
(-Ni Figure 4
NEWPORT BANNING RANCH Oil Consolidation Areas
REMEDIAL ACTION PROGRAM r 1 li
City of Newport Beach - California ` J �OSjrTl1.8C .`
FUSCOE
0 900 consultants .. , .. , . , . , m -14-2009
$\tlle moka_stred ingNIM9001108yWpmdu srr p xdlvil areas 8k11_4090110.md
� x
17
e
s
e /
c
ti
Q /
m
.+
1
:T s
�.� 4
4
AcoE 23 •.
Wetlands 2 ` _ P
Restoration`'' 3 15
Area R
19th Street
r 1 7J Sri—
. i-Allkliftl
_- +c ,- ewhall street'
iu, 1
Sw Sir
\
10
Approximate Location of Edison Transformers
21
I _
11
Personnel Changing Room and Showers
I''y r',
• 12
Salim
12
City of Newport Beach Oil Operations
_
15
Gasoline UST
18
'�
16
Coast Watch Station
:; ,,' •,
-
17
Oil / Gas Production Equipment Storage
22
\' '
.EGEND
Soil Dallas Stockpiles
�_
� 1 �
19
0
Plan Boundary
Park
�,
Preliminary Environmental Conditions
r
•n.
1
Maintenance Shop /Warehouse
9
'
2
Main Site Tank Farm (Active)
"��
, t
3
Air Compressor Plant
' e
4
Steam Generation Plant
5
Water Softeners
6
City of Newport Beach Tank Farm (Abandonec )
,- 6
7
Pilot Scale Biotreatment Cell/ Stockpiled Soil
�;. �'��'
16
6
Former Sump /Clarifier:
9
Utility Shack Transformer Storage
��*
• t'+.
19th Street
r 1 7J Sri—
. i-Allkliftl
_- +c ,- ewhall street'
iu, 1
Sw Sir
\
10
Approximate Location of Edison Transformers
21
I _
11
Personnel Changing Room and Showers
I''y r',
• 12
•'
12
City of Newport Beach Oil Operations
_
15
Gasoline UST
�, '� F 24
'�
16
Coast Watch Station
:; ,,' •,
-
17
Oil / Gas Production Equipment Storage
` • • 27
'
18
Soil Dallas Stockpiles
�_
I cunset Ridge
19
Storage Shack
�.
Park
20 Sail / Debris Stockpiles
21 Sail / Debris Stockpile
22 Treated Soil Stockpile Area
23 Equipment / Debris Stockpiles h
24 Field Offices
27 Sublease Area
r PECS formerly designated as #13 & #14 have been grouped with other
Non- specif ic area PECs:
PEC #25 — Oil Well Pads and Linear Features (roadways /pipelines)
PEC 426 — Drilling Mud Sumps / Oil Well Sumps
r.cr� Figure 5
NEWPORT BANNING RANCH PEC Location Map
REMEDIAL ACTION PROGRAM I I I I I rf1 Geosyntec "' FoliN1�
City of Newport Beach - California 91 FUSCOE
0 900 consultants . I ..... 07-14-2009
Wclientsibmoks street 112511 n9001W8,iWpmduds4epMWSlpec 8x11_h000714.mxd
Figure 6
NEWPORT BANNING RANCH Estimated Remedial Excavation Areas
REMEDIAL ACTION PROGRAM I I I I Geosyntec° 46-610 FolilVV�
City of Newport Beach - California FUSCOE
0 900 consultants ......... 0] - 14.2009
Wdie Wb.ks street_ Bxi1 _fs099714,mxd
Ge os yntec D
consukants
Appendix A
Orange County Fire Authority Guideline C -08
Combustible Soil Gas Hazard Mitigation
HRIOI&7VBA09 -07 RPT 8/20/2009
ORANGE COUNTY FIRE AUTHORITY
Planning & Development Services Section
1 Fire Authority Road, Building A Irvine, CA 92602 714 -573 -6100 www.ocfa.org
Combustible Soil Gas
Hazard Mitigation
Approved and Authorized by Guideline C -03
Laura Blaul
Fire Marshal / Assistant Chief Date: January 1, 2008
Serving the Cities of. Aliso Viejo, Buena Park • Cypress • Dana Point • Irvine • Laguna Hills • Laguna Niguel • Laguna Woods • Lake Forest • La Palma • Los
Alamitos • Mission Viejo • Placentia • Rancho Santa Margarita • San Clemente • San Ivan Capistrano • Seal Beach • Stanton • Tustin • Villa Park
Westminster • Yorba Linda • and Unincorporated Areas of Orange County
Orange County Fire Authority Page I of 17 Guideline C -03
Combustible Soil Gas Hazard Mitigation January 1, 2008
Combustible Soil Gas Hazard Mitigation
This document is intended to serve as Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA) guidance for the
scientific investigation, remediation, and /or mitigation of potentially hazardous concentrations of
combustible soil gases associated with the construction and occupancy of a building or structure
located within the areas specified herein.
These guidelines shall apply to all of the following locations:
1. Any location within an administrative boundary or a distance less than or equal to 100 feet
beyond the administrative boundary of any oil/gas field that has been defined by the Division
of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources (D.O.G.G.R.).
2. A distance less than or equal to 100 feet from any active or abandoned oil/gas well that is not
located within the administrative boundary of an oil field as defined by the D.O.G.G.R.
Exception: This guideline shall not apply to any Hydrocarbon Free Oil /Gas Well as defined
in these guidelines when complete surface to total depth data has been provided to
D.O.G.G.R. for review and certification and such certification is provided to the OCFA.
3. A distance of less than or equal to 300 feet from any gas seepage zone.
4. For locations within the city of Yorba Linda, refer to Yorba Linda Policy 26.• Methane Gas
Investigation and Mitigation for Existing Homes Undergoing Expansion or OCFA
Informational Bulletin 05 -03.
5. A distance less than or equal to 1000 feet from the refuse footprint of any existing or new
disposal site or Class II or III Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Unit described in Title 27
CCR, Chapter 2. The landfill or disposal site may be operating or closed, abandoned or
inactive.
6. Any other location identified by the OCFA as being subject to gas migration from a potential
source of a combustible gas.
The following definitions are provided to facilitate the consistent application of this guideline:
Abandoned Oil /Gas Well - A well that has been plugged and abandoned to D.O.G.G.R.
standards.
Rev. 01 -08
Orange County Fire Authority Page 2 of 17 Guideline C -03
Combustible Soil Gas Hazard Mitigation January 1, 2008
Active Methane Detection - A system of components designed to detect specified concentrations
of combustible gas within a structure and to warn the occupants via audible /visual alarms when
such concentrations are detected.
Administrative Boundary - The boundary delineating the surface area which is underlain or
reasonably appears to be underlain by one or more oil and/or gas pools as defined by the State of
California, Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources (D.O.G.G.R.).
Forced Air Venting System - A mechanically operated ventilation system designed to provide the
necessary number of air changes/hour for the purpose of maintaining combustible gas
concentrations at a safe level within a building.
Gas Membrane Barrier - A barrier installed beneath a structure's slab foundation for the purpose
of minimizing the intrusion of combustible soil gas.
Gas Seepage Zone — Any location where natural gas emerges at the surface from a subsurface
source.
Hydrocarbon Free Oil /Gas Well - Any well drilled with the expectation of, but not finding,
hydrocarbon accumulations in any quantity.
Mitigation Plan - A site specific plan prepared by a Registered Professional Engineer for the
purpose of defining measures necessary for construction to take place within a location
presenting a potential hazard due to the presence of combustible soil gases.
Registered Professional - A California Registered Professional Engineer or Registered
Professional Geologist or other credentialed professional with demonstrated proficiency in the
subject of soil gas investigation and mitigation and found acceptable to OCFA.
Soil Gas Investigation - A scientific investigation reviewed and approved by OCFA, conducted
by a Registered Professional for the purpose of determining the locations and concentrations of
combustible soil gas.
Sub -Slab Passive Venting - A non - powered system of components located beneath and/or within
a structure and designed to vent accumulations of combustible soil gas to the atmosphere.
Well - Any well defined in California Public Resources Code Division 3, Chapter 1, section
3008(a)(b) and Chapter 4, section 3703, as described below:
3008 (a): "Well" means any oil or gas well or well for the discovery of oil or gas; any
well on lands producing or reasonably presumed to contain oil or gas; any well drilled
for the purpose of injecting fluids or gas for stimulating oil or gas recovery, repressuring
or pressure maintenance of oil or gas reservoirs, or disposing of waste fluids from an oil
or gas field; any well used to inject or withdraw gas from an underground storage
facility; or any well drilled within or adjacent to an oil or gas pool for the purpose of
obtaining water to be used in production stimulation or repressuring operations. (b):
Rev. 01 -08
Orange County Fire Authority Page 3 of 17 Guideline C -03
Combustible Soil Gas Hazard Mitigation January 1, 2008
"Prospect well" or "exploratory well" means any well drilled to extend afield or explore
a new, potentially productive reservoir.
3703. "Well' means any well for the discovery of geothermal resources or any well on
lands producing geothermal resources or reasonably presumed to contain geothermal
resources, or any special well, converted producing well or reactivated or converted
abandoned well employed for reinjecting geothermal resources or the residue thereof.
1. Building Restriction Zone
To the maximum extent feasible, the slab or foundation for a proposed building shall not be
constructed over or within 10 feet of an abandoned oil /gas well. If specific site
characteristics make such a setback unfeasible, construction of structures may be allowed
within the Building Restriction Zone provided that the following mitigation measures are
incorporated. The proposed construction of one- or two- family dwellings within the
Building Restriction Zone shall be subject to further evaluation and/or mitigation.
A. A soil gas investigation and report, meeting the criteria contained herein, shall be
conducted in the immediate vicinity (25 foot radius) of any abandoned oil /gas well that
will be located within the Building Restriction Zone. The report shall be submitted to
OCFA.
B. The Mandatory Procedures for Mitigation specified in Section 4 of this guideline shall be
applied.
C. A Registered Professional shall review the soil gas investigation report and building plan
and recommend soil gas mitigation measures, if any, that may be required for the site
beyond those contained in this guideline. Any additional mitigation measures
recommended shall be included in the Mitigation Plan.
D. The abandonment of oil /gas wells located within the Building Restriction Zone shall have
the current approval of the D.O.G.G.R. Their website is
www.conservation.ca.gov /dog /for operators/Pages /construction site review faqs.aspx.
The current approval shall meet the requirements applied by D.O.G.G.R. at the time the
Mitigation Plan is submitted for review to OCFA.
** THE OCFA ADVISES AGAINST THE CONSTRUCTION OF ANY STRUCTURE
OVER ANY WELL **
2. Soil Gas Investigation
A proposed building located within the areas specified in this guideline shall be approved
only after a soil gas investigation has been completed and a report submitted to OCFA for
review and approval.
Rev. 01 -08
Orange County Fire Authority Page 4 of 17 Guideline C -03
Combustible Soil Gas Hazard Mitigation January 1, 2008
A. The investigation and report shall be prepared by and conducted under the direct
supervision of a Registered Professional.
B. The report shall contain a detailed description of the site investigation including the
methodology and the data collection techniques utilized.
C. To the degree possible, the source(s) of any anomalous levels of methane shall be
identified.
D. The soil gas investigation report shall be subject to review and approval by a third party
Registered Professional, if deemed necessary by OCFA. The applicant shall pay fees
charged for the third party review.
3. Soil Gas Concentrations
A. If the soil gas investigation report identifies combustible soil gas concentrations of 5,000
ppm or greater at any location(s), the Mandatory Procedures for Mitigation, as contained
herein, shall be applied to all buildings within 300 feet of the affected location(s).
B. If combustible soil gas concentrations in excess of 12,500 ppm are identified at any
location(s), all buildings within 300 feet of the affected location(s) shall have a specific
soil gas mitigation plan approved by a Registered Professional.
C. The Mandatory Procedures for Mitigation pertaining to buildings located within the
prescribed distances from abandoned oil /gas wells are required to be implemented
regardless of the combustible soil gas concentrations identified during the soil gas
investigation.
D. Mitigation plans shall be subject to review and approval by third party Registered
Professional, if deemed necessary by OCFA as stated above.
4. Mandatory Procedures for Mitigation
Design and installation criteria for soil gas mitigation systems have been established and are
detailed below. However, these criteria are not intended to limit the engineered design for
any specific site (see Attachments 2 through 8 for examples). Prior to the installation of a soil
gas mitigation system, plans shall be submitted to the OCFA for review /approval. All
proposed designs shall be reviewed/stamped by a California Registered Professional
Engineer. Proposed designs that vary significantly from the criteria below may be subject to
review by a third party California Registered Professional Engineer.
A. Source Removal: If all sources of combustible soil gas, such as crude oil impacted soil or
oil field sumps, have been removed, isolated, or remediated such that no potential threat
to buildings due to methane generation or migration remains, then no further mitigation
in that area shall be mandatory unless recommended by a Registered Professional. All
remediation shall be under the oversight and approval of Orange County Health Care
Rev. 01 -08
Orange County Fire Authority Page 5 of 17 Guideline C -03
Combustible Soil Gas Hazard Mitigation January 1, 2008
Agency, Environmental Health.
B. Passive Venting of Abandoned Oil /Gas Wells: All abandoned oil/gas wells within 25 feet
of any proposed building shall be vented. All wells within 300 feet of a proposed building
that are also under or within five feet of a paved road, paved parking lot, or other
continuous impermeable surface barrier where the continuous impermeable surface
barrier is within 25 feet of the proposed building, shall be vented. In the event sufficient
findings are made that well venting is not feasible, the OCFA (with D.O.G.G.R.
concurrence) may allow a waiver of the venting requirement provided that additional
mitigation measures described in section 4.F be made a part of the mitigation plan.
NOTE: Mitigation systems may not be installed within the public right of way without
prior approval from the City /County Engineer or Public Works Department. See Section
5 of this guideline.
C. Sub -slab Passive Venting: A passive venting system shall be installed beneath the slab or
foundation of a proposed building that is within:
1) 25 feet of an abandoned oil /gas well.
2) 25 feet of a continuous impermeable surface barrier (e.g.. paved road or parking lot)
covering an abandoned oiUgas well that is located less than 300 feet from the
building.
3) 300 feet of an active gas seep zone.
4) 300 feet of other anomalous combustible soil gas areas as identified in the Soil Gas
Investigation Report, except as mitigated by source removal or remediation or except
as identified in the Soil Gas Investigation Report as not posing a safety threat to
occupied buildings due to its characteristics.
D. The design for the sub -slab venting system shall be approved by a California Registered
Professional Engineer. The design and installation shall be in accordance with the
Uniform Building, Mechanical, and Plumbing Codes and meet the following criteria:
1) Ventilation trenches shall be placed such that no portion of the foundation is more
than 25 feet from a ventilation trench. Trench cross section dimensions shall not be
less than 12 inches by 12 inches. Ventilation trenches shall be back filled with pea
gravel (approximately 3/8 inch in diameter) or other material of similar size and
porosity.
2) Ventilation trenches shall be provided with perforated pipe of not less than 4 inches in
diameter. The total pipe perforation area shall be at least equal to 5% of the total
surface area of the pipe. Perforated pipe shall be located a minimum of 4 inches
beneath the foundation.
3) Where piping transitions through building footings, the penetration shall be
Rev. 01 -08
Orange County Fire Authority Page 6 of 17 Guideline C -03
Combustible Soil Gas Hazard Mitigation January 1, 2008
accomplished in compliance with the Uniform Building Code and with the approval
of the Building Official.
4) Perforated pipe shall be connected to vertical ventilation pipe. Vertical ventilation
pipe shall be not less than 3 inches in diameter and shall be constructed of materials
specified by the Uniform Plumbing and Mechanical Codes. All joints shall be tightly
sealed with approved materials. Ventilation pipe may be located within walls /chases
or shall be similarly protected from physical damage. Ventilation pipe shall be
constructed in a manner that will allow it to be connected to an active venting system,
if necessary, without modification or damage to the structure (e.g. Capped TEE fitting
located near the foundation). Ventilation pipes shall terminate at a height determined
acceptable by the designing engineer but not less than 18" above the adjacent level.
Ventilation pipes shall be located at least three feet from a parapet wall. Ventilation
pipes shall terminate at a distance of at least 10 feet from any building opening or air
intake and at least four feet from any property line. Any ventilation pipe located
within an open yard shall terminate at a height of not less than 10 feet above adjacent
grade.
5) The termination of all ventilation pipes shall be provided with a "T" connection or
other approved rain cap to prevent the intrusion of rainwater.
6) Ventilation pipe shall be clearly marked to indicate that the pipe may contain
combustible gas. This may be accomplished through stencils, labels or other methods.
Pipes shall be marked near their termination point and at five -foot intervals along the
remainder of the ventilation pipe. This includes sections encased within walls or other
enclosures. An acceptable identifier would be the words "METHANE GAS" printed
in two -inch letters.
7) All underground electrical conduit penetrating the slab or foundation of the building
shall be provided with a seal -off device as normally found on classified electrical
installations. This device is intended to prevent the travel of gas into the occupied
portion of the structure through conduit runs. Any device installed shall meet the
applicable requirements of the California Electrical Code.
E. Active Methane Detection/Forced Air Venting: A structure that will be built over an
abandoned oit/gas well and where the ground floor is not naturally vented may be
required to have an active interior methane detection system equipped with an audible
alarm and /or additional mitigation measures based on the recommendation of the
Registered Professional conducting the site specific soil gas mitigation review, which
may include an active interior methane detection/forced air venting system capable of
providing a minimum of four air changes per hour in the event methane concentrations
within the building exceed 20% of the methane Lower Explosive Limit (LEL).
F. Gas Membrane Barrier: Any building to be constructed in the areas specified by item #1
below shall be provided with a gas membrane barrier. Gas membrane barriers may be
required for locations specified in items #2 through #4 unless a review and
Rev. 01 -08
Orange County Fire Authority Page 7 of 17 Guideline C -03
Combustible Soil Gas Hazard Mitigation January 1, 2008
recommendation by the Registered Professional states that a gas membrane barrier is not
necessary. Exception: The building is of a structural design that provides natural
ventilation to prevent the accumulation of combustible gas (e.g. an open parking garage
at grade level).
1) 10 feet of an abandoned oil or gas well.
2) 25 feet of a continuous impermeable surface barrier (e.g. paved road or parking lot)
that covers an abandoned oil/gas well that is less than 300 feet from the building.
3) 300 feet of an active gas seepage zone.
4) 300 feet of other anomalous combustible soil gas level areas identified in the Soil Gas
Investigation Report except as mitigated by source removal or remediation or except
as identified in the Soil Gas Investigation Report as not posing a safety threat to
occupied buildings due to its characteristics.
5. Mitigation Plan Approval
All reports, work plans, and mitigation plans shall be subject to the approval of the OCFA.
Any methane mitigation system located within a public right of way shall also be subject to
the approval of the City or County Engineer or Public Works Department. Many local
agencies will restrict or prohibit the installation of methane mitigation systems within a
public right of way. A public right of way includes any street, parkway, sidewalk, open
space or similar area that has been or will be dedicated to a city or county.
6. Well Abandonment
Oil and gas wells to be abandoned or re- abandoned shall be done so in accordance with the
current requirements of the D.O.G.G.R. The abandonment requirements will be those applied
by D.O.G.G.R. at the time the mitigation plan is submitted for review to the OCFA.
Documentation of final abandonment approval from the D.O.G.G.R. shall be provided to the
OCFA and the building department before occupancy is approved.
7. Construction Inspection Responsibility
A Registered Professional Engineer shall perform the inspection of all gas control measures.
In order to document the inspection process properly, the following signed and stamped
certification shall be submitted to the OCFA prior to use of the building or OCFA's final
approval of the project:
• I am a Registered Professional Engineer in the State of California and I am
knowledgeable in the field of combustible soil gas control and mitigation systems.
• The soil gas control and mitigation systems installed within this project have been
constructed under my direct supervision and in accordance with the plans reviewed by
the OCFA. As -built plans are included with this statement.
• The building has been tested and determined to be free from any concentration of gases
that the control system was designed to mitigate. A copy of the test results is included
Rev. 01 -08
Orange County Fire Authority Page 8 of 17 Guideline C -03
Combustible Soil Gas Hazard Mitigation January 1, 2008
with this statement.
In order to facilitate the construction approval process, periodic correspondence may be
required to be provided to the field inspector representing OCFA or to the respective building
department of the city in which the project is located. Such correspondence shall be provided
at intervals required by the inspector and provide updated information regarding the status of
inspection activities completed by the engineer responsible for the gas control system.
8. Gas Control System Maintenance and Testing
The maintenance of all soil gas control systems shall remain the responsibility of the property
owner. All systems shall be maintained as installed and as recommended by the manufacturer
and/or system designer. The owner of the property shall be provided with written instructions
stating the required service maintenance and testing for the soil gas mitigation systems
installed. For systems requiring specialized testing to ensure proper operation, the property
owner shall obtain the services of qualified personnel to accomplish such tests. Written
documentation verifying that such tests were accomplished shall be retained by the property
owner for a period of not less than five years and made available to the OCFA upon request.
The OCFA may require any property owner to accomplish additional tests when there is
reason to believe that the concentration of gas within or near the structure is elevated above
the levels recorded at the time of the original soils gas investigation.
9. Additional Requirements of the California Fire Code
This document is not intended to address the requirements of the California Fire Code
pertaining to the location of a building in relation to an active oil /gas well. These
requirements are found in Chapter 35 of the California Fire Code. The OCFA Planning &
Development Services Section may be contacted for additional information.
Rev. 01 -08
Orange County Fire Authority Page 9 of 17 Guideline C -03
Combustible Soil Gas Hazard Mitigation January 1, 2008
ATTACHMENT 1
COMBUSTIBLE GAS STUDY CHECKLIST
(to be completed by applicant)
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Name:
Primary Contact:
Site Address (if available):
Tract /Map #:
Parcel Map Number:
DEVELOPMENT AREA
Development Density:
Open Space:
GEOLOGY /HYDROLOGY
Oil Field Name:
Groundwater Basin/Recharge Area
Phone Number:
City:
Assessor's Parcel #:
Area (acres):
Paved Area:
Number of Wells in Development Area:
Producers: Steam Injectors: Water Injectors: Idle:
Abandoned: Abandoned to Current Regulations:
Depth (ft. BGS) of:
Shallowest producing zone: Shallowest Oil or Gas Zone:
Shallowest groundwater: Shallowest drinking water:_
Number of surface expressions of fault zones: (Show on map)
Number of oil /gas seep zones: (Show on map)
1. Has a hazardous gas assessment been completed?
2. Is the hazardous gas assessment attached hereto?
3. Has the hazardous gas assessment included soil probes?
4. If yes, to what depth have the soil probes penetrated?
5. Has the hazardous gas assessment included soil borings?
6. If yes, to what depths have the soil boring penetrated?
7. The highest soil gas methane concentration identified was:
8. The background soil gas methane concentration identified was
YES / NO
YES / NO
YES/ NO
feet
YES / NO
feet
ppm (v /v)
ppm (v /v)
9. Is the applicant requesting any waivers from required mitigation? YES/ NO
10. If yes, what waiver(s) is being requested:
Rev. 01 -08
Orange County Fire Authority Page 10 of 17 Guideline C -03
Combustible Soil Gas Hazard Mitigation January 1, 2008
COMBUSTIBLE GAS STUDY CHECKLIST (Continued)
(to be completed by applicant)
Summary of Gas Assessment Conclusions
Area
(Correlate to
Map)
Methane
Level
(ppm v/v range)
Source
Potential to
Migrate
(Yes/No)
Migration
(Note re uired actions)
Source
Structures
Date
Rev. 01 -08
Applicant
Orange County Fire Authority Page 11 of 17 Guideline C-03
Combustible Soil Gas Hazard Mitigation January I, 2008
Lb
G7
a
W
W
Rev. 0 1 -08
ATTACHMENT 2
4v MIN,
GRADE ST NIIN.
12. IV
- € UT SLOPES PER "I
OSHA AND PER SLVLS'
T n_ €Ni3N�t °5 RIEPUR:IIf _
REC*OMWENO.ATIONS 11=
1111�-� -I U) ILC3J 7
.0 Hl. 711-1
TRIS ®IACHFILL :I
EY GRADING 1d r] 111 -FI
WNITRAGWR PER
SPECWICATION•S _II - JI
P II Bob 1 a
BARRIER, III- _ "1- -1
dfEL1E&6N I.1 II IIII
PER SPEC S A j
.PIPE kI1 Al �1V 11 �1! _ a II 1 cq•4• ° 0 _II I
!MIN, ^a'.0 OpE1d L i. o 'ro'n : '_ UTA: VAAIE =S
'PER SPIED 51 �I oa �o o II 1 ���� O - = 4` -0' MIN.
CAP @L1T I Al OF PIPE. 3_
12" MIN: CJi31NG °' - r e 111 - f $f4° ROOK
SfilE —l1P Tm a till
0
—
=m, -11x1
tr r� DW BRILL'HOLE
7111 101A. 'VARIES.
REQUIRES I
THIS 'VENT WITHIN I
16-01 OF FROG. E>a819N,6 PROPERLY
C4 NG ABANQUNED W1"
DIA, Fl -F. w 11 S3�orr
VAR1EB PER lboO.G -G.R. STANDAROSz
411TH STEEL PLATE
WEL02,0 COVER TOP-
ELL HEAD 1 I,T'*
NOT TO -GALE / GUIDELINE ONLY
THIS (DRAWING Ig 1SWED @T� 111E WUMT6'OF 19RANGL FOR GUIDANCE AND IINFORWATI)F ONLY,
NO WQ* AS I1E" p Hi1REW WILL EX DCNE EWCEPT AS RLV EWJ5 AND M€ ,LCo BY A
PROFESSIONAL ENUNEEIR Md 15 APPROPRIATELY P[M.TE,REQ IN THE, STIATE 4F CAILIFOR,
Orange County Fire Authority Page 12 of 17 Guideline C -03
Combustible Soil Gas Hazard Mitigation January I, 2008
J
7
a
Rev. 0 1 -08
ATTACHMENT 3
VQn_AL
AWN FLOOR � P�AlEliiAllQl'I�
WALL SLAB PER END'S SPR�C'S 'WALL
=i`il _ Illy_
I!- I_;IIV? FOanNG
1111= 1111.— illllll'I ,
MEM RtAN€
eecel:l..�9.
e. 'RE.
CARRIER FABRIC FW}
5PRAY ON MEMBRAN E;
OEOTOTILIE C-USHICW
OR 2r SmD ORA5 ium
FOR :SHEET PLASTIC MEMBRANE
L @ IPREP.ARm EARTH:SURCRA➢E }
ISQUETRIO VIE
METHANE BARRIER
HOT TO WAUE f GUIDELPWE OKLY
IA1S GRAVING L5 ISSUED BY TKE CCMTY Of GRANGE F� CE d2lCE AM 11:F�RUEATION CNLY_
HO B'fOK ia5 DESURWD HF PON SMALL BE OCKE EXCEPT AS WIWMO AND SEA5E0 EW A
PROFEMONAL E7i[m1 m *0 15 APFROP818T€EY Rt m_fOmD IH TI;E %mw OF amirGR ".
Orange County Fire Authority Page 13 of 17 Guideline C -03
Combustible Soil Gas Hazard Mitigation January I, 2008
ATTACHMENT 4
SLAB --%, �'FINISH FLOOR
1111- = -Illi � IIII- 1111 =1111_
MEMBRAdNE —jI IVV PER
PERFORATED
III 1= 1011 =_ PaP?cPEC'S
fdNANWL1iR k8A'TERIAL II . —_ 9a° �aN.
PER SPECIFICANONS TR£N._� ICH
USE TWS DUAL - MOT IRWW
IS !MAT tlP G04MAL U11UTIY TRDIM
VENT PIPE IN TRENCH
NOT TO SCALE / GUd@€LINE W-Y
FINISH FLOOR — ..MEMBRANE
-SLAB
ANY SLEEhTNG
THROUGH 17,007INGS
TO BE APPROVED 1 ,_ PERFORATED PIPE
BY STRUCTLIRAL — PER SPE,E "S
ENGINEER. - _- -
PIPING
THIS WKWNG IS ISSUED BY THE CMMTY OF ORANGE FOk DANCE AND kR)R. NATION ONLY.
NU WQW, AS UE D NER£ON WALL BE DOME D(CEPT'AS REVOU AM SCALED BY A
PROFEW9"AL ENDMER *W IS APP.IR MANLY RVM3110n IN W SKATE CF CAU�IX
Rev. 0 1 -08
Orange County Fire Authority Page 14 of 17 Guideline C -03
Combustible Soil Gas Hazard Mitigation January I, 2008
uT
e4
J
7
Rev. 0 1 -08
ATTACHMENT 5
a' DR)f MIX 1 PART BENTMITE -
00 FINE kATI ERIAL WIV IWT
RBM$T p OL'WS OR
CI022LEs THEN
WAYM TO CET AA 199
rLOMG MIXTURE O=BE
PLACEMENT IN TRENCH
AS SMOW0, 01M
Ci57.M ECR ON FLANS.
GRACE — E'ARTH ®ACXFI L
TO M - -
tt _ I - 8911 =1111
Q
. 18INTONITE PLUG
IFROM TOP OF a
TRENCH TO -ONE H' � � -
SAND BEI➢! - -
- AREA. OF
SANG, RM
in INI BENCH
WdTH0117
PLUG.
PL SHALL EXTEN
+LiM 6 3' O F TRENCH
L€"7H- TRENCH
TIRENCH f 9
NOT 'TO SCAU f tdi DII-IINt 0my
THM DRAWING IS ISSUED [BY THE. MINTY W GRAN "FpR M11YALE AND i okwktow oNar.
NO NOW A�- DESI*60 iREWSW Sl1 RE'DOIE EXCEPT N_4 REWOW AND SEALED 'BY A
PIRMEMOWAL DiIW41EER WW 15 TFE' STATE OF C•k ff5kmik..
Orange County Fire Authority Page 15 of 17 Guideline C -03
Combustible Soil Gas Hazard Mitigation January I, 2008
ANY AR,
RAN GUAFM OR SPARK 3' IA9N-
ARRESTOR IF REOUIRCOI
FRW FACE
'OF OLG?"
ROOF JACK
PER ARCHITECT
PIPE, L €,6€NU
� PUC9?ATU PLASTIC
PIPE IP'EF: SPEC'S
® YFTAL OR PLASM
PIPE: lam WPC AM
SPEC'S 9.15.. AS 'GAS'
,lD154
9DNTIRACTOR. a°'11ALL VERIFY DACT 'T'eFE OFF
CONSTRUCTION AT EACH 'YFWT RISER CALLED
GUT M ME ?LAIN& RIEAR5 MUST AMP,
'dHINTTM. AIND WUST INOT IEE INST&LE6
%HERE .MUCTURAIL WEWS6RS P90H1®IT.
FoR RIRE c-AST IN COAC1
%RAiP NMTH 'PILUMUTdS 9J4'
THICK S,TxRCFOAIA TAP€ -
FW% 2' YBM@ R&LL& OR
8UILDM DEPT. REVS
AIMPTOR, OR
IRp@UCEIR PER SLAB
spffs-
ATTACHMENT 6
t
PIRA IN 5F.W WALL
4PA. PER spre _
AIL NkTIMIAL4 ..
PER LII II
PLULIHING OWE:
Y€IA941" P7C
fll9[ _i= lm=- �IlI =IIII =1111 =1111 X11_
IIIlY11 �- !IT =IIiI -!III°
PEW PRPRJG 5_U.
ea Y
c? DIA- PER SPWS
VENT R1j R
J NOT TD S ALL / GUIVIA NE DNLY
3
7It95; DTAMIG IS A5s1 -LFEP BY THE CUAirr DF ORAA_GE FQR 0 AMP !Y#@} .IA11AFi LILY.
11,16 INDW AS 14F;'d7]HeRO- HM& SHid'LL K WK Fklri 7 AS iRE E110 AUD MALM TY A
PROVE -EMMAL EKWCU: WHO e5 ARPROPMATILT IREMSTEf® IN THE STATE OF CALIEeIilIA.
Rev. 0 1 -08
Orange County Fire Authority Page 16 of 17 Guideline C -03
Combustible Soil Gas Hazard Mitigation January I, 2008
AA IIiILOJGE OR WWOK
3; AROW MY ADAC047
j; i�f-7FIlQtd�.
24 ON
YO SCHEI 413 -
TiHRE TM
mmimm a"
M}�E
IM"." ITT
POPE LeGENO
PLASM PER' 5PEC'S
G &VA -NZEp STEEL,
Bl.Wcx OR
WRMVB. Si'.E-EL
E4
i i
� � a�Eer
I
F*z9H GRAD€
Ai1.AF'TER
Fi TTING
4 "0 PIPE 4R' DU f
PER PLAN5 .AND
SPECIMAITRWS
as
J
Rev. 01-08
4 "V
RED1JiEER
RP7
WANF€R
ALL ARC
g:_O ;.
ATTACHMENT 7
IRAQ aR
R F#IIAL
I WARD
0
FIPT TAP
AND PLUG
0
VIP 9CRED_ 410
Tmflrp
SCREEN
12 MEEK
.was newt=
6n
I IIIF -1111
IKL"1111�I111
F
4 "P
THIS DRAWING IS LSSUED BY T3E'01XATY OF QRAMX- FOR "y- .xu%e':X AND IINF0111VATfM QKY.
NO W= SAS Dryer r�tiM13H �spULL BBE�.W D=!!PPT A$ REMPIM 6A IM sl�i�xM y19Y A
p'.._Y!AL i-�°Ifl'.^- RY is A 11"!YTT_'�`�'1a69 m` efts I'CP , im im .11119E cF :W19' swA.
Orange County Fire Authority Page 17 of 17 Guideline C-03
Combustible Soil Gas Hazard Mitigation January I, 2008
IF PRW 15 INi W.1 AWA
MIN: Ountm *#AM
wite oft,mr aim mm,
be ww oz :vi l
F Nam m M SL%-k UfAgL,
CWINUT IN IRAN (W DD
OUT ww.: Imm No MWT
rs,wmw w*m wau wr auH A.
FOLINIM WN KV DMI OuNt-WOML
*-mm In mm- Omu 9W1 Em
NOWA m Qw
94OW F-Im L9Fqw-
ATTACHMENT 8
IMETMAW
NIDWTO� I ZTATM
DO NDT;BLCXX
WME PRW 0 151 PARqWft.AMk -M WKT
79 WkLK P%-r 244H V 4N Q4W. A-I'LMM
NUK WAII&T-AL DOM'M iOMOk. YW PLYr
DeRA%W PUkSK LuUmM w,-m mm9E
00 xrnm OR FED Fan
OU*L OR If UIAL EAMI WMUW
AWHALIF wm PRm Nm a
00" fff%MPM
UFt MEMCIARGR
'wave �-ftf Kuw
040srUm
Iffi-mv ryIEWUL.
mtfwf�S may W, Imum.
PA
j
03!
al
METHANg PS E
NOT TO !SCAU Ir RMIUKE ONLY
11415 DRAVANC F, M&JFD 19Y TRF OXMITY Off O4rMQ17 FOR'QUAMCE AW, NFORMA7-N CINLI-
m D ww. As mwRium Hum* amLL BE.Dm ExcuT & wamm.-AND- saLm BY A
MOFE5,�A[11 9AR4EER MM 19. APPROPMAM-Y §WWfLRO IM HE V7AijC OF CALF"A.
Rev. 01 -08