HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007 Remedial Action Plan part 1
REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN
San Luis Obispo Tank Farm
276 Tank Farm Road
San Luis Obispo, California
December 18, 2007
PREPARED FOR
Chevron Environmental Management Company
276 Tank Farm Road
San Luis Obispo, California 93406
PREPARED BY
Avocet Environmental, Inc.
16 Technology Drive, Suite 154
Irvine, California 92618-2327
Robert Van Hyning, P.E.
Principal
Project No. 1212.001
December 18, 2007 Project No. 1212.001
Mr. Eric Snelling
Project Manager
PADRE ASSOCIATES, INC.
811 El Capitan Way, Suite 130
San Luis Obispo, California 93401
Remedial Action Plan
San Luis Obispo Tank Farm
276 Tank Farm Road
San Luis Obispo, California
Dear Mr. Snelling:
Enclosed is the Remedial Action Plan for the San Luis Obispo Tank Farm. Attached are 12 hard
copies for your use. Nine copies are loose, for inclusion in the Project Execution Plan, and three
are in binders. We have also included two full-size drawing sets.
If you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to call.
Respectfully submitted,
AVOCET ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
Robert Van Hyning, P.E.
Principal
RVH:sh
Enclosure
S:\Projects\1212 Chevron_Padre_SLOTF\RemedialDesignReport\SupportingDocs\RemedialActionPlan_18Dec2007.doc
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page i
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................................... iv
LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... v
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS .................................................................. vii
1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1
1.1 REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN PURPOSE AND FRAMEWORK .................................................. 1
1.2 SCOPE OF THE REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN ........................................................................ 2
1.3 OTHER PLANS ................................................................................................................ 3
2.0 BACKGROUND INFORMATION .................................................................................... 4
2.1 CURRENT CONDITION .................................................................................................... 7
2.1.1 Off-Site Utilities ................................................................................................ 7
2.1.2 Operations Related Pipelines ............................................................................ 8
2.1.3 Potential Land Use ............................................................................................ 8
2.2 SITE HYDROLOGY ........................................................................................................ 10
2.3 WETLANDS AND RARE PLANT HABITAT ...................................................................... 11
2.4 ENVIRONMENTAL SITE CHARACTERIZATION SUMMARY .............................................. 11
3.0 OPERABLE UNITS, AREAS OF CONCERN, AND THE INTEGRATED
PREFERRED REMEDY ................................................................................................... 13
3.1 OU #1- FORMER NW OPERATIONS AREA .................................................................... 13
3.1.1 Preferred Remedy OU#1-AOC#1 Groundwater ............................................. 14
3.1.2 Preferred Remedy OU#1-AOC#2 Soil ........................................................... 15
3.2 OU #2- RESERVOIRS 5 AND 7 ....................................................................................... 15
3.3 OU #3- EAST DEVELOPMENT AREA (RESERVOIR 4) .................................................... 16
3.4 OU #4- REMAINING SITE-WIDE TERRESTRIAL AND WETLAND AREAS ........................ 18
3.5 AOC#1 - NORTH MARSH ............................................................................................. 18
3.6 AOC#2 - RESERVOIR 3 ................................................................................................ 19
3.7 AOC#3 - PLIABLE SURFACE EXPRESSIONS OF PETROLEUM ......................................... 20
3.8 OU #5- SITE-WIDE GROUNDWATER ............................................................................ 20
4.0 GENERAL REMEDIAL ACTIONS ................................................................................ 22
4.1 LONG-TERM MONITORING ........................................................................................... 22
4.2 REMOVAL EXCAVATIONS ............................................................................................ 23
4.3 CAPS ............................................................................................................................ 25
5.0 EARTH CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS ..................................................................... 26
5.1 COMMON FILL ............................................................................................................. 26
5.2 STRUCTURAL FILL ....................................................................................................... 26
5.3 GRAVEL ....................................................................................................................... 26
5.4 TOPSOIL ....................................................................................................................... 27
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page ii
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
Page
5.5 EARTH MATERIAL SOURCES ........................................................................................ 27
5.5.1 Flower Mound/OU #3 ..................................................................................... 28
5.5.2 Berms .............................................................................................................. 29
5.5.3 Borrow No. 1 .................................................................................................. 29
5.5.4 Borrow No. 2 .................................................................................................. 29
5.5.5 Borrow No. 3 .................................................................................................. 30
6.0 SITE-WIDE REMEDIAL ACTIONS .............................................................................. 31
6.1 MOBILIZATION, STAGING AREAS, AND SITE ACCESS ................................................... 31
6.2 BUILDING DEMOLITION ............................................................................................... 33
6.3 MISCELLANEOUS CLEANUP ......................................................................................... 34
6.4 PIPELINE ABANDONMENT ............................................................................................ 35
6.4.1 Pipeline Inventory ........................................................................................... 35
6.4.2 Pipeline Flushing and Pigging ........................................................................ 36
6.4.3 Pipeline Grouting ............................................................................................ 37
6.4.4 Pipeline Segment Removal ............................................................................. 37
6.5 MONITORING WELL DESTRUCTION .............................................................................. 37
6.6 HISTORICAL PRODUCTION WELLS ............................................................................... 38
6.7 LAND USE COVENANTS ............................................................................................... 38
6.8 VAPOR BARRIERS ........................................................................................................ 39
7.0 OPERABLE UNIT REMEDIAL ACTIONS ................................................................... 40
7.1 OU #1-NW OPERATIONS AREA ................................................................................... 40
7.1.1 AOC #1 Groundwater ..................................................................................... 40
7.1.2 AOC #2 Soil-Development Scenario .............................................................. 40
7.2 OU #2-RESERVOIRS 5 AND 7 ....................................................................................... 47
7.3 OU #3/FLOWER MOUND/BORROW AREA NO. 2 REGRADING ....................................... 52
7.4 OU#4-REMAINING SITE-WIDE TERRESTRIAL AND WETLAND AREAS ......................... 57
7.4.1 AOC #1-North Marsh ..................................................................................... 57
7.4.2 AOC #2-Reservoir 3 ....................................................................................... 59
7.4.3 AOC #3-Other Sticky Hydrocarbon Surface Expressions .............................. 62
7.5 OU#5-SITE-WIDE GROUNDWATER .............................................................................. 63
8.0 HABITAT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION .................................................................... 64
9.0 LONG-TERM MAINTENANCE ..................................................................................... 65
10.0 SCHEDULE ........................................................................................................................ 67
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 68
TABLES
FIGURES
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page iii
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
Page
APPENDIX A: REPORT CD
APPENDIX B: MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 93-120 AND
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
APPENDIX C: REMEDIAL DESIGN DRAWINGS
APPENDIX D: REMEDIAL DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS
APPENDIX E: EARTH MATERIALS SPECIFICATIONS
APPENDIX F: QUANTITY CALCULATIONS
APPENDIX G: HYDROLOGY CALCULATIONS
APPENDIX H: SETTLEMENT CALCULATIONS
APPENDIX I: GEOSYNTHETIC CALCULATIONS
APPENDIX J: SOIL LOSS CALCULATIONS
APPENDIX K: RETAINING WALL EVALUATION
APPENDIX L: PIPELINE QUANTITY ESTIMATE
APPENDIX M: VAPOR BARRIER ENGINEERING GUIDELINES
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page iv
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
LIST OF TABLES
Table No. Title
1 Summary of Operable Units and Preferred Remedies
2 List of Active Monitoring Wells and Wells Proposed for
Abandonment
3 Estimated Borrow Source Material Quantities
4 Estimated Remediation Construction Quantities
5 Summary of Habitat Impacts
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page v
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No. Title
1 Site Location Map
2 Site Map
3 Northwest Operations Area Historic and Current Features
4 Existing Utilities and Easements
5 Chevron Pipelines
6 Detail Plan of Chevron Pipelines in the Northwest
Operations Area
7 Existing San Luis Obispo County Land Use Plan
8 City of San Luis Obispo AASP Land Use Plan
9 Constraints to the Proposed City of San Luis Obispo Land
Use Plan
10 Proposed Land Use Concept
11 Hydrology Map
12 Wetlands, Fairy Shrimp, and Rare Plant Habitats
13 Summary of Environmental Impacts
14 Overview of Operable Units
15 Proposed Impacted Soil Stockpile Location
16 Borrow Source Location Map
17 Work Areas, Staging Areas, and Site Access
18 Preliminary Traffic Control Improvements
19 Miscellaneous Cleanup Areas
20 Monitoring Well Network Modifications
21 Northwest Operations Area (OU #1/AOC #2) Demolition
Plan
22 Northwest Operations Area (OU #1/AOC #2) Cap Grading
Plan
23 Northwest Operations Area (OU #1/AOC #2) Section A-A’
24 Northwest Operations Area (OU #1/AOC #2) Section B-B’
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page vi
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
25 Northwest Operations Area (OU #1/AOC #2) Section C-C’
26 Northwest Operations Area (OU #1/AOC #2) Section D-D’
27 Typical Survey Monument
28 Reservoir 5 (OU #2) Demolition Plan
29 Reservoir 7 (OU #2) Demolition Plan
30 Reservoir 5 (OU #2) Cap Grading Plan
31 Reservoir 7 (OU #2) Cap Grading Plan
32 Reservoirs 5 and 7 (OU #2) Typical Section
33 Reservoirs 5 and 7 (OU #2) Typical Cap Details
34 Reservoir 4 (OU #3), Flower Mound, and Borrow No. 2
Work Areas
35 Reservoir 4 (OU #3) Demolition Plan
36 Flower Mound Demolition Plan
37 Reservoir 4 (OU #3) Excavation and Geotextile Placement
Plan
38 Reservoir 4 (OU #3) Cap Grading Plan
39 Borrow Area No. 2 Grading Plan
40 Reservoir 4 (OU #3) Typical Cap Section and Details
41 North Marsh (OU #3/AOC #1) Demolition and Excavation
Plan
42 Reservoir 3 (OU #3/AOC #2) Demolition and Excavation
Plan
43 Reservoir 3 (OU #3/AOC #2) Grading Plan
44 Reservoir 3 (OU #3/AOC #2) Typical Section
45 Other PPSH Impacted Areas
46 Areas of Habitat Impact
47 Preliminary Schedule
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page vii
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
AASP San Luis Obispo Airport Area Specific Plan
ACM asbestos-containing material
amsl above mean sea level
AOC area of concern
APCD San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
AST aboveground storage tank
ASTM ASTM International
bgs below ground surface
BMP Best Management Practice
BTEX benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene, and total xylenes
Cal/OSHA California Division of Occupational Safety and Health
CD compact disc
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
cfs cubic foot per second
DTSC California Department of Toxic Substances Control
DWR California Department of Water Resources
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
ERWG Ecological Risk Working Group
FML flexible membrane liner
GIS Geographic Information System
GPS Global Positioning System
HDPE high density polyethylene
LCM lead-containing material
LNAPL light nonaqueous-phase liquid
M&RP Monitoring and Reporting Program
MCL maximum contaminant level
NCP National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan
NHIS nonhazardous impacted soil
NOAA National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration
OSHA U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration
OU operable unit
PAH polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbon
pcf pound per cubic foot
PDF portable document format
PG&E Pacific Gas and Electric Company
psf pound per square foot
psi pound per square inch
PVC polyvinyl chloride
RTP Remediation Technology Panel
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page viii
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
RWQCB California Regional Water Quality Control Board
SERRT Surface Evaluation, Remediation and Restoration Team
SLO San Luis Obispo
TEPH total extractable petroleum hydrocarbons
TIN Triangular Irregular Network
TPH total petroleum hydrocarbons
TPPH total purgeable petroleum hydrocarbons
µg/L microgram per liter
USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture
USLE Universal Soil Loss Equation
UST underground storage tank
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 1
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Chevron 1 owns a 340-acre former tank farm property south of the city of San Luis Obispo
(Figure 1), in San Luis Obispo County, that was constructed in 1910 to serve as the tidewater
accumulation point for the petroleum pipeline from the San Joaquin Valley. This property,
commonly referred to as the San Luis Obispo Tank Farm, SLO Tank Farm, or Tank Farm, was
slowly withdrawn from operation during the later decades of the twentieth century, and by the
late 1990s, was formally decommissioned. Chevron now desires to convert the property to
alternative uses that are consistent with local planning, community needs, good environmental
stewardship, regulatory requirements, and efficient asset management.
A long history of intensive industrial activity on the property, however, has affected its
environmental condition. On March 15, 2007, Avocet Environmental, Inc. (Avocet) published
the Feasibility Study, Former San Luis Obispo Tank Farm addressing the nature of the
environmental impacts and recommending a set of preferred remedial alternatives. This
Remedial Action Plan describes how the preferred remedial alternatives will be implemented.
1.1 REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN PURPOSE AND FRAMEWORK
This Remedial Action Plan is intended to provide regulatory agencies, the municipalities with
jurisdiction over the site, and other stakeholders detailed information on how Chevron will
implement the preferred remedial alternative from the Feasibility Study. It presents the detailed
engineering, which is the basis for design of the preferred remedial alternative components. It
also provides conceptual-level information on habitat restoration to support environmental
analysis through the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process, which will be
necessary to permit this project.
This document is built upon a foundation of cooperative agreements with the regulatory
community and local municipalities. As with the Feasibility Study, the Remedial Action Plan
has followed the general framework for developing site remediation documents found in the
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). It has been adapted,
however, to meet the needs of a non-CERCLA (Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation and Liability Act) site regulated by local agencies.
Working cooperatively with the various agencies to develop this plan has resulted in an approach
with broad consensus and support. Nevertheless, it is understood that approvals and permits
must be granted by these agencies independent of the cooperative process. Chevron will be
working with the regulatory agencies and municipalities to clarify the permitting process,
especially identifying the lead agency for environmental review under CEQA, which is
1 This property was originally owned and operated by Unocal. Chevron purchased Unocal, including this property,
in August 2005. Chevron is considered synonymous with Unocal for the purpose of this document.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 2
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
anticipated to include cooperative agreements and memoranda of understanding between those
bodies.
1.2 SCOPE OF THE REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN
For the purposes of this report, it is assumed that Chevron will pursue development of the site
consistent with proposed land use plans. As such, where the Feasibility Study included
discussions of open space alternatives for several of the Operable Units (OUs), those discussions
are omitted from consideration in this report. However, ecological risks are the basis of
remediation in the open space areas. Where remediation coincides with developable areas, the
remedial approach ensures compatibility with allowable uses.
This report provides the reader with a brief background of the site, its current condition, an
overview of the OUs and the associated preferred remedies developed in the Feasibility Study.
Subsequent sections of the report describe implementation of those remedies and present the
supporting engineering analyses. Detailed engineering drawings and specifications are included
in the appendices. The drawings, which are presented as portable document format (PDF) files
on the CD in Appendix A, are intended to be printed full-size (i.e., 24” x 36”). Line work quality
and legibility will suffer if the full-size drawings are printed smaller (e.g., 11” x 17”).
This report also describes important closure activities that were not relevant to the Feasibility
Study, such as the approach for abandoning the pipelines or demolishing structures. These and
some other minor cleanup issues were not identified as critical for evaluation in the Feasibility
Study or previous risk management documents, since they do not pose a direct threat to human or
ecological receptors. They do, however, affect implementation of the remedies and how they
will be conducted and are, therefore, material to this document.
Since publication of the Feasibility Study, there have been further environmental studies as well
as an extension of Runway 11-29 at the adjacent San Luis Obispo Regional Airport (Figure 1)
that are relevant to future development of the site. Consequently, Chevron has evaluated
potential changes to the existing Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP) prepared by the City of San
Luis Obispo. The proposed land use plan incorporates the new ecological resource and land use
feasibility studies. The Feasibility Study considered remedial activities that supported
development consistent with the land use plans available at that time. Similarly, the Remedial
Action Plan supports development consistent with the proposed land use plan, although it is
recognized that this requires the approval of the City of San Luis Obispo.
This report provides a brief overview of the long-term maintenance items. It describes the
general activities that will be performed to ensure continued achievement of the remedial
objectives. This section also discusses the alternatives under consideration for future
management of the open space.
If the primary objective of this process has been to protect human and ecological receptors from
exposure to potentially harmful substances, a secondary objective has been to maintain and, if
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 3
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
possible, improve the ecological function associated with the various habitats across the site.
Key among these are the wetlands, vernal pool fairy shrimp, and rare plant habitats. The
Remedial Action Plan clearly identifies which habitats will be impacted and notes whether the
impacts will be temporary, with the habitat being restored after remediation, or permanent, which
requires mitigation (i.e., replacement) of the habitat elsewhere onsite. The specific requirements
for habitat restoration and mitigation will be developed in concert with the regulatory agencies
and will be distributed under separate cover as the Habitat Mitigation Plan.
1.3 OTHER PLANS
The Remedial Action Plan has been prepared to accompany the Project Execution Plan, which is
an umbrella document for remediation, restoration, and permitting of this site. Other plans that
support the Remedial Action Plan are either included as appendices to this report or are
incorporated in the Project Execution Plan. One of these, the Habitat Mitigation Plan, has
already been mentioned.
Other documents that are discussed in the text include the Geotechnical Study, the Soil
Management Plan, and Land Use Covenants. The Geotechnical Study supports the engineering
basis for the cap designs. The Soil Management Plan will address how contractors must handle
impacted soil if its disturbance is unavoidable after remediation is complete. A draft of the plan
is included in the appendices to this report. Land Use Covenants document restrictions on the
property and record those with the deed, making its requirements binding upon future property
owners. It will be developed by Chevron independently of this Remedial Action Plan through
their legal department and with the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)
and the municipalities.
Prior to construction, the contractor will also prepare a site-specific Health and Safety Plan that
complies with the requirements of the supervisory jurisdiction as well as the stringent demands
of Chevron’s corporate health and safety program.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 4
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
Construction of Reservoir 4 – August 25, 1910
2.0 BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The following is intended to quickly acquaint the reader with the history, operations, and
background of the Tank Farm. It is largely taken from the background discussion provided in
the Feasibility Study, but has been edited and is a somewhat briefer summary. Readers desiring
more detailed information are referred to the Feasibility Study and other background documents
listed in the References of this report.
Chevron’s 340-acre Tank Farm is located at 276 Tank Farm Road in western San Luis Obispo
County, south of the city of San Luis Obispo and northwest of the municipal airport (Figure 1).
The site is divided into north and south sections by Tank Farm Road, and is bordered by light
commercial and industrial development, the San Luis Obispo County airport, agricultural and
pastoral lands, with scattered residences and a trailer park. The existing buildings in the
northwest part of the site currently serve as Chevron’s local headquarters for a variety of
environmental and remediation operations (Figure 2).
From 1910 until the early 1980s, the SLO Tank Farm was used for storing crude oil transported
via pipeline from the San Joaquin Valley. Storage facilities at the site included 6 large earthen
reservoirs, ranging in capacity between 775,000 and 1,350,000 barrels 2 , and 21 steel
aboveground storage tanks (ASTs) capable of holding 55,000 barrels each. The reservoirs were
constructed by excavating a circular or elliptical depression, which was then lined with wire-
2 One barrel is equivalent to 42 gallons.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 5
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
mesh-reinforced concrete. The walls were also reinforced concrete, but were constructed either
vertically or integrated into the sloping sides of the depression. The walls and floors of the ASTs
were constructed of heavy plate steel secured with rivets. The roofs of both the reservoirs and
ASTs were of wood and composition. All told, the site had the capacity to store over 6 million
barrels of petroleum.
On April 7, 1926, a lightning strike ignited a fire at the Tank Farm. At that time, there were
933,577 barrels of oil stored in the ASTs, and another 5,374,927 barrels of oil were stored in the
reservoirs. The total inventory was 6,308,504 barrels of oil of various grades. Eyewitnesses
claim that a lightning strike simultaneously ignited the vapors in Reservoirs 5, 6, and 7. The
power of the resulting explosion registered on the Weather Bureau barograph in downtown
San Luis Obispo, which recorded the time as 7:35 a.m. A second lightning strike ignited
Reservoir 3 sometime between 7:50 and 7:55 a.m.
Despite suppression efforts by the facility staff, the fire spread to the other reservoirs and to 12 of
the existing 15 steel ASTs over the course of the next four days by a combination of burning
embers and boil-overs, where the heated oil flowed out of the reservoirs and onto the ground
surrounding the tanks. By April 11, 1926, all but a few thousand of the six million barrels in
inventory had been burned to coke and spread across the site. This release is considered
responsible for most of the numerous surface occurrences (i.e., expressions) of highly weathered
and burned petroleum that cover the ground in topographically low areas of the Tank Farm.
Morning of April 9, 1926. Reservoir 4 (left) has been extinguished. Reservoir 2 and ASTs (right)
are still burning.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 6
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
Subsequently, Unocal resumed operations at the Tank Farm, including reconstructing ten of the
steel ASTs and four of the reservoirs (Reservoirs 3, 4, 5, and 6). Reservoirs 2 and 7 were never
again used for petroleum storage. The reconstruction effort included expanding the fire breaks
and enlarging the containment areas surrounding the reservoirs, which created numerous
hydraulically closed depressions around the site; depressions that subsequently became wetlands.
In addition to the 6 reservoirs and 21 ASTs utilized for petroleum storage, the facility included a
series of pipelines for oil movement to and from the site and for movement between the onsite
tanks and facilities. Regional pipeline operations were also conducted at the site, primarily from
the northwest area of the property (Northwest Operations Area; Figure 3). Facilities to support
pipeline operations included a pumphouse, boilers (for heating crude oil to reduce viscosity) and
an associated blow-down area, a petroleum physical properties testing laboratory, and an
electrical equipment house (Figure 3). The Northwest Operations Area also included areas for
general equipment storage and maintenance, as well as underground storage tanks (USTs) that
contained diesel fuel and gasoline (England, Shahin & Associates, May 11, 1994). The USTs
were removed in 1987.
Other historical activities at the site include the operation of a fire training school in the unpaved
eastern portion of the Northwest Operations Area (Figure 3). The school consisted of several
simulated sumps, flares, and tanks where students would practice techniques for extinguishing
petroleum-fed fires. Off-specification gasoline and diesel fuel were fed to these fixtures from a
set of three ASTs via a system of buried metal pipes.
The four reservoirs repaired after the 1926 fire continued in service for several more decades, but
were progressively decommissioned beginning in the late 1950s and continuing into the mid-
1970s, according to the following schedule:
Reservoir
Date
Decommissioned
5 1959
3 1961
6 1961
4 1976
Field evidence suggests that decommissioning involved emptying the reservoirs of liquid
petroleum and removing the roofs and, at Reservoirs 3 and 4, the vertical walls. The reinforced
concrete covering the sloping slides and bottoms was left in place. In Reservoirs 2, 5, and 7,
there is evidence that the concrete bottoms were ripped by the shank of a bulldozer in
perpendicular directions. The bottoms of the remaining reservoirs have not been directly
observed, so it is uncertain whether these have been similarly ripped. It is anecdotally reported
that the ripping was done to prevent water from accumulating in the former reservoirs.
Reservoirs 3 and 4 were largely backfilled by bulldozing the berms into the center of the
reservoirs. Reservoir 4 generally contains 5 to 6 feet of non-engineered fill and construction
debris above the concrete bottom, and Reservoir 3 is estimated to contain between 8 and 11 feet
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 7
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
of non-engineered fill. To provide access, a portion of the berms surrounding Reservoirs 5, 6,
and 7 has been pushed into the reservoirs. Approximately 1.5 feet of non-engineered fill and
construction debris cover the bottoms of Reservoirs 5 and 6, and in Reservoir 7 the berm debris
was not distributed evenly across the reservoir bottom, but rather was left as an apron near the
notch. Most of the bottom of Reservoir 7 is covered by several inches of interlayered tar and
organic debris.
A review of historical aerial photographs shows that the ten steel ASTs remaining or rebuilt after
the 1926 fire were decommissioned at various times. AST 522, located in the Northwest
Operations Area, was removed sometime between 1959 and 1965. Eight of the nine remaining
ASTs were removed in 1994, with the last AST being reserved for fire water storage. The final
AST was removed in August 2000. Fire school exercises were suspended at the Tank Farm in
the 1970s and transferred to the Richmond refinery. The pumphouse, pipelines, and boilers were
taken out of service in the early 1990s and were demolished or decommissioned in the late
1990s. Of the original Tank Farm structures, only three buildings in the operation remain.
For several years, approximately 2 acres of land near the center of the property north of Tank
Farm Road were leased to a recycling company. The site was used as a transfer station and
accumulation point for recyclable materials such as paper, glass, and aluminum. The operation
was shut down and removed in mid-2000, when the lease expired, and was not renewed
(England Geosystem, April 17, 2001).
2.1 CURRENT CONDITION
Aside from the current Chevron office buildings situated in the northwestern portion of the
property, the site presently consists of undeveloped land that contains native grasslands and both
natural wetlands and wetlands resulting from water accumulating in depressions associated with
the former oil storage facility (Figure 2). The site is best characterized as open space, with cattle
grazing for the purpose of fire prevention and weed control. Adjacent land uses include light
commercial and industrial development, the San Luis Obispo (SLO) County Regional Airport,
agricultural and pastoral land with scattered residences, and a trailer park.
Some modifications and improvements have been made to the Northwest Operations Area since
the last petroleum-dedicated ASTs were decommissioned in 1994. These include upgrades to the
front gate, the addition of a modular office building adjacent to the northernmost original
building, a new fire water tank to replace the water storage AST decommissioned in 2000, and
various upgrades to the electrical and telecommunication systems (Figure 3).
2.1.1 Off-Site Utilities
Utility companies provide natural gas, electricity, and telecommunication service to the site or
have lines that cross the site. The locations of these lines and easements are shown in Figure 4.
The Gas Company owns a 4-inch-diameter gas line located just north of Tank Farm Road. The
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 8
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
line is buried in the shoulder of the road and terminates approximately 400 feet from the west
boundary of the Northwest Operations Area. A 2-inch-diameter gas line tees off the main and
runs underground along the western property line for approximately 500 feet. That branch line
provides natural gas service to the Northwest Operations area. Aerial lines also run parallel to
Tank Farm Road, offset to the north approximately 100 feet from the road centerline. The aerial
lines include electrical power provided by Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), and
telecommunications service provided by AT&T. Electricity and telecommunications services
also branch off the main lines at the west boundary of the Northwest Operations area, run along
the western property line, and serve the ongoing operations.
Also shown in Figure 4 is the proposed sewer that is scheduled to be installed by the City of
San Luis Obispo in 2008. The City is in the process of obtaining easements and access
agreements for construction and maintenance.
2.1.2 Operations Related Pipelines
Historical operations at the site were served by approximately 25,125 feet of crude oil pipeline,
47,340 feet of water supply line, and 1,172 feet of other pipeline. The approximate locations of
these lines are shown in Figure 5. The analyses supporting the estimated lengths of pipeline are
found in Appendix L. It is believed that most of the lines were abandoned in place, although it is
reported anecdotally that much of the pipeline serving the ASTs was removed when the tanks
were removed. Since there is no record of final cleaning or abandonment procedures, it is
presumed that at least some of the lines still contain crude oil. Crude oil pipelines vary in
diameter from 8 to 16 inches. It appears that the most common diameter is 8 inches, and using
this as a nominal diameter for the entire network suggests that the crude oil pipeline volume is on
the order of 16,750 cubic feet. It is unlikely, however, that this volume of oil remains in the
lines. Many of the lines are demonstrably empty where they are exposed on the surface.
Much of the facility piping is found in the Northwest Operations Area, as shown in Figure 6.
This includes nearly 20 percent of the total crude oil pipe network (approximately 4,300 lineal
feet). This configuration allowed the operators to direct oil in and out of the facility and to
transfer oil between the various storage locations as needed. There are also 4,900 feet of water
line, 1,120 feet of dedicated Foamite fire-fighting lines, and leach and drain lines totaling slightly
less than 1,200 feet. The estimated volume of the crude oil lines in the Northwest Operations
Area is approximately 3,260 cubic feet.
2.1.3 Potential Land Use
It is expected that after closure, the site will be converted to new productive uses. These will be
consistent with the evolving land use plans for the area, although the final land use
configurations have not yet been determined. Chevron is working in concert with the City of
San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, and other stakeholders to ensure that the final
disposition of the site is in harmony with community at large.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 9
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
A key decision will be which local government jurisdiction to place the Tank Farm under. At
present, as noted previously in this report, the site is within unincorporated San Luis Obispo
County. It has been proposed, however, to annex the Tank Farm into the City as part of the
AASP. Chevron has proposed a new land use plan that incorporates new ecological and land use
feasibility studies, and conforms to the revised runway protection zones resulting from extending
Runway 11-29 at the SLO County Regional Airport. Chevron is evaluating the potential benefits
and consequences of each alternative. Since a decision has not been made prior to publication of
the Remedial Action Plan, the elements of each land use plan are briefly discussed below.
However, remediation has been tailored in this plan to support the proposed land use concept.
The SLO County General Plan envisions future development on portions of the Tank Farm
(Figure 7). Possible development areas under the County plan are situated on the east and west
ends of the northern portion of the property (i.e., north of Tank Farm Road). Anticipated land
uses in the eastern area include 17 acres zoned for industrial uses principally within the footprint
of former Reservoir 4, and 19 acres zoned for commercial services immediately to the north.
Land uses in the western area include 31 acres zoned for light industrial use. The sum of
potentially developable land under the County plan is approximately 67 acres.
Although the site is presently within unincorporated SLO County, it also lies within the City of
SLO’s sphere of influence and the City desires to annex the site in accordance with the Airport
AASP, dated January 2005. The central focus of the AASP is to convert the 340-acre site
(approximately one-third of the Airport Area) and other surrounding areas to greater beneficial
use, including limited commercial development (Business Park) and recreational open space,
while enhancing the physical link between the Airport and City areas. The AASP compliments
the adjacent Margarita Area Specific Plan, which addresses the area immediately north of the
Tank Farm. The proposed land uses, as identified in the AASP, are shown in Figure 8 and
include 2.3 acres of available Business Park development, 41.8 acres of Services/Light
Manufacturing, and the balance (approximately 296 acres) as open space (43 potentially
developable acres). The most obvious difference between the City and County plans is that the
City plan includes potential development in the eastern end of the site, south of Tank Farm Road.
The site is located beneath the departure pattern for Runway 11-29 of SLO County Regional
Airport, which has extended Runway 29 by approximately 500 feet. This had expanded the
airport safety zones beyond those originally considered in the AASP. The airport safety zones
are shown in Figure 9. These expanded zones render approximately 14.6 acres of the originally
proposed building area less suitable for development. Further, environmental studies subsequent
to the AASP have identified protected habitat for vernal pool fairy shrimp in several of the former
tank rings north of the Northwest Operations Area (discussed further in Section 2.3).
Consequently, Chevron has proposed revisions to the existing City land use plan that would be
consistent with these post AASP developments.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 10
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
The proposed land use plan is shown in Figure 10. It trades approximately 9 acres in the
northwest portion of the site and on the west edge of the area south of Tank Farm Road for just
under 16 acres in the northeast portion of the site. Overall, the developable area relative to the
AASP land use plan increases by almost 7 acres but decreases by 16 acres relative to the existing
SLO County General Plan. The proposed swap of land use designations also overlaps, to a large
degree, with the SLO County General Plan. The proposed plan provides more developable
frontage along Santa Fe Road, which is anticipated to see significant traffic when it eventually
connects Tank Farm Road with Prado Road. It also avoids 3.28 acres of protected fairy shrimp
habitat in the northwest corner of the site.
While it has not been decided whether “any or all” of the site will be annexed into the City, the
design considered in this Remedial Action Plan envisions that the site is eventually developed as
shown in the proposed land use plan (Figure 10). Chevron would perform the remediation
necessary for regulatory compliance and potentially for development of those areas of the site
identified for Service Commercial/Business Park land use. Chevron may elect to annex
developable portions of the site into the City, while the remaining areas may be left as open
space within the County for preservation as an ecological preserve. Future residential
development of any area of the site is excluded by zoning, airport safety zone restrictions, and
future institutional controls.
It is anticipated that cattle grazing may continue in selected areas of the site. Cattle are effective
at controlling invasive weeds and limiting the fuel available to a potential fire. It is expected that
cattle grazing would be limited to grassland areas, and would be excluded from upland and
wetland restoration areas. The specific requirements for continued cattle grazing will be
coordinated with the California Department of Fish and Game, the RWQCB, and the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service.
2.2 SITE HYDROLOGY
Regionally, the Tank Farm is within the Central Coast Hydrologic Area, a 6,600-square-mile
watershed that extends from Santa Barbara to the upper reaches of the Nacimiento River. More
specifically, the site is within the San Luis Obispo Hydrologic Subunit, a 44,370-acre component
of the larger San Luis Obispo Hydrologic Unit. The boundaries of these watersheds have been
defined by the California Department of Water Resources and are illustrated in Appendix G.
Locally, the Tank Farm is situated north of the East Fork of San Luis Obispo Creek, which is
tributary to San Luis Obispo Creek, and is illustrated in Figure 11. A small portion of the Tank
Farm discharges to this creek directly, referred to as Design Point B on Figure 11. However,
most of the Tank Farm consists of a closed catchment that retains storm water. This is a legacy
of the historical containment structures and other topographic modifications that were made to
facilitate operations.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 11
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
Ditches along Tank Farm Road collect storm water from the frontage properties. A local high
point is located approximately 1,000 feet east of Higuera Road. Storm water collected east of
this point drains toward the Tank Farm and eventually discharges into the North Marsh wetland
complex.
A small channel, referred to by the City of San Luis Obispo as Tank Farm Creek, is located on
the western side of the property and collects storm water from a catchment approximately 485
acres in size, including about 150 acres that are on the Tank Farm proper. Tank Farm Creek
discharges from the site at a concrete outlet works labeled Design Point A on Figure 11. Much
of that catchment is located north of the Tank Farm and currently enters the site as sheet flow, or
concentrated into natural channels, along the northern property line. Development plans for the
Margarita Area will change the upgradient hydrology and will likely concentrate flow at one or
possibly a few locations. Remediation and grading on the east side of the property will also
affect this drainage. Anticipated changes to the onsite hydrologic system are discussed in
subsequent chapters. Remediation and restoration of the North Marsh may require further
changes to the site hydrology. The details of these changes will be developed as the Habitat
Mitigation Plan is finalized in conjunction with the regulatory agencies. It is believed, however,
that the natural retention capacity of the onsite wetland complexes will be more than adequate to
address any foreseeable hydrologic changes. Improvements that may be necessary for
conveyance of storm water to the wetlands will be made in conjunction with the upstream
developers’ habitat restoration activities, as necessary.
2.3 WETLANDS AND RARE PLANT HABITAT
The Tank Farm currently hosts wetland and rare plant habitats (Figure 12). Much of the wetland
habitat has been established from the closed hydrologic conditions onsite that are artifacts of the
containment and fire suppression controls constructed after the 1926 fire. Several delineations of
the wetlands have been accompanied by supporting scientific studies. This report focuses on the
most current delineation, which encompasses federal as well as state wetlands. This most recent
delineation identified 75.95 acres of state wetlands (incorporating 55.8 acres of federal
wetlands). This total also includes 32.1 acres of vernal pool fairy shrimp habitat. In addition,
the site supports several other rare plant habitats that are identified in Figure 12.
It is likely that these current measurements will be revised to reflect recent legal developments
relative to wetland delineation. There may also be modifications to the rare plant surveys, which
will be conducted in the spring and summer of 2008. Modifications to these surveys and their
effect on remediation or grading will be attached to this report as an addendum as the
information becomes available.
2.4 ENVIRONMENTAL SITE CHARACTERIZATION SUMMARY
Considerable effort has been expended to characterize the site. The following is offered as a
brief summary to orient the reader who is not otherwise familiar with that characterization work.
It focuses on those portions of the characterization that are most relevant to the remedial action,
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 12
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
including the key soil and water impacts, wetland and rare plant habitats, and the environmental
impacts considered pertinent to risk management. For those readers desiring more detailed
information on the site characterization efforts, the documents listed in the reference section are
useful, especially the following:
• Feasibility Study, Risk Management Summary
• Seep Evaluation Trenching Report
• Supplemental Site Characterization
• Remediation Technology Panel (RTP) Assessment of Off-Site Migration and On-Site
Surface Expressions of Hydrocarbons at the San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Site
• Surface Hydrocarbon Inspection and Mitigation Plan (recently approved by the
California Department of Fish and Game, Office of Spill Prevention)
Given that petroleum storage and handling facilities operated on the property for many decades,
it is not surprising that environmental issues at the site are generally petroleum-related. Crude
oil is found in soil as deep as 60 feet below the ground surface (bgs). It is also seen in surface
expressions ranging from solid asphalt-like coke to viscous liquid. The locations and nature of
these impacts are shown in Figure 13.
Characterization of these impacts has included, in addition to their careful identification and
delineation, an evaluation of their importance relative to human and ecological health, and the
need for their remediation. Key to this effort has been the cooperative process between Chevron
and the regulatory community that has progressively reviewed existing data, evaluated
assessments, identified data gaps, established the risk associated with a given impact, and
determined which impacts require remediation. Following are the principal impacts identified in
the various site studies, RTP report, or Risk Management Plan, that were further evaluated in the
Feasibility Study:
• Liquid hydrocarbon surface expressions (red areas in Figure 13) impacting the
seasonal wetlands in the bottoms of Reservoirs 5 and 7.
• Plastic surface hydrocarbon expressions (purple areas in Figure 13) found across
the site, but predominantly in low lying areas (e.g., North Marsh, Reservoir 3) that
pose an entrapment hazard to small animals.
• Groundwater affected by light nonaqueous-phase liquid (LNAPL) and benzene
beneath the Northwest Operations area.
• Arsenic in the shallow soil of the Northwest Operations Area.
• Wetlands impaired by an asphaltic crust.
• The potential for methane to affect habitable structures
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 13
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
3.0 OPERABLE UNITS, AREAS OF CONCERN, AND
THE INTEGRATED PREFERRED REMEDY
Once a consensus on the objectives of remediation had been reached, it was necessary to
evaluate methods for achieving those goals. Chevron elected to generally follow the procedure
outlined in the NCP, which establishes the framework for evaluation of remedial actions used by
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This provided a platform for selecting
remedial alternatives that was familiar to the regulatory community and would provide a
transparent and credible process for their evaluation.
Through that process, five operable units (OUs) were developed for the Tank Farm. The four
terrestrial operable units are shown in Figure 14 (OU #5, site-wide groundwater, is not depicted).
A brief description of each operable unit is provided in the sections below and is accompanied by
a discussion of the associated preferred remedy. These descriptions are largely taken from the
Feasibility Study but have been edited to reflect the current plan to pursue the development
options where applicable, and to reflect refinement of the AASP land use zones. Detailed
proposals for implementing the preferred remedies are provided in Sections 4 through 7. A
summary list of the operable units, areas of concern, the relevant constituents of concern, and the
preferred remedies is provided in Table 1.
3.1 OU #1- FORMER NW OPERATIONS AREA
OU #1 encompasses approximately 5 acres in the northwest area of the site. Historically, this
area was used to support tank farm and pipeline operations and included equipment and
processes not found across the remainder of the site. Consequently, this area is affected, at least
in part, by a unique group of contaminants, namely arsenic in shallow soil and LNAPL with a
significant lighter fraction, including benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene, and total xylenes (BTEX),
in the saturated zone.
In addition, this area of the site is designated both by the City and San Luis Obispo County for
potential commercial development (Figures 7, 8, and 10). Although the area zoned for
commercial development in either land use plan includes all or portions of the northwest corner
of the property, including the former AST containment berms, the area of OU #1 excludes the
AST berms due to the identified value of the vernal pool fairy shrimp habitat that they support
(Figure 12). An additional concern to this operable unit is that it lies within the 100-year
floodplain (Figure 9), which affects how development can be implemented.
OU #1 includes two media-focused areas of concern (AOCs), groundwater (AOC #1) and soil
(AOC #2). As stated previously, due to a set of conditions unique to the Northwest Operations
Area, the LNAPL in the saturated zone also contains a light fraction (C5-C20), including benzene.
This light fraction is responsible for the Northwest Operations Area being the only area of the
site identified by the RTP where groundwater containing dissolved contaminants (total
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 14
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
petroleum hydrocarbons [TPH] and benzene) at concentrations greater than maximum
contaminant levels (or frequently applied action levels) has migrated offsite. The LNAPL
impact in the Northwest Operations Area covers an area approximately 600 feet long by 300 feet
wide and ranges in depth from 4 to 28 feet bgs (Figure 14). The light fraction co-occurs with,
and is dissolved in, the heavier oil. Light-end hydrocarbons, including BTEX, are hundreds of
times more soluble in oil than in water. Therefore, this light fraction would be difficult to
remove without also removing the heavier residual oil. In the Northwest Operations Area,
groundwater typically occurs at depths ranging from 5 to 15 feet bgs.
Benzene is the most toxic constituent of BTEX and its presence in soil, groundwater, and soil gas
has the potential to pose the greatest potential risk to future users of the site. The Feasibility
Study describes the circumstances surrounding the presence and discovery of the BTEX in detail.
In summary, it was determined that the BTEX does not pose a significant risk to building
occupants, provided adequate institutional controls (e.g., vapor barriers) are in place.
AOC #2 includes shallow soil in OU #1, which is impacted by arsenic and, to a more limited
extent, by TPH and polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and deeper (4 to 28 feet bgs)
soil impacted by the above-described LNAPL. Within the operable unit, the arsenic is relatively
widespread and limited to shallow (<2 feet) soil, which is consistent with its likely use as an
herbicide. Although not relevant to the development plans considered in this report, the metals
and PAHs have been identified as potential ecological risks and would be issues if the area were
converted to open space3 . The arsenic was identified as a potential human health risk for both
open space and commercial development land uses. It is assumed that the entire operable unit is
impacted with arsenic, subject to remediation given the available spatial distribution of data.
3.1.1 Preferred Remedy OU#1-AOC#1 Groundwater
It has been demonstrated that benzene dissolved in groundwater has historically migrated offsite
in the vicinity of Well SLOW-12, but rapidly attenuates and does not appear to threaten
downgradient water wells. The remedial action objectives for OU #1/AOC #1 established in the
Feasibility Study are intended to prevent human contact with TPH- or benzene-impacted
groundwater and ensure that groundwater resources downgradient of existing impacts are not
affected. Given that the LNAPL is stable and unrecoverable, the dissolved phase is naturally
contained, there is no evidence of hydrocarbon impacts to downgradient groundwater beneficial
uses, and groundwater in the airport area is not used for drinking, it was concluded that
monitored natural attenuation is sufficiently protective to be adopted as the long-term remedy for
groundwater in OU #1/AOC #1.
Therefore, the preferred remedial alternative for AOC #1 is monitored natural attenuation with
institutional controls and long-term monitoring. Monitored natural attenuation includes
semiannual sampling of the existing groundwater monitoring network on and surrounding
AOC #1; testing those samples for total extractable petroleum hydrocarbons (TEPH), total
3 In its present condition, the Northwest Operations Area was not considered suitable habitat in the pERA.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 15
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
purgeable petroleum hydrocarbons (TPPH), BTEX, and natural attenuation parameters; and
reporting those findings to the RWQCB in accordance with an approved monitoring and
reporting program.
Institutional controls will include deed restrictions limiting land use to commercial/industrial
purposes, a soil management plan to be implemented in the event contaminated soils are
disturbed, and groundwater use restrictions in impacted areas.
3.1.2 Preferred Remedy OU#1-AOC#2 Soil
AOC #2 includes shallow soil, which is impacted by arsenic and, to a more limited extent, by
TPH and PAHs, and deeper (4 to 28 feet bgs) soil impacted by LNAPL containing a light
fraction. The arsenic is relatively widespread and limited to shallow (<2 feet) soil, which is
consistent with its probable former use at the site as a herbicide. The arsenic and PAHs have
been identified as potential threats to human and ecological receptors (if the area were converted
to open space). With regard to the deeper soil, the LNAPL is not considered a direct contact
risk, but vapor intrusion by the volatile fraction may pose a risk to future onsite commercial
workers. Remedial action objectives are primarily focused on preventing human and eco-
receptor contact with arsenic, TPH, PAHs, and volatile hydrocarbons. Since the area is to be
developed, it will not support suitable ecological habitat, thereby mitigating the potential for
ecological risks.
The preferred remedy for OU #1/AOC #2 includes construction of a minimum 4-foot-thick soil
cap. The cap will provide a barrier between the impacted soil and potential receptors and also
provide a soil layer of sufficient thickness to facilitate foundation construction and utility
installation with a low potential of disturbing contaminated soil. The Northwest Operations Area
is within the 100-year flood plain associated with Tank Farm Creek. At its current grade, the
southernmost structure within the Northwest Operations Area is subject to inundation during
periods of moderate to heavy rain. Raising the ground elevation by 4 feet and regrading
appropriately would also satisfy the requirements for construction in floodplains and help
alleviate the current flooding problems. A geotextile would be placed between the cap and the
existing ground surface. It would act as an identifying marker to reduce the likelihood of
inadvertently excavating into the impacted soils. The cap will require long-term monitoring and
maintenance. Institutional controls will include deed restrictions limiting land use to
commercial/industrial purposes, excavation notification requirements, a soil management plan,
groundwater use restrictions in impacted areas, and a vapor barrier requirement for any new
buildings that are constructed in the OU; which will protect the building occupants from possible
vapors from the underlying hydrocarbons.
3.2 OU #2- RESERVOIRS 5 AND 7
OU #2 includes the former Reservoirs 5 and 7 (Figure 14). Measured from the outside toe of the
reservoir containment berms, the reservoirs cover a total area of 9.8 acres. The reservoirs
contain about 8.5 acres of wetland, none of which are identified fairy shrimp habitat, although
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 16
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
Reservoir 5 contains local communities of Congdon’s tarplant. Both reservoirs pond water
during the winter, with the amount of water largely dependent on the amount of rainfall. In years
of heavy rainfall, it is not unusual for 2 to 3 feet of water to accumulate in the reservoirs. The
reinforced concrete bottoms, though ripped, are still present in both of the reservoirs but are
covered by 1 to 2 feet of tar, non-engineered fill, and construction debris. In all land use plans,
Reservoirs 5 and 7 are in areas designated as Open Space.
Reservoirs 5 and 7 are unique in that they are the only areas of the site impacted by liquid-type
hydrocarbon surface expressions and these are the only surface expressions that are hydraulically
connected to subsurface LNAPL sources. The implication of this is that simple removal of the
shallow hydrocarbon-impacted soils will not effectively remediate the sheen that seasonally
develops on surface water in the reservoirs. The source of the hydrocarbon sheen is mobile
hydrocarbon extending to depths of up to 25 feet below the bottom of the reservoirs, which is
displaced vertically upward during periods of a rising water table. Elimination of the sheen will
require either removal of the mobile hydrocarbon at depth, making that hydrocarbon immobile,
or raising the bottom of the reservoirs to elevations above the seasonal water table highs
(RTP, 2006).
The preferred remedy caps Reservoirs 5 and 7, mitigates wetland impacts in other onsite areas,
and provides institutional controls and long-term monitoring. Cap construction will involve
removing existing non-engineered fill down to the existing concrete floor in each reservoir.
Gravel will be placed directly on top of the existing concrete floor in each reservoir to a height of
1.5 feet above each reservoir’s historical (1990 to 2005) high water table elevation. The gravel
will be covered with a layer of geotextile and a combination of common earth fill and topsoil to
create the finished surface. The cap will be graded to encourage runoff, thereby minimizing
water infiltration into the gravel reservoir.
This approach requires removal of the existing wetlands. Mitigation for these impacts will occur
in other suitable areas of the property. Specific institutional controls will depend partially on the
degree of public access, but are expected to include fencing, signs, awareness programs, and
similar active measures to ensure that access to the site is controlled. Other institutional controls
will include deed restrictions and other covenants (as needed) to preserve the land as open space
in perpetuity. Long-term monitoring will include periodic inspections and maintenance (as
needed) to ensure that the institutional controls and cap remain effective.
3.3 OU #3- EAST DEVELOPMENT AREA (RESERVOIR 4)
OU #3 includes approximately 30 acres in the eastern part of the site (Figure 14) and is also
zoned for possible future commercial development (Figures 7, 8, and 10). This operable unit
includes Reservoir 4, several surface expressions of sticky (“purple-type”) hydrocarbon that
collectively cover an area of about 2.3 acres, and the former recycling center. The floor of
former Reservoir 4 is covered with 5 to 6 feet of non-engineered, hydrocarbon-impacted soil and
construction debris. The Risk Management Summary recommended that soil within Reservoir 4
be left in place with no further action, assuming that the area remains as open space. Due to the
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 17
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
entrapment hazard posed by the sticky hydrocarbon surface expressions, however, these areas,
together with some proximal “blue”- and “green”-type expressions that are not physical hazards,
were identified by the Ecological Risk Working Group (ERWG) for remediation. OU #3
contains several small areas of wetlands, none of which are fairy shrimp habitat, and at least two
special status plants: Congdon’s tarplant and SLO morning glory. Finally, three areas of
relatively low, Level 2 ecological risk were identified in the former recycling center, but because
the area is paved and does not provide suitable ecological habitat, the Risk Management
Summary recommended no further action as long it does not revert to open space.
For purposes of the Feasibility Study evaluation, the development scenario was defined as
including all of the activities necessary to leave the operable unit in a condition such that a
developer could undertake construction. For OU #3, this is potentially significant since there are
several feet of non-engineered fill within Reservoir 4 anticipated to be incapable of supporting a
conventional spread footing building foundation without adverse differential settlement.
Consequently, the Feasibility Study considered remedial alternatives that would support high
foundation loads by removing and replacing the non-engineered, hydrocarbon-impacted fill
within Reservoir 4, as well as development alternatives that would require minimal structural
support, such as a parking lot.
Weathered, high-molecular weight TPH-impacted soil extends to depths of up to 50 feet below
Reservoir 4 (Figure 12). As no significant risk has been attributed to the presence of this
material, and considering the impracticability of contaminant removal, remedial measures
targeting this material were not considered in the Feasibility Study.
Subsequent to the Feasibility Study, a refinement of the land uses shown in the AASP has been
proposed. Consequently, the grading of the original preferred alternative was augmented to
support this land use concept. The approach is at least equally effective, in that surficial
hydrocarbon exposures are removed. In addition, the refined preferred alternative provides a soil
cover over Reservoir 4 that is at least 4 feet thick, and as much as 11-feet thick .. The cover will
provide a barrier between the impacted soil and potential receptors and also sufficient structural
support for future onsite construction. A geotextile identifying layer, placed between the cap and
the existing ground surface, would serve to reduce the likelihood of inadvertently excavating into
the impacted soils. Landscaped areas of the cover would be planted with appropriate shallow-
rooted vegetation to prevent erosion without penetrating the cover. Development will still
require the installation of vapor barriers below any future foundations or slabs to protect against
potential methane intrusion.
Construction will unavoidably impact wetlands, which will require mitigation, as well as some
Congdon’s tarplant and SLO morning glory communities. Since residual contamination will
remain at depth, institutional controls (e.g., restrictions on excavation, development of a Soil
Management Plan) will be used to minimize the potential for future onsite exposures. Long-
term monitoring will be used to assess compliance and effectiveness.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 18
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
3.4 OU #4- REMAINING SITE-WIDE TERRESTRIAL AND WETLAND AREAS
OU #4 includes all the remaining terrestrial and wetland areas of the Tank Farm not considered
in the first three operable units. OU #4 covers an area of about 270 acres, all but 24 acres of
which is planned open space. Three areas of concern were defined in the operable unit
corresponding to “must-do” areas identified by the Surface Evaluation, Remediation and
Restoration Team (SERRT) (Figure 14). These are:
• AOC#1 – the North Marsh
• AOC#2 – Reservoir 3
• AOC#3 – Other sticky hydrocarbon surface expressions.
All three of these areas were identified by the SERRT due to the presence of sticky hydrocarbon
surface expressions. However, the conditions surrounding the occurrence of these surface
expressions in each area of concern are subtly different, necessitating their separation. Over
70 acres of wetland occur in OU #4, including more than 30 acres identified as fairy shrimp
habitat. The operable unit also includes substantial coverage by a variety of special status plants.
The Risk Management Summary report also recommended two areas of surface hydrocarbon
expressions surrounding Reservoir 3, which were not identified as eco-risks, for ripping to
facilitate re-vegetation. These areas, which are also identified in Figure 14, shall be scarified to
depths of not less than 15 inches.
3.5 AOC#1 - NORTH MARSH
AOC# 1, the North Marsh, consists of approximately 11.9 acres of wetlands without vernal pool
fairy shrimp habitat located east of the Northwest Operations Area. The wetlands include the
most extensive coverage of pliable plastic (i.e., “blue” and “purple”) hydrocarbon surface
expressions at the Tank Farm. When grouped into areas based on proximity, these expressions
cover about 7 acres. The extent in the shallow subsurface, however, may be significantly larger.
Based on the 1926 topography of the North Marsh, these surface expressions may cover as many
as 13 acres. The thickness of the expressions varies but has been estimated to be 2 to 3 feet on
average. The North Marsh has not been identified as fairy shrimp habitat.
The preferred remedy is to excavate the plastic hydrocarbon surface expressions from the North
Marsh, disposing of the impacted material offsite, and improving upon the original wetland
function. The area of excavation is estimated to be between 7 and 13 acres, with an average
assumed excavation depth of 3.5 feet. Given the areas and thickness, the excavation may
generate anywhere from 40,000 to 73,000 cubic yards of material. Any material identified as
unimpacted would be stockpiled separately and used later as backfill. It is anticipated that the
soil would be disposed of as nonhazardous contaminated soil at an appropriate landfill.
Depending on the landfill used, trucks may haul backfill material from the landfill on their return
trip. It is assumed that the upper 1 foot of soil would be an appropriate organic-rich topsoil, to
be specified in a future restoration plan, consisting either of clean soil from on site or imported to
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 19
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
the site. The actual amount of topsoil used would be based on the final soil balances, but it is
assumed, for the purposes of this analysis, that 1 foot of topsoil will be imported for backfilling.
Once the excavation and backfill operations are complete, the marsh would be replanted to
restore, and potentially improve, wetland function. Mitigation will likely require that additional
wetlands be created elsewhere on the site. Institutional controls may include fencing, signs,
awareness programs, and similar active measures to ensure that access to the area is controlled.
Other institutional controls might include deed restrictions or other covenants that would
maintain the wetlands in perpetuity. Long-term monitoring would include a monitoring and
maintenance program to ensure that those controls remain effective.
3.6 AOC#2 - RESERVOIR 3
AOC #2 includes 8.4 acres within the footprint of former Reservoir 3. Much of the ground
surface within the former reservoir area is covered by pliable hydrocarbon surface expressions
with entrapment hazard potential. Studies have demonstrated that groundwater is not responsible
for the hydrocarbon surface expressions in this former reservoir. These studies have determined
that viscous oil is being slowly squeezed from the mixed reservoir fill as the soil slowly settles.
The reservoir is filled with 8 to 11 feet of non-engineered fill, including berm soils, construction
debris, and tar. Approximately 4 acres of precipitation/runoff-supported wetlands hosting fairy
shrimp habitat form seasonally along the inside edges of the former reservoir.
The preferred remedy consists of constructing a geosynthetic and soil cap that will establish a
permanent barrier between contaminated soil and potential human and eco-receptors. The cap
will attempt to reestablish wetlands in the same area, thus minimizing the amount of habitat that
must be created elsewhere on the site. Conceptually, the cap will be constructed by removing a
minimum amount of hydrocarbon-impacted soil so that the cap can be installed without
significantly changing the existing grades. Non-hazardous contaminated soil will be disposed of
at an appropriate landfill. Since the remaining reservoir fill material is non-engineered and, at
best, has poor bearing capacity, it will be necessary to support the cap with various soil and
geosynthetic materials. A geotextile will be laid over the exposed work surface and anchored in
a trench excavated around the perimeter of the work area. A tri-directional geogrid anchored in a
1-foot-thick gravel layer will be used to distribute loads as evenly as possible and to limit
settlement to the cap center. A flexible membrane liner protected above and below by
geotextiles will create the impermeable barrier. The primary function of the flexible membrane
is to prevent downward migration of water, which may help to support wetland habitat in a
manner similar to the current condition. The final component of the cap will be an overlying
thickness of common fill and organic-rich topsoil, which will be contoured to mimic the existing
topography and wetland hydrology.
Remediation may unavoidably impact up to 3.9 acres of wetlands, which has also been identified
as habitat for a sensitive species. Even if the original wetland habitat is reestablished within
Reservoir 3, additional mitigation may be required elsewhere on the site for the vernal pool fairy
shrimp habitat. Institutional controls will include fencing, signs, awareness programs, and
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 20
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
similar active measures to ensure that access to the site is controlled. Other institutional controls
might include deed restrictions or other covenants that would maintain the wetlands in
perpetuity. Long-term monitoring will include periodic inspections and maintenance (as needed)
to ensure that the institutional controls and cap remain effective.
3.7 AOC#3 - PLIABLE SURFACE EXPRESSIONS OF PETROLEUM
AOC #3 includes approximately 3 acres of sticky hydrocarbon surface expressions in six general
areas of the south Tank Farm (Figure 14). These surface expressions occur in topographically
low areas that accumulated petroleum during the 1926 fire. These expressions are limited in
areal extent by surrounding berms and are 2 to 3 feet thick on average. Because these
expressions are in topographically low spots, many occur within wetlands, some of which
include protected fairy shrimp habitat.
The preferred remedy consists of excavating the plastic hydrocarbon surface expressions,
disposing of the contaminated material offsite, and restoring the original grade. This alternative
would also restore (at a minimum) the existing wetland function, create additional wetlands
onsite to reach the expected mitigation requirements, establish institutional controls, and provide
long-term monitoring. It is intended that the initial restoration of the impacted wetlands will
occur at their current locations. Any further mitigation required in consultation with the
regulatory agencies would occur elsewhere on the site.
Institutional controls may include fencing, signs, awareness programs, and similar active
measures to ensure that access to the site is controlled. Other institutional controls might include
deed restrictions or other covenants that would maintain the wetlands in perpetuity. Long-term
monitoring will include periodic inspections to ensure that those controls remain effective.
3.8 OU #5- SITE-WIDE GROUNDWATER
OU#5 includes site-wide groundwater, exclusive of the Northwest Operations Area.
Groundwater flows toward the southwest at an average rate of about 100 feet per year and
primarily within sandy interbeds in the largely fine-grained valley fill. The major potential
source areas for petroleum impacts to water quality in OU #5 are the LNAPL areas underlying
the former reservoirs.
Groundwater monitoring of OU#5 has been conducted continuously since 1990, both on and off
the property, through a network monitoring wells. The entire network is comprised of more than
80 monitoring wells. However, sufficient data has been collected during the 17-year program
that the RWQCB has approved actively monitoring 29 wells. These are located in key positions
around the site that ensure any changes in the groundwater conditions could be rapidly
addressed.
Almost 1,000 groundwater samples have been collected from the entire monitoring network over
the 17-year program. For the most part, these samples were tested for TEPH and BTEX,
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 21
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
although a significant number were also tested for PAHs. With respect to TPH, there is no
maximum contaminant level (MCL); the RWQCB regulates this contaminant on a case-by-case
basis but often ascribes 1,000 micrograms per liter (µg/L) as a reasonable action level. A study
of the OU #5 monitoring record indicates that 43 percent (414) of the samples tested for TEPH
contained detectable (>100 µg/L) concentrations. These concentrations range from 100 to
1,600 µg/L, with a median concentration of 220 µg/L. The vast majority of detected
concentrations are in the 100 to 400 µg/L range, with many fewer in the 400 to 1,000 µg/L.
Only 2 out of the 966 samples tested for TPH have contained concentrations greater than
1,000 µg/L, and neither of these was verified by resampling. Benzene has never been detected
(<0.5 µg/L) in an OU #5 monitoring well.
Therefore, in OU #5 there is no direct evidence of offsite migration of dissolved contaminants in
excess of MCLs or the frequently applied RWQCB TPH action level of 1,000 µg/L. These
findings, together with those of the groundwater natural attenuation monitoring program, suggest
that any dissolved hydrocarbons generated in OU #5 are being attenuated by natural processes
within distances of a few hundred feet from the source.
As such, the preferred remedial alternative for OU #5 is monitored natural attenuation with
institutional controls and long-term monitoring. Monitored natural attenuation includes
semiannual sampling of the existing groundwater monitoring network on and surrounding
OU #5, testing those samples for TEPH and natural attenuation parameters, and reporting these
findings to the RWQCB in accordance with an approved monitoring and reporting program.
Institutional controls will include deed restrictions limiting land use to open space and/or
commercial/industrial purposes and groundwater use restrictions in and adjacent to impacted
areas. Land use restrictions may also be required on the Betita Property, situated south of the
Tank Farm, due to the localized presence of petroleum in the subsurface (Figure 13).
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 22
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
4.0 GENERAL REMEDIAL ACTIONS
Sections 4 through 7 provide detailed descriptions of the proposed remedial design. This section
focuses on the general remedial actions. That is, those actions applicable across the site,
irrespective of the operable unit. This includes long-term monitoring, excavation, and the
general approach used in capping.
4.1 LONG-TERM MONITORING
As described in the Feasibility Study, remedial action includes various long-term monitoring
activities. The principal monitoring activity is groundwater sampling and reporting. The
requirements of the current program are described in Monitoring and Reporting Program
(M&RP) 93-120, which is provided in Appendix B along with supporting documentation
describing its evolution over the last 15 years. The monitoring program currently requires
sampling of onsite and offsite wells according to the list provided in Table 2.
Chevron currently samples all of the wells listed on a semiannual basis. Samples are tested for
extractable range hydrocarbons, and samples from wells monitoring OU #1 are also tested for
purgeable range hydrocarbons and BTEX. A few samples are analyzed for all three constituent
types.
During remediation, 25 existing monitoring wells, including 4 that are currently monitored
(Table 2), will be abandoned (Figure 20). Their abandonment is a direct result of the remedial
activities. It is understood, however, that replacement of at least some of these wells will be
required by the RWQCB. It is noted that only four of the affected wells are actively monitored
under M&RP 93-120 at this time. Nevertheless, the number and location of replacement wells
will be as directed by the RWQCB. The details of those requirements will be appended to the
Remedial Action Plan once they have been finalized.
Another consideration to be discussed with the RWQCB will be future reductions in the
monitoring frequency. It is proposed to reduce the overall frequency of monitoring within five
years of approval of the Remedial Action Plan. The basis of this proposal is discussed more
thoroughly in Sections 7.1.1 and 7.5. As with monitoring well replacement, however, the final
requirements of the monitoring and reporting program will be prescribed by the RWQCB.
Long-term monitoring will also include periodic inspections of the caps and excavation areas.
This will be done to ensure those remedies continue to function properly and are achieving the
remedial action objectives. It is anticipated that inspections would occur on a semiannual basis.
In particular, one event should occur just prior to the rainy season and the other during or just
after the rainy season. Long-term monitoring will also be performed to evaluate habitat
restoration and mitigation. This is covered in more detail in the Habitat Mitigation Plan
(Padre, 2007b).
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 23
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
4.2 REMOVAL EXCAVATIONS
Some impacted near-surface soils, mostly those affected by petroleum with wildlife entrapment
potential, will be excavated. These selective excavations have been chosen to either improve the
function of a capping system or to mitigate an identified ecological risk. Where performed in
conjunction with construction of a cap, the excavation will remove a limited amount of material
defined by an excavation depth (e.g., 2 feet) or by exposure of some existing feature (e.g., a
former reservoir bottom).
Clean-closure areas are described further in Sections 7.4.1 and 7.4.3, the North Marsh and Other
Sticky Hydrocarbon Surface Expression areas of concern, respectively. The clean-closure
approach will be limited to pliable hydrocarbon material as originally identified in the Feasibility
Study. As a practical matter, it is understood that field determinations may occasionally be
required to ascertain the need for removal. There may be field determinations as to the need for
removal of some hydrocarbon materials, and that these determinations will be made with the
concurrence of the appropriate regulatory agencies. A practical field methodology for making
this determination is presented in the Project Execution Plan (Padre, 2007e).
Field investigations have shown that the isolated pockets of plastic hydrocarbon identified for
removal are the byproducts of the fire or operational spills and appear to be localized to within
3 to 4 feet of the ground surface. In the event that these impacts are determined to extend locally
to depths greater than 5 feet, it is proposed that removal excavations will be limited to a depth of
5 feet bgs. Four issues were evaluated in adapting this limitation: worker safety, the potential to
encounter groundwater, mitigating risk to burrowing animals, and ensuring that plastic
hydrocarbon does not resurface at some later date.
Excavations beyond 5 feet require special planning and support for worker safety, based on the
requirements of the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and the
California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA). In addition, excavations
beyond 5 feet in the low-lying areas of the site are likely to encounter groundwater. The
Feasibility Study demonstrated that the risks of further environmental impact and the expense
associated with the handling and treatment of impacted groundwater did not warrant the effort.
One objective of the remedial design is to ensure that future open space uses of the site do not
pose an unacceptable risk to potential ecological receptors, which includes burrowing animals.
The proposed limit for excavation is below the burrowing depths of most animals that are likely
to be encountered at the Tank Farm (DTSC, 1998). Further protection can be provided by using
a 0.75-inch gravel for the first 6 inches of backfill to act as a barrier to burrowing animals, if that
is deemed necessary.
It is also believed that 5 feet of compacted backfill will prevent resurfacing of the plastic
materials. The materials are viscous and generally appear to mobilize only when exposed to the
warming effects of direct sunlight (England Geosystem, Inc., 2000). By removing material from
the near-surface and replacing it with a well-compacted backfill, the likelihood that the material
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 24
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
will resurface is very low. Soil used for backfill will be compacted to 90 percent of its relative
maximum density as determined by ASTM International (ASTM) Method D1557. Remediation
will include long-term monitoring and maintenance of the site. In the unlikely event that plastic
hydrocarbon were to resurface, it will be detected by the long-term monitoring program and
further remedial steps would be taken as part of site maintenance.
Clean materials, those not impacted by plastic hydrocarbon, will be segregated during
excavation, stockpiled locally, and reused as common earth backfill. Common earth may include
solid asphaltic (e.g., green-type) hydrocarbon. Materials that are impacted by plastic
hydrocarbon will be disposed of offsite at an appropriate location.
It is uncertain, however, at what rate that disposal will be allowed to occur once traffic and air
quality impacts are considered during the environmental analysis. Assuming that there are no
constraints on truck trips, impacted soils will be loaded directly onto a truck and hauled offsite.
An alternative will be to stockpile the impacted material onsite and remove it at a rate that does
not unduly burden local streets or air quality.
The Northwest Operations Area will be used as a staging area, if needed, to stockpile
contaminated soil prior to loading on trucks for offsite disposal (Figure 15). The Northwest
Operations Area will be capped and later developed, so a small amount of hydrocarbon residue
on the existing surface will not be problematic. It is estimated that remedial actions could
generate up to 157,000 cubic yards of impacted soil (Appendix F).
If necessary, however, a secondary stockpile could be located on the south side of the Tank
Farm, adjacent to the gate on the existing paved slab (Figure 15). It is likely that this area will be
used to store equipment or materials. It is potentially available for impacted soil stockpiling if
crossing Tank Farm Road to access the central staging area is seen as being problematic. The
paved area is slightly more than an acre, and the stockpile would be limited in capacity to
approximately 15,000 cubic yards.
Access routes to the proposed stockpile location are shown in Figure 17. The routes have been
chosen to use existing roads and thereby avoid sensitive habitat. These routes may require
widening and drainage improvement, as discussed in Section 6.1. A flagman or other means of
traffic control will be provided, as necessary, at the Tank Farm Road crossing.
In operating a stockpile for impacted soil, it will be necessary to comply with local air quality
and traffic regulations. This will likely require covering the stockpile and periodic monitoring to
keep volatile organic compound emissions within regulatory limits. It will also be necessary to
control dust and minimize stockpiling during the rainy season.
It is anticipated that most hydrocarbon-impacted soils will be disposed of at the nonhazardous
impacted soil (NHIS) facility operated by the City of Santa Maria at their landfill. In order to
ensure compliance with the appropriate disposal facility’s acceptance criteria, representative
samples will be collected of the materials designated for removal..
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 25
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
4.3 CAPS
Caps will be used to separate impacted materials from potential human and ecological receptors.
They will be constructed from earthen materials, but may also include various geosynthetic
materials for additional strength or material separation. In addition, caps will support either open
space or development land uses.
A key distinction between the open space and development caps is that the former will include a
topsoil layer that will be used to support revegatation. The development caps may be vegetated
to minimize erosion, but that will be done directly on the structural fill. The revegetation will
also be of a temporary nature, and will be maintained in place only long enough to minimize
potential soil loss from the development areas. The development caps are constructed of
structural fill with a minimum thickness of 4 feet. Conversely, the open space caps are more
varied due to their differing design objectives and individual site constraints.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 26
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
5.0 EARTH CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS
There are four principal types of earth materials used for this project: common fill, structural fill,
gravel, and topsoil. Specifications regarding composition, grain size, and other relevant
parameters are provided in Appendix E. The following sections provide more detailed
information regarding each of these principal soil materials.
5.1 COMMON FILL
Common fill will be used for the majority of nonstructural and unspecialized fill needs for the
project. It is readily generated from the available onsite soils. It may consist of silt, clay, silty
sand, silty clay, clayey sand, or clayey silt. Common fill may have a wide gradation, as shown in
Appendix E. One hundred percent of the material must pass a 1-inch screen, and up to
30 percent may pass the No. 200 sieve. The soil must not have any organic or otherwise
decomposable or deleterious materials.
Common fill will generally be placed in lifts between 8 and 12 inches in thickness and
compacted to within 90 percent of its relative maximum density as measured by ASTM D1557.
5.2 STRUCTURAL FILL
Structural fill is physically identical to common fill, but will be used in areas where greater soil
strength is required, such as the caps that may support future development. The main difference
between common fill and structural fill is that it must be placed in lifts with a maximum
thickness of 8 inches and must be compacted to 95 percent of its relative maximum density per
ASTM D1557.
5.3 GRAVEL
Gravel will be primarily used during this remediation project in the caps that will be constructed
over Reservoirs 5 and 7. The gravel will provide a structural void space that will provide a low-
resistance accumulation space for rising groundwater and LNAPL. Gravel may also be used as a
bio-barrier (if needed) in excavations or shallow caps to prevent burrowing animals from
exposing contaminated materials.
Soil used for this function must be hard, durable, and not susceptible to slaking when immersed
in water. An acceptable gradation envelope is provided in Appendix E. One hundred percent of
the material must pass a 0.75-inch sieve and no less than 75 percent must be retained on a No. 4
sieve. Further, no more than 5 percent of the soil may pass a No. 200 sieve.
The gravel may be placed in lifts of up to 12 inches in thickness and compacted with two passes
of a 5,000-pound drum roller or similar piece of equipment.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 27
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
5.4 TOPSOIL
Topsoil will be used to revegetate open space caps and backfilled excavations. Topsoil layers
will typically be 1-foot-thick organic-rich soils harvested onsite, amended, or imported to meet
the specifications.
Topsoil can be any combination of silt-based or clay-based soil found onsite or locally. Onsite
topsoil sources will be expected to contain at least 10 percent organic material. Onsite soils not
meeting this requirement can be amended by the addition of fertilizers and mulch. Amended
soils, however, must contain at least 15 percent organic matter.
Topsoil will be placed in lifts no greater than 12 inches thick. It is anticipated that topsoil may
be nominally compacted during placement, but will be scarified to a depth of at least 4 inches
prior to seeding or planting.
Additional soil requirements will be specified in the Habitat Mitigation Plan to ensure that
materials used for restoration or mitigation of habitats is compatible with both the flora and
fauna served by that habitat.
5.5 EARTH MATERIAL SOURCES
It is anticipated that many of the soil materials needed for remediation may be obtained onsite.
The following sections discuss the various proposed borrow sources, the types of materials
available in each, and the estimated quantity of potential borrow material. Figure 16 shows the
location of each of the borrow sources, and Table 3 summarizes the estimated material quantities
available from each. A discussion of proposed access routes is provided in Section 6.1.
A quick comparison of Table 3 with the earth materials needs of Table 4 shows that there is
ample soil for most of the project requirements. This abundance of borrow sources is presented
to provide the greatest flexibility to Chevron in creating habitat to mitigate the unavoidable
impacts caused by remediation. Borrows No. 1 and 2 are located adjacent to large existing
wetland complexes. Borrowing from these areas provides the opportunity to expand those
complexes. Further, it is uncertain what constraints may be imposed on construction activities.
Redundant borrow sources reduces the likelihood of having to import significant quantities of
material from offsite sources.
It is important to note, however, that some borrow materials, especially the tank berms, may
contain asphaltic materials that are inseparably embedded into the soil matrix. Only the plastic
hydrocarbon has been identified as posing a potential hazard or risk, and where these materials
are expressed at the surface or exposed during other excavations, they will be removed.
Conversely, the asphaltic material does not warrant remediation and its potential incorporation
into the common or structural fills is consistent with the findings and recommendations of the
Feasibility Study. Notwithstanding this, remediation efforts will attempt to favor borrow
materials that are not impacted by asphaltic material.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 28
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
Use of the borrow sites may result in habitat impacts. The maximum potential impact for each
area is summarized in Table 5. It should be noted, however, that while all of the impacts
attributed to remediation will occur, only some of the impacts associated with the borrow sources
will be realized if a particular borrow source is used. This will be clarified as the project
permitting progresses and the habitat mitigation requirements are finalized.
5.5.1 Flower Mound/OU #3
The Flower Mound is an approximately 17.3-acre site located in the northwest corner of the site
(Figure 16). It is an outcrop of the basement bedrock complex known as the Franciscan
Formation. Typically referred to as the “Franciscan mélange,” the Franciscan Formation is
comprised of a complex collection of various rock types. Although the Franciscan Formation
found at the Tank Farm includes localized occurrences of coarse to fine-grained clastic
sedimentary rocks, it more commonly consists of highly fractured and weathered metavolcanic
rocks and serpentinite. It is these latter types of rock that comprise the Flower Mound.
Borrow activities at the Flower Mound/OU #3 Area will generate as much as 328,200 cubic
yards of material, most of which must be blasted and processed to access. Approximately
73,700 cubic yards are located on adjacent properties. Chevron will negotiate access agreements
with each property owner and determine the final disposition of offsite materials. It is expected,
though, that at least 26,300 cubic yards, and potentially all, of the offsite material may be
available for use by the project. Processing will at least include crushing, and may include
sorting, depending upon what materials are required by the project.
Material produced from the Flower Mound will be crushed and screened to the material
specifications included in Appendix E. It is anticipated that the Flower Mound material will be
readily suitable for use as common, structural fill, or road base. However, preliminary testing
(Padre, 2007a) suggests that the Flower Mound material may not be sufficiently durable for use
as gravel in the caps that will be constructed over Reservoirs 5 and 7 (Section 7.2).
Use of the Flower Mound will require abandonment of two monitoring wells, MW-13 and
TMW-4. Abandonment will be as described in Section 6.5. Replacement of monitoring wells, if
necessary, will be as prescribed by the RWQCB.
The Flower Mound/OU #3 area is integral to future development plans for the site. The City of
San Luis Obispo’s proposed extension of Santa Fe Road crosses the middle of this work area and
its rough grading is incorporated into the design. The final site grade, including the extension of
Santa Fe Road, following the completion of borrow and remediation, affects 52.9 acres. As
such, there will be permanent habitat impacts requiring mitigation elsewhere on the site. There
are approximately 0.26 acre of wetland habitat in the Flower Mound/OU#3 work area and
approximately 0.32 acre of rare plant habitat. There is no known vernal pool fairy shrimp habitat
within the Flower Mound borrow area.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 29
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
5.5.2 Berms
Numerous berms were erected around the site during its operational life. These were principally
constructed to contain oil spills and to isolate the reservoirs in the event of fire. It is proposed to
use the berms adjacent to Reservoirs 5 and 7 to supply the common fill required for cap
construction. If borrow from the berms is maximized, approximately 71,600 cubic yards will be
generated; 38,800 cubic yards at the Reservoir 5 site, and another 32,800 cubic yards at
Reservoir 7. Construction of both caps requires 37,000 cubic yards, which will result in
approximately 34,600 cubic yards of excess material that can be used for other common or
structural fill needs. Excess material will be borrowed on an as-needed basis. This material may
be locally contaminated and, therefore, unsuitable for structural fill. Borrow activities will be
monitored and the materials segregated, as necessary. Habitat impacts related to borrowing of
berm materials are discussed in the relevant remediation discussions later in this report.
5.5.3 Borrow No. 1
Borrow No. 1 is an approximately 8.6-acre site located adjacent to the North Wetland (Figure
16). It includes approximately 2.3 acres that may have been used as a disposal area for
demolition debris from the 1926 fire. Anecdotal reports suggest that the disposed materials
consist mostly of construction debris, such as concrete and wood. As described in Section 7.4.1,
this material will be characterized, removed, and managed at an appropriately permitted facility.
It is estimated that the disposal area contains approximately 10,325 cubic yards, assuming an
average depth of approximately 4 feet.
Soil suitable for use as common and structural fill, and possibly as topsoil, could be removed
from the borrow area after removal of the debris. The nominal grading contours for this area
would begin at the existing floor of the wetland area and slope back to the east at approximately
0.5 percent. Side slopes would be no greater than 4:1 (horizontal:vertical). This grading
approach would generate approximately 36,200 cubic yards of common or structural fill.
This borrow source may be used on an as-needed basis. Its main attraction is that after
borrowing the available soil the area can be used to create additional wetland. Complete
utilization of the borrow source and removal of the historical debris would potentially generate
7.84 acres of additional wetland habitat. This is in excess of the 0.77 acre of wetland that is
currently present within the proposed borrow site. It is important to note, though, that the
0.67 acre is also vernal pool fairy shrimp habitat. Full development of the borrow site would
also temporarily affect 0.37 acre of rare plant habitat.
5.5.4 Borrow No. 2
Borrow No. 2 is located on the east portion of the site, south of Tank Farm Road (Figure 16). It
covers approximately 17.73 acres. This location is anticipated to provide topsoil for revegetation
purposes. Most of this borrow site is within a future development area under the City’s AASP
and proposed land use plans. Further, its position within the airport safety zones (Figure 9)
generally preclude it as a site for habitat mitigation.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 30
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
It is estimated that at least 20,700 cubic yards of topsoil may be recovered from this location. It
is assumed that the topsoil horizon is 2 feet thick, although the Geotechnical Feasibility Study
(Padre, 2007a) suggests that as much as 4 feet of suitable material may be available. After
borrow operations are completed, the site will be regraded as shown in Figure 39 to support
future development.
It is estimated that 65,700 cubic yards of topsoil (Table 4) will be required for remedial
construction. Any topsoil deficit will need to be closed by manufacturing topsoil from other
borrow materials or importing topsoil from offsite sources.
Use of the entire Borrow No. 2 area will require abandonment of five monitoring wells, MW-17,
MW-18, MW-21, MW-30, and MW-51. Abandonment will be as described in Section 6.5.
Replacement of monitoring wells will be as prescribed by the RWQCB.
Excavation and restoration of Borrow No. 2 will permanently affect 1.38 acre of rare plant
habitat and 0.98 acre of wetland. It will also temporarily affect 0.2 acre of rare plant habitat.
5.5.5 Borrow No. 3
Borrow No. 3 has a similar function to Borrow No. 1. It provides a useful source for common
fill and structural fill, and possibly topsoil. It also provides a location that, if utilized, potentially
creates additional wetland habitat that can be used to mitigate the habitat that is unavoidably
impacted during remediation.
The proposed area is approximately 17.5 acres in extent, including approximately 6.59 acres of
existing wetland (Figure 16). It is assumed that material will be borrowed from this source
starting at the wetland along the south boundary. The existing grade would be lowered to the
elevation in the southwest corner and then allowed to slope up at approximately 0.5 percent to
the north. This approach will yield approximately 78,950 cubic yards of total borrow
(19,700 cubic yards of top soil and 59,250 cubic yards of common earth), and could generate
10.92 acres of new wetland habitat if fully utilized. This is in excess of the 6.59 acres
(3.12 acres of which are vernal pool fairy shrimp habitat) of wetland that is currently present
within the proposed borrow site. Use of the borrow site may also permanently affect 0.92 acres
of rare plant habitat.
Use of the entire area could impact several of the active wells in the groundwater monitoring
network. Consequently, the use of this borrow area is anticipated to be minimal.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 31
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
6.0 SITE-WIDE REMEDIAL ACTIONS
There are several construction-related remedial actions that are not considered specific to a
particular operable unit. Those actions are discussed in this section and include mobilization and
staging of equipment and materials, demolition of the existing buildings, miscellaneous cleanup
activities, and abandonment of the remaining pipelines.
6.1 MOBILIZATION, STAGING AREAS, AND SITE ACCESS
Mobilization is when the contractor prepares the site to begin work. This includes a variety of
tasks including moving equipment and support trailers onsite, improving site access, installing
storm water and dust control Best Management Practices (BMPs), and habitat protection
measures. To successfully accomplish this work, the contractor will require ready access to the
work areas with logical and ample traffic routes. At the same time, the contractor must also
minimize impacts to non-work areas and avoid sensitive habitat areas that must be preserved.
Figure 17 shows the anticipated work areas and the proposed staging areas and access routes.
Within the scope of the activities described in this Remedial Action Plan, the contractor shall
limit his activities to the areas identified in Figure 17. In the event unforeseen site conditions
require access to the off-limit areas, egress shall be coordinated on an as-needed basis with the
appropriate regulatory authorities.
The work areas are the limits within which remediation activities will be conducted for a given
operable unit or area of concern. The work area limit is generally defined by the extent to which
a particular site must be cleared and grubbed to properly perform the work and provide the
contractor with sufficient room to move equipment and materials. The limits shown in Figure 17
are, however, only approximate. Precise delineations of the work areas are provided in the
drawings found in Appendix C.
The contractor will use the former recycling area as his primary staging area. It is paved, readily
supplied with electrical power and telephone service, and is centrally located on the property
with reasonably convenient access across Tank Farm Road. Major maintenance (e.g., engine
rebuilds, fluid changes) will only be performed at the primary staging area in specially prepared
areas with proper spill control measures in place.
Other local staging areas are also shown in Figure 17. These are located directly adjacent to the
work areas and would be used to stage materials, park equipment, and other support activities.
Vehicles and equipment can be fueled and minor maintenance (e.g., changing tires) can be
performed at the local staging areas.
Water is available onsite for construction purposes. Water wells are located just north of the
Northwest Operations Area, at the southwest corner of the site (south of Tank Farm Road), at the
southernmost tip of the site (also south of Tank Farm Road), and on the eastern edge of the site
south of Tank Farm Road (Figure 17). The contractor will supply pumps (as necessary), storage
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 32
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
tanks, and stands to fill water trucks. One storage tank and fill stand is expected be in the
primary staging area (Figure 17), and another will likely be located south of Tank Farm Road,
adjacent to the entrance. The final locations will be determined by the contractor to best
facilitate his work, consistent with the work area constraints show in Figure 17. The contractor
is responsible for determining the adequacy of water supply and for making any upgrades to the
supply infrastructure. Prior to mobilization, the suitability of the existing water distribution
network for conveying water for construction purposes will be evaluated. If feasible, fill stations
would be located at readily accessible points such as the fire hydrants. Otherwise fill stations
will be supplied by temporary overland pipelines.
Bottled water will be used for potable purposes and will be brought onsite and stationed at work
and staging areas as needed. The contractor will also supply sanitary facilities at needed
locations.
Chevron will have relocated its employees and operations prior to starting site remediation. The
principal entrance to the site will, therefore, be relocated as shown in Figure 17. This location
utilizes the existing entrance to the site south of Tank Farm Road, but is also reasonably close to
the Primary Staging Area. It also consolidates access to the site at one point along Tank Farm
Road. A traffic study (ATE, 2007) recommended a standard intersection with left-hand turn
pockets and right-hand deceleration lanes at the site entrance. The intersection should also
include signalization to control traffic during the construction period. A preliminary traffic
control plan is shown in Figure 18. The plan will be finalized in concert with the SLO County
Public Works Department. The conceptual plan moves the entrance gate back approximately
100 feet from the road. Berms will also be removed to provide deceleration lanes and to ensure
adequate site distance. The greater distance from the road will allow trucks to park at the gate
without blocking traffic along Tank Farm Road.
Other access points will be provided as needed but controlled by the contractor. Access to the
site will also be maintained at the Northwest Operations Area, but will not be used as a primary
access to the site.
The internal routes shown in Figure 17 are intended to provide the contractor with access to all
potential work and borrow areas across the site with as little impact to sensitive habitat as
possible. The access routes utilize existing dirt tracks. Those shown as solid lines in Figure 17
will be required, while those shown as dashes will only be used if the borrow sources shown at
the end of those routes are developed. It is anticipated that most routes must be able to
accommodate two-way traffic. Existing dirt tracks will be widened, as necessary, to at least
24 feet in the direction that is least likely to affect adjoining sensitive habitat. Management
procedures will be used to minimize impacts from dust and erosion. Where necessary, the
contractor will improve the roadway by grooming the subgrade to provide a reasonably smooth
and regular surface. In areas potentially subject to inundation or rutting a geotextile will be
placed over the subgrade and will be used to provide separation between the subgrade and a
6-inch-thick (minimum) course of compacted crushed miscellaneous base or gravel. As shown
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 33
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
in Table 5, the improved roadways are expected to temporarily impact 0.1 acre of wetland,
0.04 acre of vernal pool fairy shrimp, and 0.22 acre of rare plant habitat.
The contractor shall also provide traffic control to ensure the safe operation of vehicles and
equipment. One key component will be controlling traffic crossing Tank Farm Road. It is
anticipated that the contractor will at least provide a flagman and signs. It is possible, however,
that in consultation with the appropriate municipal agency, a temporary stop sign or traffic light
may need to be installed at this location.
The contractor may suggest alternative access points onto and across the Tank Farm. It is also
possible that alternative routes may be required to mitigate impacts that may be later identified in
the environmental analysis. Any alternative routes must be approved by the Construction
Manager and the appropriate regulatory agencies prior to use.
Access to the borrow areas will be provided on an as-needed basis. As noted previously, some
of the borrow sources may be used to facilitate other project needs such as mitigating habitat
impacts. The use of these locations, and the associated access routes, will be determined at a
later date.
6.2 BUILDING DEMOLITION
There are four buildings at the Tank Farm (Figure 3), located in the Northwest Operations Area,
that will be demolished during remediation. Three of these buildings were constructed to
support historical operations at the site but are now used primarily as office space. The fourth, a
modular building installed adjacent to the northernmost original building, was constructed within
the last five years to provide additional office space. Chevron personnel and operations will
have been removed from the site prior to remediation, and it is possible that building demolition
could precede implementation of the final Remedial Action Plan.
Given the age of the three older buildings, it must be assumed that lead-containing materials
(LCM) and asbestos-containing materials (ACM) are present. Consequently, physical
demolition of the buildings will be preceded by surveys and abatement. Asbestos and lead-based
paint surveys will be conducted for each building by a California-licensed Asbestos Consultant
and California-certified Lead Consultant, respectively. Positive surveys will require abatement.
Prior to abatement, a National Emissions Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants demolition
notification form, asbestos survey report, and an asbestos abatement workplan will be submitted
to the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (APCD). ACM will be abated in
accordance with local, state, and federal regulations. Any suspect material not previously
identified and found during abatement will be presumed to be ACM unless contradicted by
specific laboratory data. Friable asbestos will be managed in air-tight roll-off bins and
transported to a hazardous waste facility (e.g., Kettleman Hills) for disposal. Nonfriable asbestos
will be managed as required for disposal at suitably permitted solid waste approved by Chevron.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 34
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
Once abatement activities are completed, recyclable or potentially reusable materials will be
removed. The building structure will be demolished using excavators. Some of the buildings
have metal structural elements or siding. This will be segregated for recycling, if economic.
Other materials will be loaded into haul trucks for disposal. Concrete foundations will be broken
apart using a hydraulic hammer and removed. It is possible that concrete will be crushed and
used as gravel elsewhere on the site.
Utility lines will be disconnected and abandoned. Where lines are aboveground, they will be
removed. Where utility service is brought to a building underground, the line will be cut at a
point at least 2 feet below grade and capped. Service lines that use pipes or conduits greater than
4I inches in diameter (e.g., water, sewer) will be filled with cement grout.
Voids created in the existing grade by demolition will be backfilled with structural fill or gravel.
6.3 MISCELLANEOUS CLEANUP
There are four locations onsite that have been identified as requiring cleanup or demolition that
are not part of one of the operable units or areas of concern. They are not generally
“contaminated” or impacted areas, although they may have some impacted soil associated with
them. Rather, they are comprised of debris or abandoned structures that are unsightly or possible
physical hazards. These are shown in Figure 19.
Three of the locations are found on the parcel north of Tank Farm Road. There are two debris
piles along the north property line. They appear to contain mostly concrete debris. As with
other concrete debris, the contractor may crush this material and reuse it for gravel elsewhere on
the site. Otherwise, the concrete shall be hauled offsite for recycling or disposal.
The other area identified on the parcel north of Tank Farm Road is the historical debris disposal
area adjacent to the North Wetland. As discussed in Section 5.5.3, the material in this area will
be excavated and removed for disposal or recycling as appropriate. It is recommended that the
limits and characteristics of the waste be defined prior to excavation and disposal. It is assumed
that the debris extends to a depth of 5 feet and that the nominal excavation volume is
18,000 cubic yards. Material removed from the excavation will be segregated on the basis of
how it will be managed. Concrete may be recycled, as described previously. Other construction
debris will be sent to a solid waste landfill for disposal. Impacted soils will either be sent to the
proposed stockpile area for later disposal or directly to the disposal facility as dictated by traffic
and air quality requirements. The excavation will not be backfilled in order to accommodate
habitat mitigation later in the project.
The fourth miscellaneous cleanup location is found south of Tank Farm Road, adjacent to
Reservoir 6 (Figure 19). It is a concrete vault of uncertain purpose, approximately 5 feet wide,
12 feet long, and 8 feet deep. The crude oil supply line serving Reservoirs 6 and 7 connected to
it, but it is not known if it was a separator, a valve box, or served some other purpose. The vault
is, however, open and presents a physical hazard to people and animals and a possible
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 35
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
entrapment hazard to small animals. The steel hand
rail will be removed and the upper 3 feet of the
concrete wall will be broken and used to fill the bottom
of the vault. A sand-cement slurry will be used to fill
the void spaces. The remaining depth of the vault will
be backfilled with common fill until the original grade
is reestablished.
6.4 PIPELINE ABANDONMENT
When operational, the Tank Farm required numerous
pipelines to move oil between the pump house, boilers,
tanks, and reservoirs. The site was also served by
water, natural gas, and septic lines. Figure 5 shows
pipeline locations based on historical facility drawings. It is estimated that more than 25,000 feet
of oil pipeline were installed onsite; approximately 4,500 feet are found in the Northwest
Operations Area (Figure 6). Much of that pipeline remains in place, as indicated on Figure 5.
Chevron intends to abandon most of the pipeline in place. Portions of the line that are within
work areas will be removed for disposal, except for the Northwest Operations Area, where the
pipelines may be closed in place by pressure-grouting. If a pipeline crosses an environmentally
sensitive area (e.g., wetland) and would not otherwise be disturbed by remediation activities, it
will also be closed in place by pressure-grouting. All pipelines will be flushed and, if possible,
pigged to remove residual hydrocarbon and vapors prior to abandonment. If a section of pipeline
is in such poor condition that it cannot be adequately cleaned, it will be excavated and removed
in its entirety.
6.4.1 Pipeline Inventory
The positions of the pipelines shown in Figure 5 and Figure 6 have not been field verified.
While these figures (and the similar engineering drawings found in Appendix C) are reasonable
approximations of their locations, final remediation will require more accurate information. It is,
therefore, expected that prior to abandonment, a detailed field survey will be performed to locate
the lines and characterize their contents. Potholes will be dug at key locations (e.g., ends,
transitions, junctions, valves) to expose the pipe and determine its diameter and materials of
construction. Line tracing will be performed using an appropriate geophysical instrument
operated by a trained technician. The alignment of the pipeline will be flagged every 5 feet.
Pothole and flag locations will be recorded using a high-precision Global Positioning System
(GPS) unit and entered into a Geographic Information System (GIS) database. A detailed
pipeline inventory, noting location, depth, size, materials of construction, and condition, will be
created to guide abandonment activities.
Given the interconnected, and possibly deteriorated, web of pipelines within the Northwest
Operations Area, Chevron may elect to cut the lines at the operable unit boundary and
Abandoned concrete vault adjacent to
Reservoir 6-to be abandoned
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 36
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
completely remove them from its interior. In this case, the lines will be removed in accordance
with Section 6.4.4 after their positions have been confirmed.
6.4.2 Pipeline Flushing and Pigging
Water trucks attached to portable pumps would be connected via hose to each petroleum pipeline
segment within the facility. Additionally, several portable storage tanks or vacuum trucks would
be stationed and attached to the pipelines to receive and collect the flush water. Each pipeline
segment will be flushed with an adequate volume of water to remove residual oil from the
pipelines. Pipeline flushing operations will continue until flush water containing total petroleum
hydrocarbons of less than 100 parts per million is achieved.
The pipeline segments that may be suitable for pigging will be identified by Chevron during the
initial potholing activities. The pigging operations will be basically the same for each pigging
run segment. Each segment will have a beginning location where the pig is “launched,” and an
end section where the pig is “received.” The pigging operation procedures are presented below.
First, the launching/receiving locations will be prepared for the procedure. Buried ends of the
pipeline will be excavated. The excavations will vary depending on the depth of the pipe, but
should not typically exceed an area larger than 7 feet wide by 12 feet long (84 square feet) and
no more than 5 feet in depth. A trench box may be used to minimize the area affected by the
excavation.
The pipeline fluids will be drained from the pipe and the pipe will then be cold-cut to gain access
to the pipe. The pig launcher/receiver will then be attached to the exposed pipe end.
Once the pig launcher and receiver are attached to the pipeline, the subject pipe segment will be
pigged. The pigging operation will involve the use of scraper-type or foam pigs. The scraper
pig is constructed to help remove any remaining hydrocarbons from the inside walls of the
pipeline as it moves down the pipe. The pigs will be pushed through the piping segment using
liquefied nitrogen gas or compressed air.
At the receiving end, vacuum trucks will be used to remove any liquids from the pipe as the
liquids are pushed ahead of the pigs. Carbon filtration canisters will treat any vapor emissions
generated during pipeline purging operations, in accordance with APCD requirements. Chevron
will obtain approval from APCD for the proposed activities. Recovered hydrocarbons and water
from the pigging operation will be properly disposed of or recycled by Chevron.
There is the possibility that a pig may become lodged in the pipe by an obstruction. If the pig
becomes obstructed along a pipe segment, these locations will be identified by the field crews.
Excavation activities may be required to remove the pig and the damaged/obstructed section of
pipe.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 37
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
6.4.3 Pipeline Grouting
Pipelines that are scheduled for abandonment and have diameters greater than 4 inches will be
grouted with a cement-slurry to prevent any future ground subsidence from pipe wall collapse.
A portable grout pump will be used to pump grout into the pipeline segments. Grout will be
pumped until grout exits the other end of the pipe segment. Following grouting, the pipeline
segment ends will be backfilled with soil and the soil compacted.
6.4.4 Pipeline Segment Removal
Chevron proposes to remove intra-facility petroleum piping that may be affected by project
remediation activities or is determined to be in poor condition. If practical, the pipeline
segments will be flushed or pigged prior to removal. The pipeline segment endpoints will be
isolated and cut. The pipeline segment will then be uncovered by excavating a trench to the
existing pipeline depth. As the pipeline is removed from the trench, a spill containment device
will be placed under the pipeline end to catch any residual fluids in the containment. All liquids
drained from the piping into the containment device will be removed using a vacuum truck and
hauled to an approved facility for disposal or recycling. The pipe segments will then be cut into
manageable pieces, the pipe ends wrapped in plastic to prevent spillage, the segments removed
from the trench, and the trench backfilled. Scrap pipe will be temporarily stored in bins and
transported offsite for recycling.
6.5 MONITORING WELL DESTRUCTION
Remediation will require the destruction of 25 monitoring wells across the site. These wells are
listed in Table 2 and shown in Figure 20. Each of the affected monitoring wells is in an area that
will be excavated or over which a cap will be constructed. Even if retention of the monitoring
wells was desired, it would be costly and difficult to protect the wells in place, and it is likely
that several would be inadvertently lost. The number and location of replacement wells will be
as directed by the RWQCB. The details of those requirements will be appended to the Remedial
Action Plan once they have been finalized.
Well abandonment will be performed in accordance with California Department of Water
Resources Bulletin No. 74-81 and the applicable requirements of the San Luis Obispo County
Department of Environmental Health. Permits for this activity will be obtained from the San
Luis Obispo County Department of Environmental Health. Monitoring well monuments will be
removed and disposed of offsite. The wells will be drilled out using an auger slightly larger than
the original boring. Most of the wells consist of 4-inch casing in an 8-inch boring. In this case, a
10-inch-diameter auger would be used to drill out the well. Cuttings will be stored in drums and
disposed of offsite. The boring will be backfilled with hydrated bentonite. The boring will be
checked 24 hours after the initial abandonment. Additional hydrated bentonite will be added if
settlement of the initial fill is observed.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 38
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
A completion report for the abandonment will be submitted to the San Luis Obispo County
Department of Environmental Health and to the RWQCB within ten days of abandoning the final
boring listed on Table 2.
6.6 HISTORICAL PRODUCTION WELLS
Review of historical operational records and facility drawings has identified the approximate
locations of three water wells. These locations are shown in Figure 19. Inspection of these areas
has not revealed any surface features associated with the wells. It is likely that the wells were
abandoned many years ago and any other record of them has long since been lost.
It is desirable, however, to ensure that the wells were properly abandoned. It is, therefore,
proposed to conduct a thorough field investigation to verify the location and condition of the
wells. It is probable that the wells were constructed with steel casings, and if they are still
present, they should be detected by a magnetometer. A licensed geophysical contractor will
sweep the approximate well sites and will map and stake any magnetic detections. A backhoe
will be used to expose the detections and identify them. If the wells are located, the method of
abandonment will be ascertained, and if the method does not meet modern standards, the well
will be abandoned according to the requirements of California Department of Water Resources
(DWR) Bulletin 74-81.
6.7 LAND USE COVENANTS
Land use covenants will be prepared for the various parcels that the site may be subdivided into.
This will include not only potentially developable parcels, but also the open space areas . A land
use covenant is a legal document that will accompany a parcel’s deed. It will be signed by
representatives of Chevron and the lead agencies (e.g., RWQCB), and will be notarized and
recorded with the County Clerk/Recorder. It is intended to ensure that future owners of the
properties understand what mechanisms are in place at the site to protect human health and the
environment, and to identify for future property owners their responsibilities in maintaining
those protections.
The specifics of the land use covenants for the Tank Farm will vary depending on which parcel
is under consideration. It will, however, identify the allowed land uses and will exclude uses that
might be allowed under current or future land use planning but are inappropriate for the site. The
land use covenants will list the various caps and other containment features that must be
maintained. It will be accompanied by various documents, such as the guidelines for vapor
barriers (Appendix M), Habitat Mitigation Plan (Padre, 2007b), and Soil Management Plan
(Padre, 2007c). The land use covenant will also restrict the use of groundwater in areas of
impacted soil on the Tank Farm property. Chevron will work with adjacent land owners to
establish covenants regarding soil and groundwater on adjacent properties affected by historical
site activities.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 39
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
Draft land use covenants (as required) will be prepared by Chevron for review by the RWQCB
and the lead municipality once the Remedial Action Plan has been approved.
6.8 VAPOR BARRIERS
The Feasibility Study identified the need for vapor barriers as an engineering control in habitable
structures erected in the potential development areas. Decomposition of the underlying
hydrocarbons generates methane. Accumulation of methane within buildings would be
unacceptable. A series of conceptual engineering approaches to control methane migration are
presented in Appendix M. These range from simple passive systems, where a liner is
constructed directly beneath a slab constructed on grade, to active systems that can be used to
vent a parking structure that is slightly below grade.
The examples provided in Appendix M are reasonable illustrations of the general approaches
used to construct vapor barriers. These diagrams have been used on other projects subject to
methane or volatile organic compound intrusion, and have been approved by other regulatory
agencies and municipalities. These are not, however, construction documents. It is expected that
a developer will use these as guides in preparing his plans and specifications.
The final version of these guidelines, which will accompany the land use covenant, will be
approved by the RWQCB and the lead municipality. The land use covenant will also include
provisions requiring approval by those agencies of the construction documents to ensure
compliance with the final vapor barrier guidelines.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 40
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
7.0 OPERABLE UNIT REMEDIAL ACTIONS
This section presents the remedial actions specific to each operable unit. It provides detailed
descriptions of how the remedial actions will be implemented, as well as the engineering and
regulatory bases behind their design. This section includes numerous figures meant to illustrate
the remedial actions, and while they are based on the engineering drawings found in Appendix
C, they should still be considered only diagrams.
7.1 OU #1-NW OPERATIONS AREA
As described in Section 3.0, OU#1 (the Northwest Operations Area) consists of two media-based
areas of concern. The first, AOC #1, is groundwater, and the second, AOC #2, is soil. The
preferred remedy for AOC #1 is monitored natural attenuation with long-term monitoring and
institutional controls. The preferred remedy for AOC #2 is construction of a soil cap, with a
minimum thickness of 4 feet, and institutional controls to manage soil that may be exposed
during development or maintenance of the site.
7.1.1 AOC #1 Groundwater
Monitored natural attenuation will be implemented using the same parameters and methods as
specified in Monitoring and Reporting Program 93-120 (Appendix B). However, remediation
will require abandonment of several monitoring wells (Table 2). Replacement will be
determined in concert with the RWQCB, which will also approve a revised M&RP.. At a
minimum, monitoring groundwater for TPH and BTEX (consistent with M&RP 93-120) will be
performed at the remaining perimeter monitoring wells MW-49, MW-50, MW-56, and
SLOW-17, and the off-site production wells 11Ea and 11Eb. Currently, monitoring is performed
on a semiannual basis. After three years, the RWQCB will evaluate the semiannual groundwater
data to determine if a reduction in the monitoring frequency is warranted.
A land use covenant will be prepared for the operable unit that includes restrictions on the use of
groundwater. Those restrictions will prohibit installation of groundwater wells within or
immediately downgradient of petroleum-impacted soils.
7.1.2 AOC #2 Soil-Development Scenario
It has been presumed in this plan that AOC #2 will be developed at some point in the future and
will not be considered suitable habitat for flora or fauna. As such, the remedial objectives are to
prevent human contact with the arsenic, TPH, and PAHs that are found in the shallow soil in this
area. Construction of a 4-foot-thick soil cap was selected as the preferred remedial alternative in
that it not only satisfied the remedial objective, but also made future development feasible by
raising the grade out of the 100-year flood plain.
Prior to building the cap, unnecessary existing features must be removed and the site must be
prepared for construction. Figure 21 illustrates the demolition plan and subgrade preparation
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 41
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
proposed for AOC #2. It is assumed that prior to demolition, building surveys have been
completed for LCM and ACM, the pipelines within AOC #2 have been either abandoned in place
or have been removed as described in Sections 6.2 and 6.4, respectively, and the monitoring
wells within the AOC will have been abandoned per Section 6.5.
The first component of remedial action for AOC #2 will be demolition of the four existing
buildings. As more fully discussed in Section 6.2, three of these buildings supported the
historical petroleum handling operations and are likely affected by LCM and ACM. After
surveys and abatement have been completed, the buildings will be demolished and managed in
an appropriate manner. Demolition will also include removal of the existing fences and gates
along the south and west boundaries of AOC #2.
Future development of the region around the San Luis
Obispo Airport envisions widening Tank Farm Road to
a 100-foot-wide right-of-way (City of San Luis
Obispo, 2005). This will necessitate moving the
southern boundary of the Northwest Operations Area
north approximately 30 feet (Figure 21). To ensure
that the historical infrastructure does not interfere with
future road widening, Chevron will remove any
existing features from this area, including pipelines and
concrete foundations.
Prior to any significant demolition work, the site must
be cleared and grubbed within the limits shown in
Figure 21 and more thoroughly defined on the construction drawings provided in Appendix C.
Clearing and grubbing will consist of removing all vegetation from the site. Brush and small
trees are cleared by cutting them down and pulling up the roots. The site is then grubbed to a
depth of at least 3 inches using a tractor or small dozer to remove grasses and other low-lying
vegetation.
There are two underground pipelines along the west
boundary of the Northwest Operations Area. One is a
2-inch-diameter natural gas line and the other is a
4-inch-diameter water supply line. The gas line is fed
by the 4-inch-diameter gas main located in Tank Farm
Road and owned by Southern California Gas
Company. The water line is fed by the existing water
well located adjacent to the southwest-most former
tank ring, but is also connected to other water lines
across the property. A series of timber poles support
both electrical and telecommunication lines. Along
that western boundary are drops to electrical panels
that feed service to the buildings. Chevron will
Northwest Operations Area along Tank F
Road - looking west
arm
Northwest Operations Area along west
property boundary – looking north.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 42
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
Northwest Operations Area - fire water tank
Northwest Operations Area - existing water
well
remove the utilities along this property line prior to
constructing the cap. The gas line will be cut and
capped at the 4-inch main under Tank Farm Road. It
will be necessary to coordinate this work with The Gas
Company. Similarly, the aerial utilities will be
disconnected at Tank Farm Road in coordination with
AT&T and PG&E. Underground electrical and
telecommunication conduits supplying service to the
demolished buildings will also be removed.
Excavations to remove buried conduits and pipelines
will be backfilled with structural fill.
It is likely
that Chevron will retain the existing water well located
Two septic tanks with leach fields manage wast
tank serves the southern build
water tank stores water
for firefighting at AOC #2. Once the buildings are
adjacent to the southwest-most former tank ring
(Figure 21). The well is also shown in the digital
image below. Electrical service will be provided to the
well after construction of the cap via an underground
conduit. The location and specifications for the
conduit are provided in the design drawings found in
Appendix C. The conduit will be made of 4-inch-
diameter PVC and will be buried at a depth of 5 feet, in
accordance with applicable local rules and regulations
for providing electrical service.
ewater at the Northwest Operations Area. One
ing and the other serves the northern building, as shown in
Figure 21. The tanks and leach lines will be abandoned in place in accordance with the standards
of San Luis Obispo County (SLOCo, 2006). This will require emptying the tank contents with a
vacuum truck, supplying a receipt of the work to the County Inspector, and then filling the tank
with a cement slurry or concrete.
There are six overhead light standards located around
the paved portion of AOC #2. These will be removed
and recycled or disposed of as appropriate. Concrete
foundations for the lights will be broken apart to a
depth of at least 2 feet bgs. The resulting hole will be
backfilled with structural fill. Conduits providing
electrical power to the lights will be cut at least 2 feet
below the existing grade and capped. Conductors
will be pulled and recycled.
A 10,000-gallon polyethylene
Northwest Operations Area - typical light
standard
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 43
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
demolished, the tank will no longer be needed and will be removed from the site. Water is
supplied to the tank by the 2-inch-diameter water line that enters near the top of the tank. The
larger 4-inch-diameter line connects to a booster pump and then to the water distribution system
that feeds various hydrants surrounding the site. Water level in the tank is maintained by
electronic sensors that ensure that a minimum depth of water is present at all times. The tank sits
on a 4-inch-thick cast-in-place concrete slab and is protected by four bollards. Once the tank has
been removed, the bollards will be pulled and the holes backfilled with a cement slurry or
concrete. The concrete slab will be broken apart and recycled onsite along with other concrete
debris for use as gravel. Water lines and conduits will be cut 2 feet below the existing grade,
capped, and any excavations backfilled with structural fill. Electrical conductors will be
removed from the conduit and recycled.
As can be seen from the above images and as indicated on Figure 21, AOC #2 is partially paved.
It is readily apparent on viewing Figure 21 that AOC #2 is cluttered with the concrete vestiges of
The pavement will be left in place. Any valve boxes or other similar types of subterranean vaults
not otherwise removed during demolition activities will be filled with cement slurry. Detachable
parking curbs will be removed for recycling, and asphalt edge curbs will removed.
The former fire school used a concrete-and-asphalt-
lined pit for teaching and training techniques for
extinguishing petroleum-fed fires (Figure 21). The
remains of the pit are shown in the adjacent image. It
may be difficult to place and compact structural fill
within the pit, which might result in unwanted
differential settlement. It is, therefore, proposed to
remove the loose debris in the bottom of the trench
until a firm surface has been exposed. The trench will
then be backfilled with cement slurry to the existing
grade. The loose material will be drummed, profiled,
and managed at an appropriately permitted facility.
the historical petroleum operations. Some of these foundations are flush with the ground surface,
or nearly so, and can be abandoned in place, such as
the one shown in the top image on the next page.
Other concrete structures that project more than
6 inches above the ground surface will protrude above
the subgrade preparation layer described below and
will interfere with construction of the cap.
Consequently, the contractor may leave in place any
concrete structure that projects above the existing
ground surface less than 6 inches. Concrete structures
that project more than that distance must be removed.
The concrete may be broken up and recycled onsite for
use as gravel. The contractor may elect to remove the
Northwest Operations Area - burn trench
used by former fire school
Northwest Operations Area - typical concrete
slab requiring removal
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 44
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
low-lying concrete structures, as well, if that proves more economic for gravel production.
Voids produced during removal of the concrete structures will be replaced by structural fill to the
existing ground surface.
Once the work area has been cleared and grubbed and the demolition and abandonment activities
have been completed, the subgrade will be prepared. This will include compacting the existing
ground surface to the specifications of structural fill. In addition, a 6-inch-thick layer of
common earth will be placed over the entire work area and compacted to the specifications of
structural fill. The intent of this effort is to provide a uniform surface over which to place the
geotextile fabric described later in this section.
A retaining wall will be constructed along the south boundary of AOC #2, as shown in Figure
22. The purpose of the retaining wall is to ensure the maximum amount of developable land
along the south boundary. Illustrations of the typical cap profile are shown in Figures 23 and 24.
Additional illustrations showing both the retaining wall and sloped edge detail are shown in
Figure 25 and Figure 26, respectively.
The retaining wall will be constructed of reinforced cast-in-place concrete with a minimum
compressive strength of 3,000 pounds per square inch. A footing for the retaining wall will be
excavated along the alignments shown in the figures and design drawings. The excavation shall
be inspected and approved by the Engineer prior to placing any steel reinforcement. Weak or
otherwise unsuitable soil shall be removed to a depth of at least 24 inches below the footing. If
the removed soil meets the requirements of common earth it may be used for backfill.
Otherwise, the soil shall be properly disposed and replaced with suitable material. All backfill
associated with the retaining wall shall be placed as structural fill.
The retaining wall design is a standard configuration taken from the Standard Plans for Public
Works Construction (1997), and the basis for its configuration is provided in Appendix K. The
wall along the south boundary will be approximately 495 feet long and will vary in height
between 3 feet and 6 feet 5 inches.
A 12-ounce geotextile will be used to identify the contact between the cap and former ground
surface. It is intended to warn future construction workers that the underlying soil layers are
potentially contaminated. Specific warnings and instructions will be provided in the land use
covenants and Soil Management Plan. Along the retaining wall, the geotextile will be placed on
the concrete footing and anchored by the overlying soil layers. Along the sloped soil boundaries,
an anchor trench will be cut beneath the location of the slope break, which is the point on the cap
surface where the grade switches from a gentle slope to a steeper slope that eventually meets the
existing grade. The anchor trench will be at least 1 foot wide and 3 feet deep, and will be
backfilled with structural fill. These end details are illustrated in Figure 26.
The cap itself covers approximately 6.4 acres and will be constructed of structural fill. To
promote proper drainage across the site, the cap thickness varies from a minimum of 4 feet to a
maximum of approximately 7 feet towards the center. It is estimated that 53,400 cubic yards of
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 45
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
common earth will be necessary to achieve the lines and grades depicted in Figure 22. It is
anticipated that this material will be obtained from the Flower Mound borrow source (Figure 16)
by crushing run-of-pit material to meet the specifications for common earth provided in
Appendix E. The cap will be thicker, on average, than the nominal thickness specified in the
Feasibility Study. This is primarily to provide adequate flexibility for future development
layouts. The proposed grading allows for surface runoff. A thinner cap could be constructed
using dedicated subsurface storm drains, but would require substantial expense to modify in the
future. A future developer can also modify the surface grade without importing materials and
still be assured that the required minimum thickness of the cap is maintained.
The Geotechnical Feasibility Study identified potentially soft soils typically between 6 and
25 feet bgs, although the depth varies, beneath the Northwest Operations Area. The settlement
analysis (Appendix H) estimates that settlement due to the load of the cap could be on the order
of 4 to 6 inches. The Geotechnical Feasibility Study estimated that additional settlement due to
foundation loads could be on the order of 1 to 2 inches.
In general, it is not considered practical to remove the soil for recompaction. Groundwater is
relatively shallow (on the order of 10 to 15 feet bgs). As was discussed in Section 7.1.1,
groundwater in this area is affected by LNAPL, benzene, as well as TPH in the soil. The site
would require significant dewatering, with treatment of the resulting effluent, and disposal of
contaminated soils.
Some recompaction of the soils beneath the pipelines will occur as they are removed. To the
degree possible during remediation, soils will be stockpiled over the Northwest Operations Area
to promote settlement. Prior to construction of the cap, it may be necessary to temporarily
stockpile petroleum-impacted soils prior to disposal. After construction of the cap, it may be
used as a location for temporary stockpiling of material from the Flower Mound or other borrow
sites.
Construction of the cap will include installation of three survey monuments at the locations
shown in Figure 22. An illustration of a typical survey monument is shown in Figure 27. Should
low spots develop following construction, they would be repaired as part of the long-term
maintenance program until the property is sold.
Future building foundations will require consideration of the soil conditions. Specific and
detailed geotechnical studies must be prepared for any work subsequent to cap construction. It
is anticipated that future foundation design over the site will require geogrid reinforcement or the
use of piles. Any work below the bottom of the cap must be in accordance with the Soil
Management Plan.
Storm water management features for this cap are designed to handle a 100-year recurrence
storm. Runoff is handled as sheet flow off the cap surface. It is directed from a high point near
the mid-point of the site to ditches along the perimeter. It is carried in ditches to hardened drop
points at the locations shown in Figure 22. Drop structures have rip-rap reinforced energy
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 46
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
dissipaters to prevent erosion. The calculations used to size the storm water management
features are found in Appendix G.
Run-on occurs at two locations and is diverted away from the cap at each. Currently, storm
water drains from the north toward where the cap will be constructed. Although the amount of
flow is relatively small, it is undesirable to allow this water to pond at the cap toe.
Consequently, a flow line will be established along the toe of slope that drains toward the
existing ditches and wetlands to the east. Ditches along the toe of slope are hardened with gravel
and cobbles to minimize erosion at the transition between the slope and the existing wetlands.
The other principal source of run-on is from the west, along Tank Farm Road. A local high point
is located on Tank Farm Road approximately 1,000 feet west of the Tank Farm. Surface runoff
from the surrounding properties is directed toward the Tank Farm in the swale that runs on the
north side of the road. At present, the runoff drains onto the agricultural property adjacent to the
Tank Farm. During heavy precipitation, the attenuation capacity of that land is exhausted and
water drains onto the Northwest Operations Area as sheet-flow. Run-on then flows across the
property, collecting in numerous local low points (including the southernmost building) until
reaching the wetland complex. The cap will cut off this route for storm water flow, and as such,
a new drainage ditch is proposed at the toe of the southern retaining wall. The flow line of the
new ditch will start at the existing grade at the western edge of the property and drop to the floor
of the wetland complex to the east and will be sized to accommodate up to 17.2 cubic feet per
second of flow (Appendix G). Rip-rap will provide erosion protection at the entrance to the
wetland complex. The ditch will include a culvert to allow access from Tank Farm Road onto
the site. The alignment and slope of the ditch are illustrated in Figure 22, and a typical cross-
section is shown in Figure 23.
In addition to the erosion control measures previously described, additional BMPs will be
provided to minimize the potential for erosion from the cap to the wetland. Unmitigated, soil
erosion could be as much as 0.2 ton per year (Appendix J). It is anticipated that the
recommended BMPs will substantially lower this total. The ditches along the top of slope of the
cap will be provided with sandbag chevrons to slow water flow and allow sediment to drop out
of suspension. Further, the surface and slopes of the cap will be covered with a spray-applied
mulch/seed, which will be maintained until the property is developed.
As discussed in Section 2.2 this portion of the site is within the 100-year flood plain of Tank
Farm Creek. Construction of the pad is anticipated to locally remove approximately 12.4 acre-
feet of flood storage capacity. It is estimated, however, that further downstream (south of Tank
Farm Road) there is an additional 27.9 acre-feet of available storage capacity. Further, it is
unknown how restoration of the North Marsh will affect flood storage capacity. However, it will
likely be augmented by expansion of the wetland complex.
As described in Sections 6.7 and 6.8, institutional controls will be adopted to protect the integrity
of the cap. The land use covenant will strictly define appropriate uses for the property.
Excavation depths will be controlled, and excavations deeper than the bottom of the cap will be
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 47
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
Reservoir 5 - typical protective enclosures
conducted under the requirements of the Soil Mitigation Plan (Padre, 2007c). Prior to
development of the site, access will be controlled through fences and gates. Additional fences
will be installed around the interior boundary of the operable unit with a locking gate, as shown
in Figure 22, to control access between the development area and the adjacent open space. Prior
to development, the cap will be periodically inspected and maintained, as necessary.
7.2 OU #2-RESERVOIRS 5 AND 7
The primary remedial action objective for Reservoirs 5 and 7 (i.e., OU #2) is to prevent the
emergence of liquid hydrocarbon on the open water that accumulates at these locations. The
sheen produced by the liquid hydrocarbon may adversely affect ecological receptors such as
water fowl. The Feasibility Study determined that the most feasible way to prevent contact is to
cap the reservoirs in a manner that allows groundwater (and the overlying hydrocarbon) to
fluctuate naturally and not try to find alternative (i.e., lower resistance) flow paths. This will
necessitate reconstruction of the existing wetlands at another location onsite.
Prior to constructing the cap, it will be necessary to clear the work area. The demolition plans
for Reservoirs 5 and 7 are illustrated in Figure 28 and Figure 29, respectively. The detailed
engineering drawings for demolition are included in Appendix C. A work area boundary has
been established for each reservoir. This boundary establishes where the contractor may operate
his equipment, disturb habitat, and where cleanup and construction will take place. The
contractor will identify this line in the field and provide protective measures to prevent impacts
outside of the boundary. These will include cones, caution tape, temporary fencing (if
appropriate), silt fences, and other dust and erosion control BMPs.
One of the first demolition tasks will be the removal of
the protective enclosures, an example of which is
shown in the adjacent image. These were installed to
ensure that small animals, such as birds, are not
entrapped in sticky plastic hydrocarbon surface
expressions. They occur both inside and outside of the
tank rings. Every location with a protective enclosure
is presumed to overlie a surface expression of plastic
hydrocarbon that requires removal. Those within the
limits of the former reservoir berm are addressed as
part of the cap construction. Outside of the berm
limits, however, soil beneath the protective enclosures
will be removed as described in Section 4.2. Note that
there are some plastic hydrocarbon surface expressions outside of the Reservoir 5 work area
(Figure 28). Excavation and impacted soil removal at this location is addressed in Section 7.4.3.
The enclosure materials will be removed from the site by the contractor and recycled (if feasible)
or disposed of in a solid waste landfill.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 48
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
Reservoir 7 – overview of existing bottom and
concrete-lined slopes
Reservoir 5 – former oil pipeline
Other site preparation activities will include the
removal of any pipeline remnants in the work area.
The old 8-inch-diameter crude oil distribution line is
nearly tangent to the southwest edge of the Reservoir 5
berm. A lateral from this line appears to branch into
Reservoir 5. The remains of the lateral can be seen
ending within the reservoir in the above image. The
remains of the 12-inch and 8-inch lines that served
Reservoir 7 may also still be present underground. The
concrete superstructure that supported those lines is
still visible in the reservoir (see adjacent image). It is
expected that the 4-inch-diameter fire water line shown
surrounding Reservoir 5 is still present. Since Reservoir 7 was abandoned after the 1926 fire, an
upgraded fire water line was never installed at that location.
If a pipeline is exposed or is encountered in grubbing, scarifying, or obtaining borrow soil, it will
There is a lot of concrete and concrete debris within
cled to create crushed gravel for use on
Five monitoring wells in OU #2 will be destroyed. Two of the monitoring wells are found in
be removed and disposed of as described in Section 6.4.4. Those portions of existing lines that
lie outside of the work area will be cut, flushed, pigged (if possible), and capped as described in
Section 6.4.2.
the work boundary of each reservoir. This includes
old pump and lightning tower foundations, valve
boxes, vaults, and other supports that were used
during historical operations. There are also several
small piles of broken concrete on the floor of
Reservoir 5 (Figure 28). It also includes the concrete
walls of the reservoirs that were cast on the berm
slopes. The approximate extent of the walls for
Reservoirs 5 and 7 is illustrated in Figure 28
and Figure 29, respectively. Although there appears
to be little of the original walls left in Reservoir 5,
much of the original walls remain in Reservoir 7 (see
adjacent photograph). Concrete debris will be
removed from the work area. If practical, it will be recy
this project. Otherwise, it will be hauled offsite for recycling. Concrete that is too impacted by
petroleum will be hauled away for disposal at an appropriate facility.
Reservoir 5 and three are found in Reservoir 7 (see Figure 28 and Figure 29, respectively). The
monitoring wells are within the proposed cap boundaries. The procedures described in
Section 6.5 will be used to abandon the monitoring wells.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 49
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
Reservoir 7 – accumulated debris in reservoir
bottom
It will also be necessary to remove the seepage study equipment that was installed to determine
the process by which sheen formed on the open water of the reservoirs and which contributed to
the design of the caps proposed in this Remedial Action Plan. The structures were constructed
by excavating holes into the reservoir bottoms and installing large-diameter corrugated metal
pipes on end. The annular space between the corrugated metal pipes and the soil was sealed with
grout. The interiors were partially filled with clean sand and were instrumented to monitor water
levels. Observations of water and LNAPL levels within the structures and the surrounding
monitoring wells provided our current understanding on sheen formation.
Any remaining instrumentation will be removed from the structures and returned to Chevron for
final disposition. Any remaining PVC sounding tubes will be pulled from the ground and
disposed. The corrugated metal pipes will then be pulled from the ground using a backhoe or
similar large piece of equipment. Any resulting void space will be filled during placement of the
gravel layer, as described below.
Other debris, concrete, or metal that is discovered within the work area will also be removed.
This will include the metal posts that are encountered at various locations, wire, fire hydrants,
and other debris. Metal and concrete will be recycled where practical. Other materials will be
disposed of as appropriate to their characteristics.
The last step prior to constructing the cap will be to
expose the original concrete floor of the reservoirs.
As can be seen in the adjacent image, there is a
variable thickness of accumulated soil and organic
matter. It is estimated that Reservoir 5 will generate
15,300 cubic yards and Reservoir 7 a further
11,000 cubic yards, for a total of 26,300 cubic yards.
This will be stripped and disposed of at an
appropriately permitted facility. Implementation of
this part of the remediation will be most successful if
accomplished in the summer, fall, and possibly early
winter if there is little precipitation that year.
Remediation may be postponed during periods of
high groundwater levels and water in storage in the reservoirs. Once construction has begun, it
should be finished as quickly as possible to prevent having to manage petroleum-impacted water.
The proposed grading plans for Reservoirs 5 and 7 are illustrated in Figure 30 and Figure 31,
respectively. A diagram of the cap profile is shown in Figure 32. The engineering drawings
(Appendix C) include the detailed designs for the caps.
Once the floor has been exposed, the reservoir bottom can be backfilled with gravel. As
described in Section 5.3, this material will be selected and placed so that it provides a
low-resistance pathway for groundwater and LNAPL to move into during their seasonal
fluctuations. Consequently, it is desirable to have a relatively uniform material with little to no
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 50
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
fine material (i.e., particle size less than No. 200 sieve). This will create large void spaces with
little resistance to flow and a low likelihood of future clogging. The gravel will be placed in lifts
no greater than 12 inches thick and will be nominally compacted by one pass of a steel drum
roller.
Placement of the gravel will be controlled by the nominal top-of-layer elevation. These
elevations, 119.20 feet above mean sea level (amsl) for Reservoir 5 and 123.50 feet amsl for
Reservoir 7, are based on the relative differences between the known concrete floor elevations
and the highest observed local groundwater elevation plus a 1.5-foot factor-of-safety. The top of
the gravel is above the downgradient ground surface of the reservoirs. Water cannot rise above
this elevation within the reservoir without daylighting outside the reservoir, thereby controlling
water levels within the reservoirs. The floor elevation of Reservoir 5 is 115.50 feet amsl, and the
highest measured groundwater elevation between 1999 and 2002 was 117.70 feet amsl.
Similarly, the floor elevation of Reservoir 7 is known to be 116.50 feet amsl, and the highest
recorded groundwater elevation was 122.00 feet amsl.
The top of the gravel layer can be no less than the specified design elevations, and results in a
minimum thickness of 3.7 and 7 feet for Reservoirs 5 and 7, respectively. It will be acceptable
for the contractor to allow the gravel layer to be thicker, but the final surface cannot have
depressions or low spots that dip below the nominal top-of-layer elevations. As shown in Table
4, it is estimated that 20,100 cubic yards of gravel will be needed to fill Reservoir 5, and another
39,000 cubic yards will be needed for Reservoir 7.
A 12-ounce 4 geotextile will be placed over the gravel to prevent migration of fine soil particles
into the void spaces from the overlying soil layers. The geotextile will be anchored in a trench
dug around the original concrete floor. The trench will be dug into a shelf cut into the existing
berm. The shelf will be approximately 3 feet wide. It is anticipated that the trench will be dug
by a small pocket-size excavator with an arm that can be offset from the machine’s centerline.
The trench will be centered in the shelf and will be approximately 1 foot wide and 3 feet deep.
The configuration of the shelf and anchor trench is illustrated in Figure 33. The trench locations
for Reservoirs 5 and 7 are shown in Figure 30 and Figure 31, respectively. The geotextile will be
placed as required by the manufacturer. This will include trimming the edges that go into the
anchor trench and sewing adjacent rolls together at their overlapped edges. Pro-forma
calculations have been included in Appendix I that demonstrate the selected geotextile will
prevent soil migration, has adequate tensile strength, and that the anchor trench is sized
appropriately to prevent pull-out.
The final grades shown in Figure 30 and Figure 31 will be achieved by placing common fill with
a 1-foot surface veneer of topsoil over the geotextile. The objective with these grading plans is
to produce as natural-looking landform as possible. The final grade will be nominally controlled
by grading from a control contour established near the top of the cap. The surface will slope at
4 Geotextile is typically identified by its weight per square yard. Therefore, an 8-ounce fabric weighs 8 ounces per
square yard.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 51
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
no more than 4:1 (horizontal:vertical). Ditches will be established around the perimeter of the
cap to ensure proper runoff of storm water. The final configuration of the slopes and ditches will
be developed in the field to best integrate with the surrounding topography within the other
parameters of the design. It is estimated that Reservoir 5 will require 12,500 cubic yards of
common fill and 12,600 cubic yards of topsoil. As shown in Figure 30, the berm borrow around
Reservoir 5 could generate another 26,300 cubic yards of common earth that could be used for
fill around the site. This material will only be removed if needed elsewhere onsite. Reservoir 7
is expected to require 24,500 cubic yards of common earth and 11,000 cubic yards of topsoil for
cap construction. An additional 8,300 cubic yards of soil are potentially available from the local
berm borrow if needed elsewhere onsite.
The slopes and ditches are designed to minimize potential erosion. The ditch slopes will vary
between 0.5 and 2 percent and are designed to accommodate the 100-year return period storm.
The discharge points of each ditch are provided with some type of energy dissipation. Where
velocities are less than 2 feet per second, a simple gravel mat is supplied. If the exit velocities
are greater than 2 feet per second, a reinforced rip-rap energy dissipater will be installed. The
hydrology and hydraulic calculations supporting the ditch dimensions and energy dissipaters are
found in Appendix G.
The U.S. Soil Conservation Service recommends limiting soil erosion to less than 2 tons per acre
per year. The calculations in Appendix J show that the estimated annual soil loss from the caps
is 0.53 ton per acre and 0.77 ton per acre for Reservoirs 5 and 7, respectively.
The surfaces of the Reservoir 5 and 7 caps will be revegetated with an approved native plant
seed mix. The specifications for this seed mix will be developed in conjunction with the
forthcoming Habitat Mitigation Plan. The surface of the cap will be scarified to a depth of at
least 3 inches. Prior to the onset of the rainy season, and preferably as close as possible to the
season’s first rain, the seed mix will be applied. The caps will be protected after application of
the seed with jute net or spray-applied mulch that will minimize erosion until the vegetation can
take root.
As noted previously, remediation of the Tank Farm results in unavoidable impacts to existing
wetlands, some of which include desirable vernal pool fairy shrimp habitat. The demolition
plans depict the wetlands on and around Reservoirs 5 and 7. Impacted wetlands are shown in
blue, while wetlands not affected by construction are shown in green. Some of the wetland
impacts will be temporary and the existing wetlands will be reestablished after remediation is
complete. Those impacts that are permanent will be mitigated at another location onsite to be
selected as the Habitat Mitigation Plan evolves in concert with the environmental analysis for
the project. A summary of the estimated habitat impacts is provided in Table 5.
It is estimated that 4.83 acres of wetland habitat in and around Reservoir 5 will be affected by
remediation. Of this total, 3.59 acres will be permanent impacts requiring mitigation at another
location onsite. Approximately 1.21 acres of the affected wetlands are also vernal pool fairy
shrimp habitat, although only 0.04 acre of that habitat is permanently removed from service.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 52
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
Due to their similar size and configuration, the amount of habitat affected by remediation of
Reservoir 7 is similar to that for Reservoir 5. The total wetland impact is estimated to be
approximately 4.22 acres with a permanent impact of 3.65 acres. Of the total wetland impact,
0.90 acre has been identified as vernal pool fairy shrimp habitat, and 0.35 acre will require
mitigation at another location onsite.
Both caps are expected to affect the habitat for rare plants onsite. The Reservoir 5 cap will affect
0.31 acre of habitat, but only 0.03 acre will be a permanent impact. Similarly, the Reservoir 7
cap will affect 0.28 acres of rare plant habitat, of which 0.15 acre will require mitigation at a
different location.
Settlement is not anticipated to be a significant issue for the Reservoirs 5 and 7 caps. The caps
will be constructed over the original concrete floors, which will tend to evenly distribute the
overlying soil loads. The cap is further reinforced by the geotextile, which, within limits, will
also distribute loads and provide a bridging support over localized weak spots. In addition, it is
likely that the soils directly beneath the reservoir are overconsolidated; that is, they have
experienced greater bearing stress than they currently experience. The reservoirs were loaded
with a 20-foot or more thickness of oil for many decades. That historical load will have worked
to compress the soils, and it is expected that additional settlement should be minimal.
To ensure proper performance of the caps, future settlement will be monitored. Three
monuments will be placed on and around the cap, as shown on the grading plans for each of the
caps. The monuments will be of a standard design acceptable to the City or County. Typically,
a survey monument will consist of a 5/8”-diameter steel or aluminum rod between 3 and 5 feet in
length. The rod is driven into the ground and then topped with a domed cap that threads onto the
rod. One monument will be located on the top of the cap, another near the edge, and a third at a
location adjacent to the cap on native ground. Monitoring of the cap will be as described in
Section 9.0
7.3 OU #3/FLOWER MOUND/BORROW AREA NO. 2 REGRADING
OU #3 is located on the eastern side of the Tank Farm north of Tank Farm Road (Figure 14). As
noted in the Feasibility Study, this area includes the remains of Reservoir 4, and has several
plastic hydrocarbon surface expressions that pose potential entrapment hazards. Chevron has
elected to implement a closure approach for this OU that supports future development in
accordance with the proposed land use plan (Figure 10). This entails excavation of the surface
expressions and construction of a cap over the former reservoir. It also includes grading of the
Flower Mound and Borrow Area No. 2 to support future development.
The work area boundaries for OU #3 and the Flower Mound, and Borrow Area No. 2 are shown
in Figure 34. Site disturbance associated with remediation of OU #3 grading of the east end of
the property will be confined to this area. Preparation of the site for remediation will include
clearing, grubbing, removal of the protective enclosures and monitoring wells, and demolition
and removal of concrete debris and pipeline remnants. A demolition plan for the Reservoir 4
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 53
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
Abandoned concrete lightening stand
foundation
area is shown in Figure 35, and a demolition plan for the Flower Mound area is shown in Figure
36. Clearing and grubbing will remove vegetation from the work area. Grubbed vegetation will
be managed as allowed by San Luis Obispo County, the RWQCB, and the APCD.
A chainlink fence secures the property along Tank Farm Road and along the eastern property
line. A barbed-wire fence separates the Reservoir 4 area from other portions of the site. The
barbed-wire fences are used by ranchers to create paddocks suitable for cattle grazing. The
chainlink fence will be maintained, except that minor modifications will be made in its alignment
to maximize the working area. The barbed-wire fence will be removed.
Five monitoring wells will be abandoned within OU #3. These are SP-6, SP-7, TMW-2,
TMW-8, and TMW-9. These wells are included on the list in Table 2. The wells will be
abandoned as described in Section 6.5. Replacement of the monitoring wells will be as
prescribed by the RWQCB.
There are four protective enclosures clustered adjacent to the northwest boundary of Reservoir 4.
These will be removed and recycled or disposed of as appropriate. It is presumed that plastic
surface expressions are beneath each of these enclosures. The underlying soil will be excavated
in accordance with Section 4.2 and the more specific
descriptions found later in this section.
Concrete foundations for the lightning towers and pumps
are still found surrounding the reservoir (Figure 35).
These will be removed from the work area and crushed
for use as gravel elsewhere on the site, or will be sent
offsite for recycling. In addition, frames constructed of
wood and concrete (believed to be test plots from a
previous study) are found on the west side of the
reservoir. These will be removed for disposal at a
permitted facility.
The remains of the foundations for the reservoir roof and interior wall can be seen in the field
and are shown in Figure 35. The contractor can abandon these foundations in place as long as
they do not interfere with achieving the lines and grades shown in Figure 38. The contractor will
also have the option of recovering the foundations to
create gravel for use elsewhere onsite if it can be shown
that the cost would be less than importing material from
offsite.
Crude oil and water lines historically served Reservoir 4
(Figure 5). It appears that most of the crude oil line has
been removed (see adjacent image), or is possibly buried
within the reservoir. There are exposed portions of the
water line, but it is believed to be substantially intact due Reservoir 4 – abandoned oil pipeline
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 54
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
to the hydrants that still surround the reservoir (Figure 34 Reservoir 4 (OU #3), Flower Mound
and Borrow Area No. 2 Work Areas
Figure 35). The remains of the crude oil line will be exposed and removed to a point outside of
the work area. Some of the water line is exposed at the surface; other portions are within the
area that will be used as common earth borrow for the cap construction. As such, the water line
will be cut at the three locations where it appears to enter the work area. Those portions within
the work area will be removed, while those sections outside of the work area will be capped and
managed as described in Section 6.4.
Figure 37 shows the areas where soil has been impacted by plastic hydrocarbon. This area is
approximately 8.35 acres and is estimated to contain as much as 40,400 cubic yards of impacted
soil. The contractor shall segregate asphaltic material and clean soil during the excavation.
Those materials can be incorporated into the structural fill for the cap. Excavation shall be
performed as described in Section 4.2. The remaining subgrade will be compacted to at least 95
percent of its relative maximum density per ASTM D1557.
Geotextile will be used to identify the cap bottom and to provide some structural support in the
event of differential settlement. The potential for settlement is discussed later in this section.
Approximately 342,900 square feet of geotextile will be anchored in a trench positioned around
the former reservoir as shown in Figure 37. The trench will be 1 foot wide and 3 feet deep.
Calculations estimating the resistance to pull-out for this trench (including potential strain
induced by differential settlement) are provided in Appendix I.
The proposed grading plan for the Reservoir 4 cap and the Flower Mound is shown in Figure 38.
The grading plan ensures a minimum of 4 feet of cover over the former reservoir bottom. The
maximum thickness is approximately 11 feet, and the average thickness is just over 6 feet. The
primary feature of the grading plan is the extension of Santa Fe Road. From Tank Farm Road,
the rough climbs along gently sweeping curves for approximately 1,200 feet at slopes ranging
between approximately 1 and 3 percent. It reaches a high point at approximately elevation 164,
and then slopes downward approximately 400 feet to elevation 160, where it ties into the existing
grade at the northern property boundary. The highest point of the grading area is at the
northwest corner of the Flower Mound. From that point, most of the grade slopes between
approximately 1 and 3 percent to the southwest. A portion of the northwest corner of the grading
area slopes to the northwest, generally following the northern down slope of the Santa Fe Road
extension. A small collector road connects with Tank Farm Road approximately 1,200 feet west
of the future Santa Fe Road intersection. The collector road rough grade runs generally north
approximately 900 feet at a slope of approximately 1 percent. At this point the collector road
turns to the east and intersects the Santa Fe Road extension about 800 feet away. The slope of
the eastern leg varies from approximately 3 to 10 percent. West and north of the collector road
the grade slopes generally westward until it ties into the existing grade. On the east side of the
grading area, approximately 900 feet north of Tank Farm Road is a small drainage basin that
collects run-off from the entire grading area.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 55
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
The layout of the cap and grading supports future development within the bounds of the
proposed land use plan. It also includes the rough grading necessary to construct the extension
of Santa Fe Road, and provides access to a land-locked parcel along the east property line. In
addition, the grading improves the utility (and consequently the value) of the surrounding
properties. It also provides a reasonably smooth transition to the former recycling area, which
will be used as the contractor’s primary staging area. It is estimated that this grading plan will
require approximately 262,800 cubic yards of structural fill. However, the Flower Mound
borrow area is expected to generate at least 328,200 cubic yards, and up to 402,000 cubic yards if
Chevron has access to the off-site material
Some of the excess may be used to regrade Borrow Area No. 2. After topsoil removal, structural
fill will be placed as shown in Figure 39. As noted previously, the limits shown in the figure are
proposed for development in both the AASP and proposed land use plans. A portion of the
grading establishes the rough grade for the Santa Fe Road extension south of Tank Farm Road.
The remaining grading establishes contours that will support future development of the site.
Enhancement of existing drainages and the construction of new channels and detention features
are required to adequately manage storm water. However, the features shown in this Remedial
Action Plan are temporary, though they may be used for several years. Development of the area
will include construction of a storm drain system, which will replace much of the overland
system. Since even the first phase of development may follow remediation by several years, a
properly designed and functioning overland system is necessary to prevent excess erosion and
transporting unwanted sediment to the North Marsh wetland complex, to which this area is
ultimately tributary. Supporting hydrology and hydraulics calculations for the overland system
are provided in Appendix G.
The hydrologic design point for the area north of Tank Farm Road is identified on Figure 38.
Overall, the peak flow to this point has been reduced, mostly due to the longer travel path that
water must flow over, which results in a longer time of concentration. The existing peak flow at
this point during the 100-year storm is estimated to be 67 cubic feet per second. The peak flow
for the same storm after grading is estimated to be approximately 51 cubic feet per second.
Most of the graded areas will drain by sheet flow to the roads. The rough graded interior roads
collect storm water and direct it to large, over-sized swales along Tank Farm Road and the north
property boundary. The larger swale along Tank Farm Road discharges to an even larger swale
along the toe of the collector road slope. That swale and the swale along the northern property
line discharge to a small sediment removal basin just before the design point. The swales are
broad and will be roughened and vegetated to reduce flow velocities, minimize erosion, and limit
sediment transport.
Regrading of Borrow Area No. 2 will alter the hydrology. At present, precipitation is trapped in
a closed catchment. Rough grading of the Santa Fe Road extension will permit 2.9 acres to
discharge directly to the East Fork of San Luis Obispo Creek. The peak flow of this discharge
during the 100-year storm is estimated to be 5.1 cubic feet per second. This is a relatively minor
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 56
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
contribution to the overall flow of the creek, and is unavoidable if Santa Fe Road is to be
extended as described in the Airport Area Specific Plan.
In addition to the erosion control measures previously described, additional BMPs will be
provided to minimize the potential for erosion from the cap to the wetlands. Unmitigated, soil
erosion could be as much as 1.38 tons per acre per year (Appendix J). It is anticipated that the
BMP regime will substantially lower this total. The ditches along the top of slope of the cap will
be provided with sandbag chevrons to slow water flow and allow sediment to drop out of
suspension. Further, the surface and slopes of the cap will be covered with spray-applied mulch,
which will be maintained until the property is developed.
Remediation activities in OU #3 and the Flower Mound will affect wetland and rare plant
habitat, which is summarized in Table 5. Two acres of wetland habitat will be impacted,
although this is a permanent impact requiring mitigation elsewhere onsite. None of the impacted
wetland is considered vernal pool fairy shrimp habitat. Remediation will also permanently affect
3.4 acres of rare plant habitat. Regrading of Borrow Area No. 2 will permanently affect 1 acre of
wetland of which 0.67 acres is vernal pool fairy shrimp habitat. It will also permanently affect
1.4 acres and temporarily affect 0.2 acres of rare plant habitat.
It was noted previously in this section that there is a potential for settlement to occur. It is
believed that decommissioning of Reservoir 4 included pushing berm material over the concrete
floor. Field inspections of this material indicate that it has not been compacted. The
Geotechnical Feasibility Study (Padre, 2007a) estimated that settlement may be on the order of 3
to 4 inches. During construction, the upper few feet of existing material will be compacted. It is
not intended, however, to expose and recompact petroleum impacted soils. Since the planned
grading is much thicker than the previously envisioned cap (11 feet versus 4 feet), it is expected
to provide improved support. In addition, a 12-ounce geotextile will be used to provide
additional tensile strength and load distribution capacity.
However, development will require lot- and building-specific geotechnical studies. Future
foundations may require geogrid support or the use of piles if the thicker fill has not adequately
compressed the underlying layers.. This latter approach would require handling spoils and other
excavated materials in accordance with the Soil Management Plan and will be specified in any
land use covenants attached to future parcels in this area.
Potential settlement of the cap will be monitored through the use of survey monuments. It is
proposed that five monuments be installed in and around this operable unit. Their locations are
shown in Figure 38. A typical survey monument detail is shown in Figure 27. The survey
monument consists of a 5/8-inch-diameter steel or aluminum rod driven to a depth of between
4 to 6 feet bgs. The rod is topped with a threaded cap mounted flush with the ground that
identifies the monument. The monuments will be periodically surveyed as part of the long-term
maintenance requirements for the site.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 57
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
In addition to possible high-load foundation requirements, the land use covenant will specify the
various institutional controls that will accompany title to the property. These will include
prohibitions on groundwater use in impacted areas, limitations on excavation, impacted soil
management requirements, as well as general guidelines on the use of vapor barriers for
habitable structures. An example of these guidelines is provided in Appendix M.
7.4 OU#4-REMAINING SITE-WIDE TERRESTRIAL AND WETLAND AREAS
The remaining site-wide impacted terrestrial and wetland areas are addressed as OU #4. It
includes three areas of concern. The first, AOC #1, is the North Marsh adjacent to the Northwest
Operations Area. The second, AOC #2, is Reservoir 3, and AOC #3 is the remaining plastic
(“sticky”) hydrocarbon surface expressions.
7.4.1 AOC #1-North Marsh
The North Marsh is a large (approximately 11.9-acre) wetland complex adjacent to the
Northwest Operations Area. The SERRT identified this area as requiring remediation as a result
of the numerous surface expressions that posed potential entrapment hazards to small animals.
After careful consideration, Chevron determined, and documented in the Feasibility Study, that
the preferred approach to remediation would be to excavate the hydrocarbon material and restore
the wetland in place with improved function and environmental utility.
The work area for OU #3/AOC #1 is defined by the clear and grub line shown in Figure 41. The
contractor will, to the extent possible, stockpile and protect cleared wetland vegetation. Greater
detail regarding selecting, segregating, stockpiling, and maintaining vegetation will be provided
in the Habitat Mitigation Plan. One possible stockpile location is shown adjacent to the North
Marsh in Figure 41. Other locations can be used, as necessary, as long as they minimize impacts
to existing and otherwise unaffected habitat.
Every attempt will be made to minimize working outside of the excavation limits. However, it is
also recognized that the excavation areas may expand in order to fully capture the hydrocarbon
materials within the wetland.
There are three protective enclosures within the work area. These will be dismantled and
removed for disposal or recycling, as appropriate. Since they are each within the wetland, the
presumption that they enclose plastic hydrocarbons is addressed by the excavation described
later in this section.
A small pile of concrete debris was identified on the east side of the wetland (Figure 41). This
material will be removed for disposal. It may be recycled into gravel for use elsewhere on the
site (if feasible), or it may be removed from the site for recycling, depending on the project
economics.
As discussed in Section 5.5.4, the facility used a location adjacent to the wetland for debris
disposal following the 1926 fire. Field observations indicate that inert materials, such as wood
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 58
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
posts, fencing, and concrete, were the principal materials discarded at this location. The area
covers approximately 2.3 acres and is estimated to be on the order of about 5 feet deep. This
suggests that there may be around 18,000 cubic yards of debris present. In the near term,
Chevron will characterize the materials interred at this location so that they can be properly
managed during remediation. At a minimum, the site will be cleared of debris when remedial
activities for the North Marsh begin. It is also possible that Chevron might expedite the work if
it would facilitate other remedial activities.
There are two monitoring wells in the work area that will be abandoned, B-36 and SP-4. They
are more fully described in Table 2 and their locations are shown in Figure 41. The wells will be
abandoned as described in Section 6.5. There are three other monitoring wells (B-33, B-35, and
MW-16) that are immediately adjacent to the work area. These will be protected in place if
possible.
PG&E and AT&T have utilities (power and telecommunications, respectively) that cross the
work area adjacent to Tank Farm Road (Figure 41). The contractor will be responsible for
protecting those utilities in place.
Several of the old facility pipelines intrude into the excavation area, as shown in Figure 41. The
historical records indicate that there are a water line and two foamite lines in the north part of the
excavation limits crossing in an east-west direction (approximately 400 lineal feet each in the
work area, approximately 1,200 lineal feet total). These lines appear to have been used for fire
suppression purposes at the 55,000-barrel ASTs. There are two former crude oil lines that cross
the excavation area in an east-west direction almost at the midpoint (approximately 860 lineal
feet each in the work area, 1,720 feet total). A water line and natural gas line (the latter is
reported to have been abandoned) run parallel to Tank Farm Road in the unpaved shoulder area
(approximately 270 lineal feet each in the work area). Another water line is found at the
southwest end of the excavation area crossing in a north-south direction. A stub off that line
protrudes into the excavation area approximately 60 feet in an easterly direction.
It is likely that pipeline abandonment will occur prior to remediation in the North Marsh. As
such, the lines will have been flushed and the larger lines pigged. If the lines are not exposed
during excavation, they will be abandoned in place as described in Section 6.4. If the lines are
exposed during excavation of the North Marsh, they will be removed for disposal. The lines will
be cut approximately 10 feet outside the work area. The exposed pipeline end will be capped
and the local excavation will be backfilled with common fill.
A preliminary excavation boundary is shown in Figure 41. It is believed that this boundary
includes all of the hydrocarbon expressions that affect the North Marsh. The boundary is
delineated in this way mostly for permitting purposes so that the potential maximum impact is
quantified in the environmental analysis. The entire excavation boundary, as shown in Figure
41, covers over 13 acres. The Feasibility Study estimated the average thickness of impacted soil
to be 3.5 feet. Excavating to this depth within the boundary would generate 75,300 cubic yards
of soil, most of which will require offsite management. The mapped hydrocarbon surface
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 59
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
expressions, in contrast, are only 7 acres (including the protective enclosures). Excavation
limited to this area would result in a correspondingly lower volume (approximately 40,000 cubic
yards). The actual volume is anticipated to be somewhere between these extremes, but the larger
quantity will be used for planning purposes.
Excavation is expected to proceed from the north to the south. This allows haul trucks to most
readily access either Tank Farm Road for offsite disposal or the temporary impacted soil
stockpile in the Northwest Operations Area. The potential haul routes are shown in Figure 17.
The access point from Tank Farm Road shown on the figure is preferred since the Remedial
Action Plan envisions some form of active traffic control at this location while work is in
progress.
Although remediation of the North Marsh will create the single largest wetland impact
(11.9 acres) for the entire Tank Farm project, it does not affect any vernal pool fairy shrimp
habitat, and the impacts are only temporary. In fact, remediation is expected to increase the size
of the habitat by approximately 2.3 acres when the historical debris disposal area is cleaned up.
Remediation may also temporarily impact up to 0.76 acre of rare plant habitat.
The specifics for restoration of the North Marsh and other protected onsite habitats are currently
being developed. The forthcoming Habitat Restoration Plan will provide the conceptual
approach to be used in restoration and mitigation. The final plan, however, will be developed in
consultation with the City, County, and regulatory agencies such as U.S. Fish & Wildlife
Service, U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, the RWQCB, and the California Department of Fish &
Game as the project proceeds through permitting and environmental analysis.
7.4.2 AOC #2-Reservoir 3
Reservoir 3 was one of the largest reservoirs and one of the last to be decommissioned.
Although it contains a large wetland complex, it is unlike Reservoirs 5 and 7 in that the wetland
is not of the open water type. Rather, it is generally a wet-marsh-type, with substantial pockets
of plastic hydrocarbon exposed at the surface where it poses a physical, and possibly chemical,
hazard to ecological receptors. Further, the wetland does not appear to be fed by groundwater,
again distinctly different from the wetlands in Reservoirs 5 and 7. The preferred remedial
alternative for this area of concern is to remove a limited amount of impacted material and
replace it with the cap components, which will include geosynthetics that will create an
impermeable barrier and help to support the overlying cap materials. This is anticipated to allow
replacement, and possibly expansion, of the existing wetlands.
The work area for Reservoir 3 is shown in Figure 42. This work boundary includes the adjacent
wetland complex to the northwest that is impacted by plastic hydrocarbon surface expressions.
Preparation of this work area will include clearing, grubbing, removal of concrete debris for
recycling or disposal, dismantling and removal of the protective enclosures, and removal of
exposed pipelines.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 60
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
Reservoir 3 – former concrete wall
foundation
There appears to be less concrete debris surrounding
this reservoir than the others across the Tank Farm.
There are a couple of lightning tower stands and some
other loose concrete debris that will be removed for
recycling. The remains of the original concrete that
lined the reservoir berm slopes can also be observed at
the ground surface (see image to left). Those portions
that are within the excavation limits (Figure 42) will be
removed for recycling as well, assuming that they are
not heavily stained with hydrocarbon. Heavily stained
concrete will be removed for disposal at an
appropriately permitted facility.
Reservoir 3 also contains the single largest protective
enclosure on the Tank Farm. This enclosure and the one
just outside the berm to the north of the reservoir will be
dismantled and removed from the work area. If practical,
the materials will be salvaged or recycled. If this proves
impractical, the contractor will dispose of the materials in
an appropriately permitted facility.
Reservoir 3 – protective enclosure
A single abandoned pipeline approaches the reservoir
from the north (Figure 42). It is uncertain if the line
even continues into the reservoir. The line will be
flushed, pigged (if practical), and abandoned in place (as
described in Section 6.4), assuming that it does not interfere with excavation or construction of
the cap. If this assumption proves incorrect, the pipeline will be cut outside the work area,
capped, and the portion inside the work area will be removed for disposal.
The water supply line that served Reservoir 3 appears to be well out of the proposed work area
and is not expected to affect the work in this area of concern. It does appear, however, that the
water line crosses several of the other plastic hydrocarbon surface expressions adjacent to the
reservoir. Managing the water line at these locations is described in Section 7.4.3, below.
Monitoring well MW-34, located on the southwest quadrant of the work area (Figure 42), will be
abandoned. It will be abandoned as described in Section 6.5. Two other monitoring wells,
MW-20 and MW-42, are adjacent to the work area and will be protected in place.
The preferred remedy developed in the Feasibility Study recommended removing approximately
2 feet of existing material and replacing it with the components of the cap. Nominally, this
would be effective in that the work area is essentially flat, though slightly higher in the center
and the east. The resulting depression supports the wetland habitat in this area. The refined
approach in this Remedial Action Plan is to remove the minimum 2 feet of material at the outer
edge of the excavation, but to deepen the excavation in the center of the reservoir so that the
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 61
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
excavated bottom has a 0.5 percent slope toward the interior. It is anticipated that this
excavation will generate approximately 26,700 cubic yards of hydrocarbon-impacted soil that
will require removal and disposal. The excavation will start at elevation 134, which is also the
elevation that the top of the cap ties into the existing ground along the outer edge of the
reservoir. The entire surface of the cap will then be approximately the same elevation as the
existing wetland complex, which should allow restoration and expansion of the existing habitat.
The subgrade surface will be compacted to a depth of 6 inches to 90 percent of its relative
maximum density per ASTM D1557. Construction equipment may require decontamination
after compaction of the subgrade. Depressions in the subgrade resulting from compaction will
be restored to the lines and grades of the design with common fill. A liner system will be
installed over the subgrade to prevent the remaining hydrocarbon materials from migrating to the
surface. The liner system will consist of (from bottom to top): 12-ounce geotextile; a 12-inch
layer of gravel with a triaxial geogrid installed mid-thickness; 12-ounce geotextile; 40-mil high
density polyethylene (HDPE) liner; 12-ounce geotextile; variable thickness (0-18 inch) common
fill; and 1-foot thickness of topsoil. An illustration of the liner section and the anchor trench
detail is shown in Figure 44.
The lower portion of the liner system is intended to bridge potentially soft portions of the
remaining soils in the reservoir. A 12-ounce non-woven geotextile will be installed to ensure
that fine soil particles do not migrate into the gravel layer. A 6-inch thickness of gravel will be
placed over the geotextile. The initial 6-inch layer will be nominally compacted by at least one
pass of a steel drum roller. A triaxial geogrid (Tensar TX-160, or equivalent) will be installed
per manufacturer’s specifications and secured in an anchor trench around the perimeter of the
original reservoir bottom (Figure 43). The geogrid will be covered with an additional 6-inch
layer of gravel.
As noted above, the purpose of this component of the liner system is support. For design
purposes, it has been assumed that the center of the cap tries to settle by approximately 2 feet,
equivalent to a 50 percent consolidation of the original impacted soil remaining between the
excavation bottom and the original reservoir bottom. While each of the geosynthetic materials
can readily accept the resulting strain, it is expected that the strain will be taken up first by the
geogrid, which is designed for this type of application. Further, the geogrid will better distribute
loads across the foundation, lessening the potential for differential settlement. This type of
geogrid is a relatively new product, but is better at locking aggregate materials and provides
superior load distribution than bi-axial geogrids. Supporting calculations for the geosynthetics
are provided in Appendix I.
Three additional geosynthetic components will be placed on the compacted gravel. These will
consist of a 40-mil HDPE flexible membrane liner (FML) over an 12-ounce non-woven
geotextile and beneath an 12-ounce non-woven geotextile. The FML creates an impermeable
barrier to future migration of hydrocarbon-impacted soils. It also will minimize infiltration
losses from the overlying wetland. The primary purpose for the geotextiles is to protect the FML
from punctures and abrasions due to angular particles in the common fill. A secondary purpose
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 62
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
for the geotextiles is to assist in distributing soil loads and bridging soft soils. Since the subgrade
slope is so mild (0.5 percent), the use of smooth rather than a textured FML will be acceptable.
A variable thickness of common fill will be used to create a nominally level surface across the
reservoir. It will be as much as 18 inches thick in the center of the reservoir and will taper out as
it reaches the anchor trench bench (Figure 44). The common fill will be pushed onto the
geosynthetics from a minimum 1-foot-thick layer. Equipment will not be allowed to operate
directly on the geosynthetics. A 1-foot-thick layer of topsoil will be used to complete the cap.
The topsoils will only be nominally compacted, and will be scarified prior to revegatation.
Restoration of the wetland habitat will be performed in accordance with the Habitat Mitigation
Plan.
A primary design objective of this remedial alternative has been to facilitate restoration and
improvement of the existing wetlands while removing the potential for contact with the
hydrocarbon-impacted soils. The liner system provides separation, and the design grades are
intended to direct water within the catchment of the reservoir (approximately 11.5 acres) to
accumulate in the wetland complex. Seasonally, approximately 12.5 acre-feet of water will
accumulate within the new 6.5-acre wetland complex.
Remediation at Reservoir 3 will have a temporary impact to the entire existing 4.23-acre wetland
complex, which is also vernal pool fairy shrimp habitat. Once remediation is complete, however,
the entire habitat will be restored, and it is expected that an additional 2.27 acres of habitat will
have been added (that is the entire area covered by the cap for Reservoir 3). Remediation will
also affect 0.38 acre of existing rare plant habitat that will be mitigated elsewhere onsite.
Some settlement is anticipated (and considered desirable) after construction of the cap. The
various geosynthetic elements of the cap are capable of withstanding the likely strains that may
be imposed during settlement and are reinforced with a geogrid designed to limit excessive
settlement. The excavation plan is designed to provide some additional weight over the center of
the reservoir and encourage the greatest relative amount of settlement at that location. This is
intended to encourage water to pool towards the center of the reservoir. Settlement will be
monitored by three settlement monuments, as shown in Figure 43. One will be located as near to
the center of the reservoir as practical, a second will be installed over the cap towards the
perimeter, and a third will be installed locally on undisturbed ground. These monuments will
consist of the typical cap section but will be cast into concrete blocks approximately 12 inches on
a side.
7.4.3 AOC #3-Other Sticky Hydrocarbon Surface Expressions
There are an additional 12 areas affected by plastic hydrocarbon surface expressions. These are
shown in Figure 45. It is proposed to excavate these areas as described in Section 4.2, and
backfill them with common fill and 1 foot of topsoil at the surface. Several of these areas are
adjacent to or within the work areas for other remedial activities, such as Reservoir 5 and
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 63
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
Reservoir 3. As a practical matter, those sites will be excavated in conjunction with preparing
the work areas for the larger remedial activities.
The 12 locations comprise 5.90 acres and are estimated to generate approximately 28,700 cubic
yards of potentially hydrocarbon-impacted soil requiring offsite disposal. Backfilling the
excavations will require 19,200 cubic yards of common earth and 9,500 cubic yards of topsoil.
Generally, the upper 3 inches of topsoil will be scarified after placement and seeded with a mix
to be specified in the Habitat Mitigation Plan. Approximately 0.97 acre of wetland habitat,
including 0.93 acre of vernal pool fairy shrimp habitat, will be temporarily impacted by the
excavations. Wetland habitat will be restored as described in the Habitat Mitigation Plan.
Remediation will also temporarily affect 0.19 acre of rare plant habitat.
In addition to the excavations, there are approximately 2.18 acres of wetland habitat that also
supports vernal pool fairy shrimp that will be ripped to a depth of no less than 15 inches on at
least a 24-inch grid. The upper 3 inches of soil will be scarified; that is, broken up into small
pieces (Figure 43). This habitat is impacted by asphaltic hydrocarbon that, while not an
ecological risk or physical hazard, still impairs the function of the wetland. It is believed that
scarifying the surface will encourage improved plant growth.
7.5 OU#5-SITE-WIDE GROUNDWATER
Monitored natural attenuation will be implemented using the same parameters and methods as
specified in Monitoring and Reporting Program 93-120 (Appendix B). However, remediation
will require abandonment of several monitoring wells (Table 2). Replacement will be determined
in concert with the RWQCB, which will also approve a revised Monitoring and Reporting
Program. At a minimum, monitoring groundwater for TPH and BTEX (consistent with M&RP
93-120) will be performed at the remaining perimeter monitoring wells MW-49, MW-50,
MW-56, and SLOW-17, and the off-site production wells 11Ea and 11Eb. Currently, monitoring
is performed on a semiannual basis. After three years, the RWQCB will evaluate the semiannual
groundwater data to determine if a reduction in the monitoring frequency is warranted.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 64
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
8.0 HABITAT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION
The remedial actions described in this Remedial Action Plan will ultimately reduce potential
human health and ecological risks. It will also improve the function and ecological value of
various types of habitat found on the site. While these actions are being implemented, however,
wetland and rare plant habitats will be impacted. Throughout the previous sections describing
the remedial actions, collateral habit impacts have been identified. These are summarized in
Table 5 and illustrated in Figure 46.
In total, it is anticipated that remediation will affect 29.0 acres of wetland, 9.5 acres of vernal
pool fairy shrimp habitat, as well as 4.8 acres of rare plant habitat. Most of the habitat will only
be temporarily affected and will be restored following remediation. However, 7.8 acres of
wetland, 0.4 acre of vernal pool fairy shrimp, and 1.08 acres of rare plant habitat will be
permanently removed from service and will require mitigation elsewhere onsite. It should be
noted that remediation will expand existing wetland habitat areas by approximately 5 acres,
irrespective of other mitigation efforts. Some of the potential mitigation areas are shown in
Figure 46. In general, the locations are found in areas that can expand upon existing habitat such
as the North Marsh or the wetland complex in the southwest portion of the site.
Restoration, improvement, and mitigation of impacted habitats will be described in the Habitat
Mitigation Plan. A conceptual version of this plan is provided in . It provides additional detail
on the delineation of wetland and rare plant habitats, opportunities and constraints related to
mitigation, and proposed mitigation ratios for discussion. Habitat mitigation will be an ongoing
point of discussion through the environmental analysis and permitting of this project. It is
understood that the Habitat Mitigation Plan, as well as this Remedial Action Plan, will be
revised as comments are received from external stakeholders such as the regulatory community.
As the particulars of the mitigation ratios and acceptable mitigation areas are developed, the
plans will be revised. It is expected that this will include detailed drawings showing the
mitigation areas, specifications on planting and grading, and a habitat maintenance plan
describing the frequency of watering, inspections, and procedures to follow to replace
unsuccessful plantings.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 65
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
9.0 LONG-TERM MAINTENANCE
Once the caps and other short-term remedial actions have been implemented, the long-term
monitoring and maintenance phase of site closure will begin. Long-term monitoring is, in itself,
considered a remedial action for various groundwater impacts. These have been previously
discussed in Section 4.1. Long-term maintenance, however, is intended to ensure that those
actions taken under this plan (e.g., excavations, cap construction) continue to achieve their
remedial objectives. This is important, in that most of the impacted materials onsite will remain
after remediation is complete, especially in the former reservoirs. Periodic inspection and, as
necessary, maintenance are, therefore, necessary components of remediation.
Inspection will primarily cover excavations, habitat restoration and mitigation areas, and the
open space caps and development caps. In general, it is anticipated that inspections will occur
periodically after a given remedial action is completed. The frequency of inspections will be
established in concert with the appropriate regulatory agencies. It is tentatively proposed to
conduct inspections quarterly for the first five years after construction and semiannually after
that.
Inspections will, at a minimum, look at the following:
• signs of erosion or burrowing by animals
• recurrence or new surface expressions of plastic hydrocarbon
• successful revegetation
• integrity of fencing and other onsite institutional controls
• settlement
Most of these activities will be visual inspections by trained technicians or subject experts (e.g.,
wetland habitat biologist). Settlement will be measured by properly trained technicians under the
supervision of a surveyor or civil engineer licensed to practice in the state of California.
Settlement measurements will monitor movement in the various caps.
Inspections will look for resurfacing of plastic hydrocarbon expressions at the excavation
locations, especially if material at depths greater than 5 feet was left in place. Inspections will
also include other areas of the site overlying impacted soils and will look for new surface
expressions. In either case, resurfaced material will be removed using the standards and
protocols described in this plan. Further recurrence of a surface expression will prompt
evaluation and a focused remedial action.
The degree to which settlement is considered unacceptable will vary between caps. It is
expected that significant settlement may occur at the Reservoir 3 cap. The geosynthetics are
designed to accept strains of up to 2 feet. The caps to be built for Reservoirs 5 and 7 are
somewhat more sensitive to settlement, in that it could compromise the void space available for
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 66
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
groundwater to occupy. These caps can accept settlements up to 1 foot, measured at the former
reservoir centers before remedial activity would need to be considered.
The development area caps are not expected to experience significant settlement prior to
subsequent construction activities. It is anticipated, however, that any structures built on these
caps will include careful geotechnical engineering that incorporates the limits and constraints of
the caps.
Over time, the caps may require maintenance. It is expected that this will be minor in nature and
would include activities such as repairing drainages or discouraging bioturbation. It may also be
necessary to replace topsoil if erosion is greater than expected or vegetation is slow to establish
itself. Frequent maintenance, however, will be necessary for the storm water management
features in the development areas. These include the surface mulching, cleaning of desilting
basins, and periodic cleaning of the culverts located at the Northwest Operations Area.
More significant repairs would be made as needed, and would be based on observations made
during the periodic inspections. This would include regrading if low spots were to develop in
caps other than Reservoir 3.
While Chevron is committed to ensuring the long-term maintenance of this project, the
mechanism for implementation has not yet been determined. Chevron may utilize its own forces
or out-source the work to a third party with experience in habitat maintenance. The specifics of
implementing long-term site maintenance will be developed in concert with the project
stakeholders, including the lead municipalities, to ensure the long-term success of the project.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 67
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
10.0 SCHEDULE
A preliminary project schedule is shown in Figure 47. It provides a high-level view of the
anticipated timeline of the principal project components.
The schedule shows the Remedial Action Plan being submitted to SLO County as part of a
grading permit application on December 20, 2007. As discussed in the introduction, it is
understood that a CEQA-compliant environmental review will be necessary for this project and
that the lead agency will be the County. The CEQA process will be triggered by a request for a
discretionary approval from a governmental agency.
It is also understood that RWQCB approval of the Remedial Action Plan will be essential to any
other project approval. The project schedule anticipates slightly more than one year for this
process, but recognizes that time will also be necessary for the proposed land use changes and
potentially annexation.
Once the project is approved, remediation will begin. At present, it is anticipated that two years
will be necessary to complete all of the remedial actions. This nominally avoids work during the
rainy seasons. It is also understood that this schedule may be lengthened due to mitigation
measures stemming from the environmental analysis, or as a practical limitation of available
manpower and equipment resources. Nominally, construction is seen being completed near the
end of 2011.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 68
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
REFERENCES
American Public Works Association, Southern California Chapter, 1997, “Standard Plans for
Public Works Construction,” BNI Building News.
Associated Transportation Engineer, November 9, 2007, Chevron San Luis Obispo Remediation
Project, Traffic and Circulation Study.
Avocet Environmental, Inc., March 15, 2007, Feasibility Study, Former San Luis Obispo Tank
Farm, 276 Tank Farm Road, San Luis Obispo, California.
BBL Sciences, December 12, 2005, Risk Management Summary, Former Unocal San Luis
Obispo Tank Farm, San Luis Obispo, California (Version 2.0).
California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), Human and Ecological Risk
Division (HERD), May 15, 1998, HERD Ecological Risk Assessment Note Number 1,
http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/AsessingRisk/upload/econote1.pdf
California Department of Transportation, 2003, Caltrans Storm Water Quality Handbooks,
Project Planning and Design Guide, April 2003.
Cleath & Associates, 2002, Well Construction and Testing, Groundwater Exploration, San Luis
Obispo Tank Farm Property, San Luis Obispo, California, September 30, 2002.
City of San Luis Obispo, 2005, San Luis Obispo Airport Area Specific Plan, City of San Luis
Obispo Community Development Department, August 2005.
Duncan, J. Michael, and Bingzhi Yang, 2002, Retaining Wall Stability Workbook
Documentation, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University
England Geosystem, Inc., November 1, 2000, Seep Evaluation Trenching Report, Unocal San
Luis Obispo Tank Farm, San Luis Obispo County.
England Geosystem, Inc., April 17, 2001, Limited Site Assessment, Former SLOCO Recycling
Center, Former San Luis Obispo Tank Farm, San Luis Obispo County, California.
England Geosystem, Inc., October 15, 2001, Supplemental Site Characterization, Unocal San
Luis Obispo Tank Farm, 276 Tank Farm Road, San Luis Obispo, California.
England, Shahin & Associates, May 11, 1994, Supplemental Ground Water Investigation,
Unocal Tank Farm Facility, 276 Tank Farm Road, San Luis Obispo, California.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 69
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
Fifield, J.S., 2004, Designing for Effective Sediment and Erosion Control on Construction Sites,
Forester Communications, Inc., Santa Barbara.
Frederick R.H., and J.F. Miller, 1979, Short Duration Rainfall Frequency Relations for
California, Proceedings from the Third Conference on Hydrometrology, August 20-24,
1979, page 67.
Goldman, S.J., K. Jackson, and T.A. Bursztynysky, 1986, Erosion and Sediment Control
Handbook, McGraw-Hill, New York.
ICBO, 1994, Uniform Building Code Volume 2, International Conference of Building Officials.
Koerner, R.M., 1990, Designing with Geosynthetics, Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
Padre Associates, Inc., 2007a, Geotechnical Feasibility Study, Tank Farm Property Tank Farm
Remedial Action Project San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California,
October 23, 2007
Padre Associates, Inc., 2007b, Habitat Mitigation Plan, December 20, 2007.
Padre Associates, Inc., 2007c, Soil Management Plan, December 20, 2007.
Padre Associates, Inc., 2007d, Hydrocarbon Typing Methodology, December 20, 2007.
Padre Associates, Inc., 2007e, Project Execution Plan, December 20, 2007.
Prussing, G. F., L.C. Hampton, and C.F. Lienesch, 1926, San Luis Obispo and Stewart Tank
Farm Fires, April 7 to 11, 1926: Union Oil Company of California, Los Angeles,
California, Engineering Department Report Dated November 1, 1926.
Remediation Technology Panel (RTP), May 9, 2006, Remediation Technology Panel (RTP)
Assessment of Off-Site Migration and On-Site Surface Expressions of Hydrocarbons at
the San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Site, prepared by Dr. David Huntley, San Diego State
University; Dr. Paul Johnson, Arizona State University; and Dr. Kent Udell, University
of California at Berkeley. Ratified May 9, 2006.
Renard, K.G., 1997, Predicting Soil Erosion by Water: A Guide to Conservation Planning with
the Revised Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE), USDA Agricultural Handbook No. 703. U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC.
Schroeder, P.R., T.S. Dozier, P.A. Zappi, B.M. McEnroe, J.W. Sjostrom, and R.L. Peyton,
September 1994, The Hydrologic Evaluation of Landfill Performance (HELP) Model:
Engineering documentation for Version 3, EPA/600/9-94, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Remedial Action Plan
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Page 70
San Luis Obispo, California December 18, 2007
San Luis Obispo County (SLOCo), 2006, Private Sewage Disposal System, San Luis Obispo
County Department of Planning and Building Department, July 6, 2006
U.S. Department of Transportation, 2001, Urban Drainage Design Manual, Hydraulic Circular
No. 22, Second Edition, August 2001.
Viessman W., and G.L. Lewis, 1996, Introduction to Hydrology, Fourth Edition, Page183.
Tables
Table 1
Summary of Operable Units and Preferred Remedies
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm
AOC #1 - LNAPL/BTEX-Impacted Groundwater Natural Attenuation + ICs + LTM
AOC #2 - Surface Soils Capping + ICs + LTM
OU #2 Reservoirs 5 & 7 -Capping + ICs + LTM
OU #3 Reservoir 4 - Capping/Excavation + ICs + LTM
AOC #1 - North Marsh Area Excavation + ICs + LTM
AOC #2 - Reservoir 3 Capping + ICs + LTM
AOC #3 - PPSH Areas Excavation + ICs + LTM
OU #5 Site-Wide Groundwater -Natural Attenuation + ICs + LTM
Operable Unit Area of Concern Preferred Remedy
OU #1 Northwest Operations Area
OU #4 Remaining Site-Wide Surface and
Subsurface Soils
Table 2
List of Active Monitoring Wells and
Wells Proposed for Abandonment
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm
San Luis Obispo, California
Active
Monitoring
Well ID
Northing
(feet)
Easting
(feet)
Ground
Elevation
(feet)
Total Depth
(feet)
Proposed for
Abandonment
11Ea 2,286,403.33 5,766,242.72 120.12
11Eb 2,285,788.14 5,765,801.69 118.48
11Ec 2,285,291.33 5,765,508.27 116.83
11Ed 2,284,934.66 5,765,842.84 120.62
11La 2,284,552.74 5,766,755.02 114.77
MW-17 2,286,370.00 5,770,908.56 142.51 20.0 X
MW-18 2,286,168.77 5,770,163.88 142.48 21.5 X
MW-19 2,285,775.94 5,769,634.88 138.72 21.0
MW-26 2,285,032.40 5,766,234.06 117.84 21.0
MW-27 2,285,626.38 5,766,432.64 119.38 22.5
MW-29 2,284,254.39 5,768,615.77 132.06 23.0
MW-35 2,284,544.36 5,769,095.02 132.93 30.0
MW-38 2,284,771.55 5,767,041.29 113.77 30.0
MW-39 2,284,782.44 5,766,583.53 114.57 30.0
MW-40 2,286,140.64 5,766,491.67 117.04 30.0
MW-41 2,286,496.67 5,766,672.93 118.48 30.0
MW-43 2,284,257.98 5,768,184.71 130.61 25.0
MW-45 2,284,500.98 5,767,405.38 127.51 31.0
MW-46 2,284,071.49 5,767,817.56 131.14 30.0
MW-47 2,284,997.98 5,766,065.13 118.12 100.0
MW-48D 2,285,438.75 5,766,297.58 119.40 40.0
MW-48S 2,285,438.75 5,766,297.58 119.50 20.0
MW-49 2,286,660.91 5,766,079.56 122.55 40.0
MW-50 2,286,893.20 5,766,084.77 121.40 40.0
MW-53D 2,285,863.52 5,766,440.08 118.00 40.0
MW-53S 2,285,863.52 5,766,440.08 118.20 20.0
MW-56 2,286,751.61 5,766,088.21 120.67 41.5
SLOW-12 2,286,835.65 5,766,153.13 120.39 15.0 X
SLOW-17 2,286,602.27 5,766,284.93 120.46 28.0
SLOW-18 2,286,728.07 5,766,212.88 120.21 26.0 X
Table 3
Estimated Borrow Source Quantities
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm
San Luis Obispo, California
Area Topsoil
(cy)
Common
Earth
(cy)
Gravel
(cy)
Off-Site Cut
(cy)
Borrow Area - 1 9,000 27,200 0 0
Borrow Area - 2 20,700000
Borrow Area - 3 19,700 59,250 0 0
Borrow Area - Flower Mound 0 262,850 65,400 73,700
Reservoir 5 & 7 Berms 0 71,600 0 0
Total 49,400 420,900 65,400 73,700
Note: The Flower Mound borrow volume consists of on-site material only.
The grading will generate approximately 73,700 cy of material outside
of the property boundary.
Table 4
Estimated Remediation Construction Quantities
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm
San Luis Obispo, California
Grading
Area(1)
(sf)
Work Area(2)
(sf)
Geotextile
12oz.
(sf)
Geomembran
e
(sf)
Geogrid
(sf)
OU #1 - Northwest Operations Area 280,300 280,300 - - - - 53,400 - - - - 280,300 - - - -
OU #2 - Reservoir 5 340,239 453,190 15,300 12,500 - - 20,100 12,600 340,239 - - - -
OU #2 - Reservoir 7 295,939 349,815 11,000 24,500 - - 39,000 11,000 160,460 - - - -
OU #3 and Flower Mound Borrow Area 2,290,570 2,290,570 - - - - 262,800 - - - - 342,886 - - - -
OU #4 - North Marsh Area 580,800 678,988 75,300 53,800 - - - - 21,500 - - - - -
OU #4 - Reservoir 3 300,161 581,436 26,700 5,100 - - 10,500 11,100 871,002 290,334 290,334
OU #4 - Remaining PPSH 256,873 155,860(3). 28,700 19,200 - - - 9,500 - - -
Borrow Area 2 527,389 527,389 - - 57,900 - - - - - - - - -
Total 4,872,271 5,317,548 157,000 115,100 374,100 69,600 65,700 1,994,887 290,334 290,334
Notes: (1) The grading area is defined by the cut or fill boundary of any given excavation or cap.
(2) The work area, which is the entire area affected by remediation activities, includes all of the area within the identified clear and grub line.
(3) Some of the work area for Remaining PPSH has already been accounted for in the work areas corresponding to Reservoirs 5, 7, and 3.
Topsoil
(cy)
Geosynthetics
Area
Estimated Areas Estimated
Impacted
Soil Volumes
(cy)
Common Fill
(cy)
Structural
Fill
(cy)
Gravel
(cy)
Table 5
Summary of Habitat Impacts
Chevron San Luis Obispo Tank Farm
San Luis Obispo, California
Temporary
(acres)
Permanent
(acres)
Temporary
(acres)
Permanent
(acres)
Temporary
(acres)
Permanent
(acres)
Northwest Operations Area - - - - - - - - - - 0.26
Reservoir 5 1.24 3.59 1.17 0.04 0.28 0.03
Reservoir 7 0.57 3.65 0.55 0.35 0.13 0.15
OU-3 and Flower Mound Borrow Area - - 1.99 - - - - - - 3.35
North Marsh Area 11.92 - -- -- -0.76 - -
Reservoir 3 4.23 - -4.23 - -0.38 0.40
Areas to be Ripped 2.18 - -2.18 - -1.78 - -
Sitewide PPSH Areas 0.97 - -0.93 - -0.19 - -
Access Roads 0.1 - -0.04 - -0.22 - -
Staging Areas - -- -- -- -0.01 - -
Total 21.21 9.23 9.1 0.39 3.75 4.19
Borrow Area No. 1 0.77 - -0.67 - -0.37 - -
Borrow Area No. 2 - -0.98 - -0.67 0.20 1.38
Borrow Area No. 3 6.59 - -3.12 - -0.92 - -
Borrow Areas
Remediation Areas
Area
Wetland Impacts VPFS Impacts Rare Plant Impacts
Figures
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO BOUNDARY
TANK FARM ROADTANK FARM ROAD
HIG
U
E
R
A
S
T
R
E
E
T
HIG
U
E
R
A
S
T
R
E
E
T
HIG
U
E
R
A
S
T
R
E
E
T
SAN LUIS OBISPOSAN LUIS OBISPO
COUNTY AIRPORTCOUNTY AIRPORT
SAN LUIS OBISPO
COUNTY AIRPORT
REFERENCE:
7.5 MINUTE U.S.G.S. TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS OF
OF PISMO BEACH AND SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA
DATED: 1965
PHOTOREVISED: 1994
V:
\
1
2
1
2
_
P
a
d
r
e
-
C
h
e
v
r
o
n
_
S
L
O
T
F
\
1
2
1
2
.
0
0
1
_
R
e
m
e
d
i
a
l
_
D
e
s
i
g
n
\
0
0
3
-
1
2
1
2
.
0
0
1
_
S
i
t
e
_
L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
_
M
a
p
.
a
i
\
0
8
/
1
2
/
0
7
0 2,000 4,000 FEET
APPROXIMATE
SCALE
N
FIGURE 1
PREPARED FOR
CHEVRON EMC
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA
REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN
SAN LUIS OBISPO TANK FARM
SITE LOCATION MAP
EXPLANATION
TANK FARM SITE
TANK FARM ROAD
RESERVOIR 4
NORTHWEST
AREA
RESERVOIR
5
RESERVOIR
6
RESERVOIR
7
RESERVOIR
3
RESERVOIR
2
FORMER
RECYCLING
AREA
FIRE SCHOOL AREAEXISTING
BUILDINGS
TANK FARM ROAD
NORTH
MARSH
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY
REGIONAL AIRPORT
TRAILER
PARK
FLOWER MOUND
Tan
k
F
a
r
m
C
r
e
e
k
East
For
k
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
Ob
i
s
p
o
Cre
e
k
SAN
T
A
F
E
R
O
A
D
Ac
a
c
i
a
C
r
e
e
k
S:
\
G
I
S
\
1
2
1
2
_
C
h
e
v
r
o
n
_
P
a
d
r
e
_
S
L
O
T
F
\
0
0
1
_
R
e
m
e
d
i
a
l
_
D
e
s
i
g
n
\
A
r
c
M
a
p
D
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
\
0
1
9
_
1
2
1
2
.
0
0
1
_
S
i
t
e
_
M
a
p
.
m
x
d
\
1
2
/
1
8
/
0
7
FIGURE 2
SITE MAP
REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN
SAN LUIS OBISPO TANK FARM
PREPARED FOR
CHEVRON EMC
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA
EXPLANATION
PROJECT AREA BOUNDARY
APPROXIMATE
SCALE
FEET
0 500 1,000250
REFERENCE:
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH BY CENTRAL COAST AERIAL MAPPING.
DATED MARCH 2, 2007.
RESERVOIR 4
NORTHWEST
AREA
RESERVOIR
5
RESERVOIR
6
RESERVOIR
7
RESERVOIR
3
RESERVOIR
2
FORMER
RECYCLING
AREA
T A N K F A R M R O A D
NORTH
MARSH
OCCUPIED
OFFICE
STUCTURES
FORMER FIRE SCHOOL LOCATION
AERIAL ELECTRICAL SERVICE (PG&E)
AERIAL ELECTRICAL SERVICE (PG&E)
AND TELECOMM SERVICE (ATT)
AERIAL ELECTRICAL SERVICE (PG&E)
AND TELECOMM SERVICE (ATT)
UNDERGROUND 4" DIA. H.P.
GAS SERVICE (THE GAS CO.)
UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL SERVICE (PG&E)
SEWER LIFT
STATION
S:
\
G
I
S
\
1
2
1
2
_
C
h
e
v
r
o
n
_
P
a
d
r
e
_
S
L
O
T
F
\
0
0
1
_
R
e
m
e
d
i
a
l
_
D
e
s
i
g
n
\
A
r
c
M
a
p
D
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
\
0
0
5
_
1
2
1
2
.
0
0
1
_
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
_
U
t
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
_
E
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
s
.
m
x
d
\
1
2
/
1
7
/
0
7
FIGURE 4
EXISTING UTILITIES
AND EASEMENTS
REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN
SAN LUIS OBISPO TANK FARM
PREPARED FOR
CHEVRON EMC
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA
APPROXIMATE
SCALE
FEET
0 500 1,000250
EXPLANATION
PROJECT AREA BOUNDARY
OVERHEAD AT&T LINES
OVERHEAD PG&E LINES
PG&E UNDERGROUND LINE
NATURAL GAS LINE
PROPOSED SEWER ALIGNMENT
REFERENCE:
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH BY CENTRAL COAST AERIAL MAPPING.
DATED MARCH 2, 2007
RESERVOIR 4
NORTHWEST
AREA
RESERVOIR
5
RESERVOIR
6
RESERVOIR
7
RESERVOIR
3
RESERVOIR
2
FORMER
RECYCLING
AREA
T A N K F A R M R O A D
NORTH
MARSH
OCCUPIED
OFFICE
STUCTURES
FORMER FIRE SCHOOL LOCATION
S:
\
G
I
S
\
1
2
1
2
_
C
h
e
v
r
o
n
_
P
a
d
r
e
_
S
L
O
T
F
\
0
0
1
_
R
e
m
e
d
i
a
l
_
D
e
s
i
g
n
\
A
r
c
M
a
p
D
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
\
0
0
4
_
1
2
1
2
.
0
0
1
_
C
h
e
v
r
o
n
_
P
i
p
e
l
i
n
e
s
.
m
x
d
\
0
8
/
1
2
/
0
7
FIGURE 5
CHEVRON PIPELINES
REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN
SAN LUIS OBISPO TANK FARM
PREPARED FOR
CHEVRON EMC
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA
EXPLANATION
PROJECT AREA BOUNDARY
CRUDE OIL PIPELINES
OTHER UNDERGROUND PIPELINES
APPROXIMATE
SCALE
FEET
0 500 1,000250
REFERENCES:
1. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH BY CENTRAL COAST AERIAL MAPPING. DATED MARCH 2, 2007
2. GENERAL ARRANGEMENT SAN LUIS OBISPO TANK FARM, PRODUCERS PIPELINE,
UNION OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA, DRAWING No. UNKNOWN, DATED APRIL 3, 1950.
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT SAN LUIS OBISPO TANK FARM NORTHERN DIVISION
PIPELINE UNION OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA, DRAWING No. D2A180, DATED JULY 30, 1981.
SEE FIGURE 6
FOR DETAIL NOTE:
LEACH LINES AND DRAIN LINES ARE SHOWN AS CRUDE
OIL LINES ON THIS FIGURE FOR CLARITY. SIMILIARLY
FOAMITE LINES ARE SHOWN AS WATER LINES DUE TO
THEIR SIMILIAR FUNCTIONS DURING OPERATIONS.
SUMMARY OF PIPELINE LENGTHS
LENGTH (FEET)
25,125
258
914
38,263
9,177
TYPES
CRUDE OIL
LEACH LINE
(SANITATION)
DRAIN LINES
WATER LINE
FOAMITE
RESERVOIR 4
NORTHWEST
AREA
RESERVOIR
5
RESERVOIR
6
RESERVOIR
7
RESERVOIR
3
RESERVOIR
2
FORMER
RECYCLING
AREA
16.85 ACRES
19.13 ACRES
258.19 ACRES
30.65 ACRES
15.18 ACRES
S:
\
G
I
S
\
1
2
1
2
_
C
h
e
v
r
o
n
_
P
a
d
r
e
_
S
L
O
T
F
\
0
0
1
_
R
e
m
e
d
i
a
l
_
D
e
s
i
g
n
\
A
r
c
M
a
p
D
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
\
0
0
6
_
1
2
1
2
.
0
0
1
_
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
_
S
L
O
_
C
o
u
n
t
y
_
L
a
n
d
_
U
s
e
_
P
l
a
n
.
m
x
d
\
1
2
/
1
7
/
0
7
FIGURE 7
EXISTING SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY
LAND USE PLAN
REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN
SAN LUIS OBISPO TANK FARM
PREPARED FOR
CHEVRON EMC
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA
APPROXIMATE
SCALE
FEET
05001,000250
EXPLANATION
PROJECT AREA BOUNDARY
RESIDENTIAL
AGRICULTURAL
COMMERCIAL SERVICES
INDUSTRIAL
PUBLIC FACILITY
RECREATION
REFERENCE:
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH BY CENTRAL COAST AERIAL MAPPING.
DATED MARCH 2, 2007
RESERVOIR 4
NORTHWEST
AREA
RESERVOIR
5
RESERVOIR
6
RESERVOIR
7
RESERVOIR
3
RESERVOIR
2
FORMER
RECYCLING
AREA
295.90 ACRES
7.8 ACRES
2.3
ACRES13.6 ACRES
COLLECTOR ROAD
UN
O
C
A
L
C
O
L
L
E
C
T
O
R
R
O
A
D
S
A
N
T
A
F
E
R
O
A
D
(
E
X
T
E
N
S
I
O
N
)
18.2 ACRES
2.2 ACRES
REFERENCE: AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH BY CENTRAL COAST AERIAL MAPPING. DATED MARCH 2, 2007.
SOURCE: AIRPORT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, SAN LUIS OBISPO, JANUARY 2005
EXPLANATION
PROJECT AREA BOUNDARY
RESIDENTIAL
BUSINESS PARK
SERVICE & MANUFACTURING
PUBLIC
OPEN SPACE
APPROXIMATE
SCALE
FEET
05001,000250
S:
\
G
I
S
\
1
2
1
2
_
C
h
e
v
r
o
n
_
P
a
d
r
e
_
S
L
O
T
F
\
0
0
1
_
R
e
m
e
d
i
a
l
_
D
e
s
i
g
n
\
A
r
c
M
a
p
D
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
\
0
0
7
_
1
2
1
2
.
0
0
1
_
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
_
C
i
t
y
_
S
L
O
_
L
a
n
d
_
U
s
e
_
P
l
a
n
.
m
x
d
\
1
2
/
1
7
/
0
7
FIGURE 8
CITY OF
SAN LUIS OBISPO
AASP LAND USE PLAN
REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN
SAN LUIS OBISPO TANK FARM
PREPARED FOR
CHEVRON EMC
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA
PROPOSED ROAD
RESERVOIR 4
NORTHWEST
AREA
RESERVOIR
5
RESERVOIR
6
RESERVOIR
7
RESERVOIR
3
RESERVOIR
2
FORMER
RECYCLING
AREA
S:
\
G
I
S
\
1
2
1
2
_
C
h
e
v
r
o
n
_
P
a
d
r
e
_
S
L
O
T
F
\
0
0
1
_
R
e
m
e
d
i
a
l
_
D
e
s
i
g
n
\
A
r
c
M
a
p
D
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
\
0
0
8
_
1
2
1
2
.
0
0
1
_
C
o
n
s
t
r
a
i
n
t
s
_
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
_
S
L
O
_
L
a
n
d
_
U
s
e
.
m
x
d
\
0
8
/
1
3
/
0
7
FIGURE 9
CONSTRAINTS TO THE
PROPOSED CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
LAND USE PLAN
REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN
SAN LUIS OBISPO TANK FARM
PREPARED FOR
CHEVRON EMC
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA
REFERENCE:
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH BY CENTRAL COAST AERIAL MAPPING. DATED MARCH 2, 2007.
SOURCE: AIRPORT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, SAN LUIS OBISPO. DATED: JANUARY 2005
APPROXIMATE
SCALE
FEET
0 500 1,000250
EXPLANATION
RESIDENTIAL
BUSINESS PARK
SERVICE & MANUFACTURING
PUBLIC
OPEN SPACE
LAND USE
RUNWAY ADDITION
RUNWAY PROTECTION
S-1a
S-1b
S-1c
100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN
AVIATION SAFETY ZONES
PROJECT AREA BOUNDARY
5 ACRES
274 ACRES
15 ACRES
5 ACRES 5 ACRES
4 ACRES
21 ACRES
1 ACRE
2 ACRES
8 ACRES
COLLECTOR ROAD
S
A
N
T
A
F
E
R
O
A
D
(
E
X
T
E
N
S
I
O
N
)
S:
\
G
I
S
\
1
2
1
2
_
C
h
e
v
r
o
n
_
P
a
d
r
e
_
S
L
O
T
F
\
0
0
1
_
R
e
m
e
d
i
a
l
_
D
e
s
i
g
n
\
A
r
c
M
a
p
D
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
\
0
2
1
_
1
2
1
2
.
0
0
1
_
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
_
L
a
n
d
_
U
s
e
.
m
x
d
\
1
2
/
1
8
/
0
7
FIGURE 10
PROPOSED LAND USE CONCEPT
REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN
SAN LUIS OBISPO TANK FARM
PREPARED FOR
CHEVRON EMC
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA
REFERENCE:
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH BY CENTRAL COAST AERIAL MAPPING.
DATED MARCH 2, 2007.
EXPLANATION
PROJECT AREA BOUNDARY
BUSINESS PARK
SERVICE & MANUFACTURING
RECREATION
OPEN SPACE
APPROXIMATE
SCALE
FEET
05001,000250
V:
\
1
2
1
2
_
P
a
d
r
e
-
C
h
e
v
r
o
n
_
S
L
O
T
F
\
1
2
1
2
.
0
0
1
_
R
e
m
e
d
i
a
l
_
D
e
s
i
g
n
\
0
2
9
_
1
2
1
2
.
0
0
1
_
H
y
d
r
o
l
o
g
y
_
M
a
p
.
a
i
\
0
8
/
1
3
/
0
7
Small Tributary Creek
SITE
DESIGN POINT A
DESIGN POINT B
2-30” DIAMETER2-30” DIAMETER
CMP CULVERTSCMP CULVERTS
B
5,476
Acres
A
485
Acres
EXPLANATION
FLOW PATH
HYDROLOGIC BOUNDARY
CLOSED CATCHMENTS
SITE
Ac
a
c
i
a
C
r
e
e
k
2-30” DIAMETER
CMP CULVERTS
BOX CULVERTSBOX CULVERTSBOX CULVERTS
2-30” DIAMETER2-30” DIAMETER
CMP CULVERTSCMP CULVERTS
2-30” DIAMETER
CMP CULVERTS
CLOSED CATCHMENTSCLOSED CATCHMENTS
APPROXIMATELY 150 Ac OFAPPROXIMATELY 150 Ac OF
TANK FARM DISCHARGE OFFSITETANK FARM DISCHARGE OFFSITE
APPROXIMATELY 150 Ac OF
TANK FARM DISCHARGE OFFSITE
Orc
u
t
t
Creek
Or
c
u
t
t Creek
East F
o
r
k
S
a
n Lu i s O b i s p o Creek
Tank Far m C r e e k
0 2,000 4,000 FEET
APPROXIMATE
SCALE
N
FIGURE 11
PREPARED FOR
CHEVRON EMC
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA
REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN
SAN LUIS OBISPO TANK FARM
HYDROLOGY MAP
REFERENCE:REFERENCE:
7.5 MINUTE U.S.G.S. TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS OF7.5 MINUTE U.S.G.S. TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS OF
ARROYO GRANDE, LOPEZ MOUNTAIN, PISMO BEACH,ARROYO GRANDE, LOPEZ MOUNTAIN, PISMO BEACH,
AND SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA.AND SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA.
REFERENCE:
7.5 MINUTE U.S.G.S. TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS OF
ARROYO GRANDE, LOPEZ MOUNTAIN, PISMO BEACH,
AND SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA.
RESERVOIR 4
NORTHWEST
AREA
RESERVOIR
5
RESERVOIR
6
RESERVOIR
7
RESERVOIR
3
RESERVOIR
2
FORMER
RECYCLING
AREA
S:
\
G
I
S
\
1
2
1
2
_
C
h
e
v
r
o
n
_
P
a
d
r
e
_
S
L
O
T
F
\
0
0
1
_
R
e
m
e
d
i
a
l
_
D
e
s
i
g
n
\
A
r
c
M
a
p
D
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
\
0
1
3
_
1
2
1
2
.
0
0
1
_
W
e
t
l
a
n
d
s
_
F
a
i
r
y
_
S
h
r
i
m
p
_
R
a
r
e
_
P
l
a
n
t
.
m
x
d
\
1
2
/
1
7
/
0
7
FIGURE 12
WETLANDS, FAIRY SHRIMP, AND
RARE PLANT HABITATS
REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN
SAN LUIS OBISPO TANK FARM
PREPARED FOR
CHEVRON EMC
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA
0 500 1,000250
Feet
Approximate
Scale
NOTE:
CRLF = CALIFORNIA RED LEGGED FROG
SOURCE: BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MAPPING CONDUCTED BY
RINCON CONSULTANTS INC., 2003. FIELD STUDIES PERFORMED
MAY THROUGH SEPTEMBER 2003.
REFERENCE: AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH BY CENTRAL COAST AERIAL MAPPING.
DATED MARCH 2, 2007
EXPLANATION
PROJECT AREA BOUNDARY
EPHEMERAL WATER
DELINEATED WETLAND
PROTECTED FAIRY SHRIMP NOT PRESENT
PROTECTED FAIRY SHRIMP PRESENT
PROTECTED FAIRY SHRIMP
NOT PRESENT (75.95 acres)
PROTECTED FAIRY SHRIMP
PRESENT (32.125 acres)
SMALL AREAS WITH LESS THAN 100 INDIVIDUALS
LARGE AREAS WITH GREATER THAN
OR LESS THAN 1000 INDIVIDUALS
HOOVER'S BUTTON CELERY
CONGDON'S TARPLANT
PURPLE NEEDLEGRASS
SAN LUIS OBISPO MORNING GLORY
CONGDON'S TARPLANT
HOOVER'S BUTTON CELERY
SAN LUIS OBISPO MORNING GLORY
PURPLE NEEDLEGRASS
!(
!(
!(
RESERVOIR 4
NORTHWEST
AREA
RESERVOIR
5
RESERVOIR
6
RESERVOIR
7
RESERVOIR
3
RESERVOIR
2
FORMER
RECYCLING
AREA
BETITA
PROPERTY
801 mg/kg
1,151 mg/kg
488 mg/kg
WETLANDS IMPACTED BY
ASPHALTIC CRUST
T-8-0.5
T-2-0.5
T-17-0.5
S:
\
G
I
S
\
1
2
1
2
_
C
h
e
v
r
o
n
_
P
a
d
r
e
_
S
L
O
T
F
\
0
0
1
_
R
e
m
e
d
i
a
l
_
D
e
s
i
g
n
\
A
r
c
M
a
p
D
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s
\
0
1
4
_
1
2
1
2
.
0
0
1
_
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
_
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
_
I
m
p
a
c
t
s
.
m
x
d
\
1
2
/
1
7
/
0
7
FIGURE 13
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN
SAN LUIS OBISPO TANK FARM
PREPARED FOR
CHEVRON EMC
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA
0 500 1,000250
Feet
Approximate
Scale
EXPLANATION
TPH IN SOIL > 100 mg/kg
EXTENT OF BTEX
LIQUID CRUDE OIL. CAPABLE OF GENERATING
"FREE" DROPLETS OF OIL. (EVALUATED FOR
REMEDIATION IN FEASIBILITY STUDY)
PLIABLE, HIGHLY WEATHERED CRUDE OIL.
EVIDENCE OF RECENT PLASTIC FLOW.
(EVALUATED FOR REMEDIATION IN
FEASIBILITY STUDY)
SOLID, FORMER CRUDE OIL
PLIABLE, HIGHLY WEATHERED CRUDE OIL.
NO EVIDENCE OF PLASTIC FLOW
LNAPL OCCURANCE
PROJECT AREA BOUNDARY
TPH IN SOIL > 1,000 mg/kg
!(SOIL SAMPLE SHOWING LEAD
CONCENTRATION IN mg/kg
REFERENCE: AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH BY CENTRAL COAST AERIAL MAPPING.
DATED MARCH 2, 2007
AREA OF ASENIC IMPACT
(EVALUATED FOR REMEDIATION
IN THE FEASIBILITY STUDY)