DOCSLIB.ORG

Benicia Refinery

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

PHMSA 000068712 VALERO REFINING COMPANY - CALIFORNIA BENICIA REFINERY OIL SPILL CONTINGENCY PLAN PHMSA 000068714 PHMSA 000068715 Record of Changes Change Effective Person Date Number Date Scope of Revision Entering Entered Change 1 July 2000 Initial Issue of Plan for D. Pearce 7/2000 Valero Refining Co. – California Benicia Refinery 2 November Update reflecting USCG comments D. Pearce 11/2000 2000 (Section 210, 232, 514, & 522) 3 July 2001 Update incorporating former Huntway G. Karr 7/2001 Asphalt Plant and Marine Terminal facility information 4 2002 Annual review and update G. Karr 12/2002 5 2003 Annual review and update N. 12/2003 Stubblefield 6 November 2004 Annual review and update, N. 11/2004 2004 Revised information reflecting RSPA Stubblefield comments (Section 210, 220, 230, 250, 400, 500, and 600 7 July 2005 Update per RSPA Comments (Table 400- N. 7/2005 1a, and Sections 514, 631) Stubblefield 8 December Update of plan for 5 yr Re-submittal per N. 12/2005 2005 OSPR Regulations ; update to address Stubblefield OSPR Inspection comments 9 March 2006 Update to Facility Information per USCG N. 3/2006 inspection comments Stubblefield 10 July 2006 Updated notification table format P. Gonzalez 7/2006 11 December Annual Update N. 01/2007 2006 Stubblefield 12 September Update for change in OSRO to NRC N. 09/2007 2007 Environmental Services Stubblefield 13 January Annual review and update N. 01/2008 2008 Submittal to OSPR for Recertification Stubblefield (Sect. 115, 210,233,242,244,252,400,530, App. E, H) 14 April Update Inside Cover, N. 0-4/2008 2008 Stubblefield 15 September Updated App. C P. Gonzales 9/2008 2009 Ref.-Spill Response Equipment 16 December Updated App.A P. Gonzales 12/2008 2008 Attached. A- Drawings 17 February EPA updated for WCD N. 02/2009 2009 Stubblefield 18 Jan 2010 Update QI Listing pg 230-3 Schneider 1/2010 19 Sept. 2010 Update CAL OES to CAL EMA C. Weber 9/2010 i April 2008 PHMSA 000068716 Record of Changes Change Effective Person Date Number Date Entering Entered Scope of Revision Change 20 Jan 2014 DOT PHMSA Letter of Corrections Witt 1/2014 O’Brien’s 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 January 2014 ii PHMSA 000068717 TABLE OF CONTENTS Record Of Changes .............................................................................................................. i List Of Tables ................................................................................................................... vii List Of Figures ................................................................................................................. viii List Of Reference Manuals ................................................................................................ ix Regulatory Cross Indices .....................................................................................................x EPA Response Plan Coversheet And Information.............................................................xv 100 Introduction ..............................................................................................................1 110 Management Approval, Manpower Authorization, And Certification .........2 115 Certificate Of Financial Responsibility .......................................................3 120 Overview ......................................................................................................5 121 Valero Refining Company – California Policy And Management ..6 122 Scope And Limitations ....................................................................6 130 Facility Information .....................................................................................7 131 Facility Data/Contacts ......................................................................7 132 Location Description ........................................................................9 132.1 Benicia Refinery And Marketing Terminal ...................9 132.2 Valero Benicia Dock ....................................................11 132.3 Submarine Pipelines.....................................................11 133 DOT Information Summary ...........................................................12 140 Reference Documents ................................................................................13 200 Emergency Response Action Plan ...........................................................................1 210 Notification Procedures ...............................................................................2 220 Spill Mitigation And Response Checklist ....................................................1 221 Immediate Response Procedures .....................................................1 iii April 2008 PHMSA 000068718 TABLE OF CONTENTS 221.1 Procedures For Prevention And Mitigation Of Discharge .......................................................................1 222 Process Team-Spill Response Team (PT-SRT) ................................8 223 Valero Benicia Refinery Spill Management Team (SMT) .............10 230 Spill Response Organization .........................................................................1 231 Organization Structure ......................................................................1 232 Qualified Individual .........................................................................1 233 Benicia Refinery Process Team-Spill Response Team (PT-SRT) ...4 234 Benicia Refinery Spill Management Team (SMT) ..........................6 236 Response Organization Position Descriptions .................................8 240 Response Strategies .....................................................................................1 250 RESPONSE RESOURCES .........................................................................1 260 Sensitive Resources At Risk ........................................................................1 261 Overview ..........................................................................................1 262 Environmentally Sensitive Resources At Risk ................................2 263 Economically Important Resources ...............................................12 270 Waste Handling And Disposal .....................................................................1 271 Overview ..........................................................................................1 272 Classification/Handling....................................................................6 273 Recovered Oil ..................................................................................8 274 Disposal Of Water Separated From Recovered Oil .........................8 275 Disposal Of Debris And Other Materials .........................................8 276 Temporary Storage...........................................................................9 277 Waste Transportation .....................................................................10 iv April 2008 PHMSA 000068719 TABLE OF CONTENTS 300 Hazard Evaluation ....................................................................................................1 310 Risk And Hazard Analysis ...........................................................................1 311 Overview ..........................................................................................1 312 History Of Significant Spills ............................................................1 313 Hazard Analysis Method..................................................................4 314 Expertise Of Analysis Group ...........................................................5 315 Results Of Hazard Analysis .............................................................5 320 Offsite Consequences Analysis..................................................................11 321 Introduction .....................................................................................11 322 SPILL TRAJECTORY ANALYSIS APPROACH AND SPILL MODEL BACKGROUND ..............................................................................11 323 APPLICATION OF OILMAP MODEL TO SPILL SCENARIOS .......13 324 Results ............................................................................................14 325 Fate And Persistence ......................................................................22 326 Toxic Effects ..................................................................................23 330 Resources At Risk ......................................................................................23 400 Spill Scenarios ..........................................................................................................1 410 Discharge Planning Volumes ........................................................................1 411 Worst-Case Discharge .....................................................................3 412 Reasonable Worst-Case Discharge ..................................................6 413 Maximum Most Probable (Medium) Discharge ..............................7 414 Average Most Probable (Small) Discharge .....................................8 420 Spill Scenarios .............................................................................................8 430 Calculation Of Response Planning Volume ..............................................11 v April 2008 PHMSA 000068720 TABLE OF CONTENTS 440 Response Capability Standards ..................................................................16 500 Training And Drills ..................................................................................................1 510 Training Procedures
Recommended publications
  • Transitions for the Delta Economy

    Transitions for the Delta Economy

    Transitions for the Delta Economy January 2012 Josué Medellín-Azuara, Ellen Hanak, Richard Howitt, and Jay Lund with research support from Molly Ferrell, Katherine Kramer, Michelle Lent, Davin Reed, and Elizabeth Stryjewski Supported with funding from the Watershed Sciences Center, University of California, Davis Summary The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta consists of some 737,000 acres of low-lying lands and channels at the confluence of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers (Figure S1). This region lies at the very heart of California’s water policy debates, transporting vast flows of water from northern and eastern California to farming and population centers in the western and southern parts of the state. This critical water supply system is threatened by the likelihood that a large earthquake or other natural disaster could inflict catastrophic damage on its fragile levees, sending salt water toward the pumps at its southern edge. In another area of concern, water exports are currently under restriction while regulators and the courts seek to improve conditions for imperiled native fish. Leading policy proposals to address these issues include improvements in land and water management to benefit native species, and the development of a “dual conveyance” system for water exports, in which a new seismically resistant canal or tunnel would convey a portion of water supplies under or around the Delta instead of through the Delta’s channels. This focus on the Delta has caused considerable concern within the Delta itself, where residents and local governments have worried that changes in water supply and environmental management could harm the region’s economy and residents.
  • Alameda, a Geographical History, by Imelda Merlin

    Alameda, a Geographical History, by Imelda Merlin

    Alameda A Geographical History by Imelda Merlin Friends of the Alameda Free Library Alameda Museum Alameda, California 1 Copyright, 1977 Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 77-73071 Cover picture: Fernside Oaks, Cohen Estate, ca. 1900. 2 FOREWORD My initial purpose in writing this book was to satisfy a partial requirement for a Master’s Degree in Geography from the University of California in Berkeley. But, fortunate is the student who enjoys the subject of his research. This slim volume is essentially the original manuscript, except for minor changes in the interest of greater accuracy, which was approved in 1964 by Drs. James Parsons, Gunther Barth and the late Carl Sauer. That it is being published now, perhaps as a response to a new awareness of and interest in our past, is due to the efforts of the “Friends of the Alameda Free Library” who have made a project of getting my thesis into print. I wish to thank the members of this organization and all others, whose continued interest and perseverance have made this publication possible. Imelda Merlin April, 1977 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The writer wishes to acknowledge her indebtedness to the many individuals and institutions who gave substantial assistance in assembling much of the material treated in this thesis. Particular thanks are due to Dr. Clarence J. Glacken for suggesting the topic. The writer also greatly appreciates the interest and support rendered by the staff of the Alameda Free Library, especially Mrs. Hendrine Kleinjan, reference librarian, and Mrs. Myrtle Richards, curator of the Alameda Historical Society. The Engineers’ and other departments at the Alameda City Hall supplied valuable maps an information on the historical development of the city.
  • Desilva Island

    Desilva Island

    SUISUN BAY 139 SUISUN BAY 140 SUISUN BAY SUISUN BAY Located immediately downstream of the confluence of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers, Suisun Bay is the largest contiguous wetland area in the San Francisco Bay region. Suisun Bay is a dynamic, transitional zone between the freshwater input of the Central Valley rivers and the tidal influence of the upper San Francisco Estuary. This area supports a substantial number of nesting herons and egrets, including three of the largest colonies in the region. Although suburban development is rampant along the nearby Interstate 80 corridor to the north, most of the Suisun Bay area is protected from heavy development by the California Department of Fish and Game and a number of private duck clubs. Black- Active Great crowned or year Site Blue Great Snowy Night- Cattle last # Colony Site Heron Egret Egret Heron Egret County active Page 501 Bohannon Solano Active 142 502 Campbell Ranch Solano Active 143 503 Cordelia Road Solano 1998 145 504 Gold Hill Solano Active 146 505 Green Valley Road Solano Active 148 506 Hidden Cove Solano Active 149 507 Joice Island Solano 1994 150 508 Joice Island Annex Solano Active 151 509 Sherman Lake Sacramento Active 152 510 Simmons Island Solano 1994 153 511 Spoonbill Solano Active 154 512 Tree Slough Solano Active 155 513 Volanti Solano Active 156 514 Wheeler Island Solano Active 157 SUISUN BAY 141 142 SUISUN BAY Bohannon Great Blue Herons and Great Egrets nest in a grove of eucalyptus trees on a levee in Cross Slough, about 1.8 km east of Beldons Landing.
  • Section 3.4 Biological Resources 3.4- Biological Resources

    Section 3.4 Biological Resources 3.4- Biological Resources

    SECTION 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4- BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES This section discusses the existing sensitive biological resources of the San Francisco Bay Estuary (the Estuary) that could be affected by project-related construction and locally increased levels of boating use, identifies potential impacts to those resources, and recommends mitigation strategies to reduce or eliminate those impacts. The Initial Study for this project identified potentially significant impacts on shorebirds and rafting waterbirds, marine mammals (harbor seals), and wetlands habitats and species. The potential for spread of invasive species also was identified as a possible impact. 3.4.1 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES SETTING HABITATS WITHIN AND AROUND SAN FRANCISCO ESTUARY The vegetation and wildlife of bayland environments varies among geographic subregions in the bay (Figure 3.4-1), and also with the predominant land uses: urban (commercial, residential, industrial/port), urban/wildland interface, rural, and agricultural. For the purposes of discussion of biological resources, the Estuary is divided into Suisun Bay, San Pablo Bay, Central San Francisco Bay, and South San Francisco Bay (See Figure 3.4-2). The general landscape structure of the Estuary’s vegetation and habitats within the geographic scope of the WT is described below. URBAN SHORELINES Urban shorelines in the San Francisco Estuary are generally formed by artificial fill and structures armored with revetments, seawalls, rip-rap, pilings, and other structures. Waterways and embayments adjacent to urban shores are often dredged. With some important exceptions, tidal wetland vegetation and habitats adjacent to urban shores are often formed on steep slopes, and are relatively recently formed (historic infilled sediment) in narrow strips.
  • Battle on Many Fronts

    Battle on Many Fronts

    RISING REALITY The Risk The Embarcadero The Future The Shorelines Resources Battle on many fronts The Bay Area faces a common threat along its shores, but must meet it with an array of ambitious and creative responses By John King November 2016 Boardwalks along the edge of the Alviso Salt Marsh restoration project allow visitors to enjoy the surrounding area on the edge of San Francisco Bay in Alviso. Michael Macor, The Chronicle The levee that rings Oakland International Airport seemingly has nothing in common with the salt­crusted stretch of flat land alongside Menlo Park’s Bayfront Park. One is a 7­foot­high line of boulders, an engineered barrier between the tidal flows that surge in through the Golden Gate twice daily and the runways used by 10,000 commercial flights every month. The other is quiet desolation, a white void dotted with stagnant pools of water. Both, though, are examples of the Bay Area shoreline at risk from the long­term effects of sea level rise — and reminders that there’s no single way to prepare for what might lie ahead. RISINGThe REALITY correct remed yThe in someRisk areas The of Embarcadero shoreline will in vTheolv eFuture forms of naThetural Shorelines healing, wi thResources restored and managed marshes that provide habitat for wildlife and trails for people. But when major public investments or large residential communities are at risk, barriers might be needed to keep out water that wants to come in. It’s a future where now­isolated salt ponds near Silicon Valley would be reunited with the larger bay, while North Bay farmland is turned back into marshes.
  • Salinity Effects on Native and Introduced SAV of Suisun Bay and the Delta 2

    Salinity Effects on Native and Introduced SAV of Suisun Bay and the Delta 2

    ! Section 1: Summary Information 1. Project title: Salinity effects on native and introduced SAV of Suisun Bay and the Delta 2. Applicant name: San Francisco State University, Romberg Tiburon Center for Environmental Studies 3. Contact person: Katharyn E. Boyer 4. Address: 3152 Paradise Drive 5. City, State, Zip: Tiburon, CA, 94920 6. Telephone #: 510-504-2424 7. Fax #: 510-558-0167 8. Email address: [email protected] 9. Agency Type: University (CSU) 10. Certified nonprofit organization: No 11. New grantee: Yes 12. Amount requested: $412,410 13. Total project cost: $412,410 (University rules do not allow formal attribution of closely related projects as match; however, two projects funded in recent weeks by the Delta Science Program [$160K] and NOAA Fisheries [$10K] represent substantial leveraging of requested funds) 14. Topic Area(s): Primary: Shallow water and marsh habitat; Secondary: X2 (freshwater- seawater interface), Non-native invasive species 15. ERP Project type: Primary: Research; Secondary: Monitoring, Pilot/Demonstration 16. Ecosystem Element: Primary: Tidal perennial aquatic habitat; Secondary: Invasive aquatic plants, Essential fish habitat, Mid-channel islands and shoals 17. Water Quality Constituent: Primary: Salinity; Secondary: Turbidity, Nutrients 18. At-Risk species benefited: Delta Smelt, Central Valley Fall-/Late-Fall-Run Chinook Salmon ESU, and Green Sturgeon ! "! ! 19. Project objectives: Characterize salinity and other abiotic factors in and outside native Stuckenia pectinata beds with comparisons to four invasive Egeria densa beds, and use mescosom experiments to evaluate and predict the effects of increased salinity on Stuckenia and Egeria, and their invertebrate assemblages. 20. Time frame: 3 years, beginning fall 2011 (depending on award/contracting schedule) Section 2: Location Information 1.
  • Executive Director's Recommendation Regarding Proposed Cease And

    Executive Director's Recommendation Regarding Proposed Cease And

    May 16, 2019 TO: Enforcement Committee Members FROM: Larry Goldzband, Executive Director, (415/352-3653; [email protected]) Marc Zeppetello, Chief Counsel, (415/352-3655; [email protected]) Karen Donovan, Attorney III, (415/352-3628; [email protected]) SUBJECT: Executive Director’s Recommendation Regarding Proposed Cease and Desist and Civil Penalty Order No. CDO 2019.001.00 Salt River Construction Corporation and Richard Moseley (For Committee consideration on May 16, 2019) Executive Director’s Recommendation The Executive Director recommends that the Enforcement Committee adopt this Recommended Enforcement Decision including the proposed Cease and Desist and Civil Penalty Order No. CCD2019.001.00 (“Order”) to Salt River Construction Corporation and Richard Moseley (“SRCC”), for the reasons stated below. This matter arises out of an enforcement action commenced by BCDC staff in June of 2018 after BCDC received information from witnesses regarding the unauthorized activities. The matter was previously presented to the Enforcement Committee on February 21, 2019. After the Committee voted to recommend the adoption of the proposed Cease and Desist and Civil Penalty Order, the Commission remanded the matter to the Committee on April 18, 2019, in order to allow Mr. Moseley to appear and present his position. Staff Report I. SUMMARY OF THE BACKGROUND ON THE ALLEGED VIOLATIONS A. Background Facts The Complaint alleges three separate violations. The first alleged violation occurred on property near Schoonmaker Point Marina, located in Richardson’s Bay in Marin County. On November 25, 2017, a San Francisco Baykeeper patrol boat operator witnessed a barge near Schoonmaker Marina being propelled by an excavator bucket.
  • RD799 Five Year Plan

    RD799 Five Year Plan

    Reclamation District 799 Five Year Capital Improvement Plan May 2012 Prepared by 2365 Iron Point Road, Suite 300 Folsom, CA 95630 This page intentionally left blank. RD 799 Five Year Plan Contents 1.0 Executive Summary .............................................................................................................. 1 2.0 Brief History of Hotchkiss Tract .......................................................................................... 3 2.1 Location .............................................................................................................................................. 3 2.2 Geomorphic Evolution ........................................................................................................................ 4 2.3 Historical Flood Events ....................................................................................................................... 6 2.3.1 Existing level of protection ........................................................................................................... 6 3.0 Identification of Need for Improvements to Alleviate or Minimize Existing Hazards ........................................................................................................................................ 7 3.1 Local Assets ....................................................................................................................................... 7 3.2 Non-local Assets and Public Benefit ..................................................................................................
  • San Francisco Bay Plan

    San Francisco Bay Plan

    San Francisco Bay Plan San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission In memory of Senator J. Eugene McAteer, a leader in efforts to plan for the conservation of San Francisco Bay and the development of its shoreline. Photo Credits: Michael Bry: Inside front cover, facing Part I, facing Part II Richard Persoff: Facing Part III Rondal Partridge: Facing Part V, Inside back cover Mike Schweizer: Page 34 Port of Oakland: Page 11 Port of San Francisco: Page 68 Commission Staff: Facing Part IV, Page 59 Map Source: Tidal features, salt ponds, and other diked areas, derived from the EcoAtlas Version 1.0bc, 1996, San Francisco Estuary Institute. STATE OF CALIFORNIA GRAY DAVIS, Governor SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION 50 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 2600 SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94111 PHONE: (415) 352-3600 January 2008 To the Citizens of the San Francisco Bay Region and Friends of San Francisco Bay Everywhere: The San Francisco Bay Plan was completed and adopted by the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission in 1968 and submitted to the California Legislature and Governor in January 1969. The Bay Plan was prepared by the Commission over a three-year period pursuant to the McAteer-Petris Act of 1965 which established the Commission as a temporary agency to prepare an enforceable plan to guide the future protection and use of San Francisco Bay and its shoreline. In 1969, the Legislature acted upon the Commission’s recommendations in the Bay Plan and revised the McAteer-Petris Act by designating the Commission as the agency responsible for maintaining and carrying out the provisions of the Act and the Bay Plan for the protection of the Bay and its great natural resources and the development of the Bay and shore- line to their highest potential with a minimum of Bay fill.
  • (Oncorhynchus Mykiss) in Streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California

    (Oncorhynchus Mykiss) in Streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California

    Historical Distribution and Current Status of Steelhead/Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in Streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California Robert A. Leidy, Environmental Protection Agency, San Francisco, CA Gordon S. Becker, Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration, Oakland, CA Brett N. Harvey, John Muir Institute of the Environment, University of California, Davis, CA This report should be cited as: Leidy, R.A., G.S. Becker, B.N. Harvey. 2005. Historical distribution and current status of steelhead/rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California. Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration, Oakland, CA. Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration TABLE OF CONTENTS Forward p. 3 Introduction p. 5 Methods p. 7 Determining Historical Distribution and Current Status; Information Presented in the Report; Table Headings and Terms Defined; Mapping Methods Contra Costa County p. 13 Marsh Creek Watershed; Mt. Diablo Creek Watershed; Walnut Creek Watershed; Rodeo Creek Watershed; Refugio Creek Watershed; Pinole Creek Watershed; Garrity Creek Watershed; San Pablo Creek Watershed; Wildcat Creek Watershed; Cerrito Creek Watershed Contra Costa County Maps: Historical Status, Current Status p. 39 Alameda County p. 45 Codornices Creek Watershed; Strawberry Creek Watershed; Temescal Creek Watershed; Glen Echo Creek Watershed; Sausal Creek Watershed; Peralta Creek Watershed; Lion Creek Watershed; Arroyo Viejo Watershed; San Leandro Creek Watershed; San Lorenzo Creek Watershed; Alameda Creek Watershed; Laguna Creek (Arroyo de la Laguna) Watershed Alameda County Maps: Historical Status, Current Status p. 91 Santa Clara County p. 97 Coyote Creek Watershed; Guadalupe River Watershed; San Tomas Aquino Creek/Saratoga Creek Watershed; Calabazas Creek Watershed; Stevens Creek Watershed; Permanente Creek Watershed; Adobe Creek Watershed; Matadero Creek/Barron Creek Watershed Santa Clara County Maps: Historical Status, Current Status p.
  • Northern San Francisco Bay Ecological Risk Assessment: Potential Crude by Rail Incident Meagan Bowis University of San Francisco, Applesnyder@Gmail.Com

    Northern San Francisco Bay Ecological Risk Assessment: Potential Crude by Rail Incident Meagan Bowis University of San Francisco, [email protected]

    The University of San Francisco USF Scholarship: a digital repository @ Gleeson Library | Geschke Center Master's Projects and Capstones Theses, Dissertations, Capstones and Projects Spring 5-20-2016 Northern San Francisco Bay Ecological Risk Assessment: Potential Crude by Rail Incident Meagan Bowis University of San Francisco, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.usfca.edu/capstone Part of the Environmental Health and Protection Commons, Environmental Indicators and Impact Assessment Commons, Natural Resource Economics Commons, Natural Resources Management and Policy Commons, Oil, Gas, and Energy Commons, and the Other Oceanography and Atmospheric Sciences and Meteorology Commons Recommended Citation Bowis, Meagan, "Northern San Francisco Bay Ecological Risk Assessment: Potential Crude by Rail Incident" (2016). Master's Projects and Capstones. 340. https://repository.usfca.edu/capstone/340 This Project/Capstone is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, Capstones and Projects at USF Scholarship: a digital repository @ Gleeson Library | Geschke Center. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Projects and Capstones by an authorized administrator of USF Scholarship: a digital repository @ Gleeson Library | Geschke Center. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This Master’s Project Northern San Francisco Bay Ecological Risk Assessment: Potential Crude by Rail Incident By Meagan Kane Bowis is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements
  • F-1'7-03 Meeting

    F-1'7-03 Meeting

    MINUTE ITEM This Calendar Item No. <!I/ was approved as Minute Item No . .J.L. by the California State Lands Commission by a vote of _g__ to,L'at Its f-1'7-03 meeting. CALENDAR ITEM C11 A) 11 08/19/03 PRC 5438 WP 5438.1 S) 2 L. Burks AMENDMENT OF MASTER LEASE NO. PRC 5438.1 (ADDENDUM NO. 14) APPLICANT: Pacific Gas and Electric Company AREA, LAND TYPE, AND LOCATION: Master Lease: Over 100 waterway crossings throughout the State. Amendment: Delete from the Lease 6.07 acres, more or less, of tide and submerged lands in Honker and Suisun Bays, near Bay Point, Contra Costa and Solano counties. AUTHORIZED USE: Master Lease: Continued use and maintenance of distribution pipelines to transport natural and synthetic gas. Amendment: Removal of an existing 10-inch and 12-inch diameter pipeline known as PG&E Line 182. LEASE TERM: Existing Master Lease: 20 years, beginning January 1, 1978. A new lease is currently being negotiated. The existing lease is in holdover. CONSIDERATION: Existing Master Lease: $30,400 per year; with the State reserving the right to fix a different rent periodically during the lease term, as provided in the lease. SPECIFIC LEASE PROVISIONS: Liability insurance: $10,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and $10,000,000 for property damage. n1 r 01. I lJs l 1U·"t REVISED 08/18/03 0 -1- CALEMDAR PAGE Mir<UT E PA GE CALENDAR ITEM NO. C11 (CONT'D) PROPOSED AMENDMENT: The Master Lease provides that the lease may periodically be amended by a series of addenda for the purpose of adding to and deleting from the lease the parcels of land necessary for the distribution of natural gas pipelines.