HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 5954 RESOLUTION NO. 5954
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING SUPPLEMENTAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 88-1 (SEIR 88-1 ) AND
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 86-1 (EIR 86-1) FOR
THE SPRINGFIELD OIL RECOVERY PROJECT LOCATED ON TWO
BLOCKS ON OPPOSITE CORNERS, SOUTHEAST AND NORTHWEST,
AT THE INTERSECTION OF SPRINGFIELD AVENUE AND
CALIFORNIA STREET AND INCLUDING 160 ACRES OF SCATTERED
WELL OPERATIONS BOUNDED GENERALLY BY FLORIDA STREET ON
THE EAST AND SEVENTEENTH STREET ON THE WEST, BETWEEN
YORKTOWN AVENUE ON THE NORTH AND MEMPHIS AVENUE ON THE
SOUTH
I
WHEREAS, the Springfield Oil Recovery Project 's related
entitlements and Supplemental Environmental Impact Report
No. 88-1 have been prepared; and
Environmental Impact Report No. 86-1 was adopted and
certified by the Planning Commission on September 3, 1986, and
City Council on October 20, 1986; and
The City of Huntington Beach was the lead agency in the
preparation of the Supplemental and original Environmental
Impact Reports; and
All persons and agencies wishing to respond to notice duly
given have been heard by the Planning Commission either through
written notice or during a public hearing on October 18 , 1988,
and such responses and comments as were made were duly noted and
responded to.
All persons and agencies wishing to respond to notice duly
given have been heard by the City Council either through written
notice or during a public hearing on November 21, 1988, and such
responses and comments as were made were duly noted and
responded to.
-1-
5954
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Huntington Beach as follows:
SECTION 1 . The City Council does hereby find that
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report No. 88-1 and
Environmental Impact Report No. 86-1 have been completed in
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and all
state and local guidelines therefore.
SECTION 2 . The City Council has considered all
significant effects detailed in Supplemental Environmental
Impact Report No. 88-1 and Environmental Impact Report No. 86-1,
together with existing and proposed measures to mitigate such
significant effects (Exhibit A) .
SECTION 3 . The City Council further finds that through
the implementation of the aforementioned mitigation measures,
the majority of the potentially adverse impacts associated with
the Springfield Oil Recovery project can be eliminated or
reduced to a level of insignificance.
SECTION 4. The City Council finds that the benefits
accruing to the city, both economically and socially, by virtue
of the consolidation of existing oil producing operations to a
single site, abandonment to modern standards of many existing
wells and replacement to modern standards of existing tanks
override the unmitigatable effects detailed in Supplemental
Environmental Impact Report No. 88-1 and Environmental Impact
Report No. 86-1 and the attached statement of overriding
considerations (Exhibit B) .
-2- 5954
SECTION 5 . The City Council of the City of Huntington
Beach does hereby adopt and certify as adequate Supplemental
Environmental Impact Report No. 88-1 and adopt and recertify as
adequate Environmental Impact Report No. 86-1 .
PASSED AND- ADOPTED by Y the City Council of the City of
Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the 21st
day of November , 1988 .
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
14
City Clerk �V City Attorney
REVIEWED AND APPROVED: INITIATED AND APPROVED:
City Administrator Acting D rector, Community
Development
5954
-3-
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FINAL FINDINGS AND FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FOR THE ANGUS PETROLEUM CORPORATION
HUNTINGTON BEACH, GALIFORNIA
OIL RECOVERY PROJECT
(ZONE CHANGE 88-11 AND USE PERMIT 88-251
EIR 86-1 : SCH NO, 66040917
AS ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL
ON NOVEMBER 21 . 1988
1 . FINDINGS REGARDING SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS THAT 3
CANNOT FEASIBLY BE MITIGATED TO A LEVEL OF
INSIGNIFICANCE
1 . 1 Aesthetics 3
1 . 2 Risk of Upset/Health and Safety 4
1 . 3 Seismic Impacts 5
2 . POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH ARE 8
NOT SIGNIFICANT OR WHICH CAN BE MITIGATED TO
A LEVEL OF INSIGNIFICANCE
2 . 1 Topography, Soils and Geology 8
2 . 2 Hydrology, Drainage and Water Quality 10
2 . 3 Biological Resources 13
2 . 4 Archaelogical/Paleontological Resources 13
2 . 5 Land Use , Zoning and General Plan 14
2 . 6 Light and Glare 22
2 . 7 Traffic and Circulation 22
2 . 8 Air Quality and Odors 25
2 . 9 Noise 27
2 . 10 Risk of Upset/Health and Safety 29
2 . 11 Public Services and Utilities 33
2 . 12 Energy Conservation 37
2 . 13 Growth Inducing Impacts 37
5954
2 . 14 Cumulative Impacts 38
3 . FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES 42
3 . 1 No Project Alternative 42
3 . 2 Reduced Intensity Alternative 43
3 . 3 More Intense Drilling Program 44
3 . 4 Abandonment of All Oil Production Sites 45
3 . 5 Alternative Sites : Parcel 1 46
3 . 6 Parcel 1 Development Only 47
3 . 7 Alternative Sites : Parcel 2 48
3 . 8 Alternative Sites : Parcel 3 49
3 . 9 Alternative Sites : Parcel 4 50
3 . 10 Medium Density Residential Project 51
4. ADDITIONAL FINDINGS 54
4. 1 Findings Relating to Project 54
Consistency With the Housing Element:
To Be Added to Section 2 . 5 . 2 . of the
CEQA Findings
4. 2 Additional Findings Relating to 54
Alternatives Proposed by the Chambers
Group , Inc . on Behalf of the Concerned
Citizens of Huntington Beach
i i . 5954
FINDINGS AND FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FOR THE ANGUS PETROLEUM CORPORATION
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA
OIL RECOVERY PROJECT
(ZONE CHANGE 88-11 AND USE PERMIT 88-25)
FIR 86-1: SCH NO, 06040917
The State Guidelines ("Guidelines" ) promulgated
pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act
("CEQA") provide as follows :
(a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a
project for which an EIR has been completed which
identifies one or more significant environmental
effects of the project unless the public agency
makes one or more written findings for each of
those significant effects, accompanied by a brief
explanation of the rationale for each finding .
The possible findings are:
(1) Changes or alterations have been required
in, or incorporated into, the project which
avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effects as
identified in the final EIR.
[This finding shall be referred to as
"finding (1) . "]
(2) Such changes or alterations are within the
responsibility and jurisdiction of another
public agency and not the agency making the
finding . Such changes have been adopted by
such other agency or can and should be
adopted by such other agency.
[This finding shall be referred to a
"finding (2) . "]
(3) Specific economic, social, or other
considerations make infeasible the
mitigation measures or project alternatives
identified in the final EIR. (Guidelines
Section 15091. )
Exhibit A 5954
[This finding shall be referred to as
"finding 3) . "]
The Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") for the
oil recovery project ("Project" ) proposed by Angus
Petroleum Corporation ("Project Applicant" ) identifies
significant effects on the environment which may occur as
a result of the Project . Section 1 of this Attachment
identifies the significant environmental effects of the
Project which cannot feasibly be mitigated to a level of
significance. Section 2 sets forth potential
environmental effects of the Project which are not
significant because of the design of the Project or which
can feasibly be mitigated to a level of insignificance .
Section 3 summarizes the alternatives discussed in the
EIR.
The findings set forth in each section are
supported by facts established in the administrative
record of the Project .
2 .
5954
1. FINDINGS REGARDING SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS THAT CANNOT
FEASIBLY BE MITIGATED TO A LEVEL OF INSIGNIFICANCE.
The City has determined that EIR mitigation
measures and proposals included as part of the Project
will result in a substantial mitigation of the following
effects , but that these effects cannot feasibly be
mitigated to a level of insignificance.
1. 1 AESTHETICS
1 . 1 . 1 Significant Effect: The neighborhood
surrounding the Project Site consists of medium density
residential uses, predominantly in small (8-10 unit)
developments and single family residences . Views of the
Project Site from adjacent residences will consist of the
screening block wall and landscaping. During the initial
drilling phases, drill rigs will be visible. During the
production and injection phases , temporary drill rigs will
be used periodically for maintenance and will be visible
from adjacent residents . Tanks will be visible above the
wall .
Findings : The City hereby makes findings (1) and
(3) •
Facts in Support of Findings : The following
measures will result in a substantial reduction of the
adverse impacts of the identified significant effect.
(a) The Project shall comply with the landscaping
requirements of Chapter 15 . 22 of the Huntington Beach
Ordinance Code.
(b) All trees shall be a minimum of 24-inch, boa
type, and spaced no more than 20 feet on center.
(c) Landscaping and the construction of masonry walls
and street improvements shall occur concurrent with
excavation and construction.
(d) Well service rigs shall be operated no more than
48 days per year , and no more than 4 well service rigs may
be on the site at any one time. These service rigs shall
not exceed 120 feet in height.
(e) Drilling derricks shall not exceed 165 feet in
height . Upon completion of initial drilling of injection
and producer wells , all drilling rigs shall be removed
from the site.
3 .
5954
(f) The enclosure of both parcels of the Project Site
will provide the most direct mitigation of visual
impacts . Surrounding the drill site with an acoustical
wall will provide a more aesthetic viewshed.
(g) During the initial drilling phases, when drill
rigs are visible, the drill site shall be surrounded by an
acoustical wall and portions of the rig will be
acoustically wrapped.
(h) The Facts in Support of Finding 2. 6, addressing
light and glare, hereby are incorporated by reference.
(i) The Project requires the drilling of 30 to 45
wells from the drill site. These wells shall be located
within the fenced and landscaped drill site and the wells
shall be concealed from view.
(j ) The topography of the Facility Site will be
substantially lowered to reduce the height of the storage
tanks .
(k) These mitigation measures included -within the
Project Design and imposed by the Use Permit will
substantially reduce the aesthetic impacts of the
Project . Nonetheless, the Project will result in a change
in the views from adjacent residences , because of the
addition of a 30-foot sound barrier wall and a 165-foot
drilling derrick. This is an unavoidable adverse impact
of the Project .
1.2 RISK OF UPSEWHEALTH AND SAFETY
1. 2 . 1 Significant Effect : Under a worst case scenario,
assuming that all oil tanks are full and the tanks are set
out in an open field without surrounding perimeter walls,
there is a "rare" (defined in the standard methodology for
risk assessment as 1: 10, 000 to 1 :1, 000,000) chance that an
oil tank fire could result in radiant heat affecting the
area outside of the immediate Project Site.
Findings : The City hereby makes findings (1) and
(3) •
Facts in Support of Findings : The following
measures will result in the substantial reduction of the
adverse impacts of the identified significant effect:
(a) Oil handling facilities will be lowered to six
feet below the level of the surrounding streets. This
measure, coupled with the eight-foot perimeter wall, will
4 .
5954
very significantly reduce any "radiant heat hazard
footprint," which is calculated using no containment at
all .
(b) Oil will be shipped on a continuous basis .
Therefore, only a minimal amount of oil will be required
to be held in the tanks . Only three on-site crude oil
tanks are permitted, and these tanks shall never be
completely full at once. The small amount of oil on site
will reduce the possibility of oil-related fires .
(c) Prior to the issuance of any building permit, a
preliminary emergency action plan (EAP) shall be prepared
and submitted. A completed EAP, based on as-built plans ,
shall be completed and submitted prior to the start of oil
production operations. The EAP shall include employee
training and periodic practice, how spillage onto streets
from the Project site would be handled, the safe handling
of any chemicals and/or hazardous materials, and shall
require full knowledge of all systems and emergency
equipment. A copy shall be on file at the Fire Department
and updated every five years . In addition, a Spill
Prevention and Control and Countermeasures (SPCC) plan in
compliance with City requirements for handling of spills ,
etc. , not otherwise covered in the EAP shall be completed
and filed with the City prior to the start of oil
production operations .
(d) The Facts in Support of Finding 2 . 11. 2, relating
to fire prevention/protection, hereby are incorporated by
reference.
(e) Although the likelihood of a fire with a radiant
heat footprint large enough to affect residences is
extremely low, if it did occur, the impacts would be
significant . Therefore, it is considered a significant
unavoidable impact.
1. 3 SEISMIC IMPACTS
1. 3 . 1 Significant Effect : If an earthquake of M 8 . O or
greater on the Richter Scale occurs with its epicenter in
the Project Area, structures in the Project Area ,
including tanks and walls of the Project facilities , would
be damaged.
Findings : The City hereby makes findings (1) and
(3) •
i
5.
5954
Facts in Support of Findings : The following
measures will result in a substantial reduction of the
adverse impacts of the identified significant effect .
(a) Project engineering will prevent the well cellars
from being damaged, even in an M 8 earthquake.
(b) Oil will be shipped on a continuous basis, so
that all of the tanks in the oil storage area will never
be full at the same time. Only three on-site crude oil
tanks are permitted and these tanks shall never be
completely full at once. The oil storage area is located
six feet below grade, and the area is surrounded by
reinforced concrete retaining walls . The volume of this
depressed retaining basin exceeds the Uniform Fire Code,
and Division of Oil and Gas requirements , by a factor of
2 . Even if the retaining wall is ruptured, the retaining
area would hold oil released by any tanks which burst or
overturn.
(c) The Facility would shut down under a "fail-safe"
system, as soon as the power went off during a major
earthquake. No emergency situations would be created
requiring immediate attention by, or an augmentation of,
public safety personnel .
(d) Engineering soils analysis and fault line
investigations were performed to determine if near surface
faulting is present within the Drill Facility Site Areas .
The resultant study concluded that no faults or related
fracture zones were observed in the trench exposures .
Accordingly, an active fault line is not known to be
present within the trench limits. The fault line
investigation report show that no faults were found.
(e) The Project will eliminate 22 existing wells and
7 tank batterires . None of the batteries has more than
rudimentary fire-fighting equipment, and the wells all
have some leaks around the stuffing boxes . Both the
existing wells and tank batteries are located in close
proximity to residences; unlike the Project, they are not
completely surrounded by block walls, with wells located
underground in trench cellars . The Project ' s design will
ensure that oil leaks resulting from a major earthquake
would not escape beyond the confines of the Project, while
existing wells and tank batteries create numerous risks of
leakage and other potential hazards in the event of a
major earthquake. In addition, all existing wells are
connected to their tank batteries by means of buried
pipelines. Many of these lines are old, and their exact
locations are not known. Approximately 18, 000 feet of
6 . 5954
pipeline will be abandoned by the Project, which will
replace the pipeline with pipelines that are in conduits
under the corner of Springfield Avenue and Huntington
Street or hung on the cellar walls, where leaks can be
found and repaired quickly. This will result in a
significant reduction in the impacts of ruptures and leaks
in the event of a major earthquake.
(f) Although the above measures would prevent the
creation of an emergency situation during an earthquake of
M 8 or greater, no known engineering or other mitigation
measures could avoid damage to - the Facility if such a
major earthquake occurred. In conjunction with damage
that would occur to the surrounding area, this is a
significant unavoidable impact of the Project .
7.
555E
2. POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH ARE NOT
SIGNIFICANT OR WHICH CAN BE MITIGATED TO A LEVEL OF
INSIGNIFICANCE
The City has determined that the following effects will
not be significant, for the reasons stated below.
2 . 1 TOPOQRAPHY, SOILS AND GEOLOGY
2 . 1. 1 Potential Effect : Development of the Project
will alter the existing topography of the Drill Site and
Facility Site. The existing surface of the ground on the
Drill Site will be graded and recompacted to substantially
follow the contours of the abutting streets . Excavation to
a depth of approximately 12 feet will be required to
permit construction of three subsurface well cellars . The
topography of the Facility Site will be lowered
approximately two feet below the street elevations on the
south and west and six feet below the street elevations on
the northeast corner, in order to reduce the height of the
storage tanks .
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findings :
(a) The Project Site currently consists of two
parcels , which are vacant except for existing oil
production facilities and well pumps . The vacant areas of
the parcels are covered with filler piles from prior
construction activity. Because the existing topography of
the Project Site is disturbed and covered with piles of
dirt, the effects of grading are not significant .
(b) The surface can be restored at the end of the
Project ' s life span. Prior to termination of the oil
operation, a plan shall be submitted for the review and
approval of the Fire Department and Development Services
Department, showing how the Site will be abandoned and
restored to its closest natural state.
(c) All loose upper soils within the foundation areas
for process equipment on the Facility Site shall be
removed and replaced as compacted fill . Foundation areas
for the well cellars on the Drill Sites shall be
overexcavated a minimum of two feet vertically and three
feet horizontally and replaced by compacted fill .
Superficial fills near the cellars should be removed and
replaced as compacted fill .
8.
5954
2 . 1.2 potential Effect : Land surface subsidence has
occurred in the Huntington Beach area, with a major
subsidence area roughly correlating with the limits of the
Huntington Beach Oil Field. According to the last
leveling survey for the Huntington Beach Pump Station
located near the intersection of Adams Avenue and Beach
Boulevard, the subsidence in the Project Area is -0. 1 to
-0 . 2 feet for the period from 1976 through 1986 . The
current average rate of subsidence per year is
approximately -0. 02 feet.
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findings :
(a) Several reports indicate that the rate of
subsidence has decreased since water flooding of oil
producing zones was initiated in 1959 . The Division of
Oil and Gas (1973) reports that the maximum recorded rate
of subsidence was 0 . 15 feet per year from 1955 to 1968,
but decreased to 0 . 05 feet per year from 1968 to 1972 .
(b) Experience in other oil fields , such as
_ Wilmington, shows that repressurization of the oil
producing zones through water injection has caused reduced
rates of subsidence and often has completely halted
subsidence and even caused from rebound.
(c) Based on the studies by the Division of Oil and
Gas and experience in Wilmington, cited above, the
implementation of the Project will not increase
subsidence, and should reduce the rate of subsidence, in
the Project Area .
2 . 1 .3 Potential Effect : In three cases, oil field
operations or other fluid injection activities have been
documented as relating to induced seismic movements . In
the Wilmington Field, California, several small ,
subsidence-induced earthquakes occurred . In the U.S.
Rocky Mountain Arsenal, Colorado, a series of earthquakes
was caused by fluid emplacement in a liquid waste disposal
project . In an oil reservoir at Rangely Field, Colorado,
water injection operations resulted in induced seismic
movements .
Findings: The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in SupQort of Findings :
(a) None of the above situations is likely to occur
at the proposed site. The Project is a water injection
9 .
5954
project, which will not cause subsidence. The Facts in
Support of Finding 2 . 1 .2 hereby are incorporated by
reference.
(b) The Rocky Mountain Arsenal and Rangely
earthquakes in Colorado occurred in hard brittle rock.
This rock is geologically different from the young
sediments of the Los Angeles basin. Therefore, this data
does not apply to the Project .
(c) Micro-earthquake monitoring systems, designed to
accurately locate small, shallow earthquakes that might be
generated by oil operations , have been in operation about
11 years in the vicinity of Inglewood and Wilmington oil
fields . No earthquakes have been located in either field
or in nearby fields , that would indicate oil operations to
be a causative factor .
2 . 2 HYDROLOGY. DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY
2. 2. 1 Potential Effect : Stormwater runoff will be
increased because the existing permeable land surface will
be decreased by approximately three acres of land,
resulting from the paving of the Project Site with
asphalt.
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findings :
(a) The increase in storm water from paving the
Project Site will not have negative impacts on the
existing storm drain system because the Project has been
designed to utilize all on-site storm water runoff for
water injection purposes .
(b) The construction of new half-section streets with
concrete curb and gutter will alleviate the present water
ponding problems along the City right-of-way.
(c) Surface drainage, including storm water, on the
Drill Site shall be diverted to catch basins, then by
gravity flow via underground pipeline across the street to
the Facility Site. The water will be collected in sand
interceptor No. 1 and then pumped into the water
processing area, filtered and mixed with the production
brine and injected into the oil bearing zone as part of
the water flood. The interior of the Facility Site will
be partially paved with asphalt over a rock base and the
remaining portion will be paved with crushed rock. The
10 .
5954
majority of stormwater and surface drainage will
infiltrate into the soil through the crushed rock. Any
remaining stormwater and surface drainage will be
collected in catch basins, diverted to the sand
interceptors and then follow the same process as water
from the Drill Site.
(d) In the event of a power failure during a 100-year
storm, an emergency valve could be opened on the Facility
Site and all stormwater could be directed via gravity flow
pipeline to Well Cellars A and B. When the cellars are
partially filled, water will flow to a three-stage
clarifier, then, if necessary, via pipeline to the storm
drain in Delaware Street. Cellars A and B have been
specifically engineered to perform as additional
clarifiers for this emergency use.
2 . 2 .2 Potential Effect : The original EIR stated that
produced water or make-up water would be released to the
sanitary sewer system. This is no longer the case.
Injection water will not release to the sanitary sewer
system.
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findings :
(a) All water used for injection into the underground
oil reservoirs will be obtained from the following
sources : storm water runoff; produced water from the
production wells ; and make-up brine water (water to
initially fill the underground reservoirs) purchased from
Chevron U.S.A. At present Chevron U.S.A. is treating and
releasing the make-up brine water into the sanitary sewer
system. Use of the brine water for injection purposes
will initially reduce the existing load on the sanitary
sewer system by approximately 30, 000 barrels per day.
(b) All brine produced with the oil will normally be
cleaned by circulation through sand filters and settling
tanks and will then be reinjected into the formations .
(c) In the event of a complete electrical failure,
all production wells will go down, and there will be no
produced water. The flow of make-up water will be stopped
at the source. The water filtration system will include
reserve capacity to allow for continued operation during
equipment maintenance or repair. If a longer time period
is needed to make repairs or to replace equipment, make-up
water will be reduced and/or a partial shutdown of high
water-cut production wells will be implemented.
11. 5954
2 .2 .3 Potential Effect: The drilling of the wells for
the Project will involve penetrating both shallow and deep
groundwater acquifers to gain access to oil-bearing layers
below, resulting in potential adverse effects on
groundwater .
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Finding : The following
measures will mitigate the identified impact to a level of
insignificance.
(a) The water found in the shallow and deep
groundwater acquifers is, for the most part, brackish.
Potable water has been extracted from acquifers in the
Huntington Beach area, although usually only in areas east
of the Newport-Inglewood Fault . The Project Site is west
of the fault and is , in fact , located between two branches
of the fault . The injection of water and extraction of
oil in the oil-bearing strata will not have a significant
effect on the quality of groundwater because the water
currently is not usable for either domestic or industrial
uses .
(b) State Division of Oil and Gas Regulations require
that the base of all fresh water sands that are penetrated
must be protected from salt water invasion from below by
cementing . The Division of Oil and Gas will require that
water tests be performed to ensure that proper seals were
formed. The Use Permit requires that pipe string
cementing through fresh water-bearing sands shall be
implemented to prevent saltwater intrusion into the
acquifers.
(c) During drilling operations, the drilling fluid
which is circulated in the well board to remove cuttings
forms a membrane around the bore hole wall and inhibits
water infiltration into the formations which have been
penetrated . The area of water infiltration from the
drilling mud is usually no more than a few feet in
diameter .
2 .2 .4 Potential Effect : Make-up water will be
transported to the Project site through a pipeline. If
the pipeline ruptured, brine could be released.
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Finding: The following
measures will mitigate the identified impact to a level of
insignificance.
12 . 5954
(a) The make-up water pipeline will be buried
approximately 30 inches below the street surface measured
from the top of the pipe. The pipeline is above the
groundwater surface and will not encounter any surface
water.
(b) The pipeline will be monitored with automatic
shutdown pressure sensors so that any sudden pressure drop
will trigger an alarm and shut down the transfer pumps .
This will insure that any release of water is minimal .
(c) Fact (a) in Support of- Finding 2 . 2 . 3, relating to
the quality of groundwater in the area, hereby is
incorporated by reference.
2 . 3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
2 . 3 . 1 Potential Effect : The development of
approximately 3 . 1 acres of the Project Site will destroy
weedy species on the Project Site.
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Finding:
(a) The Project Site is currently disrupted,
containing piles of dirt from earlier construction
activities . No cultivated or native species exist on the
site, except for weedy plants . Landscaping will replace
all vegetation lost during grading and add additional
vegetation.
(b) No , rare or endangered species are known or
expected to breed on the Project Site.
2.4 ARCHAEOLOGICAL/PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES
2.4 . 1 Potential Effect : The grading of the Project
Site and excavation for foundations and well cellars will
disturb any undiscovered archaeological and
paleontological resources .
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findings :
(a) There is little likelihood of undiscovered
resources on the Project Site. The majority of the known
archaeological sites in the City are located along the
bluffs along the banks of the Santa Ana and San Gabriel
13 .
5954
Rivers. The two archaeological sites nearest the Project
Site are approximately 0. 6 and 1 mile away from the
Project Site.
(b) During grading and excavation, earth moving crews
shall observe cuts and spoils for potential archaeological
finds . In the event of a potential find being located,
operations shall be suspended until the significance of
the find is determined. The project will be conditioned
through the Use Permit to follow specified procedures in
the event that remains are located.
2. 5 LAND USE. ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN
2 . 5 . 1 Potential Effect : The Project site currently is
zoned "Old Town Specific Plan" (District 2) , combined with
Oil Production (0) . The "O" Oil District prohibits
drilling . In order to implement the Project, a zone
change from "O" to "Ol" Oil District is required.
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findinas :
(a) Section 9682 of Article 968 of the City' s Zoning
Code provides for the establishment of "O1" Districts .
The only limitation for such an 01 District is that of a
minimum surface area (100 feet by 150 feet) , as required
by section 9682 . 1. The proposed drill site for the
Project is considerably larger than the minimum dimensions
required by section 9682. 1. Therefore, it is consistent
with this provision.
(b) Section 9682 . 2 requires dedication, or an
irrevocable offer of dedication, of all real property that
the City may require for its streets and other public
service facilities or improvements . All City-required
dedications will be implemented through the terms of
recorded tract maps for the Project site. Therefore, the
project is consistent with this provision.
2 . 5. 2 Potential Effect : The project zoning must be
consistent with the Huntington Beach General Plan.
According to the General Plan, "consistency between the
zoning proposal and the General Plan would be determined
by considering all the policies and programs of each
element of the General Plan and their relationship to the
proposed zoning . "
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
14 .
5954
The following policies of the General Plan apply
to the Project . The Project is consistent with these
policies for the reasons stated below.
(a) open Space and Conservation Element
Section 2. 1 . 2 . 1. 3 : "Encouraging beautification of oil
producing areas and restoration of non-productive oil
lands . "
The Project will remove oil producing facilities from 6
sites , thereby permitting the restoration of oil sites
scattered over 160 acres . Although oil-producing
facilities will remain on the Project site, the appearance
of the Project site will be improved over its present
condition. Therefore, the Project is consistent with this
policy.
Figure 2-1 . "Priority Open Space Areas" : "Oil Production
Areas" are included in "Third Priority Areas, " defined as
"areas containing valuable assets (not of less
significance) which should be incorporated into a
comprehensive Open Space and Conservation Program. "
The Project site is not included in any adopted Open Space
or Conservation Program.
Figure 2-2 . "Resource Conservation Priority Areas" :
"Mineral Resources" are listed as "Second Priority Areas, "
accompanied by a policy to "encourage utilization of
mineral wealth; prevent blight, pollution, and undue
destruction of natural features . "
The Project will use secondary recovery techniques to
increase the efficiency of oil production. As conditioned
and mitigated, the Project will not add to blight or
pollution. It will result in significant reductions in
air emissions from existing oil production facilities , and
will remove unsightly facilities in six areas which are
located close to residential areas . Therefore, the
Project is consistent with this policy.
Figure 2-3 . "Open Space and Conservation Plan" ; "The
plan encompasses all existing and planned open space and
conservation programs as well as several additional
projects . " (General Plan at p. 16 . )
No open space developments, open space plan areas , or
scenic corridors are designated on the Project Site or
15.
5951,
within the subsurface Project Area. The McCallen Park
site, the nearest identified site, is two blocks to the
north of the site.
(b) Seismic Safety Elements
Figure 2-6. FloQd Hazard areas : The Project site is
located in Zone C, "Minimal Flooding . " Therefore, the
Project is not in a flood hazard area.
Section 2 . 2 ,4 . 1.3 : "Continue to require geologic
investigations of all significant development projects and
to stipulate by Conditions of Approval that all
construction within those projects be designed to
withstand predicted probable ground motion accelerations . "
Project structures will be designed to withstand predicted
probable ground motion accelerations . Project engineering
will prevent the well cellar from being damaged, even in
an M 8 earthquake. The oil storage area is surrounded by
a depressed retaining basin which exceeds the Uniform Fire
Code and Division of Oil and Gas requirements . Therefore,
the Project is consistent with this policy.
(c) Noise Element
Section 2 .3 . 2 , 1: "Goal : To reduce to acceptable levels
the degree of noise exposure from all transportation,
stationary and other nuisance sources in the community to
insure the public health, safety, and welfare. "
Section 2 .3 .2 .2 . 7: "Objective: To minimize external
noises and prevent them from penetrating existing quieter
areas . "
Section 2 . 3 . 2 .3 . 2 : "Policy: The use of quieter auto-
mobiles, machinery and equipment should be encouraged. "
Section 2 .3 . 3 . Optimum Noise Levels : "The optimum noise
level for all residential uses in LDN 60 for outdoors
(approximately equivalent to CNEL 60) and Ldn 45 for
indoors . "
The Project will be conditioned, through the CUP, to
exceed the requirements of the City noise code. Truck
traffic shall be limited to daytime hours, and double
mufflers shall be used on production hoists, earth moving
equipment, well service rigs and backhoes . Only
electrical motors shall be used on drilling rigs and
production wells . No emergency generators shall be used.
Therefore, the Project is consistent with these policies.
16 .
5954
Section 2 .3 .4 . 14 . Noise Abatement Plan Noise From Oil
Pumping_ Operations : "Consider restricting new
residential development within 25 feet of an electric
motor-driven pump. "
Although this section is not directly applicable to the
Project, it implies that a 25-foot buffer should exist
between pumps and residential areas. The pumps on the
Project site will be in excess of 100 feet from the
nearest residential unit . Therefore, the Project is
consistent with this policy.
(d) Recreation Element
Figure 2-13 . Existing and PrrQposed Recreation
facilities" : "Figure 2-13 shows the existing and proposed
parks at ultimate development . "
The Project will not adversely affect or preclude the
development of any recreation facility shown in Figure
2-13 . Therefore, it is consistent with Figure 2-13 .
(e) Circulation
~ Section 3 . 1. 2 . 1: "Goal: To provide a multi-mode
transportation system that ensures the safe and efficient
movement of people and goods . "
The Project will not cause or result in significant
traffic increases . It will only require three truck trips
per day, which is too low in volume to create a
significant adverse impact to safety. Therefore, the
Project is consistent with this policy.
Section 3 . 1 .2 .2 . 5 : "Policy: Provide adequate truck and
rail service to industrial and commerical areas while
providing minimum disturbance to residential areas. "
The Use Permit establishes truck routes which will
minimize disruption to surrounding residential areas .
Therefore, the Project is consistent with this policy.
(f) Scenic Highways
No policies in the Scenic Highways Element apply to the
Project.
(g) Housing
17 .
5954
Section 3 . 3. 4 . 2 .2 : "Action: Monitor changes in
industrial and commercial land uses to assess their impact
on residential land use. "
The EIR discussion of growth-inducing impacts describes
the effect that the Project will have on residential
development, as well as the impact on further residential
development if the Project is not approved. Therefore,
the City' s review of the Project complies with this policy.
Section 3 . 3 . 5 2. 1 : "Action: Review all changes in
planned land uses to determine the cumulative impacts on
community facilities . "
The EIR discussion of cumulative impacts describes the
Project ' s cumulative impacts on community facilities .
Therefore, the City' s review of the Project complies with
this policy.
Section 3 .3 . 5 . 2 . 8 : "Action: Continue to actively
enforce land use ordinances . "
The Project will be subject to all City land use
ordinances and regulations, enforced through conditions
attached to the CUP. Therefore, the Project is consistent
with this policy.
(h) Land Use Element
Section 3 .4 .2 .3 . 5 : "To provide for the proper
development, maintenance, improvement, preservation, and
use of the City' s natural resources by removing and
restoring oil production areas as wells become
non-productive. "
The approval of the Project will permit the abandonment
and removal of 22 wells . Prior to termination of Project
oil operations, a plan must be submitted to the City,
showing how the Project site will be abandoned and
restored. Therefore, the Project is consistent with this
policy.
Section 3 .4 . 2 . 5 . 1 : "To provide and maintain a quality
living environment so that members of all economic,
social, and ethnic groups may reside in Huntington Beach
by providing an adequate level of community services,
facilities, improvements, and maintenance in all areas of
the City. "
As conditioned and mitigated, the Project will increase
the quality of areas surrounding wells to be abandoned,
18 . 5954
because the appearance of the well sites will be improved
and they could be developed for residential uses .
Therefore, the Project is consistent with this policy.
Section 3 .4 . 2 . 9 ; "To seek out and encourage industrial
development that will broaden the City' s economic base,
that is diversified, that is well related to other land
uses , and that provides local job opportunities by: "
Section 3 .4 . 2 . 9 . 2 : "Locating industrial uses adjacent to
compatible land uses . "
The Project will remove oil producing facilities from 6
sites , thereby eliminating potentially incompatible land
uses from residential areas . Although oil producing
facilities will remain on the Project site, the Project
site will be improved over its present condition to reduce
or eliminate potential land use conflicts with the
surrounding neighborhood. Overall, the Project will
reduce the potential for land use incompatibilities from
oil developments in residential areas . Therefore, it is
consistent with this policy.
Section 3 .4 . 2 . 9 .4 : "Establishing effective environmental
standards that minimize the external effects on other land
uses and the environment . "
The conditions and mitigation measures imposed on the
Project will minimize its external effects on other land
uses . Therefore, the Project is consistent with this
policy.
Section 3 .4 . 2 . 9 . 5 : "Eliminating conflicts between
existing industrial uses and non-compatible uses . "
The Project will remove oil producing facilities from six
sites, thereby eliminating potential incompatible land
uses from residential areas . Although oil producing
facilities will remain on the Project site, the Project
site will be improved over its present condition to reduce
or eliminate potential land use conflicts with the
surrounding neighborhood. Overall, the Project will
reduce the potential for land use conflicts from oil
developments in residential areas . Therefore, the Project
is consistent with this policy.
(i) Community Facilities
Section 3 . 5 . 6 .3 . 1: "Coordinate the installation of
community facilities with street improvements where
possible. "
19 .
5954
The Project will provide concrete curbs and gutters in
conjunction with the construction of half streets .
Therefore, the Project is consistent with this policy.
(j ) Coastal Element
Although this element addresses coastal policies, the
following policies relating to energy resources could be
applied to developments throughout the City.
Section 3 . 6. 2 . 6 .2 : "Encourage the production of energy
resources as efficiently as possible with minimal adverse
impacts . "
The Project will use secondary recovery techniques to
increase the efficiency of oil production. As conditioned
and mitigated, the Project ' s adverse effects will be
minimal . Therefore, the Project is consistent with this
policy.
Section 3 . 6 . 2 . 6 .2(c) ; "Encourage unitization and
consolidation of existing oil operations . . . to the maximum
extent feasible and legally permissible when such
activities (1) reduce the area used for oil facilities,
(2) are not more environmentally disruptive than existing
arrangements and (3) do not jeopardize public health,
safety or welfare. "
The Project will remove oil producing facilities from six
sites scattered over a 160-acre area and consolidate them
on a 3 . 1 acre site. This will reduce the area used for
oil facilities. The abandonment of existing wells will
eliminate potentially incompatible land uses from
residential areas . Although oil producing facilities will
remain on the Project site, the Project site will be
improved over its present condition to reduce or eliminate
potential land use conflicts with the surrounding
neighborhood . As conditioned and mitigated, the Project
will not jeopardize the public health, safety, and
welfare. It will reduce potential impacts from fire and
seismic events by removing exisiting oil facilities which
are located in close proximity to residential areas .
Therefore, the Project is consistent with this policy.
Section 3 . 6 . 2 .6 . 2(d) : "Utilize the oil suffixes to
ensure that coastal dependent energy extraction is
accommodated in areas designed other than resource
production, except for environmentally sensitive habitat
areas . "
20 .
5954
The 7
change of zone for the Project will utilize an oil
suffix to ensure that energy extraction is accomodated in
an area not specifically designated "resource
production. " The Project is not located in an
environmentally sensitive habitat area . Therefore, the
Project is consistent with this policy.
,Section 3 . 6 .2 . 6 .2 . (e) : " . . . [Consider) 'enhanced ' oil
recovery activity and. . . ensure the evaluation of impacts
different from those associated with conventional
extraction. "
This EIR discussed potential impacts of secondary water
techniques which are different from those associated with
conventional extraction (see, e.g . , discussions of
subsidence and injection water) . Therefore, the Project
is consistent with this policy.
Section 3 . 6 . 2 . 6 .4 : "Promote compatibility of oil and
other energy-related activities with surrounding uses to
the maximum extent feasible. "
a. " . . . include measures such as additional requirements
regarding fencing, planting and landscaping to ensure
aesthetic and environmental compatibility between oil
activities and other uses . "
The Project will comply with Chapter 15 .22 of the City Oil
Code (Screening and Landscaping) . Therefore, the Project
is consistent with this policy.
2. 5. 3 Potential Effect : The Project will be located in
a predominately residential area, which could have land
use impacts on surrounding residences .
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) with
respect to all land use impacts except those specifically
identified in Section 1.
Facts in Support of Findings :
(a) The Project will result in the abandonment of 22
scattered wells over a 160-acre area. It will also remove
7 associated tank batteries . Therefore, the Project will
reduce the number of residences which remain adjacent to
oil-producing uses . Currently some residences are within
20 feet of existing wells that will be abandoned under the
proposed Project . For example, on the Villa St . Croix
site, 5 operating wells are located within 20 feet or less
of condominium units . In total, therefore, the Project
will reduce land use impacts from oil-producing uses.
21.
5954
(b) The Facts in Support of Findings 1. 1, 2 . 5 . 1,
2 . 5 .2, 2 . 6 and 2 .9 hereby are incorporated by reference.
With the exception of aesthetic impacts, discussed in
Section 1. 1, mitigation measures and elements of the
Project which will reduce impacts on the environment will
also ensure Project compatibility with surrounding uses .
(c) Use Permit 88-25 includes conditions intended to
ensure that the Project is consistent with the surrounding
residential area .
2 . 6 LIGHT AND GLARE
2 . 6. 1 Potential Effect : The drilling phase of the
Project will be in operation 24 hours a day. Lighting for
safety will be required at night. Some lighting will be
visible to adjacent residents and passers-by.
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findings : The following
measures will mitigate the identified impact to a level of
insignificance.
(a) Light and glare shall be directed or screened to
prevent any direct glare from Project lighting outside it
parameter boundaries .
(b) No flood lights shall be used. Lights will be
low profile (i .e. , will light low valve and equipment
areas only) .
(c) During drilling, the :derrick will be enclosed and
all lights, except the aircraft warning light, will be on
the inside of the acoustical blanket . Lights around the
auxilliary equipment will be near ground level and well
below the top of the 30 ' acoustical wall .
2 . 7 TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION
2 . 7 . 1 Potential Effect: During the drilling phase of
the Project, 3 heavy vehicle (truck) trips a day will be
generated by the Project.
Findings: The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findings : The following
measures will mitigate the identified impact to a level of
insignificance.
22 .
5954
(a) During the drilling phase, all heavy truck
traffic shall be limited to the following streets between
the 405 Freeway and the Project site: Beach Boulevard,
Adams Avenue, and Delaware Street . Entrances to the site
shall occur only on Delaware Street, Springfield Avenue
and California Street . These truck routes and accesses
were reviewed by City staff and were chosen to reduce
impacts on the adjacent local neighborhood.
(b) Truck traffic shall be limited to the hours of
7: 00 a.m. and 5: 00 p.m.
(c) Truck deliveries shall be staggered so that no
trucks shall wait on the street for longer than five
minutes . No trucks shall be permitted to park on the
streets .
(d) Local streets affected by truck traffic shall be
inspected before and after construction. Any damage to
local streets by heavy trucks shall be repaired and
reconstructed per City requirements at the expense of the
Project applicant .
(e) It will not be necessary to restrict parking on
the side streets to accommodate trucks . Trucks with a
turning radius of 55 feet can easily turn from Springfield
Avenue onto California Street. Curbs will be painted red
to prohibit parking for 10 feet on either side of the
driveways .
(f) An overload permit shall be obtained from the
City and State (if required) for all oversized loads to be
moved on public streets .
2. 7. 2 Potential Effect : During the drilling and
construction phases, traffic will increase nominally in
the Project vicinity.
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findings : The following
measures will mitigate the, identified impacts to a level
of insignificance.
(a) All employees shall park on-site.
(b) Because the Project will pave and add curbs to
currently unfinished streets, approximately 1,700 feet of
additional curbside on-street parking will be made
available to area residents by the Project .
23 .
5954
(c) During the pre-drilling construction phase, truck
routes as approved by the Department of Public Works and
shown in the Circulation Element of the General Plan shall
be used.
(d) Truck traffic shall be limited to the hours of
7 :00 a .m. and 5: 00 p.m.
(e) Truck deliveries shall be staggered so that no
trucks shall wait on the street for longer than five
minutes . No trucks shall be permitted to park on the
streets .
(f) Local streets affected by truck traffic shall be
inspected before and after construction. Any damage to
local streets by heavy trucks shall be repaired and
reconstructed per City requirements at the expense of the
Project applicant .
(g) Additional Project-related traffic will be of
short duration and will involve less traffic than a normal
construction project.
(h) During the production/injection phase, there will
be no increase in traffic in the Project neighborhood
resulting from the Project ..
2 . 7 .3 Potential Effect : The water pipeline from the
Chevron site will disrupt traffic over a short period
along the following route: from Golden West Street east
along Clay Avenue to Huntington Street, then south along
Huntington Street from Clay Avenue to the facility site at
Springfield Avenue and Huntington Street .
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findings : The following
measures will mitigate the identified impact to a level of
insignificance.
(a) No more than one lane of traffic shall be closed
during the day and no lanes shall be closed at night .
(b) Busy intersections shall be either bored or
plated over so that traffic interruptions will be kept to
a minimum.
(c) Several hundred feet of pipeline will be
installed, surveyed, inspected and the trench back-filled
in one day. Therefore, no one area will be affected
throughout the period of construction.
24 .
5954
2 . 8 AIR QUALITY AND ODORS
2. 8. 1 Potential Effect : Temporary dust impacts will
result from Project construction activities, including the
construction of the water pipeline.
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findings : The following
measures will mitigate the identified impact to a level of
insignificance.
(a) A dust control program shall be submitted to the
Department of Development Services for review and approval
prior to the issuance of building permits .
(b) Exposed dirt areas shall be minimized in the
Project design. Roads and parking areas shall be paved
and other open areas shall be landscaped or covered (with
gravel or asphalt) to minimize dust generation.
2. 8. 2 Potential Effect : Pollutants will be emittted by
construction equipment and by vehicle trips .
y Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findingg:
(a) During the construction phase, only 17 two-way
trips will be generated by the Project. Thirty-two
two-way trips will be generated during the drilling phase,
And 7 during the injection/production phase. The
emissions from this number of trips is not significant .
2 . 8 .3 Potential Effect : Oil production facilities ,
particularly tanks, can be the source of fugitive
hydrocarbon emissions .
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findings:
(a) As required by the South Coast Air Quality
Management District, Project oil handling and storage
tanks will use a vapor recovery system which will reduce
95-98% of hydrocarbon emissions.
(b) The Project will replace 16 existing tanks which
are uncontrolled for air pollutant emissions, including
hydrocarbons. The replacement of the 16 tanks will reduce
25 .
5954
i
total estimated emissions by 24, 357 pounds per year. The
seven new Project tanks with vapor recovery, assuming 95%
efficiency, will generate 3 , 159 pounds of emissions per
year. The total emission reduction will be 21, 198 pounds
per year, 58 . 1 pounds per day, or an 87% reduction in
hydrocarbon emissions . This is the substantial net
benefit of the project .
(c) Further hydrocarbon emission reductions also will
be achieved through the elimination of other antiquated
process equipment, including open sumps, oil-water
separators and other similar equipment which is currently
uncontrolled for air pollutants .
(d) The immediate neighborhood surrounding the
Project site will be exposed to 3, 159 pounds 'per year of
emissions , or approximately 9 pounds per day. The
neighborhood currently is exposed to twice this amount
because of existing tank batteries located nearby.
2. 8 .4 Potential Effect : Oil and gas production
activities can emit benzene, a known carcinogenic air
contaminant .
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findings :
(a) An evaluation of the benzene emissions which may
be associated with the Project was conducted using the
South Coast Air Quality Management District proposed Rules
223 (Air Quality Impact Analyses) and 1401 (New Source
Review of Known and Suspected Carcinogenic Air
Contaminants) . The Project ' s potential benzene emissions ,
using a conservative figure, will be . 00057 cubic meters
per second, which is 8 to 10 times below the release
limits that require further air quality analysis .
(b) The Project will eliminate existing tanks that
are totally uncontrolled for air pollutant emissions ,
including benzene. Therefore, Project probably will
result in a net reduction in environnmental risk from
benzene emissions in the Project Area .
(c) South Coast Air Quality Management District
approved vapor recovery systems shall be used for tanks in
oil contact .
(d) Low-level, short-term exposure to benzene is not
subject to SCAQMD proposed rules, because such exposures
26 .
5954
are not thought to constitute a health risk. In the event
of an on-site spill, the system is designed to pump the
spilled fluid back through the separation system and into
the tank. Spills would be contained on site.
2 . 9 NOISE
2 . 9 . 1 Potential Effect : Oil well drilling and pumping
operations, production wastes and earth moving equipment,
and repair/maintenance equipment will generate noise which
could affect residences in the area of the Project .
Findings: The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findings : The following
measures will mitigate the identified impact to a level of
insignificance.
(a) The Project shall fully comply with the
Huntington Beach Noise Ordinance (Ordinance No. 2379) .
(b) A report prepared by an acoustical engineer
certified by the County of Orange shall be submitted to
the Director of Development Services for review and
approval prior to commencing drilling . The report shall
describe noise levels at the Project Site property line
and at the nearest residential property lines, both with
and without acoustical treatment on the drilling rig and
service rigs . The report shall indicate noise attenuation
measures necessary to assure compliance with the
Huntington Beach Noise Ordinance (Ordinance No . 2379) .
This shall include the provisions of the ordinance
regarding a maximum hourly average noise level of 50 dB(A)
during the hours from 10 : 00 p.m. to 7:00 a .m.
(c) Excessive vibration, as determined by the
Director of Development Services, shall be reduced to
acceptable levels .
(d) Noise monitoring shall be conducted under the
supervision of an acoustical engineer certified by the
County of Orange Reports shall be submitted to the
Director of Development Services within three working days
after the completion of each phase of the monitoring
effort . The monitoring shall include the following :
(1) Pre-drilling phase monitoring. Prior to the
start of the drilling phase, noise measurements
shall be obtained during the operation of the
specific drilling rig which has been selected and
27.
5954
the measurements shall be related to those which
residential
will be experienced at the nearest re s
boundaries to the drilling site. In addition,
the noise control measures which have been, or
will be, applied to the rig as needed for
compliance with the Noise Ordinance shall be
identified.
(2) Start of Drilling. Noise measurements shall be
obtained during the nighttime hours (10 : 00 p .m.
to 7:00 a.m. ) for at least six hours on each of
three nights within the five day period from the
start of the drilling phase. Monitoring shall
occur at the nearest residential boundary to the
actual drilling operation.
The noise level data shall be compared to noise
levels specified in the Noise Ordinance . Where
an ezceedance of the Ordinance is identified,
noise control measures shall be applied and an
additional two nights of monitoring shall be
required .
(3) During the Drilling Phase. Noise monitoring
shall occur during a six-hour period between the
hours from 10 : 00 p.m. to 7: 00 a.m. at least once
each month during the Drilling Phase of the
Project . The noise level data obtained shall be
conpared to the Noise Ordinance standards . Where
an ezceedance of the standards is identified,
noise control measures shall be applied and an
additional two nights of monitoring shall be
required.
(e) Truck traffic shall be limited to the hours
between 7: 00 a.m. and 5: 00 p.m. No trucks shall park on
the street, and truck deliveries shall be staggered so
that no truck will wait in the street for longer than five
minutes . There shall be no entrance or exit of vehicles
from the Drill Site between the hours of 10 : 00 p.m. and
7: 00 a.m. , except for emergency purposes.
(f) A double acoustical blanket enclosure shall be
provided at man-door entrances .
(g) No speakers, loud bells or buzzers shall be
employed on site.
(h) Sudden high frequency noise shall be kept to a
minimum by using rubber lined pipe elevators if necessary
28. 5954
and rubber tires to absorb the impact of tubulars being
rolled onto the walk in preparation for running casing .
Acoustical blankets shall be used to reduce this type of
remaining noise to insignificant levels.
(i) All drilling rigs and production wells shall be
operated by electrical motors and electric pumps only. No
emergency generator shall be used.
(j ) Double mufflers shall be used on production
hoists and earth moving equipment, further reducing the
impact to the neighborhood .
(k) Well service rigs shall be operated no more than
48 days per year between 7 : 00 a .m. and 7 : 00 p .m. or
daylight hours, whichever is shorter . No more than 4 well
service rigs may be on the premises at any one time. The
service rigs shall not exceed 120 feet in height and shall
be double-muffled and utilize acoustical blankets .
(1) The 24-hour drilling phase shall not operate for
longer than two years .
2. 9 . 2 Potential Effect : A backhoe will be used during
the construction of the water pipeline.
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Pacts in Support of Findings :
(a) Double mufflers will be used on backhoes during
the construction of the water pipeline, and workmen will
be cautioned to work as quietly as possible.
(b) Any residual noise impact will not be significant
because it will be temporary in nature and will only occur
during the day. Residents of each block will only be
affected for approximately one day.
2. 10 RISK OF UPSET/HEALTH AND SAFETY
2 . 10. 1 Potential Effect : The potential exists for oil
spills from the pipes, valves , tanks and equipment, and
from the small amounts of crude oil which will be
contained on the Facility Site in storage tanks .
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findings : The following
measures will mitigate the identified impact to a level of
insignificance.
29 .
5954
(a) If an oil spill occurred during a rainstorm,
surface drainage water could become contaminated with
crude oil The Drill Site and Facility Site have been
designed to provide containment of surface fluids such as
stormwater, and in emergency conditions, crude oil . The
Sites shall be enclosed with masonry walls which provide
complete control of surface fluids . All truck gates and
main gates shall have raised thresholds with either sloped
ramps or raised stoops which preclude surface fluids from
leaving the Site. All surface fluids shall be diverted to
catch basins .
(b) The Facts in Support of Finding 2 . 2 . 1, describing
the diversion of surface fluids to catch basins, hereby
are incorporated by reference.
(c) If the tanks ruptured and spilled oil , the
containment area for spill will contain approximately
69 , 000 cubic feet, almost two times the minimum volume
required by the State Division of Oil & Gas . The
containment area is below grade, approximately 4 feet
lower than the water processing area and 6 feet lower than
the adjacent street level. The containment area will
contain any oil spilled from tanks .
(d) The Project will use all new pipelines, valves,
fittings , tanks and equipments . All pipelines will meet
the requirements of the State of California Pipeline
Safety Act. All items will be protected against corrosion
by one or more of the following: polyvinyl cloride
coating on exterior buried pipelines, cathodic protection
system, paint coating on all above-ground pipelines and
equipment, epoxy coating on interior of water processing
tanks , and use of stainless steel fittings .
(e) An Operating Procedures Manual shall be prepared
for the training of all new employees . Each operator
shall be required to thoroughly understand and be able to
operate each piece of equipment in the system. The
operating procedures manual shall explain in detail how to
operate each piece of equipment and include emergency
procedures, shut-down of equipment and notification of
authorities .
2 . 10 .2 Potential Effect : Various chemicals, both non-
hazardous and hazardous, are utilized in oil and gas
drilling production. Chemicals may be used to enhance the
drilling mud properties during drill of oil and gas wells ,
for dehydration of the crude oil to marketable quality, to
inhibit corrosion, scale and baterial levels, and in
30. 5954
treatment of the produced water to suitable reinjection
quality.
Findings: The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findings : The following
measures will mitigate the identified impact to a level of
insignificance.
(a) None of the chemicals used for the Project will
be used in large quantities, or would ever be used off of
the Project site.
(b) All federal and state regulations, including
worker and community disclosure programs, site Business
Emergency Plans, Proposition 65 warnings, hazard labelling
and Spill Prevention Control & Countermeasure Plans, shall
be fully enforced.
(c) Fact (c) in Support of Finding 1 . 2 . 1, describing
emergency action and spill prevention plans, hereby is
incorporated by reference.
(d) If a localized spill of hazardous materials
should occur, it would be contained in the area and no
impact would occur outside the Site boundaries .
Procedures to mitigate impacts to on-site workers shall be
included in the Operations Manual .
(e) The Facts in Support of Finding 2 . 10 . 1,
describing the containment of materials on the Drill Site
and Facility Site, hereby are incorporated by reference.
(f) The State Department of Health Services has
approved a list of non-hazardous additives to rotory mud.
There is nothing in the Huntington Beach oil field
drilling history that would indicate that hazardous
materials will be required. Therefore, to the greatest
extent feasible, the operator of the Project shall use
non-hazardous additives in the Project ' s drilling mud .
2 . 10. 3 Potential Effect : Crude oil will be transported
in an existing Chevron pipeline from the Facility Site to
Chevron ' s re-pump station. There is a possibility of
pipeline rupture.
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findings :
31.
5954
(a) The addition of the Project ' s oil stream will
reduce pressure on the Chevron crude oil pipeline.
Because the oil from the Project will enter the pipeline
at a higher temperature than the oil currently in the
pipeline, it will reduce the viscosity of the oil . This
in turn will reduce pressure in the pipeline, thereby
decreasing the possibility of pipeline rupture when
compared to existing conditions .
(b) Even if the pipeline ruptured, the only oil that
would be released would be the oil in the pipeline between
block valves . Automatic shutdowns would keep the
incremental volume of oil attributable to the Project at
an insignificant level in the event of pipeline rupture.
(c) Chevron completed hydrotesting its pipeline in
March 1988 to a pressure of 750 pounds per square inch.
The test was witnesses and approved for the State Fire
Marshal by the Karin Corporation on March 8, 1988 .
(d) The Project will result in the abandonment of
approximateley 18, 000 feet of existing pipeline. Many of
these lines are old, and their exact locations are
unknown. The abandonment of this pipeline will reault in
' a significant reduction in the potential for pipeline
leaks .
2 . 10 .4 Potential Effect : The rupture of the water
pipeline, or accidents resulting from pedestrian access to
trenches during the construction of the water pipeline,
could have public safety impacts .
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findings :
(a) The Facts in Support of Finding 2 . 2 .3 , describing
measures mitigating any impacts on water quality, hereby
are incorporated by reference.
(b) The water pipeline will be monitored with
automatic shutdown pressure sensors, so that any sudden
well below hydrostatic and will be easily controlled by
the drilling mud. Therefore, all anticipated subsurface
pressure will be contained by the weight of the mud . If a
fire did occur, the open cellars will allow the Fire
Department to control it from the surface, without having
to enter the cellars .
2 . 10 . 5 Potential Effect : Oil-related gas leaks could
lead to fire or explosion.
32 . 5954
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findings :
(a) A report made by GeoScience Analytical, Inc .
(Roberti Report) determined that a Los Angeles fire and
explosion was caused by gas that was biogenic, or the
result of bacterial decay, not related to a leaking
pipeline or poorly abandoned oil well . It was also
determined that only one of the 91 gas samples analyzed in
Huntington Beach was petrogenic, or associated with oil .
Eighteen samples subsequently taken in Huntington Beach
were determined to be of biogenic origin. These studies
indicated that the problem of methane gas hazard does not
have its roots in oil field-related activity.
(b) Water flooding in an oil reservoir reduces the
amount of free gas and lessens the possibility of gas
leaks . Any free gas flows to areas of low pressure.
Producer wells are areas of low pressure, and .gas will
flow there throughout the process of repressurization .
Injection wells will be located away from poorly abandoned
wells and in close proximity to producing wells, ensuring
that free gas will flow to the producing wells .
(c) A contingency plan shall be submitted to the
Huntington Beach Fire Department for review and approval,
with steps to be taken in the event that leakage from any
abandoned wells which do not meet present day abandonment
requirements finds its way to the surface.
(d) The possibility of fire and/or explosion at the
drill rigs does not constitute a significant impact
because the drilling equipment will be equipped with Class
III blowout prevention equipment . Additionally, the
reservoirs of the Project are well known, having been
produced for over 60 years . The reservoir pressure is
well below hydrostatic and will be easily controlled by
the drilling mud . .Therefore, all anticipated subsurface
pressure will be contained by the weight of the mud. If a
fire ' did occur, the open cellars will allow the Fire
Department to control it from the surface, without having
to enter the cellars .
2 . 11 PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES
2. 11. 1 Potential Effect : The Project could increase the
demand on police protection services, including potential
increases in vandalism and noise nuisance complaints .
33 . 5954
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findings : The following
measures will mitigate the identified impact to a level of
insignificance.
(a) The proposed site will be enclosed with a
decorative masonry wall and with a landscaping berm. The
wall and landscaping will avoid providing easy access to
the site.
(b) The Facts in Support of Finding 2 . 9 . 1, relating
to noise impacts , hereby are incorporated by reference .
2. 11. 2 Potential Effect: The potential for fire, odor
or spill incidents could increase the demand on fire
prevention/protection services in the City.
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in SuPPort of Findings:
(a) The Fire Department has stated that it will
actually have a reduced workload due to the consolidation
of many oil producing sites onto one fully equiped and
protected site.
(b) An on-site fire suppression system shall be
installed as a primary source for fire protection.
(c) Oil wells shall be provided with gas detection
systems from cellars to 24-hours monitoring locations .
(d) Fire extinguishers approved by the Fire
Department must be installed within 75 feet of travel .
(e) Metal open-grate covers shall be provided over
the top of well cellars .
(f) Storage tanks shall have pre-plumbed foam
injection systems and exterior deluge water spray systems .
(g) The foam storage area and foam quantity shall be
approved by the Fire Department, and fire hydrants shall
be located in areas approved by the Fire Department.
Hydrogen sulfide detection systems approved by the Fire
Department shall be installed on the Project perimeter,
and fire extinguishers approved by the Fire Department
shall be installed throughout in the Site. All gate
openings must be 24 feet in width and installed in
compliance with Fire Department Specification 403 .
34 .
5954
(h) A full vapor recovery system shall be installed,
as required by SCAQMD.
(i) Only three on-site crude oil tanks are permitted,
which shall never be completely full at once.
(j ) Fact (c) in support of Finding 1. 2 . 1, describing
emergency action and spill prevention plans, hereby is
incorporated by reference.
(k) Prior to termination of the oil operation, a plan
shall be submitted for the review and approal of the Fire
Department and Development Services Department , showing
how the Site will be abandoned and restored to its closest
natural state.
2 . 11.3 Potential Effect : Paving of the Project site
will increase stormwater, which could present additional
demands on the sewer system.
findings: The City hereby makes finding ( 1) .
Facts in Support of Findings:
(a) The Facts in Support of Finding 2 . 2. 1 hereby are
incorporated by reference.
(b) The Project will take about 30, 000 barrels per
day of produced water from Chevron, which is currently
dumping approixmately 40, 000 barrels per day into the
sanitary sewer . Therefore, instead of adding more brine
to the sewer system, this Project will relieve the system
of about 30, 000 barrels per day.
2. 11 .4 Potential Effect : During the initial drilling
operation, a fresh water demand of 21, 000 gallons per day
is expected. Following completion of the drilling phase,
the water consumption rate will be reduced to 1, 000
gallons per day.
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findings :
(a) Fresh water use over the long term is roughly
equivalent to an industrial use one-third of an acre in
size, or about 6 attached residential units. Adequate
water supplies exist to meet this demand. The available
fire flow is 5, 500 gallons per minute with 3,000 gallons
per minute being the required fire flow at present.
35 .
5954
2 . 11. 5 Potential Effect : During the drilling phase, one
truck per day normally will be required to collect and
transport liquid oil wastes and one truck per day will be
required to handle solid waste collected in medal bins .
Following the completion of drilling . the volume of wastes
will be reduced, particularly for solid wastes such as
drill cuttings . The periodic cleaning of tanks during the
operational phase will require the removal of sludge from
tank bottoms .
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findinas : The following
measures will mitigate the identified impact to a level of
insiginficance.
(a) Dumping operations for oil field wastes are
normally handled by contract service firms that specialize
in waste disposal of this type.
(b) Sludge from tank bottoms will be deposited in a
special dump equiped to handle this type of waste, and
deposited in a Class I landfill .
(c) All waste materials, both liquid and solid, shall
be collected and separated on site, temporarily stored in
metal bins and tanks, and trucked to appropriate disposal
sites .
(d) Liquid wastes shall be collected and stored in
closed tanks to prevent the spread of odors prior to
disposal .
(e) Collection areas for waste shall be located
within peripheral walls and will not be visible to
residential areas .
2 . 11 . 6 Potential Effect : The Project will require three
business lines and a public phone on each parcel . It is
likely that an intercommunication line between the two
parcels will be included in the telephone system.
Findings : The City hereby makes finding ( 1) .
Facts in Support Qf Findings :
(a) The General Telephone Company provides telephone
service to the City and to the Project site. No current
inadequacies exist in the system. The number of lines
servicing the Project site is less than the number of
36 .
5954
lines which would be required if medium density
residential units were developed on site.
2 . 12 ENERGY CONSERVATION
2 . 12 . 1 Potential Effect : Drilling rigs and production
wells will be operated by electrical motors and electric
pumps . Although a small amount of natural gas will be
produced with the oil, additional natural gas may be
required for production.
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findings :
(a) Proper sizing of the well pumps will save energy
by reducing the amount of electricity used.
(b) Southern California Edison anticipates no
problems in providing electrical service of the Project .
Southern California Gas Company, which will provide any
additional natural gas required, also anticipates no
problems in providing service for the Project.
(c) The purpose of the Project is to produce
approximately 9 . 0 million barrels of crude oil .
2 . 13 GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS
2 . 13 . 1 Potential Effect : Compared to existing
conditions, the Project will have a growth inducing impact
of 57 units . At the City-wide average of 2 .78 persons per
household, the 57 dwelling units would house 158 persons .
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findings :
(a) The 158 persons who would be housed on the
Project site represents a population factor of only 0 . 08%
of the estimated 1987 City population.
(b) The Project will utilize two entire City blocks
for the approximately 20-30 year life of the project .
Based on existing General Plan and zoning designations ,
but for the Project, both of the two Project blocks would
be used for residential purposes . Under existing zoning,
108 residential units could be constructed on the site.
Based on existing General Plan designation, 76 units could
be built on the site. Therefore, the growth inducing
37.
5954
l
effect of the Project could be less than the number of
units that could be developed on the Project site.
2 . 14 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
2 . 14 . 1 Potential Effect : Two other oil consolidation
projects are in the process of assembly within the
vacinity of the Project . The cumulative effects of these
projects could have impacts on subsidence and gas leaks .
Findings: The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findings :
(a) The Facts in Support of Finding 2. 1. 2, describing
the effect of the Project on subsidence, hereby are
incorporated by reference.
(b) The Facts in Support of Finding 2 . 10 . 5,
describing the effect of water flooding on gas leaks,
hereby are incorporated by reference.
(c) In the Wilmington Field, water flooding took
glace in an area where many wells were damaged badly and
' not properly abandoned. Even with this large number of
improperly abandoned wells, there were no problems with
injected fluids or oil or gas surfacing via these conduits .
(d) The Signal Hill Field was unitized and three
water floods initiated in 1974 . Many of the wells in this
field are as old as the Huntington Beach wells ; however,
the Division of Oil & Gas has received notification of
only two wells that have leaked.
2. 14 . 2 Potential Effect : In conjunction with present,
approved and proposed developments in the City, the
secondary traffic effects of the induced growth from the
Project could result in negative impacts on the
circulation system.
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findings :
(a) Growth induced by the Project is controlled by
General Plan policies relating to land use designations
and circulation improvements . The land use designations
used to generate estimates of secondary traffic impacts
from induced growth are consistent with the current
General Plan designation. Therefore, the traffic
38 .
5954
generated by these uses has been taken into account in
establishing the General Plan circulation plan of arterial
streets and highways . This plan adequately accommodates
traffic estimated to be generated by General Plan
designated uses .
(b) A recent traffic study conducted for The
Waterfront, which evaluates cumulative traffic levels for
the area of the City most likely to receive heavy traffic
flows from proposed development, confirmed that traffic
will operate at acceptable levels of service.
(c) The 108 vehicles which would be associated with
the 57 units that constitute the growth inducing effect of
the Project represent a very small increment of the new
vehicles that will be within the area .
2 . 14 .3 Potential Effect : In conjunction with present,
approved and proposed projects , traffic resulting from
growth generated by the Project may add to noise levels
adjacent to circulation routes .
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findings :
(a) Implementation of the Optimum Noise Levels, and
of the Noise Abatement Plan for Traffic Noise contained in
sections 2. 3 .3 and 2. 3 .4 of the General Plan Noise
Element, will mitigate these cumulative impacts to a level.
of insignificance.
2 . 14 .4 Potential Effect : In conjunction with existing,
approved and proposed future projects, noise within the
vicinity of the Drill Site and Facility Site could exceed
City noise standards .
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findings :
(a) Facts in Support of Finding 2 .9 . 1 hereby are
incorporated by reference.
(b) The measurement of noise is, by definition, a
"cumulative" measurement. It takes into account
background noise. By conditioning the Project to comply
with the City' s Noise Ordinance, the City has ensured that
cumulative noise levels will not constitute a significant
adverse impact .
39 .
5954
2 . 14 .5 Potential Effect: As a secondary effect of the
Project, automobile emissions associated with the 57
dwelling units which constitute the Project ' s growth
inducing impact, in conjunction with present, approved and
proposed development, could result in adverse impacts on
air quality.
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findings :
(a) It is estimated that vehicle emissions
constituting a secondary impact of the Project would
result in a daily increase in vehicle emissions of 3 , 596 .3
pounds per year . Any air quality impacts from these
emissions is offset nearly six times by the improvement in
air quality caused by replacement of existing old oil
storage tanks with new tanks fully equipped with an
effective vapor recovery system. The Project will result
in a net reduction of 21, 198 pounds of hydrocarbons per
year .
2 . 14 . 6 Potential Effect : As a secondary impact of the
Project, the 57 units which constitute the growth inducing
effect of the Project could generate additional school
children, potentially causing adverse effects on the
school system.
Findings : The City hereby makes finding (1) .
Facts in Support of Findings :
(a) Huntington Beach city schools have been
experiencing a steady decline in enrollment over the past
ten years . Capacity in the school district currently
exceeds student enrollment, and the schools impacted by
the Project are particularly well situated to absorb
additional enrollment . Projected increased in enrollment
from the Project do not exceed the excess capacity, even
taking into account the increase in enrollment expected
from other projects .
(b) The total number of students from approved and
proposed projects , including Project-related additions, is
371 new students . Enrollment projections for Union High
School District schools shows a decrease in enrollment
until 1990 . An increase is projected from 1991 through
1995 . Even with new development, however, the expected
increase in students from 1992 to 1995 is not enough to
compensate for the expected decline in enrollment between
1987 and 1992 .
40 .
5954
(c) An increase in dwelling units does not
necessarily result in an increase in enrollment. From
1975 to 1987, an additional 9, 223 new dwellings were
constructed and occupied within the boundaries of the
Huntington Beach Union High School District. The net
impact on enrollment was a minus 3 , 141 students, a 37%
decrease.
41.
5954
5954
3 . FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES
3 . 1 "NO PROJECT" ALTERNATIVE
3 . 1. 1 Description of Alternative: The EIR defines the
"no project" alternative as the maintenance of existing
conditions .
3 . 1 . 2 Comparison of the Effects of the Alternative to
the Effects of the Proposed Proiect : The City hereby
finds that this alternative is not environmentally
superior to the Project .
Facts in Support of Finding:
(a) This alternative would not result in the
abandonment of 22 scattered wells over a 160-acre area .
Therefore, compared to the Project, it would increase the
number of residences which remain adjacent to
oil-producing uses . The existing wells would continue to
produce oil, gas and water without the addition of the
modern vapor recovery systems, secondary recovery
techniques , or state-of-the-art fire fighting equipment
_ which will be incorporated into the Project . The
continuing use of existing technology would have
detrimental impacts on air quality compared to the
proposed Project . The potential for arresting subsidence,
or causing rebound, through injection would be
eliminated. Excess brine produced by Chevron would not be
used for injection and would continue to be disposed of in
the sewer system, thereby increasing the load on the sewer
system in comparison with the proposed Project . Existing
facilities would not be able to withstand the impacts of
major earthquakes . Approximately 18, 000 feet of existing
pipeline would not be removed, thereby increasing the
possiblity of leaks .
(b) This alternative also would have positive
effects . It would eliminate the need for three heavy
trucks per day to travel through the neighborhood adjacent
to the Project Site during the drilling phase of the
Project; would eliminate the possibility of a fire or a
spill of oil or hazardous chemicals on the Project Site;
and would eliminate the possibility of damage to Project
facilities and walls in the event of an earthquake of a
magnitude of M 8 or greater . This alternative also would
eliminate the use of perimeter walls, which would be
required to mitigate aesthetic and noise impacts of the
proposed Project. In weighing the positive and negative
environmental effects of this alternative, however, the
42
5954
City has determined that the positive effects of this
alternative are less significant than the negative effects .
3 . 1 .3 Effectiveness in Meeting Project Objectives : The
"no project" alternative would not meet Project objectives
because it would not permit the recovery of 9 million
barrels of crude oil by using secondary recovery
techniques . Existing oil operations would only recover
approximately 500, 006 barrels of crude oil .
3 . 1 .4 Feasibility: The "no project" alternative is
feasible.
3 .2 REDUCED INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
3 .2 . 1 Description of Alternative: The "reduced
intensity" alternative would involve drilling a number of
limited injector wells for secondary oil recovery, while
retaining all existing wells currently operating in the
160-acre subsurface unit . Approximately ten injector
wells would be drilled from one of the existing well sites .
3 . 2 .2 Comparison of the Effects of the Alternative to
the Effects of the Proposed Project: The City hereby
finds that this alternative is not environmentally
superior to the Project .
Facts in Support of Finding:
(a) The "reduced intensity" alternative would not
result in the abandonment of 22 scattered wells over a
160-acre area . Therefore, compared to the proposed
Project, it would increase the number of residences which
remain adjacent to oil-producing uses . Some of these
residences are within 20 feet of existing wells;
therefore, these residences wold be less buffered from the
noise impacts of reworking the wells . This impact would
be particularly significant in the Villa St . Croix site,
in which five wells are located within 20 feet or less of
condominium units .
This alternative also would require routing high-
pressure water through lengthy pipelines under City
streets . The possibility of leakage or rupture is a
significant adverse impact which would not exist under the
proposed Project . Existing facilities would not withstand
a major earthquake.
(b) This alternative also would have positive
effects . It would eliminate the need for three heavy
43 . 5954
trucks per day to travel through the neighborhood adjacent
to the Project Site during the drilling phase of the
Project; would eliminate the possibility of a fire or a
spill of oil or hazardous chemicals on the Project Site;
and would eliminate the possibility of damage to Project
facilities and walls in the event of an earthquake of a
magnitude of M8 or greater. This alternative also would
eliminate the use of perimeter walls, which would be
required to mitigate aesthetic and noise impacts of the
proposed Project . In weighing the positive and negative
effects of this alternative, however, the City has
determined that the positive effects of this alternative
are less significant than the negative effects.
3 . 2 . 3 Effectiveness in Meeting Project Objectives: The
reduced intensity alternative would not meet Project
objectives because it would not result in optimum well
spacing for injection. As a result, only approximately
3 . 5 million barrels of oil would be recovered.
3 . 2 . 4 Feasibility: The reduced intensity alternative
is not feasible.
Facts in Support of Findings : This alternative
would require acquiring the right-of-way for a
considerable length of underground pipes . Liability for
these pipes could be significant. According to the
Project applicant , the capital costs of this alternative
would be approximately the same as the capital costs of
the proposed Project, while less than one-half as much oil
would be recovered. In addition, this alternative would
not result in optimum spacing of injector wells . If
secondary recovery did not work under this system, there
would be no way to determine the source of the problem or
to cure the situation. Based on these factors, the
Project applicant has concluded that this alternative is
not economically feasible.
This alternative also is not feasible because it
is not desirable, and may not be possible, to conduct well
reworking in very close proximity to residential units .
3 . 3 MORE INTENSE DRILLING PROGRAM
3 . 3 . 1 Description of Alternative: Under this
alternative, the proposed Project would proceed as
described in this EIR, except that the drilling program
would be intensified to reduce the time span of the
drilling phase of the Project. A second rig would be used
for drilling. The two-year drilling period would be
reduced by several months .
44 .
5954
3 .3 . 2 Comparison of the Effects of the Alternative to
the Effects of the Proposed Project : The City hereby
finds that this alternative is not environmentally
superior to the Project .
Facts in Support of Finding :
(a) Approximately twice as many heavy trucks per day
(6 instead of 3) would be required for the intensified
drilling program. Two 165 ' rigs would be used instead of
one, resulting in increased aesthetic impacts and making
it possible that noise and light/glare impacts could not
be mitigated to a level of insignificance.
(b) The Project site would be occupied for
oil-producing facilities for a slightly shorter perior of
time, because the intensified drilling program would
reduce the construction period by several months . Impacts
of the drilling phase, including the noise and traffic
impacts (although intensified) , also would occur over a
slightly shorter time period. When weighed against the
more severe and possibly unmitigable impacts that would
occur, however, this reduction in the drilling period does
not outweigh the negative impacts of this alternative.
3 .3 .3 Effectiveness in Meeting Project Objectives : The
"more intense drilling program" alternative would meet the
Project objectives .
3 .3 .4 Feasibility: The "more intense drilling program"
is feasible, but would be more expensive than the proposed
Project.
3 .4 ABANDONMENT OF ALL OIL PRODUCTION SITES
3 .4 . 1 Description of Alternative: Under this
alternative, the oil facilities on the Project site would
be removed and 22 scattered wells over 160 acres would be
abandoned, as under the proposed Project .
The Project site and the 6 scattered sites would
be available for other uses . Residential use is
designated in the General Plan and Zoning .
3 .4 .2 Comparison of the Effects of the Alternative to
the Effects of the Proposed Protect: The City hereby
finds that this alternative is environmentally superior to
the Project because it would eliminate the effect of
oil-producing uses throughout the Project Area.
45.
5954
3 .4 . 3 Effectiveness in Meeting Project Objectives :
This alternative would not result in the recovery of any
oil from subsurface reserves . Therefore, it would not
meet the Project objectives . It would reduce the amount
of oil which could be produced from 9 million barrels to
zero barrels .
3 .4 .4 Feasibility: This alternative is not feasible.
Facts in Support of Findings : It is highly
unlikely that (a) oil operators would all agree to abandon
their operations, and that (b) ready purchasers would be
available for all of the sites . Therefore, in order to
implement this alternative, the City probably would have
to acquire the mineral rights for some or all of the wells
and pay for the abandonment of the site. Some arrangement
would have to be made with the surface owner for
reimbursement of all or part of the City' s costs following
resale and/or development of the sites .
As a rough estimate, using the industry standard
of $15,000 per average daily barrel of oil production, it
would cost approximately $1 . 5 million to acquire the
_ mineral rights for all of the sites . Abandonment would
cost approximately $. 5 million. This alternative also
would deny access to the royalty owners of the mineral
estates . Even assuming that the mineral rights could be
purchased for $1 . 5 million, this figure does not assign
any value to unrecovered reserved, which are worth in the
tens of millions of dollars .
3 . 5 ALTERNATIVE SITES: PARCEL 1
3 . 5 . 1 Description of Alternative: Parcel 1 consists of
1 . 8 acres located to the northwest of the Project site on
Pine Street, bounded by Yorktown Avenue on the north and
Utica Avenue on the south. The Project applicant does not
own the surface or the minerals below the surface. The
Huntington Beach Company is the mineral owner. Parcel 1
is surrounded by approximately 15 acres of fee land which
is also owned by the Huntington Beach Company. Although
this land is currently vacant, it is zoned for residential
use. On October 24, 1988, the City Council approved the
Huntington Beach Company' s request for a zone change and
general plan conformance, to permit the residential
development of this site under "Old Town Specific Plan"
zoning .
Parcel 1 is too small to accommodate all of the
facilities and well cellars necessary for an oil recovery
46.
5954
facility. Therefore, the Project Facilities Site would
still be used. Although some wells could be drilled on
Parcel 1, some wells would still have to be drilled on the
Project Drill Site.
3 . 5. 2 Comparison of the Effects of the Alternative to
the Effects of the Proposed Project : The City hereby
finds that this alternative is not environmentally
superior to the Project .
Facts in Support of Finding: Approximately 60%
of the wells for the Project could be drilled on
Parcel 1. Although this would result in a slight
reduction in the effects of the drilling phase on the
neighborhood surrounding the Project, drilling would
affect two residential neighborhoods instead of one.
Although the area surrounding Parcel 1 currently is
vacant, it is proposed for residential use.
3 . 5 .3 Effectiveness in Meeting Project Objectives :
This alternative would meet Project objectives .
3 . 5 .4 Feasibility: This alternative is not feasible .
Facts in Support of Findings : The Project
applicant does not own Parcel 1. Furthermore, in order to
use Parcel 1 as a surface site to drill into the southeast
part of the Springfield Unit, the Project applicant would
have to acquire pass-through rights from the Huntington
Beach Company. The City has been advised that the
Huntington Beach Company is planning a surface development
for the 17 acres site surrounding Parcel 1, and that it
would not be interested in delaying this development for
the 20-30 year life of the project. On October 24 , 1988,
the City approved a zone change and general plan
conformance which will permit the development of this site
under the "Old Town Specific Plan" designation.
Therefore, the alternative is not "feasible" because it is
not capable of being accomplished successfullly in a
reasonable period of time, taking into account economic,
social , and legal factors .
3 . 6 PARCEL I DEVELOPMENT QNLY
3 . 6 . 1 De criptign of Alternative: A project designed
to be solely developed from Parcel 1 would need to be
reduced in size considerably. The 1 . 8 acre site would
only accommodate approximately one 20-well cellar and much
smaller production/injection facilities . The southeastern
47.
5954
portion of the Project could not be reached by directional
wells from Parcel 1; therefore, a portion of the
reservoirs could not be exploited.
3 . 6 .2 Comparison of the Effects of the Alternative to
the Effects of the Proposed Project : The City hereby
finds that this alternative is neither environmentally
superior nor environmentally inferior to the Project .
jFacts in Support of Finding : Although the area
surrounding Parcel 1 currently is vacant, it is proposed
for residential use. Project impacts, including aesthetic
impacts , the possibility of fire and impacts of an M 8 or
greater earthquake, would affect any such residences .
3 . 6 .3 Effectiveness in Meeting Project Objectives :
This alternative would not meet Project objectives because
it could only recover approximately 4 . 5 million barrels of
oil, since injection rates would have to be lower and the
Project could not be fully developed. It would also take
longer to produce the reserves .
3 . 6 .4 Feasibility: This alternative is not feasible.
Facts in Support of Findings : The Project
applicant does not own Parcel 1 . Furthermore, in order to
use Parcel 1 as a surface site to drill into the southeast
part of the Springfield Unit, the Project applicant would
have to acquire pass-through rights from the Huntington
Beach Company. The City has been advised that the
Huntington Beach Company is planning a surface development
for the 17 acres site surrounding Parcel 1, and that it
would not be interested in delaying this development_ for
the 20-30 year life of the project. On October 24 , 1988,
the City approved a zone change and general plain
conformance which will permit the development of this site
under the "Old Town Specific Plan" designation. .
Therefore, the alternative is not "feasible" because it is
not capable of being accomplished successfullly in a
reasonable period of time, taking into account economic,
social, and legal factors .
3 .7 ALTERNATIVE SITES: PARCEL 2
3 .7. 1 Description of Alternative: Parcel 2 is located
on the southeast corner of Beach Boulevard and Adams
Avenue. It consists of approximately 3 . 5 acres and is
zoned 01.
Parcel 2 is located at the extreme southeastern
end of the Springfield Unit and would require wells to be
48
5954
drilled which exceed the normal parameters of conventional
directional drilling. The site is too small for the
facilities necessary to accompany the wells . Therefore,
the Project Facilities Site would still be used.
3 . 7 .2 Comparison of the Effects of the Alternative to
the Effect, of the Proposed Project : The City hereby
finds that this alternative is neither environmentally
superior nor environmentally inferior to the Project.
Facts in Support of Findina : Under this
alternative, there would be a greater buffer to
residential areas, and there is direct access for traffic
from Beach Boulevard. However, impacts from the drilling
of wells would affect residential areas and would be
increased under this alternative because the wells would
require a longer trajectory and would take considerably
longer to drill . Drilling impacts would affect the people
living in part of the Seabridge project because Parcel 2
is in close proximity to this development . The first
phase, Seabridge Village, consists of 200 units . The
second phase, the Lakes at Seabridge, is planned for 202
units .
3 . 7 . 3 Effectiveness in Meeting Project Objectives :
This alternative would meet Project objectives.
3 . 7.4 Feasibility: This alternative is not feasible.
Facts in Support of Findings : The Project
applicant has been advised that the property owner is
planning a surface development on Parcel 2 when the
existing Chevron wells are no longer viable, and would not
be interested in delaying this development for the 20-30
year life of this alternative. Therefore, the alternative
is not "feasible" because it is not capable of being
accomplished successfully in a reasonable period of time,
taking into account economic, social, and legal factos.
In addition, the site configuration would not
allow for the drilling of the necessary wells, even if the
facilities were located on the Facilities Site.
3 . 8 ALTERNATIVE SITES: PARCEL 3
3 . 8 . 1 Description of Alternative: Parcel 3 is bounded
by Memphis Avenue on the north, Knoxville Avenue on the
south, Florida Street on the west, and Beach Boulevard on
the east . It consists of approximately 8. 2 acres and is
zoned C-4 (Highway Commercial) facing Beach Boulevard and
R-3 (Medium-High Residential) on the remainder of the site.
49. 5954
Parcel 3 is located at the extreme southeastern
end of the Springfield Unit and would require wells to be
drilled which exceed the normal parameters of conventional
directional drilling .
3 .8 . 2 Comparison of the Effects of the Alternative to
.the Effects of the Proposed Project : The City hereby
finds that this alternative is environmentally superior to
the Project.
Facts in Support of Findina : More buffering
could be provided since the site is larger. The
facilities and the wells could be consolidated onto one
site, reducing the perimeter of the oil producing area.
This could reduce the impacts of oil operations on
surrounding residential areas.
3 .8 .3 Effectiveness in Meeting Project Objectives :
This alternative would not meet Project objectives .
Facts in Support of Finding : This alternative
would not meet the Project objective of recovering nine
million barrels of oil, because wells would be unable to
reach the thickest part of the resevoir . It is estimated
that it would result in the recovery of a maximum of six
million barrels of oil .
3 . 8 .4 Feasibility: This alternative is not feasible.
Facts in Support of Findings: The City has been
advised that the Huntington Beach Company is planning a
surface development on Parcel 3 when the existing Chevron
facilities are no longer viable, and would not be
interested in delaying this development for the 20-30 year
life of the alternative. Therefore, the alternative is
not "feasible" because it is not capable of being
accomplished successfully in a reasonable period of time,
taking into account economic, social, and legal factors .
The alternative also would be economically
infeasible. The land costs of the alternative site would
be prohibitively high because of the C-4 and R-3 zoning .
No acre-for-acre swap with the Project site would be
possible.
3 .9 ALTERNATIVE SITES: PARCEL 4
3 . 9 . 1 Description of Alternative: Parcel 4, McCallen
Park, is located west of Delaware Street between Yorktown
Avenue and Utica Avenue. It is a dedicated park owned by
50.
5954
t
the City and consists of approximately 5 . 1 acres .
Surrounding uses are residential (R-2) .
3 .9 .2 Comparison of the Effects of the Alternative to
the Effects of the Proposed Project : The City hereby
finds that the Project is environmentally superior to this
alternative.
Facts in Support of Finding: The facilities and
wells could be consolidated onto one site, reducing the
perimeter of the oil-producing area . However, the
possibility of upset would be increased, because all of
the wells wuold have to penetrate the main portion of th
Inglewood-Newport fault . Well damage by fault movement is
a well-known phenomenon in the Wilmington oil field, even
when no measurable earthquake has been recorded . Although
surface damage to the wells or surface installations
probably would not occur, down hole damage at the fault
intercept would preclude the proper abandonment of the
damaged wells .
This alternative also would eliminate a dedicated
park. This impact could be partially mitigated by
conducting a "land swap" in which the Project applicant
traded the Project site to the City. A park could then be
established on the Project site. The park on the Project
site would be smaller than the existing 5 . 8 acre site and
would consist of two separate parcels divided by a street,
creating an adverse safety impact .
3 . 9 .3 Effectiveness in Meeting Project Objectives :
This alternative would meet Project objectives .
3 . 9 .4 Feasibility: This alternative is not feasible.
Facts in Support of Findings : The City does not
desire to exchange McCallen Park for the Project site.
Safety issues relating to the need to drill through the
Inglewood-Newport fault make this a less desiable
alternative.
3 . 10 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
3 . 10 . 1 Description of Alternative: Neither block of the
Project site would be used for oil recovery, but instead
would be made available for development of a medium
density residential development project . Oil recovery
operations would continue at the 22 wells within the 160
acre Project Area. At density levels permitted by the
General Plan, the Project Site could be developed with 76
51. 5954
I
residential units . The Huntington Beach Ordinance Code
allows for the development of 108 units, and other
provisions of the Code may allow a greater number of units
for special purpose projects .
3 . 10 . 2 Comparison of the Effects of the Alternative to
the Effects of the Proposed Protect : The City hereby
finds that this alternative is not environmentally
superior to the Project.
Facts in Support of Finding :
(a) This alternative would not result in the
abandonment of 22 scattered wells over a 160-acre area .
Therefore, compared to the Project, it would increase the
number of residences which remain adjacent to -
oil-producing uses . The existing wells would continue to
produce oil, gas and water without the addition of the
modern vapor recovery systems , secondary recovery
techniques, or state-of-the-art fire fighting equipment
which will be incorporated into the Project . The
continuing use of existing technology would have
detrimental impacts on air quality compared to the
proposed Project . The potential for arresting subsidence,
or causing rebound, through injection would be
eliminated. Excess brine produced by Chevron would not be
used for injection and would continue to be disposed of in
the sewer system, thereby increasing the load on the sewer
system in comparison with the proposed Project. Existing
facilities would not be able to withstand the impacts of
major earthquakes .
(b) This alternative also would have positive
effects . It would eliminate the need for three heavy
trucks per day to travel through the neighborhood adjacent
to the Project Site during the drilling phase of the
Project; would eliminate the possibility of a fire or a
spill of oil or hazardous chemicals on the Project Site;
and would eliminate the possibility of damage to Project
facilities and walls in the event of an earthquake of a
magnitude of M 8 or greater. This alternative also would
eliminate the use of perimeter walls, which would be
required to mitigate aesthetic and noise impacts of the
proposed Project . In weighing the positive and negative
environmental effects of this alternative, however, the
City has determined that the positive effects of this
alternative are less significant than the negative effects .
(c) In addition, the "medium density residential
development" alternative also has the adverse
52.
5954
environmental impacts associated with the construction and
occupancy of residential units . The construction of
residential units would involve the temporary impacts
normally associated with residential construction
including increased noise, traffic, dust, risk of fire,
paint fumes and trash. Such construction related impacts
would occur for a period of between nine months and a
year . Traffic and parking impacts are associated with the
sales of rental activities involved with residential
units . Such sales or renting related impacts may occur
over a period of between three months and a year . Noise,
traffic, parking, risk of residential fire are impacts
associated with the occupancy of residential units . Such
impacts would be permanent .
3 . 10. 3 Effectiveness in Meeting Project Objectives :
This alternative would not meet Project objectives because
it would not permit the recovery of 9 million barrels of
crude oil by using secondary recovery techniques .
Existing oil operations would only recover approximately
500, 000 barrels of crude oil.
3 . 10 .4 Feasibility: This alternative is feasible.
53 .
5954
4 . ADDITIONAL FINDINGS
4 . 1 FINDINGS RELATING TO PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH THE
HOUSING ELEMENT: TO BE ADDED TO SECTION 2 . 5 . 2 .
OF THE CEOA FINDINGS
(g) Houses
Section 3 . 3 . 1 . 1 : "The attainment of decent
housing within a satisfying living environment
for households of all socioeconomic , racial and
ethnic groups in Huntington Beach. "
The Project will permit the abandonment of 22
wells , which will permit the development of
housing on the sites of the abandoned wells .
Existing oil operations no longer will affect the
residential areas near the abandoned oil
facilities . As conditioned and mitigated , the
Project will not prevent the attainment of a
satisfying living environment in the Project
vicinity. Although the Project will have
aesthetic impacts , these impacts have been
mitigated to the extent feasible . Furthermore,
the Project will improve the aesthetics of the
neighborhood surrounding the abandoned oil
facilities . Therefore , the Project is consistent
with this policy .
Section 3 . 3 . 1 . 2 : "The provision of a variety of
housing opportunities by type , tenure and cost
for households of all sizes throughout the City. "
The approval of the Project will permit the
abandonment and removal of 22 wells . The area as
presently occupied by all of these wells are
currently designated and zoned for residential
use ; therefore , the Project will permit the
provision of housing on these sites . Therefore ,
the Project is consistent with this policy .
4. 2 ADDITIONAL FINDINGS RELATING TO ALTERNATIVES
PROPOSED BY THE CHAMBERS GROUP, INC . ON BEHALF OF
THE CONCERNED CITIZENS OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
The Chambers Group, Inc . proposed that the SEIR should
evaluate additional alternatives . The City determined
that this was not necessary because (1) the SEIR discusses
a reasonable range of alternatives to the Project , and (2)
the proposed alternatives are not environmentally superior
to the proposed Project .
54. 5954
1 . Proposed Alternative : Oil is processed at a site
remote from the proposed Project Area .
Findines The City hereby finds that this
alternative is not environmentally superior to
the Project .
Facts in Support of Findines :
The "processing" of oil merely consists of
separating the oil from water . If this took
place on a site remote from the Project Site, two
additional pipelines would have to be
constructed . One would transport oil and water
to the remote site ; the other would return
processed water under pressure . This would would
create an additional hazard of rupture because
the water pipeline would be under pressure . The
water pipeline for the Project , in contrast , is a
low pressure pipeline .
2 . Proposed Alternative : No Oil Storage
Alternative .
Finding : The City hereby finds that this
alternative is not environmentally superior to
the Project .
Facts in Support of Findines :
(1) The Facts in Support of the Finding for
Proposed Alternative 1 (oil processing
remote from the Project site) hereby are
incorporated by reference .
(2) If oil were not stored on the Project Site ,
any risk of fire would simply be moved to
the area in which oil is stored .
3 . Proposed Alternative : Alternative designs of the
proposed facilities on the proposed site .
Finding : The City hereby finds that this
alternative is not environmentally superior to
the Project .
Facts in Support of Findines :
The current design of the Project is intended to
mitigate visual , noise , and traffic impacts of
the Project on the surrounding neighborhood .
55 .
5954
Alternative designs were not evaluated in the
SEIR because they would not result in the
mitigation of impacts . The Project design, and
conditions imposed through the Use Permit , will
ensure that the Project design mitigates impacts
to the extent feasible .
4 . Proposed Alternative : Transfer unprocessed oil
via a new pipeline to the Chevron facility,
eliminating the need for separate processing
facilities .
Findings : The City hereby finds that this
alternative is not environmentally superior to
the proposed Project .
Facts in Support of Findings :
(1) The Facts in Support of Findings relating to
Proposed Alternative 1 "hereby are
incorporated by reference .
(2) The Chevron facility is merely a re-pump
station and does not have the capacity to
separate oil from water .
56 .
5954
SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 88-1
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 86-1
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report No. 88-1
and Environmental Impact Report No. 86-1 for the Springfield Oil
Recovery Project identifies certain unavoidable adverse
significant environmental effects . CEQA Guidelines, Section
15093, requires the decision-maker to balance the benefits of a
proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in
determining whether the project should be approved. If the
decision-maker concludes that the benefits of the project
outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the
effects may be considered acceptable.
The final EIR identifies three separate unavoidable adverse
environmental impacts . (See Section 2 .0, Draft Supplemental
EIR 88-1 . ) These are:
1 . Aesthetics •
The neighborhood surrounding the project site consists of
medium density residential uses, predominantly in small
(8-10 unit ) developments and single family residences .
Views of the project site from adjacent residences will
consist of the screening block wall and landscaping. During
the initial drilling phases, drill rigs will be visible.
During the production and injection phases, temporary drill
-1-
5954
rigs will be used periodically for maintenance and will be
visible from adjacent residents . Tanks will be visible
above the wall.
2 . Risk of Upset/Health and Safety
Under a worst case scenario, assuming that all oil tanks are
full and the tanks are set out in an open field without
surrounding perimeter walls, there is a "rare" (defined in
the standard methodology for risk assessment as 1 : 10 ,000 to
1 : 1,000,000 chance that an oil tank fire could result in
radiant heat effecting the area outside of the immediate
Project Site.
3 . Seismic
If an earthquake of Magnitude of 8 .0 or greater on the
Richter Scale occurs with its epicenter in the project area,
structures in the Project Area, including tanks and walls of
the project facilities, would be damaged.
Each of these effects is lessened by the mitigation measures
suggested in the Supplemental and original EIR, which measures
will be required and incorporated into the project .
Here, the City of Huntington Beach does find that the
benefits flowing to the City and its residents from the project
outweigh the significant adverse environmental effects which
remain after the project ' s mitigation measures are implemented
and that the aforementioned unavoidable significant effects are
acceptable, based on the following overriding considerations:
-2- 5954
1 . The project will replace 16 existing tanks which are not
subject to controls for air pollutants . This will result in
a net reduction of 21,198 pounds of hydrocarbon emissions
per year , or an 87 percent reduction in hydrocarbon
emissions . Further reductions in hydrocarbon emissions will
also result from the elimination of other antiquated process
equipment .
2 . The project will bring about the abandonment of 22 scattered
wells over a 160-acre area . As a result, the abandoned
sites can be used for other purposes consistent with their
General Plan and zoning designations . Fewer City residents
will live adjacent to or in close proximity to oil
activities . This will have positive aesthetic impacts on
the City.
3 . The project will result in the abandonment to modern
standards of wells which have been abandoned, but not to
modern standards . This will contribute to the public health
and safety.
4 . The consolidation of a number of oil producing operations on
a single site, with modern fire control equipment, will
reduce the workload of the City fire department . This will
contribute to the public health and safety.
5. The project will use approximately 30,000 barrels of
produced water for injection purposes . This water is
currently dumped into the sanitary sewer by Chevron. This
will reduce the demand on the sanitary sewer system.
-3- 5954
6. The use of water injection has been shown to arrest
subsidence, or even cause a slight rebound. The project
will help to arrest subsidence in the Huntington Beach oil
field .
Another important consideration is the increase in oil
production, from 500,000 barrels of oil to 9 million barrels
ultimately, resulting from the consolidation. The oil will be
used to produce gasoline ( 180 million gallons) and other
petroleum products (162 million gallons) .
I
-4- 5954
Res, No, 5954
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ORANGE ss:
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH )
I , CONNIE BROCKWAY, the duly elected, qualified City
Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the
City Council of said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of
members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven;
that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the affirmative
vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council
at a regular meeting thereof held on the 21st day
of November 19 88 by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers:
Kelly, Green, Erskine, -Mays, Bannister
NOES: Councilmembers:
Finley, Winchell
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
None
City Clerk and ex-officio Verk
of the City Council of the City
of Huntington Beach, California
595