HomeMy WebLinkAboutEQCB Min 1999-03-31
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
. 21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
. 43
44
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
Environmental Quality Control Board
Minutes
March 31, 1999
The adjourned Environmental Quality Control Board (EQCB) meeting of March 31,
1999 was called to order at 6:30 p.m. The meeting was held in City Council Chambers.
I. Pledge of Allegiance
II. Roll Call
Present:
Absent:
Members Hurley, McGuire, Voce
Jones, Porter
III. Approval of Agenda
MOTION by Hurley; SECOND by Voce to approve the agenda as presented.
Motion Carried:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
3-0
Hurley, McGuire, Voce
None
Jones, Porter
IV. Oral Communications - None.
V. Consent Calendar
Boardmember Hurley asked that the Consent Calendar be approved with the
exception of Item 5 and recommended that discussion on this item be held
between Items 12 and 15, changing Item 5 to Item 12.5 under Scheduled
Matters. Chairman McGuire stated that she would like to amend and add that
the Consent Calendar be approved with the exception of Item 2 which she
suggested be scheduled as Item 11 A immediately following approval of the
minutes.
MOTION by Hurley; SECOND by Voce to approve the Consent Calendar as
amended.
\\sCULL Y\CARMEN\EQCB Items\03-31-99 Minutes.doc
Page 1
.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
. 21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
.
EQCB Minutes of March 31, 1999
Motion Carried:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
3-0
Hurley, McGuire, Voce
None
Jones and Porter
1. RECEIVE AND FILE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT re: Seal Beach
Weapons Support Facility Installation Restoration Program - Draft Final Site
Management Plan, dated January 25, 1999.
2. RECEIVE AND FILE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT re: Receive and File
Response to City Comment Letter on "Mitigated Negative Declaration - Bolsa
Chica Channel Improvements" County of Orange, dated November 23, 1998
3. RECEIVE AND FILE CITY COUNCIL and EQCB COMMENT LETTER to
Weapons Support Facility re: "Draft Extended Removal Site Evaluation
Report, IR Sites 40 and 70, Naval Weapons Station, Seal Beach", dated
February 8, 1999
4. RECEIVE AND FILE EQCB STAFF REPORT re: Receive and File - Receipt
of "Preserving California's Natural Heritage" - State of California Resources
Agency, dated February 24, 1999
5. RECEIVE AND FILE CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM re: Receipt of
Additional Documents re: "Draft Environmental Impact Report No. 573 -
Marine Corps Air Station EI Toro Master Development Plan", dated March 2,
1999
6. RECEIVE AND FILE CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM re: Receipt of Orange
County Council of Governments "Air Quality Update", dated March 3, 1999
7. RECEIVE AND FILE CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM re: Seal Beach
Weapons Support Facility -Installation Restoration Program - Status Report
re: RAB Project Update, dated March 3, 1999
8. RECEIVE AND FILE CITY COUNCIUEQCB MEMORANDUM re: Receipt of
Response Letter from South Coast Air Quality Management District re: City of
Seal Beach Comments re: Revised Rule 1401 - Air Toxic Contaminants,
dated March 10, 1999
9. RECEIVE AND FILE EQCB STAFF REPORT re: Planning Update #2,
Proposed EI Toro National Wildlife Refuge, dated March 31, 1999
10. RECEIVE AND FILE EQCB STAFF REPORT re: Belmont Island
Decommissionirlg Project - Project Execution Plan, dated March 31, 1999
\\SCULLY\CARMEN\EQCB Items\03-31-99 Minutes.doc
Page 2
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
. 21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
. 43
44
45
EQCB Minutes of March 31, 1999
VI Public Hearings - None
VII Scheduled Matters
11. Approval of Minutes for January 27,1999
MOTION by Hurley; SECOND by Voce to approve the EQCB Minutes of January
27, 1999 as written
Motion Carried:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
3-0
Hurley, McGuire, Voce
None
Jones, Porter
11A. RECEIVE AND FILE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT re: Receive and
File Response to City Comment Letter on "Mitigated Negative
Declaration - Bolsa Chica Channel Improvements" County of Orange,
dated November 23,1998.
Chairman McGuire stated that she had received several calls at her home regarding
this item. She stated that she did not really have a clear understanding of the
issues, but emphasized that the plans for the county improvements of the College
Park East area would affect the wildlife, and her District would not be in favor of this
action. She said that this item had been brought to the attention of Councilperson
Campbell and she had referred concerned parties to Chairman McGuire for
discussion of this issue.
Boardmember Hurley asked whether negative findings were made. Mr. Whittenberg
explained that it was a Mitigated Negative Declaration, which states that there are
some parts that were not mitigated through project design. Mr. Hurley inquired as to
whether these were the ones that related mainly to flooding issues, and stated that
wildlife was not included in this declaration. Mr. Whittenberg stated that from the
City standpoint, there were no wildlife issues involved. He stated that a letter with
comments, initially sent by the City, was signed by the Mayor only. He stated the
reason for this was that mitigated negative declarations only have a 20-day
comment period, which does not always allow enough time for EQCB members to
review before the comment period ends. In these cases, the letter goes to City
Council, for approval, then copies are given to EQCB members on an "information
only" basis. Chairman McGuire commented on the "economic trade off' of dealing
with flooding issues versus attempting to preserve the wildlife in this area. Mr.
Whittenberg stated that from the City's standpoint, the improvements would probably
displace the birds from within the channel, but that there were 5,000 acres at the
Naval Weapons Station to which the birds could relocate. Chairman McGuire stated
\\sCULL Y\CARMEN\EQCB Items\D3-31-99 Minutes.doc
Page 3
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
. 21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
. 44
45
EQCB Minutes of March 31, 1999
that she was aware of this as a possible option for wildlife, but that for the record she
wanted to state her District's opposition to these improvements.
Boardmember Voce 'asked for clarification of the issue of the channel improvements.
Mr. Whittenberg explained it was a V-shaped, Rip-Rap lined channel, and that the
proposal was to make it a vertical channel that is fully concrete lined. The channel
width would measure 13 feet when complete and is designed to meet a 100-year
flood. Boardmember Voce stated that these improvements would make for better
drainage into the channel and shared what he described as his "vision" for the Gum
Grove Park channel improvements, noting that the same concept could be applied
to the Bolsa Chica Channel. He stated that his idea was to create a wildlife friendly
area between the golf course and Gum Grove, landscaped with trees, rocks, and
other green plant life. Boardmember Voce suggested that, were this same concept
incorporated at Bolsa Chica Channel, this could dramatically increase the wildlife
usage of the area as opposed to just having stagnant water with nothing else around
it. He also stated that for Gum Grove, by landscaping with trees and rocks this
could serve to enhance the dividing line between the park and the golf course,
preventing park visitors from wandering onto the golf course. He said that further
discussion of this recommendation would continue once the homes in the proposed
development for the' Hellman property had been constructed. Mr. Voce stated that
the developers for t~e Hellman property might also have other recommendations for
enhancing this area.
MOTION by Hurley; SECOND by McGuire to receive and file Item 11A.
Motion Carried:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
3-0
Hurley, McGuire, Voce
,None
Jones, Porter
12. BOARD REVIEW - EQCB STAFF REPORT re: Receipt of "Draft Final
Technical Memorandum - Phase II Ecological Risk Assessment
Sampling Results and Reevaluation of Ecological Chemicals of Concern
and Ecological Cleanup Levels of Sites 1 and 7, WPNSTA Seal Beach,"
Staff Report dated March 31, 1999.
Mr. Whittenberg st1ated that a report was received from the Naval Weapons
Station regarding Sampling Results of Ecological Chemicals of Concern at Sites
1 and 7 within the weapons station. He said that after review of the report,
nothing was found that would warrant a comment letter from the City. Staff
wanted to present the document to the board to see if members concurred with
the review so that the Staff Report could be received and filed. If boardmembers
feel that a comment letter should be provided, they could provide direction as to
what should be included. Boardmember Voce commented regarding this type of
report stating that it was difficult for the layman to comprehend a lot of the
\\SCULLY\CARMEN\EQCB Items\03-31-99 Minutes.doc
Page 4
.
.
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
. 21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
. 44
45
EQCB Minutes of March 31, 1999
terminology used in describing the chemicals and the levels found at the sites
studied in this report. He stated that the explanation provided of the chemical
concentration thresholds was helpful. Boardmember Hurley also indicated that
he had difficulty in understanding the report. Chairman McGuire asked if there
was a community meeting scheduled to discuss this issue. Boardmember Voce
responded that it had been cancelled due to the delay in the procedure for
acquiring results. Chairman McGuire then asked if there was a "target date" for
completing ecological cleanup of chemically tainted soils. Mr. Whittenberg
stated that some of these projects would be going on for years. Mr. Voce said
that cleanup of Site 1 could happen at any time, but that Site 7 might be
monitored for the long term. He stated that the western end of the weapons
stations was being heavily discussed because they had found some locations of
concern that are being looked into. Boardmember Hurley inquired whether
these site cleanupsl had targeted ending dates. Mr. Voce stated that a timetable
was setup, but that it sometimes gets changed due to the need for additional
studies or other factors.
MOTION by Hurley; SECOND by Voce to receive and file Item 12.
Motion Carried:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
3-0
: Hurley, McGuire, Voce
None
Jones, Porter
12A RECEIVE AND FILE CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM re: Receipt of
Additional Documents re: "Draft Environmental Impact Report No. 573
- Marine Corps Air Station EI Toro Master Development Plan," dated
March 2, 1999.
Boardmember Hurl~y asked if the board had received a copy of the Environmental
Impact Report. Mr. Whittenberg stated that a copy of the EIR was on file at City Hall
and that the public comment response time was currently running. Mr. Hurley
questioned why he felt so "ignoranf of the subject matter. Mr. Whittenberg stated
that this part of the report was a more detailed analysis than what had been viewed
previously. He stated that the first report was dealing with alternative land uses for
the property. This EIR is more focused on an airport alternative use for the land. He
stated that the Board of Supervisors has indicated that they want a different project
evaluated than what this EIR is evaluating. Boardmember Hurley stated that he felt
that he had not been kept well informed enough regarding the Master Development
Plan. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the plan came about very quickly, while other city
issues were under discussion. He emphasized that city issues will usually take
precedence over issues happening within other parts of the county. He went on to
state that this EIR evaluates the issue of a 23-million passenger a year airport at EI
Toro with a 5.4 million person per year use at John Wayne Airport, with a light rail
connecting system between the two airports. Mr. Hurley asked whether this report
\\sCULL Y\CARMEN\EQCB Items\03-31-GG Minutes.doc
Page 5
~
.
.
.
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
. 21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
. 44
45
EQCB Minutes of March 31, 1999
was in response to a letter written regarding one of the county projects and
requesting 6 copies of the final report. Mr. Whittenberg responded that he did not
believe this to be the case. He also stated that at this point the City was not yet
ready to comment on this EIR, and that he assumed that an additional EIR
document would be presented. Mr. Hurley then went on to clarify for himself the
relationship between the Community Reuse EIR and the Master Development EIR,
stating that the only similarity in the two was their reference to EI Toro Marine Corps
Air Station. Mr. Whittenberg stated that although they were two separate
documents, much of the information contained in these reports was similar.
MOTION by Hurley; SECOND by Voce to receive and file Item 12A.
Motion Carried:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
3-0
Hurley, McGuire, Voce
None
Jones, Porter
13. BOARD REVIEW - EQCB STAFF REPORT re: Receive and File:
"Draft Supplemental Analysis - Final Environmental Impact Report
No. 563 - Marine Corps Air Station EI Toro Community Reuse Plan,"
Staff Report dated March 31, 1999.
,
Mr. Whittenberg stated that this was a supplemental analysis that the County was
required to do becaLse of a lawsuit filed by a number of organizations challenging
the adequacy of the initial EIR for the reuse plan. He stated that the sections that
were evaluated in the supplemental analysis did not address issues that Staff felt the
board needed to respond to again which included:
1. Impacts on the proposed national wildlife refuge
2. A concern that the traffic analysis information be presented in wording that is
more easily understood by the public.
3. Provision of sufficient quality water to the homes and business in that area. Mr.
Whittenberg mentioned that this was not an issue of the EIR itself, so EQCB
would not have to consider this item.
Boardmember Voce asked whether what the County Supervisor's had stated
regarding this issue; did affect the board's response to it. Mr. Whittenberg stated
that this was a separate level of analysis, and gave the comparison of the
community reuse plan being like developing a specific plan for the property, and the
master development plan as coming in and developing the actual building plan. The
specific plan would be more general allowing more flexibility, and the master
development plan would be the actual final plan. He said that the only requirement
for the EIR is to make sure that it is not outside of the parameters of the master plan.
\\sCULL Y\CARMEN\EQCB Items\03-31-99 Minutes.doc
Page 6
.
.
.
.
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
. 21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
. 44
45
EQCB Minutes of March 31, 1999
Boardmember Hurley then asked if there was a specific time frame for responding.
Mr. Whittenberg stated that the public response period would run through April 9,
1999, then the county would have to respond to comments, and would then be in a
position to approve the final supplements of the EIR. Once approved by the county,
it then goes back to the court for review to make sure that it addresses the issues
that the court specified.
MOTION by Hurley; SECOND by Voce to receive and file Item 13
Motion Carried:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
3-0
Hurley. McGuire. Voce
None
Jones. Porter
14. BOARD REVIEW - EQCB STAFF REPORT re: City Response Letter
re: Draft Groundwater Monitoring Study at IR Sites 1 and 7 - Naval
Weapons Station Seal Beach. Staff Report dated March 31. 1999.
Mr. Whittenberg stated that EQCB members were not provided with the
complete 99-page document related to Sites 1 and 7, but were provided with a
copy of the Executive Summary and the section on Conclusions and
Recommendations. The letter outlines the plan for physically removing
contaminated materials within those sites. The report discusses a long-term
groundwater-monitoring program that the Navy is proposing for both sites. The
City will comment back to the Navy that the City believes that the program as
proposed is adequate to continue to evaluate what the impacts mayor may not
be on both Sites 1 and 7. Also, once the EQCB makes its recommendations,
Staff will then recommend that the letter be forwarded to City Council for
consideration on April 12, 1999. If Council concurs with the letter, a joint letter
from the Council and the Chairperson will be drafted to the Navy using the
response letter as indicated on Pages 7 and 8 of the Staff Report. Members of
the Board then revi'ewed the response letter with Mr. Whittenberg and provided
editing corrections and suggestions for clarification of the text.
Boardmember Hurley stated that the Executive Summary was not clear whether
sampling would continue at the wells on Site 7 or only in the 3 wells on the
National Wildlife Refuge. Boardmember Voce stated that during the last
discussion on this issue at the Project Managers Meeting in February 1999, it
was proposed that samplings be taken perhaps every 5-10 years for up to 30+
years of testing. When the groundwater testing no longer yields evidence of
contamination at a particular site, the well could then be closed. Chairman
McGuire asked what the determining factors were regarding "consistently clean
water." Boardmember Voce responded that this had to do with well water
consistently meeting the standards for acceptable levels set by the study.
\\sCULL Y\CARMEN\EQCB Items\03-31 ~99 Minutes,doc
Page 7
.
.
. .
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
. 21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
. 44
45
EQCB Minutes of March 31, 1999
Boardmember Hurley asked if the recommendation is adopted, will monitoring be
done only at National Wildlife Refuge or at Site 7. Boardmember Voce
responded that alternatives to handling Site 7 are still under discussion, but that
monitoring would be done on the Wildlife Refuge. One of the options under
discussion for Site 7 is excavation, but this would require sufficient supportive
evidence to justify the cost of excavation. Mr. Whittenberg referred
boardmembers to the map of Site 7, and indicated the locations of the 3 wells on
that site. He also pointed out that part of Site 7 was within the National Wildlife
Refuge and part of it was outside the refuge. He also suggested that a point to
keep in mind was' that the board did not need to be concerned with the
technological aspects of the proposal, but with the policy issues regarding
whether the levels of contamination being evaluated make sense in terms of the
community. Boardmember Voce agreed that the responsibility of the board was
to ensure that the monitoring of these wells would be adequate and long enough
to protect the community.
MOTION by Hurley; SECOND by Voce to approve City Response Letter as revised.
Motion Carried:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
3-0
Hurley, McGuire, Voce
None
Jones, Porter
VIII Staff Concerns - None.
IX. Board Concerns
Boardmember Hurley stated that he seemed to recall a few months previous that
City Council had authorized an ad hoc committee on river and beach pollution.
Mr. Whittenberg stated that he did not believe that the Council had appointed
anyone to a committee as yet and were still considering how the Council will
proceed. Chairman McGuire stated that Mayor Yost is currently performing a
needs analysis to identify the issues before appointing a committee.
Boardmember Hurley referred the board back to Item No.4, the Staff Report re:
"Preserving California's Natural Heritage," and asked whether this report
provided funding sources for various preservation projects throughout the State
of California. Mr. Whittenberg stated that he had briefly reviewed the report, and
did not believe that he saw a listing of funding sources. Boardmember Hurley
asked if the report discussed assistance with San Gabriel River Beach pollution.
Mr. Whittenberg responded that there were no provisions for beach pollution and
that it did not address the issue of sand replenishment. Boardmember Hurley
stated that he was referring to whether Seal Beach had authority for beach
issues. Mr. Whittenberg said that there were currently several ongoing efforts
that, once established, the committee on river and beach pollution could begin to
\\sCULL Y\CARMEN\EQCB Items\03-31-99 Minutes.doc
Page 8
,.
;
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
. 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
. 44
45
EQCB Minutes of March 31, 1999
address. Boardmernber Hurley interrupted to inquire again that to the best of
Mr. Whittenberg's knowledge, was there anything in the report that had to do
with Mr. Hurley's qIJestion on funding. Mr. Whittenberg stated there was not.
Chairman McGuire interjected that as she recalled from the Hellman Hearings,
no one really had records of the levels of contamination on this property, making
it difficult to say that there is contamination when regular testing is not being
done. She stated that she had received a telephone call over the holidays from
a student at St. Hedwig's who was completing a report about the contamination
issue. She asked the student to provide copies of his report to the board. She
continued that the first step is to determine whether there is, in fact,
contamination. What kind? What levels?
Boardmember Hurley then referenced Item No.1, Seal Beach Weapons Support
Facility Installation Restoration Program - Draft Final Site Management Plan.
He stated that the report was presented in November and contained 32
recommendations. He inquired as to the response from the Naval Weapons
Station. Mr. Whittenberg stated that he had not heard of any response.
Boardmember Voce stated that after the board provided their comments to the
weapons station, they were free to respond when ready. Boardmember Hurley
expressed his surprise that after having reviewed the restoration project, the
Division of Southwest Navy had made 32 recommendations for completing the
project. Mr. Whittenberg stated that this was the schedule of those sites that
would require cleanup, those that would not require further evaluation, etc.
Boardmember Hurley stated that he felt it would not be unreasonable to make an
inquiry of the Naval Weapons Station as to the status of the restoration program.
Boardmember Voce asked if what Boardmember Hurley was seeking was the
Navy's response to suggestions made by EQCB. Mr. Whittenberg interjected
that he believed Boardmember Hurley wanted a status report on the progress of
the restoration. Boardmember Voce agreed that this was a good question. Mr.
Whittenberg recommended requesting perhaps a bi-annual status report of how
the Navy is meeting the goals for completion of the restoration.
Boardmember Voce presented color photographs of Site 7 in an effort to provide
clarification of the current appearance of the site. Boardmember Hurley asked if
"dumping" had been done on the West Side, or whether there was simply
concern over possible dumping. Boardmember Voce responded that there had
apparently been some dumping done on the West Side, however, because the
refuse had been buried in trenches and then covered, it was not visible above
ground. He also stated that a tour of the sites would take place in June if
boardmembers were interested in attending.
Boardmember Voce referred to the discussion of the last meeting on the water
pooling at Sites 40 and 70. He wished to correct the information and state that
the water was pooling at Site 70, not Site 40. He also indicated the location of
the plume and Well No.2, relative to the position of the plume.
\\sCULL Y\CARMEN\EQCB Items\03-31-99 Minutes.doc
I
Page 9
I'
'!'
. 1
2
3
4
5 x.
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
.
.
EQCB Minutes of March 31, 1999
Boardmember Hurley requested that the record show that Boardmember Jones
had an unexcused ~bsence for tonight's meeting.
Adjournment
MOTION by McGuire; SECOND by Hurley to adjourn this meeting (7:31 P.M.) and
adjourn to the regularly scheduled April 1999 meeting date.
1
Motion Carried:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
3-0
Hurley, McGuire, Voce
; None
Jones, Porter
Respectfully Submitted,
~~
Carmen Alvarez, Secretary
Department of Development Services
\\sCULL Y\CARMEN\EQCB Items\03-31-99 Minutes.doc
Page 10