+

ARCO Pipeline Removal

Combined Project 06DRP-00000-00002 County of Santa Barbara

(Lead Agency)

06-058-DP City of Goleta (Responsible Agency)

FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration

Vicinity Map

Owner/Applicant Consultant Engineer Atlantic Richfield Company ARCADIS U.S., Inc Padre Associates, Inc. 6 Centerpointe Dr. 4640 Admiralty Way, Suite 523 5290 Overpass Road #217 La Palma, CA 90623 Marina del Rey, CA 90292 Goleta, CA 93111

For More Information Contact: Santa Barbara County Energy Division, (805) 568-2513 ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 1

0.0 DOCUMENT FORMATTING NOTE

The proposed project involves activity in both the County of Santa Barbara and the City of Goleta jurisdictions; as such, the applicant, Atlantic Richfield Company (ARCO), submitted applications to both agencies. Pursuant to Section 15051, Title 14, California Code of Regulations, the County and City agreed to designate the County as lead CEQA agency. Due to the differences in policy and environmental thresholds, the environmental analysis was divided into separate sections specific to each agency’s geographic jurisdiction. Therefore, this document is formatted with a discussion specific to the County portion of the project followed by a discussion specific to the City segment. Note that some information may be presented in both jurisdictional sections of the document and that as the lead CEQA agency for all aspects of the project in both jurisdictions; the County has fully studied and addressed all potential project impacts. The City-specific discussions are provided to ensure that the project is explicitly reviewed in the context of both the County and the City regulatory criteria.

The proposed project work will be performed in four distinct geographic areas within the Third Supervisorial District, involving three riparian creeks and one marine terrace as follows and shown on Figure 1:

1. Eagle Canyon Creek Area- in the County of Santa Barbara 2. Eagle Canyon Ranch Marine Terrace Area- in the County of Santa Barbara 3. Tecolote Creek Area- in the City of Goleta 4. Bell Creek Area- near the Venoco Ellwood Onshore Facility (EOF) in the City of Goleta

Figure 1 - Project Location Map

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 2

1.0 REQUEST/PROJECT DESCRIPTION

1.1 County Request/Project Description

Atlantic Richfield Company (ARCO) seeks to obtain a Demolition and Reclamation Permit (D & R) and a Coastal Development Permit requiring a public hearing (CDH) from the County of Santa Barbara to remove several abandoned pipelines and ancillary equipment associated with its former Dos Pueblos oil and gas production operation. A relatively small portion of pipeline is proposed to be abandoned in place. These pipelines originate on the former Dos Pueblos oil and gas production site, currently owned by Makar Properties, and traverse in an easterly direction across Eagle Canyon Creek and the privately owned Eagle Canyon Ranch within a former right- of-way easement leased by ARCO. The pipelines terminate on the Eagle Canyon Ranch property, with one exception. Segments of a former crude oil transport pipeline can be found eastward across the City of Goleta limit boundary. See Section 1.2 below for that discussion.

ARCO proposes to remove all above-ground portions of the abandoned pipelines. Buried segments of the pipeline bundle for which ARCO has responsibility will also be removed from the Eagle Canyon Ranch property at the property owner’s request. Less than 50 cubic yards of grading is proposed. Removal of the pipeline will require the use of mechanized equipment.

Structures proposed to be removed as part of this abandonment project include:

• The remaining above-ground portions of a 6-inch diameter former crude oil transport pipeline running from Dos Pueblos (Makar) property to Bell Creek; • An abandoned pipeline bundle (5 lines) and associated concrete, metal, and wood pipe supports remaining on the Dos Pueblos property (a distance of approximately 300 feet), Eagle Canyon Ranch (approximately 1/3 mile), and across Eagle Canyon Creek (two metal supports atop wooden beams);

Removal of the pipeline at Eagle Canyon Ranch work area will require the use of an excavator and crane. Approximately 200 feet of pipeline is located underground and will have to be precisely located and exposed prior to removal. Removed pipeline will be placed on a flatbed truck and transferred the primary staging area located on Eagle Canyon Ranch.

At Eagle Canyon Creek, a temporary scaffold will be built in the creek bed to be used for removal of the pipeline and pipeline support structures. Prior to removal, the pipeline will be tapped and residual fluid will be removed. Once residual fluid is removed the pipeline will be cut at the approximate centerline and on each end outside the eastern and western bank of Eagle Canyon Creek. Each pipeline segment will be filled with sorbent pads and a plug will be placed over the end. Once plugged the pipeline segment will be rigged with a pulling sling and pulled from the creek bed to the upland areas on the eastern and western sides with the use a small bulldozer. The pipeline support structures will then be removed with the use of equipment staged on the bank of the Eagle Canyon Creek. An opening in the tree canopy will need to be created for lifting operations. Approximately 6 to 10 eucalyptus trees will need to be removed in the vicinity of the pipe supports in order to remove the pipelines. Additionally, understory vegetation will be trimmed back or matted down with planking to provide a clear working are for project personal involved in lifting operations. Removed materials will be transported to the primary staging area with the use of flat bed truck.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 3

Access to the eastern side of Eagle Canyon Creek is provided through an existing unpaved road that runs west across Eagle Canyon Ranch from the Ellwood Pier access road. Access to the western side of Eagle Canyon Creek and will be provided through an existing access road on the neighboring Makar property. The majority of equipment and personal will access the site on the eastern side.

Equipment

Equipment estimated to be used as part of this removal project is based on the work activities required for each area. However, equipment may be subject to modifications based on the contractor selected to perform construction activities and specific equipment availability at the time of project execution. In some cases, an equivalent piece of equipment may be utilized that serves the same purpose or function of those listed above.

The equipment proposed for the removal work consists of:

Eagle Canyon Creek Area Pipe tapping machine, air compressor, generator, crane, diaphragm pump or vacuum truck, hand tools, four wheel pipe cutter, pneumatic hacksaw, and/or gasoline-powered cut-off saw, sorbent pads and end caps for cut pipe sections, front-end loader or similar piece of equipment, small bulldozer (Cat D6 or equivalent), crane, and roll-off bins/55-gallon capacity drums.

Eagle Canyon Ranch Marine Terrance Area Vegetation/tree trimming spread, air knife unit, pipe tapping machine, air compressor, skid-steer loader, backhoe, or similar piece of equipment, crane, excavator, grout delivery truck, inline grout pump, flatbed truck, forklift, or similar piece of equipment, diaphragm pump or vacuum truck, hand tools, four wheel or hydraulic pipe cutter, pneumatic hacksaw, and/or gasoline- powered cut-off saw, containment pans, sorbent pads (in addition to those listed in Section 3.0 for spill response requirements), pipe caps/fittings, welding machine, and roll-off bins/55-gallon capacity drums.

Schedule

Field work activities are proposed to occur between the dates of July 1 through November 1 (or possibly until November 15 if significant rainfall does not occur). This time period represents the normal dry season, which would allow work to be completed in the creek areas during low-flow conditions and would minimize the potential for stormwater pollution to result from Project implementation. Although not currently anticipated, it is possible that work activities in upland marine terrace areas away from the creek areas could be completed outside of the dry season referenced above. If any upland work activities are performed outside of the dry season, standard best management practices and erosion control measures would be implemented to minimize the potential for stormwater runoff from construction/disturbed areas to occur. Any additional Project schedule limitations specified in permits/approvals issued for the Project would be adhered to.

Following are the estimated work-day durations for each major project component in the County:

Eagle Canyon Creek work activities: 18 days Eagle Canyon Ranch Marine Terrace work activities: 82 days ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 4

Logistics

Key elements of the Work Plan include: designated work hours and days of operations, parking requirements, access, equipment staging, onsite security, pipeline tapping and residual fluid removal procedures, pipeline removal procedures, pipeline support structure removal procedures. The Work Plan also includes an Oil Spill Prevention and Contingency Plan, Waste Management Plan, Traffic Control Plan, Post Construction Soil Sampling and Analysis Plan. The Work Plan is subject to review and refinement as a part of the environmental review and permit process to ensure consistency with County policies and regulations.

1.2 City Request/Project Description

Prior to initial oilfield exploration in 1929, the subject properties consisted of vacant farm and ranch land. The Ellwood Oil Field discovery well was drilled on what is now the Sandpiper Golf Course in June of 1928. From 1928 until 1994, oil and gas were extracted from wells that penetrated the Ellwood Field. Throughout the 1930’s, oil well drilling and production from the Ellwood Field continued, and on-shore support facilities were placed in service, including the subject pipeline (the O-3 pipeline). The O-3 pipeline connected the present day Makar property, which was formerly the site of the Dos Pueblos Facility (within the County of Santa Barbara’s jurisdiction – west of the Goleta city limit line) with the Ellwood Onshore Facility (EOF - within City limits and presently owned by Venoco, Inc.). In 1996 to 1998, Atlantic Richfield decommissioned the Dos Pueblos facility and plugged associated oil wells.

Most of the O-3 pipeline within City limits was removed during construction of the Bacara Resort and Spa (Bacara). A small portion of the O-3 pipeline crossing Tecolote Creek, within Bacara property, was filled with grout and abandoned in place. The portion of the O-3 pipeline east of the Bacara property was cut at the eastern property line. As such, another segment of the O-3 pipeline still remains suspended over Bell Creek, and underground alongside the EOF’s western property line.

The applicant requests approval of a Final Development Plan (FDP) for the removal of these remnant portions of the abandoned pipelines and ancillary equipment within and adjacent to Tecolote and Bell Creeks with the exception of the portion of the O-3 pipeline suspended over Bell Creek (for safety purposes described below). This project serves as a restoration and enhancement project as removal of the pipeline in Tecolote Creek will improve creek flow and removal/abandonment of the pipeline portions adjacent to the Bell Creek corridor will prevent any potential spills of residual hydrocarbons from the lines into the surrounding Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area (ESHA).

Facilities and pipeline segments planned to be removed as a part of this project are depicted on Figure 2 (see Attachment A) and include:

• The remaining above ground portions of a 6-inch diameter former crude oil transport pipeline from Dos Pueblos to Tecolote Creek, • A triplex pump, skid and associated piping near the south end of the Venoco Ellwood Onshore Facility (EOF) located at 7979 Hollister Avenue, and • An old hydrogen sulfide (H2S) alarm panel immediately west of the EOF near the access to Bell Creek.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 5

In addition to removal, pipeline segments with sufficient and stable soil cover and/or where removal would create more significant environmental impacts then abandonment in place, will be abandoned in place. These include:

• Buried segments of the abandoned pipeline outside of the immediate channel of Tecolote Creek. • Approximately 800 feet of pipeline that parallels the road west of the EOF fence line, • Portion of the O-3 pipeline suspended over Bell Creek and associated concrete supports.

The 800 section that parallels the EOF fence line and the portion of the O-3 pipeline suspended over Bell Creek and its’ concrete supports will not be removed as part of the project, but will be abandoned at the time of the Venoco decommissioning as mentioned above because the proximity to active Venoco pipelines. Removing this portion of the O-3 pipeline would create the potential of injuries, loss of life and potential adverse consequences to active EOF operations. Atlantic Richfield proposes to remove this portion of the O-3 pipeline and its concrete supports after the active Venoco gas line it parallels is decommissioned.

Lastly, another line crossing Bell Creek located approximately 200 feet south of the Hollister Avenue Bridge will not be abandoned or removed as a part of this project as no evidence was found that the pipeline was ever owned or operated by Atlantic Richfield.

Tecolote Creek Project Description: Figure 3 (see Attachment A) depicts the Tecolote Creek project work area.

Scope of Work The scope of work for the Tecolote Creek work area includes the following:

• Site preparation; • Physically locate the O-3 pipeline where it crosses Tecolote Creek by using a combination of geophysical means, hand tools, and air knife/air vacuum tools; • Use hand tools, air knife/air vacuum tools and a mini excavator to expose the O-3 pipeline 5 feet into each bank. • Verify that the O-3 pipeline has been filled with grout. • Cut and cap the O-3 pipeline 5 feet into each bank. • Cut and remove the 5 feet of O-3 pipeline exposed in each bank. • Use a mini excavator to uncover/expose the remaining portion of the O-3 pipeline in the creek bed. • Use a mini excavator and/or crane to pull and/or lift the remaining portion of the O-3 pipeline out of the creek bed.

Site Access and Preparation Equipment use in creek area - Due to limited site access and the presence of sensitive resources (biological and archaeological), construction activities in the Tecolote Creek area will be accomplished without the use of heavy construction equipment operating within the creek corridor. However, a mini excavator, pneumatically operated air knife and air vacuum digging tools will be utilized to efficiently achieve the removal objective while minimizing the operations footprint in the riparian corridor.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 6

Access to work site - Personnel and equipment will access the work site from the northeastern abutment of the Hollister Avenue Bridge. Temporary steps may be installed from the road surface to the grade below the bridge. This work will occur during late summer/early fall when the flow in Tecolote Creek is historically low/intermittent at the location of the bridge and when a terminal lagoon typically extends from the sandbar that forms at the mouth of the creek to the location of the O-3 pipeline. Typically at this time of year, there is no measureable surface flow from the terminal lagoon to coastal waters. Access to the Tecolote Creek corridor will be established from the northern portion of the Hollister Avenue Bridge on the eastern side of the creek. A foot traffic and mini excavator access path will be established down the eastern and western banks of the creek to the O-3 pipeline location. The access path to the western bank will begin under the bridge in a southerly direction, and across the creek to a staging area located adjacent to the western bank of Tecolote Creek. The access path to the eastern bank will begin under the bridge from the northeast access location and continue in a southerly direction along the eastern bank.

Temporary staging area - The temporary staging area will measure approximately 25 feet by 25 feet, and will be established west of the creek and south of the bridge. This area will provide adequate space to raise and lower necessary construction materials, equipment, and supplies from a crane located either to the east of the Hollister Avenue Bridge on Hollister Avenue or on the southern side of the bridge. Plywood planking and support beams will be placed, where necessary, to level the staging area. The staging area is located 32 feet below Hollister Avenue (36 feet below the elevated rail of the bridge).

Temporary access paths - Where necessary, temporary access paths will be constructed of plywood planking material with non-skid grip tape or equivalent material applied to its surface in a manner which will maximize personnel safety and minimize impacts to vegetation. This planking will be installed by personnel utilizing hand tools. The access pathways will have a width up to six feet to allow personnel and mini excavator access. The access pathways will be delineated with temporary plastic fencing to ensure personnel and equipment stay within the pre- designated access corridor.

Gangways in creek area - Where applicable, six-foot wide platform sections of various lengths will be fabricated and lowered to the staging area. These sections will then be placed in conjunction with support beams alongside the creek edge. In addition, two elevated gangways will be fabricated across Tecolote Creek to allow personnel to cross the creek and access work areas without the need to walk within the creek itself. One gangway will be constructed under the Hollister Avenue Bridge and the other gangway will be constructed across Tecolote Creek in close proximity to the O-3 pipeline segment. The gangways will be constructed of wooden boards or planking in accordance with Cal OSHA scaffolding/walking surface requirements. The surface would be equipped with non-skid grip tape and guardrails over elevated portions. The anticipated locations for the creek crossing gangways are shown in Figure 3.

Vegetation removal - The presence of uneven ground and dense vegetation along the access pathways located between the access point at the Hollister Avenue Bridge and the O-3 pipeline location will require that native and non-native vegetation be trimmed back. Trees will be protected to the maximum extent possible and only trimmed when necessary for the safety of the workers or the safe operation of equipment. An opening will need to be created in the tree canopy to effectively use a crane positioned either east of the Hollister Avenue Bridge or on the bridge in support of lifting operations. The 25-foot by 25-foot staging area will require the ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 7

removal of approximately six planted London plane trees. Tree limbs and/or branches will be cut off by a professional tree trimming service provider using handheld equipment to the maximum extent possible. It is anticipated that an adequate opening in the tree canopy for the access trails can be established by trimming trees back (e.g., cutting back or removing specific branches) and will not require the removal of entire trees. However, due to the height of some branches that will be removed it is envisioned that personnel may have to perform some tree trimming activities from a man basket suspended by a crane positioned either east of the Hollister Avenue Bridge or on the bridge.

Understory vegetation within the staging area boundary will also be trimmed back or covered with planking or similar material to provide a clear safe working area for project personnel involved in the lifting operations. In addition, vegetation will be removed on both sides of Tecolote Creek for the access paths described above and where the pipeline extends into the creek banks to allow access to personnel involved in pipeline excavation and cutting activities. All trimmed non-native vegetation will be gathered by hand in the staging area and bundled using tarps or line. Hand saws will be used as necessary to cut trimmed branches or limbs into manageable sizes that can more easily be recovered.

The crane will be used to lift the bundled non-native vegetation to Hollister Avenue where it will be placed on a flatbed truck or similar piece of equipment and transported to the primary construction staging area pending onsite chipping/mulching or disposal offsite. The California Department of Fish and Game typically recommends that trimmed native vegetation be left on site (outside the creek channel) to provide habitat and foster native recruitment. The majority of the vegetation in this area is the native arroyo willow and cuttings of willows will root to the ground even after being cut, acting as a natural erosion control measure.

Silt fencing - Silt fencing will be placed on the creek side of all the access paths directly adjacent to the temporary plastic fencing to eliminate the potential for sediment to enter the creek due to access and pipeline removal activities. Silt fencing will also be placed around the perimeter of the staging area as feasible while allowing safe access. Additional silt fencing may be placed in selected areas along the creek bank if warranted and where it can be installed without significant disturbance to the creek bank.

Crane use - The crane positioned on Hollister Avenue or on the Hollister Avenue Bridge will be used to lower equipment and supplies to the staging area. Prior to positioning the crane, an engineering analysis will be conducted to verify a secure staging area is established and that load ratings are within bridge specifications. All traffic control will be conducted in accordance with Cal DOT and local requirements. The staging area will also be used to recover removed pieces of pipe and other equipment/materials when work has been completed. Personnel and/or the mini excavator will be required to transport equipment and construction materials between the staging area and construction site. A small waste disposal bin for the removed pipeline capable of being raised and lowered by the crane will be staged in this area. Several crane mobilizations, each limited to several hours or less are anticipated to support the pipeline removal activities. Traffic control measures for crane and personnel access are discussed in the Project Traffic Control Plan (part of the September, 2007 project work plan available at City and County offices).

Non-working hours - Equipment within the staging area will be secured during non-working hours. Lockable equipment boxes will be stationed in the staging area by the crane to properly store tools or outside the work area entirely. Personal vehicles will be parked at the public ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 8

parking lot on Hollister Avenue north of the Bacara tennis courts or other suitable location as necessary. For safety purposes at least one vehicle will be designated for use in case of emergency. At least one person will remain on standby during working hours at the parking lot. Portable sanitary facilities are proposed to be established within the Tecolote Creek staging area. Two portable sanitary devices will be placed in the staging area using the crane. Based on the short anticipated duration of the project, neither device should need service prior to demobilization.

Spill prevention - The O-3 pipeline segment crossing Tecolote Creek is a remnant section that was abandoned in place across the creek channel during previous pipeline removal operations during construction of the Bacara Spa and Resort. The remaining pipeline segment was reportedly filled with grout prior to abandonment. As such, significant amounts of residual fluids should not be present inside the pipeline. However, since no field records of the grouting operation are readily available, non-destructive test (NDT) methods will be used to verify that the pipeline is filled with grout. Even if the pipeline is filled with grout, spill prevention and potential response measures to capture any residual fluids will be used whenever the pipeline is cut. Such measures will include the availability of response materials (e.g., oleophilic sorbent pads) as well as fluid and/or oily material containment and temporary storage capability.

Pipeline Removal Summary Evaluation - Removal Execution Options

Locating the pipeline in the field - The O-3 pipeline segment within the banks of Tecolote Creek has been previously located by geophysical means and traced across the creek. Given that information the preferred approach to removing the O-3 pipeline segment within Tecolote Creek is to find and uncover the pipeline in the banks of the creek and then follow (“chase”) the pipeline toward the creek bed if not already visible (the entire length of the pipeline was visible during the preconstruction planning visits in fall 2009). A combination of hand tools, hand operated pneumatic tools, and a mini excavator would be used to expose the O-3 pipeline in the banks of the creek. The mini excavator and/or a crane located on the Hollister Avenue Bridge would then pull/lift the pipe out of the creek. The mini excavator would be used to remove sediment on top of the pipeline within the creek bed as needed to enable the pipeline to be pulled/lifted out of the creek. A more detailed description of this approach is as follows.

Timing of removal - The O-3 pipeline segment crossing Tecolote Creek is located within a dynamic environment that dictates whether the pipeline segment is exposed, submerged in water, and/or covered with sediment overburden. The pipeline removal work will occur during late summer/early fall when the flow in Tecolote Creek is historically low/intermittent at the location of the Hollister Avenue Bridge and when a terminal lagoon formed at the mouth of Tecolote Creek by a sandbar resulting from longshore drift of ocean sediment typically extends from the sandbar to the location of the O-3 pipeline. The terminal lagoon typically ranges from 3 to 5 feet deep in the vicinity of the O-3 pipeline during the late summer/early fall as confirmed by the most recent biological surveys conducted in August 2008.

Sandbar will not be breached - The sandbar that forms at the mouth of Tecolote Creek because of longshore drift of ocean sediment could be artificially breached by hand digging or use of heavy equipment and the terminal lagoon could then be drained to a level of approximately 1 to 2 feet in depth in the vicinity of the O-3 pipeline. Conventional coffer dam/stream water diversion techniques could then be constructed to enable removal of the O-3 pipeline segment. ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 9

However, artificial breaching of the sandbar would likely be unacceptable to various permitting agencies and likely is in violation of the Federal Endangered Species Act. For that reason, it is not currently proposed in this work plan.

Dewatering is not proposed - Furthermore, construction of coffer dams and dewatering a portion of the 3 to 5 feet deep terminal lagoon in Tecolote Creek to expose the O-3 pipeline for removal is impractical from a construction standpoint and would result in more environmental disturbance/damage to both riparian and aquatic vegetation and wildlife than is necessary. Construction of the sandbag coffer dams by hand in 3 to 5 feet of water would require construction workers to trample/wade around within the creek extensively and, with great difficulty using hand tools, key/anchor the bottom row of sandbags of the coffer dam into the creek bed. The bottom row of sandbags keyed into the bottom of the creek would be several feet wide to provide an adequate base for the cofferdam structure to hold back the water. Once the bottom layer of sandbags is placed, construction of 3 to 5 feet high coffer dams upstream and downstream of the O-3 pipeline would require the hand placement of several hundred sandbags extending the construction duration within the creek/riparian zone to at least a month. The placement of hundreds of sandbags would cause excessive disturbance to vegetation and wildlife within the creek including resultant significant turbidity issues. In addition, once the coffer dams were in place the dewatering pumps inside the coffer dams would have to remain in continuous operation 24 hours a day to handle leakage through/under the coffer dams. Continuous overnight operation of the pump would require portable generator powered light towers and a minimum of two construction workers for nighttime operations. For those reasons coffer dams are not considered a viable option.

Pipeline Excavation and Cutting Pipeline Locating - The O-3 pipeline segment within the eastern and western banks of Tecolote Creek will be located visually or by geophysical techniques using standard industry tools and pipeline locators. The pipeline segment will then be exposed approximately 5 feet into each creek bank using a combination of hand tools, pneumatic air knife/air vacuum hand tools and a mini excavator (e.g. Caterpillar 304C). Once the pipeline segment has been sufficiently exposed, non-destructive test (NDT) methods will be used to verify if the pipeline is filled with grout. The same tools described above will be used to excavate the soil around the pipeline after it has been exposed. The pneumatic tools will be supplied with air from an air compressor lowered to the creek staging area by the crane. The mini excavator will either be walked down the plywood planked access pathways to the work area or lifted to the staging area with the crane. All excavated sediments will be stockpiled on each side of the creek on a tarp adjacent to the creek construction zone.

Pipeline Cutting - Roots and other unusable organic material for backfill will be separated from the excavated sediments. The pipeline will be cut off approximately 5 feet into each bank of the creek with a pneumatic hacksaw and handheld impact tools (breaker bar or sledge hammer). Prior to initiating cutting procedures, a containment pan or similar device will be placed under the pipe at the location to be cut as a precaution even if the pipe is filled with grout. The segment of the pipeline beyond 5 feet into each bank that will remain in place will be checked to see if it is grouted and if grout is not present the last foot of pipe will be plugged with grout. After the pipeline has been cut off 5 feet into the banks of the creek, the remainder of the pipeline within the banks on both sides of the creek outside the wetted creek bed will be cut and removed. If not directly hoisted out of the work area with the crane, those exposed portions of the O-3 pipeline will be cut into pieces measuring approximately 2 feet in length. This size will ensure safe ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 10

transfer of the segments carried by construction workers to the staging area. A brief observational biological survey will be performed at the site by an onsite biologist prior to pipeline lifting/pulling operations.

Potential Crane Use - If the mini excavator is unsuccessful at lifting/pulling the pipeline out of the creek bed the crane will be used to attempt the removal. The tree canopy above the pipeline will need to be trimmed using techniques previously described to attempt this removal/lift. If the crane is successful at lifting the pipe out of the creek bed the pipe will be loaded onto a flat bed truck staged on Hollister Avenue or the Hollister Avenue Bridge and moved to the primary Project staging area on the Upland Bluff of Eagle Canyon Ranch where it will be cut and trucked from the Project site.

Potential Use of a Flat Plate/Mini Excavator - If the pipe segment has been buried and the weight of the sediment on top of the pipe prohibits safe lifting, a flat plate will be welded across the teeth of the bucket of the mini excavator so it can be used to scrape/push and/or dig sediment within the creek bed. The bucket of the mini excavator will then be placed on the exposed end of the remaining pipeline segment at the top of the creek bank where it is visible and it will scrape along the top of the pipe and “chase” the pipe within the creek bed using a combination of scraping/digging actions to remove sediment from over the top of the pipe. The flat plate across the bucket teeth will also minimize disturbance to branches/vegetation submerged within the creek that would otherwise get stuck in the bucket teeth.

Periodically the equipment will be re-rigged to the pipeline segment with lifting slings and will attempt to lift the remaining pipe segment out of the creek bed. The mini-excavator will continue the scraping/digging work until enough sediment has been removed and the crane can lift the pipe out of the creek bed. A brief observational biological survey will be performed at the site by an onsite biologist prior to each attempt at pipeline lifting/pulling operations.

Mini Excavator Storage - A location for storing the mini excavator when not in use will be prepared within the staging area or outside the work area entirely. An impermeable liner in the form of a double layer of 40 mil high density polyethylene (HDPE) sheets (or equivalent) will be placed on the planking where the mini excavator will be parked when not in use. Once the mini excavator is parked on the impermeable liner, sorbent booms will be deployed around the edges of the liner and then the edges of the liner will be rolled up and inward toward the inside of the storage area creating a containment area for the parked mini excavator. All maintenance work and fueling of the mini excavator will be performed within the lined containment area. The top 40 mil HDPE sheet of the impermeable liner will be inspected periodically for holes/damage and will be replaced as necessary.

Mini Excavator Fuel - Portable 5 gallon cans of fuel for the mini excavator will be either placed in the staging area with the crane or hand carried to the staging area along the access paths. The mini excavator fuel tank will be filled by hand using the portable 5 gallon fuel cans. A typical mini excavator (e.g. Caterpillar 304C) has a 40 to 50 horsepower engine and has a fuel tank capacity of approximately 20 to 30 gallons. Due to the short duration of the work in Tecolote Creek the mini excavator may not need to be refueled or will likely only need to be refueled once or twice. The lubrication points on the bucket and boom of the mini excavator will be lubricated with synthetic or vegetable oil based grease to eliminate petroleum hydrocarbons entering the creek water from petroleum based greases.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 11

Excavation Backfilling and Site Restoration Backfill - After the pipe has been removed, previously stockpiled sediments will be used as backfill material. Small amounts of additional backfill material may be needed to replace the volume of roots and other unusable organic material separated from the backfill material. The small amount of additional backfill material needed will be generated from an upland location approved by onsite biological and EQAP monitors. The backfill material will be shoveled back into the excavations and tamped/compacted using hand tools and/or hand operated pneumatic tampers (e.g. “Powderpuff”) in a manner that restores original topographic features to the maximum extent feasible.

Site Restoration - Once the backfill is complete all the materials used for the work will be moved to the creek staging area and placed in a bin and lifted by the crane to Hollister Avenue. The access planking, staging area planking, mini excavator containment area, creek crossing platforms, and silt fencing will also be removed by hand and lifted by the crane to Hollister Avenue. Areas disturbed as a result of Project activities in Tecolote Creek will be restored to pre-disturbance conditions with native vegetation in accordance with a Site Restoration Plan that will be prepared by Atlantic Richfield and approved by the Project’s Lead Agency prior to the commencement of construction activities.

Equipment Requirements The following equipment is anticipated to be required during the Tecolote Creek Pipeline removal activities:

• Crane • Flatbed Truck • Forklift • Air Compressor • Generator • Temporary plastic fencing, silt fence • Hand tools (shovels, pick axes, breaker bar, sledge hammer, saws) • Pneumatic air knife/air vacuum • Mini Excavator • Four wheel pipe cutter, pneumatic hacksaw, and/or gasoline powered cut-off saw • Grout and end caps for cut pipe sections • Hand operated pneumatic tamper • Wheel Barrows (2-3) • Wood for planking • Lockable equipment storage boxes • Pre-fabricated creek crossing platforms (2) • Rolloff bin

It should be noted that the above equipment requirements are preliminary and subject to modifications based on the contractor selected to perform construction activities and specific equipment availability at the time of Project execution. In some cases, an equivalent piece of equipment may be utilized that serves the same purpose or function of those listed above.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 12

Schedule Construction activities in the Tecolote Creek work area are proposed to occur in the late summer/early fall time period during low-flow creek conditions. Bacara has currently mandated that all work activities on Bacara property take place between the dates of September 1 and October 31. Following are work-day duration estimates for each major construction task/activity associated with the Tecolote Creek work area.

• Site access and preparation 10 days • Pipeline locating and NDT testing for grout 2 days • Pipeline excavation 3 days • Pipeline cutting and removal 5 days • Site restoration 10 days

Bell Creek Project Description: The Bell Creek project area is depicted in Figure 4 (see Attachment A).

Scope of Work The scope of work for the Bell Creek work area includes the following tasks. As previously noted, the O-3 pipeline removal activities adjacent to the EOF fence line and across Bell Creek are scheduled as part of the future phase of project activities due to safety issues and will be conducted following decommissioning of the Venoco facilities.

• Establish a temporary staging area; • Excavate and tap the below ground O-3 pipeline segment at two locations; • Purge the pipeline of any residual liquids; • Cut the O-3 pipeline at both pipe tap locations; • Remove a three-foot segment of pipe at pipe tap location #22; • Excavate and remove O-3 pipeline segment from pipe tap location #23 to the pump skid/vault box; • Install flanges, coupler, and riser on the O-3 pipeline; • Grout the 700-foot segment of the O-3 pipeline from pipe tap location #22 to pipe tap location #23; • Cap the remaining segment of the O-3 pipeline to be left in place at the location of the up gradient pipe tap; • Cut the electrical conduit approximately one foot below ground surface and abandon in place; • Remove the hydrogen sulfide alarm panel; and • Remove the triplex pump skid, electric motor, miscellaneous piping, and concrete footing present at the pipeline’s southern termination.

Site Access and Preparation Personnel and Equipment Access - Personnel and equipment will access the work site from Hollister Avenue using the unpaved roadway located along the western boundary of the Ellwood Onshore Facility (EOF). A staging area will be established along this roadway for equipment and materials storage while work on the Bell Creek O-3 pipeline segment is being performed.

Staging Area - The staging area will be located to the south of the locked access gate and will measure approximately 20 feet by 180 feet. The staging area will be maintained in a manner that ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 13

allows a minimum 12-foot wide clearance for emergency vehicles to pass the staging area and construction site. The staging area will be delineated with flagging or construction fencing to provide a visual reference of the staging area boundaries. In addition, silt screen fencing will be placed along the western boundary of the staging area as a best management practice to minimize the potential for sediments disturbed during the project to enter Bell Creek.

Site Preparation/Use - Work activities will largely be limited to the unpaved access roadway and will not require trimming back vegetation for equipment or personnel access to the work site. Minor disturbances to existing vegetation in close proximity to the vault box are anticipated. The gate that separates the staging area from Hollister Avenue will be kept closed at all times. A fence line runs parallel to the O-3 pipeline near pipe tap location #22. This fence is to remain in place and undisturbed. If it is determined that this fence line will interfere with construction activities, Venoco will be contacted to coordinate the temporary removal of the fence. If necessary, fence removal will be accomplished with the use of hand tools and kept to a minimum. Security measures specified by Venoco will be followed and fencing will be replaced as soon as practically feasible and in a manner acceptable to Venoco.

Pipeline Locating - A geophysical survey has been conducted in the Bell Creek area to delineate the extents of the O-3, V-1, and M-1 pipelines as well as the electrical conduit connected to the abandoned hydrogen sulfide alarm panel. Atlantic Richfield is currently communicating with Venoco to accurately identify the locations of existing Venoco pipelines in proximity to the vault box and southern boundary of the EOF. These include pipelines extending into the EOF from the PRC 421 piers, Platform Holly, and the seep tents. The locations of these pipelines will be plotted on construction site plans to ensure they will be avoided during project execution.

Pipeline Excavating - The buried portion of the O-3 pipeline segment paralleling the EOF will be excavated at two locations for subsequent pipe tapping and fluid removal activities. The approximate excavation locations are located 10 feet south of the active V-1 pipeline will be exposed using an air knife to avoid possible contact with the active V-1 pipeline.

Pipe Tap Locations - Pipe tap location #22 will be located a minimum of 10-feet north of the pump skid. An air knife unit will be used to expose the pipeline from its termination above ground at the wood vault box to pipe tap location #22. This 15-20-foot section will be cut using a four wheel pipe cutter or pneumatic hacksaw and completely removed, following pipe tapping procedures. The remaining portion entering the wood vault box will be blind flanged. A minor amount of manual digging may be necessary to clear loose material from the excavation. Pipe tapping activities require a minimum of two feet clearance under the pipe for placement of a containment pan.

Pipe Tap Excavations - It is anticipated that the excavations necessary to expose the pipeline for tapping as well as to install a containment pan underneath the pipeline will have a depth of four feet or greater. As such, a trench box will be used for accessing the pipeline in excavations with a depth of four feet or greater. The air knife will clear an area to adequately place a small sheet trench box, typically less than 10 feet long. If necessary, a backhoe or small excavator may be used to clear loose material from the excavation. Ingress and egress routes will be equipped with ladders and kept free of debris. The task-specific Job Safety Analysis will discuss trench box safety in further detail.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 14

Stockpiling - Excavated materials will be stockpiled adjacent to the excavation site and used as backfill material after the pipe tapping, fluid removal, and grouting activities have been completed. When stockpiling the excavated material it will be placed on plastic sheeting and covered with a tarp or similar device to ensure the excavated material does not migrate to Bell Creek. The stockpile from the excavation at pipe tap location #22 will be placed at least 30 feet from the Venoco helipad.

Backfill - Upon completion of below-grade activities, backfill will be placed in 12-inch lifts and compacted to 90% Modified Proctor. If necessary, additional road base material will be imported to bring the excavation to surrounding grade. Samples for geotechnical laboratory analysis will be collected for use in developing the 90% Modified Proctor specification. Both native and imported material samples will be collected, as applicable. Compaction activities will be completed using a compaction wheel. This compactor may be mounted to an excavator if access allows. If access is limited, a walk-behind unit will be used. Density data will be collected using a nuclear gauge by a certified geotechnical technician working under the direction of a licensed civil engineer.

Emergency Access Contraints- It is possible that the excavation completed at pipe tap location #21 could preclude emergency vehicle access along the unpaved access pathway while the excavation is open. Every effort will be made to minimize the size of the excavation footprint to maintain emergency access along this roadway. If emergency access is temporarily precluded, alternative emergency access to Sandpiper Golf Course, State Lease 421 piers, and Ellwood Beach can be maintained by diverting emergency traffic through the Ellwood Onshore Facility. The proposed activities at Bell Creek and maintenance of emergency access will be closely coordinated with Venoco. Courtesy pre- and post-work notifications will also be made to the Santa Barbara County Fire Department.

Pipeline Tapping and Residual Fluid Removal - The Bell Creek O-3 pipeline segment will be tapped in two locations (pipe tap location #21 and #22) to ensure residual liquids in the pipeline can be removed prior to subsequent decommissioning work activities. The pipe tap procedure provides safe access to the interior of the pipe through installation of a drilled and tapped valve from which residual liquids, if present, can be removed from the pipeline. The pipe tapping procedure used for the Bell Creek work area pipeline segment will be the same as the procedures used to tap the Upland Bluff pipeline segments. By conducting residual fluid removal activities from pipe tap locations #21 and #22, complete removal of remaining liquids from both portions of the O-3 pipeline is ensured. The portion of the O-3 pipeline suspended over Bell Creek that will be left in place for future decommissioning activities will be free of residual liquids by performing removal activities at pipe tap location #21.

Pipeline Grouting - The 700-foot long O-3 pipeline segment from pipe tap location #21 to pipe tap location #22 will be filled with grout and abandoned in-place. The O-3 pipeline will be cut at the pipe tap locations #21 and #22. Prior to cutting, a containment pan will be placed under the cut location to capture any residual liquids in the pipe. These locations will have been excavated and exposed during the pipe tapping and fluid removal procedure. The pipeline will be cut at both locations using a four wheel pipe cutter or pneumatic hacksaw.

A flange will be welded to each end of the pipe after the cuts have been made. A flange with a 3- inch diameter coupler will be welded onto the pipe at pipe tap location #21. At pipe tap location #22, a ninety degree elbow fitting and riser will be installed that extends to grade. This will ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 15 ensure that the top of the riser will be above pipe tap location #21. Survey equipment will be mobilized to the site to document the difference in elevation between the two pipe tap locations. This data will be used to verify the vertical elevation of the termination of the riser pipe is at an elevation greater than any other possible elevation along the pipe run.

At pipe tap location #21, a three foot section of the pipeline will be removed to allow adequate access to the pipeline. A blind flange will be welded to the up-gradient pipeline at pipe tap location #21 no closer than 10 feet from pipeline V-1 to isolate this section of the pipeline from the grouting procedures. Pipe tap location #22 will already have been isolated from the wood vault box and pump skid when the 10-15-foot section of down-gradient pipeline was removed, as discussed above.

In preparation for grouting, a hose will be attached to the riser near the wood vault box and routed to a drum or other container/tank to capture any liquids during grouting. A pre-mixed grout consisting of Portland cement, sand, and water prepared with a seven- or eight-inch slump will be mobilized to the site (approximately five to six cubic yards of grout will be required to fill the segment). An inline pump will then be connected to the flange and used to conventionally pressure pump the grout into the pipeline. In practice, approximately 30 to 40 gallons of water will be pumped into the pipeline prior to pumping the grout to reduce friction as the grout is pushed down the pipeline. This purge water will be temporarily stored in 55-gallon capacity DOT-approved drums. After the pipeline has been purged, grout will be introduced at pipe tap location #21 and grout pumping will continue until grout exits the riser and hose at pipe tap location #22. The elevation of the riser will ensure that the pipeline is completely filled with grout. Excess grout will be stored in 55-gallon capacity DOT-approved drums.

Following a curing time of at least 24 hours, the risers/flanges will be cut off below ground surface. A pipe cap will also be welded on both ends of the grouted pipe. Pipe tap location #21 will then be backfilled with the stockpiled excavated material as discussed above and contoured to match the surrounding topography. The up-gradient portion of the O-3 pipeline will be blindflanged prior backfilling of the excavation. This location will be surveyed and a small flush mounted surface monument will be put in place to document its termination. This information will be used for future decommissioning activities on the up-gradient portion of the O-3 pipeline. The excavation for pipe tap location #22 will also be backfilled with the stockpiled excavated material and contoured to match the surrounding topography. The down gradient portion of the O-3 pipeline will be blind-flanged prior to the entrance into the wood vault box as discussed above.

Remove Hydrogen Sulfide Alarm Panel and Decommission Electrical Conduit Electrical Conduit - The electrical conduit that leads from the EOF to an abandoned hydrogen sulfide alarm panel will be cut off below ground surface and abandoned in place (Figure 4). This electrical conduit is no longer operational and has been de-energized. However, proper lock- out/tag-out procedures must be conducted to verify the electrical line has been de-energized. The electrical line will be traced back to its termination within the EOF. An electrical current will be placed on the line to confirm the correct line has been located. The line will then be physically removed from any power source within the EOF.

Excavation - Personnel will excavate approximately one foot below the area where the electrical conduit is buried using shovels or other similar hand tools. Once the buried portion of the conduit is exposed to a depth of approximately one foot, the conduit will be cut using ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 16

conventional cable cutters. The minor amount of excavated materials will be shoveled back into the excavation, tamped, and contoured to match the surrounding topography.

Removal Procedure - After the electrical conduit has been cut below ground surface, the hydrogen sulfide alarm panel will be removed in its entirety. The alarm panel instruments are mounted on a piece of plywood supported by two four-inch by-four inch vertical supports. The alarm panel is located within the drip line of an oak tree. It is anticipated that the alarm panel can be pulled out in its entirety with the use of a small crane, boom truck, or backhoe. Any heavy equipment used to lift the alarm panel will be positioned a minimum of five feet outside the drip line of the oak tree, and will lift and pull the alarm panel away from the trunk of the tree towards the access roadway. Although not anticipated, if any heavy equipment must enter inside the oak tree drip line, cover plates or similar devices will be used to distribute the equipment weight to avoid potential impacts to the tree’s root system.

Remove Ancillary Equipment - Ancillary equipment located at the southern termination of the Bell Creek O-3 pipeline segment will be removed (Figure 4). This includes the triplex pump skid, electric motor, and associated inactive piping located near the termination of the O-3 pipeline. The O-3 pipeline segment will have been cut and blind-flanged during abandonment activities where it enters the existing wood vault. All above grade inactive piping entering the wood vault from the triplex pump skid will be cut and capped. The vault will not be abandoned or backfilled but will remain in place because of the potential for future reuse.

Piping entering the wood vault from the triplex pump skid - There are several flanged pipeline connections containing gasket fittings on the piping entering the wood vault from the triplex pump skid. It is assumed that these gasket fittings contain asbestos. All flanged pipeline connections containing gasket fittings will be cut approximately one foot on both sides of the flanged pipeline connections and removed. The short portion of pipe including the flanged pipeline connection and gasket fitting will be segregated from other waste streams, transferred to the Bell Creek staging area and placed in a rolloff bin or equivalent containment bin. The containment bin will be labeled “asbestos containing materials” and will be covered at all times when waste materials are not being placed into the bin. The removal process described above will allow the potentially asbestos containing materials to be removed and handled without disturbing the asbestos containing materials. The asbestos containing materials will be transported and disposed at an appropriate receiving facility.

Pump skid and footing - Once the piping has been disconnected from the vault box, the pump skid and the four-foot by 12-foot concrete footing will be removed. It is envisioned that a crane will be able to attach to the pump skid and pull both the pump skid and concrete footing out intact. After removal, the pump skid will be detached from the concrete footing using a wrench, cutting torch, or grinder. If both can not be pulled out together, the pump skid will be detached from the concrete footing and pulled out using a crane or backhoe. Some minor excavations using an air knife unit may be necessary to expose the underside of the concrete footing for the purpose of attaching rigging. Once exposed, wire rope or cloth slings will be attached and a crane or backhoe will be used to lift the concrete footing out.

Re-contouring/Backfill - Any disturbed ground surface will be re-contoured to match surrounding topography. If the concrete footing is left in place, a small amount of clean fill material will be imported and used as backfill around the concrete footing to make it flush with the existing topography. ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 17

Future Activities O-3 pipeline segment exposed across Bell Creek - Atlantic Richfield evaluated numerous methodologies to remove the O-3 pipeline segment that is exposed across Bell Creek and up the western creek bank. However, the presence of the active V-1 pipeline in such close proximity to the O-3 pipeline segment presents unacceptable safety risks should the V-1 pipeline be impacted during pipeline removal activities. An alternatives evaluation and environmental comparison of alternatives evaluated is included as Appendix F. Atlantic Richfield proposes to leave the exposed O-3 pipeline segment as well as the buried portion located between pipe tap #21 and the eastern bank of Bell Creek in place until the V-1 pipeline is decommissioned. Visual inspection of the O-3 pipeline segment suspended over Bell Creek and associated pipe supports will be performed on an annual basis to evaluate their integrity. Atlantic Richfield will maintain copies of all inspection reports and will make them available to Venoco and applicable regulatory agencies upon request. In the event that the integrity of the O-3 pipeline or the support structures is observed to be significantly reduced during any of the annual inspections, a copy of the inspection report will be provided to Venoco and the County of Santa Barbara along with a proposal for corrective action. After the V-1 pipeline is decommissioned, Atlantic Richfield proposes to prepare a separate application for removal of the O-3 pipeline segment suspended over Bell Creek extending to its western termination. The application will also include a proposal for decommissioning the buried O-3 pipeline segment located between pipe tap #21 and the eastern bank of Bell Creek.

Equipment Requirements The following equipment is anticipated to be required during the Bell Creek Pipeline abandonment activities:

• Air knife unit • Pipe tapping machine • Air compressor • Backhoe or small excavator • Crane or boom truck • Diaphragm pump or vacuum truck • Grout delivery truck • Hand tools • In-line grout pump • Welding Machine • Four wheel pipe cutter • Pneumatic hacksaw • Trench boxes (2) • Compaction wheel • Disposal bins/containers/55-gallon capacity drums • Silt screening, plastic sheeting, tarps

It should be noted that the above equipment requirements are preliminary and subject to modifications based on the contractor selected to perform construction activities and specific equipment availability at the time of Project execution. In some cases, an equivalent piece of equipment may be utilized that serves the same purpose or function of those listed above. ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 18

Schedule Construction activities in the Bell Creek work area are proposed to occur between the dates of April 1 and November 1 (or possibly November 15 if significant rainfall does not occur). Following are work-day duration estimates for each major construction task/activity associated with the Bell Creek work area.

• Establish temporary staging area 1 day • Pipeline locating 1 day • Pipeline excavating 2 days • Pipeline tapping and residual fluid removal 3 days • Pipeline cutting 1 day • Pipeline grouting 3 days • Remove H2S alarm panel and decommission electrical • conduit 1 day • Remove ancillary equipment 2 days • Excavation backfilling and site restoration 3 days

The applicant also submitted an Oil Spill Prevention and Contingency Plan, Waste Management Plan and Traffic Control for both project sites as a part of the September, 2007 work plan available at City and County offices.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 19

2.0 PROJECT LOCATION

2.1 County Project Location

The subject parcels are located on the Gaviota Coast between Naples and the Sandpiper Golf Course and are situated between Highway 101 and the Pacific Ocean. Table 2.1, below, summarizes key characteristics of the subject parcels located in the County of Santa Barbara.

Table 1 County Project Parcel Information

Jurisdiction County of Santa Barbara Property Name Former Dos Eagle Canyon Pueblos/Makar Ranch (Eagle Canyon Creek) Address South of Highway 8555 Hollister 101, on the coast Ave. Goleta , west west of Goleta; No of the Bacara street address

APN 079-200-004 079-200-005 Property Owner1 Makar Properties Gaviota Holdings LLC LLC.

Comprehensive Plan/ Petroleum and Gas Beaches, Sand Coastal Land Use Plan (County of Santa Dunes Designation Barbara General (County of Santa Plan ) Barbara General Plan ) Important Goleta Community Farmland, ESH & Plan, Coastal Zone, Riparian Corridor Appeals Overlays, Trails, Jurisdiction, ESH Coastal Zone, and Riparian Appeals Corridor Overlays, Jurisdiction, RLF & Important Farmland Monarch, Zoning District, Ordinance Agriculture (AG-II- Rural Residential 100) (RR-40) County of Santa County of Santa Barbara Article II, Barbara Article II, Coastal Zoning Coastal Zoning Ordinance Ordinance

Parcel Size (gross acreage) 202 38

Present Use & Development Formerly oil and Vacant gas site; currently vacant with planned rural residential

1 ARCO has obtained Land Owner Authorizations from all property owners which have been submitted and are on file for viewing at the Santa Barbara County Planning & Development office. ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 20

Jurisdiction County of Santa Barbara Property Name Former Dos Eagle Canyon Pueblos/Makar Ranch (Eagle Canyon Creek) Surrounding Uses/Zoning North: RR, Highway 101 RR, Highway 101 South: Pacific Ocean Pacific Ocean East: Vacant Bacara Resort West: Vacant Eagle Canyon Creek/Vacant Access Driveway access Hollister Avenue, from Hwy. 101. past Ellwood Pier security gate to dirt/gravel access road on-site

Public Services Water Supply: Owner has secured Groundwater well rights to Goleta north of Hwy. 101 Water Fire: SB County Fire SB County Fire Stations 11 & 14 Stations 11 & 14

2.2 City Project Location

The affected properties located in the City of Goleta are summarized in Table 2 below:

Table 2 City of Goleta Project Parcel Information

Site Information by Property Property Name Bacara Resort & Sandpiper Golf Venoco Ellwood Spa Course Onshore Facility (Tecolote Creek) (Bell Creek) (Adjacent to Bell Creek) Address 8301 Hollister 7925 Hollister Ave. 7979 Hollister Ave. Goleta; site is Goleta; site is Avenue just south of immediately west Tecolote Creek of Venoco EOF bridge crossing APN 079-200-013 079-210-059 079-210-042 Property Owner2 HT-Santa Barbara Sandpiper-Golf Venoco, Inc. Inc. Trust LLC General Plan/ Coastal Land Visitor Serving Open Space/Active Open Space/Active Use Plan Designation Commercial Recreation Recreation

Zoning District, Ordinance Resort/Visitor Recreation Recreation Serving Commercial

Parcel Size (gross acreage) 39 196 4.5

Present Use & Development Hotel (Bacara Recreation/Open Venoco Ellwood

2 ARCO has obtained Land Owner Authorizations from all property owners which have been submitted and are on file for viewing at the City of Goleta Planning and Environmental Services office. ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 21

Site Information by Property Property Name Bacara Resort & Sandpiper Golf Venoco Ellwood Spa Course Onshore Facility (Tecolote Creek) (Bell Creek) (Adjacent to Bell Creek) Resort and Spa), space (Bell Creek Onshore Facility Coastal Recreation not part of SPGC (EOF - oil and gas operations) processing)

Surrounding Uses/Zoning North: Hollister Avenue, Hollister Avenue, Hollister Avenue, then the Union then the Union then the Union Pacific Railroad, Pacific Railroad, Pacific Railroad, then the U.S. then the U.S. then the U.S. Highway 101 Highway 101 Highway 101

South: Pacific Ocean Pacific Ocean Sandpiper Golf Course, then the Pacific Ocean

East: Bell Creek, then the Bluffs at Sandpiper Sandpiper Golf Venoco EOF residential area and Course Santa Barbara Shores Park

West: Eagle Canyon Venoco EOF, then Bell Creek, then Ranch, Ellwood Bell Creek, then Bacara Resort Pier, Access Road Bacara Resort

Access Hollister Avenue, Hollister Avenue. Hollister Avenue. Tecolote creek can Bell Creek can be Bell Creek can be be accessed through accessed by the fire accessed by the fire the public parking access road on the access road on the lot on the Bacara west side of the west side of the property. EOF. EOF. Public Services Water Supply: Goleta Water Goleta Water Goleta Water District District District

Fire: SB County Fire SB County Fire SB County Fire Stations 11 & 14 Stations 11 & 14 Stations 11 & 14

Sewage Goleta West Goleta West Septic tank Sanitary District Sanitary District

Electric Southern California Southern California Southern California Edison Edison Edison

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 22

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

3.1 County Environmental Setting

Slope and Topography

The subject parcels are located in a transitional zone between the Santa Ynez Mountains to the north and the Pacific Ocean to the south. The pipeline to be removed runs from Makar property (formerly ARCO Dos Pueblos) to the Venoco Ellwood Onshore Facility (EOF).

The project area is located on the southern flank of the Santa Ynez Mountains which is characterized by east-west trending faults, folds, mountain ranges and valleys. Between the Santa Ynez Mountains and the Santa Barbara Channel is a transitional zone consisting of a coastal plane and shoreline. The coastal plane is comprised of uplifted and dissected marine terraces, hills and valleys (Dibblee 1966), some of which form estuaries and lagoons.

The subject parcels are located on a gently sloping marine terrace and cross the north-south drainages Eagle Canyon Creek, Tecolote Creek, and Bell Creek. The marine terrace, which generally includes areas south of Highway 101, was formed at sea level as a wave-cut abrasion platform that eroded and beveled off a bedrock surface.

“Quaternary age and older, dissected surficial sediments characterize the geology of most of the Site. These sediments predominantly occur as undivided former terrace remnants overlying Monterey Shale. The Montery Shale is a Miocene age unit of marine origin. The streambeds are comprised of alluvial deposits of silt, sand, and gravel from upstream sources. Soils on the coastal terraces at the Site are mapped primarily as Milpitas-Positas fine sandy loam and some layers of clays. Canyon bottoms are dominated by gullied alluvial deposits.”3

The subject parcels range in elevation from sea level on the south to approximately 100 ft. above sea level on the north. Slope gradients generally range from 1-2% on the marine terrace to steeper slopes of 15-30% along the creek banks.

Soils in the upland portions of the project area have been identified as Conception fine sandy loam and Milptas-Positas fine sand loam and Diablo clay. Along the Eagle Canyon Ranch and Dos Pueblos property soils have been identified as Milpitas-Positas fine sand loam, which is not considered prime farmland soil. The Eagle Creek area soil is identified as an Agueda-Goleta complex.

Air Quality

Santa Barbara County is located in the South Central Coast air basin. The Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District (APCD) is the regulatory agency for air quality in Santa Barbara County. A summary of the attainment status for Santa Barbara County, the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) are presented in Table 3, below. The County is currently in attainment for all national standards, but is

3 Excerpt from ARCO Dos Pueblos Pipeline Removal Project Botanical Surveys: Biological Survey Area Final, LFR Inc. (May 2007) a copy of which is on file at Santa Barbara County Planning & Development. ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 23 in non-attainment for the state eight-hour ozone standards as well as for particulate matter less than ten microns in diameter (PM ). 10

Table 3 Santa Barbara County Attainment Status and Air Quality Standards

California Standards National Standards Averaging Pollutant Time Attainment Attainment Concentration Status Concentration Status

Ozone 8 hour 0.070 ppm N* 0.075 ppm A

1 hour 0.09 ppm A revoked A (180 µg/m3)

Carbon Monoxide 8 hour 9.0 ppm A 9.0 ppm A (10 mg/m3) (10 m/m3)

1 hour 20.0 ppm A 35.0 ppm A (23 mg/m3) (40 µg/m3)

Nitrogen annual 0.030 ppm A 0.053 ppm A Dioxide*** average (56 µg/m3) (100 µg/m3)

1 hour 0.18 ppm A -- -- (338 µg/m3)

Sulfur Dioxide annual -- -- 80 µg/m3 A average (0.03 ppm)

24 hour 0.04 ppm A A 3) 0.14 ppm (105 µg/m 365 µg/m3

1 hour 0.25 ppm A -- -- (655 µg/m3)

annual 20 µg/m3 revoked A Particulate Matter N arithmetic (PM10) mean

24 hour 50 µg/m3 N 150 µg/m3 A

annual 12µg/m3 U 15 µg/m3 U/A Particulate Matter arithmetic - Fine (PM2.5) mean

24 hour -- -- 35 µg/m3** U/A

Sulfates 24 hour 25 µg/m3 A

Lead calendar -- -- 1.5 µg/m3 A quarter ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 24

California Standards National Standards Averaging Pollutant Time Attainment Attainment Concentration Status Concentration Status

30 day 1.5 µg/m3 A -- -- average

Hydrogen Sulfide 1 hour 0.03 ppm A -- -- (42 µg/m3)

Vinyl Chloride 24 hour 0.010 ppm -- -- (chloroethene) (26 µg/m3)

Visibility 8 hour (1000 A -- -- Reducing to 1800 PST) Particles

A=Attainment N=Nonattainment U=Unclassified U/A=Unclassifiable/Attainment

* This standard went into effect in June, 2006. Official designations have not yet been announced; our data indicate we will be considered in nonattainment of this standard.

*** The state Nitrogen Dioxide ambient air quality standard was amended on February 22, 2007, to lower the 1-hour standard to 0.18 ppm and establish a new annual standard of 0.030 ppm. These changes become effective after regulatory changes are submitted and approved by the Office of Administrative Law, expected later this year.

Flora

The juxtaposition of terrestrial and marine ecosystems within the Gaviota coast contributes to its biological diversity. The project area contains both upland and wetland communities. The terrestrial habitats vary widely in the upland communities, including:

1) Venturan or coastal sage scrub 2) Coast live oak woodland 3) Native grassland

The riparian corridor along Eagle Canyon Creek, Tecolote Creek and Bell Creek support four wetland habitat types as follows:

4) Southern mixed riparian forest 5) Southern willow scrub 6) Coastal and valley freshwater marsh vegetation 7) Coastal brackish marsh

All these habitats are degraded to varying degrees along the pipeline corridor and tend to mix with one another, especially relative to understory species. Causes of degradation include fragmentation and invasion by exotic and/or invasive plant species. In addition, the pipelines pass through smaller areas of man-made habitats, including eucalyptus groves, non-native grasslands and revegetated upland live oak habitats.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 25

There are a number of species of concern not identified on the project site but known to inhabit the general Gaviota Coast area, including: Gaviota tarplant (Deinandra increscens subsp. villosa), southern tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. Australis), Mesa horkelia (Horkelia cuneata subsp. puberula), Coulter’s saltbush (Atriplex coulteri), black flowered figwort (Scrophularia atrata), and Hoffmann’s nightshade (Solanum xanti var. hoffmannii).

The Dos Pueblos and Eagle Canyon Ranch sites support stands of perennial native grasses, represented by Nasella pulchra, N. lepida and Hordeum brachyantherum. The Santa Barbara County Local Coastal Plan considers native grassland to be Environmentally Sensitive Habitat, however none of the native perennial grass species present are species of concern or listed by the California Native Plant Society, California Department of Fish and Game, or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as threatened or endangered. Native grasslands as a plant community are considered “very threatened” by the CDFG CNDDB and are thus considered sensitive for purposes of this impact analysis.

Oak trees and oak woodlands are not listed as a rare species by the California Department of Fish and Game; however they are identified as sensitive by Santa Barbara County through habitat- specific impact assessment guidelines (County of Santa Barbara, Environmental Thresholds and Guidelines Manual, October 2006) and under the California Environmental Quality Act Oak Woodland Protection program – SB1334.

The applicant conducted a sensitive species and habitats survey of the entire Project Site in late 2006 and early 2007 (Attachment 1). Additional informal biological assessments were conducted during project planning visits in 2008 and 2009 for consistency updates and during planning visits. Specific formal survey dates were:

• October 24, 2006 • October 31, 2006 • November 3, 2006 • January 8, 2007 • March 12, 2007 • April 25, 2007

The botanical survey area consisted of approximately 13.8 acres and was divided into three main survey areas for purposes of description with the botanical survey report. The survey areas included:

• Eagle Canyon Survey Area (includes the Marine Terrace and Eagle Canyon Creek work and surrounding areas) • Tecolote Creek Survey Area (includes the Tecolote Creek work and surrounding area) • Bell Creek Survey Area (includes the Bell Creek work and surrounding area)

The survey did not identify any state or federally listed threatened or endangered plant species on the Site. A total of nine habitat types were identified within the survey area. These include five upland communities: Venturan coastal sage scrub, coast live oak woodland, native grassland, non-native grassland, and plantations and windbreaks. The three drainages within the survey area (Eagle Canyon Creek, Tecolote Creek, and Bell Creek) support four natural wetland habitat types: southern willow scrub and southern mixed riparian forest dominate the banks of the ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 26

riparian corridors, with emergent coastal and valley freshwater marsh vegetation along the channels. A coastal brackish marsh community is found at the southern tip of the eastern bank of Bell Creek, bordering well-developed salt marsh vegetation to the south. A total of 215 species of plants were observed in these areas in 2006 and early 2007, including 102 species of native plants and 113 species of non-native plants.

All of the sensitive botanical resources occur on the ocean side of the Southern Pacific railroad tracks on marine terraces and sea bluffs and in riparian drainages. These include two sensitive botanical species: Santa Barbara honeysuckle (Lonicera subspicata subsp. subspicata) and cliff- aster (Malacothrix saxatilis subsp. saxatilis), along with seven sensitive habitats: Venturan coastal sage scrub, coast live oak woodland, native grassland, southern willow scrub, mixed riparian forest, coastal and valley freshwater marsh, and coastal brackish marsh.

Santa Barbara honeysuckle is found in the unnamed drainage immediately north of Ellwood Pier in the Eagle Canyon Survey Area. Three individuals of Santa Barbara honeysuckle were observed growing in Venturan coastal sage scrub vegetation, and it should be expected that other individuals are scattered nearby. Santa Barbara honeysuckle also occurs on the western creek bank of Bell Creek immediately to the south under the cover of Eucalyptus although it was not found in the Bell Creek Survey Area.

Cliff-aster is confined to ocean-facing bluffs in the vicinity of the Site, where it can be observed clinging to precipitous cliffs on Monterey shale. A few individuals representing the sensitive subspecies were found at the southernmost tip of the Bell Creek Survey Area, while the more common subspecies was found further north.

The following plants were not observed at the Site during the fall 2006 and winter 2007 surveys; but have been reported to occur in the general area: Gaviota tarplant (Deinandra increscens subsp. villosa), Southern tarplant (Centromadia parryi subsp. australis), Mesa horkelia (Horkelia cuneata subsp. puberula), Coulter’s saltbush (Atriplex coulteri), Davidson’s saltscale (Atriplex serenana var. davidsonii), Black-flowered figwort (Scrophularia atrata), and Hoffmann’s nightshade (Solanum xanti var. hoffmannii).

Fauna

The project area contains a number of different habitats that support a variety of faunal species. Below is a description of the different habitat type and the faunal species expected to be found there.

Venturan or coastal sage scrub habitat Scrub habitats, including Coastal sage scrub, chaparral, Venturan sage scrub and riparian scrub support a wide variety of wildlife species. This variety is a result of the dense vegetative cover, structural diversity and the abundance of food resources these habitats typically provide. While amphibians tend to be scarce in scrub habitats due to the lack of permanent water, reptile, bird, and mammalian faunas tend to be relatively diverse. Some of the more common species expected to frequent scrub habitats within and adjacent to the subject parcels include: western fence lizard, side-blotched lizard, western whiptail, striped racer, common king snake, western rattlesnake, red-tailed hawk, common flicker, California thrasher, loggerhead shrike, wrentit, rufous-crowned sparrow, California quail, Anna’s hummingbird, western kingbird, violet-green swallow, Bewick’s wren, roadrunner, house finch, California ground squirrel, Merriam’s ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 27

chipmunk, Audubon’s cottontail, brush rabbit, California pocket mouse, agile kangaroo rat, deer mouse, California mouse, desert woodrat, coyote, bobcat, striped skunk, mountain lion and mule deer.

Coast live oak woodland habitat This habitat type supports a diverse resident fauna. Amphibians like ensatina, arboreal salamander, and Pacific tree frog could potentially be found within Coast live oak woodlands. Some of the more common reptiles also potentially extant include southern alligator lizard, western skink, western whiptail, western fence lizard, common king snake, ringneck snake, and gopher snake. Potential bird species in these oak woodlands include red-shouldered hawk, acorn woodpecker, Nuttall’s woodpecker, black phoebe, northern oriole, mourning dove, house wren, plain titmouse, California towhee, and spotted towhee. Common mammals potentially found in oak woodlands include: ornate shrew, broad-footed mole, Botta’s pocket gopher, Merriam’s chipmunk, western gray squirrel, deer mouse, dusky-footed woodrat, California mouse, brush mouse, striped skunk, bobcat, mule deer, and black bear.

Native grassland habitat Grasslands support the relatively high wildlife diversity. This is due, in part, to the expansive nature which typically spreads into other habitat types. Reptiles common in these areas include side-blotched lizard, western whiptail, western skink, gopher snake, common king snake, and western rattlesnake. Because they are capable of supporting high densities of prey (insects and small mammals), grasslands provide important foraging habitat for a number of raptor species, particularly where associated with roosting/nesting sites in close proximity to grasslands. Typical avian species found include red-tailed hawk, red-shouldered hawk, turkey vulture, American kestrel, white-tailed kite, mourning dove, western kingbird, horned lark, American crow, northern mockingbird, northern oriole, and house finch. Mammals potentially inhabiting the site include brush rabbit, Audubon’s cottontail, California ground squirrel, deer mouse, California vole, western harvest mouse, striped skunk, bobcat, coyote, and American badger.

Southern Willow Scrub, Southern Mixed Riparian and Valley Freshwater Marsh habitats Natural perennial or intermittent drainages such as Eagle Canyon Creek, Tecolote Creek and Bell Creek, and other areas with these habitat types, support diverse vegetation thereby providing breeding and foraging habitat for a number of wildlife species. They also may provide a source of fresh water, in addition to facilitating wildlife movement from upland areas to the ocean. Steelhead trout have been documented in Tecolote Creek and may occur in Bell and Eagle Canyon creeks as well. The creeks also provide suitable habitat for tidewater goby and may also include native partially-armored stickleback, and arroyo chub. Amphibian species potentially inhabiting these habitats may consist of arboreal salamander, ensatina, black-bellied slender salamander, western toad, Pacific tree frog, California tree frog, California newt, and California red-legged frog. Reptiles in these areas may potentially consist of western fence lizard, western skink, southern alligator lizard, ringneck snake, common king snake, two-striped garter snake, and western terrestrial garter snake. Birds frequenting these habitats may potentially include the common coot, pied-billed grebe, great blue heron, common egret, snowy egret, western gull, California gull, black phoebe, cliff swallow, Bewick’s wren, Brewer’s blackbird, red-winged blackbird, European starling, common yellowthroat, yellow-rumped warbler, and song sparrow. Marine birds such as the California brown pelican, western gull, spotted sandpiper and great blue heron are also regularly observed. Mammals residing in these habitats may included the Virginia opossum, ornate shrew, broad-footed mole, brush mouse, California mouse, dusky-footed woodrat, California vole, coyote, raccoon, bobcat, striped skunk, ringtail, and mule deer. ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 28

Coastal Brackish Marsh habitat Coastal brackish marshes differ from coastal salt marshes in the degree of freshwater input. Coastal salt marshes occur immediately adjacent to estuaries and receive a significant amount of saltwater input, whereas coastal brackish marshes typically occur further inland or upstream. Salinity may vary during tidal inundation as well as seasonal runoff from precipitations and/or flooding. Wildlife species typical of the coastal brackish marsh habitat include western fence lizard, southern alligator lizard, ringneck snake, western aquatic garder snake, Pacific-Chorus frog, western toad, topsmelt, prickly sculpin, great blue heron, American coot, mallard, black phoebe.

Non-native Grasslands A number of upland areas at the site are dominated by non-native grasses and other weedy annual species. The presence of invasive non-native species reflects the long history of land use as a ranch as well as an oil processing and/or storage facility. Because of regular disturbance and lack of structural or biotic diversity ground-dwelling wildlife species are typically unable to establish permanent, self-sustaining populations. Wildlife that are able to reside or forage in such areas include common, geographically, widespread species such as Pacific tree-frog, western fence lizard, side-blotched lizard, gopher snake, house finch, American goldfinch, white- crowned sparrow, Virginia opossum, California ground squirrel, Botta’s pocket gopher, deer mouse, western harvest mouse, house mouse, striped skunk, and coyote. Additionally, non- native grasslands when left undisturbed for significant periods of time may contain those species found in native grasslands, previously discussed herein.

Introduced Species (Plantations and Windbreaks) Introduced species have been widely planted at the Site, especially Tasmanian blue gum eucalyptus along with some red ironbark eucalyptus. The eucalyptus groves could potentially provide over-wintering habitat for Monarch butterflies, which is a species of local concern, and roosting and nesting for raptors.

Other A harbor seal haulout is located to the west of the project site on the Makar property, near the mouth of Tomate Canyon. This species is not known to occur within the project area and is protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1976.

Wildlife Surveys

A wildlife survey was conducted in the fall of 2006 that focused primarily on the three creek areas: Bell, Tecolote, and Eagle Canyon creeks (Attachment 2). Supplemental and informal surveys were also conducted during 2008 and 2009 by project biologists during planning visits on site. The surveys identified the following species which all have some form of federal, state or local protection: California red-legged frog, tidewater goby, a variety of raptors, and monarch butterfly. The site also provides habitat for the southern steelhead trout, globose dune beetles, and sandy beach tiger beetles however the species were not been observed. Additionally, the applicant performed an evaluation of habitat for steelhead in Eagle Canyon and Tecolote Creeks (Attachment 3).

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 29

California Red-legged Frog The California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) is a federally threatened species and state species of special concern. A night survey conducted in the fall of 2006 documented the presence of California red-legged frogs in both Eagle Canyon Creek and Tecolote Creek. Three adults were observed in Tecolote Creek near the south end of the railroad culvert, and one adult was observed in Eagle Canyon Creek approximately 100 feet downstream of the railroad culvert near the upstream end of the lagoon. Additionally, 20-30 red-legged frog tadpoles were observed in Eagle Canyon Creek during the steelhead habitat evaluation survey in July of 2008. No frogs were seen within Bell Creek, however the lagoon was backed up to the railroad culvert and the depth of the water in combination with the thick vegetation make it extremely difficult to survey the area. One adult red-legged frog was observed in Tecolote Creek during a 2009 planning visit.

Tidewater Goby The tidewater goby (Eucylogoblus newberryi) is a small native fish that occurs only in southern California and is a federally endangered species and state species of special concern. It is restricted to the extreme lower reaches of coastal rivers, streams and estuaries. The tidewater goby has been documented by the CDFG CNDDB (2003) to occur in all three project stream drainages. Additionally, several hundred were observed at the time of the fall 2006 survey and during the steelhead habitat evaluation survey in July of 2008.

Raptors Turkey vultures, sharp-shinned hawks, Cooper’s hawks, red-tailed hawks, red-shouldered hawks, white-tailed kites, and great horned owls are all expected to utilize portions of the project area, however none were seen during the fall 2006 survey. Nest and roost site for all of these species are protected under California Fish and Game code and the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Breeding season for these species is from February 1 through August 15 and a 300-500 foot buffer is recommended by CDFG around all active nests during this time. The appropriate distance may be determined by a qualified ornithologist based on the species, the nesting status, and the specific activity proposed in the area, however, no disturbance of an active nest is allowed regardless of the distance.

Monarch Butterfly The Monarch Butterfly is a special species of local concern that is know to migrate to the coast of Santa Barbara County in the fall of each year and aggregate in sheltered groves of trees. Monarch aggregation sites have been documented within Eagle Canyon, Tecelote, and Bell Creek (sites 56, 57, 58) by Daniel Meade. Many over wintering eucalyptus trees that were known to harbor monarch butterflies (Danaus plexippus), were removed during the construction of the Bacara Resort and Spa development. Additionally, some over wintering habitat has recently been removed on the Eagle Canyon site and a habitat restoration plan currently being permitted by Planning and Development.

Steelhead Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) is salmonid species native to the tributaries of the Pacific Ocean and is a federally listed endangered species. Steelhead were reportedly observed in Tecolote Creek in 1978-1979. Surveys for steelhead were conducted by Hunt and Associates for the proposed project in April, 2008. The steelhead survey and habitat evaluation performed by Hunt and Associates determined that Tecolote Creek provides moderate to high quality over summering habitat for adult and juvenile steelhead and it is assumed that steelhead are present in ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 30

Tecolote Creek. Habitat for steelhead in Eagle Canyon Creek was determined to be marginal to non-existent at the time of the survey.

Archaeological Sites

The Dos Pueblos area of Goleta encompasses more than a dozen recorded archaeological sites, including permanent prehistoric habitation sites, many of which lie on the coastal bluff both north and south of the pipeline alignment. Several archaeological surveys have been conducted in the project area as part of the environmental review process for the proposed Golf Links Project (Final EIR for the ARCO Dos Pueblos Golf Links Project, Fugro-McClelland (West), Inc., 1993), the construction and operation of the Bacara Resort & Spa, and proposed habitat restoration on Eagle Canyon Ranch. Five archaeological sites and one historic site were identified near the abandoned pipeline route. The following summary was compiled from existing public documents.

Five archaeological sites were identified near the abandoned pipeline route. Four are documented in a report by C.A. Singer & Associates, Inc. (November 1992) and the fifth which was recently discovered is documented in a report by Western Points Archaeology (March 2008). Only three of the sites (CA-SBA-73 in Tecolote Creek area and CA-SBA-76 and WP-GH-1 on Eagle Canyon Ranch) are in the vicinity of the proposed pipeline removal work. Two additional nearby sites are documented in the Cultural Resources Management Plan for the Hyatt (now Bacara) Goleta Resort Development (Quaternary Research Associates, Inc., April 1986): CA-SBA-71 on the west side of Bell Creek and CA-SBA-72 on the valley floor east of Tecolote Creek. These sites are shown in a figure that was previously submitted under separate cover, in order to further protect the location of the resources. Although not directly in the project area, Site CA-SBA-73 is located nearby at the mouth of Tecolote Canyon and covers a large area of the terrace above Tecolote Creek (Fugro-McClelland, Inc. 1993). According to the FEIR, research conducted at the site since 1929 suggests that this was a very influential Late Period village site. The site includes features such as a cemetery area, ceremonial dance floor, house floors and temescals, as well as numerous artifacts. A series of mitigation recommendations were presented in a Cultural Resource Mitigation Plan for the Hyatt (now Bacara) Resort Development (Erlandson, 1987).

Prehistoric site CA-SBA-76 is located on the terrace portion of the Eagle Canyon Ranch parcel. The site is described in the FEIR as a large village with burials, thus indicating a cemetery is present. This site was resurveyed during the surface examination of the proposed water pipeline route for the Golf Links Project. However, as the water line for the Golf Course is no longer proposed, the Ellwood Pier firewater storage tank will be connected to the Goleta Water District delivery system after the W-2 and W-3 Pipelines are removed. Therefore, no mitigation will be required.

The newly identified site, WP-GH-1, is also located on the marine terrace of Eagle Canyon Ranch. The site is described as a moderate density marine shell scatter containing California mussel, jewel box, giant rock scallop, and oyster. This site is currently pending formal designation.

The Golf Links Project FEIR identifies one potentially significant historic site (CA-SBA-2442H) located near the bottom of Eagle Canyon. As described in the FEIR, this site represents the location of two historic structures and an access road located in the bottom of Eagle Canyon. The structures first appear on the 1903 USGS topographic map. The structures were found to persist on the property at least through 1947; by 1954 they were removed. According to Wilcoxin et. al. (1991), as ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 31 documented in the FEIR, CA-SBA-2442H is considered a potentially significant cultural resource. As part of the Golf Links Project environmental review, the historic deposit CA-SBA-2442H was surveyed and examined. The physical remains of the site, which were found to have been severely impacted by water erosion, included a concentration of large mortared sandstone and local stream cobbles, fragments of milled redwood lumber, and a few pieces of reinforced concrete located in a clearing in a eucalyptus grove (Fugro-McClelland (West), Inc., 1993). The only diagnostic artifact discovered was a mold-made clear glass whiskey bottle dating to circa 1946 (ibid.).

Surface Water Bodies

The marine terrace has been incised by three drainages that traverse the Site in a north-south direction: Eagle Canyon Creek, Telcolote Creek, and Bell Creek, each of which descends from higher elevations in the Santa Ynez Mountains and empties into the Pacific Ocean. Eagle Canyon Creek maintains a relatively permanent flow but is intermittent in the work area during dry periods. Tecolote and Bell Creeks are similarly considered perennial but can have intermittent flows during low rainfall years. During late summer and fall, the creeks often are dammed by accumulated sand and during this period the terminal lagoons are disconnected from the ocean.

Surrounding Land Uses

Many of the surrounding parcels have not been intensively developed. The majority of these parcels are in the rural area, devoted to open space or agricultural use. Some are also used for oil and gas production.

The Dos Pueblos site was historically used for oil and gas production from the 1920s to 1997. Decommissioning of these facilities began more than ten years ago and much of the equipment has been removed. This project addresses decommissioning of most of the remaining infrastructure, cleanup of contaminated soils, and site restoration.

The Eagle Canyon Ranch is undeveloped with the exception of the active Gas Company Metering Station, the Ellwood pier access road, Ellwood pier and associated infrastructure (fire water tank and a security trailer), in addition to the pipelines proposed for removal.

Existing Structures

The Eagle Canyon Ranch property is vacant with exception of an emergency fire water tank, a road/parking area used by Venoco, and access to a pier used by Venoco.

3.2 City Environmental Setting

As noted previously, the discussions below address the portion of the overall project area that falls within the City of Goleta jurisdiction (within the City limits). As the Lead Agency, the County of Santa Barbara has reviewed the environmental impacts of all project areas. The discussions below provide overlapping discussion from the perspective of the City and are included to ensure that project activities are reviewed in the context of both County and City threshold criteria.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 32

Aesthetics

The Tecolote Creek project area is within the Bacara Resort and Spa property. The creek itself is bordered by riparian and other vegetation for about 140-feet to the west until the Bacara development begins, riparian vegetation and a Bacara outbuilding and coastal access parking lot to the east, Hollister Avenue to the north and the Pacific Ocean to the south. The Bell Creek project area is within the Sandpiper Golf Course property. The creek itself is bordered by riparian and other vegetation to the west, riparian vegetation and the Ellwood Onshore Facility to the east, Hollister Avenue to the north, and the Pacific Ocean to the south. The City’s General Plan (policy VH1.1) designates both creeks and the vegetation associated with their riparian corridors as a scenic resource. Furthermore, both creeks provide a view corridor to the Pacific Ocean, which is also protected in the City’s General Plan policy VH 1.3.

Agriculture

Both the Tecolote and Bell Creek project areas are wetland/creek areas, which are not feasible for an agricultural use. However, the Tecolote Creek project area is designated as “Urban and Built Up Land” and the Bell Creek project area is designated as “Grazing Land” on the California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection’s Santa Barbara County Important Farmland Map (2007). The majority of the soil type within the Tecolote Creek work area is GU (Gullied Land - non-prime soils). There is also MEe2 (Milpitas Positas fine sandy loams, 15 to 30 percent slopes, eroded – non-prime soils) located at and near the creek lagoon, and MeF2 (Milpitas Positas fine sandy loams, 30 to 50 percent slopes, eroded – non- prime soils) soils are also present. Bell Creek primarily consists of GdA (Goleta loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes – prime soils) soils, but also contains smaller amounts of MeE2 and MeD2 (Milpitas Positas fine sandy loams, 9 to 15 percent slopes, eroded – non-prime soils) soil types.

Air Quality

Criteria Pollutants To protect human health, State and Federal air quality standards have been established for 11 pollutants. According to the Air Pollution Control District (APCD), Santa Barbara County is currently considered in attainment of the federal eight-hour ozone standard, and in attainment of the state one-hour ozone standard. The County does not meet the state eight-hour ozone standard or the state standard for particulate matter less than ten microns in diameter (PM10); and does meet the federal PM10 standard. There is not yet enough data to determine the attainment status for state standard for particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5), although the County has been designated as “Unclassifiable/Attainment” by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the County will likely be in attainment for the federal PM2.5 standard. (Molly Pearson, SBCAPCD, 01/05/09).

Ozone air pollution is formed when nitrogen oxides (NOx) and reactive organic compounds (ROCs) react in the presence of sunlight. According to the APCD, the major sources of ozone precursor emissions in Santa Barbara County are motor vehicles, the petroleum industry, and solvent usage (paints, consumer products, and certain industrial processes). Sources of PM10 include grading, demolition, agricultural tilling, road dust, mineral quarries, and vehicle exhaust.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 33

Global Climate Change/Greenhouse Gases The analysis provided below on Climate Change/Greenhouse Gases is derived from information available from various state agencies, boards, and associations. Sources include:

• CAPCOA – California Air Pollution Control Officers Association; CEQA and Climate Change; January 2008 • CARB - California Air Resources Board (ARB); Recommended Approaches for Setting Interim Significance Thresholds for Greenhouse Gases under the California Environmental Quality Act, Preliminary Draft Staff Proposal; October 24, 2008 • Department of Justice, Office of the California Attorney General; Global Warming Measures; December 9, 2008 • Governor’s Office of Planning and Research; CEQA and Climate Change: Addressing Climate Change through California Environmental Quality Act Review; June 2008 • Governor’s Office of Planning and Research; OPR Proposed CEQA Guidelines Amendments; April 2009 • ICF Jones and Stokes; Goleta General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan Supplemental Environmental Impact Report; July 2009 • Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District; CEQA Guide; June 2009

Background

International and Federal legislation have been enacted to deal with climate change issues. The Montreal Protocol was originally signed in 1987 and substantially amended in 1990 and 1992. In 1988, the United Nations and the World Meteorological Organization established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to assess the scientific, technical, and socioeconomic information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change, its potential impacts, and options for adaptation and mitigation. The IPCC consists of 600 scientists from 40 countries. In February 2007, it issued a report on global climate change stating that they are about 90 percent certain that people are the cause of global warming. The report also states that global atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide have significantly increased since pre-industrial times (1750); that warming of the climate system is unequivocal; and that changes in climate are now affecting physical and biological systems on every continent.

The IPCC’s best estimates are that the average global temperature rise between years 2000 and 2100 could range from 0.6 degrees Celsius (1.08 degrees Fahrenheit) with no increase in GHG emissions above 2000 levels, to 4.0 degrees Celsius (7.2 degrees Fahrenheit) with a substantial increase in GHG emissions (IPCC, 2007). Large increases in global temperatures could have massive deleterious impacts on the natural and human environments.

According to the EPA, a GHG is any gas that absorbs infrared radiation in the atmosphere. This absorption traps heat within the atmosphere creating a greenhouse effect that is slowly raising global temperatures. California state law defines GHG to include the following: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride (Health and Safety Code, Section 38505g). Many human activities add to the levels of most of these naturally occurring gases. CO2 is released to the atmosphere when solid waste, fossil fuels (oil, natural gas, and coal), and wood and wood products are burned. N2O is emitted during agricultural and industrial activities, as well as during combustion of solid waste and fossil fuels. CO2 and N2O are the two GHGs released in greatest quantities from mobile ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 34

sources burning gasoline and diesel fuel. Methane, a highly potent GHG, results from off- gassing associated with agricultural practices and landfills, as well as other sources.

Climate change could impact the natural environment in California in the following ways, among others:

• rising sea levels along the California coastline; • extreme-heat conditions, such as heat waves and very high temperatures, which could last longer and become more frequent; • an increase in heat-related human deaths, an increase in infectious diseases, and a higher risk of respiratory problems caused by deteriorating air quality; • reduced snow pack and stream flow in the Sierra Nevada mountains, affecting winter recreation and water supplies; • potential increase in the severity of winter storms, affecting peak stream flows and flooding; • changes in growing season conditions that could affect California agriculture, causing variations in crop quality and yield; and • changes in distribution of plant and wildlife species due to changes in temperature, competition from colonizing species, changes in hydrologic cycles, changes in sea levels, and other climate-related effects.

These changes in California’s climate and ecosystems could occur at a time when California’s population is expected to increase from 34 million to 59 million by the year 2040 (California Energy Commission, 2005). As such, the number of people potentially affected by climate change, as well as the amount of human-related GHG emissions, is expected to significantly increase. Similar changes would also occur in other parts of the world, with regional variations in resources affected and vulnerability to adverse effects.

th th Worldwide, California is estimated to be the 12 to 16 largest emitter of CO2 and is responsible for approximately 2 percent of the world’s CO2 emissions. California is the second largest emitter of GHG emissions in the United States (behind Texas). In 2004, California’s gross GHG emissions were 492 million metric tons (MMT) of CO2 equivalent (CO2E) (California Energy Commission, 2006).

Evolving Regulatory Setting

In 2005, Governor Schwarzenegger issued California Executive Order S-3-05 establishing the following emission targets for California: 1) reduce GHG emissions to 2000 levels by 2010; 2) reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020; and 3) reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Executive Orders are binding on State agencies. Accordingly, S-3- 05 will guide State agencies’ efforts to control and regulate GHG emissions but will have no direct binding effect on local efforts.

In September 2006, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed Assembly Bill (AB) 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. AB 32 establishes regulatory, reporting, and market mechanisms to achieve quantifiable reductions in GHG emissions and a cap on statewide GHG emissions. AB 32 requires that statewide GHG emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020. AB 32 also includes guidance to institute emission reductions in an economically efficient manner and conditions to ensure that businesses and consumers are not unfairly affected by the reductions. ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 35

AB 32 demonstrates California’s commitment to reducing the rate of GHG emissions and the state’s associated contribution to climate change, without intent to limit population or economic growth. Although AB 32 did not amend CEQA, it identifies the environmental problems in California caused by global warming (Health and Safety Code, Section 38501a).

Senate Bill (SB) 97, enacted in 2007, amends the CEQA statute to establish that GHG emissions and their effects are a prominent environmental issue that requires analysis under CEQA. This bill directed OPR to prepare, develop, and transmit to the California Natural Resources Agency (Resources Agency) guidelines for the feasible mitigation of GHG emissions or the effects of GHG emissions by July 1, 2009. The Natural Resources Agency is required to certify or adopt those guidelines by January 1, 2010. On April 13, 2009, OPR submitted to the Resources Agency proposed amendments to the state CEQA Guidelines for GHG emissions. These proposed CEQA Guideline amendments provide guidance to lead agencies regarding the analysis and mitigation of the effects of GHG emissions in CEQA documents.

As an interim step toward development of required guidelines, OPR published a technical advisory entitled, “CEQA and Climate Change: Addressing Climate Change through California Environmental Quality Act Review,” in June 2008. OPR recommends that lead agencies make a good-faith effort, based on available information, to estimate the quantity of GHG emissions that would be generated by a proposed project, and to mitigate the impacts where feasible. OPR acknowledges in this document that the most difficult part of the climate change analysis will be the determination of significance. OPR also asked the California Air Resources Board (CARB) technical staff to recommend a method for setting thresholds which would encourage consistency and uniformity in the CEQA analysis of GHG emissions throughout the state.

In October 2008, CARB published its Climate Change Proposed Scoping Plan (Proposed Scoping Plan), which is the State’s plan to achieve GHG reductions required by AB 32. The Proposed Scoping Plan contains the main strategies California will implement to achieve a reduction of 169 million metric tons (MMT) of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e), or approximately 30 percent from the state’s projected 2020 emission level of 596 MMT of CO2e under a business-as-usual scenario. The Proposed Scoping Plan states that land use planning and urban growth decisions will play an important role in the state’s GHG reductions because local governments have primary authority to plan, zone, approve, and permit how land is developed to accommodate population growth and the changing needs of their jurisdictions. CARB further acknowledges that decisions on how land is used will have large impacts on the GHG emissions that will result from transportation, housing, industry, forestry, water, agriculture, electricity, and natural gas emission sectors. The Proposed Scoping Plan was approved by the CARB on December 11, 2008.

In addition to the Scoping Plan, CARB has also released the Preliminary Draft Staff Proposal: Recommended Approaches for Setting Interim Significance Thresholds for Greenhouse Gases under the California Environmental Quality Act (CARB Draft Staff Proposal). The CARB Draft Staff Proposal includes potential interim performance standards for project types and emissions sources including construction, energy, water use, waste, transportation, and total mass GHG emissions. Specific thresholds and performance criteria for these categories have yet to be developed.

SB 375 was signed in September 2008 and aligns regional transportation planning efforts, regional GHG reduction targets, and land use and housing allocation. SB 375 requires Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) to adopt a Sustainable Communities Strategy ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 36

(SCS) or Alternative Planning Strategy (APS), which will prescribe land use allocation in that MPO’s Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). It also establishes new streamlining opportunities for compatible projects under CEQA. SB 375 will likely take several years to become fully implemented due to the complex relationship between state, regional, and local agencies. First, the State must develop the modeling guidelines and the GHG regional reduction targets, then regional agencies must develop their sustainable communities strategies. Only after the State and regional agencies accomplish their SB 375 responsibilities will cities and counties be required to bring their housing elements into conformity and be able to take advantage of the new CEQA streamlining tools.

Determining Significance

The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Assembly Bill 32, Health and Safety Code Section 38500 et. seq.) requires reduction of California’s GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. The California Air Resources Board has established this 1990 level at 427 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent emissions as an attainment goal. Pursuant to AB 32 and other related legislation, various actions have established plans and regulations that identify emission limits and reduction measures.

The Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) is developing and the California Resources Agency will certify and adopt amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines on or before January 1, 2010, pursuant to SB 97. These new CEQA Guidelines will provide regulatory guidance on the analysis and mitigation of GHG emissions in CEQA documents. The proposed amendments were transmitted to the California Resources Agency in April 2009 and include proposed changes that would assist lead agencies in determining significance, in the establishment of thresholds of significance, and in identifying mitigation measures, among other amendments.

Establishment of thresholds at the state and/or local level has been a point of discussion and analysis by various agencies and boards (i.e., OPR, CARB, CAPCOA [California Air Pollution Control Officers Association]). Information has been presented on various scenarios including no thresholds, a zero threshold, and a non-zero threshold. Values for a non-zero threshold vary and include the factoring in of performance standards as well as a quantitative threshold in determining significance.

The CARB has been requested by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research to make recommendations for GHG-related thresholds of significance. Consistent with this request, the CARB released a Preliminary Draft Staff Proposal in October 2008 (Draft Staff Proposal), which represents the first step toward developing recommended statewide interim thresholds of significance for GHGs that may be adopted by local agencies for their own use. The Draft Staff Proposal focuses on common project types, including industrial, residential, and commercial projects. The collective greenhouse gas emissions from these sectors, together with the transportation sector, represent approximately 80% of the statewide greenhouse gas emissions inventory in 2004. ARB staff believes that thresholds in these important sectors would advance climate objectives, would streamline project review, and would encourage consistency and uniformity in the CEQA analysis of GHG emissions throughout the State.

A significant effect on the environment means a substantial, or potentially substantial, change in the environment cause directly or indirectly by the project. The incremental effect of a project ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 37

can be significant when it is cumulatively considerable; that is, when the effect is added to that of other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects that also contribute to the problem (State CEQA Guidelines, 2009).

CARB staff believes that for the sectors evaluated in the Draft Staff Proposal, non-zero thresholds can be supported by substantial evidence. Zero thresholds are not recommended because 1) some level of emissions in the near term and at mid-century would still be consistent with climate stabilization; and 2) current and anticipated regulations and programs apart from CEQA, will proliferate and increasingly reduce the GHG contributions of past, present, and future projects.

Any non-zero threshold must be sufficiently stringent to make substantial contributions to reducing the State’s GHG emission peak, to causing that peak to occur sooner, and to putting California on track to meet its interim (2020) and long-term (2050) emissions reductions targets. CARB staff believes that the preliminary interim approaches outlined in their Draft Staff Proposal are consistent with these objectives. The approach relies on an industrial project meeting performance standards (or equivalent mitigation) for construction-related emissions and transportation-related emissions, and with mitigation, emissions of no more than 7,000 metric tons of CO2e/year from non-transportation sources. Residential and commercial projects would also be required to meet performance standards (or equivalent mitigation) for construction- related emissions and operations-related emissions, and with performance standards or equivalent mitigation would emit no more than an amount of CO2e/year that is still being developed (CARB, Draft Staff Proposal, 2008).

CAPCOA (California Air Pollution Control Officers Association, CEQA and Climate Change, 2008) looked at options for GHG thresholds. Quantitative thresholds were studied based on capture of 90 percent or more of likely future discretionary developments. The objective was to set the emission threshold low enough to capture a substantial fraction of future residential and non-residential development that will be constructed to accommodate future statewide population and job growth, while setting the emission threshold high enough to exclude small development projects that would contribute a relatively small fraction of the cumulative statewide GHG emissions. A 900 metric ton threshold was selected based on an analysis that included data from four diverse cities (Los Angeles, Pleasanton, Dublin, and Livermore). This threshold would apply to industrial, residential, and commercial projects but it is noted that any adoption of such a threshold would require further investigation. The CAPCOA document also looked at other possible thresholds, including zero thresholds, CARB reporting thresholds, and efficiency-based thresholds, among others. CAPCOA notes that this document is considered a “white paper” and is intended as a resource and not a guidance document.

OPR’s proposed amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines do not propose any thresholds but do include the following proposed questions regarding “Greenhouse Gas Emissions” contained within the Environmental Checklist Form (Appendix G) of the proposed Guidelines:

VII.a. Would the project generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant effect on the environment?

VII.b. Would the project conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs?

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 38

OPR indicates that a lead agency should make a good faith effort, based on available information, to describe, calculate, or estimate the amount of GHG emissions resulting from a project.

While numerous threshold options have been discussed in various publications, at this time, neither the State of California, nor the Santa Barbara County APCD, nor the City of Goleta have established or adopted CEQA significance thresholds/screening tables for GHG emissions.

Biology

The following text describes the flora and fauna found in Tecolote and Bell Creeks: Figures 5 and 6 show ESHAs as identified in the project specific biological studies (as well as the GP/CLUP required buffers from these ESHAs) as provided in the September, 2007 project work plan (Vince Semonsen, 03/07 and LFR Inc., 01/07). Figures 7 and 8 show City designated ESHA’s and their buffers in Tecolote and Bell Creeks.

Vegetation – Upland Communities

Venturan Coastal Sage Scrub In the Bell Creek Survey Area, Venturan coastal sage scrub occurs west of the eucalyptus trees on the western side of Bell Creek south of Hollister Avenue, mostly just outside the survey perimeter in a restoration area A small patch of coastal scrub vegetation immediately below and under eucalyptus trees on the west bank of Bell Creek appears to be original, dominated by California sagebrush, coyote bush, poison-oak, and giant rye.

Coastal scrub vegetation also occurs on the east side of Bell Creek in openings and along the access road adjacent to Venoco’s Ellwood Oil and Gas Processing Facility. Coyote bush, California sagebrush, and Brewer’s saltbush are common along the access road towards the ocean, along with short-leaved cliff-aster (Malacothrix saxatilis subsp. tenuifolia). A few cliff- aster specimens (M. saxatilis subsp. saxatilis) are found at the far southern end of this area. Chaparral sunflower occurs with coyote bush and California sagebrush in openings among trees towards the north end of this segment, near Hollister Avenue.

This community would be classified as Venturan Coastal Sage Scrub in the CNDDB community classification system (Holland, 1986). Areas where California sagebrush is dominant are best described by the California Sagebrush Series within the CNPS Manual of California Vegetation (Sawyer and Keeler-Wolf, 1995). Venturan Coastal Sage Scrub has a global rank of G3 (10,000- 50,000 acres worldwide) and a state rank of S3.1 (10,000-50,000 acres statewide, very threatened), as listed in the CNDDB (2007). Sage scrub is a protected ESHA under policies CE 1 and CE 5 of the GP/CLUP.

No Venturan coastal sage scrub was found within the Tecolote Creek project area.

Coast Live Oak Woodland Habitat In the Tecolote Creek Survey Area, coast live oak individuals are present sporadically along the stream margins on both banks. Individuals vary in height from 6 feet to about 20 feet and most appear to be planted as part of the Bacara Resort’s restoration effort (as evidenced by flags, tubing, and other infrastructure remaining at the base of individual oak trees). Associated with ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 39

the oak trees and saplings are red willow, arroyo willow, western sycamore, California wild rose (Rosa californica), and dense thickets of California blackberry.

Coast live oak woodland occurs on the east side of Bell Creek within the Bell Creek Survey Area, where coast live oak trees occur with Mexican elderberry, poison-oak, California blackberry, coyote bush, and canyon sunflower. Invasive weeds also inhabit this area, especially cape-ivy, nasturtium, periwinkle (Vinca major), poison-hemlock, and bristly ox-tongue (Picris echioides). This area was previously disturbed during pipeline installation. A hydrogen sulfide alarm panel is located under the drip line of an oak tree in this area; this oak tree is declining in health and has lost considerable foliage and branches (see photographs in Appendix A.) The east side of Bell Creek also contains plantings of coast live oak saplings and is included in the Bell Canyon Riparian planting zone of Tierney (2003).

A few scattered coast live oak trees also occur on the west side of Bell Creek at the lower margin of the Eucalyptus grove that covers the steep western stream bank. This community would be classified as the Coast Live Oak Woodland Community in the CNDDB community classification system (Holland, 1986), and as the Coast Live Oak Series within the CNPS Manual of California Vegetation (Sawyer and Keeler-Wolf, 1995). Coast Live Oak Woodland has a global rank of G4 (apparently secure, but factors exist to cause some concern; i.e. there is some threat or somewhat narrow habitat) and a state rank of S4 (apparently secure, but factors exist to cause some concern; i.e. there is some threat or somewhat narrow habitat), as listed in the CNDDB (2007).

Non-Native Grassland/Ruderal Areas No native grassland habitat was found in either the Tecolote or Bell Creek project areas. However, in the Tecolote Creek Survey Area, the non-native grasslands slender wild oats, rip-gut brome, soft chess, annual fescues, and dallis grass (Paspalum dilitatum) were present in ruderal areas, along with spotted spurge (Euphorbia peplus), poison-hemlock, and Italian thistle.

In the Bell Canyon Survey Area, non-native grasses such as slender wild oats (Avena barbata), rip-gut brome (Bromus diandrus), soft chess (Bromus hordeaceus), rescue grass (Bromus catharticus), foxtail barley (Hordeum murinum), and annual fescues (Vulpia species) occur in ruderal areas along the dirt road adjacent to the Venoco facility, as well as in disturbed grassy areas nearer to Hollister Avenue. Associated with these grasses are weedy mustards (Brassica rapa, B. nigra, and Hirshfeldia incana) and filaree (Erodium cicutarium, E. botrys) along with patches of poison-hemlock, sharp-leaved fluellin (Kickxia elatine), and others.

A number of weeds occur immediately adjacent to roadways and on paths in both project areas; such ruderal species include common knotweed (Polygonum arenastrum), red spurrey (Spergularia rubra), tumbleweed (Amaranthus albus), prickly sow-thistle (Sonchus asper subsp. asper), smooth cat’s ears (Hypochaeris glabra), Russian-thistle, and others.

In general, the grassland areas would be classified as Non-Native Grasslands in the CNDDB community classification system (Holland, 1986) and as California Annual Grassland Series within the CNPS Manual of California Vegetation (Sawyer and Keeler-Wolf, 1995). Non-native Grassland has a global rank of G4 (apparently secure, but factors exist to cause some concern; i.e. there is some threat or somewhat narrow habitat) and a state rank of S4 (apparently secure, but factors exist to cause some concern; i.e. there is some threat or somewhat narrow habitat), as listed in the CNDDB (2005).

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 40

Non-native Eucalyptus Trees In the Tecolote Creek Survey Area, eucalyptus trees are concentrated on the western perimeter of the survey area, as well as north of the survey area adjacent to the Hollister Avenue Bridge spanning Tecolote Creek.

In the Bell Creek Survey Area, a dense stand of eucalyptus covers the western banks of Bell Creek. This sizeable population also supports some native species in the understory, especially poison-oak and giant rye (Leymus condensatus). Just south of the survey area a population of the sensitive Santa Barbara honeysuckle (Lonicera subspicata subsp. subspicata) occurs under the eucalyptus at the lower edge of this blue gum population. A few coast live oaks also occupy the lower edge of the eucalyptus grove. Additional planted species include myoporum (Myoporum laetum) and Pacific waxmyrtle, which are planted in the Bell Creek Survey Area adjacent to Sandpiper Golf Course; wax-myrtle is also found near the tennis course in the Tecolote Creek Survey Area along with other cultivated trees and shrubs. In addition, ornamental plantings along the road banks facing Hollister Avenue include pride-of-Madeira (Echium candicans), Mexican sage (Salvia leucantha), Carmel creeper (Ceanothus griseus var. horizontalis), myoporum, and others.

The tree plantings of eucalyptus can best be described by the Eucalyptus Series within the CNPS Manual of California Vegetation (Sawyer and Keeler-Wolf, 1995); there is no corresponding CNDDB classification. As part of non-native stands, these and other planted species are not treated in either the CNDDB or CNPS classification. However, the eucalyptus groves adjacent to Bell and Tecolote Creek are City designated ESHAs for monarch butterfly and/or raptor roosting habitat.

Wetland Communities Tecolote Creek is a watershed extending north from the project area and draining acreage from ridges and peaks over 3,000 feet in elevation. Southern willow scrub, southern sycamore alder riparian forest, and coastal and valley freshwater marsh habitats are all found within the survey area for this watershed.

Bell Creek forms at the confluence of Winchester Canyon Creek and Ellwood Canyon Creek, which drains the slopes of Brush Peak (3,069 feet) and other ridges and draws. Like Tecolote Creek, Bell Creek supports southern willow scrub, southern sycamore alder riparian forest, and coastal and valley freshwater marsh habitats in the survey area. In addition, southern brackish marsh is found at the southern tip of the survey area in this watershed.

Both Tecolote and Bell Creeks and the lagoons at the mouth of each creek meet the GP/CLUP Conservation Element definition of a “wetland” (policy CE 3.2).

Southern Willow Scrub Southern willow scrub is found in both the Tecolote and Bell Creek project areas. Tasmanian blue gum is abundant in the riparian area on the western banks above Bell Creek, but is replaced by southern willow scrub and southern sycamore alder riparian forest closer to the water.

Native herbs and grasses commonly present along the drainages – on banks or in the stream channels - include the native western verbena (Verbena lasiostachys), creeping wild-rye (Leymus triticoides), prairie bulrush (Bolboschoenus [Scirpus] maritimus), and tall flatsedge (Cyperus ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 41

eragrostis), along with cattail (Typha angustifolia and T. domingensis); these plants are discussed more fully in the next section on coastal and freshwater marsh species.

This vegetation has been classified as Palustrine Forested Broadleaved-deciduous (Salix lasiolepis) Phreatophytic Canyon-slope Wetland by Ferren et al. (1996) and Southern Willow Scrub by Holland (1986). Southern Willow Scrub comprises the Arroyo Willow Series in the CNPS Manual of California Vegetation (Sawyer and Keeler-Wolf, 1995). Southern Willow Scrub has a global rank of G3 (10,000-50,000 acres worldwide) and a state rank of S2.1 (2,000- 10,000 acres statewide, very threatened) as listed in the CNDDB (2007).

Southern Mixed Riparian Forest The vegetation along the stream banks of Tecolote Creek consists primarily of southern mixed riparian forest. Red willow predominates, along with western sycamore, white alder, black cottonwood, and arroyo willow. This area has been the site of restoration plantings, as discussed in Section 3.3. Bell Creek also supports southern mixed riparian forest. Non-native Tasmanian blue gum is found north of the Hollister Avenue bridge along Tecolote Creek and also occupies the western bank of Bell Creek. Several of the sycamores planted in riparian restoration areas in both creeks strongly resemble London plane tree (Platanus x acerifolia = P. x hispanica), rather than western sycamore.

The southern mixed riparian forest forms a dense tangle of woody vegetation that crowds and shades out other growth in places, although openings and banks support mule fat, Mexican elderberry, creek clematis (Clematis ligusticifolia), cattail, small-fruited bulrush (Schoenoplectus [Scirpus] microcarpus), and other wetland species that are obligate or facultative wetland indicator species (USFWS,1996). An unusual exotic species native to South America and in the milkweed family, bladderflower (Araujia sericifera), grows up riparian trees in the Tecolote Creek drainage as well. In addition, invasive species are present in these wetland forests, especially cape-ivy and eupatory (Ageratina adenophora). The invasive giant reed (Arundo donax) also forms large clumps in both Bell and Tecolote Creeks.

GP/CLUP Figure 4-1 shows the presence of sage scrub/dune/bluff scrub west and southeast of the Tecolote Creek project area and west and northeast of the Bell Creek project area.

In the CNDDB community classification system (Holland, 1986), the cottonwood-willow riparian vegetation is part of the Southern Sycamore Alder Riparian Woodland Community. This vegetation best fits into the Sycamore Series listed in the CNPS Manual of California Vegetation (Sawyer and Keeler-Wolf, 1995). Southern Mixed Riparian Forest has a global rank of G2 (2,000-10,000 acres worldwide) and a state rank of S2 (S2.1 -- 2,000-10,000 acres statewide, very threatened), as listed in the CNDDB (2007).

Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh Plants typically associated with freshwater marsh habitat occur within the both the Tecolote and Bell Creek riparian corridors. This habitat is a component of the riparian corridor and is not an isolated habitat feature. Tecolote Creek supports a diverse assemblage of freshwater marsh species, including southern cattail, California bulrush, small-fruited bulrush (Schoenoplectus [Scirpus] microcarpus), iris-leaved rush, common rush (J. patens), toad rush (J. bufonius), tall flatsedge, smooth scouring rush (Equisetum laevigatum), willow smartweed (Polygonum lapathifolium), willow-herb, giant creek nettle, love grass (Eragrostis pectinacea), and other wetland plants. ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 42

Bell Creek also supports a variety of freshwater marsh plants, including narrow-leaved cattail (Typha angustifolia), willow-herb, giant creek nettle, California bulrush, prairie bulrush (Bolboschoenus [Scirpus] maritimus), and others. Weedy occupants of marshy areas in all creeks include rabbitsfoot grass (Polypogon monspeliensis), bristly ox-tongue (Picris echioides), Bermuda- grass (Cynodon dactylon), curly dock (Rumex crispus), and others.

Of these, prairie bulrush, iris-leaved rush, narrow-leaved cattail, and wild heliotrope are obligate wetland species (USFWS, 1996), meaning that they grow in wetland habitats almost always (99% of the time or more). Additional species are facultative wetland indicators, growing in wetlands 66 – 99 % of the time, including giant creek nettle, toad rush, tall flatsedge, sneezeweed, Hooker’s evening-primrose, meadow barley, curly dock, rabbit’s foot grass, and others (USFWS, 1996).

GP/CLUP Figure 4-1 shows the presence of the Riparian/Marsh/Vernal along both the Tecolote and Bell Creek corridors.

This vegetation has been classified as Palustrine Emergent-Persistent Seasonally-flooded Coastal-plain Wetland by Ferren et al. (1996) and Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh by Holland (1986). The Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh includes the Sedge Series and the Cattail Series in the CNPS Manual of California Vegetation (Sawyer and Keeler-Wolf, 1995). Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh has a global rank of G3 (10,000-50,000 acres worldwide) and a state rank of S2.1 (2,000-10,000 acres statewide, very threatened), as listed in the CNDDB (2007).

Coastal brackish marsh, Coastal brackish marsh is adjacent to southern coastal salt marsh offsite and occurs in a very small portion of the survey area at the southern tip of the Bell Creek survey area. Representative species in this area include alkali-heath (Frankenia salina), Parish’s glasswort (Salicornia subterminalis), salt marsh jaumea (Jaumea carnosa), salt grass (Distichlis spicata), prairie bulrush, and sticky baccharis are found to the immediate south of riparian scrub in a low, saline area.

GP/CLUP Figure 4-1 shows the presence of the Riparian/Marsh/Vernal along both the Tecolote and Bell Creek corridors.

Beach and Shoreline GP/CLUP Figure 4-1 shows beach and shoreline south of both project Tecolote and Bell Creek project areas (outside of the project areas).

Sensitive Plants

Santa Barbara honeysuckle (Lonicera subspicata var. subspicata) Santa Barbara honeysuckle occurs on the western creek bank of Bell Creek. Although it does not occur in the Bell Creek Survey Area, it occurs immediately to the south under the cover of Eucalyptus. It is possible that it occurs within the survey area in densely vegetated areas.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 43

This unique variety of honeysuckle is known primarily from Santa Barbara County, and in the Santa Ynez Mountains and nearby Transverse Ranges in particular. This subspecies, with its limited range, continues to be threatened by development of natural habitat and other disturbances.

Cliff-aster (Malacothrix saxatilis subsp. saxatilis) A few Cliff-aster individuals representing the sensitive subspecies were found at the southernmost tip of the Bell Creek Survey Area.

Cliff-aster is endemic to southern California, occurring primarily in Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties, with a few populations reported from Orange County as well. It is categorized as CNPS 4.2, a plant of limited distribution that is fairly endangered in California.

Black Flowered Figwort While no black flowered figworts were identified in the project specific biological study, GP/CLUP Figure 4-1 shows the presence of the species on the northeast of the of Tecolote Creek project area beyond the Hollister Avenue bridge.

Wildlife

California Red-legged Frog Previous surveys within Tecolote and Bell Creeks (1995-1998), have documented the presence of California red-legged frogs. The one night survey conducted for this report confirmed the presence of California red-legged frogs in Tecolote Creek. Three adults were observed in Tecolote Creek near the south end of the railroad culvert. No frogs were seen within Bell Creek, however the lagoon was backed up to the railroad culvert and the depth of the water in combination with the thick vegetation make it extremely difficult to survey the area.

Also, on June 14, 2009 a focused survey for California red-legged frogs in Tecolote Creek in association with the proposed Bacara Resort and Spa project was performed by Brock A. Orgeta of DUDEK. Approximately 12 individuals were identified up to approximately 490 feet upstream of the outlet were identified in this survey.

The GP/CLUP Figure 4-1 shows the presence of red-legged frogs in both Tecolote and Bell Creeks.

Tidewater Goby Tidewater gobies were documented from Tecolote and Bell creeks during the construction of the Bacara Resort in the late 1990’s. At that time several hundred gobies were relocated during the bridge construction over Tecolote and Bell Creeks as per the U.S. Fish and Wildlife permit conditions. During the surveys for this report several hundred tidewater gobies were observed in Bell Creek, none were seen in either Tecolote Creek or Eagle Canyon Creek. The GP/CLUP Figure 4-1 shows the presence of tidewater gobies in the lagoons of both Tecolote and Bell Creeks.

Steelhead Trout ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 44

Tecolote Creek is designated critical habitat for the steelhead trout by the Endangered Species Act. Steelhead trout habitat has been identified in the Bell Creek corridor in Figure 4-1 of the General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan.

Least Bell’s vireo The riparian willows in both the Tecolote and Bell Creek corridors could provide nesting habitat for the least Bell’s vireo, a federally listed species.

Raptors A variety of raptors are expected to utilize portions of the area where pipeline removal will occur, including, turkey vultures, sharp-shinned hawks, Cooper’s hawks, red-tailed hawks, redshouldered hawks, white-tailed kites and great horned owls. During the October 2006 surveys no nests or roosts were seen in the vicinity of the pipeline within the creek corridors.

Monarch Butterflies Monarch butterfly aggregation sites have been documented within Tecolote and Bell creeks, labeled sites 57 and 58 respectively in Daniel Meade’s 1999 publication “Monarch Butterfly Overwintering Sites In Santa Barbara County California”. According to Meade bridge construction in the mid 1990’s over Tecolote Creek (site 57) and Bell Creek (site 58) destroyed both sites, however small numbers of Monarchs still visit the two sites in the fall. The GP/CLUP Figure 4-1 shows a monarch butterfly site just north of the Hollister Avenue bridge in the Tecolote and Bell Creek corridors.

Globose Dune Beetle While no globose dune beetles were identified in the project specific biological study, GP/CLUP Figure 4-1 shows the presence of the species on the beach just south of Tecolote Creek.

Cultural Resources

As provided in Section 3.5 Cultural Resources of the City’s General Plan Final EIR, the city is known to contain prehistoric, ethnographic, historical and paleontological resources. Figure 3.5- 1 of the City of Goleta General Plan Final EIR shows areas containing sensitive historic/cultural resources, identifying 46 historic resource locations. Several archaeological surveys have been conducted in the project area as part of the environmental review process for the proposed Golf Links Project (Final EIR for the ARCO Dos Pueblos Golf Links Project, Fugro-McClelland (West), Inc., 1993), as well as for the construction and operation of the Bacara Resort & Spa.

Three archaeological sites were identified near the abandoned pipeline route. The following summary was compiled from existing public documents. One archaeological site (CA-SBA-73 in Tecolote Creek area) was identified near the abandoned pipeline route and is documented in a report by C.A. Singer & Associates, Inc. (November 1992). Two additional nearby sites are documented in the Cultural Resources Management Plan for the Hyatt (now Bacara) Goleta Resort Development (Quaternary Research Associates, Inc., April 1986): CA-SBA-71 on the west side of Bell Creek and CA-SBA-72 on the valley floor east of Tecolote Creek.

Although not directly in the project area, Site CA-SBA-73 is located nearby at the mouth of Tecolote Canyon and covers a large area of the terrace above Tecolote Creek (Fugro- McClelland, Inc. 1993). According to the FEIR, research conducted at the site since 1929 suggests that this was a very influential Late Period village site. The site includes features such ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 45

as a cemetery area, ceremonial dance floor, house floors and temescals, as well as numerous artifacts.

Geology/Soils

The majority of the soil type within the Tecolote Creek work area is GU (Gullied Land - non- prime soils). GU consists of well drained areas in which the soil profile has been largely destroyed by deep gullies. It is in small and large valleys and on terraces, and is typically in deeply entrenched drainage ways. Permeability and available water capacity are variable. In most places effective rooting depth is more than 60 inches. Runoff is very rapid, and the hazard of erosion is very high. This land typically is a heavy sediment contributor which may damage land below. Maintenance of good cover on sides of the gullies is important for stability and erosion control. (Santa Barbara County Soil Survey, 1981).

There is also MEe2 (Milpitas Positas fine sandy loams, 15 to 30 percent slopes, eroded –prime soils) located at and near the creek lagoon, and MeF2 (Milpitas Positas fine sandy loams, 30 to 50 percent slopes, eroded – prime soils) soils are also present in the project area. The MeE2 consists of 45 percent Milpitas fine sandy loam and 40 percent Positas fine sandy loam. These moderately steep dissected soils are on terraces and are in unpredictable patterns. Also included in the complex are small areas of Milpitas stony fine sandy loam and Ayar, Zaca, and Diablo soils. Runoff is very rapid and the hazard of erosion is high. Available water capacity is 3 to 5 inches and effective rooting depth is 6 to 22 inches. (Santa Barbara County Soil Survey, 1981).

The MeF2 complex consists of 40 percent Milpitas fine sandy loam and 40 percent Positas fine sandy loam. These steep dissected soils are on terraces and are in unpredictable patterns. Also included in the complex are small areas of Milpitas stoney fine sandy loam and Ayar, Diablo, and Zaca soils. Runoff is very rapid, and the hazard of erosion is very high. Available water capacity is 2 to 5 inches, and effective rooting depth is 4 to 20 inches. (Santa Barbara County Soil Survey, 1981).

Bell Creek primarily consists of GdA (Goleta loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes – prime soils) soils, but also contains smaller amounts of MeE2 and MeD2 (Milpitas Positas fine sandy loams, 9 to 15 percent slopes, eroded – prime soils) soil types. GdA is a nearly level soil on broad flood plains with a fine texture. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of erosion is slight. Available water capacity is 8.5 to 10 inches. The MEe1 is described above, and the MeD2 complex consists of 45 percent Milpitas fine sandy loam and 40 percent Positas fine sandy loam. These strongly sloping soils are on terraces and are in unpredictable patterns. Included in mapping are small areas of Milpitas stony fine sandy loam and areas that are not eroded or are slightly eroded. Also included are a few small severely eroded spots. Most MeD2 areas have had 6 to 22 inches or soil removed by erosion. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of erosion is high. Available water capacity is 2 to 5 inches, and the effective rooting depth is 6 to 22 inches. (Santa Barbara County Soil Survey, 1981).

The nearest earthquake fault, the active More Ranch Fault, lies approximately 200-feet to the south of the mouth of Bell Creek (USGS California Preliminary Geologic Map of the Santa Barbara Coastal Plain Area; Santa Barbara County (2006) by Scott A. Minor, Karl S. Kellogg, et al.). (Santa Barbara County Soil Survey, 1981).

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 46

Hazards and Hazardous Materials

The pipeline proposed for abandonment at Bell Creek was flushed with water prior to the previous abandonment; however residual hydrocarbon liquids may still be present. The pipeline tapping procedure has the potential to result in an accidental discharge of liquids. This risk is not present in the Tecolote Creek project area as the pipeline proposed for removal there is filled with grout.

During pipeline cutting procedures at Bell Creek, hydrocarbon vapors contained within the pipelines could be released. These vapors could ignite with the use of a torch or other heat/spark source and cause a fire in the work area or pose a health hazard to those involved in the work task.

There are no known spill/release incidents from either the Bell Creek or Tecolote Creek pipelines. However it is possible there was a spill from one of these pipelines and, hence, the soil near the pipelines could be contaminated.

There is a potential for spilling of gasoline or diesel fuel from construction equipment and portable sanitary facilities used for the project.

The project site is not listed on the Cortese List pursuant to Gov’t Code Section 65962.5 as a hazardous materials site nor does the project site lie within ¼ mile of any school. Although no private airstrips are in the vicinity of the project site, the property does lie within 3 miles of the Santa Barbara Municipal Airport (SBMA). The project site is not within the Wildland Fire Hazard Area of the City.

Hydrology and Water Quality

The project is within Tecolote and Bell Creeks. Both creeks generally are considered perennial; however, the creeks may only have intermittent flows during dry periods and droughts. The creeks are identified in the City’s General Plan as blue-line streams and are within the Potential Tsunami Run Up Area. Both creeks have an associated flood hazard area that parallels the creeks approximately 180 feet wide.

Land Use and Planning

The Bell and Tecolote Creek project areas lie within the western-most area of the City. The Bell Creek project area abuts Venoco’s Ellwood Onshore Facility (Land Use: Open Space/Active Recreation, Zoning: Recreation) and Sandpiper Golf Course (Land Use: Open Space/Active Recreation, Zoning: Recreation) to the east and the Bacara Resort and Spa (Land Use: Visitor Serving Commercial, Zoning: Resort/Visitor Serving Commercial) to the west. The Tecolote Creek project area runs through the Bacara Resort and Spa property. The project site is subject to the goals, policies, and objectives of the City’s General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan as well as Article II of the City of Goleta Municipal Code (the Coastal Zoning Ordinance). Development Plan (DP) approval by the City is required for the proposed project in accordance with Article II. However, since the City does not have a certified Local Coastal Plan, and if the DP is approved by the City, the applicant must submit an application to California Coastal Commission (CCC) for a Coastal Development Permit (CDP). If a CDP is granted by the CCC, the applicant must ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 47

then submit a follow up Land Use Permit (clearance) application to the City for DP effectuation and condition compliance.

Mineral Resources

No known mineral resources have been identified on the project site nor would the proposed pipeline removal project result in the loss of a locally important mineral resource recovery site.

Noise

Both the Bell and Tecolote project areas lie within the 60dB Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) noise exposure contour within the City. Noise exposure contours map points of equal average noise levels in the same way that topographic contours map points of equal elevation. The primary sources of noise in the area are vehicular traffic along U.S. Highway 101 and Hollister Avenue; train traffic on the Union Pacific railroad, aircraft operations at the Santa Barbara Municipal Airport, and to a lesser extent the waves of the Pacific Ocean. The Bell Creek project area is also subjected to the noise emitted from the Ellwood Onshore Facility immediately east of the creek. Sensitive noise receptors in the vicinity include the Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas (ESHAs) associated with the creek riparian corridors themselves as well as the nearby beach and shoreline ESHAs, the customers and employees of the Sandpiper Golf Course and the guests and employees of the Bacara resort.

Noise is defined as unwanted or objectionable sound. The measurement of sound takes into account three variables; 1) magnitude, 2) frequency, and 3) duration. Magnitude is the measure of a sound’s “loudness” and is expressed in decibels (dB) on a logarithmic scale. Decibel levels diminish (attenuate) as the distance from the noise source increases. For instance, the attenuation rate for a point noise source is 6dB every time the distance from the source is doubled. For linear sources such as Highway 101 or the railroad tracks, the attenuation is 3 dB for each doubling of distance from the source.

The frequency of a sound relates to the number of times per second the sound vibrates. One vibration/second equals one hertz (Hz). Normal human hearing can detect sounds ranging from 20 HZ to 20,000 Hz.

Duration is a measure of the time to which the noise receptor is exposed to the noise. Because noise levels in any given location fluctuate during the day, it is necessary to quantify the level of variation to accurately describe the noise environment. One of the best measures to describe the noise environment is the Community Noise Equivalent Level or CNEL. CNEL is a noise index that attempts to take into account differences in the intrusiveness of noise between daytime hours and nighttime hours. Specifically, CNEL weights average noise levels at different times of the day as follows:

Daytime—7 am to 7 pm Weighting Factor = 1 dB Evening—7 pm to 10 pm Weighting Factor = 5 dB Nighttime—10 pm to 7 am Weighting Factor = 10 dB

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 48

Population and Housing

The project areas are creeks located at the western-most area of the City. Bell Creek is abutted by the Ellwood Onshore Facility to the east and Bacara Resort and Spa to the west. Tecolote creek is entirely within the Bacara Resort and Spa property. The nearest residential areas to the project areas occur in a single family residential subdivision across (north of) U.S. Highway 101 in the County’s jurisdiction, the Winchester Commons development, also north of the 101, but in the City’s jurisdiction, and the Bluffs at Sandpiper development just east of Sandpiper Golf Course. The nearest school to the project site is the Ellwood Elementary school located just northeast of the Sandpiper Golf course.

Public Services

Police and fire protection services would be provided by the City of Goleta Police Department and Santa Barbara County Fire Department.

Recreation

According to the General Plan inventory of existing parks and open space, as of 2005, the City contains approximately 526 acres of parkland and open space areas available for recreational purposes. The 526 acres equates to approximately 17 acres of recreational area per 1,000 residents. The Sandpiper Golf Course and Venoco EOF sites are designated as recreation in both the GP/CLUP and Coastal Zoning Ordinance. The GP/CLUP designates the public parking lot and beach access on the Bacara property as Regional Open Space. Other designated open space sites nearby the project area include the Sperling Preserve and Santa Barbara Shores parks, located just east of the Sandpiper Golf Course. The City parking lot located on the nearby Sperling Preserve property is also designated for public beach/open space access.

Transportation and Traffic

Hollister Avenue near the bridge over Tecolote Creek consists of two vehicular traffic lanes separated by a center median, two bicycle lanes, and one pedestrian sidewalk. One vehicular traffic lane provides travel in the eastbound direction and the other lane provides for westbound travel. Each vehicular traffic lane measures 16 feet in width. The width of the center median varies from 16 feet on the eastern side of the bridge to three feet on the western side of the bridge. Each bicycle lane measures seven feet wide and the sidewalk measures five feet wide. The total length of the bridge is 172 feet.

The subject portion of Hollister Avenue was privately constructed by the Bacara in 1997 to provide site access following a subsequent building phase. While the portion of the road directly north of Bacara is privately owned by Bacara, the remainder of the road (the bridge over Bell Creek to Hollister Avenue) has a public road easement. As such, an encroachment permit is required to position a crane on Hollister Avenue for lifting support.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 49

Utilities and Service Systems

Sewage Disposal Temporary sanitary units will be provided by the applicant.

Water Supply The applicant will acquire water for flushing lines and dust mitigation from a private water purveyor.

Solid Waste The removed pipeline segments, residual pipeline liquids, and other project related waste streams will be transported to City approved facilities for proper recycling or disposal in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations. The closest local facilities will be used when available to minimize the costs and impacts from transportation/air emissions. ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 50

4.0 POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS CHECKLIST

The following checklist indicates the potential level of impact and is defined as follows:

Potentially Significant Impact: A fair argument can be made, based on the substantial evidence in the file, that an effect may be significant.

Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation: Incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from a Potentially Significant Impact to a Less Than Significant Impact.

Less Than Significant Impact: An impact is considered adverse but does not trigger a significance threshold.

No Impact: There is adequate support that the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to the subject project.

Reviewed Under Previous Document: The analysis contained in a previously adopted/certified environmental document addresses this issue adequately for use in the current case and is summarized in the discussion below. The discussion should include reference to the previous documents, a citation of the page(s) where the information is found, and identification of mitigation measures incorporated from the previous documents.

4.1 AESTHETICS/VISUAL RESOURCES 4.1.1 County Impact Discussion:

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document a. The obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public or the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open X to public view? b. Change to the visual character of an area? X c. Glare or night lighting which may affect adjoining areas? X d. Visually incompatible structures? X a-b. The project site located in Santa Barbara County is made of up a marine terrace, Eagle Canyon Ranch and Eagle Canyon Creek. These areas are primarily undeveloped. The project proposes removal of abandoned structures (pipes, pipe racks, etc.) and restoration of the area to its natural state which will enhance rather than degrade the visual resources of the project site.

Demolition activities may create short-term visual impacts due to heavy equipment operation and the possible trimming of vegetation to access the project sites. The project is located along the Highway 101 Scenic Corridor and demolition activities could temporarily compromise a significant visual resource. On Eagle Canyon Ranch, pipeline removal equipment would be visible at a distance (a minimum of 500 feet) by motorists on Highway 101. Additionally, a temporary scaffold will be built in the Eagle Canyon Creek work area, but will not likely be visible to the public. All of the proposed work is temporary with an estimate of 147 days for completion of the entire project.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 51

The proposed vegetation removal for each work area is described below.

Eagle Canyon Creek Work Area. Along the slopes of the Eagle Canyon Ranch and Dos Pueblos properties, a crane staging area will be established on the eastern bank of Eagle Canyon Creek. The area around this crane staging area will require trimming back of the existing vegetation and tree canopy. Some disturbance to existing vegetation in close proximity to the pipeline crossing adjacent to the creek banks may also be necessary. An opening may need to be created in the tree canopy to effectively use a crane in support of lifting operations. Vegetation/trees trimmed back in the Eagle Canyon Ranch work area would not be visually detected from any public viewshed and would not result in significant impacts to existing visual resources.

Marine Terrace Work Area. If necessary at the time of construction, vegetation trimming or removal will be limited to a 15-foot wide area paralleling the pipeline bundle. Vegetation trimming in an approximate 15-foot wide corridor along the pipeline bundle is not expected to result in significant adverse impacts to visual resources. Access to the pipeline bundle will be conducted from a mowed corridor that parallels the pipeline bundle directly south of the pipelines.

Threshold Summary

The proposed project is considered to be consistent with Local Coastal Plan policies 4-1 to 4-11 and Santa Barbara County Comprehensive Plan Scenic Highway Element since the construction equipment will only be located on site for a short period of time, the project does not involve the development of new structures, there will be no significant loss of vegetation, and all pipeline proposed to be abandoned in place is underground. Given the consistency with the Local Coastal Plan and the Scenic Highway Element and the temporary nature of the project, visual impacts are considered to be less than significant.

c. No night work is proposed; therefore, glare from lighting is not an issue.

d. No new structures are proposed therefore no visually incompatible structures would result from the proposed project.

4.1.2 City Impact Discussion

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document a. The obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public or the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open X to public view? b. Change to the visual character of an area? X c. Glare or night lighting which may affect adjoining areas? X d. Visually incompatible structures? X

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 52

Impact Discussion: a-b. The mouths of both creeks, the adjacent shoreline, the creeks themselves and the vegetation associated with their riparian corridors are all designated as scenic resources in the City’s General Plan. The nearby U.S. Highway 101 is designated as a scenic corridor in the General Plan.

A temporary staging area will be established west of Tecolote Creek and south of the bridge. Also, temporary access paths constructed of plywood planking with a width of up to six feet wide and 60 feet in length, temporary plastic fencing, and two elevated gangways fabricated across Tecolote Creek will be put in place for pipeline removal activities. Approximately 1,300 square feet of vegetation will be cleared, up to six non-native London Plane trees will be removed, and the cutting and selective limbing of up to 15 native willow trees will occur within the Tecolote Creek corridor. Such demolition activities and vegetation removal could temporarily compromise the Tecolote Creek scenic resource. Such impacts are considered potentially significant.

A crane and staging area will be positioned either east of, or on, the Hollister Avenue bridge at Tecolote Creek to support lifting operations. The staging area will be used to recover removed pieces of pipe and other equipment/materials, and will house a small waste disposal bin and two portable sanitary devices. The crane and staging area will be visible from the surrounding area and the U.S. Highway 101 and if the waste disposal bin is not properly enclosed, trash generated from the project could blow into nearby sensitive resource areas or offsite. Such temporary impacts are considered potentially significant.

The portion of the O-3 pipeline suspended over Bell Creek will be left in place for future decommissioning due to safety concerns as the active, high pressure gas, V-1 pipeline is in close proximity to this line (see the Hazardous Materials/Risk of Upset section for further analysis and mitigation). Leaving this portion of the line in place will continue the existing visual blight caused by the pipeline in the Bell Creek corridor, a GP/CLUP designated visual resource. However, since this pipeline is currently part of the existing environmental setting/baseline, leaving the pipeline temporarily in place will be adverse, but less than significant.

A 20 foot by 180 foot staging area will be located on the unpaved roadway located along the western boundary of the Ellwood Onshore Facility (EOF) delineated with flagging or construction fencing. The staging area will be used to stage a mini crane or backhoe, recover removed pieces of pipe and other equipment/materials, and will house a small waste disposal bin and two portable sanitary devices. If the waste disposal bin is not properly enclosed and emptied, trash generated from the project could blow into nearby sensitive resource areas or offsite. Such impacts are considered potentially significant. c. No night work is included in the application. The area where equipment will be stored will not be lit at night beyond the light provided by existing street lights. As such no impacts related to lighting will occur. d. No new structures are proposed therefore no visually incompatible structures would result from the proposed project. ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 53

Cumulative Impacts

The portion of the O-3 pipeline suspended over Bell Creek is scheduled and mitigated for future removal upon the decommissioning of the active, high pressure gas, V-1 pipeline in close proximity to this line (see the Hazardous Materials/Risk of Upset section for analysis and mitigation). As all other visual impacts will also be temporary as well, the project’s contribution to cumulative visual/aesthetic impacts would be considered less than significant.

Mitigation and Residual Impact:

Mitigation measures to address construction and employee trash, creek corridor revegetation, and the portion of the O-3 pipeline to be left in place are described under the discussion of Biological Resources and Hazardous Materials/Risk of Upset sections, respectively.

With implementation of the mitigation measures within Biological Resources and Hazardous Materials/Risk of Upset sections, residual project specific and project contributions to cumulative aesthetic impacts would be considered less than significant.

4.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES 4.2.1 County Impact Discussion:

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document a. Convert prime agricultural land to non-agricultural use, impair agricultural land productivity (whether prime or non- X prime) or conflict with agricultural preserve programs? b. An effect upon any unique or other farmland of State or X Local Importance? Impact Discussion: a-b. The project will not result in the conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural use, nor will it impair agricultural land productivity. None of the subject properties are in the Agricultural Preserve program. Any soil removed due to grading or digging activities to remove the pipeline and associated support structures would be replaced through a monitored cut-and-fill process. Additionally, pipeline segments that would be abandoned in place would not hinder agricultural activities.

The Makar/Dos Pueblos parcel is zoned Ag-II-100; however this property is not currently used for agricultural purposes. The Eagle Canyon Ranch property contains farmland of state-wide importance but is zoned RR-40, Rural Residential, and is not used for farming purposes.

Mitigation and Residual Impact: The project will not result in impacts to agricultural land or uses. The project will result in removal of facilities that could be impediments to agricultural land productivity. No mitigation is necessary. ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 54

4.2.2 City Impact Discussion:

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document c. Convert prime agricultural land to non-agricultural use, impair agricultural land productivity (whether prime or non- X prime) or conflict with agricultural preserve programs? d. An effect upon any unique or other farmland of State or X Local Importance? Impact Discussion: a-b. Neither the Tecolote or Bell Creek work areas are designated or zoned Agriculture by the City’s General Plan or Coastal Zoning Ordinance. Also, neither work area is currently used for agriculture purposes or included in any agricultural preserve programs. However, despite the wetland/creek setting of the Bell Creek corridor, it is designated as Grazing Land on the Santa Barbara County Important Farmland Map (Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection, 2007). Due to the Bell Creek project area’s wetland characteristics and urban surroundings, the likelihood of using this area as grazing land use is not feasible. Furthermore, the proposed project would actually improve the area by removing potentially hazardous inactive gas pipelines that could impact soils in the area. As such, no impacts to agricultural resources are expected to occur with project implementation.

Cumulative Impacts

The proposed project would not contribute to any cumulative impact on agricultural resources within the City of Goleta.

Mitigation and Residual Impact: The project will not result in impacts to agricultural land or uses. The project will result in removal of facilities that could be impediments to agricultural land productivity. No mitigation is necessary.

4.3 AIR QUALITY 4.3.1 County Impact Discussion:

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document a. The violation of any ambient air quality standard, a substantial contribution to an existing or projected air quality violation including CO hotspots, or exposure of X sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations (emissions from direct, indirect, mobile and stationary sources)? b. The creation of objectionable smoke, ash or odors? X c. Extensive dust generation? X

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 55

Impact Discussion: a. Construction emissions from the proposed project would result from transportation of equipment and workers to and from the site and the use of construction equipment such as a crane and trucks on-site for site preparation for access and staging, i.e. vegetation removal, loading and transportation of pipe and waste for off-site disposal, grading to remove segments of buried pipe from Eagle Canyon Ranch and the creek sides, and restoration and revegetation activities following project completion.

Project completion from all four sites- Bell Creek, Tecolote Creek, Eagle Canyon Creek and Eagle Canyon Ranch uplands- is expected to take approximately twenty weeks or 147 days. Estimates of potential construction emissions are summarized in Table 4 and Table 5 below for total and daily expected emissions. The calculations are based on the equipment used, usage factors for the equipment, and emissions factors for each of following 5 pollutants: nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), reactive organic compounds (ROC), sulfur oxides (SOx), and suspended particulate matter of 10 microns or less in size (PM10).

Table 4 Estimated Total Project Emissions

Estimated Maximum Emissions (lb.) PM Equipment NOx ROC CO SOx PM 10 150 Ton Crane 55.4 6.0 16.0 5.0 10.4 5.0 Backhoe 39.6 4.4 11.4 3.6 7.6 3.6 A-Frame Truck 123.4 13.4 35.6 11.2 23.2 11.2 Concrete Truck 22.2 1.2 5.2 1.8 4.4 2.0

Dump Trucks travel within SBC 315.9 15.9 73.5 26.4 10.3 9.9

Dump Trucks travel outside of SBC 2858.8 142.6 664.8 239.4 280.2 269.0 Total lbs. 3084.5 160.4 723.4 259.1 301.9 289.8 Total tons 1.54 0.08 0.36 0.13 0.15 0.14

Table 5 Estimated Daily Project Emissions

Estimated Daily Emissions (lb.) PM Equipment NOx ROC CO SOx PM 10 150 Ton Crane 1.1 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 Backhoe 0.8 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 A-Frame Truck 2.5 0.3 0.7 0.2 0.2 0.2 Concrete Truck 0.4 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0

Dump Trucks travel within SBC 4.2 0.2 1.0 0.4 0.4 0.4

Dump Trucks travel outside of SBC 114.4 5.7 26.6 9.6 11.2 10.8 Daily Total lbs. 123.4 6.4 28.9 10.4 12.1 11.6

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 56

The total emissions from the project, estimated in Table 4, do not exceed the threshold of 25 tons per year for any of the pollutants listed. Therefore the project would not contribute substantially toward exceedances of standards for ozone.

The County of Santa Barbara is currently in attainment for CO, therefore there are no adopted thresholds of significance for CO. CO hotspots are mainly a concern at major intersections. The project’s trucks and other mobile equipment would not regularly pass through major intersections,

No sensitive receptors (such as schools, houses, etc) are located within a quarter mile of the project area. b. The pipeline removal is not anticipated to create objectionable smoke, ash, or odors, nor would there be long-term operational emissions associated with the project as no new structures are proposed. c. Dust control mitigation measures will be incorporated into the field work as described below. Traffic volume should be relatively light and not move fast enough to kick up significant dust from the hard-packed surface of the road. To keep dust levels down on the dirt access road within the upland project area, the roadways will be hosed down daily with water from a water truck.

Mitigation and Residual Impact: Dust control measures for all construction activities are required as a standard condition of all permits. The following measures are expected to further reduce potential air quality impacts.

Applicant proposed mitigation measures include:

AQ-1) Project-related dust will be kept to a minimum through the following dust control measures: • Water trucks will be used as necessary during vegetation removal; mowing, grading, earth moving, excavation, or transportation of cut and fill materials to prevent dust from leaving the site. • During pipeline removal work on Eagle Canyon Ranch, water trucks will be used to hose down the dirt access road daily and keep areas of traffic damp to prevent dust from leaving the site. AQ-2) The pipeline removal contractor will designate a person to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering as necessary, to prevent transport of dust off- site.

AQ-3) The contractor will use, whenever feasible: • heavy-duty diesel powered construction equipment manufactured after 1996 (with federally mandated “clean” diesel engines); • catalytic converters on gasoline-powered equipment or diesel catalytic converters if available; • electric equipment instead of diesel powered equipment; ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 57

• minimum practical engine size of construction equipment; • smallest practical number of simultaneously operating construction equipment.

AQ-4) Construction equipment will be maintained consistent with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment will be checked and tuned to ensure efficient operation.

The proposed mitigation incorporates County standard conditions. No further mitigation measures are required for impacts to air quality, as no residual impact is anticipated.

Greenhouse Gases

Background Greenhouse gases (GHGs) include water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and other compounds. Combustion of fossil fuels constitutes the primary source of GHGs. GHGs accumulate in the atmosphere, where these gases trap heat near the Earth’s surface by absorbing infrared radiation. This effect causes global warming and climate change, with adverse impacts on humans and the environment. Potential effects include reduced water supplies in some areas, ecological changes that threaten some species, reduced agricultural productivity in some areas, increased coastal flooding and other effects.

Methodology The methodology to address Global Climate Change in CEQA documents is evolving. Until appropriate regulatory entities develop CEQA thresholds for GHGs, only relatively large GHG emitters will be considered to have cumulatively significant effects on the environment. Projects that are estimated to emit the equivalent of 25,000 metric tons of CO2 emissions from direct and indirect, long-term operational sources would be considered to have a cumulatively significant impact on greenhouse gas emissions. Projects below these levels remain unclassifiable until more evidence becomes available.

4.3.2 City Impact Discussion:

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document a. The violation of any ambient air quality standard, a substantial contribution to an existing or projected air quality violation including CO hotspots, or exposure of X sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations (emissions from direct, indirect, mobile and stationary sources)? b. The creation of objectionable smoke, ash or odors? X c. Extensive dust generation? X

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 58

Impact Discussion: a, c The primary sources of criteria pollutant emissions for the project would result from the use of internal combustion engines during construction activities. Specifically, conventional construction equipment such as cranes, excavators, backhoes, loaders, air compressors, welders, and generators will be utilized to execute the project. Additional sources of air pollutant emissions include emissions from on-road motor vehicles used to transport materials and personnel to and from the project areas as well as dust generated during grading activities.

A tabulation of assumptions, references, and calculations for the Project emission estimates are provided in Appendix A of the Project’s September 2007 work plan (available at City and County offices). Table 6 details estimated cut quantities for project grading (Alan Emslie, Padre and Associates, 2009). The fill volumes will be the same as the cuts as the applicant will essentially just dig holes and then fill the same holes back to the same original grade.

The City’s Environmental Thresholds & Guidelines Manual has identified a long term quantitative emission threshold of significance of 25 pounds/day (PPD) for ozone precursors nitrogen oxides (NOx) and reactive organic gases (ROGs). In addition, the City’s thresholds establish criteria for conducting carbon monoxide (CO) emission modeling. However, the Santa Barbara County APCD has indicated that due to the relatively low background ambient CO levels in Santa Barbara County, localized CO impacts associated with traffic at congested intersections are not expected to exceed the CO health-related air quality standards. As a result, “hotspot” analyses are no longer required. (Vijaya Jammalamadaka, SBCAPCD, 08/05/08)

Short term thresholds for NOx and ROG have not been established by the City, and data from the County of Santa Barbara indicates these types of emissions account for only 6% percent of total NOx and ROG. Therefore, project generated construction emissions are considered less than significant.

However, due to the fact that Santa Barbara County is not in compliance with State standards for airborne particulate matter (PM10), construction generated fugitive dust (50% of total dust) is subject to the City’s standard dust mitigation requirements. As such, project dust generation from construction activities is considered a potentially significant impact. ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 59

Note total of 70 cubic yards of cut and fill for the project. original grade. As such, to calculat : Only cut quantities are shown in this table as the applican Table 6 Preliminary Earthwork (Cut only) Quantities e cut and fill quantities, the 35 cubic yard cut number would have to be doubled, which eq t will essentially just dig holes and then fill the same holes ba

uals a ck to the

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 60

Furthermore, the project will involve demolition of pipelines that may release regulated friable asbestos. Friable asbestos crumbles into a dust of microscopic fibers that can remain in the air for long periods of time. If inhaled, they pose a serious heath threat as asbestos fibers can become permanently lodged in body tissues. Since there is no known safe level of exposure, all asbestos exposure should be avoided. This is particularly important when removing asbestos insulation. As a result of the proposed grading, and the air basin’s current non-attainment of State PM10 standards, any project generated fugitive dust, and potential release of asbestos fibers would be considered to pose a potentially significant air quality impacts. b. The pipeline removal is not anticipated to create objectionable smoke, ash, or odors, nor would there be long-term operational emissions associated with the project as no new structures are proposed.

Cumulative Impacts

There will be no operational emissions beyond the removal of the pipelines, however, the project’s construction contribution to cumulative PM10 emissions would be considered potentially significant as a result of the area’s current non-attainment status of the State’s PM10 standard.

There are a number of modeling tools that can be used to estimate GHG emissions associated with various project types. The most consistently used model for estimating a project’s direct impacts is the Urban Emissions Model (URBEMIS). URBEMIS is designed to model emissions associated with development of urban land uses and attempts to summarize criteria air pollutants and CO2 emissions that would occur during construction and operation of new development. This model is publicly available and widely used by CEQA practitioners and air districts, including the CARB. Use of this model would ensure consistency statewide in how CO2 emissions are modeled and reported from various project types (CAPCOA, 2008).

The URBEMIS model does not contain emission factors for GHGs other than CO2, except for methane from mobile sources, which is converted to CO2e. This may not be a major problem since CO2 is the most important GHG from land development projects (CAPCOA, 2008). It also constitutes approximately 84 percent of all GHG emissions in California and is considered a “reference gas” for relating the amount of heat absorbed to the level of GHGs emitted.

The URBEMIS model also does not calculate GHGs associated with consumption of energy produced offsite (indirect impacts) and may in some instances, result in the double counting of “linked” trips (i.e., the concept that a residential trip and a commercial trip are quite possibly the same trip, resulting in “double-counting”). However, as noted above, this model is still considered appropriate. Therefore, the City’s methodology for quantifying GHG emissions relies upon the URBEMIS 2007 9.2.4 air quality modeling software, which is the most current version available.

Project Short-term Construction Emissions. Project construction activities for the pipeline removal project, especially those associated with equipment operations for grading, would contribute to cumulative GHGs and global climate change. Based on construction model runs conducted using the URBEMIS 2007 9.2.4 air quality modeling software for the 2008 unmitigated condition, anticipated that project construction generated CO2 emission levels would ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 61

be 710.18 metric tons (inclusive of personnel transport for all project sites including those outside of the City)

Project Operational Emissions. Direct operational and indirect long-term emissions CO2 emissions would not occur as a result of project implementation is the project is a temporary, construction project.

Project Significance. The project’s short-term construction and long-term operational GHG emissions would be a small percentage of California’s GHG emissions, which were estimated at 492 million metric tons of CO2e in 2004 (California Energy Commission, 2006). The project’s emissions are also substantially less than any of the previously noted threshold values identified at the state level (CARB, 2008; CAPCOA, 2008). The project would also not conflict with any plan, policy, or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions (OPR, Draft CEQA Amendments, 2009) as a result of identified required and recommended mitigation measures that would be applied to the project permit as conditions of approval (see below). Therefore, impacts associated with climate change/greenhouse gases are considered less than significant.

Mitigation and Residual Impact: CITY AQ-1) If the construction site is graded and left undeveloped for over four weeks, the applicant shall employ the following methods immediately to inhibit dust generation:

a) Seeding and watering to revegetate graded areas; and/or b) Spreading of soil binders; and/or c) Any other methods deemed appropriate by City staff.

Plan Requirements & Timing: These requirements shall be noted on all plans submitted for issuance of any LUP for the project. Monitoring: City staff shall perform periodic site inspections to verify compliance.

CITY AQ-2) Dust generated by construction activities shall be kept to a minimum with a goal of retaining dust on the site. The following dust control measures listed below shall be implemented by the contractor/builder:

a) During clearing, grading, earth moving, excavation, or transportation of cut or fill materials, water trucks or sprinkler systems are to be used to prevent dust from leaving the site and to create a crust after each day's activities cease. b) During construction, water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to keep all areas of vehicle movement damp enough to prevent dust from leaving the site. At a minimum, this would include wetting down such areas in the later morning and after work is completed for the day and whenever wind exceeds 15 miles per hour. c) Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation.

The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering as necessary to prevent transport of dust off-site. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. Plan Requirements & Timing: All of the aforementioned requirements shall be noted on all plans ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 62

submitted for issuance of any LUP for the project. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to City staff and the APCD and shall be posted in three locations along the project site’s perimeter for the duration of grading and construction activities. Monitoring: City staff shall perform periodic site inspections to verify compliance as well as contact the designated monitor as necessary to ensure compliance with dust control measures.

CITY AQ-3) During all project grading and hauling, construction contracts must specify that construction contractors shall adhere to the requirements listed below to reduce emissions of ozone precursors and particulate emissions from diesel exhaust:

a. All portable diesel-powered construction equipment shall be registered with the state’s portable equipment registration program OR shall obtain an APCD permit. b. Diesel powered equipment should be replaced by electric equipment whenever feasible. c. Diesel construction equipment meeting the California Air Resources Board (CARB) Tier 1 emission standards for off-road heavy-duty diesel engines shall be used. Equipment meeting CARB Tier 2 or higher emission standards should be used to the maximum extent feasible. d. Other diesel construction equipment, which does not meet CARB standards, shall be equipped with two to four degree engine timing retard or pre-combustion chamber engines. Diesel catalytic converters, diesel oxidation catalysts and diesel particulate filters as certified and/or verified by EPA or California shall be installed. e. Catalytic converters shall be installed on gasoline-powered equipment, if feasible. f. All construction equipment shall be maintained in tune per the manufacturer’s specifications. g. The engine size of construction equipment shall be the minimum practical size. h. The number of construction equipment operating simultaneously shall be minimized through efficient management practices to ensure that the smallest practical number is operating at any one time. i. Construction worker trips shall be minimized by requiring carpooling and by providing for lunch onsite.

Plan Requirements & Timing: The construction emission requirements shall be printed all plans submitted for any LUP, building, or grading permits. Monitoring: City staff shall verify compliance with requirements for printing the aforementioned construction emission requirements on all plans submitted for any LUP, building, or grading permits. APCD inspectors shall verify compliance in the field.

CITY AQ-4) Idling of diesel trucks during loading and unloading shall be limited to a maximum of five (5) minutes. In addition, drivers of diesel trucks shall not use diesel-fueled auxiliary power units for more than five (5) minutes to power a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on the vehicle equipped with a sleeper berth, at any location. Plan Requirements & Timing: The aforementioned restrictions of diesel truck idling shall be printed on all plans submitted for any LUP, building, or grading permits. Monitoring: City staff shall monitor in the field for compliance.

CITY AQ-5) Prior to the demolition or removal of any pipeline segment, the applicant shall complete and submit an APCD Asbestos Demolition and Renovation Compliance Checklist. Plan ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 63

Requirements & Timing: The aforementioned permit requirement shall be noted on all plans submitted for issuance of any LUP for the project. At least ten (10) working days prior to commencing any construction activities, the applicant shall submit the aforementioned permit application to the APCD. Monitoring: City staff shall verify compliance with requirements for printing the aforementioned APCD permit requirements on all plans submitted for any building or grading permits. APCD inspectors shall verify compliance in the field.

With implementation of the above mitigation measures, residual project specific as well as project contributions to cumulative air quality impacts involving ROGs, NOx and PM10 would be considered less than significant. Project contributions to GHG emissions would be reduced through implementation of the recommended mitigation measures noted above.

4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 4.4.1 County Impact Discussion:

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document Flora a. A loss or disturbance to a unique, rare or threatened plant X community? b. A reduction in the numbers or restriction in the range of any X unique, rare or threatened species of plants? c. A reduction in the extent, diversity, or quality of native vegetation (including brush removal for fire prevention and X flood control improvements)? d. An impact on non-native vegetation whether naturalized or X horticultural if of habitat value? e. The loss of healthy native specimen trees? X f. Introduction of herbicides, pesticides, animal life, human

habitation, non-native plants or other factors that would X change or hamper the existing habitat? Fauna g. A reduction in the numbers, a restriction in the range, or an impact to the critical habitat of any unique, rare, threatened X or endangered species of animals? h. A reduction in the diversity or numbers of animals onsite (including mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish or X invertebrates)? i. A deterioration of existing fish or wildlife habitat (for X foraging, breeding, roosting, nesting, etc.)? j. Introduction of barriers to movement of any resident or X migratory fish or wildlife species? k. Introduction of any factors (light, fencing, noise, human presence and/or domestic animals) which could hinder the X normal activities of wildlife?

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 64

Impact Discussion:

Sensitive Habitats and Special Status Species

Native Grassland Habitat

The Santa Barbara County Coastal Plan considers native grassland to be an “Environmentally Sensitive Habitat.” None of the native perennial grass species present in the upland areas of Eagle Canyon Ranch and the Makar property are species of concern or listed by the California Native Plant Society, California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service as threatened or endangered. However, native grasslands as a plant community are considered “very threatened” by the CDFG CNDDB and are thus considered sensitive for purposes of this impact analysis.

The only locations where native grasslands were identified during the late 2006/early 2007 botanical survey were on the Marine Terrace portion of the Project Site. A small patch of native grassland is located within the “West of Eagle Canyon Creek Work Area” between the western termination of the Pipeline Bundle and the secondary staging area. A second, larger patch of native grassland (approximately 0.4 acres) occurs in the “Central Work Area” east of Eagle Canyon Creek. The northernmost extent of the larger patch occurring within the Central Work Area is located approximately 30 feet south of the Pipeline Bundle. It is anticipated that disturbances to this patch of native grassland can be avoided during Project execution. To ensure that it is avoided, it will be resurveyed and the perimeter flagged by a qualified biologist no more than 30 days prior to initiating construction. The flagging will provide a visual reference of the resource to those working onsite and all personnel will be instructed to stay outside of the flagged area. This requirement will be included in a worker’s environmental training and awareness program conducted prior to initiating construction activities and will be strictly enforced by a qualified biologist who will be onsite during all construction activities.

The small patch of native grassland located between the western termination of the Pipeline Bundle and the secondary staging area may not feasibly be avoided during Project execution as it is located within a corridor required for equipment access. To minimize disturbances to this patch of native grassland, cover plates, planking or similar will be placed over the grasses to allow equipment and personnel to pass over the grasses without destroying them. The width, length, and time the cover plates/planking is present will be minimized to the maximum extent feasible. It is currently anticipated that cover plates/planking will be placed along a 15-foot wide corridor that extends 50 feet from the established access road north of the secondary staging area to the northern extent of the native grassland patch. This would temporarily disturb 750 square feet of native grassland. The placement of cover plates/planking will be completed in consultation with the onsite biologist. After the cover plates/planking is removed, it is expected that the disturbed grasses will naturally rebound and will not require supplemental restoration. Equipment used to remove the wooden pole located directly northwest of this patch of native grassland will either operate from the cover plates/planking or outside the limits of the native grassland habitat. A post construction survey of native grasslands avoided through use of the cover plates to ensure that the method was a success.

By implementing the above avoidance and minimization measures (as well as the best management practices listed in the mitigation section), significant impacts to sensitive native grassland habitat are not expected to occur. ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 65

Venturan Coastal Sage Scrub Habitat

Venturan coastal sage scrub covers significant portions of the Marine Terrace, dominating the marine terrace in many areas, along with associated ravines and slopes. There are also some smaller areas of Venturan coastal sage scrub located in the Bell Creek Work. An approximately 15-foot wide corridor of Venturan coastal sage scrub habitat paralleling the Pipeline Bundle along the northern boundary of Parcel 5 will be disturbed during pipeline removal operations on the Marine Terrace. In addition, a 15-foot corridor on both sides of the Pipeline Bundle that follows a north-south alignment may also be disturbed. Depending on conditions at the time of Project execution, this vegetation may be trimmed back to provide equipment access to the work area, promote worker safety, and minimize the risk of fire during construction.

There are several pipeline segments that traverse ravines and slopes on the Marine Terrace. If possible, these pipelines will be removed by cutting the pipes at the top and bottom of the slopes and using an excavator or equivalent to pull the pipes up the hill. As the pipes are pulled up the hill they will be cut into approximately 20 foot segments and transferred to the primary staging area. Utilizing this methodology will minimize disturbances to Venturan coastal sage scrub habitat on the slopes. However, if this methodology can not feasibly be implemented or is unsuccessful at removing the subject pipelines, they will be cut into 20 foot segments on the hillsides and removed with a crane. If the pipelines must be cut on the hillsides and removed by crane, additional disturbances to Venturan coastal sage scrub habitat will occur. If necessary, up to a 15-foot wide corridor in the Venturan coastal sage scrub will be trimmed back to provide personnel access for pipeline cutting activities.

Regardless of the methodology used to remove pipelines on the Marine Terrace, there will be some disturbances to Venturan coastal sage scrub habitat from vegetation trimming activities, equipment access and operation, and pipeline removal activities. Table 5 below estimates the potential disturbances to Venturan coastal sage scrub habitat. These estimates are for the worst- case scenario removal activities.

Table 7 Estimated Maximum Disturbance to Venturan Coastal Sage Scrub

Marine Terrace Work Area Area of Disturbance (acres) West of Eagle Canyon Creek Area 0.076 Central Work Area 0.496 Eastern Work Area 0.471 Total 1.043

The Venturan coastal sage scrub habitat located within the Bell Creek work area will largely be avoided by restricting a majority of work activities to the unpaved access road paralleling the western boundary of the Venoco EOF. Some minor disturbances may result from excavation activities at pipe tap location #22 and removal of the pump skid and piping leading into the vault box as well as for equipment access required to remove the hydrogen sulfide panel. An estimated maximum disturbance of 140 square feet of Venturan coastal sage scrub located at the southern termination of the O-3 pipeline could result from Project execution. The Venturan coastal sage scrub located between the access roadway and the hydrogen sulfide alarm panel is highly disturbed. It is expected that the backhoe, small crane, or boom truck used to lift and remove the ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 66

hydrogen sulfide alarm panel will not result in significant impacts to the disturbed Venturan coastal sage scrub habitat.

If feasible, pipelines traversing hillsides or slopes on the Marine Terrace will be removed by cutting the pipes at the top and bottom of the slopes and using an excavator or equivalent to pull the pipes up the hill. This will minimize the need to trim back Venturan coastal sage scrub habitat to access and remove the pipes. Areas of disturbed Venturan coastal sage scrub habitat that are removed or damaged beyond the ability to recover as a result of the Project will be restored in accordance with a Site Restoration Plan that will be prepared by Atlantic Richfield and approved by the County of Santa Barbara, the City of Goleta, and other agencies as appropriate, prior to initiating construction activities. In addition, the best management practices listed in the mitigation section will be implemented throughout construction activities. By implementing theses measures, significant impacts to sensitive Venturan coastal sage scrub habitat are not expected to occur.

Coast Live Oak Woodland Habitat

No coast live oak woodland habitat was identified in the Marine Terrace Work Area. An area of coast live oak woodland habitat was identified west of Tecolote Creek and south of Hollister Avenue. The coast live oak woodland habitat identified in this area is located outside of the work area limits and will not be disturbed during pipeline removal activities. An area of coast live oak woodland habitat was identified east of Bell Creek and west of the access road paralleling the western boundary of the Venoco EOF. The coast live oak woodland habitat identified in this area is primarily located outside of the work area limits and will not be disturbed during construction. However, the hydrogen sulfide alarm panel that will be removed is located within the drip line of an oak tree that is declining in health and which has lost considerable foliage and branches. To minimize additional impacts to this oak tree, any heavy equipment used to remove the hydrogen sulfide panel will be positioned a minimum of five feet beyond the drip line and will lift and pull the panel away from the trunk of the tree towards the access roadway.

There are also several oak tree saplings nearby. To ensure that these saplings are avoided, the area will be resurveyed and each sapling will be flagged by a qualified biologist no more than 30 days prior to initiating construction. The flagging will provide a visual reference of the resource to those working onsite and all personnel will be instructed to stay outside of the flagged area. If equally as effective, construction fencing may be used to delineate exclusion areas rather than flagging individual saplings. This requirement will be included in a worker’s environmental training and awareness program conducted prior to initiating construction activities and will be strictly enforced by a qualified biologist who will be onsite during all construction activities. With implementation of the above measures, no significant impacts are expected to occur to oak woodland habitat.

Riparian Habitats

As both riparian and wetland habitats have experienced significant losses throughout California (up to 96% reported in some instances), all riparian and wetland habitat types are considered to be of concern. This includes the southern willow riparian scrub, coastal and valley freshwater marsh, and coastal brackish marsh habitats identified with the botanical survey area. Potential impacts to each riparian habitat are discussed below. The distribution of Southern willow scrub and Southern mixed riparian forest habitat in the Marine Terrace work area is limited to an area ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 67

south of the access road and west of the firewater storage tank in the Eastern work area. It is anticipated that this area of Southern willow scrub and Southern mixed riparian forest habitat can be avoid during Project execution. To ensure that it is avoided, it will be resurveyed and the perimeter flagged by a qualified biologist no more than 30 days prior to initiating construction. The flagging will provide a visual reference of the resource to those working onsite and all personnel will be instructed to stay outside of the flagged area. This requirement will be included in a worker’s environmental training and awareness program conducted prior to initiating construction activities and will be strictly enforced by a qualified biologist who will be onsite during all construction activities. In the event that this area can not be avoided altogether and minor disturbances result from excavation and removal of the W-2 and W-3 Pipelines, the disturbed area will be restored in accordance with a Site Restoration Plan that will be prepared by Atlantic Richfield and approved by the County of Santa Barbara and other regulatory agencies as appropriate.

Southern willow scrub and Southern mixed riparian forest habitat lines the banks of Eagle Canyon Creek. The pipelines crossing Eagle Canyon Creek will be cut on both sides in areas dominated by nonnative plantation and windbreak habitat (dominated by eucalyptus trees). Minor tree trimming will be required in this area to provide an opening for a crane to lift the pipeline off the support structure and lowered to the ground adjacent to the temporary scaffold. A temporary scaffold will be built in this area to be used for pipeline tapping and removal of the pipe supports. Approximately 6 to 10 eucalyptus trees will need to be cut down to grade in the vicinity of the pipe supports in order to remove the pipelines. A bulldozer or equivalent equipment will be used to pull the pipelines out of the creek area to the upper areas on the eastern and western banks. Minor disturbances to surrounding vegetation are expected, but no significant impacts to Southern Willow Scrub or Southern mixed riparian forest habitat.

Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh

The location of coastal and valley freshwater marsh habitat in the Eagle Canyon Work Area is located outside the proposed work area and is not expected to be impacted during Project execution. No impact is anticipated.

Santa Barbara honeysuckle

The individuals of Santa Barbara honeysuckle identified during the botanical survey north of the Ellwood Pier in the Marine Terrace and west of Bell Creek are not in a location that will be disturbed by proposed Project activities. No impacts are anticipated.

Loss of Healthy Native Specimen Trees

Some trees in the Eagle Canyon Creek and Tecolote Creek work areas may be trimmed back to allow access for pipeline removal activities. Approximately six non-native London plane trees will be removed at Tecolote Creek for the staging area and up to 10 eucalyptus trees will be cut to facilitate equipment access and mobility at Eagle Canyon Creek. If impacts to native trees as a result of trimming activities are beyond that which the trees will naturally recover they will be restored in accordance with the Site Restoration plan that will be prepared in support of the Project.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 68

Wildlife

Work in the creek crossing areas will occur during late summer/early fall when creek flow is at its lowest levels. Workers will have to enter the Eagle Canyon Creek area to build a temporary scaffold to tap and drain the pipelines and to remove the pipe support structures, but the work will be conducted in late summer/early fall when the creek is historically dry to reduce potential impacts to the tidewater goby, the California red legged frog, and southern steelhead trout (if present), to the maximum extent possible. Birds or other wildlife activities or movements could be temporarily altered by the human activity. For example, increased sedimentation could adversely affect spawning of the tidewater goby as well as the southern steelhead trout. However, the impacts would be minimal if the proposed mitigation measures are followed.

Tidewater Goby

For the tidewater goby, the most sensitive time for work to occur in these drainages would be during migration and spawning in the peak months of April through June (Moyle et. al 1995). Since work will occur during late summer/early fall outside the peak spawning season and when the creek flow is at its lowest levels, it will minimize the potential impacts that could occur to the tidewater goby. In addition, measures to prevent sedimentation will be employed that will help protect their habitat (BIO – 5 and BIO -15).

Southern Steelhead Trout

The Project is not anticipated to impact steelhead trout as the construction will occur during late summer/ early fall, outside its spawning period, will be conducted during the low flow or dry season, and will avoid and minimize in-water activities if water is present (see Mitigation Measures).

California Red-legged Frog

California red-legged frogs were observed with Eagle Canyon and Tecolote Creeks during the nighttime survey conducted in October 2006 for purposes of this Project and have been observed in Tecolote Creek on subsequent occasions. Although not observed in Bell Creek during this survey, they have been observed in the recent past and are assumed to inhabit Bell Creek. With construction taking place during the lowest creek flow levels, the potential impacts on the red- legged frog are expected to be minimal. No activities are proposed to occur within Bell Creek. A mini excavator will be operated on the banks of Eagle Canyon and Tecolote Creeks. Specific measures to minimize potential impacts to sensitive wildlife species (including California red- legged frogs) as a result of work in Tecolote Creek have been incorporated into the work plan. Please refer to the mitigation and residual impacts section for details on the impact avoidance and minimization measures that will be implemented (BIO–5, BIO-13, BIO–15, BIO–16 and BIO–20).

Globose and Sandy Beach Tiger Beetles

Although the CNDDB (2003) states that the sandy beach tiger beetle and globose dune beetle may occur in the area, these species’ habitats are not located within the project areas and no impact is expected to occur.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 69

Monarch Butterfly

Approximately 6 to 10 eucalyptus trees will be cut down in the vicinity of Eagle Canyon Creek to allow equipment access and mobility for pipeline removal. This area has not been documented as a significant monarch wintering site. The removal of over wintering eucalyptus trees is not anticipated during the construction at the project sites. No potential impact is expected to occur to the monarch butterfly.

White-tailed Kite

Although the kite has been present in the Project area, no nests were observed in the immediate vicinity of the subject pipelines. Project activities will require trimming back trees in the Tecolote Creek and Eagle Canyon Creek work areas. Significant removal of trees is not anticipated. Surveys for nesting birds, in particular nesting raptors, will be conducted in the early spring (February/March) prior to Project implementation to verify the presence or absence of nesting activity. Nest sites for this species are protected under California Fish and Game code and the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The breeding season is generally considered from February 1 through August 15 and a 300-500 foot buffer is recommended by CDFG around all active nests during this time. The appropriate distance may be determined by a qualified ornithologist based on the species, the nesting status, and the specific activity proposed in the area, but must be established prevent disturbance of the nest. If an active raptor nest is found at the time of construction, a construction buffer of 500 feet will be maintained until August 15th or until the young have fledged, or unless modified by the ornithologist with approval of the County and the City. With implementation of the above survey and adherence to the buffer area, if found, no adverse impact to the white-tailed kite or other raptors are anticipated to occur due to this project.

Mitigation and Residual Impact:

General environmental protection measures will be implemented for the protection of vegetation and wildlife, air and water quality. As implemented, none of the potential impacts are anticipated to be significant. However, to ensure that impacts are minimal and would remain insignificant under unusual or unexpected weather conditions, take avoidance and minimization and general mitigation measures will be implemented. Consultation with the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USF&W), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries Service), and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) will be conducted to obtain the required permits or authorizations to compete this work with minimal impacts. General environment protection measures that benefit all species include the following:

Applicant-proposed mitigation measures:

BIO-1) To ensure the implementation of the mitigation and take-avoidance measures, prior to the initiation of the project, an employee environmental awareness and mitigation monitoring plan shall be developed. This plan shall be used to train employees and contractors relative to the environmental protection measures of the projects. The Atlantic Richfield project team shall ensure that the plan is followed during field work and all members shall have authority to stop work if appropriate measures are not being implemented. A final report shall also be prepared ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 70

detailing the implementation and efficacy of the mitigation and take avoidance measures. This report shall be submitted to all interested agencies involved in the projects.

BIO-2) Atlantic Richfield shall contact the Energy Division prior to commencement of construction to schedule a pre-construction meeting at the project site. The pre-construction meeting shall be attended by the permittee and/or its agent, key construction personnel, County Environmental Quality Assurance Program (EQAP) monitor and other pertinent agency representatives.

BIO-3) Preconstruction surveys will be conducted by a P&D-qualified biologist no more than 30 days prior to initiation of the projects and compared to the original survey. During this time, areas to be protected and cordoned off will be flagged to alert equipment operators of areas to be protected. This shall include any plant habitat or locations of plant and wildlife species of concern. All personnel and equipment shall be directed to remain within the surveyed project areas. All equipment and vehicles shall remain on existing roadways or trails with the exception of special access areas. The preconstruction survey shall be submitted to Santa Barbara County Planning and Development and CDFG prior to removal activities.

BIO-4) If work is proposed during the breeding season (February 1 – August 15), surveys for nesting birds, in particular nesting raptors shall be conducted in the early spring (February/March) prior to Project implementation to verify the presence or absence of nesting activity. If an active raptor nest is found, a construction buffer of 500 feet shall be maintained until August 15th or until the young have fledged unless modified by a qualified ornithologist with the approval of the County and the City based on the species nesting, the nesting status, and the proposed activity to occur within 500 feet of the nest. The survey and any protection recommendations shall be submitted to Santa Barbara County Planning and Development and CDFG within 30 days of completion and prior to removal activities.

BIO-5) Atlantic Richfield will have a P&D-qualified biological monitor onsite during all construction activities to minimize impacts to the streams and upland areas, as well as, sensitive species that could potentially inhabit the area. Additionally, within each riparian area the County EQAP monitor will delineate and survey a construction corridor for project personnel. Construction crews shall stay within the surveyed work corridors and make every effort to avoid walking in any flowing water. To the maximum extent possible sediment shall also be prevented from entering the stream channel. The biological monitor will ensure that personnel are adhering to mitigation and avoidance measures as well as any biological issues that may arise on a day to day basis. The biological monitor will interact directly with Atlantic Richfield’s site supervisor, the site health and safety office, and the county’s EQAP biological monitor to ensure that biological issues and mitigation measures are followed per the conditions of the various permits and the area-specific work plan. All direction to contractors and other workers for tasks potentially impacting biological issues and mitigation measures will come through the Atlantic Richfield supplied biological monitor. Should a change in conditions or requirements become necessary, the County EQAP monitor has complete “stop-work authority” to shut down construction activities while the issue is resolved and documented. The safety of the workers and property will be considered before any changes to mitigation and avoidance measures are implemented.

BIO-6) Although not anticipated, if an incidental take of a protected species should occur, the P&D-qualified biological monitor will immediately provide verbal notification of the incident to ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 71

the US Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game. In addition, the biological monitor will conduct an evaluation of the incident (in consultation with US Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game), impacts to the environment, and any necessary changes in project plans to avoid a repeat of the incident. A report describing the incident, results and additional measures implemented will be prepared and submitted to the US Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game within one week of the incident.

BIO-7) All waste, garbage, and trash created during the projects will be maintained in covered containers and will be removed from the project sites and disposed of in accordance with local and state regulations as specified in the Project’s Waste Management Plan.

BIO-8) Feeding or harassment of wildlife will not be allowed. Pets will not be allowed on-site.

BIO-9 Trees will be protected from potential inadvertent damage through the following measures:

a) Work areas shall be surveyed for trees, including revegetated oak saplings and seedlings, any other oaks, and willows, by a P&D- qualified biologist no more than 30 days prior to initiating demolition in that work area.

b) Trees that can not be avoided will be individually marked for trimming or removal. Trees outside the work area will be flagged and protected with the use of a tree guard or fencing. Fencing shall be located at our outside of the critical root zone and be at least three feet in height of a material acceptable to P&D. Workers will be instructed to stay outside of the fenced areas.

c) In the event that any trees, including saplings and seedlings outside the delineated work area, are inadvertently lost they will be replaced at a ratio of 10:1 for oak trees and at the ratio specified in mitigation measure BIO-18 for all other species.

BIO-10) To minimize disturbances to native grassland habitats that can not be avoided, wooden planking or equivalent will be placed over the grasses to allow equipment and personnel to pass over the grasses without destroying the grasses. The width, length, and time the planking is present will be minimized to the maximum extent feasible. The placement will be conducted in consultation with the onsite biologist and County EQAP Monitor.

BIO-11) If feasible, pipelines traversing hillsides or slopes on the Marine Terrace shall be removed by cutting the pipes at the top and bottom of the slopes and using an excavator or equivalent to pull the pipes up the hill. This will minimize the need to trim back Venturan coastal sage scrub habitat to access and remove the pipes.

BIO-12) Vegetation shall be trimmed back whenever possible rather than removing vegetation during site preparation and access requirement activities. The trimming back or clearing of vegetation necessary for personnel and equipment access shall be done by hand, to the maximum extent feasible.

BIO-13) To minimize the potential for a temporary increase in sediment loading, sediment fencing will be installed at the access points. Sediment fencing shall be installed temporarily ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 72

below the pipeline excavation sites to protect the drainage in case of rain during the projects prior to site stabilization following completion of the work.

BIO-14) Except as identified otherwise in the project description, the majority of the construction work shall be performed from creek banks. No heavy equipment, including mini excavators, shall be operated from within the creek beds. A pre-construction reconnaissance level survey shall be conducted prior to construction work to identify the presence of the frogs though they are assumed present in the riparian work areas.

BIO–15) The mini excavator used at Tecolote Creek shall be stored only within the staging area on an impervious liner (or outside the project area entirely). Refueling of the mini excavator shall only occur when the mini excavator is parked on the impervious surface. Fuel shall not be stored within onsite.

BIO-16) The Project’s Oil Spill Prevention and Contingency Plan shall be implemented during Project execution and strictly adhered to.

BIO-17) A post construction survey of native grasslands avoided through use of the cover plates shall be conducted to ensure that impact avoidance was a success. If there is a measurable impact, the native grasslands will be restored according the Restoration Plan.

BIO-18) Habitat Restoration Plan. The applicant shall hire a County-approved botanist, biologist, or restoration ecologist to prepare a Habitat Restoration Plan for approval by P&D. The plan shall be designed to compensate for the permanent loss and/or degradation of coastal scrub habitat at a 2:1 ratio; willow scrub habitat at a 4:1 ratio; riparian at a 4:1 ratio; coastal and valley freshwater marsh at a 4:1 ratio; and native grassland at 1:1 as necessary following monitoring of planting. The Habitat Restoration Plan shall also dictate complete restoration of all temporary disturbance areas with appropriate native habitat. The applicant shall implement the approved Habitat Restoration Plan. Plan Requirements: The Restoration Plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following:

Goals of the Restoration. The goal of the plan shall be to provide adequate compensation in terms of functions of the respective habitats for disturbance to the habitats listed above.

Restoration Site Selection and Demarcation. Restoration shall occur in locations that are ecologically appropriate and are contiguous to preserved or undisturbed habitat if feasible, and shall avoid other sensitive wildlife to the maximum extent feasible. The rationale for site selection shall be included, taking into account soils, slope, aspect, and any other necessary physical attributes. (If areas have been identified, the identified areas shall be used.) All proposed restoration areas (polygons) shall be mapped and shown on a site plan and/or diagram contained within the Restoration Plan, and shall be clearly delineated in the field with stakes, signage, and/or chain link fencing until established.

Site Preparation Methods. Any proposed site preparation methods shall be detailed. Areas for hydroseeding, tilling, drill-seeding, and planting shall be flagged, and reviewed and approved by P&D staff prior to actual implementation. If ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 73

restoration is occurring within riparian ESH areas, any channel or flow modifications shall be identified.

Identification and Collection of Native Plant Materials, Seeds and Cuttings. Collection of native grass seed and cuttings shall occur over a range of onsite and nearby local microenvironments using established methods.

Planting Methods, Layout Plan, and Plant and Habitat Protection Techniques. The plan shall specify the quantities and amounts of any plug and container plants, diagram their placement on site, and indicate on plans any protection measures to be implemented for native grasses. Individual trees, particular shrubs, or sensitive plants within 25 feet of construction or earth disturbance which are not required to be removed to carry out the project shall be protected throughout all grading and construction activities by fencing acceptable to P&D. Fencing shall be installed prior to the pre-construction meeting. The Plan shall contain specifications for such fencing, including type and location. Special status plants on CNPS lists 1-3 shall be avoided or trimmed, but not removed to the maximum extent feasible.

Irrigation Plans. The Habitat Restoration Plan shall address the need for supplemental irrigation. If irrigation is required, water conservation shall be considered and the plants shall be weaned off of irrigation over a period of two to three years.

Exotic Species Removal and Management Methods. Cape ivy, thistles, and mustards shall be removed from the restoration area as needed to prohibit spread for a minimum of three years following construction by a landscape company and under the supervision of the restoration plan manager. Management of exotic species in restoration and enhancement areas shall be based on the least toxic approach; however, limited herbicide application may be allowed if carefully timed and placed and applied by a licensed applicator. Specific removal methods must be identified in the plan. Personnel implementing the weed removal shall demonstrate that they can distinguish between native and non-native plants at different periods of development including early germination.

Specific Enhancement techniques and methods and areas (if no actual restoration).

Supervision by a P&D-Qualified Biologist or Restoration Practitioner. The restoration shall be done under the supervision of a County-approved botanist/biologist.

Success Criteria, Monitoring and Maintenance Methods. Success criteria acceptable to P&D for each restoration component and which would result in the long-term establishment of restored habitats with similar density (number of plants per unit area), species composition, and percent cover as the area of habitat which was destroyed or otherwise impacted. The restoration area shall be monitored and maintained for a period of at least 3 years after installation, and plantings shall be ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 74

replaced and/or the plan shall be altered if criteria are not met. If success criteria are not met after 3 years, monitoring and maintenance shall continue on year to year basis until criteria are met as determined by a P&D-qualified biologist.

Special requirements for On-site Construction Monitoring During Restoration. A County-qualified botanist or biologist shall be present onsite during all ground disturbance activities which are near or have the potential to disturb sensitive plant or animal species. The biological monitor shall submit weekly reports to P&D on the results of any restoration grading and restoration activities. A pre-construction meeting with construction personnel shall be part of this effort, and a follow-up report to P&D shall be prepared.

Cost estimate. A cost estimate for implementing the restoration plan and associated monitoring and reporting shall be prepared by a county-approved and qualified restoration specialist and included in the plan. The cost of restoration is to be borne by the applicant.

Installation and Performance Security. A performance, maintenance, and replacement security shall be posted with Planning and Development prior to issuance of a Coastal Development Permit for the project. The amount of the required security shall be the cost estimate above plus a 15% contingency. The amounts shall be agreed to by P&D. If such maintenance has not occurred, the plants or improvements shall be replaced and the security held for another year. If the applicant fails to either install or maintain according to the approved plan, P&D may collect security and complete work on property.

Schedule for Implementation. The specific timeframe for restoration and all subcomponents listed above shall be specified in the plan.

Timing: The Final Restoration Plan shall be received and approved prior to approval of the Coastal Development Permit. P&D may elect to conduct outside peer review by a restoration specialist if warranted. The installation and maintenance security shall be received prior to issuance of a Coastal Development Permit and will be released three years after the installation, if plants and irrigation have been established and maintained.

Monitoring: P&D shall inspect and review any grading, construction, installation of plantings, and implementation of the restoration for compliance with the overall plan prior to release of the performance security. The applicant shall be responsible for quarterly inspections and annual reporting of the restoration for three years.

Implementation of these mitigation measures is expected to reduce residual impact to a less than significant level. ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 75

4.4.2 City Impact Discussion:

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document Flora a. A loss or disturbance to a unique, rare or threatened plant X community? b. A reduction in the numbers or restriction in the range of any X unique, rare or threatened species of plants? c. A reduction in the extent, diversity, or quality of native vegetation (including brush removal for fire prevention and X flood control improvements)? d. An impact on non-native vegetation whether naturalized or X horticultural if of habitat value? e. The loss of healthy native specimen trees? X f. Introduction of herbicides, pesticides, animal life, human habitation, non-native plants or other factors that would X change or hamper the existing habitat? Fauna g. A reduction in the numbers, a restriction in the range, or an impact to the critical habitat of any unique, rare, threatened X or endangered species of animals? h. A reduction in the diversity or numbers of animals onsite (including mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish or X invertebrates)? i. A deterioration of existing fish or wildlife habitat (for X foraging, breeding, roosting, nesting, etc.)? j. Introduction of barriers to movement of any resident or X migratory fish or wildlife species? k. Introduction of any factors (light, fencing, noise, human presence and/or domestic animals) which could hinder the X normal activities of wildlife?

City Impact Discussion:

Note: While project activities occur within City designated ESHA and required ESHA buffers, it should be noted that GP/CLUP policy CE 1.6(d) allows these activities within the ESHA and ESHA buffers as it is a resource restoration and enhancement project Policy CE 1.7 requires full mitigation of any impacts created by the project. Figures 5 and 6 (see Attachment A) show ESHAs as identified in the project specific biological studies (as well as the GP/CLUP required buffers from these ESHAs) as provided in the September, 2007 project work plan (Vince Semonsen, 03/07 and LFR Inc., 01/07). Figures 7 and 8 (see Attachment A) show City designated ESHA’s and their buffers in Tecolote and Bell Creeks. a-c Venturan Coastal Sage Scrub Venturan coastal sage scrub is designated as an ESHA in the GP/CLUP Conservation Element. The Venturan coastal sage scrub habitat located within the Bell Creek work area will largely be avoided by restricting a majority of work activities to the unpaved access road paralleling the western boundary of the Venoco EOF. However, this existing access road is located within the required 25’ buffer of the Venturan coastal sage scrub (GP/CLUP Conservation Element). The Venturan coastal sage scrub located between the access roadway and the hydrogen sulfide alarm ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 76

panel is highly disturbed. It is expected that the backhoe, small crane, or boom truck used to lift and remove the hydrogen sulfide alarm panel will not result in significant impacts to the disturbed Venturan coastal sage scrub habitat since the panel is not located within the GP/CLUP required buffer. Some minor disturbances may result from excavation activities at pipe tap location #22, removal of the pump skid and piping leading into the vault box, and for equipment access required to remove the hydrogen sulfide panel. An estimated maximum disturbance of 140 square feet of Venturan coastal sage scrub located at the southern termination of the O-3 pipeline could result from Project execution. Such impacts are considered potentially significant.

Southern Willow Scrub and Southern Mixed Riparian Forest Southern willow scrub and Southern mixed riparian Forest are also protected in the GP/CLUP Conservation Element, and dominate the Tecolote Creek work area. This habitat will be disturbed as a result of site access requirements and pipeline removal activities. Specific disturbances to this habitat will include trimming back the vegetation to provide access to the site, installation of access planking (including creek crossing gangways), establishing a small staging area, and excavations approximately five feet into the creek banks to expose and remove a portion of the O-3 Pipeline. Table 4.4-2 estimates the potential disturbances to Southern willow scrub and Southern mixed riparian forest habitat in the Tecolote Creek work area (note that Table 8 does not include calculations for disturbance of the GP/CLUP required buffer area from this resource).

Table 8 Estimated Maximum Disturbances to Southern Willow Scrub and Southern Mixed Riparian Forest Habitat in the Tecolote Creek Work Area

Reason for Potential Maximum Dimensions Area of Area of Disturbance Disturbance of Disturbance (feet) Disturbance (feet2) (acres) Access pathway under bridge and 180 X 6 1,080 0.025 along east bank of Tecolote Creek Establish staging area 25 X 25 625 0.014 Disturbance in pipeline removal area (includes excavation and 40 X 40 1,600 0.037 creek crossing platform) Totals: 3,305 0.076

The southern willow scrub and southern mixed riparian forest habitat located within the Bell Creek Work Area will largely be avoided by restricting a majority of work activities to the unpaved access road paralleling the western boundary of the EOF. Some minor disturbances may result from excavation activities at pipe tap location #22 and removal of the pump skid and piping leading into the vault box. An estimated maximum disturbance of 200 square feet of southern willow scrub and southern mixed riparian forest located at the southern termination of the O-3 Pipeline could result from Project execution (not inclusive of the GP/CLUP required buffer area). Such impacts are considered potentially significant.

Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh A small area of coastal and valley freshwater marsh habitat, as well as its GP/CLUP required buffer area, in the Tecolote Creek work area will be disturbed when the O-3 Pipeline is excavated approximately 5 feet into each side of the creek bank, and then removed. Other disturbances in the GP/CLUP buffer area include the creation and use of the access pathway and the temporary staging area. Such impacts are considered potentially significant.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 77

Coastal Brackish Marsh A small area of Coastal Brackish Marsh is present near the vault and skid proposed for removal in the Bell Creek project area. The GP/CLUP requires a 100-foot buffer from Coastal Brackish Marsh; the excavation and removal activities will encroach into the buffer but will not encroach on the mapped habitat. Such impacts are considered potentially significant.

Beach and Shoreline GP/CLUP Figure 4-1 shows beach and shoreline ESHA south of both Tecolote and Bell Creek project areas. Potential sedimentation and silt runoff from project activities could negatively affect this ESHA. Such impacts are considered potentially significant.

Sensitive Plants

Santa Barbara Honeysuckle Several Santa Barbara Honeysuckle were recorded in the project biological study just south of the Bell Creek project area. The individuals of honeysuckle, and their associated 25-foot recommended buffer area (G. McGowan, LFR; 05/06/09) are not within the proposed Bell Creek project area. As such, no impacts to Santa Barbara Honeysuckle are expected.

Cliff-aster A few Cliff-aster individuals representing the sensitive subspecies were found at the southernmost tip of the Bell Creek Survey Area. The excavation and removal activities related to removal of the skid and vault are within the recommended 25-foot buffer area for this species (G. McGowan, LFR; 05/06/09). Such impacts are considered potentially significant.

Black Flowered Figwort While no black flowered figworts were identified in the project specific biological study, GP/CLUP Figure 4-1 shows the presence of the species on the northeast of the of Tecolote Creek project area beyond the Hollister Avenue bridge. As project activities will not occur near this area, no impacts to Black Flowered Figworts are expected. d. Non-Native Grassland/Ruderal Areas occur in both the Tecolote and Bell Creek project areas. In general, these species are considered invasive and not protected under the City’s General Plan or other by other applicable agencies. However, Figure 4-1 of the GP/CLUP identifies areas within both Tecolote and Bell Creek corridors as monarch butterfly and/or raptor roosting habitat. If any raptor species are present in these areas, they could use the non-native grasslands for foraging habitat. As such, project disturbance of these non-native grasslands could create potentially significant impacts on raptor foraging in the area.

As stated above, both project sites also contain non-native eucalyptus trees, which are considered an environmentally sensitive habitat in the GP/CLUP for monarch butterfly roosting. As described in the environmental setting section of this document, the project specific biological study indicated that these eucalyptus groves are not known to support a winter aggregation site but are used by a small number of monarch butterflies during the fall and winter months. As such, project disturbance of these non-native eucalyptus trees could create potentially significant impacts to monarch butterfly roosting behavior in this area. ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 78

e. Coast Live Oak Woodland Habitat Clearing along the west bank of the Tecolote Creek project area will require that up to six, large, planted non-native London Plane trees (Platanus x acerifolia) will be removed to facilitate crane access from the bridge above. Also approximately ten native willow trees (Salix lasiolepis) will be trimmed, approximately five will cut to the ground, and up to 15 additional willows will be selectively limbed (limbing is projected to occur on the bank of Tecolote Creek) to facilitate equipment access. Such impacts are considered potentially significant.

Coast live oak woodland occurs on the east side of Bell Creek within the Bell Creek Survey Area. This area was previously disturbed during pipeline installation and contains plantings of coast live oak saplings (Tierney 2003). The coast live oak woodland habitat identified in this area is primarily located outside of the work area limits and is not expected to be disturbed during construction.

However, the hydrogen sulfide alarm panel that will be removed is located within the drip line of an oak tree that is declining in health and has lost considerable foliage and branches. There are also several oak saplings nearby. To minimize additional impacts to the mature oak tree, the applicant has proposed that any heavy equipment used to remove the hydrogen sulfide panel will be positioned a minimum of five feet outside the oak tree drip line and will lift and pull the panel away from the trunk of the tree towards the access roadway.

f. The project does not involve the use of herbicides, pesticides, or introduce animal life, human habitation, or non-native plants to any ESHA. Vegetation removal and trimming would, however, change and potentially hamper the existing habitat areas as described in this section. Such impacts are potentially significant.

g-k California Red-legged Frog, Tidewater Goby, Steelhead Trout, and Least Bell’s vireo The California red-legged frog, tidewater goby, steelhead trout and least Bell’s vireo are protected by the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). The Act is administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Section 9 of the Act prohibits the taking of any federally listed endangered or threatened species. Section 3(18) of the Act defines take to mean harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or attempt to engage in any such conduct. Service regulations (50 CFR 17.3) define harm to include significant habitat modifications or degradation which actually kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding or sheltering. Harassment is defined by the Service as an intentional or negligent action that crates the likelihood of injury to wildlife by annoying it to such an extent as to significantly disrupt normal behavioral patterns which include, but are not limited to breeding, feeding, or sheltering (Roger P. Root, Fish and Wildlife Service, 1/07/09).

Factors contributing to local California red-legged frog, tidewater goby, steelhead, and least Bell’s vireo declines include (but are not limited to) habitat destruction and degradation/fragmentation, off-road vehicle activity, and drought (Kiesecker and Blaustein 1988, 1998; USFWS 1994, 1996, 2000; Adams 1999, 2000; Lawler et al. 1999; Cook and Jennings 2001; Kiesecker, Blaustein and Miller 2001a; Cook 2002). The proposed project will temporarily disturb the Tecolote and Bell Creek wetland habitats through increased human ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 79

presence on site, removal of vegetation on site, noise and other construction activities, and in Tecolote Creek, excavation in and immediately adjacent to the Tecolote Creek streambed. Such impacts are considered potentially significant.

Raptors While the project specific biological survey did not find any nests or roosts in either project area, a variety of raptors are expected to utilize portions of the Tecolote and Bell Creek project areas including, turkey vultures, sharp-shinned hawks, Cooper’s hawks, red-tailed hawks, red shouldered hawks, white-tailed kites and great horned owls. The GP/CLUP Conservation Element Raptor Nest Protection Policy CE 8.4 requires development to “be designed to provide a 100-foot buffer around active and historical nest sites for protected species or raptors when feasible” and states that if an “active raptor nest site exists on the subject property, whenever feasible no vegetation clearing, grading, construction or other development activity shall be allowed within a 300-foot radius of the nest site during the nesting and fledging seasons.” As stated above, no nests were identified in the project area; however GP/CLUP Figure 4-1 identifies both Tecolote and Bell Creek corridors as raptor roosting sites. Project construction activities are proposed within the GP/CLUP raptor roosting buffer area. Hence, if any raptor nests are present in either project area, project construction activities would create a potentially significant impact on any raptor species present.

Monarch Butterflies Small numbers of monarch butterflies visit both the Bell and Tecolote sites in the fall. The GP/CLUP Figure 4-1 shows a monarch butterfly site just north of the Hollister Avenue bridge in the Tecolote and Bell Creek corridors. GP/CLUP policy CE 4.5 establishes a minimum 100 foot buffer around existing and historic roost sites. Both Tecolote and Bell Creek project areas encroach into the 100’ buffer around GP/CLUP Figure 4-1 monarch butterfly roosting habitat (as shown in Figures 7 and 8 of this document). The trimming of vegetation and eucalyptus trees in both project areas could compromise the habitat. Such impacts are considered potentially significant.

Globose Dune Beetle While no globose dune beetles were identified in the project specific biological study, GP/CLUP Figure 4-1 shows the presence of the species on the beach just south of Tecolote Creek. Any release of silt or sedimentation from project activities in both project areas could flow to the beach areas where the Globose Dune Beetle habitat exists. Such impacts are considered potentially significant.

City of Goleta Mitigation Measures

CITY BIO-1) To ensure the implementation of the mitigation and take-avoidance measures, prior to the initiation of the project, an employee environmental awareness and mitigation monitoring plan shall be used to train employees and contractors relative to the environmental protection measures of the project. Plan Requirements and Timing: The plan shall be approved by the City prior to issuance of any LUP for the project and prior to the training. Monitoring: City staff or their designated biological monitor shall ensure that the plan is followed during field work and shall have authority to stop work if appropriate measures are not being implemented. A final report shall also be prepared by Atlantic Richfield detailing the implementation and efficacy of the mitigation and take avoidance measures. This report shall be submitted to all interested agencies involved in the project. ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 80

CITY BIO-2) Atlantic Richfield shall schedule a pre-construction meeting at the project site with City staff or their designee. The pre-construction meeting shall be attended by the permittee and/or its agent, key construction personnel and other pertinent agency representatives. The construction conference shall include a review of all resource protection and other mitigation measures and project conditions. Plan Requirements and Timing: Atlantic Richfield shall schedule this meeting 10-days in advance of the start of construction. Monitoring: City staff shall verify compliance during field inspections.

CITY BIO-3) Preconstruction surveys will be conducted by a City-qualified biologist no more than 30 days prior to initiation of the project, and said surveys shall be compared to the original survey. The biologist shall recommend if any additional mitigation is necessary to address changes since the original survey was done. Plan Requirements and Timing: During this time, areas to be protected and cordoned off will be flagged to alert equipment operators of areas to be protected. This shall include any plant habitat or locations of plant and wildlife species of concern listed in the above analysis. All personnel and equipment shall be directed to remain within the surveyed project areas. All equipment and vehicles shall remain on existing roadways or trails with the exception of special access areas. The preconstruction survey shall be submitted to the City, CDFG and any other applicable agencies prior to removal activities. Monitoring: City staff shall verify compliance prior to the beginning of construction.

CITY BIO-4) Surveys for nesting birds, in particular nesting raptors, shall be conducted in the early spring (February/March) prior to Project implementation to verify the presence or absence of nesting activity. If an active raptor nest or other sensitive bird species is found and work is proposed while the nest is active, a construction buffer of 300 feet for raptors, and a buffer to be determined by the City approved biologist and City staff for other sensitive bird species, shall be maintained until August 15th or until the young have fledged, whichever occurs later. As noted previously, the size of the buffer may be adjusted by a qualified ornithologist with approval of the City Biologist based on the proposed activity, the species nesting, and the status of the nest, but shall be large enough to prevent disturbance. Plan Requirements and Timing: The survey shall be submitted to the City, CDFG and any other applicable agencies within 30 days of completion and prior to removal activities. Monitoring: City staff shall verify compliance prior to construction activities.

CITY BIO-5) Atlantic Richfield will have a City-qualified biological monitor onsite during all construction activities to minimize impacts to the streams and upland areas, as well as, sensitive species that could potentially inhabit the area. Plan Requirements and Timing: Within each riparian area the City monitor will delineate and survey a construction corridor for project personnel. Staging areas and pipeline access routes will be flagged or fenced prior to project commencement. Monitoring: The biological monitor will ensure that personnel are adhering to mitigation and avoidance measures as well as address any biological issues that may arise on a day to day basis. The biological monitor will interact directly with Atlantic Richfield’s site supervisor and the site health and safety office to ensure that biological issues and mitigation measures are followed per the conditions of the various permits and the area-specific work plan. Should a change in conditions or requirements become necessary, the City biological monitor has complete “stop-work authority” to shut down construction activities while the issue is resolved and documented. The safety of the workers and property will be considered before any changes to mitigation and avoidance measures are implemented.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 81

CITY BIO-6) Washing of any project equipment shall not be allowed near sensitive biological resources. An area designated for washing functions shall be identified on the plans submitted prior to issuance of any LUP for the project. The wash off area shall be in place throughout construction. Plan Requirements and Timing: The wash off area shall be designated on all plans and shall be reviewed and approved by City staff prior to LUP issuance. Monitoring: City staff shall site inspect throughout the construction period to ensure compliance and proper use.

CITY BIO-7) Although not anticipated, if an incidental take of a protected species should occur, the City-qualified biological monitor will immediately provide verbal and written notification of the incident to the City, County, US Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game. Within three (3) working days of the incident, a report shall be submitted to all agencies including the date, time, location of the carcass, a photograph, cause of death, if known, and any other pertinent information. Care shall be taken in handling dead specimens to preserve biological material in the best possible state for later analysis. Should any injured tidewater gobies or California red-legged frogs survive, the Fish and Wildlife Service shall be contacted regarding their final disposition. The remains of tidewater gobies or California red-legged frogs shall be placed with the University of California, EEMB Department, Santa Barbara, CA 93106, Attn: Mark Holmgren (805-893-4098) or an equivalent facility. Arrangements regarding proper disposition of potential museum specimens shall be made with the University of California by Atlantic Richfield prior to implementation of any actions. In addition, the biological monitor will conduct an evaluation of the incident (in consultation with the City, County, US Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game), impacts to the environment, and any necessary changes in project plans to avoid a repeat of the incident. Plan Requirements and Timing: This requirement will be noted in the Land Use Permit for the project. Monitoring: City staff shall confer with the project biologist throughout the construction period to ensure compliance.

CITY BIO-8) All waste, garbage, and trash created during the projects will be kept in covered containers and will be removed from the project sites and disposed of in accordance with local and state regulations. Staging areas shall be cleaned-up and restored to pre-project conditions within 30-days of project completion. If any damage to City streets or city street landscaping occurs, the applicant shall submit a plan to the Planning and Environmental Services Department for restoration (vegetation restoration for the riparian corridors is described separately under mitigation measure CITY BIO-16).Plan Requirements and Timing: This requirement shall be submitted to, and approved by the Planning and Environmental Services Department prior to issuance of any LUP for the project. Monitoring: City staff shall monitor for completion of clean up and restoration pursuant to the approved plan.

CITY BIO-9) Feeding or harassment of wildlife will not be allowed. Pets will not be allowed on- site. Plan Requirements and Timing: This requirement will be noted in the Land Use Permit for the project. Monitoring: City staff shall site inspect throughout the construction period to ensure compliance.

CITY BIO-10) To minimize the potential for a temporary increase in sediment loading, sediment fencing will be installed temporarily below the pipeline excavation sites to protect the drainages in case of rain during the project, and prior to site stabilization following completion of the work. If instream removal of sediment needs to occur in Tecolote Creek to remove the pipeline, non- permeable silt curtains or Visquene sheets must be positioned vertically in the water column to ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 82 isolate the instream area. Plan Requirements and Timing: This requirement will be specified in the Land Use Permit for the project. Monitoring: City staff shall site inspect prior to, and throughout, the construction period to ensure compliance.

CITY BIO-11) Except as identified otherwise in the project description, the construction work shall be performed from creek banks. No heavy equipment, including mini excavators, shall be operated from within the creek. Personnel will not be allowed to walk in the creeks except for biological surveys and activities associated with pipeline tapping/cutting activities. Creek crossings for workers and equipment will only be allowed at the designated areas described in the project description. A survey shall be conducted immediately prior to a commencement of construction work to assess the presence of the California red-legged frogs, tidewater goby, steelhead trout and least Bell’s vireo. Plan Requirements and Timing: This requirement will be specified in the Land Use Permit for the project. Monitoring: City staff shall site inspect prior to, and throughout, the construction period to ensure compliance.

CITY BIO–12) The mini excavator used at Tecolote Creek shall be stored only within the staging area on an impervious liner (or off site entirely). Refueling of the mini excavator shall only occur when the mini excavator is parked on the impervious surface. Fuel shall not be stored onsite. Plan Requirements and Timing: This requirement will be specified in the Land Use Permit for the project. Monitoring: City staff shall site inspect prior to, and throughout, the construction period to ensure compliance.

CITY BIO-13) The Project’s Oil Spill Prevention and Contingency Plan included in the September, 2007 work plan shall be implemented during Project execution and strictly adhered to. Plan Requirements and Timing: This requirement will be specified in the Land Use Permit for the project. Monitoring: City staff shall site inspect prior to, and throughout, the construction period to ensure compliance.

CITY BIO-14) If the excavation at pipe tap location #22 (shown on Figure 4) exceeds four feet in depth, a trench box will be used to minimize potential impacts to surrounding sensitive botanical resources. Plan Requirements and Timing: This requirement will be specified in the Land Use Permit for the project. Monitoring: City staff shall site inspect prior to, and throughout, the construction period to ensure compliance.

CITY BIO-15) The following measures shall be employed for pipeline removal within Tecolote and Bell Creek project areas. The following measures apply to pipeline removal whether or not there is any stream flow.

a) The construction zone shall be flagged and fenced through the riparian corridor using silt fencing at least 2 feet tall subject to the approval of the City approved biologist. The fencing shall be installed at least one week prior to any construction activities. It shall have no gaps, it shall be keyed into the substrate, and it shall be regularly inspected and maintained.

b) Once the construction zones have been fenced and cleared they shall then be surveyed daily prior to any construction activities and periodically throughout the day for any red- legged frogs. If found the animals shall be relocated outside of the construction zone with approval from USFWS.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 83

Plan Requirements and Timing: This requirement will be specified in the Land Use Permit for the project. Monitoring: City staff shall site inspect prior to, and throughout, the construction period to ensure compliance.

CITY BIO-16) The applicant shall submit a Habitat Restoration Plan to address project- generated impacts on wetland resources. The Mitigation Plan shall be prepared by a City, California Department of Fish and Game, Army Corps of Engineers and Fish and Wildlife Service approved biologist or restoration ecologist. The Mitigation Plan shall include a Plan to restore and revegetate all wetland areas disturbed by construction activities. The plan shall include provisions for the enhancement (restoration and/or revegetation) of wetlands within the coastal zone (or adjacent to it if necessary as determined by the City Biologist) in the City of Goleta to achieve a minimum 3:1 replacement ratio to mitigate all permanent impacts to wetland habitat resulting from the proposed project. A map shall be included to show the existing and proposed habitat polygons to ensure that the restoration (a) shall connect with existing wetland resources; (b) shall replace existing disturbed upland habitat; and (c) is feasibly located for long term success. Additionally, the Habitat Restoration Plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following:

a. The date prepared, author, and any revision dates. b. The project description. c. The site description and past use. d. Discussion of vegetation and any special status plant and tree species in the vicinity of disturbance sites. e. Discussion of the amount of vegetation and trees lost, and recommendations by the City approved biologist for restoration, and recommended native species to use in such restoration and at what replacement ratios. f. Measures to protect trees from potential inadvertent damage through the following measures: 1) Work areas shall be surveyed for trees, including re-vegetated oak saplings and seedlings any other native trees by a City qualified biologist no more than 30 days prior to project initiation in that work area. 2) Trees that can not be avoided will be flagged for removal. Trees adjacent to the work area will be protected with the use of a tree guard or fencing. Fencing shall be located at our outside of the critical root zone and be at least three feet in height consisting of a material acceptable to the City. Workers will be instructed to stay outside of the fenced areas. 3) In the event that any native trees are inadvertently lost they will be replaced at a ratio of 10:1. g. Objectives. h. Measures for protection of resources during construction. i. Site preparation methods. j. Identification of suitable locations for wetland and buffer restoration/enhancement including planting native trees to be replaced at a 10:1 ratio within the same watershed within the Coastal Zone of the City of Goleta if feasible as determined by the City Biologist, and hydroseeding methods. Restoration of transitional areas shall utilize native creek/wetland-upland transitional coastal sage shrubs and plants that occur on the margins of Tecolote and Bell Creeks. k. A provision that the management and maintenance activities within ESHA and the buffer zones shall be performed in accordance with GP/CLUP Conservation Element Policy CE ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 84

1.10, which restricts the use of insecticides, herbicides, and artificial fertilizers within these areas and requires use of low-impact weed abatement and brush clearing methods. l. A list and number of plants and seed mixtures (lbs/acre) to be used shall be provided. The seed stock used should be collected from the Tecolote and Bell Creek watersheds if feasible. If seed quantities are not available, seed collection shall be conducted within the local region limited to the South Coast area. m. Provisions to minimize disturbances to native grassland habitats that cannot be avoided, including, but not limited to, placing wooden planking or equivalent over the grasses to allow equipment and personnel to pass over such areas. The width, length, and time the planking is present will be minimized to the maximum extent feasible and placed in consultation with the onsite biologist / City monitor. n. Provisions to trim back vegetation whenever possible rather than removing vegetation during site preparation and access activities. The trimming back or clearing of vegetation necessary for personnel and equipment access shall be done by hand, to the maximum extent feasible under the direction of the City-qualified biologist. o. Provisions for a post construction survey of native grasslands avoided through use of the cover plates to ensure that impact avoidance measures are a success. Provisions for restoration shall be included in the case that there is a measurable impact. p. Irrigation requirements. q. Weeding requirements and list of non-native species to be removed and methods for removal. r. Provisions for short-term and long-term maintenance with performance criteria to be implemented by a qualified biologist or restoration ecologist. s. Establishment of performance securities and a monitoring period of a least (5) years. t. Detailed maps illustrating restoration areas and conservation easements, if applicable. u. Cost estimate to implement all planning, construction, and other phases of the restoration efforts, including maintenance and monitoring periods.

Plan Requirements and Timing: The Habitat Restoration Plan shall be consistent with these requirements and the GP/CLUP. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Goleta prior to issuance of the LUP. The approved plan shall be incorporated into the approved development plan. Monitoring: City of Goleta staff shall inspect periodically throughout the construction phase. The quantification (acreage) of final impacts to be restored in accordance with the restoration plan shall be determined upon completion of the work. The approved monitoring plan shall be implemented, and annual reports submitted to City of Goleta staff for review. Corrective actions identified in the monitoring reports and by City of Goleta staff shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City of Goleta prior to the termination of monitoring and release of performance securities.

CITY-BIO 17) Two types of performance securities will be employed to ensure installation and maintenance of the required revegetation and restoration plans, including but not limited to:

a. the native tree replacement and mitigation, and; b. wetland restoration

Performance Securities shall be posted prior to issuance of any Land Use Permit for the project. One type shall be equal to the value of installation and/or replacement of all required items; the other shall be equal to the value of maintenance of the items for the required maintenance period of (3) years. The amounts shall be agreed to by the City of Goleta. The installation security ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 85

shall be released upon satisfactory installation of planted and/or seeded stock. If performance standards are achieved, the City of Goleta may release the maintenance security after (3) years. If the applicant fails to either install or maintain according to plans, the City of Goleta may collect security and complete work on the property. Plan Requirements and Timing: Prior to any Land Use Permit issuance, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City to install, and maintain required vegetation for the life of the project. Monitoring: City of Goleta staff shall field check for restoration and maintenance, and site inspect prior to sign-off release of both installation and maintenance securities. City of Goleta staff signature is required for performance security release.

CITY BIO-18) The applicant shall limit excavation and grading to the dry season of the year (i.e. April 15th to November 1st) unless a City approved erosion control plan, incorporating appropriate BMPs identified in the EPA guidelines for construction site runoff control (EPA Fact Sheet 2.6, Construction Site Runoff Minimum Control Measures, 01/00), is in place and all measures therein are in effect. All exposed graded surfaces shall be stabilized or reseeded with ground cover vegetation to minimize erosion. Plan Requirements: This requirement shall be noted on the Land Use Permit for the project. Timing: Graded surfaces shall be stabilized or reseeded within four (4) weeks of grading completion in compliance with the Habitat Restoration Plan required under mitigation measure CITY BIO-19. Monitoring: City staff shall site inspect during grading to monitor dust generation and four (4) weeks after grading to verify compliance.

CITY BIO-19) The applicant shall obtain proof of exemption or proof that a Section 401 water quality certification from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board as well as a Coastal Zone Management consistency certification from the California Coastal Commission, has been received by the respective agencies. Plan Requirements & Timing: The applicant shall submit written verification of compliance with this requirement and City staff shall review and approve documentation prior to LUP issuance. Monitoring: City staff shall review the documentation prior to LUP issuance.

CITY BIO-20) Fencing installed around the riparian habitat must be removed as soon as project activities are finished, or when determined appropriate by the City, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Army Corps of Engineers approved project biologist, to prevent creating barriers to California red-legged frogs. Plan Requirements and Timing: This requirement shall be included in the project LUP. Monitoring: City staff shall verify compliance during field inspections.

CITY BIO-21) To avoid transferring disease or pathogens between aquatic habitats during the course of red-legged frog surveys, the biologist must follow the Declining Amphibian Population Task Force’s Code of Practice. Plan Requirements and Timing: This requirement shall be included in the project LUP. Monitoring: City staff shall verify compliance during field inspections.

CITY BIO-22) Any non-native predators of the tidewater goby or California red-legged frog shall be permanently removed from the wild if they can be captured while monitoring project activities in compliance with the California Fish and Game code. Plan Requirements and Timing: This requirement shall be included in the project LUP. Monitoring: City staff shall confer with the project biologist during pre-construction and construction activities to ensure compliance.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 86

Implementation of these mitigation measures is expected to reduce residual impact to a less than significant level.

CULTURAL RESOURCES County Impact Discussion:

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document Archaeological Resources a. Disruption, alteration, destruction, or adverse effect on a recorded prehistoric or historic archaeological site (note site X number below)? b. Disruption or removal of human remains? X c. Increased potential for trespassing, vandalizing, or X sabotaging archaeological resources? d. Ground disturbances in an area with potential cultural resource sensitivity based on the location of known historic X X or prehistoric sites? Ethnic Resources e. Disruption of or adverse effects upon a prehistoric or historic archaeological site or property of historic or cultural X X significance to a community or ethnic group? f. Increased potential for trespassing, vandalizing, or X X sabotaging ethnic, sacred, or ceremonial places? g. The potential to conflict with or restrict existing religious, X X sacred, or educational use of the area? Impact Discussion: a. – g. The proposed project is not expected to adversely affect any known archaeological or historically significant resources as the pipelines to be removed are almost entirely aboveground or presently exposed. Excavation will only be necessary to access and remove short buried segments in the Eastern work area of the Marine Terrace and near the access roadway east of Eagle Canyon Creek. All of the proposed excavation areas are sufficiently located outside the limits of known sensitive archaeological sites. In addition, the limited excavation necessary as part of the Project will take place along the pipeline alignment within a previously disturbed corridor. No impacts to the historic site (CA-SBA-2442H) are anticipated as the site can and will be avoided during pipeline removal work. Project workers will be educated as to the significance and sensitivity of the nearby sites prior to work and mitigation measures will be implemented to ensure that vandalism to these resources does not occur. No new access trails to the sites will be created by the proposed project.

Several conditions in the CUP issued for the Golf Links Project, including oil and gas facility abandonment, address the protection of archaeological resources. Most of these apply to the proposed golf course construction effort on the Dos Pueblos site and installation of the water line proposed as part of golf course development across the Bacara property. Atlantic Richfield proposes to incorporate the relevant conditions as part of its pipeline removal project to ensure the protection of these sites. ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 87

Mitigation and Residual Impact:

Applicant proposed archaeological mitigation measures include:

CR-1) Impacts to known archaeological resources will be prevented, to the maximum extent feasible, through avoidance.

CR-2) Prior to the start of pipeline abandonment work, the Atlantic Richfield project team will hold a meeting with contractors, project personnel, and the County to review the Project Work Plan, safety procedures, and sensitive resources in the area. Workers will be made aware of archaeological and historical resources near the project site and the importance of avoiding such resources. In addition, the roles and authority of the archaeological and Native American monitors, as well as that of the County Environmental Quality Assurance Program (EQAP) monitor, will be reviewed.

CR-3) In order to prevent vandalism to archaeological resources, a P&D-qualified archeologist and a Native American representative pursuant to the County Archaeological Guidelines will be required for:

• All work inside and within 50 feet of an archaeological site and

• All work requiring earth disturbance.

CR-4) Heavy equipment and vehicles on Eagle Canyon Ranch will be limited to the existing, well- established access road, primary staging area in the previously disturbed tank farm area, and pipeline right-of-way. At site CA-SBA-76, low impact rubber wheeled construction equipment will be used during pipeline and pipe rack removal.

CR-5) In the event archaeological remains are encountered during grading, work shall be stopped immediately or redirected until a P&D qualified archaeologist and Native American representative are retained by the applicant to evaluate the significance of the find pursuant to Phase 2 investigations of the County Archaeological Guidelines. If remains are found to be significant, they shall be subject to a Phase 3 mitigation program consistent with County Archaeological Guidelines and funded by the applicant. With implementation of these mitigation measures, residual impacts would not be significant.

City Impact Discussion:

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document Archaeological Resources a. Disruption, alteration, destruction, or adverse effect on a recorded prehistoric or historic archaeological site (note site X number below)? b. Disruption or removal of human remains? X c. Increased potential for trespassing, vandalizing, or X sabotaging archaeological resources? ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 88

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document d. Ground disturbances in an area with potential cultural resource sensitivity based on the location of known historic X or prehistoric sites? Ethnic Resources e. Disruption of or adverse effects upon a prehistoric or historic archaeological site or property of historic or cultural X significance to a community or ethnic group? f. Increased potential for trespassing, vandalizing, or X sabotaging ethnic, sacred, or ceremonial places? g. The potential to conflict with or restrict existing religious, X sacred, or educational use of the area? Impact Discussion:

a. b., d., e., g. Three known archaeological sites are near the project areas: CA-SBA-71, CA-SBA-72 and CA- SBA-73. These three sites contain the remnants of several separate (but overlapping) village occupations. Archaeologists have investigated the area since the late 1800s, with additional work in the 1960s and 1970s. Archaeological teams have worked on sites periodically since 1986. (Erlandson, Rick, Vellanoweth; 2008)

SBA-71 is located on the Bacara property about 30m above sea level on the narrow coastal bluff overlooking the mouths of Tecolote and Bell creeks. This site was occupied about 7,700 and 3,400 years ago, but the most intensive use of this site was associated with a Chumash occupation beginning about 2,300 years ago. Prior to the construction of the Bacara Resort, grave robbers and relic hunters inflicted heavy damage on portions of the site. (Erlandson, Rick, Vellanoweth; 2008)

At SBA-71, the most concentrated archaeological materials are found in the southern site area. Coastal erosion has removed an unknown amount of the southern site area, so the original extent of the site is unknown. This site contains a Chumash cemetery, probable residential and cooking features and a possible dance floor. (Erlandson, Rick, Vellanoweth; 2008)

It is highly unlikely that project activities would encroach into SBA-71 as it well outside of both the Bell and Tecolote Creek work areas. However, it is possible that the extents of the site do indeed cover the project area, and disturbance of any resources located there would be considered a potentially significant impact.

SBA-72 lies southeast of the Tecolote Creek work area. This is a large archaeological site with a long record of human occupation. By the 1920s, this site had been farmed intensively for many years, it was later heavily modified by the construction of oil facilities beginning in the 1930s. In recent decades, this well known village site was heavily disturbed by looters, vandals, and grave robbers. Prior to construction of the Bacara Resort, this site was covered with a thick layer of fill sediments to protect the burials and other cultural features from future depredations. (Erlandson, Rick, Vellanoweth; 2008)

SBA-72 was a substantial Chumash village occupied for roughly 1,500 years from about AD 50 to 1500. Late Holocene occupations of the site seems to have begun in the northern area, later shifting primarily to the southern area – although these occupations overlap and cannot always be easily ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 89

differentiated. The work of D.B. Rogers in the 1920s provided important insights into the layout of this Chumash village, including the location of two living areas, two discrete cemeteries, a dance floor and sweat lounge. (Erlandson, Rick, Vellanoweth; 2008)

The extents of SBA-72 are well south of the proposed project area; however, it is possible that the minor excavation activities to expose the pipeline could disturb archaeological materials from SBA- 72. Such impacts are considered potentially significant.

SBA-73 is located just west of Tecolote Creek, and immediately west of the Tecolote Creek project area and contains northern and southern loci. Similar to SBA-72, the site has been excavated repeatedly and extensively, beginning with the work of Stephen Bowers in 1877, Frederick Ward Putnam in 1908, and D.B. Rogers in the 1920s. After a hiatus of over 50-years, further studies of the site were conducted by archaeological teams from UCSB in 1979, 1981, and 1987 and by WESTEC in 1988 and Hutash Consultants in the 1990s. (Erlandson, Rick, Vellanoweth; 2008)

By the 1970s, when the first relatively modern archaeological work was conducted at SBA-73, the site had been heavily modified by industrial development and other ground-disturbing activities. These activities damaged many site areas, including deposits near the beach where a pier once stood, much of the western margin of the site, and a section of the southern site area that appears to have been graded away during development or restoration activities. Since 1979, however, archaeological work has shown that large sections of the site escaped destruction and remain highly significant. However, the site has been disturbed by oil and other development and/or restoration activities. (Erlandson, Rick, Vellanoweth; 2008)

The large size, complex structure and diverse contents of SBA-73 suggest that the site was an ancient center of Chumash life occupied for roughly 1,500 years. Similar to SBA-72, this Chumash village site contains two discreet residential areas, two cemetery plots, a dance floor, temescal and a wide variety of cultural features. (Erlandson, Rick, Vellanoweth; 2008)

Minor excavation activities in Tecolote Creek are projected to occur just outside the known western boundary of SBA-73. However, it is possible that additional archaeological deposits will be uncovered. Such impacts are potentially significant. c., f. The proposed project is temporary and both the Tecolote and Bell Creek project areas will be restored to their pre-project condition. Vegetation and tree removal will make the project areas more visible to the adjacent properties and public, which would discourage vandalism activities. However, this would be a temporary, beneficial impact as the vegetation will mature, and again, provide shelter for any vandalism activities. As such, post project conditions after restoration are not expected to change from the existing, baseline conditions. Therefore, impacts related to trespassing, vandalizing, or sabotaging any archaeological or other cultural areas are considered less than significant.

Cumulative Impacts:

Continued loss of cultural resources on a project-by-project basis could result in significant cumulative impacts to such resources over time. As such, the project is considered potentially significant contribution to this cumulative impact.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 90

Mitigation and Residual Impact:

CITY CR-1) A pre-construction workshop shall be conducted by a City-qualified archaeologist and a Chumash Native American most likely descendant observer. Attendees shall include the applicant, City staff, construction supervisors, and equipment operators to ensure that all parties understand the monitoring program and their respective roles and responsibilities. All construction personnel who would work during any phase of ground disturbance shall be required to participate in an orientation training session and sign to acknowledge understanding of the requirements. The names of all personnel who attend the workshop(s) shall be recorded. The workshop shall:

a. explain why monitoring is required and identify monitoring procedures;

b. describe what would temporarily stop construction and for how long;

c. describe a reasonable “worst case” new discovery scenario such as the discovery of intact human remains or a substantial midden deposit;

d. explain reporting requirements and responsibilities of the construction supervisor;

e discuss prohibited activities including unauthorized collecting of artifacts; and

f. identify the types of archeological materials that may be uncovered and provide examples of common artifacts to examine.

Plan Requirements and Timing: The minutes and attendance sheet from the Preconstruction Workshop shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to and as a condition precedent to issuance of any LUP for grading for the project. Monitoring: Planning and Environmental Services staff shall verify submittal of all required documentation prior to issuance of any LUP.

CITY CR-2) All work in Tecolote Creek will be performed in accordance with the work plan with minimal excavation to occur on either side of the stream channel to cut and remove the exposed pipe. Plan Requirements and Timing: The final LUP and grading and improvement plans shall include the aforementioned provisions in the Notes/Specifications. Monitoring: Planning and Environmental Services staff shall check all plans prior to issuance of grading and construction permits and shall spot check during field investigations as necessary.

CITY CR-3) The applicant, at its sole expense, shall retain a City-qualified archaeologist and Chumash Native American most likely descendant observer to monitor all ground disturbing construction activities within the Tecolote Creek project area to ensure that any potential discoveries are adequately recorded, evaluated, and, if significant, mitigated. Plan Requirements and Timing: A contract for the Construction Monitoring Plan, including identification of the City-qualified archeologist and Chumash Native American most likely descendant observer, shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to and as a condition precedent to issuance of any LUP for the project. Monitoring: City staff shall periodically perform site inspections to verify compliance.

CITY CR-4) In the event that cultural resources are uncovered during grading/construction activities in either the Tecolote or Bell Creek work areas, work shall cease immediately in the vicinity of the find and the applicant shall bear the cost of the immediate evaluation of the find’s importance and any appropriate Phase 2 or Phase 3 investigations and mitigation subject to prior approval of City staff. Plan Requirements and Timing: The project LUP and any grading and improvement plans shall include provisions in the Notes/Specifications to recover cultural resources ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 91 as described above. Cultural resource investigations/recovery shall be conducted by an archaeological, paleontological, historic or ethnographic expert acceptable to the Planning and Environmental Services Department. Monitoring: Planning and Environmental Services staff shall check all plans prior to issuance of grading and construction permits and shall spot check during field investigations as necessary.

With implementation of the above mitigation measures, the project’s residual impacts on cultural resources would be less than significant.

ENERGY

County and City Impact Discussion: Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document a. Substantial increase in demand, especially during peak X periods, upon existing sources of energy? b. Requirement for the development or extension of new X sources of energy? Impact Discussion: a., b. Only mobile equipment will be used to execute the pipeline removal work, which would not result in a substantial increase in demand upon nearby energy sources. There are no structures proposed as part of this project, therefore no new energy sources would be required.

Mitigation and Residual Impact: No mitigation is necessary; residual impacts would not result.

FIRE PROTECTION County Impact Discussion:

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document a. Introduction of development into an existing high fire X hazard area? b. Project-caused high fire hazard? X c. Introduction of development into an area without adequate water pressure, fire hydrants or adequate access for fire X fighting? d. Introduction of development that will hamper fire prevention techniques such as controlled burns or backfiring X in high fire hazard areas? e. Development of structures beyond safe Fire Dept. response X time?

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 92

Fire protection services are provided by Santa Barbara County Fire Station No. 11, located at 6901 Frey Way. Back-up service is provided by Santa Barbara County Fire Station No. 14, located at 320 Los Carneros Road. Response time to the site from either station is approximately 5 to 9 minutes (Hedrick, personal communication 2004).

Impact Discussion: a., b.

The proposed Project would not introduce new structures into the area, however, the Project would involve the temporary use of equipment in a designated high fire hazard area (eastern end of Makar property and Eagle Canyon Ranch sites) (FEIR, 1993).

Overgrown vegetation in access pathways, staging areas, and along the pipeline right-of-way will be mowed or trimmed prior to work to reduce the chance of a vehicle-induced brush fire. Each pipeline will be tapped at one or more low spots in the line to ensure that any residual liquids that may be present are fully drained prior to cutting. The pipelines will then be cut into manageable segments for offsite transport. No oxygen acetylene cutting torches are proposed to cut the pipelines which will further minimize the potential for a fire to result from Project activities.

c.-e. The project work area is adjacent to the Venoco EOF where both water and foam fire suppression systems are maintained. The sites are also adjacent to the Bacara property where water pressure is adequate and fire hydrants exist. A water tank, owned and operated by Venoco, is situated on the southeastern edge of Eagle Canyon Ranch for fire protection on the Ellwood Pier. The water supply line for the tank originates north at a well north of Highway 101 and traverses the eastern portion of Eagle Canyon Ranch. Venoco is currently working on connecting the firewater storage tank to the Goleta Valley Water District infrastructure. In the event water connection does not occur in a timely fashion, Venoco will be required to truck in water for the water tank until a permanent water system is in place. All these systems currently in place would be available to Atlantic Richfield in the unlikely event an incident does occur.

The project does not propose any new development of new structures, but rather removal of existing structures. Short-term impacts may arise as a result of the introduction of mechanized equipment during removal work, however the temporary usage would not hamper fire prevention techniques in the area. No new structures beyond safe Fire Department response time are proposed to be developed.

Mitigation and Residual Impact: Numerous fire prevention measures are incorporated into the Project Work Plan to effectively minimize the risk of a project-caused fire.

Applicant proposed fire mitigation measures include:

FIRE-1) In order to minimize the potential for a vehicle-induced brush fire, vegetation along the pipeline right-of-way will be mowed or trimmed where necessary prior to equipment access. Vegetation trimming will likely be necessary adjacent to the pipeline corridor along Eagle Canyon Ranch and possibly on the eastern portion of the Makar property.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 93

FIRE-2) Oxygen-acetylene torches shall not be used to cut the pipelines into segments for offsite transport.

FIRE –3) The following measures shall be taken to mitigate the potential for brush or grass fires from use of heavy equipment, welding, vehicles with catalytic converters, etc. These requirements include:

• All equipment with the potential to work off-road shall be equipped with appropriate mufflers and have extinguishers and extinguishing equipment (shovels, water, etc) on each vehicle. • Personnel shall be briefed on the dangers of wildfire and be able to respond accordingly should the need arise. • On-site supervisor(s) shall have a cell phone or other means of initiating a 911- response time a timely manner in the event of a medical emergency and/or fire. • All dead and decadent vegetation immediately within work areas should be removed and soil disturbance should be keep to a minimum. • Smoking shall be prohibited at the project site. • Hot work permit required as needed. • A water tender will be available on each construction site during the entire phase of construction. • A competent water tender operator shall be available on site during all construction and remain on site a minimum of 30 minutes after all construction has finished for the day.

FIRE -4) Prior to pipeline removal work, Atlantic Richfield will provide the City of Goleta and Count of Santa Barbara Fire Departments and area fire stations with a detailed work schedule.

FIRE -5) Prior to pipeline removal work, Atlantic Richfield will provide Venoco with a detailed schedule for work near its fire water supply line (Eagle Canyon Ranch).

With implementation of these mitigation measures, residual impacts would not be significant.

City Impact Discussion:

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document a. Introduction of development into an existing high fire X hazard area? b. Project-caused high fire hazard? X c. Introduction of development into an area without adequate water pressure, fire hydrants or adequate access for fire X fighting? d. Introduction of development that will hamper fire prevention techniques such as controlled burns or backfiring X in high fire hazard areas? e. Development of structures beyond safe Fire Dept. response X time?

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 94

Impact Discussion: a-c, e A portion of the Tecolote Creek work area is within the Wildland Fire Hazard Area as identified in the City of Goleta, General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan, Figure 5-2. The remainder of the Tecolote Creek work area, and the entirety of the Bell Creek work area, are adjacent to the Wildland Fire Hazard Area. The proposed Project would not introduce new structures into the area, but it would involve the temporary use of vehicles and equipment that could ignite a brush fire.

The applicant has proposed to mow or trim overgrown vegetation in access pathways, staging areas, and along the pipeline right-of-way prior to work to reduce the chance of a vehicle- induced brush fire. Each pipeline will be tapped at one or more low spots in the line to ensure that any residual liquids that may be present are fully drained prior to cutting. The pipelines will then be cut into manageable segments for offsite transport. No oxygen acetylene cutting torches are proposed to cut the pipelines which will further minimize the potential for a fire to result from project activities.

Emergency fire protection services will be provided by Santa Barbara County Fire Station No. 11, located at 6901 Frey Way in Goleta. This fire station does not meet the standard of one engine company/12,000 population assuming three fire fighters per station, one firefighter/4,000 population, and five minute response time. The proposed project will not create any new population, structures or other infrastructure requiring additional, long-term fire protection services. However, fire protection services will be required during construction, and due to the Fire Department’s existing deficiency in service standards, impacts are potentially significant.

d. No fire prevention techniques such as controlled burns or backfiring occur in the Bell and Tecolote Creek work areas. As such, no impacts related to fire prevention activities are anticipated.

Cumulative Impacts

There will be no long term impacts on fire protection/emergency response services beyond the removal of the pipelines. As such, no cumulative impacts should occur.

Mitigation and Residual Impact:

CITY FIRE–1) The applicant shall submit a Fire Management Plan to the City including, but not limited to, the following measures:

a. An alternative emergency access plan for the Bell Creek project area in the case that emergency access is required there while construction is blocking the access way. The applicant shall include written approval by any affected property owners (i.e. Venoco, Bacara, Sandpiper) if access is required for alternative emergency access. b. Vegetation management methodology and locations/amounts of vegetation requiring removal or trimming. c. All equipment with the potential to work off-road shall be equipped with appropriate mufflers and have extinguishers and extinguishing equipment (shovels, water, etc) on each vehicle. ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 95

d. Personnel shall be briefed on the dangers of wildfire and be able to respond accordingly should the need arise. e. On-site supervisor(s) shall have a cell phone or other means of initiating a 911 response time a timely manner in the event of a medical emergency and/or fire. f. All dead and decadent vegetation immediately surrounding work areas should be removed and soil disturbance should be keep to a minimum. g. Smoking shall be prohibited at the project site. h. Oxygen-acetylene torches shall not be used to cut the pipelines into manageable segments for offsite transport. i. Hot work permit required as needed. j. A water tender will be available on each construction site during the entire phase of construction. k. A competent water tender operator shall be available on site during all construction and remain on site a minimum of 30 minutes after all construction has finished for the day.

Plan Requirements and Timing: The Fire Management Plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Santa Barbara County Fire Department as well as City staff prior to LUP issuance. Monitoring: SBCFD and City staff shall verify compliance prior to issuance of any LUP for the project. City staff shall verify compliance with the Fire Management Plan through routine inspections.

CITY FIRE -2) Prior to commencement of any pipeline removal work, Atlantic Richfield will provide the City of Goleta, Santa Barbara County Fire Department, Sandpiper Golf Trust, Bacara Resort and Spa, Venoco, Inc., and any other affected agencies and property owners with a detailed work schedule. Plan Requirements and Timing: The work schedule shall be submitted at least seven days in advance of the start of construction activities. Monitoring: City staff shall City staff shall verify compliance through routine inspections.

Further mitigation measures to address vegetation restoration are described under the discussion of Biological Resources.

With implementation of these mitigation measures, project specific as well as the project’s residual contribution to cumulative fire protection impacts would be considered less than significant.

GEOLOGIC PROCESSES County Impact Discussion:

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document a. Exposure to or production of unstable earth conditions such

as landslides, earthquakes, liquefaction, soil creep, X mudslides, ground failure (including expansive, compressible, collapsible soils), or similar hazards? b. Disruption, displacement, compaction or overcovering of X the soil by cuts, fills or extensive grading? c. Permanent changes in topography? X ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 96

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique X geologic, paleontologic or physical features? e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or X off the site? f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands or dunes, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river, or stream, or the bed of the X ocean, or any bay, inlet or lake? g. The placement of septic disposal systems in impermeable X soils with severe constraints to disposal of liquid effluent? h. Extraction of mineral or ore? X i. Excessive grading on slopes of over 20%? X j. Sand or gravel removal or loss of topsoil? X k. Vibrations, from short-term construction or long-term X operation, which may affect adjoining areas? l. Excessive spoils, tailings or over-burden? X

Impact Discussion: a. There would not be any exposure to or production of unstable earth conditions such as landslides, earthquakes, liquefaction, soil creep, mudslides or ground failure resulting from the proposed Project. It will be necessary to trim back some vegetation to provide equipment access, however no significant erosion is anticipated as the site will be restored following the completion of the pipeline removal work in accordance with a Restoration, Erosion Control and Revegetation Plan that will be approved by the County of Santa Barbara and other relevant agencies.

b. – d., i., j. The project will involve a minimal amount of excavation work. The majority of the length of pipe to be removed is above ground. Excavation will be required to remove segments of pipe that are buried on the Eagle Canyon Ranch property. Cumulative soil excavation volumes are estimated to be less than 50 cubic yards. If estimates or actual excavation volumes are projected to exceed 50 cubic yards, appropriate grading permits will be obtained. This grading work will occur on relatively flat surfaces (approximately 0-10% gradients). Excavated soils will be used as backfill material and therefore there will be no loss of topsoil. As such the pipeline removal project will not involve any permanent changes in topography, nor will it cause destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic, paleontologic or physical features.

Although not anticipated, the potential exists to encounter hydrocarbon contaminated soils during the excavations that will be necessary to decommission some of the pipeline segments. The presence of hydrocarbon contaminated soils is expected to be minimal (if encountered at all) as there have not been any leaks or spills reported from the subject facilities nor has any visual discoloration or staining of soils been observed by applicant personnel during numerous field investigations. In addition, it has been more than 13 years since any of the Project pipelines have been used to transport petroleum hydrocarbons. If hydrocarbon contaminated soils are encountered during decommissioning, they will be handled in accordance with the project’s approved Waste Management Plan. As required by the mitigation measures proposed, a qualified individual (field monitor) will be onsite to observe excavation activities and will ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 97

conduct field screening of the excavated soil. Suspect materials will be screened both visually and through the use of a field portable photo-ionization detector (PID). Should impacted soils be identified, they will be handled in accordance of the Waste Management Plan. Under no circumstances will petroleum-impacted soils be used as backfill materials. e., f. Personal will enter Eagle Canyon Creek to build a temporary scaffold to tap, drain and removed the pipeline and pipe support structures. Additionally, a bulldozer staged on the existing road will pull the pipeline with a pulling sling to the upland areas of Eagle Canyon Creek.

g. The project will not involve the placement of septic disposal systems. h., l. No permanent extraction of soil for mineral or ore materials or excessive spoils, tailings or over- burden is proposed. The only exception to this is if the surface or underlying soil shows signs of hydrocarbon contamination, in which case it will be stockpiled, sampled and analyzed for petroleum hydrocarbon constituents per the Sampling and Disposal Plan included in the Project Work Plan. Per the plan requirements, shallow soil samples will also be collected at specified intervals (every 150 feet) from beneath the pipelines (2 feet below grade), primarily within Eagle Canyon Ranch. The analytical results will be evaluated to determine if further assessment is warranted to delineate the extent of potential hydrocarbon contamination of the soil. Preliminary results will be reported to the lead agency and the County of Santa Barbara Fire Department, Fire Protection Division (FPD), per the Oilfield Restoration Program. Assessment and remediation will be conducted according to a work plan approved by the appropriate agency. k. Any vibrations from construction work that would affect adjoining areas (i.e. the Bacara Resort) are likely to be short-term, occur during daylight hours, and minimal in comparison to vibrations from nearby traffic corridors, such as Highway 101 and the parallel railroad tracks between the highway and the site.

Mitigation and Residual Impact: Several mitigation measures will reduce potential impacts on siltation and soil erosion in the creek drainage areas. Mitigation measures BIO-5, BIO-13, BIO-14, and BIO-18 and the mitigation measure below would ensure that residual impacts would not be significant.

GEO-1) All trenched and excavated areas should be compacted to 90% relative compaction (modified proctor dry density) to help minimize the channeling of runoff, erosion, and the potential for localized landslides. Where trenched excavations are placed on slopes that exceed a 20% slope, a County approved “sack breaker” or equivalent design shall be employed to prevent channeling of runoff along the backfilled ditch. Backfill on slopes greater than 20% should be benched; the ground surface of these slopes should be stabilized using a County approved jute netting or equivalent design. All excavations should be returned to their original lines and grades.

GEO-2) The applicant shall limit excavation and grading to the dry season of the year (i.e. April 15 to November 1) unless a Building & Safety approved erosion and sediment control plan is in ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 98 place and all measures therein are in effect. All exposed graded surfaces shall be reseeded with ground cover vegetation to minimize erosion.

City Impact Discussion:

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document a. Exposure to or production of unstable earth conditions such X as landslides, earthquakes, liquefaction, soil creep, mudslides, ground failure (including expansive, compressible, collapsible soils), or similar hazards? b. Disruption, displacement, compaction or overcovering of X the soil by cuts, fills or extensive grading? c. Permanent changes in topography? X d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique X geologic, paleontologic or physical features? e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or X off the site? f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands or dunes, X or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river, or stream, or the bed of the ocean, or any bay, inlet or lake? g. The placement of septic disposal systems in impermeable X soils with severe constraints to disposal of liquid effluent? h. Extraction of mineral or ore? X i. Excessive grading on slopes of over 20%? X j. Sand or gravel removal or loss of topsoil? X k. Vibrations, from short-term construction or long-term X operation, which may affect adjoining areas? l. Excessive spoils, tailings or over-burden? X

Impact Discussion: a. Areas within the Bell Creek work area are designated as having high landslide potential in accordance with Figure 5-1 of the City’s GP/CLUP. There are also high landslide potential areas adjacent to both project areas. The active More Ranch Fault line is located approximately 2,300- feet from the southernmost portion of the Bell Creek work area, and approximately 4,100-feet from the southernmost point of the Tecolote Creek work area.

As stated in the existing setting, the majority of the soil type within the Tecolote Creek work area is GU (Gullied Land - non-prime soils). There is also MEe2 (Milpitas Positas fine sandy loams, 15 to 30 percent slopes, eroded –prime soils) located at and near the creek lagoon, and MeF2 (Milpitas Positas fine sandy loams, 30 to 50 percent slopes, eroded – prime soils) soils are also present in the project area.. For all three soil types, runoff is very rapid, and the hazard of erosion is very high (USGS Santa Barbara County Soil Survey, 1981).

Bell Creek primarily consists of GdA (Goleta loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes – prime soils) soils, but also contains smaller amounts of MeE2 and MeD2 (Milpitas Positas fine sandy loams, 9 to 15 percent slopes, eroded – prime soils) soil types. GdA is a nearly level soil on broad flood plains with a fine texture. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of erosion is slight. For both of the MeE2 ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 99

and MeD2 soil types, runoff is rapid, and the hazard of erosion is high (Santa Barbara County Soil Survey, 1981).

If the areas of soils excavation are not refilled with the minimum compaction required, erosion impacts could be potentially significant.

b – d, i, j The project will involve a minimal amount of excavation work. Excavation will be required to remove segments of pipe that are buried within the stream channel of Tecolote Creek, for tap locations for segments of pipe to be abandoned near Bell Creek, and areas around the hydrogen sulfide panel, pump and skid near Bell Creek. Soil excavation volumes are estimated to be approximately 35 cubic yards. This grading work will occur on relatively flat surfaces (approximately 0-10% gradients). Excavated soils will be used as backfill material and therefore there will be little to no loss of topsoil. As such the pipeline removal project will not involve any permanent changes in topography, nor will it cause destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic, paleontologic or physical features. However, such geologic impacts could occur if the fill is not compacted property. Such an impact is considered potentially significant.

e. The Tecolote Creek work plan indicates that the applicant will find and uncover the pipeline in the banks of the creek and then follow (“chase”) the pipeline toward the creek bed. A combination of hand tools, hand operated pneumatic tools, and a mini excavator would be used to expose the O-3 pipeline in the banks of the creek. The mini excavator and/or a crane located on the Hollister Avenue Bridge would then pull/lift the pipe out of the creek. The mini excavator would be used to remove sediment on top of the pipeline within the creek bed as needed to enable the pipeline to be pulled/lifted out of the creek. If the pipe is submerged in water, there is risk of additional water erosion of soils. Such an impact is considered potentially significant.

f. Excavation in both project areas are projected to be approximately 35 cubic yards, all of which, is intended for use as fill so there will be little to no loss of topsoil. As such, no changes in the deposition or erosion of beach sands or dunes, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river, or stream, or the bed of the ocean are expected. Therefore, no related impacts are anticipated.

g. The project will not involve the placement of septic disposal systems. Therefore, no such impacts would occur.

h., l. No permanent extraction of soil for mineral or ore materials or excessive spoils, tailings or over- burden is proposed. As such, no such impacts would occur.

k. Construction equipment to be used in Tecolote and/or Bell Creek project areas that could create vibration that could be felt at adjacent properties are the crane, flatbed truck, forklift, air compressor. generator, mini excavator, pipe tapping machine, boom truck, diaphragm pump or vacuum truck, grout delivery truck, in-line grout pump, compaction wheel, and the backhoe. The amount of vibrations potentially created by these sources is minimal, and very little ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 100

vibration (if any) is expected to be felt at adjacent properties. As such, impacts related to vibration are less than significant.

Cumulative Impacts:

Project contributions to cumulative, adverse erosion impacts in the area would be considered potentially significant. All other project contributions to cumulative impacts on geologic processes and soils would be considered less than significant.

Mitigation and Residual Impact:

CITY GEO-1) The applicant shall submit a Grading, Recompaction and Erosion Control Plan meeting minimum compaction requirements to the Planning and Environmental Services Department, Building and Safety Division. Plan Requirements & Timing: Said plan must be reviewed and approved by the Building and Safety Division prior to issuance of any Land Use Permit for the project. Monitoring: City staff shall perform periodic site inspections to verify compliance with the approved Grading, Recompaction and Erosion Control Plan.

Further mitigation measures to address erosion and sedimentation are described under the discussion of Hydrology & Water Resources and Biological Resources.

With implementation of these mitigation measures, project specific residual impacts, as well as the project’s contribution to cumulative impacts, would be considered less than significant.

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS/RISK OF UPSET County Impact Discussion:

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document a. In the known history of this property, have there been any past uses, storage or discharge of hazardous materials (e.g., X X fuel or oil stored in underground tanks, pesticides, solvents or other chemicals)? b. The use, storage or distribution of hazardous or toxic X X materials? c. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (e.g., oil, gas, biocides, bacteria, pesticides, X X chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? d. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an X X emergency evacuation plan? e. The creation of a potential public health hazard? X X f. Public safety hazards (e.g., due to development near chemical or industrial activity, producing oil wells, toxic X X disposal sites, etc.)? ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 101

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document g. Exposure to hazards from oil or gas pipelines or oil well X X facilities? h. The contamination of a public water supply? X X Impact Discussion: a. The abandoned pipelines to be removed were used to transport oil, gas and water from the Dos Pueblos oil field to the Ellwood Onshore Facility and Gas Company distribution system. The western portion of the field began operation in the 1940’s. Most of the wells were abandoned by 1992; the remainder were abandoned in 1997. The offsite pipelines were flushed with water in 1997 prior to abandonment. Oil and gas processing, storage and distribution facilities, including storage tanks and pipelines, existed in the project area from the 1940’s until the facilities were decommissioned as part of the Dos Pueblos Golf Links project in the 1990’s. Remnants of the abandoned pipeline still remain throughout the project area.

As part of the FEIR for the ARCO Dos Pueblos Golf Links Project (County of Santa Barbara, 1993), a preliminary hazardous waste assessment was conducted to identify known past handling and disposal practices and possible historic releases of materials that may impact the project. The scope of work included:

• A site reconnaissance of the subject property to identify obvious potential hazardous conditions. • Interviews with ARCO’s facility manager and environmental personnel at the time and review of company documents for information regarding past facility operations including records of disposal practices and releases, and spills or leaks of hazardous materials. • Review of Department of Transportation (DOT) records regarding past and present oil production activities at the subject site. • Review of APCD records of past incidents which involved releases of hazardous materials to the surrounding environment. • Review of Santa Barbara County Environmental Health Services (EHS) and Leaking Underground Fuel Tank records for known reported hazardous releases onsite. • Review of historic aerial photographs of the subject property, conducted at the University of California Santa Barbara Map and Imagery Department.

The results of these investigations are documented in Section 5.7.1.4 of the Dos Pueblos Golf Links FEIR. All reported incidents, including a spill of produced oil and water in 1991, occurred near the now-removed facilities on the Dos Pueblos property itself. Clean-up efforts are also documented in the FEIR. Some remediation work occurred on the Dos Pueblos property as part of onsite facility abandonment. As part of subsurface facility removal, observations of the surrounding soils were made for visual indications of leaks or contamination. If hydrocarbon stains were detected, soils up to 7.5 cubic yards (or 200 cubic feet) per location were placed in a bin and transported off-site to an approved landfill.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 102

There were no reported incidents originating from the offsite pipelines, which are the subject of this analysis. Additionally, ARCO performed a Phase I database search performed for reported spills of hazardous materials on the subject parcels. The results of this search noted that there are approximately eighty (80) oil, gas, or related wells that are located both onshore and offshore within a two-mile radius of the project sites. However, no reports indicated spills specifically in the project areas.

There are no known spills associated with the abandoned pipelines. However, some of the pipelines have an asphalt-type coating that, in the past, was commonly used to protect the pipelines in corrosive environments.

This material appears on the pipe racks as well as on the ground surface, beneath the pipelines and was analyzed for the presence of asbestos. Analytical results show that asbestos is not present. b. The proposed project is a demolition and reclamation project. No development is proposed that would include use, storage or distribution of hazardous materials. Hazardous materials encountered during the remediation, including contaminated soils, would be required to be handled in accordance with an approved Waste Management Plan. c. All pipelines are proposed to be tapped prior to their removal to safely removal any residual liquids. This procedure will ensure that no residual hydrocarbons are released into the environment. d., g. The project will not interfere with any emergency response or evacuation plans, nor will it create a potential public health or safety hazard. The worksites involving heavy equipment are not readily accessible to the public. h. Although the pipelines were flushed with water prior to abandonment, residual hydrocarbon liquids may be present. Removal of pipelines from Eagle Canyon Creek could result in an accidental discharge of liquids. Each pipe will be tapped and residual liquids drained into a barrel prior to cutting to minimize the potential for such an occurrence. The project mitigation measures described below are proposed to minimize the risk of an accidental discharge and ensure prompt effective response should one occur.

Mitigation and Residual Impact:

Applicant-proposed mitigation measures:

HAZ-1) Each pipeline to be removed or grouted in-place will be tapped at one or more low sections and drained of any residual liquids prior to cutting the line for removal. Drums or other appropriate containers staged to capture liquids drained from the tapped line shall include a secondary containment skid or pallet to capture any misdirected fluid. Sorbent booms shall be staged down slope of and around the drum prior to draining of pipeline liquids, wherever pipe ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 103

tapping is to occur, especially on the bank of a creek such as Eagle Canyon Creek. The collection area will be isolated using delineators and caution tape to create an exclusion zone for the workers. Hot-work precautions shall be observed and documented before tapping the line and appropriate personal protection equipment as specified in the site’s Health and Safety Plan shall be worn when inside the exclusion zone. A four-gas meter (measuring oxygen, carbon monoxide, hydrogen sulfide and lower explosive limit) shall be utilized during the pipe tapping and residual fluid removal process to monitor for the potential presence of flammable vapors or gases emitted from the subject pipelines that could ignite or pose a health hazard to those involved in the work task.

HAZ -2) The Oil Spill Prevention and Contingency Plan prepared in support of the Project will be implemented to reduce the potential for a release of petroleum hydrocarbon materials to occur, and although not anticipated, to appropriately respond to a release if one occurs.

HAZ -3) The Project’s Traffic Control Plan (Section 5.0 of the Project Work Plan) will be implemented to minimize potential interferences with emergency ingress/egress.

HAZ -4) If field screening indicates that contaminated soils may be encountered along the pipeline right-of-way during project work, Atlantic Richfield will promptly notify the appropriate regulatory agencies and sample the affected soils to analyze the type and concentration of the potential impact. If the contaminated soils are determined to exceed clean- up thresholds, as established by the County of Santa Barbara Fire Prevention Division (FPD) (formerly Protective Services Division), then Atlantic Richfield will prepare a workplan to delineate the extent of the contaminants in the soil after all pipelines and support structures have been removed and pursue the appropriate modifications to its permit(s) to address this unanticipated work scope. If contaminated soil is found, up to 50 cubic yards of material may be stockpiled onsite for later off-site disposal.

The mitigation measures identified in Section 4.7 (Fire Protection) will also serve to reduce project risk. With implementation of these mitigation measures, residual impacts would not be significant.

City Impact Discussion:

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document a. In the known history of this property, have there been any past uses, storage or discharge of hazardous materials (e.g., X fuel or oil stored in underground tanks, pesticides, solvents or other chemicals)? b. The use, storage or distribution of hazardous or toxic X materials? c. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (e.g., oil, gas, biocides, bacteria, pesticides, X chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? d. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an X emergency evacuation plan? e. The creation of a potential public health hazard? X ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 104

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document f. Public safety hazards (e.g., due to development near chemical or industrial activity, producing oil wells, toxic X disposal sites, etc.)? g. Exposure to hazards from oil or gas pipelines or oil well X facilities? h. The contamination of a public water supply? X

Impact Discussion: a. SECOR International Incorporated conducted a review of available records pertaining to the oil and gas pipeline distribution system affiliated with the Dos Pueblos onshore facilities. This review was conducted to differentiate Site facilities previously owned and operated by Atlantic Richfield (who operated the Dos Pueblos facilities from 1985 to 1993) from those of other operators the site from the early 1930’s through the life of the field. This review included records held by Santa Barbara County, City of Goleta, California State Lands Commission, California Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources, and corporate records held by Atlantic Richfield. Publicly available aerial photo archives have also been searched as well as numerous local, state, and federal databases containing information on hazardous materials/waste. In addition, the current operators/owners of the properties in question have been interviewed. One of the key findings of the due diligence investigation is that there is no evidence of a release of petroleum hydrocarbons or other chemicals during the time Atlantic Richfield operated the site facilities between December 20, 1985 and April 1, 1993.

While no evidence of any oil releases were found associated with the O-3 pipeline, there is still the potential for soil contamination resulting from O-3 operations to be found during excavation. Such impacts are considered potentially significant. b. Construction equipment proposed for use in the creek areas, such as the mini excavator, require the use of petroleum fuel. If refueling activities result in a spill of fuel, such impacts would be considered potentially significant. Also placement of portable sanitary facilities are proposed within both creek corridors. If such facilities leak or spill, impacts would be considered potentially significant. c.,-e.–h. Residual hydrocarbon liquids may be present in the pipelines located in the Bell Creek project area (the pipeline at the Tecolote Creek project area is filled with grout and as such, this risk is not applicable there). Cutting these pipelines has the potential to result in an accidental discharge of liquids. Such a discharge is potentially significant.

During pipeline cutting procedures, hydrocarbon vapors contained within the pipelines could be released. These vapors could ignite with the use of oxygen-acetylene torch and cause a fire in the work area. Such impacts are also considered potentially significant.

As previously stated, the portion of the O-3 pipeline suspended over Bell Creek is not proposed for removal at this time due to the safety constraints already outlined in this document. From its ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 105 western termination, the pipeline is exposed and follows an eastern alignment down-slope towards Bell Creek, where it is supported by a steel pipe support structure located adjacent to the western bank of Bell Creek. At this point, the pipeline is suspended over Bell Creek and continues east for approximately 68 feet where it rests on another pipe support, and then enters the subsurface on the east bank of Bell Creek. The pipeline continues east underground for approximately 150 feet where it bends 90 degrees to the south and continues approximately 700 feet, paralleling the western boundary of the Venoco Ellwood Onshore Facility, terminating at a redwood vault box located south of the Venoco helipad.

The entire east-west alignment of O-3 (approximately 326 linear feet) closely parallels Venoco’s high pressure, active, gas pipeline (V-1). V-1 extends approximately 3,600 feet from inside the Venoco Ellwood Onshore Facility west to a Southern California Gas Company metering station located immediately adjacent to the Ellwood Pier access gate. V-1 transitions from a surface to a subsurface pipeline in close proximity to the western termination of O-3. In some places, the two pipelines are positioned only inches apart, and share common pipeline supports, located above the western and eastern banks of Bell Creek. A steel cable connected to concrete anchors on both sides of Bell Creek provides additional structural support for V-1. This steel cable crosses directly over O-3, but it is not connected to O-3. V-1 reportedly has a normal operating pressure of 950 psig with a hydrogen sulfide concentration of less than 4 parts per million by volume (CSLC, 2006).

Removal of O-3 presents an inherent risk of disturbing V-1. Potential disturbances to V-1 include the following:

• Direct contact from O-3 during removal operations; • Direct contact from equipment used to remove O-3; • Soil disturbances on both sides of Bell Creek as a result of any earthmoving activities • required to remove O-3; • Disturbance to the steel pipeline support adjacent to the western bank of Bell Creek that • currently supports both pipelines; • Disturbance to the steel cable currently supporting V-1 suspended over Bell Creek; and • Increased static load on V-1.

The potential risks of the above disturbances could include rupture of, or damage to V-1. A breach or rupture of V-1 as a result of Project activities presents a significant potential for injury and/or loss of life to those nearby. It is quite possible that the breach or rupture could cause an ignition source, such as a spark from metal to metal contact, that would result in an explosion or fire. Based on the 6-inch diameter pipeline operating at a pressure of 1,000 pounds per square inch, V-1 has an estimated potential impact radius of approximately 131 feet. The Potential Impact Radius (PIR) of V-1 would not only present an extreme hazard to project personnel onsite, but would also encompass Hollister Avenue, which is located 100 feet north of the Bell Creek pipeline crossings and has the potential to conflict with emergency access to the Venoco Ellwood Onshore Facility, Sandpiper Golf Course (for fire suppression access), Venoco Pier (and offshore Venoco, ExxonMobil, and Plains Exploration and Production platforms), the Bacara, and the Southern California Gas Company metering station. As such, the option of removing this portion of the O-3 pipeline is not proposed until the Venoco facility is decommissioned.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 106

However, leaving the pipeline in place also presents risks. If there were a leak or break in the pipeline, residual hydrocarbons remaining in the pipeline could be released into the environment. Such impacts are considered potentially significant.

d. It is possible that the excavation completed at pipe tap location #21 in the Bell Creek project area could preclude emergency vehicle access along the unpaved access pathway while the excavation is open. As described in the project description, if emergency access is temporarily precluded, alternative emergency access to Sandpiper Golf Course, State Lease 421 piers, and Ellwood Beach can be maintained by diverting emergency traffic through the Ellwood Onshore Facility. However, if accommodations for the planned alternative emergency access are not finalized and enforceable, such impacts are potentially significant.

Cumulative Impacts: The project’s contribution to cumulative hazards risks is considered less than significant.

Mitigation and Residual Impact:

CITY HAZ-1) Each pipeline to be removed or grouted in-place will be tapped at one or more low sections and drained of any residual liquids prior to cutting the line in preparation for removal. Drums or other appropriate containers staged to capture liquids drained from the tapped line shall include a secondary containment skid or pallet to capture any misdirected fluid. Sorbent booms shall be staged down slope of and around the drum prior to draining of pipeline liquids, wherever pipe tapping is to occur. The collection area will be isolated using delineators and caution tape to create an exclusion zone for the workers. A four-gas meter (measuring oxygen, carbon monoxide, hydrogen sulfide and lower explosive limit) shall be utilized during the pipe tapping and residual fluid removal process to monitor for the potential presence of flammable vapors or gases emitted from the subject pipelines that could ignite or pose a health hazard to those involved in the work task. Plan Requirements and Timing: This requirement shall be noted on all grading plans. Monitoring: City staff shall site inspect during construction activities to verify compliance.

CITY HAZ -2) If field screening indicates that contaminated soils may be encountered along the pipeline right-of-way during project work, Atlantic Richfield will promptly notify the appropriate regulatory agencies and sample the affected soils to analyze the type and concentration of the contamination. If the contaminated soils are determined to exceed clean-up thresholds, as established by the County of Santa Barbara Fire Department, Fire Prevention Division, then Atlantic Richfield will prepare a workplan to delineate the extent of the contaminants in the soil after all pipelines and associated equipment have been removed and pursue the appropriate modifications to its permit(s) to address this unanticipated scope of work. If contaminated soil is found, up to 50 cubic yards of material may be stockpiled onsite for later off-site disposal. Plan Requirements and Timing: Said plan must be submitted to the Fire Department and the City of Goleta staff within 60 days of the completion of work. Monitoring: Santa Barbara County Fire Department and City staff shall verify submittal, and compliance, with the work plan.

CITY HAZ-3) No hazardous materials shall be stored (i.e. gasoline/diesel for refueling or portable sanitary facility) within staging areas that are within an ESHA. Plan Requirements ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 107

and Timing: This requirement shall be noted on any LUP and grading plans. Monitoring: City staff shall site inspect during construction activities to verify compliance.

CITY HAZ-4) The project shall comply with the conclusions and recommendations contained in the Health and Safety Plan prepared by SECOR dated April 23, 2007. Plan Requirements & Timing: Said plan must be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department and Planning and Environmental Services Department prior to issuance of any Land Use Permit for the project. Monitoring: Santa Barbara County Fire Department and City staff shall perform periodic site inspections to verify compliance.

CITY HAZ-5) To ensure decommissioning/removal of O-3 pipeline suspended over Bell Creek, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City for decommissioning/removal of said pipeline upon the decommissioning of the V-1 high pressure gas pipeline or the EOF, whichever comes first. Plan Requirements and Timing: The applicant shall sign the decommissioning/removal agreement including any and post performance securities required for an amount approved by City staff prior to issuance of any LUP for the project. Monitoring: City staff shall contact ARCO upon decommissioning of the V-1 pipeline and/or the EOF. Release of any performance security requires approval of a subsequent decommissioning and removal plan by the City, and physical removal of the pipeline by ARCO.

CITY HAZ-6) A detailed plan shall be submitted to the Santa Barbara County Fire Department, Fire Prevention Division and the City of Goleta, with written approval of said plan by Venoco, Inc., and any other affected property owners providing access, for an alternative emergency access plan at the Bell and Tecolote Creek work areas. Plan Requirements and Timing: Said plan must be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department and the City of Goleta staff prior to issuance of any Land Use Permit for the project. Monitoring: Santa Barbara County Fire Department and City staff shall field verify alternative emergency access is provided for during construction activities.

CITY HAZ -7) Prior to demolition activities at Bell Creek, Venoco’s active, high pressure, gas line will be clearly marked in the field. Plan Requirements and Timing: This requirement shall be noted on any LUP and grading plans. Monitoring: City staff shall site inspect prior to the start of construction activities to verify compliance.

CITY HAZ -8) The Oil Spill Prevention and Contingency Plan prepared in support of the Project will be implemented to reduce the potential for a release of petroleum hydrocarbon materials to occur, and although not anticipated, to appropriately respond to a release if one occurs. Plan Requirements and Timing: This requirement shall be noted on any LUP and grading plans. Monitoring: City staff shall site inspect prior to the start of construction activities to verify compliance.

CITY HAZ -9) Visual inspection of the O-3 pipeline segment suspended over Bell Creek and associated pipe supports will be performed on an annual basis to evaluate their integrity. If the pipeline’s integrity is compromised, measures shall be identified to correct the problem subject to the approval of the City. Plan Requirements and Timing: Atlantic Richfield will maintain copies of all inspection reports and will make them available to Venoco and applicable regulatory agencies upon request. In the event that the integrity of the O-3 pipeline or the support structures is observed to be significantly reduced during any of the annual inspections, a copy of the inspection report will be provided to Venoco and the City of Goleta along with a proposal for ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 108

corrective action. Monitoring: City staff shall verify submittal of annual inspections, and proposals for corrective action if required.

The mitigation measure identified in the Fire Protection section will also serve to reduce project risk. With implementation of these mitigation measures, residual impacts would not be significant.

HISTORIC RESOURCES County Impact Discussion:

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document a. Adverse physical or aesthetic impacts on a structure or X X property at least 50 years old and/or of historic or cultural significance to the community, state or nation? b. Beneficial impacts to an historic resource by providing X X rehabilitation, protection in a conservation/open easement, etc.? Impact Discussion: a., b. The proposed project is not expected to adversely affect any historically significant resources as the pipelines to be removed are well away from the known vicinity of a historical structure. No impacts to the historic site (CA-SBA-2442H) are anticipated as the site can and will be avoided during pipeline removal work. No new access trails to the site will be created by the proposed project.

Project workers will be educated as to the significance and sensitivity of the nearby site prior to work.

Mitigation and Residual Impact:

HR-1) Prior to the start of pipeline abandonment work, the Atlantic Richfield project team will hold a meeting with contractors, project personnel, and the County to review the Project Work Plan, safety procedures, and sensitive resources in the area. Workers will be made aware of archaeological and historical resources near the project site and the importance of avoiding such resources. In addition, the roles and authority of the archaeological and Native American monitors, as well as that of the County Environmental Quality Assurance Program (EQAP) monitor, will be reviewed.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 109

City Impact Discussion:

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document a. Adverse physical or aesthetic impacts on a structure or X property at least 50 years old and/or of historic or cultural significance to the community, state or nation? b. Beneficial impacts to an historic resource by providing X rehabilitation, protection in a conservation/open easement, etc.?

Impact Discussion: a., b. Neither the Tecolote nor Bell Creek project areas are shown to contain any historical resources (City of Goleta General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan Figure 6-2). The nearest identified resource occurs approximately one half of a mile to the east along Hollister Avenue adjacent to Devereux Creek, which has been identified as the Barnsdall-El Rio Grande gas station. This gas station was built in 1929 and is the last of the Pearl Chase Spanish style gas stations. This site is not within either project work area, and will not be disturbed as a result of project implementation.

Although there have been no previous paleontological discoveries on-site, the location of the project areas within creeks with lagoons that feed into the Pacific Ocean, and given the historical presence of Chumash Indians in the Santa Barbara area, there remains the potential for such resources to be uncovered and adversely affected by construction activities. As such, the potential for disturbance of any remaining historical/paleontological artifacts onsite is considered to be potentially significant.

Cumulative Impacts Continued loss of historic resources on a project-by-project basis could result in significant cumulative impacts to such resources over time. The project’s potential impact is considered a considerable contribution to this cumulative impact.

Mitigation and Residual Impact:

CITY HR-1) In the event that cultural resources are uncovered during grading/construction activities, work shall be ceased immediately in the vicinity of the find and the applicant shall bear the cost of the immediate evaluation of the find’s importance and any appropriate Phase 2 or Phase 3 investigations and mitigation as approved by the City. Plan Requirements and Timing: The project grading plans shall include provisions in the Notes/Specifications to recover cultural resources as described above. Cultural resource investigations/recovery shall be conducted by an paleontological, historic or ethnographic expert acceptable to the Planning and Environmental Services Department. Monitoring: Planning and Environmental Services staff shall check all plans prior to issuance of grading and construction permits and shall spot check during field investigations as necessary.

With implementation of the above mitigation measure as well as mitigation in the Cultural Resources section of this document, the project’s residual impacts on historic resources would be less than significant. ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 110

4.11 LAND USE County Impact Discussion:

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document a. Structures and/or land use incompatible with existing land X use? b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific X plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c. The induction of substantial growth or concentration of X population? d. The extension of sewer trunk lines or access roads with capacity to serve new development beyond this proposed X project? e. Loss of existing affordable dwellings through demolition, X conversion or removal? f. Displacement of substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing X elsewhere? g. Displacement of substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing X elsewhere? h. The loss of a substantial amount of open space? X i. An economic or social effect that would result in a physical change? (i.e. Closure of a freeway ramp results in isolation of an area, businesses located in the vicinity close, neighborhood degenerates, and buildings deteriorate. Or, if X construction of new freeway divides an existing community, the construction would be the physical change, but the economic/social effect on the community would be the basis for determining that the physical change would be significant.) j. Conflicts with adopted airport safety zones? X

Impact Discussion: a. The proposed pipeline removal project will not result in the addition of any structures or a change in land use. b. Policy 6-30 of the Local Coastal Plan states “Oil and gas facilities shall be dismantled and removed…in an orderly and timely manner that avoids long-term impacts to health, safety, and welfare of the public and environment.” A portion of the O-3 pipeline is proposed to remain in place and be removed at a later date. This is consistent with Policy 6-30 because that portion of pipeline runs parallel to Venoco’s EOF and Line 96 and has been found to be unsafe to remove until the Venoco facilities are decommissioned. Additionally, ARCO’s intent is to remove its old ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 111

abandoned infrastructure in a manner that protects existing resources. Removal of the remaining portions of abandoned oil and gas pipelines is consistent with the land use policies of the County and the Local Coastal Plan. With the exception of Tecolote Creek, project work would occur in areas not readily accessible to the public. Therefore, the proposed pipeline removal project is consistent with policies of the California Coastal Act, the City of Goleta General Plan, Santa Barbara County Comprehensive Plan, Local Coastal Plan and Coastal Zoning Ordinances as discussed in Section 9.0.

c., d. The project would not result in the creation of any new structures, sewer lines or access roads and, hence, would not result in any growth-inducing impacts.

e. - g. No existing affordable dwellings exist in the project area, therefore no demolition, conversion or removal of such structures or displacement of people will occur.

h. No short or long-term adverse impacts to land uses would result from the proposed project. No open space would be lost.

i. No negative economic or social effects would result from the proposed abandonment project.

j. The project area is not located within an airport safety zone.

City Impact Discussion:

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document a. Structures and/or land use incompatible with existing land X use? b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific X plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c. The induction of substantial growth or concentration of X population? d. The extension of sewer trunk lines or access roads with capacity to serve new development beyond this proposed X project? e. Loss of existing affordable dwellings through demolition, X conversion or removal? f. Displacement of substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing X elsewhere? g. Displacement of substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing X elsewhere? ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 112

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document h. The loss of a substantial amount of open space? X i. An economic or social effect that would result in a physical change? (i.e. Closure of a freeway ramp results in isolation of an area, businesses located in the vicinity close, neighborhood degenerates, and buildings deteriorate. Or, if X construction of new freeway divides an existing community, the construction would be the physical change, but the economic/social effect on the community would be the basis for determining that the physical change would be significant.) j. Conflicts with adopted airport safety zones? X

Impact Discussion: a., b. The proposed project complies with all development standards of the Recreation (REC) zone district under the Coastal Zoning Ordinance (CZO). However, while the proposed pipeline removal project would not add any new structures, it does propose to temporarily leave a portion of the O-3 pipeline suspended over Bell Creek in place (abandoned). General Plan policy LU 10.3(c) calls for the removal of “unused, inactive, or abandoned pipelines as of 2005, including the remnants of the ARCO pipeline.” As stated in the Hazardous Materials/Risk of Upset section, ARCO has found it infeasible to remove this segment of the pipeline at this time due to safety concerns related to the active, high pressure gas, V-1 pipeline in close proximity to this line. This decision is supported by General Plan policy SE10, the objective of which is to minimize injuries, illnesses, loss of life and property, and economic and social disruption due to potential upsets associated with the storage, use, handling, and transport of hazardous materials. With implementation of mitigation measure HAZ-5, the project can be found consistent with LU 10.3(c). As such, General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan consistency impacts are considered less than significant. c. -g. The project will not create any population growth as no new structures are proposed. As such, there is no need for extensions of sewer trunk lines or access roads to serve any new development. There will be no demolition of affordable dwellings as no such structures exist in the project areas. No displacement of existing housing or people will occur as a result of project implementation. Therefore, no such impacts would occur related to population or housing. h. Both project areas are located within designated open space (City of Goleta GP/CLUP Figure 3- 5). The proposed project would require construction within these open space areas, however, with the implementation of mitigation measures in the Biological Resource section of this document, no loss of open space would occur. As such, impacts are considered less than significant. i. No negative economic or social effects would result from the proposed abandonment project.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 113

j. Although the project site does lie within the area of influence of the Santa Barbara Municipal Airport as defined by the Santa Barbara County Airport Land Use Plan, it is outside of any airport safety zones (approach/clear zones). As such, the project would not conflict with airport safety zones, and no associated impacts would occur.

Cumulative Impacts

The project’s contribution to cumulative land use and planning impacts would be considered less than significant.

Mitigation and Residual Impact: Mitigation to address decommissioning (as opposed to removal) of the portion of the O-3 pipeline suspended over Bell Creek are included in the Hazardous Materials/Risk of Upset section.

Residual project specific, as well as project contributions to cumulative impacts, would be considered less than significant.

NOISE County Impact Discussion:

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document a. Long-term exposure of people to noise levels exceeding X County thresholds (e.g. locating noise sensitive uses next to an airport)? b. Short-term exposure of people to noise levels exceeding X County thresholds? c. Project-generated substantial increase in the ambient noise X levels for adjoining areas (either day or night)?

The Santa Barbara County Environmental Thresholds Manual (Santa Barbara County, 2002) identifies several land uses that are considered to be sensitive noise receptors. These receptors include schools, residential development, commercial lodging facilities, hospitals or care facilities, libraries, and churches. The maximum threshold for exterior noise exposure compatible with these noise-sensitive uses is 65 dB Day-Night Average Sounds Level (L ). According to dn the Santa Barbara County Comprehensive Plan Noise Element (cited in County of Santa Barbara Environmental Thresholds Manual), without mitigation, exterior daytime and nighttime noise levels associated with grading and construction activities within 1,600 feet of sensitive receptors could result in a potentially significant impact.

Primary noise sources existing in the project area include vehicle traffic on Highway 101, periodic trains and over-flying aircraft.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 114

Impact Discussion: a. – c.

No long-term noise sources would be created by the proposed pipeline removal project. Limited short-term exposure to construction noise is anticipated in the immediate area surrounding the project sites, but is not expected to exceed County thresholds. The nearest and only sensitive noise receptor in the vicinity of the proposed pipeline removal project is the Bacara Resort & Spa. However, the hotel and conference rooms are located on the western portion of the Bacara property, more than ¼ mile away from Bell Creek.

Equipment to be used on the Eagle Canyon Ranch would include a vacuum truck, an A-frame truck, two end dump trucks, and a water truck. The noisiest operations would be that of a chainsaw to cut the wooden pipe supports and branches that have grown or fallen over the pipelines and the operation of a mini bulldozer at Eagle Canyon Creek. This work would occur on the westernmost portion of the Ranch property, more than ½ mile from the hotel. It is unlikely that this activity would be heard at the Bacara Resort or by passers-by above the ambient noise level.

Other potential receptors in the general area include two residential developments, both located north of Highway 101: Embarcadero Heights and Winchester Commons. These residential developments are at least ¼ mile from the project sites and are separated from the sites by the freeway and railroad. Noise generated from these transport corridors is likely to be louder than pipeline removal activities and would overshadow project-related noise.

Construction noise in the Tecolote Creek work area and eastern portion of the Marine Terrace work area were modeled to estimate the noise levels that could be experienced at the Bacara. Four individual construction scenarios were modeled. These scenarios consist of a crane, air compressor, generator, pneumatic tool, and a pump operating simultaneously in the Tecolote Creek work area and three work activities utilizing different work spreads at the eastern termination of the O-3 Pipeline east of the Venoco Ellwood Pier access road. The results of the modeling effort are summarized in the table below. Table 9 – Predicted Noise Levels for Pipeline Removal

Distance to Sensitive Estimated Estimated Construction Scenario Receptor – Bacara (feet) Leq (dBA) Ldn (dBA) Tecolote Creek (crane operation, air compression, 330-480 65.6 63.4 generator, pneumatic tool, and Pump) Marine Terrace (operation of an air compressor 280 63.3 62.4 and saw) Marine Terrace (operation of an excavator) 280 65.6 63.4 Marine Terrace (operation of a crane) 280 60.1 61.3

The above construction scenarios are those that would occur in closet proximity to the Bacara and are considered to be worst-case scenarios of estimated noise levels caused by the project to the Bacara. As shown in the table above, the Ldn for each construction scenario is below the significance threshold established by the County of Santa Barbara (65 dBA Ldn). No noise impacts to sensitive receptors are anticipated. In addition, no long-term noise sources would be created by the proposed project. ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 115

Mitigation and Residual Impact: NS – 1) Noise levels shall remain below 65 dBA at sensitive receptors in the surrounding area. A field test will be conducted by Atlantic Richfield and monitored by the County EQAP monitor for any noise compliant received. If the noise level is measured to be 65 dBA or greater at a sensitive receptor, Atlantic Richfield shall modify field operations to keep the noise level below 65 dBA.

Implementation of this mitigation measure is expected to reduce residual impact to a less than significant level.

City Impact Discussion:

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document a. Long-term exposure of people to noise levels exceeding X County thresholds (e.g. locating noise sensitive uses next to an airport)? b. Short-term exposure of people to noise levels exceeding X County thresholds? c. Project-generated substantial increase in the ambient noise X levels for adjoining areas (either day or night)?

Impact Discussion: a. – c.

The Noise Element of the City’s General Plan establishes a limit of 60 dB(A) as typically acceptable for noise sensitive receptors, which includes ESHA’s, the Bacara Resort and Spa and Sandpiper Golf Course. Under the Conservation Element of the General Plan (Policy CE 1.9(f)), noise levels from new development should not exceed 60 dB(A) at habitat sites. However, this policy allows this noise level to be exceeded during construction when it can be demonstrated that significant adverse impacts on wildlife can be avoided or will be temporary. Noise from project implementation will be temporary as this project is a construction project, and no new noise generating uses will remain upon project completion. However, while construction equipment is operating in the project areas, noise impacts to sensitive receptors are considered potentially significant.

Cumulative Impacts

Short term project construction noise would result in a less than significant contribution to cumulative noise impact on sensitive receptors.

Mitigation and Residual Impact: CITY NS-1) All noise-generating project construction activities shall be limited to Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Construction shall generally not be allowed on weekends and state holidays. Exceptions to these restrictions may be made in extenuating circumstances (in the event of an emergency, for example) or on a case by case basis at the discretion of the Director of Planning and Environmental Services. The applicant shall post the allowed hours of ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 116

operation near the entrance to the site, so that workers on site are aware of this limitation. Plan Requirements and Timing: Three (3) signs stating these restrictions shall be provided by the applicant and posted on site. Such signs shall be a minimum size of 24” x 48.” All such signs shall be in place prior to beginning commencement of any grading/demolition and maintained through to occupancy clearance. Violations may result in suspension of permits. Monitoring: City staff shall closely monitor compliance with restrictions on construction hours, and shall promptly investigate and respond to all noncompliance complaints.

CITY NS-2) Stationary construction equipment that generates noise which exceeds 65 dB(A) measured 50-feet from the source in an unattenuated condition shall be shielded to reduce such noise levels to no more than 60 dB(A). Plan Requirements and Timing: The applicant shall submit a list of all stationary equipment to be used in project construction which includes manufactures specifications on equipment noise levels. The applicant shall also provide recommended mitigation measures from the project acoustical engineer that would bring this project into compliance with this requirement. This information shall be reviewed and approved by City staff prior to issuance of any LUP for the project. All City approved noise attenuation measures for stationary equipment used in any construction and/or demolition activities shall be implemented and maintained for the duration of the period when such equipment is onsite. Monitoring: City staff shall verify compliance prior to issuance of any LUP for the project. City staff shall periodically inspect the site to ensure compliance with all required stationary equipment noise attenuation requirements.

CITY NS-3) The following measures shall be incorporated into grading and building plan specifications to reduce the impact of construction noise:

a) All construction equipment shall have properly maintained sound-control devices, and no equipment shall have an unmuffled exhaust system.

b) Contractors shall implement appropriate additional noise mitigation measures including but not limited to changing the location of stationary construction equipment, shutting off idling equipment, and installing acoustic barriers around significant sources of stationary construction noise.

Plan Requirements and Timing: All of the above mitigation measures shall be noted on all plans submitted for any LUP and/or grading permit(s). Monitoring: City staff shall verify compliance prior to any LUP or grading permit(s) approval as well as conducting periodic field inspections.

With implementation of these mitigation measures, residual project specific noise impacts, as well as the project’s contribution to cumulative noise impacts in the area, would be considered less than significant. ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 117

PUBLIC FACILITIES

County Impact Discussion:

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document a. A need for new or altered police protection and/or health X care services? b. Student generation exceeding school capacity? X c. Significant amounts of solid waste or breach any national, state, or local standards or thresholds relating to solid waste X disposal and generation (including recycling facilities and existing landfill capacity)? d. A need for new or altered sewer system facilities (sewer X lines, lift-stations, etc.)? e. The construction of new storm water drainage or water quality control facilities or expansion of existing X facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Impact Discussion: a., b., d., e. No new structures or public uses, such as police, health care, school, or water quality control facilities, or sewer or storm drain systems are required as part of the removal project. Therefore, no new needs for public services will result from project implementation. c. Remaining landfill capacity is limited in Santa Barbara County, and the County is under State legislative mandate (AB939) to reduce solid waste disposal. In order to reduce this potentially significant impact on the County’s waste handling facilities, materials need to be recycled or salvaged to the maximum extent feasible, consistent with AB 939 mandates and Demolition and Reclamation Permit requirements which state that a waste management plan must “maximize recycling and minimize waste”.

As described in the Sampling and Disposal Plan portion of the Project Work Plan, the removed pipeline segments, pipe racks, and concrete supports will be transported via truck to approved facilities for proper recycling or disposal in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations. Only minor amounts of solid waste would be generated by the proposed project; such waste would consist of hydrocarbon-stained soils, should they be discovered during pipeline removal operations and should they exceed recyclable thresholds. As discussed in the project work plan, this material, if encountered, would be transported to a recycling center for reuse as road base, or to an approved and licensed waste facility for disposal if necessary. The closest facilities will be used when available to minimize the costs and impacts from material transportation.

Mitigation and Residual Impact: PF -1) Atlantic Richfield shall abide by County requirements to minimize wastes and maximize recycling to reduce the demand on the County’s waste disposal facilities by salvaging and recycling a minimum of 80% of all metal tonnage and 100% of concrete tonnage found to be ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 118 recyclable or salvageable (e.g. nonhazardous). To ensure compliance, the Energy Division, in consultation with the County Public Works, Resource Recovery and Waste Management Division, shall review manifests, receipts, or other comparable shipping/receiving documents that designate the ultimate disposition of materials removed from the site.

Impacts to Public Facilities would be less than significant with implementation of the above mitigation measure. Residual impacts would be insignificant.

City Impact Discussion:

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document a. A need for new or altered police protection and/or health X care services? b. Student generation exceeding school capacity? X c. Significant amounts of solid waste or breach any national, state, or local standards or thresholds relating to solid waste X disposal and generation (including recycling facilities and existing landfill capacity)? d. A need for new or altered sewer system facilities (sewer X lines, lift-stations, etc.)? e. The construction of new storm water drainage or water quality control facilities or expansion of existing X facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Impact Discussion: a., b., d., e. The project is involves abandonment and removal of existing pipeline segments, and as such, no new structures or population growth would result from project implementation. Therefore, the project does not create new needs for public services including police, health care, school, sewer or stormwater facilities. No associated impacts to such public services would occur. c. Remaining landfill capacity is limited in Santa Barbara County, and the County is under State legislative mandate (AB939) to reduce solid waste disposal. In order to reduce this potentially significant impact on the County’s waste handling facilities, materials need to be recycled or salvaged to the maximum extent feasible, consistent with AB 939 mandates which state that a waste management plan must “maximize recycling and minimize waste”.

A limited amount of general refuse and garbage will be generated during decommissioning activities. As described in the Waste Management Plan section of the Project Description, the following waste streams will or could result from project implementation:

1. Asbestos Containing Materials (gasket fittings in flanged pipeline connections) 2. Concrete (pipe supports and grout); 3. Decontamination wastewater (from sampling activities); 4. Garbage/refuse; 5. Green waste (vegetation trimmings); 6. Hydrocarbon-impacted soils (not anticipated); ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 119

7. Pipeline liquids; 8. Sanitary wastes; 9. Steel (pipe, pipe supports, cable, triplex pump skid, valves, etc); and

Although not anticipated, it is possible that additional waste streams could be generated during implementation of the project that were not considered in the Waste Management Plan discussed in the Project Description. As such, solid waste impacts are considered potentially significant.

Mitigation and Residual Impact: CITY PF-1) A Waste Reduction and Recycling Plan (WRRP) shall be submitted to the Community Services Department for review and approval. Said plan shall indicate how a 50% diversion goal shall be met during construction including but not limited to the following:

a. Demolition and/or excess construction materials shall be separated onsite for reuse/recycling or proper disposal (e.g., concrete asphalt). b. During grading and construction, separate bins for recycling of construction materials and brush shall be provided onsite. c. The applicant/property owner shall contract with a City approved hauler to facilitate the recycling of all construction recoverable/recyclable material. (Copy of contract to be provided to the City.) Recoverable construction material shall include but not be limited to asphalt, lumber, concrete, glass, metals, and drywall.

Plan Requirement and Timing: This requirement shall be printed on any LUP and/or grading and construction plans. Materials shall be recycled as necessary throughout construction. All materials shall be recycled prior to completion of the project. Monitoring: At the end of the project, the applicant shall submit a Post-Construction Waste Reduction & Recycling Summary Report documenting the types and amounts of materials that were generated during the project and how much was reused, recycled, composted, salvaged, or landfilled.

With implementation of the above mitigation measure, residual project specific impacts and project contributions to cumulative impacts on public facilities would be considered less than significant.

RECREATION County Impact Discussion:

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document a. Conflict with established recreational uses of the area? X b. Conflict with biking, equestrian and hiking trails? X c. Substantial impact on the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities (e.g., overuse of an area with X constraints on numbers of people, vehicles, animals, etc. which might safely use the area)?

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 120

Impact Discussion: a. – c. The proposed project activities would not interfere with or constrain any established or future recreational uses within the project area, including biking, equestrian and hiking trails. All work and equipment operations would be limited to the pipeline right-of-way and adjacent access routes. The work sites would not interfere with recreational opportunities at the Bacara Resort, excepting some minor temporary interference with traffic to the resort. In order to keep this disturbance to a minimum, equipment on Hollister Avenue will be operated only on non-event days pre-arranged with the Bacara resort (see discussion of traffic impacts)

Both Dos Pueblos and Eagle Canyon Ranch properties are privately owned and not available for public use. The project will proceed within ARCO’s lease area with the property owners’ full knowledge and consent. Furthermore, pipeline removal work is expected to be completed within a matter of two to three weeks at any one site.

Mitigation and Residual Impact: Project impacts to recreational resources would not be significant. No mitigation is proposed.

City Impact Discussion:

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document a. Conflict with established recreational uses of the area? X b. Conflict with biking, equestrian and hiking trails? X c. Substantial impact on the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities (e.g., overuse of an area with X constraints on numbers of people, vehicles, animals, etc. which might safely use the area)? Impact Discussion: a. – c.

Figure 3-1 of the City’s GP/CLUP shows the existing public parking lot, vertical accessway and beach access point located on the Bacara property as coastal access locations. This figure also shows a proposed access location consisting of a parking lot, vertical accessway and beach access point located in the Bell Creek project area. Figure 3-2 designates the Haskells Beach and Haskells Beach access as Regional Open Space. Figure 3-5, and associated policy OS 7.3 designates all ESHAs as protected space for Preservation of Natural Resources. The Tecolote Creek project area is within the property containing the Bacara Resort and Spa, which provides open space and recreational activities for hotel guests on site. The Bell Creek project area is a part of the Sandpiper Golf Course property; however, the site is mostly separated from the golf course by the existing Venoco oil and gas processing plant and is not part of golf course operations.

The proposed project activities would temporarily interfere with the Tecolote and Bell Creek ESHA protected open space with construction activities. As such impacts are temporary, they can be found less than significant. Furthermore, with mitigation applied in the Biological ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 121

Resources section of this document, any long-term impacts to these areas can be found less than significant.

The proposed project activities could also affect public access to Haskells Beach (including the aforementioned public parking lot) and private access to the Bacara Resort and Spa. Such impacts are considered potentially significant.

Cumulative Impacts

With implementation of mitigation measures described in Biological Resources, the proposed project would make no measurable contribution to cumulative impacts on recreation.

Mitigation and Residual Impact: Mitigation measures to address ESHA restoration are described under the discussion of Biological Resources. Further mitigation measures to address public access to Haskells Beach and private access to the Bacara Resort and Spa are described under the discussion of Transportation/Circulation.

Upon implementation of the mitigation measures referenced above, residual project specific impacts on Recreation, as well as project contributions to cumulative impacts, would be considered less than significant.

TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION County Impact Discussion:

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement (daily, peak-hour, etc.) in relation to existing traffic load and X capacity of the street system? b. A need for private or public road maintenance, or need for X new road(s)? c. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new X parking? d. Substantial impact upon existing transit systems (e.g. bus service) or alteration of present patterns of circulation or X movement of people and/or goods? e. Alteration to waterborne, rail or air traffic? X f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians (including short-term construction and long- X term operational)? g. Inadequate sight distance? X ingress/egress? X general road capacity? X emergency access? X h. Impacts to Congestion Management Plan system? X

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 122

Project related traffic at each work site is estimated as follows:

• Operating a crane (and possibly a flatbed truck or forklift) on Hollister Avenue adjacent to the bridge over Tecolote Creek to provide lifting support necessary to execute removal of the O-3 pipeline segment crossing Tecolote Creek.

• Operation and staging of equipment on the unpaved access roadway located between Bell Creek and the EOF.

• Equipment operation on the Ellwood Pier access roadway in support of removing pipeline segments adjacent to the roadway

• Heavy-duty truck access between Highway 101 and the Makar property gate Impact Discussion: a., h. Overall, the project would not generate a substantial increase in traffic or affect any congestion management plan systems. Existing roadways have adequate capacity to handle project traffic loads. In addition, any traffic increases would be temporary, as the project work at all four sites will be completed in stages. b. Equipment and workers will make use of existing access roads and trails along the pipeline corridor. Access to Tecolote Creek and Eagle Canyon Ranch is available via Highway 101 to Winchester Canyon Exit and Hollister Ave.

Access to the western side of Eagle Canyon Creek and the remaining pipeline segment located on the Makar property will be made using a series of private asphalt/gravel/dirt roads, accessed through a locked gate off of southbound Highway 101. The primarily dirt roads on the property are the old oilfield access roads between the former wells and production infrastructure and will not require maintenance post-project activity. However, the existing wooden bridge on the property that provides over the railroad tracks, necessary to access the Eagle Canyon Creek site, may not be structurally sound for heavy equipment or vehicles. The structural integrity must be reviewed and approved by the Southern Pacific Railroad Company (Railroad) to allow access. In the event it is not structurally sound, a temporary crossing must be approved by the Railroad and County or an alternative access or approach must be used.

Existing gravel and dirt roads provide east-west access across the entire Eagle Canyon Ranch property to the eastern side of Eagle Canyon Creek. Equipment access to Eagle Canyon Ranch will be through an electric gate at the end of Hollister Avenue, controlled by Venoco for access to the nearby Ellwood Pier.

Workers and the mini excavator used for pipeline removal will access Tecolote Creek via six- foot wide access pathways made of plywood planking down the eastern and western banks of Tecolote Creek. A crane or mini excavator will be situated on situated on the Hollister Ave. bridge above the creek to pull/lift the pipe out of the creek.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 123

c. Adequate parking areas exist to accommodate construction vehicles and equipment. In order to minimize traffic congestion around the resort and near the Ellwood Pier access road, workers (operators and laborers) will park off site at Sandpiper golf course and be brought to the work areas by van pool operated by a professional driver. Construction equipment will be staged inside the Ellwood Pier gate or inside the Venoco access road gate near Bell Creek when not in use or at night.

d. No impact upon existing transit systems is anticipated with the project due to the limited amount of workers and construction vehicles required for the removal project, set to occur in stages. A slight alteration of present patterns of circulation may result from equipment staging and operation along Hollister Ave. due to pipeline removal activities in Tecolote Creek. This would be temporary and occur on days when traffic to the Bacara Resort is expected to be minimal.

e. A railroad crossing plan will be required and approved by Union Pacific Railroad to prevent any interference with the railroad.

f. The removal project is not expected to result in any long-term alterations to existing automobile traffic paths or conditions that might increase traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians. Short-term construction activities along Hollister Ave. may slightly affect traffic paths in this area, but standard safety measures shall be observed to avoid increased hazard. In addition, the equipment shall be operated from one side of Tecolote bridge only, thereby leaving an alternate footpath on the other side available to pedestrians. g. Sight distance, general access routes and road capacity are not anticipated to be adversely affected by the project. Any changes to traffic or circulation will be made evident with warning signs and implemented to avoid impacts to ingress or egress activity at the project sites, including emergency access.

Mitigation and Residual Impact: With the following mitigation measures project impacts to traffic or circulation are not considered to be significant:

TRAN-1) Prior to the start of pipeline abandonment work, Atlantic Richfield will obtain approval from the Bacara to position a crane on Hollister Ave. which is owned by the Bacara.

TRAN-2) The Sandpiper Golf Course parking lot will be used for worker parking to minimize traffic in the area. Prior to commencement of the proposed pipeline removal Atlantic Richfield will obtain an access agreement with Sandpiper Golf Course for overflow parking.

TRAN-3) The structural integrity of the existing wooden bridge located on the Makar property that provides access to the Eagle Canyon Creek site must be reviewed and approved by the Southern Pacific Railroad Company (Railroad) to allow access. In the event it is not structurally sound, a temporary crossing must be approved by the Railroad and the County or an alternative access route or approach must be used. ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 124

City Impact Discussion:

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement (daily, peak-hour, etc.) in relation to existing traffic load and X capacity of the street system? b. A need for private or public road maintenance, or need for X new road(s)? c. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new X parking? d. Substantial impact upon existing transit systems (e.g. bus service) or alteration of present patterns of circulation or X movement of people and/or goods? e. Alteration to waterborne, rail or air traffic? X f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians (including short-term construction and long- X term operational)? g. Inadequate sight distance? X ingress/egress? X general road capacity? X emergency access? X h. Impacts to Congestion Management Plan system? X

Impact Discussion: a. b., d. f, g. The Project Description includes a Traffic Control Plan (TCP) prepared in accordance with the procedures recommended in the 2006 Work Area Traffic Control Handbook published by the American Public Works Association, Southern California Chapter (APWA, 2006).

Specifically, the project components and locations addressed within this TCP in Goleta include the following:

• Operating a crane (and possibly a flatbed truck or forklift) on Hollister Avenue adjacent to the bridge over Tecolote Creek to provide lifting support necessary to execute removal of the O-3 pipeline segment crossing Tecolote Creek; and • Operation and staging of equipment on the unpaved access roadway located between Bell Creek and the EOF;

Hollister Avenue near the bridge over Tecolote Creek consists of two vehicular traffic lanes separated by a center median, two bicycle lanes, and one pedestrian sidewalk. One vehicular traffic lane provides travel in the eastbound direction and the other lane provides for westbound travel. Each vehicular traffic lane measures 16 feet in width. The width of the center median varies from 16 feet on the eastern side of the bridge to three feet on the western side of the bridge. Each bicycle lane measures seven feet wide and the sidewalk measures five feet wide. The total length of the bridge is 172 feet.

Positioning a crane on Hollister Avenue will require temporary closure of one of the two existing traffic lanes. The crane will be positioned just to the east of the bridge in the eastbound traffic lane of Hollister Avenue. The eastbound traffic lane on the Hollister Avenue will be temporarily ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 125

closed during mobilization and operation of the crane. This temporary lane closure is considered to be a short-term stationary closure which is defined as an active work zone from one hour to one day. The westbound traffic lane will remain open during these activities and will be used to allow traffic to bypass the construction zone in alternating directions. The bypass lane will be a minimum of ten feet in width and have a minimum of two feet clearance from the curb or any other obstruction. It should be noted that construction equipment not actively engaged in work activities will not be parked in the immediate work vicinity.

Project construction activities would also require the following (in accordance with the proposed TMP):

• Temporary restriction of pedestrian and bicycle traffic (an alternative bypass for both are provided for in the TMP) • Numerous warning signs will be provided • Existing traffic signs that would conflict with the new construction traffic control signs will be covered • Flag persons to stop traffic intermittently as required by the work process will be provided for • All project personnel working on the bridge (including flag persons) will be required to wear protective equipment • A qualified individual familiar with the specifications in the TCP will be provided for patrolling/inspection

While the portion of the road directly north of Bacara is privately owned by Bacara, the remainder of the road (the bridge over Bell Creek to Hollister Avenue) has a public road easement. As such, an encroachment permit is required to position a crane on Hollister Avenue for lifting support.

The access roadway to be used for the Bell Creek project area is an unpaved roadway located between Bell Creek and the Ellwood Onshore Facility. This roadway is maintained as an emergency access roadway to Sandpiper Golf Course, State Lease 421 piers, and Ellwood Beach. Execution of the Project will require use and disturbance of this roadway, which has the potential to interfere with emergency access requirements. Such impacts are considered potentially significant.

Access into the City from U.S. Highway 101 will be achieved by use of the Hollister Avenue overpass. However, construction of a new overpass in this location, and demolition of the existing overpass, is scheduled to start in late 2009. City of Goleta Community Services staff have indicated that access from the existing overpass will be still be provided for during construction, however, there may be intermittent and temporary closures/re-routing (R. Gaglione; July, 2009). This interchange supports several commuter bus services to Lompoc and the Santa Ynez Valley as well as other day-to-day traffic. Due to the potential, associated traffic impacts that the project would have on this interchange, impacts are considered potentially significant. c. Vehicular access to the project site for construction activities and workers is available from Hollister Avenue (classified as a local street and road in the City’s GP/CLUP Figure 7-2). However, because construction activities often conflict with onsite construction vehicle parking, ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 126

such vehicles may have to be parked offsite for significant amounts of time. While offsite parking in the near vicinity is available, it is not on land owned by the applicant. As such, demand for construction related vehicle parking either on or offsite is considered to pose a potentially significant, short term parking impact.

h. Since the proposed project will not create any long term impacts, congestion management consistency analysis with the Santa Barbara County Association of Government’s (SBCAG) Guidelines is not necessary. Hence, the project will not cause any impacts to the local Congestion Management Program system.

e. Neither the Tecolote or Bell Creek project areas lie within an airport safety zone, rail transit or waterborne transportation route. As such, no impacts to these methods of transportation would occur as a result of project implementation.

Cumulative Impacts

The project’s contribution to cumulative roadway levels of service, alternative transportation methods and emergency access would be temporary and addressed by the following mitigation measure. As such, transportation cumulative impacts are less than significant.

Mitigation and Residual Impact:

CITY TRAN-1) A revised Transportation Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved by the City as a part of the encroachment permit application. Plan Requirements & Timing: The applicant shall prepare said plan including provisions for construction personnel parking and construction equipment/materials staging, for both on and offsite locations in the vicinity of the project site. If parking on other properties in the City is proposed, 1) it may not occur on public coastal access parking lots within the City of Goleta, and 2) it must be proven that sufficient parking remains for the existing use of said property. The applicant shall include written approval by any affected property owners (i.e. Venoco, Bacara, Sandpiper) for use of their property and/or private roads as staging and/or parking areas. Said plan shall be reviewed and approved by City staff prior to issuance of any LUP for the project. Monitoring: City staff shall periodically monitor in the field to verify compliance throughout all construction activities.

With implementation of this mitigation measure as well as mitigation in the Fire Protection section of this document, residual project specific and cumulative traffic impacts would remain less than significant.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 127

WATER RESOURCES/FLOODING County Impact Discussion:

Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water X movements, in either marine or fresh waters? b. Changes in percolation rates, drainage patterns or the rate X and amount of surface water runoff? c. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? X d. Discharge, directly or through a storm drain system, into X surface waters (including but not limited to wetlands, riparian areas, ponds, springs, creeks, streams, rivers, lakes, estuaries, tidal areas, bays, ocean, etc) or alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, or thermal water pollution? e. Alterations to the course or flow of flood water or need for X private or public flood control projects? f. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards X such as flooding (placement of project in 100 year flood plain), accelerated runoff or tsunamis? g. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of groundwater? X h. Change in the quantity of groundwater, either through direct X additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or recharge interference? i. Overdraft or overcommitment of any groundwater basin? X Or, a significant increase in the existing overdraft or overcommitment of any groundwater basin? j. The substantial degradation of groundwater quality X including saltwater intrusion? k. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise X available for public water supplies? l. Introduction of storm water pollutants (e.g., oil, grease, X pesticides, nutrients, sediments, pathogens, etc.) into groundwater or surface water?

Existing Conditions: The pipeline to be removed crosses Eagle Canyon Creek and although the creek maintains a permanent flow during most years, it may have intermittent flow during extreme drought years. The beach area along Dos Pueblos and Eagle Canyon properties lie within the 100-year flood plain. Impact Discussion: Pipeline removal work will be performed during the dry season (late summer to early fall) when water flows should be at their lowest levels. Wherever possible, work within the three creek crossings will be conducted by hand; a mini excavator will be used for pulling and lifting operations in Eagle Canyon Creek. The mini excavator shall be stored in the staging areas on an impervious surface. Heavy equipment, such as a crane, an A-frame winch truck, and mini excavator, will be staged on the creek banks and the bridges above the creeks to lift and remove ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 128 sections of abandoned pipe from the pipe supports. In addition, no grading is planned, tarps and mats will be used to protect vegetation on the ground, sandbags and silt fencing will be used where necessary to prevent soil erosion into the creeks. a. – c. Temporary work in streambed locations would occur during pipeline and pipe support removal activities in the Eagle Canyon Creek site. The pipe supports are proposed to be pulled out with equipment staged on the top of the bank. In the event they cannot be removed with this method, the pipe supports may be cut at grade. None of the proposed activities are expected to affect surface waters or drainage patterns, result in long-term changes in currents or the course or direction of water movements, nor will it permanently change drainage patterns or the rate of surface water runoff. d. Removal of the concrete footing supporting the old abandoned pipe on the bank Eagle Canyon Creek could result in localized soil erosion into the stream drainage and increased turbidity. The soil removed will be used as back fill once the pipeline is removed. These activities are likely to temporarily increase sedimentation in the immediate area; however, these effects would be temporary and minimized through the implementation of the project mitigation measures. e., f. Some of the project areas are located within the 100 year flood plain, however the proposed project is not anticipated to alter the course or flow of water during flood events, nor will it result in a net water discharge into surface waters, exposing people or property to water related hazards such as flooding, accelerated runoff or tsunamis. g. – k. The majority of the removal project will take place on the surface of the earth; minor excavation may be required to retrieve the ends of the pipelines from the creek banks. However, no alteration of the direction or rate of flow of groundwater is expected. The proposed project will not decrease available surface or groundwater supplies nor degrade groundwater quality. Water needed for dust suppression on the upland portions of the project will be trucked in and runoff minimized through sandbags or other mitigation measures, if necessary. l. There is some potential for discharge of pollutants into the creek channels. Unlike the pipeline segment at Tecolote Creek, which is filled with grout, some of the pipeline segments could contain residual liquids left over from flushing at the time they were abandoned. As discussed in Section 4.9 (Hazardous Materials/Risk of Upset), each pipe will be hot-tapped and any residual liquids carefully drained prior to cutting. In addition, visquene sheets will be placed beneath the barrel into which pipeline liquids will be drained and sorbent booms and pads will be positioned downslope of the barrel prior to draining of any liquids. Adequate containment vessels will be on hand prior to cold cutting. These measures will minimize the chance of accidental discharge into the surface waters and prevent potential contamination of groundwater. In addition, fine particles and flakes of metal and concrete from the pipe cutting process could also be discharged to the creek waters at these three crossings. Mitigation measures will be used to contain and collect the fine debris create when cutting pipe and concrete materials.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 129

Mitigation and Residual Impact: Mitigation Measures BIO-5, BIO-13, BIO-15, BIO-16, BIO-18 and HAZ-4 would reduce impacts to a less than significant level.

City Impact Discussion: Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water X movements, in either marine or fresh waters? b. Changes in percolation rates, drainage patterns or the rate X and amount of surface water runoff? c. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? X d. Discharge, directly or through a storm drain system, into X surface waters (including but not limited to wetlands, riparian areas, ponds, springs, creeks, streams, rivers, lakes, estuaries, tidal areas, bays, ocean, etc) or alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, or thermal water pollution? e. Alterations to the course or flow of flood water or need for X private or public flood control projects? f. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards X such as flooding (placement of project in 100 year flood plain), accelerated runoff or tsunamis? g. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of groundwater? X h. Change in the quantity of groundwater, either through direct X additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or recharge interference? i. Overdraft or overcommitment of any groundwater basin? X Or, a significant increase in the existing overdraft or overcommitment of any groundwater basin? j. The substantial degradation of groundwater quality X including saltwater intrusion? k. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise X available for public water supplies? l. Introduction of storm water pollutants (e.g., oil, grease, X pesticides, nutrients, sediments, pathogens, etc.) into groundwater or surface water?

Impact Discussion: a. - c., g., h. None of the proposed project activities, including the aforementioned excavations, will result in long-term changes in currents or the course or direction of water movements as no permanent structures or flood control facilities are proposed. Furthermore, project activities will not permanently damage drainage patterns or the rate of surface water runoff, nor will it decrease available surface or groundwater supplies as impacts to the creeks are a result of temporary construction activities and mitigation within the biological resources section of this document reduces construction impacts to less than significant levels.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 130

d., j., l. Temporary work in the Tecolote streambed includes excavation approximately five feet into the bank of the creek to remove the pipeline. While no work is proposed in the Bell Creek streambed, excavation activities that will occur in the creek’s buffer areas (excavation around the hydrogen sulfide alarm panel and pipe-tap locations, and soil stockpiling) These activities are may temporarily increase sedimentation in the immediate area, which is considered a potentially significant impact.

There is some potential for discharge of pollutants into the creek channels at Tecolote and Bell Creeks. The project proposed to located portable sanitary facilities within the ESHA areas. If such facilities were to leak or spill, resulting impacts would be considered potentially significant. Additionally, any diesel or gasoline powered equipment used in either project area could leak and such impacts would be considered potentially significant.

While the pipeline segment at Tecolote Creek is filled with grout, the pipeline in the Bell Creek project area is not, and hence, could contain residual liquids left over from flushing at the time it was abandoned. If these liquids spill into the Bell Creek corridor, impacts would be considered potentially significant.

Furthermore, fine particles and flakes of metal and concrete from the pipe cutting process in both Tecolote and Bell Creek work areas could also be discharged to the creek waters. Such impacts are considered potentially significant.

e., f. Bell and Tecolote creeks lie within the 100 year flood plain, however the proposed project does not propose any new structures, but the removal of pipelines, and as such is not anticipated to alter the course or flow of water during flood events, nor will it result in a net water discharge into surface waters, exposing people or property to water related hazards such as flooding, accelerated runoff or tsunamis.

At Tecolote Creek, the pipeline lying across the stream bed has acted as a partial dam, trapping sediment and vegetative debris. Water continues to move over the top of the pipe, but the pipe may interfere with the natural rate of flow depending on the volume of water flowing in the creek. As such, removal of this pipeline would serve as a beneficial, private, flood control project in Tecolote Creek.

Since the pipeline in the Bell Creek project area does not traverse the streambed, no flood control impacts are expected.

i., k Since the proposed project does not propose any new structures or population growth, additional demand for water will not occur. Water used for dust mitigation purposes during construction will be obtained from a private water provider; hence, not impacting any public water supplies or groundwater basins.

Mitigation and Residual Impact: Mitigation Measures Biological Resources and Hazardous Materials/Risk of Upset would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 131

INFORMATION SOURCES

Agencies Consulted:

City Departments Consulted City of Goleta Planning and Environmental Services Dept. City of Goleta Community Services Dept.

County Departments Consulted Santa Barbara County Energy Division Santa Barbara County Fire Department Santa Barbara County Building & Safety Division Santa Barbara County Flood Control District

Special Districts Air Pollution Control District

State Agencies California Coastal Commission State Lands Commission

Other Entities Atlantic Richfield Co. Pacific Management Technologies, Inc. Venoco, Inc. Bacara Resort & Spa Parsons Family Sandpiper Golf Course

Goleta General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan x Land Use Element x Visual and Historic Resources Element x Open Space Element x Transportation Element x Conservation Element x Public Facilities Element x Safety Element x Noise Element

Santa Barbara County Comprehensive Plan: x Land Use Element x Circulation Element x Coastal Plan and Maps

Other Sources of Information: x Field visit x Zoning maps

x Calculations x Planning files, maps, reports

x ARCO Project Work Plan x Archaeological maps and reports ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 132

x County Records x Other technical references (reports, survey, etc.)

x Other: A Canyon Through Time; Jon M. Erlandson, Torbon C. Rick; Rene L. Vellanoweth • ARCO’s Project Work Plan, • Fugro-McClelland (West), Inc. and September, 2007 County of Santa Barbara Planning & Development Department, 1993. Final EIR for the ARCO Dos Pueblos Golf Links Project. • Pacific Management Technologies, • City of Goleta General Plan/Coastal Inc. ARCO Pipeline Removal Project Land Use Plan policies (see table Environmental Analysis. November above). 2004. • Calculations of air pollution • Dudek and SAIC, July 2001. emissions based on hours of Habitat Conservation Plan, Dos equipment usage, prepared by Pacific Pueblos Golf Links, County of Management Technologies, Inc. Santa Barbara. Prepared for CPH Dos Pueblos Associates, LLC and ARCO Environmental Remediation, LLC. • Correspondence with John Storrer, • Correspondence with Phil Kinney of Environmental Quality Assurance SECOR International, Inc. and Program Monitor Anthony Brown of Atlantic Richfield Company (ARCO/BP). • ARCO’s Spill Contingency Plan and • Correspondence with Tom Luster of Fuel and Lubricant Drip Mitigation the California Coastal Commission Plan

• City of Goleta General Plan/Coastal • Correspondence with Gregory Scott Land Use Plan Final Environmental of the California State Lands Impact Report Commission • County of Santa Barbara Planning & • C.A. Singer & Associates, Inc., Development Department, November 1992. Cultural Resources Archaeology and Biological Assessment for the Proposed ARCO Resources Topographic Maps. May Dos Pueblos Golf Links, Santa 2004. Barbara County, CA. • City of Goleta Environmental • California Department of Fish and Thresholds and Guidelines Manual. Game, 2004. List of federal and state threatened and endangered species of the state of California and their status. • County of Santa Barbara • California Department of Fish and Environmental Thresholds and Game, Sacramento, CA, 2003. Guidelines Manual Natural Diversity Database search for the Goleta and Dos Pueblos Canyon Quadrangles. • Santa Barbara Museum of Natural • California Coastal Act of 1972, History, Department of Vertebrate version as of January 1992. Zoology. Unpublished Sight and Specimen Records. ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 133

• Conception Coast Project. Steelhead • Cultural Resources Management Assessment and Recovery Plan for the Hyatt (now Bacara) Opportunities in Santa Barbara Goleta Resort Development. County, California. June 2002. Quaternary Research Associates, Inc. April 1986. • J.C. Wang, 1986. Fishes of the • Correspondence with Greg Sacramento-San Joaquin estuary and McGowan of LFR and ARCADIS adjacent waters, company California. A guide to the early life histories. Interagency Ecological Study Program for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary.

PROJECT SPECIFIC AND CUMULATIVE IMPACT SUMMARY Direct short- and long-term project specific impacts are summarized in each section of this document.

Mitigation and prevention measures that have been completed or are required as specified herein are sufficient to mitigate all aforementioned impacts to less than significant levels.

As also stated in this document, cumulative impacts to the surrounding area resulting from the pipeline removal project activity would not be significant. Current projects either proposed or underway in the adjoining area include:

Eagle Canyon Ranch (Makar) Property Development/ARCO Remediation The private landowner of the Dos Pueblos Ranch property, Makar Properties, applied to develop two residential structures on the parcel zoned AG-II-100 in 2006. Before proceeding with this development, ARCO must complete remediation activities in the area following the company’s abandonment of oil and gas production facilities on the parcel, begun during Phase I of the ARCO Dos Pueblos Golf Links project. The area is thought to contain leftover hydrocarbons in the soil beneath the abandoned facilities.

Recommissioning of State Lease 421 Venoco proposes to bring the two oil wells located on State Lease 421 back into production. Oil would be pumped from one well and processed on the piers before being sent to the Ellwood Marine Terminal. Land use permitting authority resides with the City of Goleta, the County of Santa Barbara, the State Lands Commission and the California Coastal Commission. The Final EIR is under preparation by the State Lands Commission.

Venoco Extended Field Development Project Venoco has proposed development of the South Ellwood Field. The project proposal includes extension of lease PRC 3242 boundary in state waters, modification of gas and oil processing equipment at Ellwood Onshore Facility, installation of a new 10 mile-long pipeline along Hwy 101 to Las Flores Canyon, and cessation of activities at the Ellwood Marine Terminal (to be fully restored), including use of the Barge Jovalan. The Final EIR is under preparation by the State Lands Commission. ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 134

Line 96 Modification Project This project is a proposal from Ellwood Pipeline, Inc. to realign Line 96. The existing portion of Line 96 within City limits that primarily runs east/west would be abandoned/removed, and a new pipeline would be constructed from a point near the Ellwood Onshore Facility (EOF) to an interconnect with the Plains All American Pipeline (PAAP) at a point near Las Flores Canyon.

Beach Hazards Removal Project This project was put on hold under the Governor's declared state of fiscal emergency in January 2004 and has since been restarted. The project’s goal is to remove manmade hazards along the coast of Santa Barbara County. A total of 24 sites were identified for removal, and 21 of these are along or offshore from Santa Barbara County. The hazards range from partially abandoned oil wells and piers to failed seawalls and sheet piling. Other agencies involved include the State Lands Commission, the County of Santa Barbara, the Coastal Commission, State Parks, and the Cities of Santa Barbara and Carpinteria.

Comstock Project This project involves the construction of a new 62 unit residential subdivision located on the northwest corner of the Santa Barbara Shores parcel, immediately east of Sandpiper Golf Course. The project footprint will be 24.5 acres. Grading commenced October 2005, 31 units have been built to date, and the construction of the remaining units is on hold pending economic conditions.

Rancho Mobile Home Park Subdivision The proposed project involves the subdivision of the existing Rancho Mobile Home Park, comprised of 17.84 acres (gross), into a one-lot subdivision of 150 residential condominium units with utilities, accessways, drainageways, amenities, and open space to be held in common ownership by a lot-owner’s association. No additional mobile homes or mobile home sites would be created by the proposed subdivision. No physical alterations to the project site or any new signage are proposed as part of the subdivision application beyond that required under a Development Agreement between the park owner and the City. All of the proposed mobile home spaces would be offered for sale to the current mobile home owners pursuant to the Development Agreement. Non-purchasing residents would be allowed to continue to rent their space pursuant to the terms of the Development Agreement.

Haskell’s Landing The project includes a one-lot subdivision of a 14.46 acre parcel located in western Goleta at the northwest corner of Hollister Avenue and Las Armas Road for a 101-unit residential condominium development within 42 buildings, including 10 affordable units, with associated infrastructure and open space. The Goleta City Council approved the project on May 19, 2009; the applicant has commenced the review process with the California Coastal Commission.

Mariposa at Ellwood Shores The proposed project includes a 70,510 square foot assisted-living community accommodating a maximum of 99 elderly residents located at 7760 Hollister Avenue in western Goleta. The structure would be two stories and include a covered porch at the entrance, a large central courtyard and a barbeque terrace. The project would maintain the existing Venoco Offsite 30- foot Meteorological Station previously permitted to monitor air quality downwind of the gas processing plant. Additional elements include a 350 kw emergency generator, landscaping, utilities, drainage improvements, and access and parking to serve proposed project.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 135

Bacara Completion Phase The proposed project is a request for approval of a 55-unit resort condominium hotel development within a 12.66-acre site located on “Lot 2” adjacent to the existing Bacara Resort and Spa, and widening of the existing Hollister Avenue access. The resort condominium hotel units (suites) would range in size from approximately 2,300 to 2,900-square feet, and would be constructed within a total of 8 buildings with a building height up to 35 feet from finished grade, plus additional height for chimneys and architectural projections. Additional proposed improvements include a pool, pool cabanas, resort support facilities, and guest parking. An underground parking garage with 132 spaces would accommodate hotel guest parking, and would also include areas for resort services and storage. To accommodate the proposed improvements, the existing tennis club/maintenance building, 4 tennis courts, the 50-space public parking lot, and the vertical beach access trail would be relocated within the 12.66-acre “Lot 2” area.

MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Less than Reviewed Signif. Less Under Will the proposal result in: Poten. with Than No Previous Signif. Mitigation Signif. Impact Document 1. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade X the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? 2. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term to X the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals? 3. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, X but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects and the effects of probable future projects.) 4. Does the project have environmental effects which will X cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 5. Is there disagreement supported by facts, reasonable X assumptions predicated upon facts and/or expert opinion supported by facts over the significance of an effect which would warrant investigation in an EIR ?

Impact Discussion: 1. Removal will be performed in order to prevent further possible degradation of the environment and to restore the work sites to a natural condition. The only direct impact that is foreseen from the removal activity is the temporary disruption to riparian and coastal bluff habitats within the project area. This disruption, however, is not likely to reduce suitable habitat available to fish or wildlife species or the overall health of flora and fauna communities once mitigation is incorporated, as discussed in Section 4.4, Biological Resources. Therefore, residual impacts of this and all other potential impacts from the project are deemed less than significant.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 136

The piecemeal removal of the pipeline represents the final alteration to a facility reminiscent of a historic period of oil and gas development along the central coast of California. The impact is less than significant, however, as the structure itself is not deemed historic. Please see the preceding Impact Analysis sections of this document for more detail on these areas.

2. The pipeline removal project is deemed necessary to prevent further deterioration of the pipeline and the possible release of potentially hazardous materials into the environment. The short-term impacts from removing the pipeline are limited in comparison to the long-term environmental benefits of preventing potentially hazardous conditions from continuing or worsening. While some habitat disruption is likely to occur within the stream areas, possibly affecting fish and riparian species, the removal will improve overall conditions, such as eliminating potential blockage of the Tecolote Creek drainage, and is likely to improve stream flow.

3. The pipeline removal represents the last step toward complete demolition and reclamation of ARCO’s oil and gas facilities in the project area. As such, this project is not likely to contribute significant negative impacts that would outweigh the positive cumulative effects of completing the abandonment project. Though limited individual impacts may occur at each of the work sites, none are projected to be significant and all are proposed to be minimized through the implementation of the project mitigation measures. The cumulative impact of the project is not likely to be considerable in any of the issue areas discussed above due to the distance between work sites, disparate qualities of the habitats affected and limited disruption to humans, fish and wildlife species.

4. No substantial adverse effects to humans or the environment are anticipated to occur as a result of this project. Please see the preceding impact analysis section of this document for more detail on this.

5. There is no known disagreement over the significance of any effect which would warrant investigation in an EIR for this abandonment project.

PROJECT ALTERNATIVES

Not applicable, as no potentially significant impacts were identified.

INITIAL REVIEW OF PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH APPLICABLE SUBDIVISION, ZONING AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REQUIREMENTS

The pipeline right-of-way crosses four parcels having separate ownership and land use. ARCO has a valid easement for the operation, maintenance, and ultimate abandonment of its pipelines across these parcels. Surrounding land uses currently include an oil and gas processing plant, hotel and recreation area, and vacant land zoned for agricultural use. The owners of the Dos Pueblos property have pursued permits for residential development, though the issue of ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 137

remediation due to soil contamination from past oil and gas activities on this parcel remains to be addressed by ARCO. Highway 101 and the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way are located immediately north of the project sites.

Two of the worksites are located within the jurisdiction of the City of Goleta (Bell Creek/EOF and Tecolote Creek). The Eagle Canyon Ranch and Dos Pueblos worksites are located within the unincorporated area under the jurisdiction of Santa Barbara County. The entire project area lies within the Coastal Zone. As such, the following plans and policies apply to the project:

- California Coastal Act - City of Goleta General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan, Coastal Zoning Ordinance - Santa Barbara County Comprehensive Plan, Local Coastal Plan, and Coastal Zoning Ordinance

Each of these plans was reviewed in light of the project, and the project was found to be consistent with them, either because the project poses no threat of impact in these areas, incorporates preventative measures to address/prevent impacts in these areas, or will implement mitigation measures to lessen impacts in these areas. No significant conflicts were discovered between the project and these plans.

California Coastal Act While the California Coastal Commission has approved Santa Barbara County’s Local Coastal Plan (discussed below), the Local Coastal Plan for the City of Goleta has not been approved; therefore, the policies of the California Coastal Act apply to those project areas under the City of Goleta’s jurisdiction. The applicable policies of the Coastal Act were reviewed, and this project was found to be consistent with them.

The main applicable policies of the Coastal Act are:

30106 Definition of development 30212 b) Definition of new development 30107.5 Definition of environmentally sensitive area 30001.5 Protection of the quality of the coastal zone environment 30210, 30211 Public access and recreational opportunities (consistent with public safety) 30212 Public access provided in new development projects unless adequate access exists nearby (which it does, on the Bacara property) 30231 Protection of biological productivity and water quality 30232 Protection against the spillage of hydrocarbons and hazardous substances 30233 b) Safe and appropriate disposal of dredged substances and spoils 30240 Prevention of impacts to environmentally sensitive habitat areas and recreation areas 30250 New development close to existing development 30251 Protection of scenic and visual resources of coastal areas 30253 Prevention of impacts to air quality, hazards, erosion, structural integrity, and the surrounding area 30262 Prevention of geologic instability and subsidence hazards 30600 Proper permitting

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 138

The abandonment project qualifies as development under the Coastal Act since it involves the “demolition, or alteration of the size of any structure, including any facility of any private, public, or municipal utility.” While no new structures will be built with the removal project, it also qualifies as new development given that the project does not fall under any of the exceptions listed for new development in Section 30212(b).

Under Section 30231 of Article 4 of the Coastal Act, which regulates activities within or near the marine environment, biological productivity and water quality are to be maintained and restored through adequate protective measures, including “preventing…interference with surface water flow…and minimizing alteration of natural streams”, both goals of the pipeline removal project. By removing the abandoned pipeline along the streambed of Tecolote Creek, which currently interferes with water flow, and from the banks of Bell, Tecolote and Eagle Canyon creeks, the project will be fulfilling this measure.

Section 30232 states that “Protection against the spillage of crude oil, gas, petroleum products, or hazardous substances shall be provided in relation to any development or transportation of such materials. Effective containment and cleanup facilities and procedures shall be provided for accidental spills that do occur.” The prevention and mitigation measures indicated in Section 4.9, Hazardous Materials/Risk of Upset, include detailed procedures to avoid spillage of hydrocarbons potentially released during pipeline cutting and removal operations. The project- specific Spill Contingency Plan includes prevention techniques as well as spill response strategies in the event of an unanticipated release of residual pipeline liquids. This plan will be submitted to the appropriate agencies for review and approval prior to project execution.

Furthermore, the mitigation measures listed under Section 4.9 of this document include a removal plan for contaminated soil that addresses Section 30233(b) of the Coastal Act, which sets out goals for soil disposal. As noted under mitigation measures within the Hazards Materials/Risk of Upset section, “If field screening indicates that contaminated soils maybe encountered along the pipeline right-of-way during project work, Atlantic Richfield will promptly notify the appropriate regulatory agencies and sample the affected soils to analyze the type and concentration of the potential impact. If the contaminated soils are determined to exceed clean-up thresholds, as established by the County of Santa Barbara Fire Prevention Division (FPD) (formerly Protective Services Division), then Atlantic Richfield will prepare a workplan to delineate the extent of the contaminants in the soil after all pipelines and support structures have been removed and pursue the appropriate modifications to its permit(s) to address this unanticipated work scope. If contaminated soil is found, up to 50 cubic yards of material may be stockpiled onsite for later off-site disposal.”

With regards to the protection of environmentally sensitive habitat areas (ESH) and recreation areas, as mandated by Section 30240, this project shall “be sited and designed to prevent impacts which would significantly degrade those areas, and shall be compatible with the continuance of those habitat and recreation areas.” The very nature of the pipeline removal project embodies this goal with the removal of structures from environmentally sensitive areas to prevent further impacts from present development. Section 4.4, Biological Resources, of this document provides specific measures to mitigate removal activity impacts to species and resources within environmentally sensitive habitats and recreation areas, including biological assessment, an employee awareness program, construction flagging, and a Habitat Restoration Plan for surrounding species and habitats.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 139

Section 30251 of the Coastal Act states, “Permitted development shall be sited and designed to protect views to and along the ocean and scenic coastal areas, to minimize the alteration of natural land forms, to be visually compatible with the character of surrounding areas, and, where feasible, to restore and enhance visual quality in visually degraded areas.” Visual impacts from the proposed project are addressed in Section 4.1 of this document, Aesthetics/Visual Resources, which explains that because no permanent structures are proposed, the project would not result in the obstruction of any scenic vistas or permanently change the visual character of the area. Short-term visual impacts occur due to temporary abandonment work, including heavy equipment operation and the possible trimming of vegetation to access the project sites, however these impacts would be minimal and would affect only the immediate area surrounding the project sites. Over the long-term, the project would restore the visual quality in the project area as existing abandoned above-ground pipelines, pipe supports, and ancillary equipment would be removed.

Sections 4.3 (Air Quality), 4.8 (Geologic Resources), and 4.9 (Hazardous Materials/Risk of Upset) of this document address the remaining policies of the Coastal Act applicable to this pipeline removal project, primarily Section 30253, Minimization of adverse impacts (i.e. prevention of impacts to air quality, hazards, erosion, structural integrity, and the surrounding area) and Section 30262, Oil and gas development (prevention of geologic instability and subsidence hazards).

City of Goleta General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan Elements Portions of the proposed project lie within the city limits of Goleta, including portions of the pipeline that remain suspended over Bell Creek, through Tecolote Creek, along the Venoco EOF property line, and ancillary equipment in the Bell Creek area consisting of a skid and vault. As such, the removal activities must comply with the City of Goleta General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan (GP/CLUP). The project was preliminarily found to be in conformity to applicable elements of the GP/CLUP either because the project poses no threat of impact in these areas, incorporates preventative measures to address/prevent impacts in these areas, or will implement mitigation measures to lessen impacts in these areas. No significant conflicts were discovered between the project and these land use policies.

Issue areas derived from the applicable sections of the GP/CLUP and are briefly evaluated below:

Land Use: The project description is an approved use in all land use designations/affected properties that the project will use. In addition, policy LU 10.3 specifically calls for the removal of these ARCO pipelines, which this project would do.

Open Space: As noted in the Open Space section of this document, the project would temporarily interfere with the Tecolote and Bell Creek ESHA protected open space with construction activities. As such impacts are temporary, have been found less than significant. Furthermore, with mitigation applied in the Biological Resources section of this document, any long-term impacts to these areas will be less than significant.

Cultural/Historical/Archaeological Resources: Mitigation measures to avoid impacts to archaeological areas, as required under policies within the Open Space Element, include the supervision of cut and fill and digging operations in known resource areas by a qualified ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 140

archaeologist and Native American consultant. No activities are proposed near historical sites within the subject parcels.

ESHA/Stormwater Management: Coastal bluff and creekside areas of the project would be protected by mitigation measures to prevent pollution, erosion and sedimentation of the bluffs and creeksides and protect these areas through proper grading techniques. Mitigation applied within the biological resources section of this document would make any long-term impacts to these areas less than significant.

Air Quality: Construction activities would result in the creation of air pollution from the use of internal combustion engines. Specifically, conventional construction equipment such as cranes, excavators, backhoes, loaders, air compressors, welders, and generators will be utilized to execute the project. Additional sources of air pollutant emissions include emissions from on- road motor vehicles used to transport materials and personnel to and from the project areas as well as dust generated during grading activities. The residual air quality impacts have been found less than significant due to the mitigation measures imposed in the air quality section, which are consistent with policies CE 12.2 and 12.3.

Safety: Hazards related to the potential existence of contaminated soils, a possible fuel spill from construction equipment, leaving the portion of the O-3 pipeline suspended over Bell Creek adjacent to the active V-1 gas pipeline in place, and geologic issues are identified in the Hazards and Geologic Resource sections of this document. Mitigation measures from both sections make residual safety impacts less than significant consistent with policies SE 5.4, 5.5, 6.1, 6.4, 6.6 and 8.12.

Scenic Resources: The mouths of both creeks, the adjacent shoreline, the creeks themselves and the vegetation associated with their riparian corridors are all designated as scenic resources in the City’s General Plan. The nearby U.S. Highway 101 is designated as a scenic corridor in the General Plan. The proposed demolition activities and vegetation removal could temporarily compromise the Tecolote and Bell Creek scenic resources. The crane and staging area will be visible from the surrounding area and the U.S. Highway 101. The portion of the O-3 pipeline suspended over Bell Creek will be left in place for future decommissioning due to safety concerns as the active, high pressure gas, V-1 pipeline is in close proximity to this line. These potentially significant impacts have been mitigated down to less than significant in the Aesthetics/Visual Resources section of this document consistent with policies VH 1.1 – 1.6, 2.1 – 2.3, 4.9 and 4.12.

Construction Noise: The Noise section of this document found that construction noise could cause temporary, potentially significant impacts. As such, mitigation was imposed consistent with policies NE 6.4 and 6.5, which brought residual impacts down to less than significant.

City of Goleta Coastal Zoning Ordinance

See Santa Barbara County Coastal Zoning Ordinance below.

Santa Barbara County Comprehensive Plan

The unincorporated area of the proposed project that is located outside the city limits of Goleta remains under the jurisdiction of the County of Santa Barbara. These portions of the project include the pipeline bundle across Eagle Canyon Ranch property from the eastern boundary with Bacara ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 141

Resort and the access road to Venoco’s pier to the western side of Eagle Canyon Creek. As such, the removal activities must comply with the Santa Barbara County Comprehensive Plan. Of the various general plan elements adopted, the Land Use element and its subsections contain policies applicable to this project. Policies found in this element that apply to the pipeline removal project are listed below.

Land Use Element- Adopted December 1980, Revised August 1982 LU General Policy 4 Requirement for adequate services available for proposed development LU Hillside and Watershed Protection Policy 1 Minimization of cut and fill operations 2 Preservation of natural conditions at site 4, 5 Measures to retain sediment during grading operations, stabilize soils 7 Prevention of pollutant runoff into nearby streams, wetlands, groundwater 8 Grading permit requirement LU Streams and Creeks Policy 1 Minimization of impacts within stream corridors LU Flood Hazard Policy 2 Prevention of additional flood hazards near creeks LU Historical and Archaeological Sites Policy 2 Prevention of impacts to archaeological or cultural sites on parcel 4 Prohibition of unauthorized uses impacting arch/cultural sites LU Parks/Recreation Policy 4 Preservation of hiking and equestrian trails LU Open Lands Policy 2 Protection of County watersheds and their productivity LU Visual Resources Policy 1 Requirement for landscaping plan submittal Circulation Element B.Roadway Standards a. Estimated Future Volume from additional project traffic less than capacity

The proposed project was evaluated in light of each of these policies under the Land Use Element and found to be consistent with them, either because the project poses no threat of impact in these areas, incorporates preventative measures to address/prevent impacts in these areas, or will implement mitigation measures to lessen impacts in these areas. No significant conflicts were discovered between the project and these land use policies.

With regard to Land Use General Policy, the proposed project would require no additional services, including water, sewer, fire or police protection. Coastal bluff and creekside areas of the project that qualify under the Hillside and Watershed Protection Policy, Streams and Creeks Policy, Flood Hazard Policy, and Open Lands Policy would be protected by mitigation measures to prevent pollution, erosion and sedimentation of the bluffs and creeksides and protect these areas through proper grading techniques. These mitigation measures are identified under Sections 4.4, 4.8, and 4.9, as stated above. As identified in mitigation measure HAZ-6, ARCO will apply for a grading permit for the proposed cut and fill operations if needed.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 142

Mitigation measures to avoid impacts to archaeological areas, as required under the Historical and Archaeological Sites Policy, include the supervision of cut and fill and digging operations in known resource areas by a qualified archaeologist and Native American consultant. No activities are proposed near historical sites within the subject parcels. With regard to the Parks/Recreation Policy of the Land Use element, as stated under Section 4.14, Recreation, proposed project activities would not interfere with any recreational uses, including vertical or lateral coastal access, hiking paths or equestrian trails. All work and equipment operations would be limited to the pipeline right-of-way in primarily privately-owned properties.

While the Visual Resources Policy #1 requires a landscaping plan to be submitted to the County for all commercial, industrial, and planned developments, the proposed project, as an abandonment project, is exempted from submitting such a plan due to the removal nature of the project. Revegetation efforts are included in the mitigation measures as a Restoration, Revegetation, and Erosion Control Plan (RECRP) is required under Section 4.4, Biological Resources.

Santa Barbara County Local Coastal Plan

The California Coastal Commission certified Santa Barbara County’s Local Coastal Plan in 1981 and subsequently approved amendments. The main applicable policies of the Local Coastal Plan, which applies to those areas of the proposed project that lie within County jurisdiction, address the following issues and can be found under the following Sections:

General Development Policy 2.6 Adequate services and resources available for proposed project 2.11 Regulations on development adjacent to ESHA Geologic Hazards Policy 3.8 Review of potential geologic hazards in work area 3.9 Safety standards for projects crossing fault lines Flood Hazard Area Overlay Designation Policy 3.11 Prevention of grading within 100-year flood plain and fringe setbacks 3.12 Prevention of additional flood hazards near creeks Hillsides and Watershed Protection Policy 3.13 Minimization of cut and fill operations 3.14 Preservation of natural conditions at site 3.15 Grading operations prohibited during rainy season 3.16 Measures to retain sediment during grading operations 3.17 Slope stabilization measures following grading operations 3.19 Prevention of pollutant discharge into coastal streams or wetlands Visual Resources Policy 4.2 Requirement for landscaping plan submittal Oil and Gas Policy 6.3 Environmental review requirement for oil and gas development in ESHA 6.4 Return project site to natural conditions following production completion 6.12 Pipeline permission in ESHAs 6.14 Follow-up survey to areas treated under Revegetation Plan Coastal Access and Recreation Policy 7.2 Allowance of vertical coastal access Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas Policy ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 143

9.1 ESHA protection measures 9.4 Critical bird habitat protection measures 9.9 Prohibition of permanent structures in wetlands and buffer zones 9.11 Prohibition of unpermitted discharge of wastewater into wetlands 9.13 Prohibition of unauthorized vehicles and foot traffic in wetlands 9.18 Native grasslands protection 9.20 Prohibition of grass-cutting in vernal pools and 5’ buffer areas 9.21 Protection of vernal pools from development 9.22 Monarch butterfly habitat protection measures 9.25 Protection of marine mammal rookeries during mating season 9.28 White-tailed kite habitat protection measures 9.35 Oak tree protection measures 9.36 Native vegetation protection measures 9.40 Revegetation of stream corridors impacted by development 9.41 Minimization of impacts to streams from permitted development Archaeological and Historical Resources Policy 10.2 Prevention of impacts to archaeological or cultural sites on parcel 10.4 Prohibition of unauthorized uses impacting arch/cultural sites Air Quality Policy 11.1 Accordance with Air Quality Attainment Plan

The policies listed under the General Development, Geologic Hazards, Flood Hazard, Hillsides and Watershed Protection, Visual Resources, Coastal Access and Recreation, and Archaeological and Historical Resources conform to the Land Use Element under the Santa Barbara County Comprehensive Plan discussed above; thus, the mitigation measures incorporated into the proposed project discussed above similarly comply with these requirements. A discussion of the various mitigation measures, including a revegetation plan, proposed to avoid impacts to ESHAs can be found under Section 4.4, Biological Resources, which addresses the relevant concerns cited under the ESHA and Oil and Gas Policy. Air quality concerns are addressed under Section 4.3, Air Quality, through a list of four mitigation measures.

Santa Barbara County Coastal Zoning Ordinance

The following applicable sections of the Santa Barbara County Zoning Ordinance for Coastal Areas, Article II, were reviewed, and this project was found to be consistent with them:

Definitions 35-58 Development Energy Facility Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area Nonconforming Use Development Standards 35-65 Archaeology 35-67 Bluff Development Zoning Districts 35-69.3, 69.4 AG-II Zoning District Permitted Uses for Dos Pueblos Parcel 35-70.4 RR Zoning District Permitted Uses for Eagle Canyon Parcel 35-81 CV Zoning District- Nonconforming Use for Bacara Parcel 35-87.3 M-CD Zoning District Permitted Uses for Venoco EOF Parcel ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 144

35-89 REC Zoning District- Nonconforming Use for Sandpiper Parcel Overlay Districts 35-95 Flood Hazard Area requirements for Bell and Tecolote creeks 35-97 ESHA protections, Development Standards for: 35.97.9 Wetland Habitats 35.97.10 Native Grassland Habitats 35.97.11 Vernal Pool Habitats 35.97.12 Butterfly Tree Habitats 35.97.13 Marine Mammal Rookery and Hauling Ground Habitats 35.97.14 White-Tailed Kite Habitats 35.97.17 Seabirds Nesting and Roosting Site Habitats 35.97.18 Native Plant Community Habitats 35.97.19 Stream Habitats General Regulations 35-140 Tree Removal Permit Guidelines Oil and Gas Facilities 35-157 Oil and Gas Pipeline Guidelines, Development Standards Nonconforming Structures and Uses 35-161 .4 Discontinuance of current nonconforming use Permit Procedures 35-169 Coastal Development Permits 35-170 Abandonment of Oil/Gas Land Uses

The removal of the oil and gas pipelines falls within the definition of Development under Article II, the Santa Barbara County Coastal Zoning Ordinance, as “demolition [] of any structure”. The pipelines are currently a non-conforming use within several zone districts (REC, CV) and are regulated under several overlay districts, listed above. The Zoning Ordinance sets forth certain restrictions on abandonment and performance standards directly pertaining to this project and use of the project area post-abandonment under Section 35-170. The findings of approval required under this section (section 35-170.12) for an abandonment permit (and Development Plan – City of Goleta) have been met.

ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 145

RECOMMENDATION BY P&D STAFF On the basis of the Initial Study, the staff of Planning and Development:

Finds that the proposed project WILL NOT have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, recommends that a Negative Declaration (ND) be prepared.

X Finds that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures incorporated into the REVISED PROJECT DESCRIPTION would successfully mitigate the potentially significant impacts. Staff recommends the preparation of an ND. The ND finding is based on the assumption that mitigation measures will be acceptable to the applicant; if not acceptable a revised Initial Study finding for the preparation of an EIR may result.

Finds that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and recommends that an EIR be prepared.

Finds that from existing documents (previous EIRs, etc.) that a subsequent document (containing updated and site-specific information, etc.) pursuant to CEQA Sections 15162/15163/15164 should be prepared.

Potentially significant unavoidable adverse impact areas:

With Public Hearing X Without Public Hearing

PREVIOUS DOCUMENT:

ARCO Dos Pueblos Golf Links Conditional Use Permit (91-CP-085), presented before Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors on August 17, 1993.

PROJECT EVALUATOR: DATE:

DETERMINATION BY ENVIRONMENTAL HEARING OFFICER X I agree with staff conclusions. Preparation of the appropriate document may proceed. I DO NOT agree with staff conclusions. The following actions will be taken: I require consultation and further information prior to making my determination.

SIGNATURE:______DRAFT MND DATE: ______

SIGNATURE:______FINAL MND DATE: ______ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 1

ATTACHMENT A

Figure 2 - Tecolote and Bell Creek Pipeline Elements Figure 3 - Tecolote Creek Area Site Plan Figure 4 - Bell Creek Site Plan Figure 5 - Tecolote Creek ESHA Buffers Figure 6 - Bell Creek ESHA Buffers Figure 7 - Tecolote Creek ESHA Buffers GP/CLUP Figure 8 - Bell Creek ESHA Buffers GP/CLUP ARCO Pipeline Removal (06DRP-00000-00002) February, 2010 FINAL Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 2

ATTACHMENT B

Draft MND Comment Letters

¤£101

U. P.R .R.

H o ll is te r A v Temporary staging area e to be lined with silt fence and hay bales Access Pathway (goes under bridge)

6" Diameter High Pressure Gas Line (V-1)

6" Diameter Oil (0-3) Parking Lot

Tennis k e re C Courts

te lo o c e T

± Pacific Ocean 0 100 200 Feet

Legend Figure 5 Sensitive Habitats Other Features

Coastal Valley and Freshwater Marsh City of Goleta Planted Eucalyptus Parcels Southern Willow Scrub and Southern Mixed Riparin Forest Note: ESHA designations derived from the September, 2007 Project Work Plan prepared by SECOR International Incorporated. Buffers 25' Buffer of Southern Willow Scrub and Southern Mixed Riparian Forest SECOR Biological Study 100' Buffer of Coastal Valley Freshwater Marsh Tecolote Creek ESHA Buffers ARCO Pipeline Removal Draft MND; September, 2009 Access Pathway Under Bridge

Access Pathway

U .P. R. R.

Parking Lot

Electrical Line ¤£101 H oll iste r A ve Alternative Emergency Access Corridor 6" Diameter High Pressure Gas Line (Owned by Venoco) Excavation/Pipe Tap Location #21 jk V-1 (Active) k jkj Temporary Soil Stockpile Area

Hydrogen Sulfide Alarm Panel 12 Foot Emergency Access Corridor Bell Creek Staging Area

VENOCO INC. K

E

E

R

C

L 6" Diamter Oil (0-3) L

E

B Dirt Road Skid Heliport jk Temporary Soil Stockpile Area

Excavation/Pipe Tap Location #22

VAULT ± Pacific Ocean 0 100 200 Feet Legend Figure 6 Sensitive Species Buffers Other Features jk Cliff-Aster 25' Buffer of Cliff Aster City of Goleta jk Santa Barbara Honeysuckle 25' Buffer of Santa Barbara Honeysuckle Parcels Sensitive Habitats 25' Buffer of Coast Live Oak Woodland Coast Live Oak Woodland 25' Buffer of Disturbed Venturian Coastal Sage Scrub Coastal Brackish Marsh 25' Buffer of Venturan Coastal Sage Scrub Coastal Valley and Freshwater Marsh 25' Buffer of Southern Willow Scrub and Southern Mixed Riparian Forest Disturbed Venturan Coastal Sage Scrub 100' Buffer of Coastal Brackish Marsh Planted Eucalyptus SECOR Biological Study Southern Willow Scrub and 100' Buffer of Coastal Valley Freshwater Marsh Bell Creek ESHA Buffers Southern Mixed Riparian Forest Note: ESHA designations derived from the September, 2007 Project ARCO Pipeline Removal Draft Venturan Coastal Sage Scrub Work Plan prepared by SECOR International Incorporated. MND; September, 2009 ¤£101

U. P.R .R.

H o ll is Access Pathway te Temporary staging area r (goes under bridge) A to be lined with silt fence v e and hay bales ¨[ ^_

6" Diameter High Pressure Gas Line (V-1)

Parking Lot

6" Diameter Oil (0-3)

Tennis k ! e re C Courts ^_ te lo o c e T

¡[ [à

± Pacific Ocean 0 100 200 Feet Legend Sensitive Species Buffers Figure 7 ^_ Monarch Butterfly Sites 25' Buffer of Coastal Sage Scrub/Dune/Bluff Scrub ! Red-Legged Frog 100' Buffer of Monarch/Raptor Roost Habitat ¡[ tidewater goby 100 ft Buffer of Open Water [à globose dune beetle 300' Buffer of Monarch/Raptor Roost Habitat ¨[ black-flowered figwort Other Features Sensitive Habitats City of Goleta Open Water Monarch butterfly and/or Raptor Roosting Habitat Note: ESHA designations derived from Figure 4-1 of the City of Goleta General Plan/ Coastal Land Use Plan (September, 2006). ESHA locations are approximate. City of Goleta GP/CLUP Riparian/Marsh/Vernal Tecolote Creek ESHA Buffers Sage Scrub/Dune/Bluff Scrub Beach and Shoreline ARCO Pipeline Removal Draft MND; September, 2009 Access Pathway Under Bridge

^_ Access Pathway

U .P. R. R.

Parking Lot

Tennis

Courts ^_ ¤£101 H oll iste Alternative Emergency r A ve Access Corridor 6" Diameter High Pressure Gas Line Electrical Line (Owned by Venoco) Excavation/Pipe Tap Location #21 !

V-1 (Active) Temporary Soil Stockpile Area

Hydrogen Sulfide Alarm Panel 12 Foot Emergency Bell Creek Access Corridor Staging Area

K

E

E

R

C

L L 6" Diamter Oil (0-3) E

B

Skid Heliport

Temporary Soil Stockpile Area

Excavation/Pipe Tap Location #22

Vault ¡[

±

0 100 200 Feet Pacific Ocean

Legend Sensitive Species Buffers Figure 8 ^_ Monarch Butterfly Sites 25' Buffer of Coastal Sage Scrub/Dune/Bluff Scrub ! Red-Legged Frog 100' Buffer of Monarch/Raptor Roost Sites ¡[ tidewater goby 100' Buffer of Open Water Sensitive Habitats 300' Buffer of Monarch/Raptor Roost Sites Open Water Other Features Monarch butterfly and/or Raptor Roosting Habitat City of Goleta Riparian/Marsh/Vernal Parcels City of Goleta GP/CLUP Sage Scrub/Dune/Bluff Scrub Bell Creek ESHA Buffers Note: ESHA designations derived from Figure 4-1 of the City of Goleta General Plan/ Beach and Shoreline Coastal Land Use Plan (September, 2006). ESHA locations are approximate. ARCO Pipeline Removal Draft MND; September, 2009 United States Department of the Interior

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office 2493 Portola Road, Suite B Ventura, California 93003

IN REPLY REFER TO: 81440-2010-CPA-0034 December 29, 2009

Dean Dusette Santa Barbara County Planning and Development Division of Water Rights 123 East Anapamu Street Santa Barbara, California 93101

Subject: Comments on the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Proposed ARCO Dos Pueblos Pipeline Removal (County Permit 06DRP-00000-00002/City of Goleta Permit 06-058-DP), Gaviota, Santa Barbara County, California

Dear Mr. Dusette:

We are responding to your correspondence, received in our office on December 2, 2009, requesting comments on the draft mitigated negative declaration (DMND) for the proposed ARCO Dos Pueblos pipeline removal in Gaviota, Santa Barbara County. The proposed project site is located on the Gaviota Coast between Naples and the Sandpiper Golf Course, situated between Highway 101 and the Pacific Ocean. The applicant, Atlantic Richfield Company (ARCO) proposes to remove all above-ground portions of abandoned ARCO oil and gas pipelines and associated infrastructure, in addition to some buried pipelines on the Eagle Canyon Ranch. The project site was used for oil and gas development and production by ARCO from 1928 through 1997. Less than 50 cubic yards of grading is proposed in relation to this project. Removal of the pipeline would involve the use of mechanized heavy equipment; however, there would not be any heavy equipment working directly within the 3 main creeks that occur onsite (Bells Creek, Tecolote Creek, and Eagle Canyon Creek), where a mini-excavator would be used from the creek banks instead. Specifically, the subject project involves removal of the remaining portions of a 6-inch diameter former crude oil transport pipeline running from Dos Pueblos (Makar) property to Bell Creek; abandoned pipeline bundle (5 lines) and associated concrete, metal, and wood pipe supports remaining on the Dos Pueblos property (approximately 300 feet), Eagle Canyon Ranch (approximately 1,760 feet), and across Eagle Canyon Creek (two metal supports on top of wooden beams); a Triplex pump skid, electric motor, and associated piping near the south end of the Veneco Ellwood Onshore Facility; and an obsolete hydrogen sulfide alarm panel west of the Veneco Ellwood Onshore Facility near the Bell Creek access. For the Tecolote Creek portion of the project, personnel and equipment would access the work site from the northeastern abutment of the Hollister Avenue Bridge. The temporary staging area would measure approximately 25 feet by 25 feet and be established west of Tecolote Creek and south of the bridge. This portion of the subject project would involve vegetation removal and trimming within the staging area and along the access pathways, including on both sides of Tecolote Dean Dusette 2

Creek. For the Bell Creek portion of the project, personnel and equipment would access the work site from Hollister Avenue using the unpaved roadway located along the western boundary of the Ellwood Onshore Facility. The temporary staging area for this portion would measure approximately 20 feet by 180 feet and would be established along this roadway. No major vegetation removal or trimming would occur for this portion of the subject project. The proposed project is scheduled to take place during the dry season from April 1 to November 1 (or November 15, if significant rainfall does not occur). Although not anticipated, some work may occur in the upland areas outside of the dry season.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (Service) responsibilities include administering the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act), including sections 7, 9, and 10. Section 9(a)(1)(B) of the Act prohibits the taking of any federally listed endangered or threatened fish or wildlife species. Section 3(18) of the Act defines take to mean to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct. Service regulations (50 CFR 17.3) define harm to include significant habitat modification or degradation which actually kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding or sheltering. Harassment is defined by the Service as an intentional or negligent action that creates the likelihood of injury to wildlife by annoying it to such an extent as to significantly disrupt normal behavioral patterns which include, but are not limited to, breeding, feeding, or sheltering. The Act provides for civil and criminal penalties for the unlawful taking of listed species. Exemptions to the prohibitions against take may be obtained through coordination with the Service in two ways. If a project is to be funded, authorized, or carried out by a Federal agency and may affect a listed species, the Federal agency must consult with the Service, pursuant to section 7(a)(2) of the Act. If a proposed project does not involve a Federal agency but may result in the take of a listed animal species, the project proponent should apply to the Service for an incidental take permit, pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act.

The project area contains both upland and wetland communities. Upland communities include Venturan or coastal sage scrub, coast live oak woodland, and native grassland. The riparian corridors along Eagle Canyon Creek, Tecolote Creek, and Bell Creek support a mixture of southern mixed riparian forest, southern willow scrub, coastal and valley freshwater marsh vegetation, and coastal brackish marsh habitats. Surveys for sensitive species and habitats were conducted at the subject project site on October 24, 2006, October 31, 2006, November 3, 2006, January 8, 2007, March 12, 2007, and April 25, 2007. Additional informal biological assessments were conducted during project planning visits in 2008 and 2009 for consistency updates and during planning visits. The DMND states that the federally endangered Gaviota tarplant (Deinandra increscens subsp. villosa) was not identified during surveys on the project site, but is known to inhabit the general Gaviota Coast area. No federally listed plant species were found within the proposed subject project site during the botanical reconnaissance surveys.

A night survey conducted in the fall of 2006 documented the presence of federally threatened California red-legged frogs (Rana aurora draytonii) in both Eagle Canyon Creek and Tecolote Creek. Three adults were observed in Tecolote Creek near the south end of the railroad culvert, and one adult was observed in Eagle Canyon Creek approximately 100 feet downstream of the Dean Dusette 3

railroad culvert near the upstream end of the lagoon. Additionally, 20-30 red-legged frog tadpoles were observed in Eagle Canyon Creek during a steelhead habitat evaluation survey in July of 2008. No California red-legged frogs were seen within Bell Creek; however, the DMND states that the lagoon was backed up to the railroad culvert and the depth of the water in combination with the thick vegetation made it extremely difficult to survey the area. One adult red-legged frog was observed in Tecolote Creek during a 2009 planning visit. California red- legged frogs are likely to make overland excursions between the drainages in this region; therefore, in addition to the occurrence of California red-legged frogs within the drainages on the property site, frogs are likely to disperse through the project area when they move overland between aquatic habitats. Work conducted in and around these creeks, as well as in upland areas during the wet season, may result in take of the California red-legged frog.

Historical occurrences of the federally endangered tidewater goby (Eucylogoblus newberryi) are reported within all three drainages in the project area (California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) 2009). Several hundred tidewater gobies were observed in Bell Creek at the time of the fall 2006 survey and during the steelhead habitat evaluation survey in July of 2008; none were seen during the surveys in either Tecolote Creek or Eagle Canyon Creek.

Our assessment of the proposed project does not constitute a full review of potential effects to species listed pursuant to the Act. To assist the County and the City in adequately evaluating the proposed project from the standpoint of fish and wildlife protection, we offer the following comments and recommendations.

The DMND notes that migratory birds are expected to utilize portions of the project area; however, none were seen during the fall 2006 survey. The DMND notes that riparian habitat in both the Tecolote and Bell Creek corridors could provide nesting sites for the federally endangered least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus). Based upon the information that is included in the DMND, it is unclear whether protocol surveys were performed for least Bell’s vireo or whether this species was observed during other surveys performed at the project site.

Federally endangered steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) were reported in Tecolote Creek between 1978-1979. Surveys for steelhead were conducted by Hunt and Associates for the proposed project in April 2008. During the steelhead survey, it was determined that Tecolote Creek provides moderate to high quality over-summering habitat for adult and juvenile steelhead and it is assumed that steelhead are present in Tecolote Creek. The DMND states that habitat for steelhead in Eagle Canyon Creek was marginal to non-existent at the time of the survey. Steelhead trout are under the jurisdiction of the National Marine Fisheries Service and, as such, will not be discussed further.

Typical habitat for the federally threatened vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi) includes small swales or earthen slumps with a grassy or muddy bottom in unplowed grassland where water will persist for 6 to 7 weeks in the winter or as few as 3 weeks in the spring (Eriksen and Belk 1999). Because vernal pool fairy shrimp are known to persist in habitat that is not generally considered characteristic of vernal pools (e.g., the presence of concentric vegetation Dean Dusette 4

rings), we recommend that the proposed pre-construction surveys include verification of the presence/absence of vernal pool branchiopod species in all suitable habitats in accordance with our current guidelines. We recommend avoidance of vernal pools/seasonal wetlands and surrounding uplands as the best way to minimize project effects on these habitats and any constituent listed species.

We are also concerned about the potential effects of the proposed project on the federally endangered southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus) which may occur in the project vicinity. Based on the information contained in the DMND, it is not clear whether or not this species was included in prior survey efforts.

The applicant has proposed numerous mitigation measures (under BIO-1 through BIO-18, found on pages 65 to 68, and CITY BIO 1 through 22, found on pages 75 to 81of the DMND) to address potential impacts to biological resources that may occur as a result of the proposed project activities. While many of the measures may minimize impacts to listed species, the potential for adverse effects still exists. Measure BIO-6 even states that “if incidental take of a protected species should occur, the CPD/City-qualified biological monitor will immediately provide verbal notification of the incident to the Service and California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). However, the DMND does not indicate that ARCO has pursued any form of take authorization with the Service. Please note that despite the incorporation of any mitigation measures developed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, any take of listed species that could result from the proposed project would require exemption pursuant to section 7 (if a federal nexus exists) or authorization pursuant to section 10 of the Act.

Only listed species receive protection under the Act. However, sensitive species should be considered in the planning process in the event they become listed or proposed for listing prior to project completion. We recommend that you review information in the California Department of Fish and Game’s CNDDB. You can contact CDFG at (916) 324-3812 for information on other sensitive species that may occur in this area. We appreciate the opportunity to provide comments on the proposed project. If you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact Heather Abbey of my staff at (805) 644-1766, extension 290.

Sincerely,

/s/: Steve Kirkland

Steve Kirkland Senior Biologist cc: Mathew McGoogan, National Marine Fisheries Services Anthony Spina, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Antal Szijj, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Martin Potter, California Dept. of Fish and Game

REFERENCES

[CNDDB] California Natural Diversity Data Base. 2009. Element occurrence reports for Eucyclogobius newberryi. Rarefind: A database application for the California Dept. of Fish and Game, Natural Heritage Division data, California Natural Diversity Data Base, Sacramento.

Eriksen, C. and D. Belk. 1999. Fairy shrimps of California’s pools, puddles, and playas. Mad River Press, Eureka, California.

[Service] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002. Recovery plan for the California red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. viii + 173 pp.

[Service] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2005a. Revised guidance on site and assessments and field surveys for the California red-legged frog. Sacramento, California.

Ksen~Sku~Mu Frank Arredondo ~Chumash MLD Po Box 161 Santa Barbara Ca, 93102

December 28, 2009

Dean Dusette, Project Planner Santa Barbara County Planning and Development 123 E Anapamu St. Santa Barbara Ca, 93101

Re: DMND ARCO Pipeline Removal

(County permit 06DRP-00000-00002)

(City of Goleta Permit 06-058-DP)

I thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above referenced project. My name is Frank Arredondo. I am Chumash/Coastanoan. I am recognized within my community as the Former Director of the Board with the Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation. Currently, I am an active member of the Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation; I am listed on the Most Likely Descendant (MLD) list for the Chumash Territory and the Native American Contact list with the Native American Heritage Commission. My comments today are of my own.

Being of Native American descendant, from the Chumash territory, I have a strong vested interest in the project. I currently provide comment on several Planning and Development projects in the surrounding areas that have cultural resources impacts. I have been an advocate for the preservation of those Cultural Resources within my community and for several years now as well as placing an emphasis on local governments adhering to policies and procedures. I thank you for taking the time to review my comments. As per several SB county guidelines the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed project is not adequate or complete. It does not identify how it came up with its results and conclusions that impact Cultural resources and the appropriateness of a Mitigated Negative Declaration. The mitigation measures have not been reviewed and agreed upon by the Native American community. With more than a dozen recorded archaeological sites in the Goleta and Dos Pueblos area Native Americans need to be contacted to address ethical concerns. With out the consultation from the Native American community as to the correct project type such as a MDN, is not yet appropriate. If the Community reviews the MND and find that the impacts will affect there cultural heritage then the actions of the MND constitute an Impact and a EIR is required.

The Draft MND states that significant but mitigable effects on the environment are anticipated in the following area: cultural resources. The DMND identifies it is possible that additional archaeological deposits will be uncovered. Such impacts are potentially significant.

In accordance with the SB County coastal Zoning ordinance sec. 35-65 3. Native Americans shall be consulted when development proposals are submitted which impact significant archaeological or cultural sites.

Santa Barbara County Coastal Zoning Ordinance

Sec. 35-65. Archaeology. 1. When developments are proposed for lots where archaeological or other cultural sites are located, project design shall be required which avoids impacts to such cultural sites if possible. 2. When sufficient planning flexibility does not permit avoiding construction on archaeological or other types of cultural sites, adequate mitigation shall be required. Mitigation shall be designed in accord with guidelines of the State Office of Historic Preservation and the State of California Native American Heritage Commission. 3. Native Americans shall be consulted when development proposals are submitted which impact significant archaeological or cultural sites.

7. Development Standards for Production Activities. In addition to the development standards set forth in Section 35-176.10 required for Production Plans and the regulations of the M-CR and AG-II districts, the following regulations shall apply. w. Archaeological and historical resources shall be protected in accordance with Section 3.10 of the Coastal Land Use Plan, and significant impacts shall be mitigated to the maximum extent feasible, potentially including the following measures: 1) Consider alternative sites and pipeline corridors within the designated planning area that lessen impacts to archaeological and historical resources; 2) As necessary, Phase I, II, and III assessments shall be conducted at the expense of the applicant; 3) Areas containing resources shall be fenced and appropriately protected during grading and construction, and the County shall require monitoring of the site during grading and construction (including abandonment) by an approved archaeologist and Native American as applicable; 4) An educational workshop shall be conducted for construction workers prior to and during construction as the County deems necessary for specific projects.

5. Development Standards. In addition to the regulations of the applicable zoning district, the following standards apply to new or expanded consolidated pipeline terminals. m. Archaeological and historical resources shall be protected in accordance with Section 3.10 of the Coastal Land Use Plan and Division 3, Section 35-65 of the Coastal Zoning Ordinance. Where adverse impacts to archaeological and historical resources cannot be avoided, reasonable mitigation shall be required and designed in accordance with the guidelines of the State Office of Historic Preservation and the State of California Native American Heritage Commission.

Other ordinances and policies also apply:

Santa Barbara County Comprehensive Plan-Land Use Element Republished May 2009 ,pg 77 HISTORICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES POLICIES 1. All available measures, including purchase, tax relief, purchase of development rights, etc., shall be explored to avoid development on significant historic, prehistoric, archaeological, and other classes of cultural sites.

3. When sufficient planning flexibility does not permit avoiding construction on archaeological or other types of cultural sites, adequate mitigation shall be required. Mitigation shall be designed in accord with guidelines of the State Office of Historic Preservation and the State of California Native American Heritage Commission.

5. Native Americans shall be consulted when development proposals are submitted which impact significant archaeological or cultural sites.

Other applicable policies of the Coastal Act were reviewed, and this project was found missing theses:

Section 30116 Sensitive coastal resource areas "Sensitive coastal resource areas" means those identifiable and geographically bounded land and water areas within the coastal zone of vital interest and sensitivity. "Sensitive coastal resource areas" include the following: (a) Special marine and land habitat areas, wetlands, lagoons, and estuaries as mapped and designated in Part 4 of the coastal plan. (b) Areas possessing significant recreational value. (c) Highly scenic areas. (d) Archaeological sites referenced in the California Coastline and Recreation Plan or as designated by the State Historic Preservation Officer. (e) Special communities or neighborhoods which are significant visitor destination areas.

Section 30244 Archaeological or paleontological resources Where development would adversely impact archaeological or paleontological resources as identified by the State Historic Preservation Officer, reasonable mitigation measures shall be required.

The abandonment project qualifies as development under the Coastal Act since it involves the “demolition, or alteration of the size of any structure, including any facility of any private, public, or municipal utility.” While no new structures will be built with the removal project, it also qualifies as new development given that the project does not fall under any of the exceptions listed for new development in Section 30212(b).

Other applicable points and policies of the coastal land use plan that were left out are:

Coastal Land Use Plan Republished June 2009 145 3.10 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL RESOURCES 3.10.1 COASTAL ACT POLICIES 30244. Where development would adversely impact archaeological or paleontological resources as identified by the State Historic Preservation Officer, reasonable mitigation measures shall be required.

3.10.4 POLICIES Policy 10-1: All available measures, including purchase, tax relief, purchase of development rights, etc., shall be explored to avoid development on significant historic, prehistoric, archaeological, and other classes of cultural sites. Policy 10-2: When developments are proposed for parcels where archaeological or other cultural sites are located, project design shall be required which avoids impacts to such cultural sites if possible. Policy 10-3: When sufficient planning flexibility does not permit avoiding construction on archaeological or other types of cultural sites, adequate mitigation shall be required. Mitigation shall be designed in accord with guidelines of the State Office of Historic Preservation and the State of California Native American Heritage Commission. Policy 10-4: Off-road vehicle use, unauthorized collecting of artifacts, and other activities other than development which could destroy or damage archaeological or cultural sites shall be prohibited. Policy 10-5: Native Americans shall be consulted when development proposals are submitted which impact significant archaeological or cultural sites.

Under the DMND Information sources pages 126-128, list the agencies and ordinances and policies and sources of information. Several of the ordinances required to address ethical element and Native American consultation are listed but not used in this project. There is no documentation that any consultation or correspondence has ever taken place with the Native American community. Requirements from the State Native American Heritage Commission as well as the Santa Barbara County Environmental guidelines pgs 45-57 require substantial involvement of the Native American community. The county policies that apply are the • “County of Santa Barbara Environmental Thresholds and Guidelines Manual, 8. Cultural Resources Guidelines Archaeological, Historical, and Ethnic Elements” • “County of Santa Barbara Resource Management department Regulations Governing Archaeological and Historical Projects undertaken in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act and Related Laws: cultural Resource Guidelines” • “The Regulations Governing Archaeological and Historical Projects Undertaken in Conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act and Related Laws: Cultural Resource Guidelines,” § 5097.96: The NAHC inventory of Native American sacred places Authorizes the Native American Heritage Commission to prepare an inventory of sacred places located on public lands and to review the administrative and statutory protections accorded to such places. Directs the commission to submit a report to the Legislature recommending actions, as the commission deems necessary, to preserve such sacred places and to protect the free exercise of Native American religions.

§ 5097.97: NAHC investigations Enables the Native American Heritage Commission to investigate the effect of proposed actions by a public agency if such action may cause severe or irreparable damage to a Native American sacred site located on public property or may bar appropriate access thereto by Native Americans. Authorizes the commission to recommend mitigation measures for consideration by the agency if the commission finds, after a public hearing, that the proposed action would result in such damage or interference. Allows the commission to ask the attorney general to take appropriate action if the agency fails to accept the mitigation measures.

In conclusion, the DMND does not address the Native American rights to consultation of the mitigation measures. Unless further documentation can be provided to establish that Native Americans have been contacted to determine if religious or ceremonial impacts have taken place the impact shall be potentially significant and require a Environmental Impact Report.

A complete review of the proposed project needs to be sent to the Contacts listed on the County Native American Contact list and the NAHC Native American Contact list. Consultation should take place that represents the process as instructed by the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines.

Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines The definition for consultation in 36 CFR §800 refers to the "Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Federal Agency Preservation Programs pursuant to the National Historic Preservation Act” for further guidance on consultation. That reference is to Standard 5 and its concomitant Guidelines: Consultation General Principles: Standard 5 "An agency consults with knowledgeable and concerned parties outside the agency about its historic preservation related activities. [Sections 110(a)(2)(D) and (E)(ii)]." Guidelines: Consultation General Principles "(a) Consultation means the process of seeking, discussing, and considering the views of others, and, where feasible, seeking agreement with them on how historic properties should be identified, considered, and managed. Consultation is built upon the exchange of ideas, not simply providing information. Whether consulting on a specific project or on broader agency programs, the agency should: 1. make its interests and constraints clear at the beginning; 2. make clear any rules, processes, or schedules applicable to the consultation; 3. acknowledge others' interests and seek to understand them; 4. develop and consider a full range of options; and, 5. try to identify solutions that will leave all parties satisfied. (b) Consultation should include broad efforts to maintain ongoing communication with all those public and private entities that are interested in or affected by the agency's activities and should not be limited to the consideration of specific projects. (c) Consultation should be undertaken early in the planning stage of any Federal action that might affect historic properties. Although time limits may be necessary on specific transactions carried out in the course of consultation (e.g., the time allowed to respond to an inquiry), there should be no hard-and-fast time limit on consultation overall. Consultation on a specific undertaking should proceed until agreement is reached or until it becomes clear to the agency that agreement cannot be reached. (d) While specific consultation requirements and procedures will vary among agencies depending on their missions and programs, the nature of historic properties that might be affected, and other factors, consultation should always include all affected parties. Section 110(a)(2)(D) specifies that an agency's preservation-related activities be carried out in consultation with other Federal, State, and local agencies, Indian tribes, Native Hawaiian organizations, and the private sector.

I thank you for your time. Please feel free to contact me with any question you might have.

Best wishes, Frank Arredondo Ksen~Sku~Mu Chumash MLD Po Box 161 Santa Barbara, Ca 93102 Email [email protected] 805-617-6884