WPCL a_ !p!@iX*Lw:6c$ 2n-MF׍ڞl?]ΙzP +%B z.ْзEfKx?&`39u׷9L֖yC(G6I ƸG  l4cg twvW;J}U=byVX8n F51* &X/Gw>8<|oB2l/fcBmT0+0؊uaJOpFŁڀبC5Rsd3y 4ZKU|1_|}tk~R@G]g1~}9} yӰ5[ ZaxjTzٽ۹$^wcPآ-$܍2(}TME ڿRV,?cU(}$GIh7HW18v9Rp7 0~T 0x 0kJ 0k 0  0~ 08 0  0 0 0  0 01 0C 0V& 0| 0K 0 0 0V 0 0 0! 0I"U00" %# 0"# 0z# 0>$ "% 0=3% 0Fp% 0P% 1& 0& 1t' 0{(# 9) 0\D*E* 0$* 06* 00* 0:,+ 0f+ +- 0[1- h- 0[- 0- 0!.U.0 0&L0 0r0U.7 1kA7U@7 007 068U@R; 0~; 0= 0= 0}> 0? 0? 0@ 0A 0tB 0zC 0tC 0 DU.EU+@JE 0}E 0GU@H 0I 0J 0L 0N 0RP 0w#R 0+R 07S 02T 0.V 01W 0?0Y 0;oZ 03[ 0-\ 0; ^ 0E_ 0 .~^>!~$%'AU91\4 `(Times NewRomanTTU            _UX` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:<_        #99d#  :::C77D4A`ArialTTC .  ,     &77:d& US      X   A7> .~^>!~$%'AU91\4 `(Times NewRomanTTU7D4A`ArialTT$35;AGMU]c2I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)1\4 `(Times NewRomanTT0.Header86IMP-headerU<.\4 `(Times NewRomanTTU5+ 4 <DL!5U<.\4 `(Times NewRomanTTUnd !(#%'0*,.8135@8:<H?ACPFHKXMOR`TVYh[]`pbd gnU<.\4 `(Times NewRomanTTU5+ 4 <DL!5U<.\4 `(Times NewRomanTTUnd !(#%'0*,.8135@8:<H?ACPFHKXMOR`TVYh[]`pbd gn.\4 `(Times NewRomanTT86IMP-NormalU<.\4 `(Times NewRomanTTU5+ 4 <DL!5U<.\4 `(Times NewRomanTTU5+ 4 <DL!5PB0HeadingChapter Heading@..  2I.3  Ԁ   Ԉ tO 4Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers.. 2I.3  Ԁ  0..L=6SubheadingSubheading 2A.3  ..    ~>%8P-Lvl 1 HdgMain Heading with paragraph number  21.3  Ԁ0p..p  0p..p?%8P-Lvl 2 HdgLevel 2 heading with paragraph number  20.13  Ԁ0p..p  0p..p>"8P-Lvl 3 HdgLevel 3 heading with paragraph number  20.0.13  Ԁ0 ..   0p..p@"8P-Lvl 4 HdgLevel 4 heading with paragraph number  20.0.0.13  Ԁ0 ..   0p..pR8Level 1 HdgMain Heading   X8Level 2 HdgLevel 2 heading   X 8Level 3 HdgLevel 3 heading   :gn8line number  XXXCI*A`ArialTTCXXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU*A`ArialTT* `(Times NewRomanTT<:footnote ref   4 hE) `CG TimesEG=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU<:footnote tex      4" ..UM* `(Times NewRomanTTU    G=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU* `(Times NewRomanTT64heading 9 4     G=4X4` hp x (#%'GE) `CG TimesE    G=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU64heading 8 4     G=4X4` hp x (#%'GE) `CG TimesE    G=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU64heading 7 4     G=4X4` hp x (#%'GE) `CG TimesE    G=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU64heading 6 4     G=4X4` hp x (#%'GE) `CG TimesE    G=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU64heading 5 4     G=4X4` hp x (#%'G E) `CG TimesE    G=X` hp x (#%'0*G XXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU6&4heading 4          6x}4heading 3&    &&&E) `CG TimesE'  XXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU6~4heading 2&    &&&E) `CG TimesE'  XXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU6|4heading 1&    &&&E) `CG TimesE'  XXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU<:{ N}Normal 4     G=4X4` hp x (#%'G&&&E) `CG TimesE    G=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU<x}:{ 3}level 3&    &&&E) `CG TimesE'  XXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU>~:{ 2}level 2)&    &&&E) `CG TimesE'  XXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU@{:{ 1}level 1d)&    &&&E) `CG TimesE'  XXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU>x}:{ 4}level 4)&    &&&E) `CG TimesE'  XXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU>uz:{ 5}level 5)&    &&&E) `CG TimesE'  XXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU@{:{ 6}level 6l)&    &&&E) `CG TimesE'  XXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU<:{ W}IndentW      G=X` hp x (#%G....&&&E) `CG TimesE    G=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU<in:{ S}1 1/2 S  &&&E) `CG TimesEXXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU<:{ I}Indent      G=X` hp x (#%G....&&&E) `CG TimesE    G=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU<:{ X}Indent `     G=` X` hp x (#%'G..&&&E) `CG TimesE    G=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU:8page number   4 hXXXCI*A`ArialTTCG=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU< :level 2 (Cap&    '  <:level 1 (Cap&    '  <:level 4 (u/l&    '  .,norm1   (&tt   4  XXXUM* `(Times NewRomanTTUG=X` hp x (#%'0*G XXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU. ,linea  . ,lineb  (&n4       4 ......XXXUM* `(Times NewRomanTTU    G=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU(&h2  4XXXUM* `(Times NewRomanTTUG=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU,*toc1  4` " ! XXXUM* `(Times NewRomanTTUG=X` hp x (#%'0*G XXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU,*toc2 4     44 " T$UM* `(Times NewRomanTTU    G=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU,*toc3       4 " UM* `(Times NewRomanTTU    G=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU,*toc4  4" T$UM* `(Times NewRomanTTUG=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU&$H   4"  UM* `(Times NewRomanTTUG=X` hp x (#%'0*G XXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU. ,lines  &$n   4" XXXUM* `(Times NewRomanTTUG=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU(&h1   4"  XXXUM* `(Times NewRomanTTUG=X` hp x (#%'0*G XXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU0.source `     ` 4` " ....UM* `(Times NewRomanTTU    G=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU(&n1 4      44" ..XXXUM* `(Times NewRomanTTU    G=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU.,Toc H   4"  XXXUM* `(Times NewRomanTTU  G=X` hp x (#%'0*G XXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU(&n2 "      " 4` " ` ..` XXXUM* `(Times NewRomanTTU    G=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU(&h3   4" XXXUM* `(Times NewRomanTTUG=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU(&n3 4      44" XXXUM* `(Times NewRomanTTU    G=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU(&ce      4" ......XXXUM* `(Times NewRomanTTU    G=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU*(com 4      44" ..XXXUM* `(Times NewRomanTTU    G=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU. ,Times  8_6ESA Indent 4     G=4X4` hp x (#%G....    G=X` hp x (#%'0*G* (ESA  2"0Title 2  #OO #dd20Title 1  #OO #dd2in0index 1  &&&E) `CG TimesEXXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTU<in:index headin  &&&E) `CG TimesEXXXUJ* `(Times NewRomanTTUBV!$3Document Style  @..  23  Ԁ     Ԉ B-$4Document Style 23  Ԁ   B=$5Document Style.. 23  Ԁ   B $6Document Style.. . B $7Document Style0..B $8Document Style8..B& $9Document Style0..0` ..` D& &10Document Style0..8` ..` X83&11Technical Document Style  23  Ԁ     .. X-(&12Technical Document Style 23  Ԁ   .. X*$&13Technical Document Style 23  Ԁ   .. X)$&14Technical Document Style 23  Ԁ   .. X/&15Technical Document Style.. 23  Ԁ. X/&16Technical Document Style.. 23  Ԁ. X/&17Technical Document Style.. 23  Ԁ. X/&18Technical Document Style.. 23  Ԁ. D &19Document Style.. . D &20Document Style8..D &21Document Style0..D-&22Document Style 23  Ԁ   D& &23Document Style0..0` ..` fS &24Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..23  Ԁ..0..ff &25Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..` 23  Ԁ..0` ..` D=&26Document Style.. 23  Ԁ   fy &27Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. 23  Ԁ` ..` 0 .. f &28Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..23  Ԁ .. 0..f &29Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..h23  Ԁ..0h..hf &30Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..h..23  Ԁh..h0..f &31Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..h....23  Ԁ..0..f &32Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..h....p..p23  Ԁ..0p..pDV!&33Document Style  @..  23  Ԁ     Ԉ X/&34Technical Document Style.. 23  Ԁ. X/&35Technical Document Style.. 23  Ԁ. X-(&36Technical Document Style 23  Ԁ   .. X*$&37Technical Document Style 23  Ԁ   .. X)$&38Technical Document Style 23  Ԁ   .. X83&39Technical Document Style  23  Ԁ     .. X/&40Technical Document Style.. 23  Ԁ. X/&41Technical Document Style.. 23  Ԁ. (&42(&43(&44   4 hU) `(Times NewRomanTTUG=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXU) `(Times NewRomanTTU) `(Times NewRomanTT(&45      4" ..U) `(Times NewRomanTTU    G=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXU) `(Times NewRomanTTU(&46 4     G=4X4` hp x (#%'G&&&U) `(Times NewRomanTTU    G=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXU) `(Times NewRomanTTU(}&47&    &&&U) `(Times NewRomanTTU'  XXXU) `(Times NewRomanTTU*&48)&    &&&U) `(Times NewRomanTTU'  XXXU) `(Times NewRomanTTU,&49d)&    &&&U) `(Times NewRomanTTU'  XXXU) `(Times NewRomanTTU*}&50)&    &&&U) `(Times NewRomanTTU'  XXXU) `(Times NewRomanTTU*z&51)&    &&&U) `(Times NewRomanTTU'  XXXU) `(Times NewRomanTTU,&52l)&    &&&U) `(Times NewRomanTTU'  XXXU) `(Times NewRomanTTU(&53      G=X` hp x (#%G....&&&U) `(Times NewRomanTTU    G=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXU) `(Times NewRomanTTU(yn&54  &&&U) `(Times NewRomanTTUXXXU) `(Times NewRomanTTU(&55      G=X` hp x (#%G....&&&U) `(Times NewRomanTTU    G=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXU) `(Times NewRomanTTU(&56 `     G=` X` hp x (#%'G..&&&U) `(Times NewRomanTTU    G=X` hp x (#%'0*GXXXU) `(Times NewRomanTTU( &57&    '  (&58&    '  (yn&59  &&&U) `(Times NewRomanTTUXXXU) `(Times NewRomanTTU# e37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)3K=K,,&Km{{IO-%-,,J-m`%7,7,,7mq`%:,:,,1:g2P=P,,1&P=YHY,,Ym#<^H^,,1^l*>2>,,>mm)A2A,,1Ar,A5A,,Amr,E5E,,1ET\1K=K,,j&K{M/M=M,,&MnMlx/D8D,,Dm6O@O,,?Om55S@S,,1?S dFEIREISSEIRVenturaCastaicAlamedaCajonEIREIPNorthridgeSusannaPacoimaTujungaVerdugo25thHynesCadiztankeredTwentynineSheepholeCabazonunblendedtankeringVignes24th$Socioeconomics$ particulates PM10NO2B.T.C.NOXROCcrudesdownslopePeirsonspineflowerthreespinesticklebackdrainagesalluviationCRMPprecutbanks"ethnohistoric"curationFairchildbackfillInglewoodnearshoreDBAcorrosivitybbls minimization landformsviewshedberms revegetating Saugus&Paleontological&PRMPCAAQS Buenaventura &desulfurization&WhitakerComptonDominguezBarstowAdelantouninsulatedSisquocSCAQMDHolseronshoreTaylor&0 d d d($    (H2I$ !       0  'dxd Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5(32$ !     ($A<< c Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5($A<< c Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5($(32$ !     C<< c Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5($A<< cTable_B) `CG Times&&m PE37&P) `CG TimesY PE37P) `CG TimesO PE37P,xA`ArialTT&&txP7&P7D4A`ArialTT::}D4P :P1\4 `(Times NewRomanTT}\4 PP.\4 `(Times NewRomanTTa\4 PP.\4 `(Times NewRomanTTu\4 PP*A`ArialTTomanTTXXxPXP* `(Times NewRomanTTXXx PXP* `(Times NewRomanTTdPP) `CG TimesmanTTc PE37P* `(Times NewRomanTTXXxPXP* `(Times NewRomanTTPP) `(Times NewRomanTTX P7P) `(Times NewRomanTTXXv P7XP) `(Times NewRomanTTb P7P) `(Times NewRomanTT&&l P*7&P,xA`UniversmanTTixP7P%\  `$Times NewRomanTX\  P6G;P%\  `$Times NewRomanT&&a\  P6G;&P) `CG TimesmanT??r PE37?P($    Table_AFEIREISSEIRVenturaCastaicAlamedaCajonEIREIPNorthridgeSusannaPacoimaTujungaVerdugo25thHynesCadiztankeredTwentynineSheepholeCabazonunblendedtankeringVignes24th$Socioeconomics$ particulates PM10NO2B.T.C.NOXROCcrudesdownslopePeirsonspineflowerthreespinesticklebackdrainagesalluviationCRMPprecutbanks"ethnohistoric"curationFairchildbackfillInglewoodnearshoreDBAcorrosivitybbls minimization landformsviewshedberms revegetating Saugus&Paleontological&PRMPCAAQS Buenaventura &desulfurization&WhitakerComptonDominguezBarstowAdelantouninsulatedSisquocSCAQMDHolseronshoreTaylor _ '(  XmX&&mXX>('*d>>('*d>\ 1\ 2\ 3\ 4\ 5\ 6\ 7\ 8\ 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28"  .+ '++"  /'  X B.X  hp xT$XB^T$ PARTC.ENVIRONMENTALANALYSIS X nT$m&&mmqmSOCIOECONOMICS  X 1)  X B.X  hp xT$XBm&&mmgm PreAdmin.Baseline,GTCMarineTerminal10791 &m&gm&m&&&m@RC.12  1  'dxd  /'   @h h KW&& PARTG.SUMMARYOFPREVIOUSFEIR  X ?' L1xdEL1x??'xdEx?+_  CG TimesBoldt 1)   H;&&H;FinalEIS/SEIR,January1996#H;F#&&H;@^^0G  1  DUDUUUDUH ) '2(   3 Xp00 !X3 &&(# PARTG.SUMMARYOFPREVIOUSFEIR#&& Z#  X ?' !xdE x?3|7 "u,ae^6=U\\===\====\\\\\\\\\\==Qs~sm=Gsizbsw===\\=Q\Q\Q=\\33\3\\\\DG3\\\\QQ\Q\\\\\\=\\\\\\\\\QQQQQz~QsQsQsQsQ=3=3=3=3\\\\\\\\\\Q\\\\\i\QQQ}Q}Q~Q~QnrQsQsQrQ\\\\\\\\=3=3=3=3fG\r3rBs3u7r3\j\\\\yByBzDcFcFcFbGrBr3s3\\\\\\\uQuQuQ\s3\zDbGs3\\n\\sQ=33\4==\\==/N\\\=QKK\\\\\\@\\\\@==__\00\\pp\\\mff=_\@\_\壣\==p=\\f\z\=\Q\iwUzpNmń\QQ====؄psfpfzQsGwQ\Q=3QzffQz\Qpi\p\\sQQzpfppppsG\=33QQQppQpppp===\\\\\\\ppppppppppppppppppppppGGGGGGG\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\333333333333QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQppppppppppppppppppppppi\Q="u,ae^!%377bV%%%7b%%%%7777777777%%nbn1bOEKQEAOQ%+MEdQO?OI;EQOhOOG%%%77%17171%777V7777)+77O771171n777777%777777777O1O1O1O1O1bIK1E1E1E1E1%%%%Q7O7O7O7O7Q7Q7Q7Q7O7O1Q7O7O7O7Q7?7O0O1O0K0K0K1K1QBD0E1E1D0O7O7O7O7O7O7Q7Q7%%%%P=+M7DD(EF!DQ7Q@Q7Q7O7O7bOI(I(I);*;*;*;+D(DEQ7Q7Q7Q7Q7Q7hOO7F0F0F0Q7EQ7I);+EO7O7QBO7Q7E1%O74%%77%%/nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnNOOO777%1--77a777bb7'7777b'%%997bnn77CCTn7n7O7A\\==b%97h'OOnnn7Onn9OObbnnn7nnnnbbnnnb7%%nnnnnOCnbOOOOOOOOOO%n7O7=7bnOnI7%7O17?OVGnnOOOOOOOOOOnnnnn3nOOOOnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnOOnnnnnn\ICVnOnnn/AOOOOnnnnnnOOO7OOnOOnnnOOO1OOOO1OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO%OOO%OOO%OOO%OOOOOOOOOOOOOOCE=C=I1E+G1Q7O1%M1I=d=Q1I7O1OC?7C77E1O1ICO=VCCCOCE+Q7%O1O11CC1CCCC%%%7777777CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC+++++++77777777777777777777771111111111111111111CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC?71%n"u,ae^(,>CCwh,,,Cw,,,,CCCCCCCCCC,,w;w`T[cTO`c,4^Tyc`M`YHTc`~``V,,,CC,;C;C;,CC%%C%hCCCC14%CC`CC;;C;CCCCCC,CCCCCCCCC`;`;`;`;`;wY[;T;T;T;T;,%,%,%,%cC`C`C`C`CcCcCcCcC`C`;cC`C`C`CcCMC`;`;`;[;[;[;[;cPS;T;T;S;`C`C`C`C`C`CcCcC,%,%,%,%aJ4^CS%S0T%U(S%cCcMcCcC`C`Cw`X0X0Y1H3H3H3H4S0S%T%cCcCcCcCcCcC~``CU;U;U;cCT%cCY1H4T%`C`CcP`CcCT;,%%`C4,,CC,,/N```CCC,;66CCuCCCwwC/CCCCw/,,EECw##CCQQeCC`COooJJw,EC~/``C`E``wwCwwwC,,`Qw``````````,C`CJCw`YC,C`;CM`hV``````````>``````oYQh`9O```````C```````;````;````````````````````````````````````````````,```,```,```,``````````````QTJQJY;T4V;cC`;,%^;YJyJc;YC`;`QMCQCCT;`;YQ`JhQQQ`QT4cC,%%`;`;;QQ;QQQQ,,,CCCCCCCQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ4444444CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC%%%%%%%%%%%%;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQMC;,"u,ae^(,>CCwm,,,Cw,,,,CCCCCCCCCC,,wCw`Y``YPhh4@hY~`hPh`JY````Y,,,CC,CJ;J;/CJ%,J%mJCJJ;4,JC`CC;CCCCCCCCC,CCCCCCCCJ`C`C`C`C`C``;Y;Y;Y;Y;4%4%4%4%`JhChChChC`J`J`J`J`C`C`KhChC`C`CPJ`C`C`C`;`;`;`;`[X;Y;Y;X;hChChChChChChJhJ3%4%4%4%yL@hJX%X5Y%Y4Y%`K`j`K`JhChCc`;`;`;K3J4K3J4X5X-Y,`J`K`J`J`K`J``CX;Y;X;`JY%`J`;J4Y,`C`C`[hC`JY;4%%hC4,,CC,,/N```CCC,C99CCCCCwwC/CCCCw/,,MMCw##CCQQeCC`CTooJJw,MC~/``C`L``wwCwwwC,,`Qw``````````,C`CJCw`YC,C`;CM`h[``````````@``````tYQh`9O```````C```````C````C````````````````````````````````````````````,```,```,```,``````````````QYJQJY;Y4Y;h;`;4%h;YJ~J`;YCh;`QQCQCCY;`;YQ`JhQQQ`QY4h;4%%h;`;;QQ;QQQQ,,,CCCCCCCQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ4444444;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;%%%%%%%%%%%%;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQC;,) p`CG Times,_ p CG TimesBold )4&_ p`$CG TimesItalic*:*0 p.CG TimesBold Italic"u,ae^6=U\\===\====\\\\\\\\\\==\zznGXznfzz===\\=\fQfQ@\f3=f3f\ffQG=f\\\Q\\\\\\\\\=\\\\\\\\f\\\\\QzQzQzQzQG3G3G3G3f\\\\ffff\\g\\\\nf\\\QQQQ}yQzQzQyQ\\\\\\ffF3G3G3G3iXfy3yIz3zGz3ggf\\ψQQQgFfGgFfGyIy>z=fgffgf\yQzQyQfz3fQfGz=\\}\fzQG33\4==\\==/N\\\=\NN\\\\\\@\\\\@==ii\00\\pp\\\sff=i\@\i\壣\==p=\\f\z\=\Q\i~XzpNmń\\\====؄pzfpfzQzGzQQQG3QzffQz\Qpp\p\\zQQzpfppppzGQG33QQQppQpppp===\\\\\\\ppppppppppppppppppppppGGGGGGGQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ333333333333QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQppppppppppppppppppppppp\Q="46^ ^@HdllHHHlHHHHllllllllllHH`HT|tHHHllH`l`l`Hll<<l<llllPT<llll``l`llllllHlllllllll``````````H<H<H<H<llllllllll`lllll|l_`___``_``_llllllllH<H<H<H<xTl=N<A=l~llllNNPuRuRuRtTN=<lllllll___l<lPtT<llll`H<<l4HHllHH/NlllH`XXllllllLllllLHHppl88lllllxxHplLlqllHHHllxllHl`l|d\l``HHHHxx`T`l`H<`xx`l`|lll``xTlH<<````HHHlllllllTTTTTTTllllllllllllllllllllll<<<<<<<<<<<<```````````````````|l`H"u,ae^@HdllHHHlHHHHllllllllllHHlTh͜xٜHHHllHlx`x`Llxodur[rjUdurrrg555OO5FOFOF5OO,,O,{OOOO;>,OOrOOFFOFOOOOOO5OOOOOOOOOrFrFrFrFrFjlFdFdFdFdF5,5,5,5,uOrOrOrOrOuOuOuOuOrOrFuOrOrOrOuO[OrFrFrFlFlFlFlFu_bFdFdFbFrOrOrOrOrOrOuOuO5,5,5,5,tX>oOb,b9d,e0b,uOu\uOuOrOrOri9i9j;Vb9b,d,uOuOuOuOuOuOrrOeFeFeFuOd,uOj;U>d,rOrOu_rOuOdF5,,rO455OO55/NrrrOOO5F@@OOOOOO8OOOO855RRO))OOaaxOOrO^XX5RO8rrOrRrrO卍O55rarrrrrrrrrr5OrOXOrjO5OrFO[r{grrrrrrrrrrIrrrrrrja{rC^rrrrrrrOrrrrrrrFrrrrFrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr5rrr5rrr5rrr5rrrrrrrrrrrrrradXaXjFd>gFuOrF5,oFjXXuFjOrFra[OaOOdFrFjarX{aaarad>uO5,,rFrFFaaFaaaa555OOOOOOOaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa>>>>>>>OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO,,,,,,,,,,,,FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa[OF5"u,ae^/5IOO555O5555OOOOOOOOOO55Orjrrj_{{>L{jr{_{rXjrrrrj555OO5OXFXF8OX,5X,XOXXF>5XOrOOFOOOOOOOOO5OOOOOOOOXrOrOrOrOrOrrFjFjFjFjF>,>,>,>,rX{O{O{O{OrXrXrXrXrOrOrY{O{OrOrO_XrOrOrOrFrFrFrFrliFjFjFiF{O|O{O{O{O{O{X{X<,>,>,>,[L{Xi,i?j,j>j,rYr~rYrX|O{OurFrFrFYYi?i6j5rXrYrXrXrYrXrrOiFjFiFrXj,rXrFX>j5rOrOrl{OrXjF>,,{O455OO55/NrrrOOO5OCCOOOOOO8OOOO855[[O))OOaaxOOrOdXX5[O8rrOr[rrO卍O55rarrrrrrrrrr5OrOXOrjO5OrFO[r{lrrrrrrrrrrLrrrrrrja{rC^rrrrrrrOrrrrrrrOrrrrOrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr5rrr5rrr5rrr5rrrrrrrrrrrrrrajXaXjFj>jF{FrF>,{FjXXrFjO{FraaOaOOjFrFjarX{aaaraj>{F>,,{FrFFaaFaaaa555OOOOOOOaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa>>>>>>>FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF,,,,,,,,,,,,FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaOF5"u,ae^6=X\\===\====\\\\\\\\\\==\nnzni=Qzfznn\fnnff===\\=\\Q\Q3\\33Q3\\\\FF3\QzQQFQ\Q\\\\\\=\\\\\\\\\n\n\n\n\n\zzQnQnQnQnQ=3=3=3=3z\\\\\\\\\fQn\\\\fQ\n\n\n\n\yQyQzQzQnnQnQnQnQ\\\\\\\\>3=3=3=3\QzQg3gBf3g3g3y\zny\z\\\znFnFnF\F\F\F\FgBg3f3\\\\\\zfQgFgFgF\f3z\nF\Ff3fQfQn\\nQ=33\4==\\==/N\\\=\UU\\\\\\@\\\\@==\\\33\\pp\\\b\\=\\@\[\塡\==p=\p\f\z\=\Q\iwUzpNmń\QQ====pppfpfzQpGfQ\Q=3zQzffzQz\Qpp\p\\fQfQzppfppppppG\=33QfQQppQpppp===\\\\\\\ppppppppppppppppppppppGGGGGGG\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\333333333333QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQppppppppppppppppppppppi\Q="u,ae^6F_\\===\====\\\\\\\\\\==\zzzznF\znnzfnzznn===\\=\\Q\Q@\f33\3f\\\FF3fQz\QF\\\\\\\\\=\\\\\\\\\z\z\z\z\z\zQzQzQzQzQF3F3F3F3f\\\\ffffpQz\\\\nQ\n\y\z\y\yQyQzQzQuyQzQzQyQ\\\\\\ffF3F3F3F3b\z\n3nIn3n>n3ggf\\ňyFyFzFgFgFgFfFnFn3n3fgffgfznQnFnFnF\n3fzFfFn3nQnQu\fzQF33\4==\\==/N\\\F\QQ\\\\\\=\\\\===bb\33\\pp\\\iii=b\=\s\塡\==p=\z\f\z\=\Q\i~XzpNmń\\\====zpzfpfzQzGpQQQG3zQzffQz\Qpp\p\\pQpQzpzfpppzpzGQG33QpQQppQpppp===\\\\\\\ppppppppppppppppppppppGGGGGGGQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ333333333333QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQppppppppppppppppppppppp\Q="u,ae^18MSS888S8888SSSSSSSSSS88Jxir{icx{8Aui{x`xoYi{xxxl888SS8JSJSJ8SS..S.SSSS>A.SSxSSJJSJSSSSSS8SSSSSSSSSxJxJxJxJxJorJiJiJiJiJ8.8.8.8.{SxSxSxSxS{S{S{S{SxSxJ{SxSxSxS{S`SxIxJxIqIqIrJrJ{dgIiJiJgIxSxSxSxSxSxS{S{S8.8.8.8.z]AuSg/gZ?Z?Z?YAgYAi.xSxS{dxS{SiJ8..xS488SS88/NxxxSSS8JDDSSSSSS;SSSS;88VVS++SSffSSxSc]]8VS;xxSxWxxS唔S88xfxxxxxxxxxx8SxS]SxoS8SxJS`xlxxxxxxxxxxMxxxxxxofxGcxxxxxxxSxxxxxxxJxxxxJxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx8xxx8xxx8xxx8xxxxxxxxxxxxxxfi]f]oJiAlJ{SxJ8.uJo]]{JoSxJxf`SfSSiJxJofx]fffxfiA{S8..xJxJJffJffff888SSSSSSSffffffffffffffffffffffAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS............JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJffffffffffffffffffffff`SJ8"u,ae^9@Y``@@@`@@@@``````````@@Uyyr@Kyngy|@@@``@U`U`U@``55`5````GK5````UU`U``````@`````````UUUUUUyUyUyUyU@5@5@5@5``````````U`````n`TUTTTUUswTyUyUwT````````@5@5@5@5jK`w6wEy5{:w6`o````EEGhIhIhIgKwEw6y5```````{T{T{T`y5`GgKy5``s``yU@55`4@@``@@/N```@UNN``````C````C@@cc`22``uu```rjj@c`C`d`媪`@@u@``j``@`U`n|YuRrŊ`UU@@@@؊uyjujUyK|U`U@5UjjU`Uun`u``yUUujuuuuyK`@55UUUuuUuuuu@@@```````uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuKKKKKKK``````````````````````555555555555UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuun`U@"u,ae^9@Y``@@@`@@@@``````````@@`sK\sj@@@``@`jUjUC`j5@j5j`jjUK@j```U`````````@````````j`````NJUUUUUK5K5K5K5j````jjjj``k````sj```TTUUTUUT``````jjI5K5K5K5n\j6M5K5kkj``َTTUkIjKkIjKMA@jkjjkj`TUTj5jUjK@```jUK55`4@@``@@/N```@`RR``````C````C@@nn`22``uu```yjj@n`C`n`媪`@@u@``j``@`U`n\uRrŊ```@@@@؊ujujUKUUUK5UjjU`Uuu`u``UUujuuuuKUK55UUUuuUuuuu@@@```````uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuKKKKKKKUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU555555555555UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu`U@T(#< !     ݛXX3 Xp00 !X3֜% . 33@IIT @@?? G.1INTRODUCTION   AsdescribedinthePartAofthisdocument,thepreviouslyproposedrouteofthePacificPipelinewasanalyzedinanEnvironmentalImpactReport(EIR)thatwascompletedinSeptember1993.WhilemuchofthepreviouslyproposedroutewasinSantaBarbaraandVenturaCounties,theanalysisincludedinthatdocumentcoveredamajorpartofthepipelineroutethatwouldstillbeutilizedbyPPSIifthecurrentlyproposedprojectisconstructed:therouteportionbetweenCastaicJunctioninSantaClaritaandtherefineriesatCarson/WilmingtonandElSegundo.ThepreviousFEIRdescribedtheenvironmentalsettingandconsequencesoftheconstructionandoperationofthePacificPipeline,evaluatingaroutefromcoastalSantaBarbara,throughVenturaCounty,andintoLosAngelesCounty(seeFigureA1inPartA).ThepipelinewasintendedtoprovidecrudeoiltransportationfromSantaBarbaraandVenturaCountiestoLosAngelesarearefineries;itwouldnothaveservedSanJoaquinValleyproducers.TheFEIRalsoevaluatedseveralalternativestothePacificPipeline.TheFinalEIR(FEIR)waspreparedunderthedirectionoftheCaliforniaPublicUtilitiesCommission(CPUC)pursuanttotheCaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityAct(CEQA),underwhichtheCPUCwasthedesignated"leadagency."TheFEIRdocumentreflectscommentsmadebyagenciesandthegeneralpublicduringthepublicscopingperiodandDraftEIRpublicreviewperiod.BecauseofeventsthatoccurredsincethepublicationofthepreviousFEIR,andbecausethiscurrentdocument(asajointEIS/SEIR)mustalsocomplywithNationalEnvironmentalPolicyAct(NEPA)andotherFederalguidelines,asummaryofthepreviousFEIRispresentedherein.ThepreviousFEIRisherebyincorporatedbyreferenceintothisEIS/SEIR,andisavailableforreviewasdescribedinPartA.5ofthisdocument.SectionG.2presentsadescriptionoftherelevantportionsofthepreviouslyProposedProjectandthealternativesthatwereevaluatedintheFEIR.SectionG.3summarizesthecomparisonofalternativesandtheEnvironmentallySuperiorAlternativefromtheFEIR.SectionG.4summarizesforeachissueareatheenvironmentalimpactsandmitigationmeasuresfortheCastaicJunctiontoWilmington/ElSegundoportionofthePacificPipeline.Thisportionoftheproposedroutehasnotchanged,andthereforehasnotbeenreanalyzedinthisdocumentexceptwherecircumstanceswarrantedadditionalanalysis.SectionG.5summarizesthecumulativedevelopmentimpactsandmitigationmeasures,andSectionG.6includestheImpactSummaryTablesfromtheFEIR,listingthemitigationmeasuresrelevanttotheLosAngelesCountyportionoftheoriginallyproposedroute.  -'' Ї33@ E G.2DESCRIPTIONOFPREVIOUSLYPROPOSEDPROJECT  @vvPANDPROJECTALTERNATIVES 33 ӈ   G.2.1DESCRIPTIONOFPREVIOUSLYPROPOSEDPROJECT   PPSIappliedtotheCPUCandotheraffectedjurisdictionsforpermitstoconstructandoperatea171milepipelinefromSantaBarbaraCountytoWilmingtonandElSegundorefinerydestinationsintheLosAngelesBasin.TheproposedpipelinerouteisshowninFigureA1.ThepipelinewastohavebeenburiedalongmostofitslengthintheSouthernPacificTransportationCompany(SPTC)railroadrightofway(ROW).Itwouldhavehadacapacityof130,000barrelsperday(BPD).Constructionoftheproposedpipelinewastotakeapproximately12months.Fiveseparategroupsofworkersandequipment(referredtoaspipelinespreads)wouldinstallthepipelinesimultaneouslyindifferentlocations.Theconstructionspreadswouldprogressatanaveragerateof0.5to1mileperdayinopenareasand300to500feetperdayinurbanareas.Constructionactivitieswouldbecontainedintherailroadrightsofwayforthemajorportionofthepipeline'slength.Thepipelinewouldbefullyinsulated;noheaterswererequiredforthisproject.Allproposedpumpswouldbeelectricallydriven.ThepipelinewastobeoperatedfromacentralcontrolfacilitylocatedinVenturaCounty,andequippedwithasophisticatedcommunicationsystem,includingfiberopticsandaredundantsatellitedishsystemforbackupinemergencies.Thepipelinewasalsotobeequippedwith43remotelycontrolledblockvalves(37alongthelengthofthepipelineandsixatpumpandtransferstations)thatcouldbeshutdownfromthecontrolcenterupondetectionofanyanomalies.Inaddition,thepipelinewastohave28checkvalvesthatautomaticallypreventthebackwardflowofoilifaruptureoccurs(seeTableG1).ThepumpstationsweretobelocatedinSantaBarbaraandVenturaCountieswiththeexceptionoftheSylmarPressureReliefStationinLosAngelesCounty.ThatstationhasbeenreplacedinthecurrentlyproposedpipelinewiththeWhitakerPressureReductionStation(seedescriptioninPartBofthisdocument).OfthosevalvesproposedbytheApplicantandanalyzedinthepreviousFEIR,17blockvalvesand4checkvalveswouldbelocatedintheLosAngelesCountyportionoftheroute.FollowingisatablelistingvalvesproposedfortheLosAngelesportionoftheroute.OneblockvalvethatwasoriginallyproposedtobelocatedattheSylmarPressureReliefStationhasbeendeletedfromthislistsincethisstationwillnotexistinthecurrentscenario. G.2.2 0 DESCRIPTIONOFPROJECTALTERNATIVES  g'## BasedonCEQArequirements,arangeofreasonablealternativeswasselectedforanalysis.Initially28alternativeswereconsidered;asaresultofascreeninganalysis,15alternativesweredroppedand13wereselectedforfullanalysisintheEIR.Ofthese13alternatives,eightwererelatedtotheportionoftherouteinSantaBarbaraandVenturaCountiesandarenotrelevanttothecurrentlyProposedProject.FollowingisadescriptionofthefivealternativesrelevanttothecurrentlyProposedProject. .** Ї@S S ? TableG1BlockandCheckValveLocationsPreviousFEIR   *q ddd Xdd Xdd X(#(#q,d ,td",td", t +  *  xH*33 ,&&Milepost -0M -BlockValve -0M -CheckValve -0M -Reasons ?0!0M H0 x  H?111.1 'f ' 'f 'X +f +LyonCanyon ?0!f  H   (H?115.0 'l  'X 'l  ' +l  +SantaSusannaFault ?0!l  H (  (H?119.75 'r 'X 'r ' +r +SanFernandoFault ?0!r H (  (H?121.25 'x  'X 'x  ' +x  +PacoimaWash ?0!x  H (  H?124.25 '~  'X '~  ' +~  +TujungaWash:HansenSpreadingGrounds ?0! 2 H   (H?129.0 ' 8 'X ' 8 ' + 8 +BurbankWesternChannel ?0! 8 H (  (H?133.75 '! >  'X '! >  ' +! > ! +VerdugoWash ?0!! > " H (  (H?136.5 ''D # 'X ''D $ ' +'D % +HollywoodFault ?0!'D & H (  (H?139.75 '-J ' 'X '-J ( ' +-J ) +LosAngelesRiver ?0!-J * H (  (H?145.0 '3P + 'X '3P , ' +3P - +25thStreet ?0!3P . H (  (H?150.5 '9V / 'X '9V 0 ' +9V 1 +WilmingtonBranch ?0!9V 2 H (  (H?154.5 '?\3 'X '?\4 ' +?\5 +ComptonCreek ?0!?\6 H (  (H?158.5 'Eb7 'X 'Eb8 ' +Eb9 +DominguezChannel ?0!Eb: H (  (H?158.75 'Kh; ' 'Kh< 'X +Kh= +DominguezChannel ?0!Kh> H (  (H?159.25 'Qn? 'X 'Qn@ ' +QnA +EndofWilmingtonRoute R=!QnB H (  (HR ElSegundoBranch K<-WtC" H (  (HK0.125 ']zD 'X ']zE ' +]zF +WattsJunctionScraperTrap ?0!]zG H (  (H?2.0 'cH 'X 'cI 'X +cJ +ComptonCreek ?0!cK H (  (H?6.125 'iL 'X 'iM ' +iN +LagunaDominguez ?0!iO H (  (H?6.25 'oP ' 'oQ 'X +oR +LagunaDominguez ?0!oS H (  (H?10.5 'uT 'X 'uU ' +uV +EndofElSegundoRoute =,!uW H (  xH= ){X )17 ){Y )4 +{Z + TOTAL 1'%{[ H0 x   1&&,33 CajonPipeline(withAAPL)Alternative  ^ TheCajonPipelinewouldconsistofa142mileinsulated20inchheavyoilpipelinewithamaximum180,000BPDcapacity.Itwouldconnect12GaugeLaketobothGATXandtheHynesstationintheLosAngelesarea.ThepurposeoftheproposedCajonPipelineistotransportcrudeoilfromboththeSantaBarbaraChannelandfromtheSanJoaquinValleytoLosAngelesrefiningcenters.CrudeoilwouldleavetheSantaBarbaraareaviatheexistingAllAmericanPipeline(AAPL)andwouldbedeliveredtoanewterminal,theCajonTerminal,at12GaugeLake,California(27mileswestofBarstow).Thislegoftheroutewouldconsistof237milesofexistingpipeline.ApumpstationandoilstoragetankswouldbelocatedattheCajonTerminalat12GaugeLake;aboosterpumpstationwouldbelocatedatAdelantotocarrytheoilovertheCajonPassintotheLosAngelesarea.AFinalEIS/EIR(EnvironmentalImpactStatement/EIR)wasreleasedinJuly1993forthisprojectwhichisproposedasacommoncarrierpipeline.LeadagenciesaretheCityofAdelanto(forCEQA)andtheU.S.BureauofLandManagement(BLM)(forNEPA).(NOTE:seeSectionB.4.2intheEIS/SEIRforanupdatedDescriptionofthisalternative.) -)l  ARCOPipeline90Alternative   ARCOPipelineCompany(previouslycalledFourCornersPipelineCompany)operatesAPLLine90,anuninsulated16inchcommoncarriercrudelinethatconnectsterminalsintheLosAngelesareatotheAAPLatCadiz,CA,locatedintheeasternMojaveDesert.Thispipelinewasinstalledin1958andcurrentlytransportscrudethatistankeredintotheLosAngelesbasinandcarriesitinaneasterlydirectiontotheAAPL,whichinturn,transportstheoiltorefinerydestinationsontheGulfCoast.ThisalternativewouldhavetransportedSantaBarbaracrudebypipelinefromGaviotatoCadizviatheAAPL(adistanceof353miles),atwhichpointtheoilwouldbetransferredintotheAPLLine90fortransportationtotheHynesstationintheLosAngelesarea(adistanceof188miles).Line90wouldhavetobemodifiedtoallowreversedflowandwouldrequirethreenewpumpstationsandmodificationofanexistingpumpstation(TwentyninePalms).Gasfiredheaterswouldneedtobeinstalledatthreestations(Sheephole,TwentyninePalms,andCabazon).UseofthisalternativewouldallowunblendedSantaBarbaraoffshorecrudetobedeliveredtoalargenumberofrefineriesintheLosAngelesbasin.Thisheatedpipelinealternativewouldallowfortransportinguptoamaximumof100,000BPDofSantaBarbaraoffshorecrudetoLosAngelesrefineries.IntheEIS/SEIR,thisalternativeisnolongerconsideredfeasiblebecausetheoperatorofLine90hasnopendingplansorapplicationsforchangingthedirectionofflow.Therefore,theFEIRanalysisofthisalternativeisnotpresentedinSectionG.4below. NoProjectAlternative  Qn TheNoProjectAlternativerepresentedprojectswhichwereinplaceandinoperationatthetimetheFEIRwasprepared.TheNoProjectAlternativewasassumedtoresultinascenarioinwhichtheoilproducedoffshoreSantaBarbarawouldbetransportedtorefineriesthroughpipelinesandtankeringoperationsthatwereinexistenceatthetime(Note:tankeringisnolongeroccurringfromtheSantaBarbaraChannel).TheNoProjectAlternativeassumedthatthefollowingeventswouldoccur:pG &&330 p PointArguellooilproductionwouldreachitspeakproductionof70,000to85,000BPDveryrapidlyy"p(#p(# 0 p SantaYnezUnitoilproductionwouldstartinlate1993orearly1994andtakeafewyearstoreach90,000or A#^ 100,000BPD p(#p(# 0 p TankeringfromGaviotawouldtakeplaceatanaveragerateof50,000BPD$ !p(#p(# 0 p Acompositescenariowasusedforuseofexistingpipelines:%!"p(#p(#  p 0 0 AllAmericanPipeline(AAPL)toPentland+APL(ARCOPipeline)Line63(unheated)toLosAngeles )'F#$ incombinationwithTexacoheatedlinetotheSanFranciscoBayArea; 0(#0(#  p 0 0 AAPLtoWestTexas;and,($&0(#0(#  p 0 0 UnocalSisquocPipelinetotheSantaMariaRefinery.0!0(#0(##&& pG;#)%'!(#!(# 33;ItisnotedthatthepreviouslyProposedProjectwouldhavehadathroughputof130,000BPDtotheLosAngelesarea.NoneofthepipelinescenariosundertheNoProjectAlternativecouldachievethesame objective.Thus,incomparingthealternativesitwasalsoimportanttocomparetheirpotentialtotransport X-u)+ equalvolumesofcrude.ItwasforthatreasonthatacombinationofexistingpipelinesandtankerswasconsideredundertheNoProjectAlternative. TheNoProjectAlternativeconsideredinthecurrentEIS/SEIRanalysisisbasedonadifferentscenario,sinceseveralfactorshavechangedsincethecompletionoftheFEIR(seePartsA.4.4andB.4.5). AlternativeRouteAlignments    Alternativeroutealignmentsweredefinedasconnections,minorfeederlines,orpipelineroutechangesthatwerenotcompletealternativestotheprojectasawholebutwhichcouldbeaddedtoit.Thefollowingtwoalignments,locatedinLosAngeles,arerelevanttothisanalysisbecausetheyarelocatedintheportionoftheproposedroutethathasnotchangedsincetheoriginalanalysis.TheremainingalignmentswerelocatedinSantaBarbaraandVenturaCountiesandarenotaddressedbecausetheyarenotrelevanttothecurrentlyProposedProjectroute. EastAlamedaStreetAlignment (downtownLosAngeles).Thisalternativewhichwasproposedbythe .K AlamedaCorridorTransportationAuthority(ACTA),wouldincludemovingthepipelineoutoftheproposedSouthernPacificRailroadROW(locatedimmediatelywestofEastAlamedaStreetinLosAngeles)totheEastAlamedaStreetROW.ACTA'sintentinthisproposalistoensurethatconflictswouldnotoccurbetweenthepipelineandACTA'splannedtransportationimprovementsfortheAlamedaCorridor.ACTAisconsideringconstructionofabelowgradeconfigurationforconsolidatedraillines.IftheProposedProjectwereconstructedandadepressedraillineconfigurationwereapproved,thiswouldnecessitatemovingthepipelineintoEastAlamedaStreetanyway.Thisalternativealignmentwouldavoidthiseventuality.SeePartA.4.1inthisEIS/SEIRforadescriptionoftheroutealongAlamedaStreetascurrentlyplanned. SantaFeAvenueRoute (downtownLosAngeles).Thisalternativedeviatesfromtheproposedroutein e LosAngelesforfourmiles,fromthejunctionofSpringandVignesStreetstoAlamedaand24thStreets.ThisroutewassuggestedbytheCountyofLosAngelestotakeintoconsiderationpublictransitplanningalongtheproposedcorridor.ThisalternativewouldeliminatethepotentialtransportationimpactsassociatedwithconstructingtheProposedProjectinAlamedaStreet. @! ! IG.3SUMMARYCOMPARISONOFALTERNATIVES  %!!  G.3.1 0 BACKGROUND  '## Asdescribedpreviously,avarietyofalternativeswereconsideredintheFEIR;theyaredescribedindetailinPartBofthatdocument.InPartCoftheFEIR,theenvironmentalimpactsassociatedwiththeproject(asthenproposed)andthealternativeswereassessed(seePartCoftheFEIR,alsosummarizedinSectionsG.4throughG.6below).InPartDoftheFEIR,acomprehensivecomparisonofalternativesfocusedonthesignificantimpactsandmajordifferences,ortradeoffs,inimpacts.ThecomparativeanalysispresentedinPartDwasintendedtoprovidedecisionmakerswithinformationsothattheycouldmakebalanced, .** reasoneddecisionsonthependingpipelineapplicationwhichhadbeensubmittedtotheCPUCandresponsibleagencies.TheanalysisbelowissummarizedfromPartDoftheFEIR,whichincludeddetaileddiscussionandcomparisonofalternatives.First,theProposedProjectandtheNoProjectandmajorpipelinealternativeswerecompared,withselectionoftheenvironmentallysuperioralternative.Second,abriefcomparisonofthealternativeroutealignmentswasmade. G.3.20 0 PREVIOUSLYPROPOSEDPROJECTCOMPAREDTONOPROJECTANDPIPELINE (0(#0(# 0 p 00p(#p(#ALTERNATIVES;ENVIRONMENTALLYSUPERIORALTERNATIVE  - 0(#0(# Determinationofwhichoftheprojectalternativesisenvironmentallysuperiorisalwaysadifficultprocess,anddependsonmanyfactors.Differentalternativesaresuperiorincertainissueareas,andinsomeissueareasthereareonlyslightdifferencesamongthealternatives.InordertomeettheCEQArequirementtoidentifyanenvironmentallysuperioralternative,weconsideredtheimportanceofissueareas(e.g.,systemsafety,airquality,biology,culturalresourcesandlanduse)thathavepotentiallongterm,widespreadsignificantimpacts.Evenintheselimitedissueareas,determiningasuperioralternativewasextremelydifficultbecauseofthetradeoffsassociatedwithdifferentpipelineroutes.AsdescribedindetailinPartDoftheFEIR,thepreviouslyProposedProjectandCajonPipelineAlternativehadcloselymatchedimpactssuchthattheclearsuperiorityofonecouldnotbeeasilydemonstrated.However,asshowninTableG2,thePacificPipelineofferedclearadvantagesovertheCajonPipelineintwoenvironmentalissueareas(versusoneforCajon)andminoradvantagesinsixissueareas(versusthreeforCajon).Inaddition,theactualimplementationofeffectivemitigationmeasurestoreduceenvironmentalimpactwasconsideredtobemoreassuredforthePacificPipelineProject.Thiswasbasedonscrutinyofthetwoalternativesintermsofenvironmentalimpactanalysisandmitigationmeasuresdevelopedbytheleadandresponsibleagencies(asindicatedbytheirrespectiveEIRandEIS/EIR).ThecomparisonofthepreviouslyProposedProjecttotheNoProjectAlternativeresultedintheFEIRconcludingthatthepipelinewouldbeenvironmentallypreferablebecausetheNoProjectAlternativeincludedtankeringofoilproducedintheSantaBarbaraChannel.Theriskofanoilspillfromtankering,andsubsequentimpactsonthemarineandcoastalenvironment,wereconsideredtobemoreseriousthantheriskofpipelinerupture.IncomparingthepreviouslyProposedProjecttotheAPL90Alternative,theageoftheAPL90andtheattendantriskofoilspillsandlikelihoodofsignificantrepairand/orreplacementcausedtheAPL90tobelessenvironmentallydesirablethantheProposedProject.Asaresult,thepreviouslyProposedProjectwasselectedastheenvironmentallysuperioralternativeovertheCajonPipeline,APL90,andNoProjectAlternatives.̛̛̜ .**  33@ ATableG2SummarySidebySideComparisonofProposed  L@ IProjectandCajonPipelineAlternative   L &&* ddd td"td" t (#(#,0 H ,( ,0 (H +  7"  l7EnvironmentalIssueArea ?*Da" ?ProposedProject ?*Da" ?CajonPipelineAlternative QB*Da" l  LQAirQuality 0!Da 0 *ClearAdvantage 4!Da 4ClearDisadvantage H9!Da L  LHBiologicalResources 0!Da  0NoDistinction 4!Da  4NoDistinction H9!Da  L  LHCulturalResources 0!D a  0MinorDisadvantage 4!D a  4 *MinorAdvantage H9!D a L  LHEnvironmentalContamination 0!D a 0 *MinorAdvantage ** 4!D a 4MinorDisadvantage** H9!D a L  LHGeology 0!D a 0MinorDisadvantage 4!D a 4 *MinorAdvantage H9!D a L  LHHydrology 0!D a 0ClearDisadvantage 4!D a 4 *ClearAdvantage H9!D a L  LHLandUse 0!D a  0NoDistinction 4!D a  4NoDistinction H9!D a  L  LHNoise 0!Da  0 *MinorAdvantage 4!Da  4MinorDisadvantage H9!Da  L  LHPublicServices 0!Da  0NoDistinction 4!Da  4NoDistinction H9!Da  L  LHPublicUtilities/Energy 0!Da ! 0 *ClearAdvantage 4!Da " 4*ClearDisadvantage H9!Da # L  LHSocioeconomics 0!Da $ 0NoDistinction 4!Da % 4NoDistinction H9!Da & L  LHSoils 0!Da' 0MinorDisadvantage 4!Da( 4 *MinorAdvantage H9!Da) L  LHSystemSafety 0!Da* 0 *MinorAdvantage 4!Da+ 4MinorDisadvantage H9!Da, L  LHTransportation 0!Da- 0 *MinorAdvantage 4!Da. 4MinorDisadvantage H9!Da/ L  LHVisualResources 0!Da0 0 *MinorAdvantage 4!Da1 4MinorDisadvantage H9!Da2 L  LHPaleontology 0!Da3 0 *MinorAdvantage 4!Da4 4MinorDisadvantage F5!Da5 L  LFЀTOTALS 2!Da6 2TwoClearAdvantagesSixMinorAdvantagesFourNoDistinctions 4!9 4OneClearAdvantageThreeMinorAdvantagesFourNoDistinctions1'%< L0    1H; 0 p *00p(#p(#Indicatesthealternativeshowingenvironmentaladvantageinissuearea.Da=0(#0(# 8 p **80ppInsufficientinformationonCajonforassessmentofpotentialproblems;moreadvancedstudyofPacificPipeline > givesgreaterchanceforsuccessfulmitigation. 0P0P &&H;33 G.3.3 0 COMPARISONOFALTERNATIVEROUTEALIGNMENTS  C NumerousalternativealignmentsforshortsegmentsoftheProposedRoutewereevaluatedinSectionC.18oftheFEIR.DetailedcomparisonofthesealignmentsisincludedinFEIRSectionD.4.TheonlytwoalternativealignmentscontainedintheCastaicJunctiontoLosAngelesrefineriesportionoftheoriginallyProposedroutearetheEastAlamedaStreetandSantaFeAvenueAlignments.TheEastAlamedaStreetAlternativeAlignmentwasconsideredenvironmentallysuperiorbyasmallmarginovertheProposedRouteandtheSantaFeAvenueAlignmentbasedoncomparisonofimpactsinthetransportation/traffic,culturalresourcesandenvironmentalcontaminationissueareas.@C  G.4ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTSANDMITIGATIONMEASURES XqԈ )&N ThissectionsummarizesfindingsoftheFEIR,theenvironmentalimpactsidentified,andthemitigationmeasurespresentedthatcouldreducetheimpacts.SixteenenvironmentalissueareasofconcernwereidentifiedandevaluatedfortheoriginallyProposedProjectandalternatives. ..*R ЇTheanalysispresentedfortheCajonPipelineAlternativewasprimarilybasedontheCajonPipelineEIR/S(EIP,1993)andisaddressedineachissueareadiscussionforthecurrentlyProposedProject(PartCofthisEIS/SEIR).Therefore,theCajonAlternativeanalysisisnotsummarizedinthefollowingsections.TheNoProjectAlternativeconsideredintheFEIRisaddressedinthefollowingsummaryofeachissuearea,aswellasthetworelevantalternativeroutealignments.ThemitigationmeasuresproposedtoreduceimpactsaremorefullydescribedintheImpactSummaryTablesfortheoriginallyProposedProject.ThesetableshavebeenmodifiedtoremovethemitigationmeasuresspecifictoSantaBarbaraandVenturaCountiesandareincludedinSectionG.6.  G.4.1 0 AIRQUALITY u 2   G.4.1.1  ProposedProject  <  TheSouthCoastAirBasinisinviolationofozone,fineparticulates(PM10),carbonmonoxide,andnitrogen )F dioxide(NO2),airqualitystandards.TheProposedProjectwouldgenerateconsiderablepollutantemissions .K fromconstructionequipmentoveraconstructionscheduleofalmostoneyear.Ontheotherhand,the171milepipelinewouldbetheleastpollutingmethodfortransportingSantaBarbaracrudetorefineriesinLosAngeles. G.4.1.1.1 0 Construction  Gd TheApplicantproposednumerousemissioncontrolmeasuresonconstructionequipmenttoreduceemissionstothemaximumfeasibleextent,includingretardinginjectiontimingondieselenginestwodegreesB.T.C.(BeforeTopCenter),andusinghighpressureinjectorstoreducenitrogenoxides(NOx) [x emissionsbyapproximately40percent.Speciallyformulateddieselfuelwouldbeusedtoreduceemissionsofreactiveorganiccompounds(ROC)byapproximately15percent.Thesepollutants,alongwithsunlightarethemaincontributorstotheformationofozoneintheatmosphere(harmfultohumansandmaterials).Dieselfuelwouldbelimitedtoan0.05percentsulfurcontent.Moreover,enginesonallconstructionequipmentusedwouldbeproperlymaintained,andsufficientwatersprayingofconstructionsiteswouldbeperformedtoreduceairbornedustbyatleast50percent.ConstructioninLosAngelesCountymustcomplywiththeSouthCoastAirQualityManagementDistrict(SCAQMD)criteriaof2.5tonsofROCorNOx,24.75tonsofcarbonmonoxide(CO),or6.75tonsof %!! particulatematterlessthan10micron(PM10)orsulfuroxides(SOx).Constructionisalsoexpectedtoresult &"" inexceedingthefineparticulateairqualitystandardsduringadversemeteorologicalconditions(alsoofconcernarethestateonehournitrogendioxideandCOstandards,the8hourCOstandard,andthe24hourfineparticulatestandard).Adversemeteorologicalconditionsincludelowwindspeedandasurfaceinversion,typicallyduringthewinter.Forparticulates,adverseconditionsalsoincludedrysoilandhighwindspeed.Exceedingoneoftheseairqualitystandardsonceduringtheoneyearofconstructionisconsideredasignificant(ClassI)impact.Variousmeasureswouldbeemployedtoreducethelikelihoodandtheseverityofexceedingtheseairqualitystandards. .** Frequentcurtailmentofconstructionactivitiesduringadverseairqualityconditionswouldberequiredtopreventallpossibleviolationsofairqualitystandards.Suchasevereapproachtoemissionscontrolisconsideredeconomicallyinfeasibleandisnotrecommended.Mitigationmeasuresincludedwerepresentedtoreduceconstructionemissionsandthepotentialforexceedinganairqualitystandardduringconstruction.Thesemeasuresincludeextensivedustcontrols,useofalternativefuelsandcatalyticconverters,transportationmanagement,andexpeditiouspreparationofpumpstationsites. G.4.1.1.2 0 Operation   # Forpipelineoperation,theApplicantcommittedtoaninspectionandmaintenanceprogramtoreduceROClossesfromflanges,valves,andsealsbyapproximately80percent.Duringoperations,theprojectwouldalsomeettheemissionthresholdsintheSCAQMDCEQAHandbookandregulations.Asaresult,operationalemissionsimpactswouldbeadverse,butnotsignificant(ClassIII).Emissionswouldalsooccuratelectricalgeneratingplantstopowerthepipelinepumps.Thisimpactwouldbelessthansignificant(ClassIII)underallnormalconditions.Anextremeconditioncouldoccurwhereallprojectpowerwouldbeproducedonlybyfossilfueledpowerplantsinthelocalairbasinforovertheequivalentofonehalfweekduringasevendayperiod.InthatcasetheSCAQMDNOxsignificancethresholdwouldtemporarily 3P beexceeded(ClassIshortterm).LosAngelesrefinerieshavebeenprogressivelyconvertingtotherefiningofcrudeoilwithhighersulfurcontent,assuchcrudeslatesarelessexpensive.Mexican(Mayan)andSantaBarbaracrudesnowshippedbytankertoLosAngelesare"sour"andmeetthisobjective(i.e.thosewithmorethanaonepercentsulfurcontent).ThetrendtouseincreasingamountsofsourcrudesatLosAngelesrefinerieswilloccurwitheitherapprovalordenialofthePacificPipelineProject.Whiletheairbasinisincompliancewiththesulfurdioxideairqualitystandards,usageofhighsulfurcrudefromSantaBarbaraorotherlocationscouldcauseanincreaseinambientconcentrationsofsulfurdioxide.However,therefinerieswillremainincompliancewiththeirpermittedemissionlimits.TheProposedProjectcannotimposeadditionalconditionsontherefineries.ThepotentialincreaseinsulfurdioxideemissionsrepresentacumulativeClassIIIadverseimpact.Operationsemissionswouldbereducedbyapplicationofmitigationmeasuresrequiringpotentialemissionsoffsetsandrideshareprograms.AnaccidentcouldresultinalargespillthatwouldreleasesignificantamountsofROC.Besidestheimpactupontheozoneproblem,thelightcomponentsofthecrudeoilwouldevaporaterapidly.Peoplenearthespillcouldbeharmedbytheseairtoxicgases.Underverylimitedcircumstancesthevaporscouldignite,resultinginheat,firedamage,injury,orsignificantparticulateemissions.Theimpactofaspillonairqualitycouldbeadverse(ClassIII)orsignificant(ClassI),dependingonthesizeofthespillandthemeteorologicalconditionsatthetime.̛̜ .**  G.4.1.2  ProjectAlternatives/Alignments    G.4.1.2.1 0 TheNoProjectAlternative 󛀀   ThisalternativeincludescontinuedshipmentofSantaBarbaracrudeoilviatankersandbarges.Tankering  emissionsaresubstantiallygreaterthanthoseforanyprojectalternative.Atankerspillcouldbemuchlargerthanapipelinespill,resultinginagreatershorttermreleaseofROCemissionsintotheairbasins,asignificantimpact. G.4.1.2.2 0 AlternativeRouteAlignment.s 󛀀  -  ThesignificantairqualityimpactsforallofthealternativealignmentsarethesameasfortheProposedProject.Nonsignificantimpactsaresimilar,butvarysomewhatintheamountofemissionsthatwouldbeproducedeitherduringconstructionoroperations.Noneofthealternativesaresuperioronthebasisofairqualityconsiderations.  G.4.2 0 BIOLOGICALRESOURCES B 3P  G.4.2.1  ProposedProject  =Z ̜ G.4.2.1  Construction  Gd Becausetheproposedpipelinewastobeconstructedalmostentirelyinrailorroadeasementsandisgenerallylocatedadjacenttoheavilytraveledhighways,minimaldisturbancetobiologicalresourceswouldresultfromconstructionalongmostofthelengthoftheProposedProject.SignificantimpactswouldbeexpectedwheretheROWmustdepartfromthealreadydisturbedeasements.PotentiallysignificantbutmitigableconstructionimpactsmightoccurattheSantaClaraRivercrossingwhereconstructioncoulddisturbnativehabitatthatsupportrare,threatened,orendangeredspecies;wheredisturbancesuchasfootandvehiculartraffictransgressintosensitiveareasoutsidetheROW;wheresensitivehabitatsorspeciesdownslopeofthemaintainedROWareimpactedasaresultoferosionandsedimentation;whereestablishedtreesattheedgesofthemaintainedROWmustbetrimmedoraresubjecttorootdamageasaresultoftrenchingorvehicularactivity;andwherenoiseandincreasedhumanactivitydisruptbreedingornestingbysensitivewildlifespecies.Significant(ClassII)impactstosensitivevegetation,wildlife,andaquaticresourcesthatrelyonthehabitatsinthevicinityoftheSantaClaraRivercrossingcouldbemitigatedthroughsitespecificrestorationandrevegetationplans,erosionandsedimentcontrolmeasures,andconstructiontimingtoavoidimpactingsensitiveaquaticspeciesandsensitivenestingbirds.NosensitivespecieswereidentifiedatotherstreamcrossingsinLosAngelesCounty.Alongtheproposedroute,thereareseveraloccurrencesofsensitivehabitats(suchassoutherncoastliveoakwoodland)andsensitiveplantspecies(suchasPeirson'smorningglory,andSanFernandospineflower) .** adjacenttotheprojectROW.Inadvertentfootorvehiculartrafficonslopesadjoiningthemaintainedcorridorcouldleadtoerosionandthelossofhabitatforthesenativeplantcommunitiesandsensitivespecies.Thisisapotentiallysignificantimpact(ClassII)whichwouldbemitigablebyavoidance.Throughouttheroute,erosionandsedimentationimpactscausedbyconstructioncouldhavesignificant(ClassII)impactsonsensitiveaquaticresources,plants,andanimalsdownslopeoftheProposedProject.Impactsduetoerosionwouldbegreatestatstreamcrossingswheresensitivespeciesoccurdownstreambecausestreamflowcouldcarrysedimentfromdisturbedsoilsdownstream,causingturbidityandsedimentation.Impactswouldbemitigablethroughrefinementandeffectiveimplementationofanerosioncontrol,revegetation,andlandscapingplan,implementationoferosionandsedimentcontrolmeasuresatadditionalstreamcrossingsnotproposedbytheApplicant,andconstructiontimingsothatperennialstreamswouldbecrossedduringperiodsofminimalflowandintermittentstreamswouldbecrossedwhenthereisnowaterpresent.BetweenMilepost(MP)107and110.6,nativetrees(especiallyoaks)growimmediatelyadjacenttothemaintainedROWandmightbedamagedbyconstruction.Thelossofoaktreeswouldbeconsideredasignificantimpact(ClassII),mitigablethroughavoidanceand/orreplacement.NoiseandincreasedhumanactivityduringconstructioncouldcausesensitivewildlifespeciestotemporarilyabandonsuitablenestingorforaginghabitatadjacenttothepipelineROW.Inaworstcase,theaddeddisturbancewouldcreatelocallysignificant(ClassII)impactsthatcouldbemitigatedbyconstructiontimingtoavoidsensitivehabitatsduringnestingorbreedingperiods. G.4.2.1.2 0 Operation  Vs TheonlyunavoidablesignificantimpactduetooperationoftheProposedProjectwouldbeanaccidentaloilspill.Thesignificanceofimpactsduetooilspillswoulddependuponthevolumeofoilspilledandthedegreetowhichsensitivespeciesorhabitatswouldbeaffected.SpillsattheSantaClaraRivercrossingcouldalsoresultinregionallysignificant(ClassI)impactsbecauseitcouldaffectanessentialhabitatoftheStateandFederallylistedunarmoredthreespinestickleback.TheApplicant'sproposedactionincludesblockandcheckvalvesatmostmajordrainageswheresensitivehabitatsoccurdownstream,effectivelyminimizingtheamountofoilthatcouldbespilled.Additionalmitigationmeasuresarepresentedthatlessentheimpactsofoilspillsonsensitivebiologicalresources.Potentiallysignificantresidualimpactswouldbeunavoidable(ClassI)forsomeaccidentscenarios. G.4.2.2  ProjectAlternatives/Alignments  '##  G.4.2.2.1 0 NoProjectAlternative  )%% Withtheinclusionoftankering,thisalternativewouldinvolvethesignificant(ClassI)impactsassociatedwiththepotentialformassivemarineoilspills,tankerballastdischargeeffects,andpossiblecetaceancollisions. .**  G.4.2.2.2 0 AlternativeRouteAlignments   NobiologicalresourceswouldbeaffectedbytheEastAlamedaStreetorSantaFeAlignments.  G.4.3 0 CULTURALRESOURCES Q   G.4.3.1  ProposedProject    PrehistoricresourceswereidentifiedwithintheLosAngelesportionofthepipelineROW;thesecouldbedisturbedbyconstruction.SomeareaswithintheROWwerenotsurveyedforthepresenceofarchaeologicalremains.Inotherareas,groundvegetationand/oralluvialsedimentsmayhaveobscuredthepresenceofpotentiallysignificantculturalresources.Potentiallyburiedsitesmayalsobelocatedbeneathdevelopedurbanareaswherethegroundsurfaceisnotvisible.ThesignificanceofmanyofthesiteswithintheROWhasbeenpreviouslyestablished,althoughmanyothersiteshaveneverbeensystematicallyinvestigated.Impactsassociatedwithpipelineconstructiononbothgroupsofsitesareconsideredpotentiallysignificantbutmitigable(ClassII).Mitigationmeasureswouldincludeevaluatingallsensitiveareasforwhichtheculturalresourcessurveyisnotconsideredsufficientlyreliableduetoexcessivegroundvegetation,alluviation,orpavedsurfaceswhichprecludesurfacevisibility.Afteridentificationofpotentiallysignificantculturalresources,effortsshallbemadetoavoidsitestothemaximumextentfeasible.ACulturalResourcesManagementPlan(CRMP)andProgrammaticAgreement(PA)shallbeestablishedpursuanttoFederal,State,andlocalguidelineswhichshallcoordinatetreatmentoftheunavoidablyimpactedresourcesincludingsignificancetestinganddatarecovery,ifnecessary.Othersignificant,butmitigable,impactsonculturalresourcesincludepotentialdisturbanceduringerosioncontrolandrevegetationprogramexcavation,illicitartifactcollectionbypipelineworkers,andconstructionequipmentandoilspillcontainmentencroachmentinsensitiveareas.Avarietyofmeasuresincludingreviewandapprovalbyanarchaeologistofallprogramsthatcouldaffectculturalsites,apreconstructionworkshop,andavoidanceofallcutbankswouldmitigatetheseimpacts.PhysicalimpactsonprehistoricarchaeologicalsitesareconsideredanadverseeffectonNativeAmericanvalues.Thesesitesarebelievedtobesacredtothesepeoples.Besidesthearchaeologicalsites,grassesandherbsusedbycontemporaryNativeAmericanscouldbedisturbedbypipelineconstruction.TheseimpactsonNativeAmericanvaluesareconsideredsignificantbutmitigable(ClassII).Mitigationmeasuresincludeavoidanceofallprehistoricsitesandsensitiveresourceareas,particularlyethnohistoricvillagesandthosewhereburialsexistorarelikelytooccur.IncludingNativeAmericanswhoareassociatedbygenealogytotheseethnohistoricvillagesalongwithotherlocalNativeAmericansinconsultationforsitetreatmentandexcavationmonitoringwouldberequired.NativeAmericanmonitoringofalldisturbanceswithinsiteswouldbenecessary,coordinatedamongallgroupswithpreviousexperience.AllartifactswouldrequirecurationinafacilitywhichprovidesaccesstoNativeAmericansthroughanagreementwithaffectedparties.̜ .**  G.4.3.2  ProjectAlternatives/Alignments    G.4.3.2.1 0 NoProjectAlternative    TheNoProjectAlternativewouldhavenodirectorindirectimpactsonculturalresources. G.4.3.2.2 0 AlternativeRouteAlignments 󛀀   BoththeEastAlamedaStreetandtheSantaFeAvenuealignmentswouldhavethepotentialtoimpactsignificantculturalresources,whichcouldbemitigatedbymeasuresidentifiedfortheproposedroute. G.4.4 0 ENVIRONMENTALCONTAMINATION  7   G.4.4.1  ProposedProject  $A  ManyindustrialsitesalongtheproposedROW,historicandcurrent,areknownorsuspectedtohavesoilorgroundwatercontaminationbyhazardoussubstances.Inaddition,operationandmaintenanceoftheraillines,railcarsandlocomotivesovertheyearshaveresultedinvaryinglevelsofsoilandgroundwatercontamination.OtherhazardousmaterialssourcesthatcouldaffecttheProposedProjectincludesurfacerunofffromcontaminatedsitesandmigrationofcontaminatedgroundwaterplumestothepipelineroute.ApreliminaryenvironmentalassessmentwasundertakentoidentifysiteswithknownorsuspectedcontaminationthatwouldimpactconstructionoftheProposedProject.Thepreliminaryassessmentconsistedofcompilationofaregulatoryagencydatabase,reviewofagencyrecords,datareviewandscreening,fieldcheckofpotentiallycontaminatedsites,andsynthesisofthedata.Inaddition,historicalaerialphotographsfortheperiod1927to1958forWilmingtontoLosAngeleswerereviewed(FairchildCollection).Twohundredtwentythreeactivepotentiallyhazardouswastesiteswerefoundtobepresentwithin500feetoftheLosAngelesportionoftheproposedroute,includingseveralsitesidentifiedduringfieldreconnaissanceandrecordreview,butnotlistedinthedatabase.Thesesiteswerescreenedtoeliminatesiteslistedasrequiringnofurtheragencyaction,siteslistedonlyashazardouswastegenerator,storageordisposalfacilities,andleakyundergroundfueltanksinareaswheregroundwaterlevelsarewellbelowthebaseofthetrench.Theremainingsiteswerethenrankedaccordingtohigh,mediumandlowpotentialtosignificantlyimpacttheprojectbycausinghazardouswasteintheROW.SiterankingsarebasedonproximityandphysicalseparationfromtheROW,thenatureofthesitecontamination,physicalconditionsatthesite,andagencypriorityranking.Siteswithnoavailablerecords,includingoilprocessingfacilitiesinElSegundoandWilmingtonandactiverailyards,wererankedashighimpactpotentialsites.IntheLosAngelesportionoftheroute,only70ofthesiteswithin500feetoftheROWweredeemedsignificantenoughtoassignaranking,with14rankedashighimpactpotentialsites,41rankedasmediumimpactpotentialsites,and15rankedaslowimpactpotentialsites.TransportofcontaminantstotheROWfromhighandmediumpotentialsiteswouldimpactworkerhealthandsafetyorresultinpotentialpublic .** exposuretohazardousmaterialsduringconstructionandwastehandling.Therefore,highandmediumimpactpotentialsitesareconsideredsignificant(ClassII)impacts,whichcanbemitigatedthroughsiteinvestigationandcleanup.LowpotentialsitesarenotlikelytocontaminatetheROWandareconsideredClassIIIimpacts.Impactsarealsolikelyfromunknowncontaminationencounteredduringtrenchexcavation.Unknowncontaminationresultingfromunauthorizeddisposal,unknownsources,orundetectedpipelineleaksmaybeencounteredanywherealongtheProposedRoute.ThepresenceofunknowncontaminationisaClassIIimpact,whichcanbemitigatedthroughinvestigationofpotentialsites.Adverse,butnotsignificant(ClassIII)impactswouldresultatlocationsrequiringoffsitetransportofcontaminatedsoil.Inthesecasesadditionaltrucktripstoexportthehazardouswasteandimportcleanbackfillmustbeconsideredfortrafficandairqualityimpacts.Therearealsopotentialimpactsassociatedwiththepipelineroute'spassagethroughoilfieldswhereabandonedwellsmaybeencountered.Ifpluggedandabandonedwellsaredamagedoruncoveredduringexcavationorgrading,remedialpluggingoperationsmayberequired.Theimpactofencounteringawellcouldbesignificant,however,theimplementationofmitigationmeasuresprovidingforinvestigationofwellsknownorencounteredinthearea,reducingtheimpacttolessthansignificant(ClassII). G.4.4.2  ProjectAlternatives/Alignments  B_  G.4.4.2.1 0 NoProjectAlternative  Li TheNoProjectAlternativewouldnotaltertheexistingpotentialforworkerorpublicexposuretoenvironmentalcontamination. G.4.4.2.2 0 AlternativeRouteAlignments  e ScreeningcriteriawereusedtoidentifysevensitesfromtheregulatoryagencydatabasethathavethepotentialtoproducecontaminatedsoilorgroundwateralongtheEastAlamedaStreetalignment.Fivesitesrankasmediumpotentialforimpactonthealignmentandtwositesrankashavingalowimpactpotential.TransportofcontaminantsintotheROWfromthemediumimpactpotentialsiteswouldresultinasignificant,butmitigable(ClassII)impact.Lowpotentialsitesareconsideredadverse(ClassIII)impacts.ThesiteswithknowncontaminationandtheirrankingsarethesameforthisalternativeasforthesectionoftheProposedProjectitwouldreplace.ScreeningcriteriawerealsousedtoidentifytensitesfromtheregulatoryagencydatabasethathavethepotentialtoimpacttheSantaFeAvenuealignment.Twositesrankashighimpactpotential,twoasmediumimpactpotentialandsixaslowimpactpotential.TransportofcontaminantsintotheROWfromthehighandmediumimpactpotentialsiteswouldresultinasignificant,butmitigable(ClassII)impact.Lowpotentialsitesareconsideredadverse(ClassIII)impacts.ThesectionoftheProposedProjectthatwouldbereplacedbythisalignmentpassesnearfourmediumimpactpotentialsites. .** М  G.4.5 0 GEOLOGY    G.4.5.1  ProposedProject    ThegeologichazardswhichwouldhavethemostsignificantimpactondesignandoperationoftheProposedProjectareslopestabilityonsteepnaturalslopesandtheseismicimpactsassociatedwithfaultruptureandliquefaction/lateralspreading.Oilpipelinescanbedesignedtowithstandsubstantialfaultmovementwithoutrupturewhenthedirectionandmagnitudeofanticipatedoffsetiswelldefined.However,becauseoftheuncertaintiesregardingdirectionandmagnitudeofanticipatedoffsetandbecausefaultcrossingdesignhasnotbeenthoroughlytestedbynature,theactiveSanFernando,Verdugo,Hollywood,EchoPark,andNewportInglewoodfaultcrossingswouldbedesignatedassignificant(ClassI)impacts.ThepotentiallyactiveHolserfaultcrossingwouldbedesignatedasadverse,butnotsignificant(ClassIII)impacts.TheElysianParkfaultisablindthrustandisnotexpectedtoproducesurfacerupture.Amitigationmeasurewasincludedrequiringdesignandanalysisrequirementstominimizeeffectsoffaultmovementonthepipeline.Strongearthquakeinducedgroundshakingcanresultinsignificantdamagetoabovegroundstructures.Itgenerallyonlyimpactsburiedstructureswhentheshakinginducesgroundfailure,suchassettlementorliquefaction,orwhentheburiedstructurespansanabruptchangefromstifftosoftorverysoftsoils.StronggroundshakingatthereceivingstationsinWilmingtonandElSegundowouldbeasignificant,butmitigable(ClassII)impact.AreasofmoderatetohighliquefactionpotentialalongtheProposedProjectalignmentincludestreamandrivercrossings,approximately20percentoftheSanFernandoValleyandLosAngelesBasinsectionoftheproposedroute.Thepotentialforliquefactionandlateralspreadingdamagetothepipelineintheseareaswouldbeasignificant,butmitigable(ClassII)impactifsitespecificinvestigationsareperformed.SeeSectionC.6(Geology)andC.13(SystemSafety)inthisEIS/SEIRfordiscussionoftheJanuary1994NorthridgeearthquakeandassociatedruptureoftheARCOPipelinewhichresultedinevaluationofthepotentialforpipelinefailure. G.4.5.2  ProjectAlternatives/Alignments  ~#  G.4.5.2.1 0 NoProjectAlternative  %!! TheNoProjectAlternativewouldnotalterexistingpotentialforimpactscausedbygeologicandseismichazards. G.4.5.2.2 0 AlternativeRouteAlignments  *&& ThegeologicimpactsassociatedwiththeSantaFeAvenueandEastAlamedaStreetAlternativeAlignmentsaresimilartothesectionsoftheProposedProjectthesevariantswouldreplace. .**  G.4.6 0 HYDROLOGY    G.4.6.1  ProposedProject    TheLosAngelesCountyportionoftheproposedpipelinewouldcrossorpassadjacentto25streamsorwatercourses.Elevencrossingswouldbetrenchedintoanunlinedwatercoursenearalinedsectionsuchasataboxculvert(Category2crossing).Threecrossingswouldbetrenchedintheunprotectedstreambedwithoutnearbychannellining(Category3crossing).Eightcrossingswouldbemadeonabridgestructure(Category4crossing).Threecrossingswouldbeboredbeneathanexistinglinedchannel(Category5crossing).FloodrelatedimpactscouldoccurthroughdiversionofflowsonCategory2and3crossingsduringconstruction,diversionofflowsonCategory2and3crossingsthroughchannelalterationsanddirectobstructionofflowsbythepipelinewhenplacedonabridgeinCategory4crossings.Mitigationmeasuresrequireminimumflowdisturbanceandchannelalterationduringandafterconstruction,mitigatingtheseimpactstoalevelofnosignificance(ClassIIimpact).StreamscourimpactstothepipelineonCategory2and3crossingscouldresultinruptureofthepipelineandoilcontaminationofthestream,groundwaterandriparianhabitat.TheseimpactswouldbeavoidedbytheApplicant'sproposaltoburythepipelinetoadepthfourfeetbelowthedepthofscourfora100yearflood.Mitigationmeasuresrequiretheburialofthepipelinefourfeetbelowthedepthofscour,or1.3timesthedepthofscour,whicheverisgreater,thusmitigatingscourrelatedimpactstoalevelofnosignificance.ErosionandscourimpactsresultinginruptureofthepipelinecouldoccurastheresultofpierscourinCategory4crossingsanderosionofunprotectedstreambanksatCategory2and3crossings.Theseimpactscouldbereducedtoalevelofnosignificance(ClassIIimpact)bymodifyingthecrossingmethod,deeperburialofthepipelinenearerosivestreambanksand/orinstallingbankprotection.Waterqualityandgroundwaterimpactsarerelatedprimarilytothescouranderosionimpactsdescribedaboveandcouldbemitigatedasdescribedtoalevelofnosignificance(ClassIIimpact).ConstructionrelatedwaterqualityimpactswouldbeavoidedbymitigationmeasuresincludedintheProjectDescription. G.4.6.2  ProjectAlternatives/Alignments  $   G.4.6.2.1 0 NoProjectAlternative  &"" BecausetheNoProjectAlternativeincludedcontinuedtankeringfromtheGaviotaInterimMarineTerminal,marinewaterqualityimpactsofthisactivitywereevaluated.Impactsofballastdischarges,deckandbilgedischarges,increasedvesseltrafficareconsideredtobeClassIIIimpacts;howeveralargeoffshoreoilspillwouldresultinacuteandcatastrophicimpacts(ClassI)withregionalconsequences.  ,((    G.4.6.2.2 0 AlternativeRouteAlignments   TheimpactsassociatedwiththeSantaFeAlignmentandEastAlamedaStreetAlignmentarethesameastheProposedProject. G.4.7 0 LANDUSEANDPUBLICRECREATION    G.4.7.1  ProposedProject   # ConstructionoftheProposedProjectwouldresultinsignificant,butmitigable(ClassII)impactsonlanduseandpublicrecreation.Themajorityoftheseimpactswouldbeshorttermandlimitedtolocalizedconstructionactivities.Primaryaccesstosomerecreationalparkswouldbeblockedduringconstruction,however,schedulingconstructionactivitiestoavoidpeakhoursofuseatrecreationalparkswouldmitigatethesetemporaryimpacts.Adverse,butnotsignificant(ClassIII)impactswouldaffectresidentiallandusesbytemporarydisruptionsofpublicservicessuchaswater,gas,andelectricity,aswellasdisruptingaccessroadswithinresidentialneighborhoods.Theseimpactscouldbemitigatedbyinformingresidencesinadvanceofconstructionactivitiesintheirneighborhoods.Additionally,usingapubliccontactinterfacebetweenconstructioncrewsandresidentscouldmitigatethetemporaryimpactsofconstructionactivities.Noiseandimpededaccessmayadverselyaffectschoolsandreligious,scientificandothersensitiveusesduringconstruction.Theseimpactsmaybemitigatedbylimitingconstructionhourswhereaschoolorothersensitiveuseislocated.Mitigationmeasuresweredevelopedtoreducepotentialimpactsintheseareas.TheprimaryconcernwiththeoperationoftheProposedProjectisthepotentialforlongtermsafetyriskstoexistingorplannedusesinthevicinityofthepipeline.Aruptureofthepipelinewherepopulatedareasand/orrecreationallandsfallwithinanareathatcouldbecontaminatedbyoilfromaspillorsubjecttofireandthermalradiationwouldresultinasignificant,unavoidable(ClassI)impact.Toreducethepotentiallanduseimpacts,specialoilspill/fireemergencyresponseproceduresshouldbeimplementedforsensitivelandusessuchasschools,hospitals,residences,religiousfacilities,andrecreationallands. G.4.7.2  ProjectAlternatives/Alignments  ~#  G.4.7.2.1 0 NoProjectAlternative  %!! Significantimpacts(ClassI)oncoastallandusesandrecreationalresourceswouldoccurduetothepresenceoftankersinthenearshorearea.̜ G.4.7.2.2 0 AlternativeRouteAlignments  *&& LanduseimpactsfromtheAlamedaStreetEastandSantaFeAvenueAlignmentswouldbeofthesametypeandmagnitudeasdescribedfortheProposedProject.LongtermsafetyriskstoexistingorplannedusesofthevariousalignmentswouldbethesameasfortheProposedProject. .** Ї G.4.8 0 NOISE    G.4.8.1  ProposedProject    Therearesomesensitivereceptors(schools,hospitals,residences,parks,etc.)thataresufficientlyclosetothepipelineROWthatseverenoiselevelswouldoccurwhiletheconstructionspreadwouldbeprogressingpastthem.Asignificantnoisethresholdwasdefinedasanincreaseinambientdaytimelevelofabout15dBA.Thereceptorsthatwouldbesignificantlyimpactedaregenerallyconcentratedinlessdevelopedareas.Ingeneral,theimpactislessthansignificantinindustrializedurbanareasofLosAngelesCountybecauseofthegenerallyhigherambientnoiselevels.Highbackgroundnoisewouldpartiallymaskpipelineconstructionnoise.Moreover,industriallandusesgenerallyaremoretolerantofnoise,asimpactisdeterminedbythephysicalnoiselevel,itscharacter,andsubjectiveexpectations.NeverthelessinLosAngelesCountythereareeightlandusesthatwouldexperienceshortterm(onehalfday)severenoiseimpacts(ClassI).Significantnoiseimpactwouldgenerallylastatmostoneday.Mitigationmeasurespresentedcanreducenoiseimpactsbyprohibitingconstructionbefore7a.m.andafter7p.m.,providingadvancenoticetoaffectedparties,settingupatollfreecomplaintline,andassuringthatvehicleshadpropermufflers.Significantimpactsforindividualreceptorscouldbemitigatedtoalessthansignificantlevelbyschedulingconstructiontoavoideventsthatcouldbeaffected(ClassII). G.4.8.2  ProjectAlternatives/Alignments  Gd  G.4.8.2.1 0 NoProjectAlternative  Qn Thenoiseimpactfromexistingtankeringisadverse,butlessthansignificant(ClassIII)duetoexistingnoiselevelsfromU.S.Highway101. G.4.8.2.2 0 AlternativeRouteAlignments  j Smalldifferencesinnoiseimpactswouldoccuralongthealternativealignments.Therewouldnotoccuranydifferencesinreceptorsthatwouldexperienceseverenoiseimpact.   G.4.9 0 PUBLICSERVICES  $   G.4.9.1  ProposedProject  &"" Projectrelatedpopulationgrowthwouldcreateashorttermadverse(ClassIII)impactwithintheLosAngelesUnifiedSchoolDistrictasaresultofprojectconstruction.Fortyacrefeetofwaterwouldberequiredduringconstructionwithmostneededfordustsuppression.Thewaterwouldbemadeavailablebyvariouswaterdistrictsalongthepipelineroute.Amitigationmeasurewouldrequireuseofreclaimedwater,availablefrommostWaterDistricts.Theimpactwouldbeadverse(ClassIII). .** ЇPublicserviceimpactscouldbemitigatedbyrequiringtheApplicanttoparticipateinasocioeconomicmonitoringandmitigationprograminLosAngelesCounty,andbyrequiringtheApplicanttopaymitigationfees.Theimpactonservicedemandfromafuelspillaccidentcouldbemitigatedtoalevelthatislessthansignificant(ClassII).Oilspillimpactsonpublicserviceswouldbesignificantandunavoidable.Abilitytorespondtootheremergenciesduringaspillincidentwouldbesignificantlycompromised(ClassI).AnothermitigationmeasurewouldmaintainahighstateofreadinessforemergencyresponsebyrequiringtheApplicanttoprovideconsultation,trainingandfundingtoemergencyserviceproviders.PropertytaxesfromtheProposedProjectwouldbebeneficialtopublicrevenues,butthesharetofiredepartmentswouldbeinsufficienttoprovideforaneffectivestateofreadinessforhandlingamajoraccident.Annualgeneralfundrevenueswouldincreasebyapproximately$221,000inLosAngelesCounty.LesserpropertytaxrevenueswouldberealizedbytheaffectedcitiesalongtheROW.ItwillbenecessarytoremoveexcessuncontaminatedsoilfromsomesectionsoftheROW.Areasneedingearthand/orrockfillwillneedtobeidentifiedsothatthesematerialswouldnotbedisposedinalandfill.Withthismitigationtheimpactswouldnotbesignificant(ClassII). G.4.9.2  ProjectAlternatives/Alignments  8U  G.4.9.2.1 0 NoProjectAlternative  B_ Thelikelihoodofdemandforemergencyservicesfollowinganonshoreoilspillwouldbelower,butwouldbesignificantlyhigherforanoffshorespill,involvinglocal,State,andFederalagencies.Theexistinglevelofreducedreadinessofonshoreemergencyserviceswouldnotbemitigated,asitcouldbeifmitigationmeasuresfortheProposedProjectwereapplied. G.4.9.2.2 0 AlternativeRouteAlignments  e AlternativeRouteAlignmentswouldhavepublicserviceeffectssimilartotheProposedProject.   G.4.10 0 PUBLICUTILITIESANDENERGY  y"  G.4.10.1  ProposedProject  $  Asignificantimpactwouldoccurifautilitywereaccidentallydisruptedduringconstructionresultinginacollocationaccident.Acollocationaccidentisonewhereanaccidentinvolvingonepipelinecausesconsequentialdamageandimpactstoanotherpipelineorutilityinthesameutilitycorridor.Acontingencyplanwouldbeappliedtoseethatthemostcriticalutilitieswouldberestoredfirst.Thereisalsoasmallprobabilitythatanaccidentinvolvingthepipelinewouldoccurduringoperations.Theseimpactscanbemitigatedtoalevelthatislessthansignificant(ClassII).̛̜ .**  G.4.10.2  ProjectAlternatives/Alignments    G.4.10.2.1 0 NoProjectAlternative    Theriskofacollocationaccidentinthepipelinecorridorswouldcontinueasexistingnow. G.4.10.2.2 0 AlternativeRouteAlignments    Thechangesinthepipelinealignmentneitherincreasenordecreasethepotentialforacollocationaccident.  G.4.11 0 SOCIOECONOMICS  2   G.4.11.1  ProposedProject <   TheconstructionoftheProposedProjectwouldemployanestimated254constructionworkersinLosAngelesCounty,abeneficialimpacttothelocaleconomy.Somelocalbusinessesalongtheproposedroutewouldbetemporarilydisruptedbyconstructionactivities.Disruptionscouldbecausedbytheremovalofcontaminatedsoils,thegenerationofnoiseandairpollution,andinterruptionstopublicservices,traffic,andparking.MitigationwouldincludethecarefulhandlingofcontaminatedsoilsandtheemploymentofabusinessrelationscoordinatortodevelopandimplementaBusinessImpactMitigationPlan.Theoperationofthepipelinewouldhaverequired39fulltimeemployees,mostworkingoutofanofficeinVenturaCounty.BecausethePacificPipelineascurrentlyproposedincludeshiringoffulltimeemployeesintheTaylorYardvicinityonly,thoseLosAngelesareaimpactsareevaluatedinthisnewdocument.Anoilspillcouldhavesignificantshortterm(ClassII)impactsonlocalbusinessesandtemporaryhousing.TheseimpactscouldbemitigatedbyexpandingtheApplicant'sOilSpillContingencyPlantoaddressspecificmeasuresrelativetobusinessdisruptionsanddirectcostrecovery.  G.4.11.2  ProjectAlternatives/Alignments  y"  G.4.11.2.1 0 NoProjectAlternative  $  TheNoProjectAlternativewouldnotrequirenewconstructionandonlyminimalincreasesinlongtermemployment.However,continuedtankering(atGaviota)andbarging(atEllwood)wouldincreasetheprobabilityofashorttermClassIimpactfromanoilspill. G.4.11.2.2 0 AlternativeRouteAlignments  *&& AllotheralignmentswouldhavethesamesocioeconomicimpactsastheProposedProject.̛̜ .**  G.4.12 0 SOILS    G.4.12.1  ProposedProject    ThesoilcharacteristicswhichmayhavethemostsignificantimpactonthedesignandoperationoftheProposedProjectarethesoil'sshrinkswellpotentialandcorrosivity.Theinclusionofcathodicprotectionintheprojectdesignhasreducedtheimpactofcorrosivesoilstoanadverse,butnotsignificant(ClassIII)impact.Expansivesoilsarescatteredthroughouttheproposedalignmentandcoulddamagestructureswhosefoundationsrestonthesesoils.Sincethepipelineisductile,itisnotexpectedtobeimpactedbyexpansivesoils.However,thepresenceofexpansivesoilsatthesiteofanyoftheabovegroundprojectfacilitieswouldbeasignificant,butmitigable(ClassII)impact. G.12.2 0 ProjectAlternatives/Alignments  <   G.4.12.2.1 0 NoProjectAlternative  )F TheNoProjectAlternativewouldnotalterexistingpotentialforimpactsfromerosionorcorrosivesoils. G.4.12.2.2 0 AlternativeRouteAlignments  =Z TherearenosignificantsoilrelatedimpactsassociatedwiththeSantaFeAvenueorAlamedaStreetEastalignments. G.4.13 0 SYSTEMSAFETYANDRISKOFUPSET  Vs  G.4.13.1  ProposedProject  `} SystemsafetyimpactsassociatedwiththeProposedProjectprimarilyresultfrompotentialcrudeoilspillsthathavethepotentialforsignificantimpactsinotherissueareas.Otherdirectimpactscouldoccurfromfiresatthepumpstationsand/oralongthepipelineROW.Spillprobabilities(orfailurerates),usinghistoricalpipelinefailurerates,weredevelopedforthepipelinebasedontheprobablenumberofspillsperpipelinemileperyear,andthelength,diameterandageofthepipeline.Itwasestimatedthatapproximatelytwoleaksandonerupturecouldoccurduringthe20yearoperatinglifeofthepipeline.  Theconsequencesofoilspillsincludeimpactsinotherissueareasfromlandbasedoilspills,riskofoilspillignitionandexposuretotheresultingfire,andimpactstocreeksandriverbeds.PotentialspillvolumesintheareaofsensitivereceptorsinLosAngelesCountyweredeterminedtobeintherangefromapproximately707to3,307bbls.Theareaaffectedbythesespillswouldrangefrom15to140acres,assumingthespilloccursondryland.Thepoolfiremodelingofcrudeoilspillsindicatedthatthesewouldbemostlikelytooccuratthepumpstations,withmaximumthermalradiationhazardzonesof40metersand20metersforminorandmoderateinjuries,respectively.  -)) Basedupontheestablishedsignificancecriteria,leaksandrupturesfromthepipelineareconsideredtobe likelyeventswithpotentiallysevereconsequences.Therefore,anoilspillfromthepipelineisconsideredtohavethepotentialforsignificant(ClassI)impactsdependinguponthelocationofthespill.Thepotentialimpactsassociatedwithanoilspillarediscussedineachissueareathatcouldbeaffected.Thereisnosignificantrisktothepublicfromthecrudeoilfirehazards,sotheseareconsideredtopresentanadversebutnotsignificant(ClassIII)impact.ThehazardsassociatedwithpotentialoilspillswouldbelargelymitigatedbymeasuresthatPPSIisproposingtoincorporateintoitsdesignrelatingtooilspillpreventionandresponse.TheApplicantisrequiredtohavetheOilSpillContingencyPlanapprovedbytheCPUCandthelocalresponseagenciespriortothestartofpipelineconstruction.Additionalmitigationmeasureshavebeendevelopedtoaddressconstructionsafety,spillprevention,minimizationofspillvolumes,andspillcontainmentandresponse. G.4.13.2  ProjectAlternatives/Alignments  $A  Impactsfromalltheprojectalternativesandroutealignmentswouldhavepotentiallysignificant(ClassI)impactsassociatedwithoilspills,andadversebutnotsignificant(ClassIII)impactsfromcrudeoilpoolfires.TheNoProjectAlternativewouldfeaturethecontinuedrisksofacatastrophicoilspillinthemarineenvironmentduetotankering. G.4.14 0 TRANSPORTATIONANDTRAFFIC  Gd  G.4.14.1  ProposedProject  Qn ConstructionoftheProposedProjectwouldhaveanimpactonthestudyarea'stransportationsystemastheconstructionactivitieswouldphysicallyblockmanyofthepublicroadwaysalongthepipelinecorridor.AlthoughtheproposedalignmentisprimarilywithintherailroadROWoftheSouthernPacificTransportationCompany,somesegmentsarelocatedwithintheROWofpublicstreetsandhighways.Asconstructionoccursattheselocations,portionsoftheroadwaywhicharenormallyusedfortrafficcirculationand/orparkingwouldbetemporarilyunavailableforthesepurposes.Atthenumerouslocationswherethepipelinewouldcrossaroadway,theApplicanthascommittedtoboringunderneaththeroadway,therebyminimizingtrafficdisruptionsduringconstruction.Atthelocationswherethepipelinerunsparalleltoaroadway,constructionactivitieswould,inmostcases,resultintrafficimpactsastravellanes,shoulders,driveways,andparkingareaswouldbeblocked.Theimpactsatanyparticularlocationwouldhaveadurationofonetothreedays.ConstructionoftheProposedProjectwouldresultinClassIIimpactsastheconstructionactivitieswouldincreasetrafficcongestion,blockaccesstoadjacentproperties,obstructpedestriancirculation,increasetheaccidentrisk,andrestrictemergencyaccess.Therewouldalsobeanincreaseintrafficvolumes,anincreaseinparkingdemand,alossofexistingparkingspaces,anddisruptionstotransitoperations.TheimpactsarecategorizedasClassIIastheycouldbemitigatedtoalevelthatislessthansignificant. .** Proposedmitigationmeasuresincludepeakperiodrestrictionsforlaneclosures,alternativeaccessandparkingprovisionsforblockedproperties,alternativepedestrianroutes,detailedtransportationmanagementplans,offstreetparking/stagingareas,offstreetstorageforconstructionequipment,andadvancenotification/coordinationwithaffectedpropertyowners,residents,businesses,emergencyserviceproviders,publicagencies,andtransitagencies.Asignificant,unmitigable(ClassI)impactwouldoccurduringtheoperationoftheProposedPipelineifanoilspillweretoaffectrailroadoperations,highwaytraffic,pedestrians,and/ortransitoperations.Theseimpactscouldbereducedwithaneffectiveemergencyresponseplan. G.4.14.2  ProjectAlternatives/Alignments   -   G.4.14.2.1 0 NoProjectAlternative  7  Thisalternativewouldhavenosignificanttrafficimpacts. G.4.14.2.2 0 AlternativeRouteAlignments  .K ThetransportationimpactsfortheAlternativeRouteAlignmentswouldbecomparabletotheProposedProjectimpactsastheconstructiontechniqueswouldbevirtuallythesame.Theprimarydifferentiationisthattheimpactswouldoccuronadifferentsetofstreetsandhighways. G.4.15 0 VISUALRESOURCES  Li  G.4.15.1  ProposedProject  Vs Shorttermconstructionimpactsonvisualresources,whichwouldresultfromthepresenceofequipment,materials,andworkersontheROW,wouldbeadverse,butnotsignificant(ClassIII).TemporaryalterationoflandformsandvegetationalongtheROWduringconstructionactivitieswouldalsobeanadverse,butnotsignificant(ClassIII)impact.LongtermvisualimpactsresultingfromtheProposedProjectwouldallbeadverse,butnotsignificant(ClassIII)impacts.Theyincludevisualimpactsduetoconstructionofabovegroundfacilities,scarringofslopes,longtermalterationinvegetationalongtheROW,andimpactduetoaccidentaloilspillsduringpipelineoperation.Theseadverseimpactswouldnotbeconsideredsignificantdueprimarilytothelowfrequencyandminimalextenttowhichmostoftheproposedfacilitieswouldbeviewed,andtheminimaleffectthevisualintrusionoftheproposedfacilitywouldhaveontheviewshed.Mitigationmeasuresrecommendedforlongtermvisualimpactsincludepaintingabovegroundfacilitiesinvisuallycompatiblecolorstoblendinwiththesurroundingstructuresandlandscape;installinglandscapeoutsidethechainlinkfenceenclosingabovegroundfacilities;constructingtheearthenbermssurroundingfencesinamounded,naturallooking,form;avoidingdamagetonearbyvegetationandhabitatsduringconstructionactivities;andregrading,revegetating,andrestoringareasdisturbedbypipelineconstructionorbyaccidentaloilspillsduringpipelineoperation. .**  G.4.15.2  ProjectAlternatives/Alignments    G.4.15.2.1 0 NoProjectAlternative    Thisalternativewouldfeaturecontinuedtankerintrusionintothenearshoremarinevisualsetting. G.4.15.2.2 0 AlternativeRouteAlignments    VisualimpactsfromtheEastAlamedaStreetandSantaFeAvenuealignmentswouldbesimilartotheProposedProjectandwouldnotbesignificant. G.4.16 0 PALEONTOLOGY  7   G.4.16.1  ProposedProject  $A  TheProposedProjectROWwouldencroachthroughatotalof20geologicalrockunits.Ofthese,two(SaugusFormationandOlderAlluvium)thatmayoutcropintheLosAngelesCountyportionofthepipelinearecharacterizedashavingamoderatetohighpotentialforcontainingvertebratefossils.Thepotentialofagivenfossiltocontributetotheunderstandingandinterpretationofthepastisbasedonthespecimen'squality,preservationandrelativeuniqueness.Allvertebratefossils,however,regardlessofabundance,areconsideredhighlysignificant.Therefore,potentialimpactsontheseresourcesrelatedtopipelineconstructionareconsideredsignificant,butfeasiblymitigated(ClassII).Mitigationmeasuresincludeconductingaworkshopwithapaleontologistforconstructionworkersandmonitorstoeducatethemregardingthepresenceandappearanceoffossilresources,developingaPaleontologicalResourcesMonitoringPlan(PRMP)detailingsignificanceevaluationandmitigationprocedures,anddevelopingappropriatecurationagreementstoensurescientificaccesstothepreservedspecimens. G.4.16.2  ProjectAlternatives/Alignments  y"  G.4.16.2.1 0 NoProjectAlternative  $  Noimpactswouldoccurfromthisalternative.  &"" G.4.16.2.2 0 AlternativeRouteAlignments  ($$ ImpactsfromtheAlamedaStreetEastandSantaFeAvenuealignmentswouldbethesameastheProposedProject.̛̜ .** @> G.5CUMULATIVEDEVELOPMENTIMPACTSANDMITIGATIONMEASURES:  @ OPREVIOUSLYPROPOSEDPROJECT   ThissectionpresentsabriefsummaryoftheFEIR'sfindingsregardingcumulativeimpacts.NosignificantcumulativeimpactswereidentifiedintheissueareasofEnvironmentalContamination,GeologyandSoils,andHydrologysonosummariesforthoseissueareasarepresentedbelow.NotethattheCumulativeanalysisinPartCofthisEIS/SEIRincludesanupdatedanalysisoftheLosAngelesareabecauseadditionalcumulativeprojectswereidentifiedalongthepipelineroute.  G.5.1 0 AIRQUALITY m=   -  CumulativeimpactsduringoperationoftheProposedProjectwerenotidentifiedinLosAngelesCounty.Cumulativeairqualityimpactswouldoccurduringconstructionofthepipelineonlyifanotherprojectweretobeconstructedincloseproximityatthesametime.Alsoofnotearetransportationlinearprojects(roads,etc.)neartheROW.Transportationimprovementprojectsusuallyinvolveextensivegradingandleavesoildisturbedforconsiderableperiodsoftime.The24hourfineparticulatestateairqualitystandard(CAAQS)isofparticularconcern.ThisstandardisregularlyexceededinLosAngelesCounty;andtherecouldoccursignificantparticulateemissionsduringthepreparationofbuildingsitesandinallphasesoftransportationimprovementprojects.AlsoofconcernistheNO2CAAQSduringconstructionintheLos =Z Angelesarea.Heavyconstructionequipmentproducesignificantnitrogenoxidesemissions.ThecumulativeimpactsofthepipelinealternativesandroutealignmentsintheLosAngelesareawouldhaveessentiallythesamecumulativeimpactsonairqualityastheProposedProject.  G.5.2 0 BIOLOGICALRESOURCES BB [x CumulativeimpactscouldariseifhabitatdisturbanceandlossduetoconstructionoftheprojectwouldaddincrementalimpactstothoseexpectedfromproposedfutureprojectsadjacenttotheInterstate5corridor.Futurecommercial,industrial,andresidentialdevelopmentwithintheseareas,incombinationwiththeProposedProject,couldresultincombinedsignificantimpactstosensitivehabitats.TheoverallpotentialforcumulativeimpactsassociatedwiththeProposedProjectwouldbeminimalbecause,forthemostpart,theprojectwouldbelocalizedwithinanalreadydisturbedROW.  G.5.3 0 CULTURALRESOURCES D %!! ImpactsonmanyrecordedsitesalongtheLosAngelesCountyportionoftheroute,andthepotentialforimpactsonotherresourcesinsensitive,butnotfullyinvestigatedareaswouldresultinasignificantcontributiontoregionalimpactsontheseresourcesandNativeAmericanvalues(ClassII).FeasiblemitigationoftheseimpactswouldresultfromincorporationofmeasuresdefinedfortheProposedProject.̜ .**  G.5.4 0 LANDUSEANDPUBLICRECREATION   CumulativeconstructionalongtheproposedpipelineROWwouldgenerateshorttermadverseimpactsonnearbylandusesduetonoise,traffic,andlaneclosures.Advancenoticingandonsiteconstructioncoordinationwouldminimizetheselandusedisturbances.  G.5.5 0 NOISE H   Cumulativenoiseimpactswouldoccurifutilityrepairprojects,pipeline,orroadwayconstructionprojects,orconstructiononapropertyneartheROW,weretooccursimultaneouslywithconstructionofthepipeline.Thecombinednoiseeffect,however,wouldnotbesignificantlygreaterthantheimpactfromthelouderofthetwoprojects.Thus,cumulativenoiseeffectsarenotsignificant.ThisnonsignificantimpactwouldapplytotheProposedProject,aswellastoalternativealignments.̀  G.5.6 0 PUBLICSERVICES J )F ThepreviousFEIRfoundthattherewouldbenosignificantcumulativeimpactonschoolsinLosAngelesCounty.BecausethecontrolcenterwaspreviouslyproposedtobelocatedintheCityofBuenaventura,impactsonschoolswereseenonlyinVenturaandSantaBarbaraCounties.(TheimpactsofthenewlocationofthecontrolcenterintheCityofLosAngelesisanalyzedinPartCofthisEIS/SEIR.)TheProposedProjectwouldplaceanadditionaldemandonalreadyovertaxedpublicemergencyservices.Amitigationmeasureprovidingfinancialandotheraidtoaffectedagenciescanreducethisimpacttoalevelthatislessthansignificant(ClassII).Thealternativeroutealignmentswouldnotincreasetheseverityofthiscumulativepublicservicesimpact.  G.5.7 0 PUBLICUTILITIESANDENERGY 5N j TherearetwowaysinwhichtheProposedProjectcaninteractwithotherprojectsthroughtheirutilities:(1)directinterruptionofutilitiesusedbyothers;or(2)anaccidentwherebyeithertheProposedProjectdamagesanotherproject,orthatprojectharmsthePacificPipeline.Thestepstakenduringpipelineconstructiontoavoidimpactstoutilitiesaresophisticated.TheApplicantwouldboreunderpavedroadsandtheutilitiesburiedintheroadwaywhencrossinganintersection,afteridentifyingthepositionofeachutility.GiventhethousandsofutilitiesalongthepipelineROWtherewouldoccurafewcaseswhereautilitywouldneedtoberepositioned.Thisactionwouldbetakenonlyaftertheutilityownerwasinformed,andplanningwascompletedtoassurethattheinterruptionwouldlastonlyafewhours.AnadverseinteractionbetweentheProposedProjectandanotherburiedutilitycouldbeinitiatedbyhumanerrororaneventinnature,suchasanearthquake.Heavycrudeoilisnoteasilyignited,butthisisnotthecaseforagasline.BecausearenohighpressuregaslineswouldbeburiedinthesameeasementwiththeLosAngelesCountyportionofthePacificPipeline,nosignificantimpactstoutilitiesareexpected. .** NosignificantcumulativeimpactwouldoccurforthealternativeroutealignmentsinthedowntownLosAngelesarea. G.5.8 0 SOCIOECONOMICS   Cumulativedevelopmentoccurringatthesametimeandinapproximatelythesamelocationasthepipelineconstructioncouldexacerbatesomeimpactstolocalbusinesses,particularlythoseinvolvingtraffic,noise,airpollution,andpublicserviceinterruptions.Thecumulativeimpactswouldlikelyremainadverse(ClassIII).Cumulativepopulationgrowthinthestudyareawouldalsocreatesignificantunavoidable(ClassI)impactsonaffordablehousing.MitigationofallcumulativeimpactswouldbethesameasthosedesignedfortheProposedProject.TheProposedProjectwasnotexpectedtoincreasecumulativelongtermaffordablehousingimpactsinLosAngelesCounty,asitdidnotincludeanyemploymentintheLosAngelesarea.TheProposedProjectwouldincreasethepotentialforanonshoreoilspill,whichcouldhavesignificantsocioeconomicimpacts.  G.5.9 0 SYSTEMSAFETYANDRISKOFUPSET W .K ConstructionactivitieswithinorneartheSPTCROWaftertheProposedProjectisinplacecouldleadtopipelineruptureandaconsequentoilspill.Evenwiththeproposedmitigationmeasures,thistypeofthirdpartyimpactwasstillconsideredlikelyduringthelifetimeoftheProposedProject,andthereforetheimpactisconsideredsignificantandunmitigable(ClassI).PotentialsafetyimpactsassociatedwiththeuseofhighsulfurheavycrudeoilintheLosAngelesarearefinerieswereevaluatedandfoundnottobesignificant,duetotheavailabilityofdesulfurizationcapacityattheserefinerieswhichhasbeendesignedtohandletheselevelsofsulfur.Theproposedpipelinewouldbecolocatedwithsomeotherpipelinesinsomepartsoftheroute.Alargemagnitudeearthquakecouldcausearuptureinbothpipelines,resultinginacumulativeimpactonthesamereceptors.However,asdiscussedinthemaindocument,theprobabilityofthisoccurrenceisverylow.Theclosenessofthepipelinetosomeindustrialzonesthatmanufactureorusehighlyflammablematerialscouldcausehighimpactasaresultofaccidentalreleaseofoilandreactionwiththesehazardousmaterials,butscenariosthatcouldcauseconcurrentreleaseandinteractionarehighlyimprobable.̛  ~#    G.5.10 0 TRANSPORTATIONANDTRAFFIC  ] %!! Cumulativetrafficimpactswouldoccurifutilityprojects,pipeline,orroadwayconstructionprojectsweretobeimplementedsimultaneouslywiththeconstructionoftheProposedProjectonaroadwaythatwouldbedisruptedbytheproject.Thecumulativetrafficimpactscouldbeminimizedthroughclosecoordinationwiththeagenciesresponsibleforencroachmentpermitsoneachaffectedroadwayandwiththeutilitycompanieswhichhavefacilitiesalongthesamerightofway.̜ .** М  G.5.11 0 VISUAL  `  SignificantcumulativevisualimpactsarenotexpectedtooccuralongtheProposedRouteforthefollowingreasons:(1)ingeneral,theproposedrouteislocatedprimarilyinareasthatarealreadydisturbed(existingrightofwaysorbeneathexistingroads)anditspresencewithinitsfieldofviewwouldnotbenoticeable;(2)formuchofitslength,thepipelinerouteiseffectivelyscreenedeitherbyexistingvegetation,landforms,orstructures,and(3)ingeneral,otherprojectsarenotlocatedwithinthefieldofviewofeithertheProposedProject'sabovegroundfacilitiesorassociatedareasofnoticeablesurfacedisturbance.  G.5.12 0 PALEONTOLOGY b  -  Basedonthesensitivesoilsandformationsthatwouldbeencroachedbythepipeline,theProposedProjectwouldrepresentasignificantcontributiontoregionalimpactsonfossilresources.Thepotentialfortheseimpactsisdeterminedtobefeasiblymitigated(ClassII)byimplementingmitigationmeasuresidentifiedfortheProposedProject.@  F G.6IMPACTSUMMARYTABLESFROMPREVIOUSFEIR  8U TheImpactSummaryTableswhichfollowpresentthesignificantenvironmentalimpactsandmitigationmeasuresfortheportionsoftheoriginallyProposedPacificPipelineProjectthatarestillincludedintheApplicant'sproposedroute(i.e.,inLosAngelesCounty).TheImpactSummaryTablesareorganizedfirstaccordingtoimpactclassandwithineachclassaccordingtoissueareainthesameorderaspresentedinPartCofthepreviousFEIR.Readingfromlefttorightacrossthetables,(1)eachimpactisdescribedbriefly,(2)thephaseoftheprojectlifeinwhichtheimpactwouldoccurisgiven,(3)theextentandscopeoftheimpactisexplained,(4)themitigationmeasureispresented,and(5)theresidualeffectoftheimpact(i.e.,afterapplicationofrecommendedmitigationmeasures)isidentified.Whennoresidualimpactoccursornomitigationmeasureisspecified,thisissoindicated.Thefollowingtablessummarizethesignificantimpacts(ClassI,IIandIV);PartCofthepreviousFEIRpresentsadetaileddescriptionoftheseimpactsaswellasadversebutnonsignificantimpacts(ClassIII).Thesignificancecriteriausedtoclassifyimpactsforeachissueareaandexplanationsofthemeaningsof"shortterm,""longterm,""local,"and"regional,"whichdiffersomewhatamongissueareas,areprovidedbyissueareainPartCoftheFEIR.Theimpactsarethenspelledoutindetail,followedbytheirnumberedmitigationmeasures.Next,detailsarepresentedforcumulativeimpactsandmitigationmeasuresandunavoidablesignificantimpacts.AMitigationMonitoringProgram,whichprovidesdetailsoneachmitigationmeasureandthenameoftheagenciesandpartiesresponsible,ispresentedattheendofeachissueareaanalysisinPartCofthepreviousFEIR.TheMitigationMonitoringProgramlistallmitigationmeasuresproposedinthedocument,includingsomethatareassociatedwithClassIIIimpactsandnotshowninthefollowingtables.