The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutStaff Report 4672 City of Palo Alto (ID # 4672) City Council Informational Report Report Type: Informational Report Meeting Date: 5/5/2014 May 05, 2014 Page 1 of 7 (ID # 4672) Council Priority: Land Use and Transportation Planning Title: Airport Update Subject: Informational Update Report on the Transition of Management and Control of the Palo Alto Airport (PAO) from Santa Clara County to the City of Palo Alto From: City Manager Lead Department: Public Works This report is provided for informational purposes. It updates the most recent report to the Council, dated June 17, 2013, regarding the staff’s efforts to secure the transfer of management and control of the Palo Alto Airport (PAO) from Santa Clara County (County) to the City. No Council action is required at this time. Executive Summary As directed by the Council on November 13, 2007 (CMR:418:07), staff has been working with the County to achieve an early termination of the PAO ground lease between the City, as landlord, and the County, as tenant, and the transfer of all PAO-related agreements and instruments necessary to the City’s assumption of management and control of PAO. Staff continues to engage in due diligence efforts to anticipate and resolve potential environmental site assessment issues, complete multiple-agency coordination efforts to secure an orderly transfer of the applicable agreements and documents’ rights and obligations to the City, and finalize the drafting of the necessary transfer agreements and instruments between and among the affected agencies. Staff anticipates presenting the requisite agreements between the City and the County, FAA, State Lands Commission and CalTrans for the Council’s approval on August 4, 2014. County staff will present some of these agreements, to which it is a party, for the Board of Supervisors’ approval on August 5, 2014. After the agreements have been signed, the City will qualify as the sole airport sponsor of May 05, 2014 Page 2 of 7 (ID # 4672) PAO and will immediately be eligible to apply for Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) grant funding. The County will continue to provide day-to-day operations staff for an additional 120-day period after the parties’ execution of agreements and instruments before the transition will become legally effective. Background and Discussion On June 17, 2013, City staff informed the Council of the status of the transfer of PAO from the County to the City (Staff Report #ID 3793). Below is a list of actions that are in progress.  Transfer, Assignment and Assumption Agreement (TAAA). The draft TAAA between the City and the County was presented to the County for its consideration on November 15, 2013 (Attachment A). The TAAA addresses the transfer of PAO leases and related agreements between the County and its tenants and the ongoing obligations of the County to maintain and repair PAO’s premises until the transfer is finalized. The agreement will directly affect rights and obligations arising under leases with the two fixed based operators (FBOs), namely, Roy-Aero Enterprises and Airport Management Group, Inc., and all agreements arising under those two County/FBO leases. The City anticipates the final draft TAAA will be provided to the FAA for its review and comment by June 2014. Related to the TAAA negotiations is an environmental contamination matter arising at PAO. On November 19, 2013, the County’s Department of Environmental Health (DEH) filed a voluntary cleanup program action against the County’s Roads and Airports Department due to the discovery of certain contaminants at PAO. In January 2014, DEH issued a no-action letter to the County (Attachment B); the case regarding existing contaminants at PAO has now been closed. The DEH letter acknowledges that contaminants could be discovered in the future after new excavation and grading activities and the installation of water wells occur at PAO. The DEH would require the City to undertake a voluntary cleanup program in that event, so the City must consider its options regarding how to apportion responsibility between the City and the County for pre- and post-transfer PAO environmental conditions. May 05, 2014 Page 3 of 7 (ID # 4672) Federal Obligations Assignment and Assumption Agreement (FAA AAA). The draft FAA AAA among the City, the County and the FAA will apply to the federal grant assurances that the City must assume upon the withdrawal of the County as an airport sponsor of PAO. The FAA AAA is subject to a public notice and hearing procedure before the FAA can approve the City as the sole sponsor of PAO.  FAA Air Traffic Control Tower Lease and Operating Agreements (ATCT LOA). The current ATCT LOA between the County and the FAA is coterminous with the City/County ground lease. The new ATCT LOA between the City and the FAA was presented in late 2013 to the FAA for its review and approval.  State Lands Commission (SLC)/County lease and SLC/City lease. The existing SLC/County lease applicable to public trust lands will be terminated, and the new SLC/City lease applicable to those lands will be negotiated. The SLC and the City are currently negotiating the terms of the SLC/City lease.  Baylands Levee Agreement (BLA). The City, the County, and the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) are parties to the current BLA. Under the BLA, SCVWD has directed the County to address the findings and recommendations of the 2013 SCVWD Palo Alto Airport Levee Inspection Report, dated January 30, 2014 (Attachment C), which pertains to outstanding unperformed levee maintenance work. The City anticipates that the County will complete the required levee maintenance and repair work prior to the effective date of transfer. Thereafter, the County will withdraw and the City will be responsible post-transfer for any ongoing levee maintenance.  Airport Layout Plan (ALP). The FAA requires the City to submit the ALP for PAO, depicting the physical layout of existing facilities at PAO, in order for the City to be eligible for FAA grant funding to PAO. The City has contracted with Mead & Hunt, an airport consulting firm, to update the ALP. The only changes to the document are technical updates required by the FAA to meet new FAA guidelines and standards. No new projects will be noted in this document. All future projects, other than air field maintenance, will require addressing in a future airport master plan document, and that will be addressed in the near future. The ALP will include an airport property survey of PAO, identifying all May 05, 2014 Page 4 of 7 (ID # 4672) real property available for airport use. The project is now is 90% complete and will be sent to the FAA for final review and approval in May 2014.  PAO Runway/Apron/Taxiway Deferred Maintenance. The City has evaluated the existing pavement conditions at PAO. City staff believes the County has deferred maintenance at PAO over the past four years, due to a noncompliance standing matter with the FAA, thus making the County ineligible for FAA grant funding. Under FAA rules and practices, the Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (Part 16) proceeding determination indicates that the County is out of compliance on a matter relating to another County-operated airport, thus the County’s inability to obtain federal funding appears to create potential safety concerns that could arise after the City gains management and control of PAO. The County believes it is in compliance with ground lease terms and conditions relating to the pavement condition (Attachment D). CalTrans has determined the PAO runway meets minimum safety requirements [see annual CalTrans State Permit Compliance inspection report, dated January 23, 2014, (Attachment E)]. The City expects to receive PAO in good condition at the time of transfer, so that the potential financial burden placed on the City to assume the financial responsibility for the effect of the County’s deferred maintenance will be minimized (Attachment F). The County expects to resolve the Part 16 proceeding soon, so that it can seek and obtain federal funding and then seek bids for capital improvement work (e.g., repairs, slurry sealing and striping) for the three County-run airports, including PAO. City staff has been working with the FAA to obtain funding during FY 2014 to accomplish the PAO CIP work. The County’s Part 16 proceeding has directly affected the City’s ability to receive federal funding by not later than August 2014 (which is late in time during FY 2014). The City hopes the FAA will attempt to accommodate the City’s time constraints if the County and City are able to complete the execution of the transfer agreements and instruments by the first week of August 2014. The City expects the County to agree to pay a portion of the cost of this project that is borne by the airport sponsor.  Airport Capital Improvement Plan (ACIP). City staff has established a conceptual ACIP, that identifies deferred pavement maintenance, and a Master Plan, that will allow planning for the future of PAO. This plan has been well received by the FAA; it could help identify PAO as a priority for future year grants. May 05, 2014 Page 5 of 7 (ID # 4672) (Attachment G). The ACIP is a 5-year plan required by the FAA, which allows the FAA to prioritize and rank airports in the region for available funding. Each year, the airport sponsor submits grant applications for specific projects. The projects will require the Council’s adoption of a resolution to authorize the filing of grant applications. The total 5-year ACIP for PAO is estimated to be $14 million and the grant from the FAA would comprise $12.2 million. Approximately $1.4 million in local match funding would need to be allocated to support the ACIP. The State of California will match funding at 5% of the 90% of the federal portion of funding. This funding is based on availability. The City would not be eligible for the funding during the first year, because it has missed the funding cycle, which only opens up biannually and the next scheduled updated in fall, for programming in FY 2016. In order to avoid missing the federal funding opportunity in FY 2014, the FAA has encouraged the City to solicit for on-call consultant services prior to becoming the airport sponsor, so that the City will be eligible for reimbursement at the time of transfer. Staff is currently preparing a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for federal projects in compliance with FAA regulations. The airport sponsor is required to select the services for architectural, engineering, and planning consultants that would normally be included in an airport grant project, types of contracts for these on-call consultant services, contract format and provisions, and guidelines for determining the reasonableness of consultant fees. This process prequalifies consultants for airport projects for a 5-year period. As there is no funding identified at this time, the RFQ would not commit the City to award a contract or to pay any costs. Contracts would be awarded based on individual grant projects and funding approved by Council. It is important to note that any FAA grant award would only cover about 90% of the cost and that the Airport Fund would have to cover the remaining 10% of the cost, which, most likely, would require an additional loan from the General Fund to the Airport Fund.  Palo Alto Airport Association (PAAA). City staff continues to attend the monthly meetings, which are now held at the PAO Terminal. Staff has been working with the group to identify the needs and concerns of PAO tenants and airport users. Staff began supporting PAAA at its annual event, Airport Day, which was held May 05, 2014 Page 6 of 7 (ID # 4672) last September 2013, and staff is now working with the group on planning for this year’s Airport Day (September 28, 2014). Resource Impact The FY 2015 Proposed Operating Budget will include recommendations to add the resources required to operate the airport. The recommendations will include a loan from the General Fund to the Airport Fund for FY 2015 in the amount of $560,000. In future years, the Airport Capital Improvement Plan (Attachment G), if supported by grants from the FAA (90% of the cost) will most likely require matching funds from the Airport Fund (10% of the cost). Further, since FAA grants are paid once the project is complete, the Airport Fund would have to have sufficient funds to front the costs. It is anticipated that during the next few years, in order to provide sufficient cash flow to the Airport Fund, additional loans would have to be approved by the City Council to front the cost of capital improvements. These loans would then be paid back, once FAA reimbursements are received. Timeline Staff is on track with the projected timeline and is consistent with the June 2013 update (Attachment H), in which it was identified that the transfer would be effected no sooner than between July 1, 2014 and December 31, 2014. Staff anticipates bringing the transfer agreement to Council on August 4, 2014. The County will take the transfer agreement to the Board of Supervisors on August 5, 2014. Policy Implications The information provided in this staff report is consistent with previous Council guidance and discussions. Attachments:  Attachment A_Termination of the Palo Alto Airport Ground Lease - letter dated 11-15-13 (PDF)  Attachment B_Voluntary Cleanup Program Case Closure: Palo Alto Airport, 1901, 1903, 1925 Embarcadero Road, Palo Alto, CA - letter dated 1-31-14 (PDF)  Attachment C_2013 Palo Alto Airport Levee Inspection Report - dated January 2014 (PDF)  Attachment D_County Email Comments dated February 13 2014 (PDF) May 05, 2014 Page 7 of 7 (ID # 4672)  Attachment E_California Department of Transportation Inspection - letter dated 01-23-14 (PDF)  Attachment F_City's Response to County's February 13, 2014 Comments to Draft Agreement - response letter dated 03-07-14 (PDF)  Attachment G_Palo Alto Airport Capital Improvement Plan - Fiscal Years 2015-2020 (PDF)  Attachment H_Palo Alto Airport Transfer Timeline - as of April 2014 (PDF) CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 650.329.2392 November 15, 2013 Jeffrey V. Smith County Executive County of Santa Clara 70 West Hedding Street, 11th floor San Jose, CA 95110 RE: Termination of the Palo Alto Airport Ground Lease Dear MySmittf' This letter transmits a draft Termination, Assignment and Assumption Agreement (the "agreement") between the City, the County and the Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA") for transfer of the Palo Alto Airport ("PAO") from the County of Santa Clara's control to the City of Palo Alto. This is being done as directed by the Palo Alto City Council. The FAA is a party to this contract, because it must approve the transfer of the County's obligations arising under FAA grant agreements to the City. The agreement addresses the following key matters: • the transfer of leases and other agreements between the County and its tenants that provide goods and services at PAO, including the two fixed -base operator leases; • the transfer of the FAA grant agreements; and • the ongoing obligations of the County to maintain and repair PAO's premises, including the remediation of certain contaminated portions of PAO. I am informed that the effective date of termination of the ground lease and the transfer of the pertinent contracts will occur when the agreement is recorded at the County Recorder's office. Regarding the obligations noted above, the City is aware that the County must fulfill certain remediation requirements concerning environmental contamination at PAO, and thus the City anticipates the County will complete this task, as practicable, before the transition is completed. The City is also aware the County has engaged in substantial deferred maintenance at PAO, which has resulted in deterioration of PAO's runway, taxiways and apron. The City hopes the County will have sufficient time to fully address the City's concerns regarding these matters before the transition is completed. In the event the County Tacks sufficient time and/or resources to do this, the City has included in the agreement a number of provisions that address these issues. Following are the City staff who will be working with your staff to effect the smooth transition of PAO from the County to the City: CityOfPaloAlto.org Printed with soy -based inks on 100% recycled paper processed without chlorine. • J. Michael Sartor, Director of Public Works, mike.sartor@citvofpaloalto.org, (650) 329-2270. • Andrew Swanson, Airport Manager, andrew.swansonPcitvofpaloalto.org, (650) 329-2688. • Grant Kolling, Senior Assistant City Attorney, grant.kollingOa citvofpaloalto.org, (650) 329- 2171. The City greatly appreciates your and the County's Airport Division staffs assistance in moving this matter forward in a seamless, expeditious and efficient manner during this fiscal year 2013-14. Please do not hesitate to contact me or Mike Sartor if you should have any questions or comments regarding the transition process. Sincerely, • JAMES KEENE City Manager JK:js Attachment: Termination, Assignment and Assumption Agreement with Exhibits Copy: Mike Sartor, Director of Public Works Andy Swanson, Airport Manager Molly Stump, City Attorney Grant Kolling, Senior Asst. City Attorney Recorded at no charge in accordance With Government Code § 6103 at the Request of and, when recorded, mail To: City of Palo Alto Office of City Attorney 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Space above for Recorder's use only TERMINATION, ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT BY AND AMONG THE CITY OF PALO ALTO, THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, AND THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION REGARDING THE PALO ALTO AIRPORT This TERMINATION, ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT (this "City/County Assignment Agreement"), dated, for reference purposes, 2013 (the "Effective Date"), is made by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA, a California chartered municipal corporation (the "City"), and the COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA, a political subdivision of the State of California (the "County"), and the FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, an agency of the U.S. Department of Transportation ("FAA") (individually, a "Party" and, collectively, the "Parties"), in reference to the following facts and circumstances: RECITALS: A. The City claims ownership of the Palo Alto Airport ("PAO"). In 1967, the City, as landlord, and the County, as tenant, entered into a fifty-year ground lease of land, on which PAO is located (the "City/County Ground Lease"). The Parties entered into four amendments to the City/County Ground Lease that will expire in July 2017. The City/County Ground Lease and the four amendments are attached at Exhibit A and Exhibit B. B. The California Lands Commission ("CLC") also claims ownership under the public trust doctrine of all or part of the lands, on which PAO is located. In 1971, the CLC and the County entered into a ground lease, to expire in October 2017, whereby the CLC leased to the County the land on which PAO is located (the "CLC/County Ground Lease"). 131104 dm 00710295A Page 1 C. The County has informed the City of the County's desire and intention to not renew the City/County Ground Lease. To provide for the orderly transfer of possession, operations, management and control of PAO from the County to the City, the City and the County intend by this City/County Assignment Agreement to terminate the City/County Ground Lease. The City acknowledges the CLC and County's commitment to terminate the CLC/County Ground Lease upon the transfer of possession, operations, management and control of PAO. D. During its exclusive possession and control of PAO, the County has on several occasions secured federal funding for airport development and planning under the FAA's Airport Improvement Program ("AIP") and executed one or more FAA grant agreements (the "Grant Agreements"), as required under the AIP. The most recent Grant Agreement is for FAA Project Number 3-06-0182-08, executed in September 2011. A list of the current and outstanding Grant Agreements is attached at Exhibit C. The Parties intend by this City/County Assignment Agreement for the County to assign and the City to assume all of the County's existing obligations under the Grant Agreements, including all conditions and special conditions, until the expiration of the Grant Agreements by their terms and the operation of federal law, regulation and policy. E. During its exclusive possession and control of PAO, the County has entered into agreements, contracts, leases, licenses, permits and other documents for the conduct of aeronautical and non -aeronautical activities at PAO. These agreements, contracts, licenses, permits and other documents are attached at Exhibit D through Exhibit 0, inclusive. The City and the County intend by this City/County Assignment Agreement for the County to assign and the City to assume the County's existing obligations under these agreements, contracts, licenses, permits and other documents, excepting therefrom only the County's obligations arising under the CLC/County Ground Lease, which the City understands will be terminated upon the County's issuance of a quitclaim deed to the CLC. A new ground lease between the CLC and the City will be negotiated. Going forward, the City acknowledges that it may seek to renegotiate any such agreement, contract, license, permit or other document with the party or parties thereto, as pertains to PAO. F. In 1979, the City, the County and the Santa Clara Valley Water District (the "District") entered into an Agreement Relative to Baylands Levees, establishing the parties' responsibilities for inspection and maintenance of the levee system partially surrounding PAO. The County assumed the responsibility for maintaining the levee to the east of the runway at PAO. In 2005, the County and the District entered into another agreement relating to the levee maintenance project at PAO, whereby the County was required to make remedial repairs to the levee, and the District was required to provide construction oversight and monitor the County's 131104 dm 00710295A Page 2 compliance with all regulatory requirements. The County acknowledges there are maintenance and repair work deficiencies relating to the levee, which the City will require the County to correct on or before the Recordation Date (as defined in Section 1.1) or, if the County is unable to fully perform its obligations by such date, the County will pay the City the consideration referred to in Section 1.9 within the time permitted in order that the City will have sufficient funds to perform the required maintenance and repair work after the Recordation Date. The 1979 and 2005 levee agreements (the "Levee Agreements") are attached at Exhibit P and Exhibit Q respectively. G. The City and the County acknowledge that there are items of personal property owned, controlled or used by the County in connection with PAO operations that will be transferred by the County to the City as of the Recordation Date. The Bill of Sale is attached at Exhibit R. H. The City and the County wish to complete the transition of PAO's possession, operations, management and control from the County to the City in an expeditious and timely manner. As the County has not planned for or completed work that over the past several years the County could and should have performed and completed under the City/County Ground Lease with respect to the taxiways and aprons' pavements and the levee and but for the County's substantial deferred maintenance and repairs regarding PAO, the City and the County agree that the County will provide consideration to the City within thirty (30) days of the Recordation Date to defray the capital improvement costs that the City is required to undertake after it takes possession, operation, management and control of PAO. That amount is set forth in Section 1.9. AGREEMENT: IN CONSIDERATION OF Recitals A through H, inclusive, which are made a substantive portion of this City/County Assignment Agreement, the following agreements, covenants, terms and conditions hereof, and for other valuable consideration, the Parties agree: SECTION 1. TERMINATION, ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION 1.1 As of the date of recordation of this City/County Assignment Agreement with the County Recorder, County of Santa Clara, California (the "Recordation Date"), the City/County Ground Lease will be deemed terminated by the City and the County. Except as provided in Section 1.8 and subsections 1.8.1 and 1.8.2 below, the County thereafter will not have any further outstanding obligations to the City under the City/County Ground Lease. 131104 dm 00710295A Page 3 1.2 As of the Recordation Date, the County grants, conveys, transfers and assigns to the City all of the County's rights, title, interests, and obligations, arising under the agreements, contracts, licenses, permits, and other documents and any and all amendments thereto, excepting therefrom only the County's obligations arising under the CLC/County Ground Lease, made and entered into by the County in its capacity as tenant of PAO under the City/County Ground Lease to conduct permitted aeronautical and non -aeronautical activities at PAO. 1.3 As of the Recordation Date, the County grants, conveys, transfers and assigns to the City, all of the County's rights, title, interests, and obligations, as the airport sponsor for PAO, and the City assumes, covenants, acknowledges and agrees to be bound by and to perform, observe and be subject to, all of the obligations, covenants, terms and conditions of the Grant Agreement(s) applicable to PAO. 1.4 As of the Recordation Date, the County grants, conveys, transfers and assigns to the City, all of the County's rights, title, interests, and obligations, arising under the Levee Agreements. 1.5 As of the Recordation Date, the City accepts and assumes all of the County's rights, title, interests and obligations, and further assumes, covenants, acknowledges and agrees to be bound by and to perform, observe and be subject to all of the obligations, covenants, terms and conditions of the agreements, including the Grant Agreement(s), contracts, licenses, permits and other documents and amendments thereto applicable to PAO, and the Levee Agreements, excepting therefrom only the County's obligations arising under the CLC/County Ground Lease. 1.6 As of the Recordation Date, in regard to all outstanding obligations of the County to perform maintenance and repair work not otherwise arising under section 1.7 and sections 1.8, 1.8.1 and 1.8.2, including, without limitation, the County's obligation to perform maintenance and repair work to PAO's taxiways and aprons' pavements in order to deliver to the City those portions of PAO in the condition described and attached at Exhibit S, that the County has not fully performed and will not be able to fully perform as of the Recordation Date, the County shall pay the City the consideration described in Section 1.9. 1.7 Not less than sixty (60) days before the Recordation Date or by such other date as the City and the County may mutually agree to, the County shall provide a complete report to the City in regard to the current status of all outstanding maintenance and repair work concerning the levee partially surrounding PAO that are required to be completed by the County in accordance with its various contract obligations and/or applicable law. The County 131104 dm 00710295A Page 4 shall perform all required maintenance and repair work as may be required by the District by a date thirty (30) days before the Recordation Date or by such other date as the City and County may mutually agree to; provided, however, to the extent the County is unable to fully perform and has not performed such required work by the Recordation Date, the County shall pay the City the consideration described in Section 1.9. 1.8 The County acknowledges and understands that, as of August 1, 2011, the City, acting by its environmental consultant, Northgate Environmental Management, Inc., Oakland, California ("NEM"), conducted an investigation and released to the City and the County its Phase 11 Environmental Site Assessment regarding the occurrence of environmental contamination at PAO during the County's tenancy under the City/County Ground Lease. NEM has determined that such conditions (collectively, the "Environmental Contamination") have occurred during the County's tenancy under the City/County Ground Lease as a result of the activities of the County and/or its tenants, licensees, permit holders or others authorized or permitted by the County to be present at PAO during the term of the City/County Ground Lease. 1.8.1 To address the Environmental Contamination, the County acknowledges that it entered into a Remedial Action Agreement with the County of Santa Clara Department of Environmental Health (the "DEH"), dated June 20, 2013 (the "RAA"). Pursuant to the RAA, the DEH approved an additional Work Plan for soil and groundwater characterization to be performed by the County Roads and Airports Department (the "Additional Site Characterization"), regarding Environmental Contamination at PAO. 1.8.2 The City's assumption of the County's obligations under Sections 1.1 through 1.7, inclusive, are subject to and conditioned upon the County's performance or satisfaction of the following prerequisites on or before the Recordation Date: (a) the County's completion of the Additional Site Characterization and all required and necessary remediation and other clean-up of PAO in accordance with the RAA, any update(s) thereto, and any and all other applicable agreements, work plans, and regulatory requirements, (b) the County's receipt of a "no further action" letter from the DEH and the City's receipt of a copy of that letter; and (c) the County's procurement of an environmental insurance policy with limits of not less than three million dollars ($3,000,000.00) as of the Recordation Date, covering PAO operations for the period of time of the County's tenancy under the City/County Ground Lease arising before the Recordation Date and continuing for a period of three (3) year after the Recordation Date. Such policy (i) shall cover clean-up costs and claims for bodily injury and property damage associated with the Environmental Contamination occurring prior to the Recordation Date; (ii) shall insure the County's environmental indemnification obligation to the City hereunder; (iii) shall not 131104 dm 00710295A Page 5 exclude Environmental Contamination addressed by the "no further action" letter issued by the DEH; (iv) shall have a deductible or self -insured retention of not more than one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.00); and (v) shall name the City as an "additional named insured". The City shall pay for a portion of the insurance premium, attributable to the environmental insurance policy referred to in (c) above, equal to and not exceeding twenty percent (20%) of the cost of the premium. 1.9 As payment of consideration to the City for its inability to complete all of the work described in Recital H by the Recordation Date, the County shall provide to the City the sum of eight million dollars ($8,000,000.00) within thirty (30) days of the Recordation Date of this City/County Assignment Agreement. The amount shall be transferred to the City by electronic funds transfer, the details of which the City will provide to the County by separate letter. The County's failure to make payment to the City by the due date shall constitute a default and a material breach of this City/County Assignment Agreement, and the City will be entitled to charge interest at the maximum rate permitted by law on the due and unpaid amount, until paid. SECTION 2. FAA APPROVAL 2.1 The FAA hereby determines that the City is an eligible sponsor under the AIP, holds good title to all or part of the land underlying PAO, and is capable of performing all of the existing obligations under the Grant Agreements. The FAA accordingly consents to the transfer of authority from the County to the City of the obligations arising under the Grant Agreements. 2.2 The FAA will release conditionally the County from any and all obligations set forth in the Grant Agreements arising under any previously issued grants and/or other federal obligation instruments executed before the Effective Date hereof upon the City's performance of all actions legally necessary to complete the transfer of exclusive possession and control of PAO and of the County's performance of all material obligations arising under this City/County Assignment Agreement and any and all related documents, incorporated therein or attached thereto. 2.3 Immediately upon the completion of the transfer of exclusive possession, operations, management and control of PAO, as set forth in this City/County Assignment Agreement, the City and the County acknowledge that the separate obligations of the County arising under the County/FAA Air Traffic Control Tower Land Site Memorandum of Agreement, including Exhibit A, Operation Agreement for Air Traffic Control Tower (collectively, the "MOA") 131104 dm 00710295A Page 6 as well as the Grant Agreements and/or other federal obligation instruments, shall be deemed to expire and the City's obligations under the MOA shall commence. SECTION 3. INDEMNITY BY COUNTY 3.1 The County shall indemnify, save, defend, and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officials, officers, employees, consultants, contractors, subcontractors, agents and representatives from any and all claims, demands, liability, loss or damage for injury to or death of any individual, or for property damage, occurring on or about PAO before the Recordation Date, and caused by, arising out of, or resulting from the negligence or willful misconduct of the County, its elected and appointed officials, officers, employees, consultants, contractors, subcontractors, agents, representatives, tenants, licensees, permit holders and/or other third parties authorized or permitted, directly or indirectly, by the County to come on to and be present at PAO for aeronautical and non -aeronautical purposes. 3.2 Without limiting the generality of Section 3.1, the County shall indemnify, save, defend, and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officials, officers, and employees from any and all claims, demands, liability, loss or damage for injury to or death of any individual, for property damage, or for environmental remediation costs occurring in, on or about PAO and arising out of, or relating to: (a) the activities of County and/or its agents, subcontractors or representatives in completing (or failing to complete) the remediation of the environmental contamination existing at PAO as of the Recordation Date in accordance with the RAA and any update(s) thereto; and (b) the existence or presence of any Hazardous Materials in, on, or about PAO or the release or discharge of any Hazardous Materials from PAO, including any violations of any Environmental Laws with regard to PAO, related to environmental contamination (i) that came to be present on the PAO during the term of the City/County Ground Lease or (ii) that was caused or exacerbated by County or its employees, agents or contractors at any time. For purposes of this City/County Assignment Agreement: a. "Hazardous Materials" shall mean all chemicals, pollutants, contaminants, wastes, toxic substances, petroleum and petroleum products, or any other chemical, material or substance that: (a) because of its quantity, concentration or physical or chemical characteristics, exposure to the same is limited or regulated for health and safety reasons by any governmental authority; (b) poses a significant present or potential hazard to human health and safety or to the environment if released into the workplace or the environment; or (c) is otherwise defined as a hazardous substance, material or waste under Environmental Laws. 131104 dm 00710295A Page 7 b. "Environmental Laws" shall mean all present and future federal, state or local laws, ordinances, codes, statutes, regulations, administrative rules, policies and orders, and other authorities, which relate to the environment and/or which classify, regulate, impose liability, obligations, and/or list or define hazardous substances, materials, wastes, contaminants, pollutants and/or the Hazardous Materials, including, without limitation, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, 42 U.S.C. § 9601, et seq., as now or hereafter amended; the Resources Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. § 6901, et seq., as now or hereafter amended; the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, 49 U.S.C. § 1801, et seq., as now or hereafter amended; the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1251, et seq., as now or hereafter amended; the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7901, et seq., as now or hereafter amended; the Toxic Substance Control Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 2601— 2629, as now or hereafter amended; the Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300f — 300j, as now or hereafter amended; the Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300f — 300j, as now or hereafter amended; the Occupational Safety and Health Act, 29 U.S.C. § 651, et seq., as now or hereafter amended; the Oil Pollution Act, 33 U.S.C. § 2701, et seq., as now or hereafter amended; the Emergency Planning and Community Right -to -Know Act, 42 U.S.C. § 11001, et seq., the California Aboveground Petroleum Storage Act, California Health and Safety Code, §§ 25270 — 25270.13, as now or hereafter amended, California Underground Storage Tank Program, California Health and Safety Code, §§ 25280 — 25299, as now or hereafter amended; and any similar federal, state or local laws and ordinances and the regulations now or hereafter adopted, published and/or promulgated pursuant thereto, and other state and federal laws relating to industrial hygiene, environmental protection or the use, analysis, generation, manufacture, storage, disposal or transportation of any Hazardous Materials. SECTION 4. RELEASE; WAIVER 4.1 The Parties acknowledge and agree that the provisions of California Civil Code section 1542, which is set forth in Section 4.2, shall not be deemed to apply to this City/County Assignment Agreement or the rights and obligations of the City and the County arising hereunder. 4.2 California Civil Code section 1542 provides: "A general release does not extend to claims which the creditor does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release, which if known by him or her must have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor." 131104 dm 00710295A Page 8 4.3 The waiver by either the City or the County of a breach of or a default by the County or the City under any provision of this City/County Assignment Agreement will not be effective, unless it is stated, in writing. That waiver will not be construed as a waiver of any subsequent breach of or default under the same or any other provision of this City/County Assignment Agreement, nor will any delay or omission on the part of either the City or the County to exercise or avail itself of any right or remedy that it has or may have against the County or the City hereunder operate as a waiver of any right or remedy. SECTION 5. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 5.1 All agreements, covenants, terms, conditions, rights and obligations of this City/County Assignment Agreement will be legally binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Parties and their successors and assigns. 5.2 This City/County Assignment Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California and federal law, as applicable. In the event that an action is brought to enforce any provision of this City/County Assignment Agreement, the Parties agree that trial of such action will be vested exclusively in the state courts of California or in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in the County of Santa Clara, California. The prevailing party in any action brought to enforce any provision of this City/County Assignment Agreement may recover its reasonable costs and attorneys' fees expended in connection with that action. 5.3 If a court, tribunal or regulatory body determines that any provision of this City/County Assignment Agreement, the Exhibit(s), or amendment(s) thereto is/are invalid, illegal, void or unenforceable, then the validity, legality and enforceability of the provision(s) as applied to any other particular facts or circumstances, and the other provisions of this City/County Assignment Agreement, the Exhibits, or any amendment thereto will not in any way be affected or impaired, will remain in full force and effect, and otherwise will be enforced to the maximum extent possible so as to effect the intent of the Parties. 5.4 The section captions and headings of this City/County Assignment Agreement are inserted for convenience only, do not form a substantive part hereof, and will not be used in any way to construe or interpret this City/County Assignment Agreement. 5.5 This City/County Assignment Agreement represents the entire understanding and agreement of the Parties with respect to the assignment of rights and the assumption of obligations contemplated hereby. 131104 dm 00710295A Page 9 5.6 This City/County Assignment Agreement supersedes any and all prior negotiations, representations, agreements or understandings, whether written or verbal, with respect to the subject matter hereof. 5.7 The Exhibits referred to in this City/County Assignment Agreement and any addenda, appendices, attachments, and schedules that, from time to time, may be referred to in any duly executed amendment hereto are by such reference incorporated in this City/County Assignment Agreement and will be deemed to be a part hereof. In the event of a conflict between this City/County Assignment Agreement and any, some or all of its Exhibits, the document imposing the more specific duty or obligation will prevail. References made to "this City/County Assignment Agreement" are intended to be made to both the City/County Assignment Agreement and its Exhibits, except as otherwise provided. 5.8 This City/County Assignment Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which will be an original, but all of which together will constitute one and the same instrument. 5.9 This City/County Assignment Agreement may be amended only by a written instrument, which is signed by the Parties. 5.10 The Parties agree that the normal rule of construction to the effect that any ambiguity is to be resolved against the drafting party will not be employed in the interpretation of this City/County Assignment Agreement, any Exhibit hereof, or any amendment thereto. [THIS PORTION IS LEFT BLANK] 131104 dm 00710295A Page 10 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties by their duly appointed representatives have signed this City/County Assignment Agreement as of the Effective Date. CITY OF PALO ALTO COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Greg Scharff Mayor ATTEST: Ken Yeager Chair, Board of Supervisors ATTEST: City Clerk Clerk, Board of Supervisors APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND SUBSTANCE: Senior Asst. City Attorney Deputy County Counsel APPROVED: APPROVED: City Manager County Executive Director of Public Works Director of Roads and Airport Director of Administrative Director of Public Works Services 131104 dm 00710295A Page 11 FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTATION By: Title: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Title: Exhibit A — City/County Ground Lease Exhibit B — City/County Ground Lease Amendments Exhibit C — FAA Grant Agreements 3-06-0182-08, 3-6-0182-07, 3-06-0182-06 Exhibit D — Roy Aero, LLC FBO lease documents Exhibit E — Dr. Brandt FBO lease documents Exhibit F — Exhibit G — Exhibit H — Exhibit I — Exhibit .1 — Exhibit K — Exhibit L — Exhibit M — Exhibit N — Exhibit 0 — Exhibit P — Agreement Relative to Baylands Levees Exhibit Q —Agreement by and between Santa Clara Valley Water District and the County of Santa Clara for Levee Maintenance Project at Palo Alto Airport Exhibit R — Bill of Sale Exhibit S — Condition of Airport Pavements 131104 dm 00710295A Page 12 County of Santa Clara Department of Environmental Health 1555 Berger Drive, Suite 300 San Jose, Califomia 95112-2716 (408) 918-3400 www.EHinfo.org January 31, 2014 Mr. Chris Ellsbury County of Santa Clara Roads and Airports Department 1505 Schallenberger Road San Jose, California 95131 (chris.elIsbury@rda. sccgov.org) Ms. Patricia Roy PA Fuel Service Tank Farm 1901 Embarcadero Road Palo Alto, California 94303 SCCo Case No. 05S2W31H02s APN <008-06-001> Mr. Andrew Swanson Public Works City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, California 94301 (andrew. swanson@cityofpaloalto. org) Rossi Aircraft Inc. 1903 Embarcardero Road Palo Alto, California 94303 Subject: Voluntary Cleanup Program Case Closure: Palo Alto Airport, 1901, 1903, 1925 Embarcadero Road, Palo Alto, California Ladies and Gentlemen: This letter confirms the completion of site investigation and remedial action activities for the release of waste formerly located at the above -described location. Thank you for your cooperation throughout this investigation. Your willingness and promptness in responding to our inquiries concerning the release of waste are greatly appreciated. Based on information in the above -referenced file, and with the provision that the information provided to this agency was accurate and representative of site conditions, this agency finds that the site investigation and remedial action carried out at the above -referenced site satisfies the cleanup goal requirements of the remedial action agreement between the responsible party and the Department of Environmental Health as outlined in Section 101480 of the Health and Safety Code, and that no further action related to the release of waste at the site is required. It should be noted that any additional or previously unidentified contamination at this site might require further investigation or cleanup. The data collected at the site and presented in the case closure summary, Section 3, indicates the following conditions were reported at the site at the time of closure: - Soil - 1,700 parts per million (ppm) Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) as Gasoline (TPHg), 160 ppm TPH as Diesel (TPHd), 4.1 ppm TPH as Aviation Gasoline (TPHav), Board of Supervisors: Mike Wasserman, Cindy Chavez, Dave Cortese, Ken Yeager, S. Joseph Simitian County Executive: Jeffrey V. Smith 8-00, Palo Alto Airport January 31, 2014 Page 2 of 2 5,900 ppm TPH as Motor Oil (TPHmo), 149 ppm TPH as Kerosene (TPHk), 11 ppm Ethylbenzene, 35 ppm Xylenes, 0.72 ppm Methyl tert Butyl Ether (MtBE), 0.018 ppm DDE and 0.0075 ppm Alpha Chlordane. Groundwater — 3,750 parts per billion (ppb), TPHg, 0.213 ppb TPHd, 1,200 ppb TPHag, 3.9 ppb Benzene, 2.9 ppb Toluene, 26.6 ppb Ethylbenzene, 17.1 ppb Xylenes, 21 ppb MtBE, 43.3 ppb Tert Butyl Alcohol (TBA), 56.7 ppb Acetone, and 11.1 ppb Methyl Ethyl Ketone (MEK). Residual contamination in soil and groundwater remains at the site that could pose an unacceptable risk under certain site development activities such as site grading, excavation, or the installation of water wells. The County and the appropriate planning and building department shall be notified prior to any changes in land use, grading activities, excavation, and installation of water wells. This notification shall include a statement that residual contamination exists on the property and list all mitigation actions, if any, necessary to ensure compliance with this site management requirement. This notice is issued pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 101480 of the Health and Safety Code. Please contact our office if you have any questions regarding this matter. Sincerely, )°""' 4444-Y Jim Blarney Director Attachment: Case Closure Summary cc: Nathan King, Regional Water Quality Control Board (nking@waterboards.ca.gov) Mark Piros, Department of Toxic Substances Control (mpiros@dtsc.ca.gov) Jack Hardin, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (Jack.Hardin@stantec.com) Carl Honaker, County Airport Administration, County of Santa Clara, Roads and Airports Department (carl.honaker@rda.sccgov.org) Dennis Laduzinsky, Northgate Environmental Management, Inc. (dennis@ngem.com) Michael Murdter, Director, County of Santa Clara, Roads and Airports Department (Michael.Murdter@rda.sccgov.org) J. Michael Sartor, Director, Public Works Department, City of Palo Alto, P.O. Box 10250, Palo Alto, CA 94303 File cc (without enclosure): City of Palo Alto, Building & Planning Department, 250 Hamilton Ave., Palo Alto, CA 94301 County of Santa Clara Department of Environmental Health Hazardous Materials Compliance Division CASE CLOSURE SUMMARY Voluntary Cleanup Program I. AGENCY INFORMATION Date: November 19, 2013 Agency Name: County of Santa Clara, Department of Environmental Health. City/State/Zip: San Jose, CA 95112 Responsible Staff Person: Lani Lee II. CASE INFORMATION Address: 1555 Berger Drive, #300 Phone: (408) 918-3400 Title: Senior Hazardous Materials Specialist Site Facility Name: Palo Alto Airport Site Facility Address: 1901, 1903, 1925 Embarcadero Road, Palo Alto 94303 VCP Case No.: 05S2W31H02s URF Filing Date: NA APN: 008-06-001 Responsible Parties Address Phone Number County of Santa Clara Roads and Airports c/o Chris Ellsbury 1505 Schallenberger Rd. San Jose, CA 95112 (408) 494-2719 City of Palo Alto Public Works c/o Andrew Swanson 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 329-2373 PA Fuel Service Tank Farm c/o Patricia Roy 1901 Embarcadero Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 -- Rossi Aircraft Inc. 1903 Embarcadero Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 -- System/Source of Contamination Contents Closed In Place/Removed? Date Wash Rack Sump -- Existing NA Tank Farm Jet Fuel, Aviation Gasoline, Diesel Existing NA Fuel Island Pumping Station Jet Fuel, Aviation Gasoline, Diesel Existing NA III. RELEASE AND SITE CHARACTERIZATION INFORMATION Cause and Type of Release: Undetermined Site characterization complete? Yes Monitoring wells installed? No Number: 0 Proper screened interval? NA Highest GW Depth Below Ground Surface: 1' Lowest Depth: 7' Flow Direction: east to southeast as reported at LUFT case 05S2W32E01f located onsite 1 This case closure summary report is a summary of site conditions based on data collected at the site and included in the case file. It should be used in conjunction with the complete case file which can be reviewed online at http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/ 1 Most Sensitive Current Use: San Francisco Bay (aquatic habitat) Summary of Production Wells in Vicinity: There are no active water supply wells located within a %<-mile radius of the site. There are 2 standby water production wells, one of which is located downgradient. Based on construction information for this well, it is unlikely that the release at this site will impact this well. Are drinking water wells affected? No Aquifer Name: Santa Clara Valley Confined Sub - Basin Is surface water affected? No _ Nearest SW Name: San Francisquito Creek borders the northern end of the runway; San Francisco Bay is approximately 145 feet north to northwest of the tank farm Off -site Beneficial Use Impacts (Addresses/Locations): None. Reports on file? Yes Where are reports filed? SWRCB Geotracker Database TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL OF AFFECTED MATERIAL Material Amount (Include Units) Action (Treatment or Disposal w/Destination) Date Tank -- -- -- Piping -- -- -- Soil -- -- -- Groundwater -- -- — Description of Interim Remediation Activities: None. CONTAMINANT CONCENTRATIONS IN SOIL' Please see Attachment 3 for additional information on contaminant locations and concentrations Soil (ppm) Soil (ppm) Contaminant Max2 After1° Contaminant Max2 After'9 TPH (Gas) 1,7003 -- TPH (mo) 5,900b -- TPH (Diesel) 1603 -- TPH (k) 149' -- TPH (av gas) 4.14 -- PCBs NDb -- Benzene <1.03 — OCPs 0.0185 -- Toluene <1.03 -- Heavy Metals Note9 -- Ethylbenzene 113 — Xylene 353 -- MTBE 0.725 — Notes: 1. This table presents maximum historical contaminant concentrations in soil and documented contaminant concentrations if confirmation sampling was conducted. 2. The maximum concentration listed is the highest concentration reported for a specific constituent in soil samples collected at the site. 3. Soil sample collected at 1 foot below the ground surface (ft bgs) in boring B11 in the Tank Farm Area in May 2011. 4. Soil sample collected at 3 ft bgs in boring B19 in the former UST case area in May 2011. 5. Soil sample collected at 12 ft bgs in boring B11 in the Tank Farm Area in May 2011. 6. Soil sample collected at 1 ft bgs in boring B25 in the Wash Rack Area in May 2011. Organochlorine Pesticides (OCPs) detected in this sample were 0.018 ppm DDE and 0.0075 ppm Alpha Chlordane. 7. Soil sample collected at 3 ft bgs in boring SB17 in the Tank Farm Area on 7/3/13. 8. All soil samples analyzed for Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) were not reported to have concentrations present above the laboratory reporting limits. 9. Soil samples collected in May 2011 were analyzed for CAM -17 Metals. Please refer to Attachment 3 for specific detections. 10. "— " indicates that confirmation soil sampling was not conducted. Remediation was not conducted. 2 CONTAMINANT CONCENTRATIONS IN GROUNDWATER' Please see Attachment 4 for additional information on contaminant locations and concentrations Water (ppb) Water (ppb) Contaminant Maximum Contaminant Maximum TPH (Gas) 3,7502 Xylene 17.1 b TPH (Diesel) 0.213 Ethylbenzene 26.62 TPH (avgas) 1,2004 TPH (mo) ND' Benzene 3.92 MTBE 216 Toluene 2.92 TBA 43.32 Methyl Ethyl Ketone 11.15 Acetone 56.75 Notes: 1. This table presents maximum contaminant concentrations in groundwater. Wells were not installed and therefore groundwater was not monitored. 2. Grab groundwater sample collected from boring SB3 in the Tank Farm Area on 9/24/12. 3. Grab groundwater sample collected from boring SB18 at the golf course on 7/3/13. 4. Grab groundwater sample collected from boring B19 in the former UST case area in May 2011. 5. Grab groundwater sample collected from boring SB13 in the Wash Rack area on 9/26/12. 6. Grab groundwater sample collected from boring B11 in the Tank Farm Area in May 2011. 7. All groundwater samples that were analyzed for motor oil or oil were not reported to have concentrations present above the laboratory reporting limits. IV. CLOSURE Does completed corrective action protect existing beneficial uses per the Regional Board Basin Plan? Yes Does completed corrective action protect potential beneficial uses per the Regional Board Basin Plan? Yes Does corrective action protect public health for current land use? Environmental Health Department staff does not make specific determinations concerning public health risk. However, it does not appear that the release would present a significant risk to human health. Site Management Requirements: The site is developed with a municipal airport with runway, airplane tie - down areas, an FAA control tower, a terminal building, several airplane hangars, repair shops and offices. Residual contamination both in soil and groundwater remains at the site that could pose an unacceptable risk under certain site development activities such as site grading, excavation, or the installation of water wells. Therefore, the impact of the disturbance of any residual contamination or the installation of water well(s) in the vicinity of the residual contamination shall be assessed and appropriate action taken so that there is no significant impact to human health, safety, or the environment. This could necessitate additional sampling, health risk assessment, and mitigation measures. DEH and the appropriate planning and building department shall be notified prior to any changes in land use, grading activities, excavation, and installation of water wells. This notification shall include a statement that residual contamination exists on the property and list all mitigation actions, if any, necessary to ensure compliance with this site management requirement. The levels of residual contamination and any associated site risk are expected to reduce with time. Should corrective action be reviewed if land use changes? Yes; See Site Management Requirements Number of Wells Commissioned: 0 Number of Wells Decommissioned: 0 Number of Wells Retained: 0 List Enforcement Actions Taken: None. List Enforcement Actions Rescinded: None. V. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, DATA, ETC. Site History: The site (102 acres in size) is developed with a municipal airport with runway, airplane tie -down areas, an FAA control tower, a terminal building, several airplane hangars, repair shops and offices. The site has been developed as an airport since 1934. From 1934 through the early 1950s, the airport runway was 3 located on the parcel to the west which is the current location of the Palo Alto Golf Course. Several buildings associated with the airport were located on the southwest portion of the Site. Vacant marshlands, ponds, levees, and drainage channels occupied the northern and eastern areas of the Site. The airport was dosed to the public for several years in the early 1940s during World War II. It was reported that people familiar with the history of the airport indicated that it was likely used as an emergency or back-up runway, and possibly as a training facility during that time. By 1956, the airport had reopened to the public and the runway was moved to its current location. Over the next 20 years, the Site was gradually filled in and developed with additional buildings and paved airplane tie -down areas. The major buildings and paved tie -down areas appear to have been constructed at the Site by 1982. The Site does not appear to have changed significantly since 1993. In 2009, a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Phase I) was completed for the site. The Phase I identified several recognized environmental conditions at the site and recommended conducting a Phase II Investigation. Tank Farm This is where above ground storage tanks are located and are used by refueling businesses to store gasoline, aviation gasoline and diesel fuel. The fuel is loaded from these tanks into tanker trucks that dispense fuel around the property. There are 3 known reported releases in this area. 2011 — In May, Borings B10 through B12 were advanced adjacent to the Tank Farm. 10 soil samples were collected and reported to contain maximum concentrations of 1,700 parts per million (ppm) Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) as Gasoline (TPHg), 160 ppm TPH as Diesel (TPHd), 210 ppm TPH as Motor Oil (TPHmo), 0.0028 ppm Benzene, 11 ppm Ethylbenzene, 35 ppm Xylenes, 5.7 ppm Naphthalene, and 0.72 ppm Methyl tert Butyl Ether (MtBE). Grab groundwater samples were collected and reported to contain maximum concentrations of 460 parts per billion (ppb) TPHg, 5.4 ppb Ethylbenzene, 17.1 ppb Xylenes, 21 ppb MtBE, 1 ppb Naphthalene, and 9.3 ppb TBA. 2012 — In September, 4 soil borings (SB1 B through SB4) were advanced in this area. Boring SB1A was abandoned after encountering an obstruction at 32 -inches. 9 soil samples were collected and reported to contain maximum concentrations of 1,050 ppm TPHg, 71.6 ppm TPHd, 600 ppm TPHmo, and low to non - detectable concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs). 2013 — In July, 2 soil borings (SB17 and SB18) were advanced to 10-12 ft bgs on the golf course property immediately west of the tank farm and 2 soil borings (SB19 and SB20) were advanced east of the tank farm. The investigation was conducted because an open channel creek was identified west of the tank farm. The channel creek flows into a concrete drainage pipe located under the Tank Farm. Actual flow direction of the creek is not known, but it could act as a preferential pathway. 6 soil samples were collected from the borings and reported to contain maximum concentrations of 1,060 ppm TPHmo, 8.81 ppm TPHg, 0.0545 ppm Acetone, and 0.0183 ppm MEK. Groundwater only entered borings SB17 and SB18 (on the golf course property) in sufficient quantity for grab groundwater samples to be collected. The samples were reported to have maximum concentrations of 28.5 ppb TPHg, 213 ppb TPHd, 188 ppb TPHmo, 366 ppb TPH as Kerosene (TPHk), and low to non - detectable concentrations of VOCs. With these additional borings, the impact to soil and groundwater in the Tank Farm area appears to be defined. The highest concentrations were found in borings advanced closest to the Tank Farm on the eastern side. 4 Fuel Island The Fuel Island is connected by underground pipes to the Tank Farm. It is a self-service fueling station for use by private plane owners. 2011 — In May, 2 borings (B13 and B22) were advanced near the fuel island and boring B14 was advanced along the piping from the Tank Farm to the Fuel Island. 6 soil samples were collected and reported to contain maximum concentrations of 5,200 ppm TPHmo and all other constituents were not reported to be present above the laboratory reporting limits. The 1 ft bgs soil sample from Boring B22 was also analyzed for metals, which were detected. Grab groundwater samples were collected and were not reported to have concentrations of the tested constituents present above the laboratory reporting limits. 2012 — In September, 5 soil borings (SB5 through SB9) were advanced around the fuel island and boring SB10 was advanced along the piping from the Tank Farm to the fuel island. 13 soil samples were collected and reported to have maximum concentrations of 1,750 ppm TPHmo, 0.311 ppm TPHg, and low to non -detectable concentrations of VOCs. Former Hazardous Materials Storage Areas 2011 — In May, Boring B15 was advanced near the former hazardous materials storage areas located on the western portion of the site near the Tank Farm. 2 soil samples and two grab groundwater samples were collected and were not reported to have concentrations of the Constituents of Concern (COCs) present above the laboratory reporting limits. Storage and Waste Oil Collection Storage Shed 2011 — In May, Boring B16 was advanced near this shed on the southeastern portion of the site. 2 soil samples were collected and reported to have maximum concentrations of 2 ppm TPH as aviation gasoline (TPHav) and 46 ppm TPHmo. 2012 — In September, boring SB16 was advanced in this area. 2 soil samples were collected and were reported to have low concentrations of TPHd, TPHmo and Acetone. Former Underground Storage Tank (UST) This area was a Leaking Underground Storage Tank Case (05S2W32E01f), which was granted case closure on March 12, 2013. 2011 — In May, Borings B17 through B21 were advanced near the former UST and former above ground storage tank (AST) and boring B24 was advanced near the former waste oil UST. 12 soil samples were collected and reported to contain maximum concentrations of 4.1 ppm TPHav, 180 ppm TPHmo, and metals. The samples were not reported to have VOCs, other than isopropyl benzene (0.011 ppm), present above the laboratory reporting limits. Grab groundwater samples were collected and reported to contain maximum concentrations of 1,200 ppb TPHav, 9.9 ppb TBA, and metals. Wash Rack Sump 2011 — In May, Boring B25 was advanced in the area of the Wash Rack Sump. 2 soil samples were collected and reported to contain maximum concentrations of 5,900 ppm TPHmo, 0.018 ppm DDE, and 0.0075 ppm Alpha -Chlordane, and metals. TPHg, TPHav, TPHd, VOCs and Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) were not reported to be present above the laboratory reporting limits. 5 The grab groundwater sample collected from B25 was not reported to have concentrations of TPHg, TPHav, TPHd, TPHmo and VOCs present above the laboratory reporting limits. This sample was not analyzed for metals. 2012 — In September, 5 borings (SB11 through SB15) were advanced in this area and reported to have maximum concentrations of 35.5 ppm TPHd, 254 ppm TPHmo, 0.239 ppm Acetone, and 0.0447 ppm Methyl Ethyl Ketone (MEK). Grab groundwater samples were collected from the borings and were reported to have low concentrations of Acetone and MEK. General Airport Property There is a longstanding practice at airports to discharge small quantities of fuel to the ground surface during pre-flight inspections as noted in the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (May 1, 2009). 2011 — In May, Borings B1 through B9 were advanced in and around the aircraft repair, maintenance and hangars. 18 soil samples were collected and reported to have maximum concentrations of 1.1 ppm TPHg, 16 ppm TPHd, 1,600 ppm TPHmo, 0.0015 ppm Alpha -Chlordane, and metals. Grab groundwater samples were collected and reported to contain maximum concentrations of 190 ppb TPHmo, 2.6 ppb Naphthalene, 13 ppb Tert Butyl Alcohol (TBA), and metals. Borings B26 through B31 and boring B23 were advanced throughout the tarmac portions of the site where oil leaks, accidental releases and intentional fuel discharges related to general airplane parking and mobile refueling practices may have occurred. 14 soil samples were collected and reported to contain maximum concentrations of 17 ppm TPHd, 240 ppm TPHmo, 0.0013 ppm heptachlor epoxide, and metals. Grab groundwater samples were collected from these borings and were only reported to contain up to 4.2 ppb Naphthalene and 11 ppb TBA. All other constituents were not reported to be present above the laboratory reporting limits. Fingerprinting of Petroleum Hydrocarbons 2012 — In September, 2 soil samples (SB2-1.5 and SB3-1.5) and 2 groundwater samples (SB3-GW and SB4-GW) were submitted for fuel fingerprinting. Samples of TPHg, TPHd, Jet Fuel and Aviation Gas were supplied to the laboratory for comparison with the samples. The soil samples were reported to have hydrocarbons similar to the TPHav sample. There were insufficient hydrocarbons present in SB4-GW to fingerprint. The other groundwater sample was reported to have low molecular peaks consistent with TPHav and TPHg. Considerations and/or Variances: The site is developed as a municipal airport and has been since around 1934. It is unlikely that the site usage will change in the future. Through these investigations, low concentrations of contaminants were identified across the general airport property in both soil and groundwater. The site includes a Leaking Underground Storage Tank case, which was granted case closure on March 12, 2013. In the case closure, it documents the residual contamination that remains in soil and groundwater in this area. More significant contamination was found in soil and groundwater in the area of the Tank Farm and the Fuel Island and the Wash Rack Sump. The extent of contamination in these areas appears to be limited. Additionally, the activities that may have caused the contamination (fuel dispensing and plane washing) continue at the site in these areas. The site is underlain by approximately 14 feet of lean clay, which would minimize the likelihood of migration of the contamination. 6 VI. CLOSURE CRITERIA Pollutant Sources are Identified and Evaluated and the Site is Adequately Characterized: The site is currently developed with a municipal airport with runway, airplane tie -down areas, an FAA control tower, a terminal building, several airplane hangars, repair shops and offices. Portions of the site have been used as an airport since 1934. The airport has been reconfigured and expanded since that time. The site is adequately characterized through several phases of soil and groundwater investigations. Exposure Pathways, Receptors, and Potential Risks, Threats, and Other Environmental Concerns are Identified and Assessed: Nearby receptors were identified, and exposure pathways such as direct contact, inhalation and ingestion of contaminants in soil and groundwater were investigated and assessed through soil and groundwater sampling and testing. Pollutant Sources are Remediated to the Extent Feasible: Remediation was not conducted at the site. Unacceptable Risks to Human Health, Ecological Health, and Sensitive Receptors, Considering Current and Future Land and Water Uses, are Mitigated: The residual contamination in soil and groundwater at the site does not pose unacceptable risks to human health. TPHg, TPH(av gas), Benzene, MtBE, and TBA concentrations in groundwater are slightly above the Regional Water Quality Control Board's groundwater screening levels for drinking water. Based on the results of the groundwater sampling, TPHg, TPH(av gas), Benzene, MtBE and TBA concentrations in groundwater at the site are not a risk to indoor air. The residual TPHg, TPHd, TPH(av gas), TPHk, TPHmo, Ethylbenzene, Xylenes, MtBE, and Alpha Chlordane in soil are confined to depths of at least 1 ft bgs and the site is paved with asphalt or concrete; and therefore they do not pose a direct contact, inhalation and ingestion risk to human receptors. Unacceptable Threats to Groundwater and Surface Water Resources, Considering Existing and Potential Beneficial Uses, are Mitigated: The residual contamination in soil and groundwater at the site do not pose an unacceptable risk to groundwater and surface water resources. It is likely that the concentration of contaminants will decrease by natural processes over time. Conclusion: The Department of Environmental Health believes that the residual soil and groundwater contamination at the site does not pose a continuing, significant threat to groundwater resources, human health, or the environment. Regional Water Quality Control Board objectives have not been compromised. The investigation was performed in accordance with state and local guidelines. The Department of Environmental Health recommends that this site be closed. 7 VII. LOCAL AGENCY REPRESENTATIVE DATA Prepared by: Lani Lee Title: Senior Hazardous Materials Specialist Signature: Date: November 19, 2013 Reviewed by: Gerald O'Regan, PG Title: Environmental,v Health Geologist Signature: / —. Date: A/0i vvv.(eb )3 Lug Approved by: Michael Ballle • -Title: Program Manager Signature: Date: 1/14(17/1 /47,'"'---------- This closure approval is based upon the a�'gable information and with the provision that the information provided to this agency was accurate and representative of site ditions. The file for this case can be reviewed online at http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/ Attachments: 1. Site Vicinity Map 2. Site Plan 3. Soil Analytical Data 4. Groundwater Analytical Data This document and the related Case Closure Letter shall be retained by the lead agency as part of the official site file. 8 SOURCES: USGS 73 MINUTE TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS — PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA QUADRANGLE, 1991 AND MOUNTAIN VIEW, CALIFORNIA QUADRANGLE, 1991 FILEPATH:W:\ACTIVE OFFICE LOS GATOS\PALO ALTO\185702539-SLM13.dwglkmitchelllAug 05, 2013 at 10:44 !Layout FIGURE 1 .f6 ./ Kcki Wash Ra cr Aooroximate Location of Civil Air Patrol Bulldln Palo Alto Munkl • . Golf Course Hangar Buildings Loc@lion of Former Gasoline and Waste 011 USTs Approximate Location of Former ASTs Palo Alto Aero Service z _' SUBLEASE AREA: `_ AIRPORT MANAGEMENT GROUP ! ` 1903 EMBARCADERO RD,S".--. Airport Pump Station Advanlage Avialian Pato Alto Wastewater - Treatment Plan SITE BOUNDARY Storage She -s and ti Waste Oil Collection LEGEND: B-23. Approximate boring location 0 150 300 Scale (Feet) en FIGURE 2 Site Plan northgate envIrco ;enter! reoragemere. inc Project No. 1210.02 Phase II ESA Palo Alto Airport Palo Alto, Califomia 1/I1H1?�UP,M1l. AL 0 ALTO )30L. F CCU 44 AF'PR07MA1EL0—CA7[Ohl OF. ORME "5-0•GALI.5()4.LILTANdi T 810 S® -U ROY a•_. _, 01 E CADERO ROAD 4+iy= I iGLIRE .7 • LEGEND: MW -5 B-22 • SS -7C PROPERTY LINE MONITORING WELL LOCATOR SOIL BORING LOCATION (NORTNGATE 2011) SOIL BORING LOCATOR (STANTEC 2012) 1 I- J SEE CORRESPONDING FIGURE FOR DETAILS STORAGE SHED: AND WASTE OIL COLLECTION L ROSSI - — . it 0 A.IN?1I•LA T -t" ` - PALO ALTO TE PAL .'t 0 200 400 APPROXIMATE SCALE (FEET) Staetec FOR: ADDMONAL SITE ASSESSMENT PALO ALTO AIRPORT PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA SITE MAP FIGURE 2 15575 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD, BLDG C LOS GATOS, CAIRORNIA 85032 PHONE 1405) 356.6124 FAX (408)35E4138 JOB NUMBER: 185702538 DRAWN BY; CHECKED BY: GM APPROVED BY: GN DATE 1108312 FILEPATM:WOACTIVE OFFICE LOS GATOS\PALO ALTO.1B5702538•SM12Atwgl40Bc3IQNov DB, 2212 al 15231L3you0 SITE MAP PALO ALTO 1WIDNfCJPAL GOLF COURSE APPROXIMATE LOCATION bF FORMER 250 -GALLON STE OILTANK CIVIL AIR PATR BUILDING SB-15(+) LEGEND: FAA AIRTRAFFIC CONTROETOWER SB-12 B-25 • SB-14 O PROPERTY LINE WASH RACK SUMP AREA SOIL BORING LOCATION (NORTHGATE 2011) WASH RACK SUMP AREA SOIL BORING LOCATION (STANTEC 2012) 0 50 100 APPROXIMATE SCALE (FEET) D Stantec 15575 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD, BLDG C LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA 95032 PHONE (408) 356-6124 FAX (408) 356-6138 FOR: ADDITIONAL SITE ASSESSMENT PALO ALTO AIRPORT PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA JOB NUMBER: 185702539 DRAWN BY: KM WASH RACK SUMP AREA WITH SOIL BORING LOCATIONS CHECKED BY: GM APPROVED BY: GM FIGURE: 5 DATE: 11/08/12 FILEPATH:W:IACTIVE OFFICE LOS GATOS\PALO ALTO\185702539-SM12B.dwg(Kmltchell)Nov 08, 2012 at 15:40JLayout: WASH RACK LEGEND: B-25 • SB-12 O ORMER COUNTY HAZMAT STORAGE PALO ALTO AIRPORT PROPERTY PROPERTY LINE TANK FARM AREA SOIL BORING LOCATION (NORTHGATE 2011) TANK FARM AREA SOIL BORING LOCATION (STANTEC 2012/2013) APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF CONCRETE DRAINAGE PIPE 0 S II$LEASE AREA:` ROY-AERO ENTERPRISES 1901 EMBARCADERO ROAD 50 100 APPROXIMATE SCALE (FEET) "17., Stantec 15575 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD, BLDG C LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA 95032 PHONE (408) 356-6124 FAX 1408) 356-6138 FOR: FOLLOW UP TANK FARM INVESTIGATION PALO ALTO AIRPORT PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA TANK FARM AREA WITH SOIL AND GRAB GROUNDWATER SAMPLING LOCATIONS FIGURE: 3 JOB NUMBER: 185702539 DRAWN BY: KM CHECKED BY: GM APPROVED BY: GM DATE: 08/05/13 FILEPATH:W:IACTIVE OFFICE LOS GATOS\PALO ALT01185702539-SM13B.dwglkmitcheRlAug 05, 2013 at 11:08(Layout TANK FARM LEGEND: ®.SB-1B AK FARM SUBLEASE AREA: ROY-AERO ENTERPRISES 1901 EMBARCADERO ROAD HANGAR BUILDINGS PROPERTY LINE B-22 • SELF-SERVICE FUELING STATION AREA SOIL BORING LOCATION (NORTHGATE 2011) SELF-SERVICE FUELING STATION AREA SOIL BORING LOCATION (STANTEC 2012) SB-7 Stantec 15575 LOS GATOS BOULEVARD, BLDG C LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA 95032 PHONE (408) 356.6124 FAX (408) 356-6138 0 SELF-SERVICE FUELING STATION 50 SF3-7 100 FOR: ADDITIONAL SITE ASSESSMENT PALO ALTO AIRPORT PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA JOB NUMBER: 185702539 DRAWN BY: KM APPROXIMATE SCALE (FEET) SELF-SERVICE FUELING STATION AREA WITH SOIL BORING LOCATIONS CHECKED BY: GM APPROVED BY: GM FIGURE: 4 DATE: 11/08/12 FILEPATH:W:IACTIVE OFFICE LOS GATOS PALO ALTO1185702539-SM12B.dwg(Kmltchell(Nov 08, 2012 at 15:58ILayout: FUELING STATION wt 1 TABLE 2 Soil Sample Analytical Res ults - TPH, VOCs, Pesticides, and PCBs Soil Sample ID ANALYTE Total Petroleum Hydrocarb ons Volatile Organic C ompou nds Organochlorme Pesticides PCBs Sample Depth e o to px e w G a2 m` F V a WxW F m F Benze ne r = F! 0 0 W n E T m Isopr opyl Be nze ne E e e a .0 .0 .. = E F a_ 8 2 "= b -5. . Z O ` i 0 w A alpha -Chl ord ane Heptachlor Epoxide e _ a n. S m ii µ8/k8 µg/kg mpjkg mg/kg Ng/kg µ8%k8 µIke µte/ g Peke NS/k8 NS/kg N ,ikt . Ng/kg µ8/k8 14_12 Ng/kg fVcg NBtkg YBik4 fie,/kg mg/kg 0-1-1.0 1.0 < I00 <100 <2.0 6 .5 - -- - - - -- - - -- - - - <2 .0 <2.0 <2.0 ND ND 0-1-7.0 7. 0 <98 <98 <2.0 <4.0 <9 .8 <9.8 <9.8 <14.7 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9,8 ND - -- - - 0-2-1.0 1.0 <98 < 98 <4.0 41 <9.8 <9,8 <9 .8 <14.7 4 .8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9 ,8 <9.8 ND - -- - - -- B-2.5.0 5.0 <100 - <100 Q,0 17 - - - - - - - - - - - - <1 .9 <1.4 <1.3 ND ND 0-3-1.0 1. 0 <80 <80 < 2. 0 8.5 <8 .0 <8.0 <8.0 <12.0 4.0 <8.0 <8 .0 <8.0 <8.0 <8.0 <8.0 ND <1 .9 1.5J <1 .3 ND ND 0-3.5.0 5.0 <100 <100 Q.0 9.1 - - - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- 0-4-1. 0 1.0 630 ° < 92 6.1' <4.0 <9.2 <92 <9.2 <13 .0 <9 .2 <9.2 <9.2 <9,2 <9.2 <9.2 <9 .2 ND <2.0 <2 .0 <2.0 ND ND 8-4-4.5 4. 5 1.100 ° <100 < 2.0 <4.0 <10 <10 <10 <15,2 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 NI) - - - - - 0-5-15 1.5 <81 <81 <2.0 <4. 0 <8.1 <8.1 <8.1 <12.2 <8.1 <8 .1 <8.1 <8.1 <8.1 <8.1 4.1 ND - - - - - 0-5-7. 0 7.0 <100 < 100 <2. 0 <4.0 - - - - - - - -- - -- - - <20 <2.0 <2 ,0 ND ND Bfi-1. 0 1. 0 <90 <90 16''' 36 <9.0 <9 .0 <9.0 <13.5 <9.0 <9.0 <9.0 <9.0 <9.0 <9.0 <9.0 ND - - - - - 0-6-6.0 6.0 <95 <95 <2. 0 <4.0 <9.5 <9 .5 4.5 <14.3 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9 .5 ND <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 ND ND 0-7.1.0 1,0 <87 <87 <2. 0 11 <8. 7 <8.7 <8.7 <13.1 <8 .7 4.7 <8 .7 <8.7 <8.7 4 .7 <8 .7 ND <4.8 <3,6 <3.2 ND ND 0-7-75 7. 5 <140 <140 <2.0 <4.0 <14 <14 <14 <20 .8 <14 <14 <14 <14 <14 <14 <14 ND - - -- -- - B-8-1.0 1.0 <83 <83 <60 1, 600 < 1.3 4. 3 <8.3 <12.5 <83 <8 .3 <8.3 4.3 <8.3 4.3 <8,3 ND - - - - ND B-8-4.5 4.5 <100 <100 Q. 0 22 - - - - - - - - - - - - <1 .9 <1.4 <1 .3 ND ND B-9-1. 0 1.0 < 100 <100 < 2,0 <4. 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - <4,8 <3.6 <3.2 ND ND 8-9.7.0 7. 0 <100 <100 <2.0 <4.0 <10 < 10 <10 <15.2 <I0 <10 <10 <10 <10 40 <10 ND - - -- -- - 8-10-1.0 1.0 <97 <97 <4.0 35 <9. 7 < 9.7 <9.7 <14.6 <9.7 <9 .7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 ND - - - - - 0-10.65 6. 5 <100 <100 <2.0 <4.0 - - - - - - - - -- -- - - -- - - - - 8-11-1. 0 1.0 1,700,000 <17,000 160' 210 <1,000 <1,000 11,000 35,000 <1,000 1,300 5,600 9,100 26,000 1,100 5,700 ND - -- - - - 0-11.12.0 12.0 1,100 <110 2. 2' <4. 0 2. 8 J <11 20 57.6' 72 1 .6 J 6.9 J 13 42 <11 20 ND -- - - - - B-12-1.0 1.0 <89 419 38 2 62 2 <8.9 4.9 <8.9 <13. 4 <8 .9 <8 .9 <8.9 <8 .9 <8.9 <8.9 <8.9 ND - -- - - - 8-12-7.0 7. 0 <100 <100 <2.0 <4. 0 - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - -- - - B-13-15 1.5 <100 <100 <120 4,400 - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - ND B-13.7.0 7. 0 <110 <110 <2.0 <4. 0 <11 <11 <11 < 16.4 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 ND - -- - - - 8-14.1. 0 1. 0 <84 <84 <4.0 30 <8A <8.4 <8.4 <12. 6 < 84 <8 .4 <8.4 <8 .4 <8.4 <8.4 <8 .4 ND - - - - - 8-147. 0 7. 0 42 <82 <2.0 <4, 0 <15 <15 <15 <22.6 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 141) - - -- - -- ' B-15-1. 0 1.0 <86 <86 <2.0 <4.0 <8.6 <8.6 <8.6 <12.9 <8. 6 4.6 4 .6 <8.6 <8 .6 <8 .6 4.6 ND <2.0 <2 .0 <2.0 ND NI) B-15-7.0 7. 0 <110 <110 < 2.0 <4.0 <11 <I1 <11 <16.5 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 41 <11 14D <2 .0 <2.0 <2.0 ND ND 0-16-1.0 1.0 < 84 2,000° < 2.0 4.4 <8.4 4. 4 4.4 <12.6 <8. 4 <8.4 4,4 4 .4 <8 .4 <8.4 4 .4 141) <2.0 <2 .0 <2 ,0 ND ND B-16-7.0 7.0 <110 <110 <2.0 46 <11 <11 <11 <16,3 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <II <11 ND <20 <20 <20 ND ND Phase II Enviro nmental Site Assessment Palo Alto Airpo rt Palo Alto. California 1 of 3 August 1.2011 TABLE 2 Soil Sample A nalytical Res ults - TPH, VOCs, Pesticides, a nd PCBs Soil Sample ID ANALYTE T otal Petroleum Hydrocarbons Volatile Organic Compou nds Organochlorine Pesticides PCBs V a e. F e : < 2..°. F. F V d t5 e F O E1 c F Y W B it X W i Isopropyl Benze ne e 4.1 c 0 0 .` c 1 E E .�, 0 .0 E F .�. g - y. a e 1 Z Other V OCs G alpha -Chlorda ne 1 W - S1 v CF . Q i Sample D epth µg/kg pg/kg mg/kg mg/kg pg/kg pg/kg ftg/kg 13g/kg 13g/kg pg/kg pg/kg pg/kg pg/kg pg/kg µ0/kg µg/kg pg/kg µF/kg µ8A6 µ6' /'g mg/kg B-17-1.0 1. 0 < 100 <100 <2 .0 27 -- - - - -- - - - -_ - -- - - - -- - - B-17-7. 0 7. 0 <100 <100 <2.0 4.3 -- - - - -_ -- - - -- -- - - - -- - -- - B-18-1. 0 1. 0 <110 <110 <2.0 <4 .0 <11 <11 <11 <16 .4 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 ND -- - -- -- -- B-18-6. 5 6.5 <100 <100 <2. 0 <4.0 - - __ __ _- __ - - - - -- - __ - -_ - - B-19-3.0 3.0 <500 4,100 <2.0 6.8' - - -- - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -- 0. 19-7.5 7.5 <100 <100 <2.0 <4.0 - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - _ 11-20-2. 0 2.D <500 2,200 <2.0 12' <9,0 <9.8 <9.1 <14 .7 <9.8 11 <9 .8 <9.0 <9 .8 <9.8 <9.8 ND -• - -- -- - B-20-7. 0 7. 0 < 500 2,250 <2. 0 <4.0 <50 <50 <50 <75 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 ND - - - - - 0-21-1.0 1.0 < 91 <91 <20 180 <9.1 <9.1 <9.1 <13 .7 <9.1 <9.1 <9 .1 <9.1 <9 .1 <9.1 <9.1 ND -- -- - -- •- B-21-7. 0 7. 0 < 100 <100 <2.0 <4.0 - - - -- - - - - - - -- .. - - - - - B-22-1. 0 1. 0 <97 <97 <240 5,200 <9,7 <9.7 <9.7 <14.6 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9 .7 <9 .7 <9.7 ND - - - - ND B-22-7.0 7.0 <120 <120 <2.0 <4.0 <12 <12 <12 <18 .2 <12 <12 <12 <12 <12 <12 <12 ND <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 ND ND B-23-1. 0 1.0 <100 < 100 < 2.0 13 < 10 <10 <10 <15 .0 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 ND <8 .0 <8 .0 <8 .0 ND ND B-23-4.5 4. 5 <100 < 100 <2. 0 19 - - - - - - - - - - -- -- - -- - - - 8-24-1. 0 1.0 <100 < 100 <2.0 <4. 0 - - -- -- - - -- -- - -- -- - <2.0 <2 .0 <2 .0 ND ND B-24-3.0 3.0 <82 <82 -- -- < t. 2 <8.2 <8.2 <12.3 <8.2 <8 .2 <8 .2 <8.2 <8 .2 <B.2 <8.2 ND - -_ - -- -- B-24-4.5 4.5 <100 <100 <2.0 <4. 0 - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - - B-25.1.0 1. 0 <100 <100 <180 5,900 - - -- - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - -- ND B-25-4.5 4.5 <95 <95 <4. 0 110 < 9. 5 <9,5 < 9.5 <14 .3 <9.5 <9 .5 <9 .5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 ND 18 J 7.5 J <63 ND ND B-26-1.0 1.0 <77 <77 <2. 0 <4.0 <7.7 <7.7 <7.7 <11.6 <7.7 <7.7 <7.7 <7 .7 <7 .7 <7.7 <7 ,7 ND <2.0 <2 .0 <2.0 ND ND B-26.6. 0 6. 0 <190 <100 <2.0 <4. 0 - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - 8-27-0.5 0.5 <100 <100 <2.0 15 - - - - - - - - - - - - <1.9 <1.4 1 .3 N13 ND B-27-4.0 4.0 <92 <92 17 r 240 < 9.2 <9. 2 <9.2 <13.8 <9.2 <9.2 <9 .2 <9 .2 <9 .2 <9.2 <9 .2 ND - - - - - B-28-1.0 1.0 <100 < 100 <2.0 14 - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -- B-28-4.0 4.0 <92 <92 <2.0 5,6 <9. 2 <9.2 <9.2 < 13.8 <9.2 <9.2 <9.2 <9 .2 <9.2 <9 .2 <9.2 ND <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 ND ND 8-29-1.0 1. 0 <70 <70 <2. 0 50 <7.0 . < 7.0 <7. 0 <10.5 <7.0 <7 .0 <7.0 <7.0 <7.0 <7.0 <7 .0 ND <9.5 <7.2 <6.3 ND ND B-29-5.0 5.0 <100 <100 <2.0 17 - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- -- - - -- - 8-30-1.0 1.0 <78 <78 <2. 0 <4.0 <7. 8 < 7.8 <7.8 <11.7 <7.8 <7.8 <7.8 <7.8 <7.8 4 .8 <7.8 ND <2 .0 <2 ,0 <2 .0 ND ND B-30-2.0 2.0 < 100 <100 <2.0 <4.0 -- - - - - - - -_ -. - - _- - - - - - B-31-1.0 1. 0 <I00 < 1(10 4. 8' 10' - - - - - -• - - - - - - -- - - - - B-31-6.0 6.0 <100 < I00 <2.0 <4. 0 <10 < 10 <10 <15.2 <10 <10 <10 <I0 <10 <10 <10 ND <2.0 <2 .0 «2.0 ND ND Regulatory Standards RWQC B ESL -Tier 1 03,000 ' 83,000 83 370 44 2,900 2, 300 2,300 23 ne ne ne ne ne 1,300 na 1,700 440 14 nn no RWQCB ESL - Commercial/ lndusteial 83, 000 93,000 83 2,500 44 2,900 3,300 2,300 23 ne ne ne ne an 2,800 na 4,000 1,700 14 nn na RWQCB ESL - L eaching C on cerns 83,000 83,000 83 ne 44 29,000 3,300 2,300 23 no ne ne ne ne 3,400 na 11,000 150 14 na na TTLC ne ne ne ne ne ne ne ne ne ne ne ne ne ne ne na 1.000 2,500 ne no 00 Phase 11 Environmental Site Assessment Palo Alto Airport Pa lo A lto. Ca lt%mhn 2 of August 1.2011 TABLE 2 Soil Sample A nalytical Results - TPH, VOCs, Pesticides, and PCBs Soil Sample ID Smnole Depth ANALYTE Total Petrole um Hydrocarbons Volatile Orga nic Compounds Organochlonne Pesticide P CBs ITPH as Gasoline S 4 m i S iit F U TPH as Di esel P m 5 r ,°, sb ' F B n a W e ' I,' S m _ E ci e .• c ti e a g 6 F 4 ]3R-Trimethy@e oze1 a L y' e - t $ Z Other VOCs w CI < 2 a 1 Heptachl or Epoxidel B v rL .ae O pg/kg pg/kg mg/kg mg/kg pg/kg pg/kg pg/kg pg/kg pg/kg pp/kg pg/kg pg/kg og/kg pg/kg pg/kg µW/kg pg/kg pg/kg pg/kg pg/kg mg/kg NOTES mg/kg: milligrams per kilogram (pods per million ) pg/kg, micrograms per kilogr am (pons per Killion ) TPH : Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons PCB: Polychlorinated Biphenyle <: N ot detected at or abov e the indicated labo ra to ry method reporting limit —: Nol tested ND: No t detec ted above the laboratory metho d rapn rbug limit: limits vary by co mpound 0e: No t established n e: Not applicable .1 Indic ates a va in between the method detection limit and the praetieal gtantitiolion limit an d that the reported conenenotin n should he co nsidered as estimate d. ESL: Tie r 1 - En viron mental Screen in g Lev el for shalin vv soil = <10 feet deep in residential land u se (RWQCB. 2008 Tonle A -I, Commercial/Industrial - soil screening level for 'hollow sail= <(0 feet deep in co mmercial/industrial lan d use (RWQCB . 2008 T abl e A-2) Leaching Concerns - soil screen io g leve l prote ctiv e of groun dwater that re a sourc e of drin king water AND protective of dis charge of groundwater to a smfnce ente r an d su bsequen t impact on aquatic life (RWQCB. 2008 Table 01 TTLC. To tal Thre sho ld Limit Concentra tio n for de fining a emote as a hazardous pa ste Phas e II Env ironmenta l Site Assessment Pa lo Alto Air por t Palo Alto. California 3 of3 (1) Not typical ofDiesel standard pattern (2) N ot typiee of Diesel or motor oil standard pattern (3) Discrete hy dmcarho n peaks present within the motor nil gruntitiation range (dl Unkmarvn hvdrocnfien peaks pr ese nt within the motor oil quontitintion mage (5) Reported value is the result of contributio n from hydr oc arb ons heavier than requested f uel in ra nge of C5 -C12 quantified as gasoli ne (possibly s mddord solvent) (6) Sample chromatogram match Aviation gas patter n (possibly aged A viation gas). Reported vvlo n i ncludes amount of heavier hydrocarbons Willi,/ range of C5 -C12 quantified as Gasoline (7) sop-vylene reported at 56 pg/kg, o-nt'le ne reported at 1.6 pg/kg and .3 -flagged August 1. 2011 TABLE 3 Soil Sample Analytical Results - Metals Soil Sample ID Snmple Depth ANALYTE P g 4 e E .1 E _ e a e e .0 n o o. a d Merc ury 2. o - E .� °' En L i 0 = a a c `e il mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg" .. mg/kg mg' g mg/k: mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/k9 mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg B-1-1.0 1 .0 5 .4 9 .3 46 <2.0 <1.0 50 16 52 19 <0.10 <5.0 53 <5.0 2.9 <5.0 54 75 B-2-1.0 1 .0 8 .9 4.6 47 <2.0 1.0 62 18 63 15 <0 .10 <5.0 44 <5.0 7 .4 <5 .0 79 66 B-3-5.0 5 .0 <5 .0 3.6 160 <2,0 13 27 12 25 11 <0.10 <5.0 62 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 29 83 B-4-1.0 1.0 <5.0 5.4 160 <2.0 <1.0 27 7 .9 26 7 .1 <0,10 <5 .0 35 <5.0 <1 .0 <5 .0 34 55 B-5-7. 0 7.0 <5.0 4 .2 61 <2 .0 <1.0 28 7.1 18 7.2 <0.10 <5.0 34 <5.0 <1.0 <5 .0 28 37 B-6-6. 0 6.0 <5,0 3.1 21 <2 .0 <1.0 34 7.4 11 4.7 <0.10 <5 .0 41 <5.0 <1.0 <5 .0 34 36 B-7-7. 5 7.5 <5.0 3.3 18 <2.0 <1.0 37 7.3 15 5.0 <0.10 <5,0 39 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 28 36 11.8.1.0 1. 0 <5.0 3.7 250 <2,0 <1.0 16 <5.0 15 1 .0 0 .18 <5.0 25 <5.0 1 .5 <5.0 24 25 B-9-1.0 1.0 <5,0 3 .6 47 <2 .0 <1.0 49 13 32 9 .9 <0.10 <5.0 42 <5.0 3 .5 <5.0 55 56 11-15-1.0 1. 0 <5. 0 7.8 51 <2.0 1.0 58 17 30 12 <0.10 5 .1 66 <5.0 <1,0 <5.0 52 75 11-15-7.0 7.0 <5.0 4.3 36 <2.0 <1.0 33 6.1 23 5.7 <0.10 5 .4 38 <5 .0 <1.0 <5.0 37 59 11-16-1.0 1. 0 <5. 0 4.8 120 <2 .0 <1.0 59 9 .9 32 7.9 <0 .10 <5.0 49 <5 .0 2 .3 <5.0 51 91 11-16-7.0 7. 0 13 1.9 89 <2.0 <1.0 91 26 44 7.4 <0.10 <5.0 71 <5.0 8.5 <5.0 100 45 11-224 .0 1. 0 <5.0 2.8 450 <2 .0 <1 .0 34 9 .9 15 <1 .0 <0.10 <5.0 55 <5.0 1 .4 <5 .0 25 26 B-234 5 4. 5 < 5.0 6.4 64 <2 .0 <1.0 44 10 27 11 <0.10 <5 .0 46 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 44 50 B-24-1. 0 1. 0 36 6. 9 13 <2 .0 <1.0 120 36 68 1.9 <0 ,10 <5 .0 79 <5.0 24 <5.0 140 59 11-25-4.5 4.5 < 5. 0 2. 5 92 <2.0 <1.0 18 <5 .0 13 4.5 <0.10 <5.0 19 <5.0 1 .5 <5.0 22 25 B-26-1.0 1.0 16 4.2 94 <2.0 <1.0 110 22 47 4 .0 <0.10 <5.0 91 <5 .0 7 .3 <5 .0 89 47 11-27-4. 0 4.0 5.0 5.0 160 <2.0 <1 .0 45 12 33 18 <0 .10 <5.0 36 <5 ,0 3.6 <5 .0 51 51 11-28-1.0 1. 0 <5. 0 9.9 49 <2. 0 <1.0 48 14 26 20 0 .12 <5.0 56 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 43 64 11-29-5,0 5.0 < 5. 0 8. 1 38 < 2.0 1.7 51 10 30 21 0.36 <5.0 53 <5 .0 <1.0 <5.0 42 75 B-30-2.0 2. 0 <5.0 4. 3 17 <2. 0 < 1.0 42 7.1 15 5 .4 <0 .10 <5.0 40 <5 .0 <1.0 <5.0 37 42 0131-1. 0 1.0 <5.0 6. 9 44 <2.0 <1.0 45 10 31 18 0 .15 <5.0 40 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 42 59 Regulatory Standards RWQC B ESL - Tier 1 6.3 0.39 750 4 1.7 750 40 230 80* 1.1 40 150 10 20 1 .3 16 600 RWQCB ESL- Commercial/In dustrial 40 1.6 1,500 8 7. 4 750 80 230 320' 10 40 150 10 40 16 200 600 TTLC 500 500 10,000 75 100 2,500 8,000 2,500 1,000 20 3,500 2,000 100 500 700 2,400 5,000 NOTES mgkg: milligrams per kilogram (parts per mi lion) <; Not detected at of above the in dicated lab rntory method reportin g limit ,: Not tested ND: Not detected above the laboratory method reporting limit: limits vary by compound ne: Not established na: Not applicable ESL: T ier 1 - Environmen tal Screenin g Lev el for soil <10 feet deep in residen tial land nse (RWQCB, 2008 Table A-1) * - California H uman Health Screenin g Level for residential/commercial land use established by California EPA is listed (September 2009) Commercial/Indu strial - soil screening level for soil <10 feet dap in commercial/industrial lan d use (RWQCB, 2008 Table A -2) TTLC: Total Threshold Limit Co ncentration for definin g a waste as a hazardous waste Phase II Environ men tal Site Asse ssme nt Pa lo Alto Airport Palo Alto, California 10(1 August 1, 2011 Table 3 Current Soil Analytical Detections Palo Alto Airport 1925 Embarcad er o Road Palo Alto, CA Sample Location Sampl e ID Date Depth (feel bps) TPHA (mg/kg) mo TPHylbenz e (nigrkg) TPH-k (mg/kg) TPH-0 (CB -C10) (151,119)9) Benzene (pg/kg) Tolu ene (pg/kg) Elhne (pg/k Xylene (t ot al) (YB/k8) Methyl T ed B utyl Ether (P9/150) A ceton e (Y9/kg) ten- Burylbenzerre (Y9/k9) Isopropyl benzene (Y0/k9) n-Prapyl benzene (YO/k9) M ethyle ne chloride (Y9/kg) Methyl ethyl ket one (NH✓k9) Tert-Amyl Me Ether (Y9/t9) Ten B utyl Alcohol (YB/k9) 1'2'4- Trlmethyl benzene (Yg/ka) , t,3 ,5- Tdmethyl be nzene (pg,k9)9nla) _ Tier 1 ESLifdri0UetExpoasr0 .. ..- 450 - 3 ,702 45q 850 0110 "' ...:. .270 ' 210008-. 5.000 _ 100.000 85500' -'1.1E<07 - _-- NE - NE NE 17000 2,1E407 NE. ._ . 32E.00 - Tle rl E9ta}Otiumethtfl9[g5cem,,, 63 . NE : 93 _83 ,000. 44. - 2)900'.' 5;900- :2300 29 .600, NE . NE NE 77 3;900 NE 75 NE we NE - HE LOwast:TESLfoEC0011Ter010gk1du8M81 81 2.. ..1_, 03 53;003 44 ,. ,. °{080 .; 8300. 2,500+ 23 1)[10". NE NE NE 77 ' 3;900 NE Tan k Farm S9-18.7 9242012 7 <5.0 29.81 45.0 • .50 <0.50 <050 <0 .60 <0.99 0.99 <9.9 6 .50 <0.50 <0.50 <5.0 <20 <0.50 <09 <0.99 <0.99 80. 18.12 924 2012 12 <5.0 <10 <5.0° .49 6.49 <0,49 <0.49 6.98 .0,98 16.9 J .049 6.49 <0.4e <4 .9 <2.0 <0.49 .9.8 <0.00 <0.98 60.2.1.5 924/2012 1.5 6.0 34.41 .5.0• 70,800° 0.66J <0.48 58 251 0.97 215 3.81 2.4J 1,01 <4.8 3 24 .0.48 12 61 3.8J 3.71 58.2.6 9242012 a 5,90 ".. .I <9 .9 <49 49 <0.49 6.49 6,49 0,98 6 ,98 24,51 6.49 .0.49 <0.49 <4.9 <2,0 .0,49 119 .1 <0.98 <0.98 S a-2-12 9242012 12 49 14,61,J <4.9• <48 40 .48 6 ,48 <0.48 .0.07 0.97 <0.7 <0.48 0 .48 40 ,48 <4.8 <1 .9 0 .48 <9.7 <0 .87 0 .97 9834.5 92 42012 1 .5 71 ,8 997 .49 • 1,090,000 ° 640 701 J 1.9301 1,5101 <1 500 <1 3,000 <640 <940 <840 6 ,400 <2.000 <640 <13,000 <1,300 <1,300 983.7 9/242 012 7 .5.0 4 .9 45.0' <50 6.60 <0 .50 <050 6 .99 0.99 11.21 6.50 <0.50 <0,50 <5,0 20 <0.50 46.7 <0 .59 <0 .99 513-4-1. 5 9242 012 1 .5 <29 600 < 25• <49 <0A8 .0 .49 .0 .49 6,98 6 .98 54.9 6.49 <0.49 <0 .49 04 9 7 ,OJ <0 .49 0.8 <0 .90 <0 .98 58-4-7 921/2012 7 12.8' <9.9 449 ° <49 <0.49 <0 .49 <0.49 <0.03 6 ,08 59 .7 0.49 <0 .49 <0,49 049 0 .31 <0.49 6,8 6 .96 6 ,98 Fuel Island 99.5.1.5 9252012 1.5 <74 1,690 <74 ° 209° 1.1 J 32.8 <0.47 <094 6 ,94 48.0 <0 .47 <0.47 <0 .47 <47 791 6.47 15.5 J .0 .94 0,94 583-8 025/2012 8 4.8 69 <4.8 < <40 6.48 6.48 <0.49 6 ,97 6 .97 33.5 J <0 .48 6 .48 .0.48 <4 .8 03.9 40.48 <9 .7 <0.97 6,97 SB-6-1.5 9252012 1.5 40 1,750 49' 311' 0.901 52.2 .0.47 095 .0.05 53 ,0 40.47 6.47 .0.47 <4 .7 4,81 .0 ,47 <5.6 6 .95 <0.95 90-0.7 02 62 012 7 4,9 .8.7 49' 47 .0.47 <0.47 <0 .47 6.94 .0.94 2421 <0.47 <0.47 6.47 4 ,7 <1.9 .0 .47 <9,4 <0.94 40.94 99.7-1.5 9252012 1. 5 09 123 <9.9 • 08.3',1 40 .46 <0.48 <0 .40 <0.96 .0 .98 220 <0.48 <0.48 .0 .48 <4.8 29 .3 6.48 49.6 <0.06 698 SB-7-0 9252012 8 <5.0 09 45 .0 ° <49 6.49 <0.49 <0.49 6 .97 <0.97 20 .SJ .0.49 <0 .49 6,49 <4.9 <1.9 6.49 .9.7 6 .97 <0 .97 SB-8.16 02 52012 1,5 6.0 30 .31 6.0° .50 .0 .50 0.751 .0.50 <1.0 <1 .0 132 0.50 <0.5o <050 .6.0 245 6.50 <10 .1 .0 .1.0 SB-0-0 9252012 a 6,0 <10 45 .0° 48 6.40 <0.48 <0 .48 <0.98 40.96 12.01 608 660 <0.48 <050 <0 .49 0.9 0 49 45.0 <1 .9 <2.0 <0.48 <0 .50 <9 .6 40.9 <0 .96 40 .99 .0 .96 6,99 98.8.15 9252 012 15 6.0 <f0 <5 .0° <50 <0 .50 050 40 .50 09 .99 <0.99 .99 5B$1.5 92 52 012 1.5 4. 5 33.3' 49• <48 <0 .48 <0.48 6.48 <0,57 6.67 259 <0.48 <0.48 <0.48 <4 .8 43 .4 6.40 .9 .7 <0 .97 6.97 55-9-7 9252012 7 <5.0 499 05 .' 46 6 .46 .0,48 .0.40 6 ,92 6.92 33.71 40.40 6.48 40.48 <4 .0 <1.8 0.40 <9.2 6.92 6.92 00. 10-1. 5 0252012 1.5 69 74, 5 694 46 6.48 .0 .48 <0 .48 6.96 <0.98 <9.8 6.40 0,48 <0.48 <4.5 <1.9 <0,48 <9.6 6,98 <0.95 50-10-8 92 52012 8 449 .9 9 44.5' <47 <0.47 6 ,47 0. 47 40.95 6 .95 39 .8 607 6 07 <0,47 < 47 .1.9 40.47 <9.5 <0 .95 <0.95 Wash Rack 9B-51-1 9262 012 1 23,1° 20.9 449• <49 <0 .45 .0.49 0 .40 <0.98 6.95 0 .8 0.49 <0.49 <0.49 .4 .9 42 ,0 6.49 49.0 <0 .98 40 .98 58.12-1. 5 0202 012 1.5 35.5 • 254 <10° <47 <0.47 <0.47 <0.47 6.05 0.85 30.2J .0.47 .0,47 40.47 <4 .7 .1 .0 6.47 <0 .5 <0.95 40.95 58.12-4 5282012 4 803°,J <59 < 5. 0• <49 0.49 0.49 <0.49 .0.00 <0.96 125 0.49 <0 .49 .0 .49 4.9 19.41 <049 <0.8 <0.98 0.98 89.13-1. 5 9282012 1.5 13, 3• 58. 8 .5.0' <49 0 ,49 .0.49 0.49 097 .0 .97 <9 ,7 0 ,49 6.49 <0,49 4.9 <1.9 0 ,49 057 0 ,97 <0 .97 513-14-1.5 8282012 1. 5 11. 5 • 265° 4 49 ° < 40 40.48 40.48 0.48 <0.97 40,97 238 0.48 <0,45 <0.46 <4.8 44.7 0,48 6.7 097 0.97 90-14.4 92 82012 4 7.10 4, J 00. 9 44, 9' 447 0 .47 <0.47 <0 .47 <0 .93 0.93 94.5 <0.47 <0 .47 0 .47 <4.7 14.3 J 0.47 <9.3 <0.93 093 58-15-1.5 92992012 1.5 8. 54°,1 997" ,1 .5. 0• <47 0.47 .0.47 .0.47 0.04 <0.94 233 40,47 <0 ,47 <0 47 4.7 39 0.47 49.4 40.94 0,94 5B-15-4 926/2012 4 7.18',1 .10 6.0' 49 0.49 .0 .49 0 .49 097 0.97 135 0.49 <0.49 <0,49 8 .11 24.2 0 .49 <9.7 0 .97 .0.97 SlorageMJasle Oil Shed 56-18.1.0 92 02012 1. 5 <9.0 .9.9 < 50 < < 47 6.47 <0.47 0.47 0.95 0.95 6.5 0 .47 <0.47 0.47 <4 .7 <1 ,0 0,47 <9.5 0 .95 .0 .95 80-16-7 92 8/2012 7 39, 8 ° 59.5 6.0 ° .45 0. 45 0.45 <0,45 0,90 40,90 57.4 0 ,45 <0.45 40.45 <4.5 4.8,1 0.45 .9 .0 <0.90 <0.90 Notes: Soli con centrations measured In milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) and micrograms per kilo gram ( pglkg) bge = below ground surface TPI+d a To tal Petroleum Hydro ca rbons as die se l TPH-ms = Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as motor o9 TPH-k = Total Petr oleum Hydrocarbo ns as kerosene TPH-g= Total Petro leu m Hydrocarbon s as 9060 116 e ESL = Environmental Screening Level whe re groundwa te r is a potential drinking water sourc e Ina Co mmerclelfndu strial se tting, as sa t forth by the San Francisco Bay Regi onal Wat er Quality C ontrol B oard In May 2008 (Tabl e A-2) J = Estimated value due to the presence of multiple interfedng peaks. The 4896190ns fo r the superscript footnotes below applicable to tables only and do not co rrelate to laboratory analytical reports: ° = Pattern more closely resembles avletlon gas standard; possible presence of lo wer concentrations of unleaded gasoline. = Pattern resembles aviation gas standard. °. No JetA pattern found. ° = Dleaei pattern is not pres ent; value due to multiple discre te pe aks In diesel range, "= TPH quanNla tlan based on large Individual peek(s), pattern does not appear to be petroleum related. 1= Estimated value due to the presence of multiple Interfering peaks. ° =Value due to multiple discrete pea ks in diese l range. = Diesel pe8em Is not present; value due to discrete pea ks In diesel ran ge . BOLD denotes co ncentration levels at or above a ny ESL presented. T° ble 3 Palo Afro lary e4 3OR T.5<rev.a4¢ Page 1 N1 Man. ooneu0ng Services Inc . Table 1 Tank Farm Area Soil Analytical Results Palo Alto Airport 1925 Embarcadero Road Palo Alto, CA Sample Location Sample 1D Date (feat bgs) (mg/kg) (mg/k9) (mg/kg) TPH (08 .070) (mg/kg) B en zene tmglkg) Tol uen e (mg/kg) Ethylb enz ene (m929) 1C l an e y (t otal) (mg/k9) M ethylT ert Butyl Eth er (mg/k9) Aceton e (m9/kg) tan- Bu rylbenz ene (mg/kg) Iso PmPYI benzen e (mg/kg) n-PTopyl b enzene (mg/kg) <9/ ylen e chloride (mg/k g) Methyl amyl keton e (mg/kg) Tart - Amyl Methyl Eh e (m9/kg) T en Butyl Alcohol (mg/kg) 1,2,4- Trimethyl b enz ene (m9/k9) 1,3,6 - Trlmethyi ben zen e (mg/kg) 1164 .,3 FS8pipfDirad ,Ery1000re . 1,190. . . 100;090 1.100 2400 3 .7 -_ '4;9e0 _ . ... .24 2,500 190 5.8E+05 ,:� - NE NE__. 45 . 2.5E1.05 NE _ .....N € _ 7,E NE Ttar 1;M.,_ i.G"OL11Atn5 . 3;400- NE ..3 .400 2l'g00 1.2 9:3 47 - 11' 8.4 ' 0.5 . NE NE NE 34 _ 13 NE 110 NE NE 4000 0013j94:1TSY,4i0C0007W1118(00( 1012 517ial _.._ _. ;800 2,509 500 500 1.2 9,3 47 . 11 6.4 0„5 NEE NE NE 34 13 NE 110.-,. NE NE SBA 8-7 9/24/2012 7 <5.0 29.81 <5 .0 ° <0.05 <0 .0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.00099 <0.00099 <0.0099 <0 .0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.005 _ <0 .002 <0.0005 <0.0099 <0.00099 <0.00099 Ta nk Farm SB-18-12 9/24/2012 12 <5.0 <10 <5.0 ° <0.049 <0.00049 <0.00049 <0.00049 <0.00098 <0 .00098 0.0169 .1 <0.00049 <0.00049 <0.00049 <0.0049 <0.002 <0.00049 00.0098 <0.00098 <0.00090 08-2-1. 5 9/24/2012 7.5 <5.0 34 .41 <5.0 ° 70.8' 0 .00066 J <0.00048 0.0058 0.0025.1 <0.00097 0.215 0 .00313J 0 .0024 J 0.001 .1 <0.0048 0.0324 <0.00048 0.0126 J 0 .0038 J 0.0037 J SB-2-6 9/24/2012 8 5.90 ", J <9.9 <4 .9 <0 .049 <0.00049 <0 .00049 <0.00049 <0.00098 <0.00098 0 .0245 J <0.00049 <0.00049 <0.00049 <0.0049 <0 .002 <0 .00049 0 .0119.1 <0.00098 <0.00098 08-2-12 9/24/2012 12 <4.9 14.61, J <4,9 ° <0.048 <0,00048 <0.00048 <0.00048 00.00097 <0.00097 <0.0097 <0 .00048 <0.00048 <0.00048 <0 .0048 <0.0019 00.00048 <0 .0097 <0.00097 <0.00097 SB-3-7.5 9/24/2012 1. 5 71. 6 99.7 <4 .9 ' 1,060 6 <0.640 0.701 J 1.930.1 1.510 J <1.3 <13 <0.040 <0.840 <0.940 00.4 <2.6 <0.640 <13 <1 .3 <1.3 08-3.7 9/242 012 7 <5. 0 < 9.9 <5 .0 ° <0.050 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0 .00099 <0.00099 0.0112 J <0.0005 <0 .0005 <0.0005 <0.005 <0.002 <0.0005 0.0467 <0.00099 <0.00099 88.4.1. 5 9/24/2072 1, 5 <25 800 <25' <0.049 <0 .00049 <0.00049 <0.00049 <0.00098 <0.00090 0.0549 <0 .00049 <0 .00049 <0 .00049 <0.0049 0.007 J <0.00049 00 .0098 <0.00098 <0,50098 SEI-4-7 9/242 012 7 12.81 <9. 9 <4,9° <0 .049 <0.00049 <0.00049 <0.00049 <0 .00098 <0 .00090 0.0597 <0.00049 <0.00049 <0.00049 <0.0049 0.0083 ,I <0,00049 <0.0096 <0.00098 <0,00098 S&17-3 7/32013 3 < 5.0 < 10 149 a 8 .81 <I <0.00019 <0.00019 <0 .00019 <0.00038 <0.00038 <0.38 <0.019 <0,019 <0.019 <0.19 <0.077 <0 .019 <0.38 <0.038 0.102 .1 ° 58-18.4 7/3/2013 4 <4.9 55.3 < 9.7 <0.049 <0.00049 <0.00049 <0.00049 <0 .00098 <0.00098 <0.0098 <0.00049 <0.00049 <0.00049 <0 .0049 <0.002 <0.00049 <0.0090 <0.00098 <0.00090 09-19-1. 5 7/3/2013 1.5 <50 7,060 <50 0.0541 °, J <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0 .00099 <0.00099 0 .0371 J <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0 .005 0.0047.1 <0.0005 <0 .0099 <0.00099 <0.00099 SB-19-4 7/3/2013 4 <4.9 52.9 d.9 0.463 ` <0.00049 <0.00049 <0 .00049 <0.00098 <0 .00098 0.0545 <0.00049 <0.00049 <0.00049 <0.0049 0.0088 J <0.00049 <0.0090 <0.00098 <0.00098 56-20.4 7/312013 4 <5.0 < 9.9 < 5.0 <0.048 <0.00048 <0 .00048 <0 .00040 <0.00097 <0 .00097 <0,0097 <0,00048 <0 .00048 <0.00048 <0 .0048 <0.0019 <0.00048 <0 .0097 <0.00097 <0.00067 S&205 7/32013 5 <4. 9 65. 1 < 4.9 0,211 ° <0.00049 <0.001349 <0 .00049 <0.00097 40,00097 0.0841 <0.00049 <0 .00049 <0 .00049 00.0049 0.0183.1 <0 .00049 <0.0097 00.00097 <0 .00097 Notes: Soil concentration s measu red in milligrams pe r kilogram (mg/kg) bgs = below gro und surface TPH-d = Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as diesel TPH-mo = Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as motor oil TPH-k = Total Pe troleum Hydrocarbo ns as kerosene TPH-g = Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon s as gasoline ESL = Environmental Screening Level where groundwater is NOT a potential drinking water source in a Commerclal/Industriai setting, as set forth by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board in May 2013 (Table A-2) J = Estimated value. The definitions for the supe rscript footnotes below applicable to ta bles o nly a nd do not dire ctly c orrela te to laboratory analytical reports: ° = Dilution required du e to high co ncen tration of non -ta rget hydrocarbons. b = Pattem more closely resembles aviation gas standard; possible presence of lower concentrations of unleaded gasoline. `= Atypical pattern; valu e primarily due to a single peak(s). e = Pattem is consistent with Jet -A. ° = No Jet A pattern found. `= Atypical pattern; heavier hydrocarbons co ntributing to quantitation. o. n. = Superscripts not used on this table. Diesel pattern is not pre sent; value due to discrete peaks in diesel range. = Estimated value due to the prese nce of multiple Interfering pe aks. " = Value due to multiple discrete peaks in diesel range. BOLD denotes concentration levels at or above any ESL presented. Tabta 1 Palo Alto Alrpon Sall Table.aba Pace I of 1 Steno[ Co nsuninc Ser vices In c. TABLE 4 Gro undwater Sample Analytical Res ults - TPH and VOCs ANALYTE T otal Petroleum Hydroc arbons Volatile O rganic Compo unds G roundwater Sample ID I a .� (+ e S .a7,1 mT. fa R i� F O 'J' F m e F b c r w k F g °' a Z O „eR , i F e a 0. e e a e a a _ .0 6 - b e Y a. .L., E `� - p r O µg.& µl mg/ L mg/L µg/L Etg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L Itg/L µg/L mg/L µg/L B -1-W <50 <50 <0.10 <0 .20 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <1.50 <0.50 2 .6 <5.0 <0.50 <0 .50 <0.50 ND B -2-W <50 <50 <0.01 <0 .20 <0 .50 <0.50 <0.50 <1.50 <0.50 3 .5 <5 .0 <0.50 <0.50 <0 .50 ND B -3-W <190 <190 <0.10 <0.20 <2.9 <1 .7 <1.4 <2 .9 <3,3 <5.0 <13 <2.6 <1.8 <2.9 ND B -4-W <50 <50 <0.01 <0.20 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <1.50 <0.50 1.8 <5.0 <0 .50 <0 .50 <0 .50 ND B -S -W <50 <50 <0 .10 <0.20 <0.50 <0 .50 <0.50 <1.50 <0.50 2 .1 <5.0 <0.50 <0 .50 <0.50 ND B -6-W <95 <95 <0.10 <0.20 <1.5 <0 .84 <0.68 <1.44 <1.7 <2.5 13.1 <1.3 <0.88 <1.5 ND B -7-W <50 <50 <0.10 <0.20 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <1 .50 <0 .50 <1.0 <5.0 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 ND B -8-W < 50 <50 <0.0612 0 .19 J <0 .50 <0.50 <0.50 <1 .50 <0 .50 <1.0 <5 .0 <0 .50 <0.50 <0.50 ND B -9-W <50 < 50 <0.10 <0.20 <0.50 <0 .50 <0.50 <1.50 <0.50 <1.0 <5.0 <0.50 <0,50 <0.50 NI1 B -10-W <50 <50 <0.0596 <0 .134 <0 .50 <0.50 <0.50 <1.50 <0 .50 <1.0 <5.0 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 ND B -11-W 460' <50 <0.10 <0.20 <0.50 <0 .50 5 .4 17.1 21 1 <5.0 1 .1 2.6 8.4 ND B -12-W <50 <50 <0.10 <0.20 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <1 .50 <0 .50 <1.0 9.3 <0 .50 <0.50 <0.50 ND B -13-W < 240 < 240 <0.10 <0 .20 <3.7 <2.1 <1.7 <3,6 <4.1 <6 .3 <17 <3.3 <2.2 <3 .6 ND B -14-W <240 < 240 <0.10 <0.20 <3.7 <2.1 <1.7 <3.6 <4 .1 <6.3 <17 <3.3 <2.2 <3.6 ND B -I5 -W <95 <95 < 0.10 ' <0.20 <1.5 <0 .84 <0.68 <1.44 <1.7 <2 .5 <6 .6 <1.3 <0.88 <1 .5 ND B -15 -W -FD <50 <50 <0.10 <0. 20 <0 .50 <0 .50 <0 .50 <1.50 <0.50 <1 .0 <5 .0 <0.50 <0 .50 <0.50 ND B -17-W <95 <95 <0. 0524 <0.118 <1.5 <0 .84 <0.68 <1.44 <1.7 <2.5 9.9 J <1.3 <0 .88 <1 .5 ND B -18-W <50 <50 <0.10 <0.20 - - - - - - - - - - - B -19-W <220 1,200 <0.01 < 0.20 <1.5 <0 .84 <0.68 <1 .44 <1 .7 <2.5 <6.6 <1.3 <0.88 <1.5 ND B -20-W < 220 910 <0.10 <020 <1.5 <0.84 <0.68 <1.44 <1 .7 <2 .5 <6 .6 <1.3 <0 .88 <1 .5 ND B -21-W <50 <50 < 0.10 < 0.20 < 0.50 <0.50 <0 .50 <1 .50 <0.50 <1.0 6 .3 <0.50 <0.50 <0 .50 ND B -22-W < 240 <240 < 0.10 <0.20 <3, 7 <2.1 <1.7 <3 .6 <4.1 <6.3 <17 <3.3 <2.2 <3.6 ND B -23-W <240 <240 < 0.0456 <0.103 <3.7 <2. 1 <1 .7 <3,6 <4,1 <6.3 <17 <3.3 <2,2 <3.6 ND B -24-W <240 <240 <0.0444 <0. 0999 < 3. 7 <2. 1 <1.7 <3.6 <4 .1 <6.3 <17 <3 .3 <2.2 <3.6 ND B -25-W < 50 <50 <0.I0 <0.20 < 0. 50 <0. 50 <0.50 <1.50 <0.50 <1.0 <5.0 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 ND B -26-W <50 <50 <0.10 <0. 20 <0. 50 < 0. 50 <0.50 <1.50 <0.50 <1.0 <5.0 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 ND B -27-W <95 <95 <0.10 < 0. 20 <1.5 <0,84 < 0.68 <1.44 <1.7 <2.5 11.1 <1 .3 <0 .88 <1 .5 ND B -28-W <50 <50 <0.10 <0. 20 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <1.50 <0 .50 <1 ,0 <5.0 <0 .50 <0.50 <0 .50 ND B -29-W <50 < 50 < 0.10 < 0. 20 <0. 50 <0.50 < 0.50 <1.50 <0.50 3.3 <5.0 <0,50 <0 .50 <0,50 ND B -29 -WD <50 <50 <0.10 <0.20 <0. 50 <0.50 <0.50 <1. 50 <0.50 4.2 <5.0 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 ND B -30-W <50 < 50 < 0.10 <0.20 <0.50 <0,50 <0.50 < 1. 50 <0.50 <1.0 <5 .0 <0.50 <0.50 <0 .50 ND B -31-W <50 <50 <0.10 <0.20 <0.50 < 0.50 <0. 50 <1.50 <0,50 2 .5 <5,0 <0.50 <0.50 <0 .50 ND Phase II Environmenta l ,Site Investiga tion Palo Alto Airport Palo Alto, Cah; fornia 1 oft TABLE 4 Groundwater Sample Analytical Results - TPH a nd VOCs Grou ndwater Sample ID AN ALYTE T otal Petroleum Hydrocarbons Volatile Organic Compounds O 1; 1 O W ¢„ °— 21 w F C9 u L 0 1 H 0 1W F d `i a e 12 e 2 7 W A °u X W P7 N aphthalene C r e F rt-Pr opylben zene 1,3,5 -Trim ethylbe nzen e 8>, d N C .� e C eF eii Oth er V OCs µg/L µg/L mg/L mg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L Regulatory Standards RWQCB ESL - V apor Intrusion ne ne ne ne 1,800 530,000 170 ,000 160,000 80,000 3,200 ne ne ne ne na R WQC B ESL - Aquatic Habitat 210 210 0 .21 0.021 350 2,500 43 100 8,000 240 18,000 ne ne ne na MCL 100 /5,000° 100 /5,000' 0 ,1 /2 .5' 0.1 /2.5° 1 150 300 1750 13 17' 12° ne ne ne na NOTES Og/L.: Micrograms per liter mg/L: Milligrams pe r liter TPH : Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons <: Not detected at or above the indicated laboratory method reporting limit —: Not tested ND: Not detected abo ve the labo ra to ry metho d reporting limit; limits very by c ompound ne: Not established n e: N ot applicable 3: D etected value falls between the metho d MDL and PQL. The reported concentration should be considered as estimated rather than quantitative. ESL: V apor Intrusion - Env iro nmental Screening Level for potential vapor intrusio n into buildings (RWQCB, 2008 Table E-1) ESL: A quatic H abitat - En vironmental Screening Level for impacts to marine aquatic habitat (RWQCB, 2008 Ta ble P -4a) MCL: Maximu m contamin ant le vel fo r drinking water, California Departmen t of Public He alth (Oct ober 2008) a: MCL not established. ESL for drinking water / non -drinking water shown in stead (RWQCB, 2008) (1) Result is elevated due to contribution from non fuel hydro carbons within C5 -C12 ra nge quantified as gasoli ne Phase If E nvironmen tal Site In vestiga tion Palo Alto Airpo rt Palo Alro. California 2 of 2 A ugust 1, 2011 TABLE 5 Groundwater Sample Analytical Results - Metals An alyte Units Reg ain o ry Standards B -2-W B -5-W B -6-W B -7-W B -9-W B -15-W B -15-W -Pp B -24-W B -26-W B -28-W B -31-W 831 -WD MCL RWQCB ESL Aqu atic Aqu atic Habit nt Dissolved Metals Antimony, mg/L <0.004 <0 .4 <0.4 <0.4 <0.4 <0.004 <0.009 <0.1 <0.1 <0.4 <0.4 <0 .4 <0 .4 0.006 0.5 Arsenic mg/L 0 .015 <0.5 <0 ,5 <0 .5 <0.5 0.028 0.024 <0 .1 0.13 J <0.5 <0 .5 <0 .5 <0 .5 0.01 0.036 Bariu m mg/L 0 .044 0.68 1 <0.2 <0.2 0.28 J 0 .18 0.15 1 .8 0.071 J <0.2 <0 .2 <0.2 <0.2 1 1 Beryllium mg/L <0 .002 <0.2 <0 .2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 .002 <0.005 <0.05 <0 .05 <0.2 <0 .2 <0 .2 <0.2 0.004 0.00053 Cadmium mg/L <0 .001 <0 .1 . <0 .1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.001 <0.005 <0.03 <0.03 (0 .1 <0 .1 <0 .1 <0 .1 0.005 0.0092 Chromium mg/L <0.002 <0 .2 <0.2 <0 .2 <0.2 <0 .002 <0.005 <0 .05 <0.05 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 .2 0 .05 0.18 Cobalt mg/L <0.002 <0 .2 <0 .2 <0.2 <0,2 <0 .002 <0.005 <0 .05 <0.05 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.140° 0 .003 Copper mg/L < 0.003 <0.3 <0 .3 <0.3 <0.3 <0 .003 <0.009 <0.08 <0.08 <0 .3 <0.3 <0 .3 <0 .3 I .3 0.0031 Lead mg/L <0. 005 <0,5 <0 .5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.005 <0.014 <0.1 <0 .1 <0.5 <0.5 <0 .5 <0.5 0.015 0.0056 Mercury mg/L <0.00005 <0.00005 <0 .00005 <0 .00005 <0.00005 <0.00005 <0 .0002 <0.00005 <0.00005 <0.00005 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0 .0002 0.002 0 .00025 Molybdenum mg/L 0.011 <0.2 <0 .2 <0.2 <0,2 <0 .002 <0.009 <0.05 <0.05 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 .2 0.035° 0.24 Nicke l mg/L 0. 0086 J <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 .002 <0.009 <0.05 <0 .05 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 .2 0.1 0 .0082 Selen ium mg/L 0.013 J <0.4 0.481 <0.4 <0.4 0.096 0 .045 <0 .1 <0.1 <0 .4 <0.4 <0.4 <0 .4 0 .05 0 .071 Silver mg/L <0. 002 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0,0056 <0.005 <0.05 <0 .05 <0.2 <0.2 <0 .2 <0.2 0.035 ° 0 .00019 Thallium mg/L <0. 004 < 0.4 <0,4 <0.4 <0 .4 <0.004 <0 .009 <0 .1 <0.1 <0.4 <0.4 <0 .4 0 .44J 0 .002 0.004 V an adiu m mg/L <0.004 < 0.4 <0,4 <0.4 <0.4 <0 .004 <0 .009 <0.1 <0.1 <0.4 <0.4 <0 .4 <0.4 0.015° 0 .019 Zinc mg/L 0.00401 < 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 .2 <0.002 <0 .009 <0.05 <0 .05 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 .2 5.0' 0 .081 N OTES mg/L: Milligrams per liter <: Not detected at or abov e the indicated laboratory method reporting limit -: Not tested ND: N ot detected above the laboratory method reporting limit; limits vary by compound J: De te cted valu e falls be tween the metho d MDL and PQL. The repo rted concentration should be consider ed as estimated rather than quantitative . MCL: Max imu m con taminant level for drinking wa ter, Califomia Department of Public Health (October 2008) a: MCL not established. ESL for drinking water / non -drinking water shown instead (R WQCB, 2008) ESL: Aquatic Ha bitat - Environ men tal Sc reen ing Level for impacts to marin e aqua tic habitat (R WQCB, 20013 Table F -4a) Phase 11 Environm ental Site Assessment Palo Alto Airport Palo Alto, Califo rnia I of I August I, 1011 Table 4 Current Grab Grou ndwater Analytical Detections Palo Alto Airp ort 1925 Embarcadero R oad Palo Alto, CA Sample Location Semple IG Date TPH-d (mg/L) TPH-mo (mg/L) TPH-k (mg/L) TPH-g (CB -C10) 0 .10/0 Benzene Toluene (Yg/L) Ethylbenzene (Y9/L) Xylene (t otal) (Mt) (Mt) Methyl Ted Butyl Ether (MP Acetone 810/L) Bromoform (N9/L) tart- Butylbenzene (N9/L) Isopropyl benzene 881/1-) Methyl ethyl ketone OWL) n-Propylbenzene Ten -Butyl Alcohol OWL) (��) 1.2,4- Trimethyl benzene (N9/L) 1,3,5- Trimethyi benzene (N9/L) RWQCI3 ESL- :Vapor ;Intrusion "NE NE - NE NE -"'1 800 530,000 170,000 150;005 . .- 80;000 1 .5E+05 NE NE - NE 8 0E+07 NE RW QCB E SL- A vatic t4stltat .0:21 6.21 ' _ 3 21 2,10 350 ' 2,500 43 t00 0,000 11500 3,200 NE NE 14 000. NE .. 18,000 NE NE MCL . -. 0. 2r 521 ' 210', 1 150 300 . 1;753 13, 8,300' 100 ' NE NE 41200• NE _ ...... 12 ' NE NE SB-2-GW 9/24/2012 < 0.050 <0.10 <0050° <25 <0 .20 <0 .20 <0 .20 <0 .46 <0 .20 8.3J <0.22 <0 .26 <0.20 <2.0 <0.20 <2.4 <0.20 <0 .20 Tank Farm SB-3-G W 9/24/2012 0.0977 ° , J <0.12 <0.058 ° 3,750 ° 3.9 2.9 28 .8 13 .3 <0 .50 20.4 J <0.55 3 .6 J 3.2 <5.0 1 .5 J 43 .3 6 .2' 0.99 °, J 0B-4-GW 9/24/2012 <0.052 <0,10 <0.052' 47,5"°,J <0 .20 <0.20 <0.20 <0 .46 <0.20 <4.0 <0.22 <0.28 <0 .20 <2.0 <0.20 2.7' <0,20 <0.20 SB-5-W 9/25/2012 <0.047 <0.094 <0 .047 a <25 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.46 <0.20 <4.0 <0 .22 <0.28 <0 .20 <2,0 <0 .20 <2.4 <0.20 <0 .20 SB-6-W 9/25/2012 < 0.047 <0.094 <0,047 ° <25 <0.20 <0.20 <0 .20 <0.46 <0.20 <4.0 <0.22 <0.26 <0.20 <2.0 <0 .20 <2.4 <0 .20 <0 .20 Fuel Island SB-7-W 9/25/2012 < 0.060 <0.12 <0.060 ° <25 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.46 0.321, J 8.0 1, J <0 .22 <0.28 <0 .20 <2.0 <0 20 <2.4 <0.20 <0.20 S8 -8-W 9/25/2012 - -- -- <25 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.48 <0 .20 34 .51 <0 .22 <0.28 <0 .20 5.1 J <0 .20 <2.4 <0.20 <0.20 SB-9-W 9/25/2012 -- -- -- <25 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.46 <0.20 22 .1 <0.22 <0.28 <0 .20 3.5 J <020 <2 .4 <0.20 <0.20 S8 -11-W 9/26/2012 <0. 052 <0.10 <0.052' <25 <0.20 <0 .20 <0.20 <0.46 <0.20 <4 ,0 <0 .22 <0.28 <0.20 <2.0 <0.20 <2.4 <0.20 <0.20 SB-12-W 9/28/2012 - - - <25 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0 .46 <0,20 14.0 °, J 0.45°, J <0.28 <0 .20 <2.0 <0 .20 <2 .4 <0 .20 <0.20 Wash Rack SB-13-W 9/26/2012 - - - <25 <0 .20 <020 <0.20 <0.48 <0 .20 56.7 ° <0 .22 <0.28 <0 .20 11.1 <0 .20 <2.4 <0.20 <0.20 SB-14-W 9/28/2012 - -- -- <25 <0.20 <0.20 <0 .20 <0.46 <0.20 23 .51 <0 .22 <0.28 <0 .20 4 .4 J <0.20 <2.4 <0.20 <0.20 SB-15-W 9/28/2012 < 0.10 <0.20 < 0. 10' <25 <0 .20 <0 .20 <0 .20 <0 .48 <0.20 20.81 0.461, J <0 .28 <0 .20 2 .8 J <0.20 <2.4 <0 .20 <0.20 Notes: Water concentrations measured in milligrams per liter (mg/L) and micrograms per liter (Ng/L) TPH-d = Tota l Petroleum Hydrocarbons as die se l TPH-mo = Total Pe troleum Hydroc arbons as mo tor oil TPH-k = Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as kerosene TPH-g = Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as gasoline ESL = Environmental Screening Level w here groundwater Is a potential drinking water source in a Commercial/Industrial setting, as set forth by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board In May 2008 (Vapor Intrusion Table E .1; Aquatic Habitat Table F -4A) M CL = Maximum contaminant level for drinking water, Califo mia Department of Public Health (October 2008) MCL not established. Final ESL for drinking water shown instead (RW QCB 2008; Table F-3) NE = No t established - = Not tested J = Estimated value. The definitions for the superscript footnotes below applicable to tables only and do not correlate to laboratory analytical reports a = Continuing calibration v erification outside of control limits; associated result may be biased high. b = Pattern more closely resembles aviation gas standard; possible presence of lower concentrations of unleaded gasoline. c = Pattem resembles aviation gas standard. d = Resembles laboratory diesel standard; does not resemble standard provided by client. e = No Jet A pattern fou nd. f = Sample vial contained more than 0. 5 cm of sediment. Sample was no preserve d to a pH <2. g = Sample vial co ntained more than 0.5 cm of sediment. BOLD denote concentration levels at or above any ESL presented. Table 4 Palo Alto Alrpoa GW Table fetid. Page 1 of 1 Mantes Consulting Senna. Inc. Table 2 Tank Fenn Area Grab Gro undwat er Analyti cal Res ults Palo Alto Airport 1925 Embarc adero Road Pal o Alto, CA Semple Location Sample ID D ale TPH-d (m g/L) TPH-mo (mg/L) TPHic (mg/L) 7PH-g (C6 C10 ) (pg/L) Be nzene (pg/L) T oluene OWL) Nepalalene ( KM Ethylbe nzena (144.)(tot(total)Butyl Xylene (pg/L) Methyl Ted Ether (pg/L) A cetone (pg/L) Br om or orm (per) n- Butylbenzene (pg/L) s ec- Butylbenzene IPA-) t art- B utylbenzene (PA) Isopropyl benzene (Pg/L) P- isopropyl toluene 041/L) Methyl ethyl ketone (N O n-Propylbenzene (pg/L) T ert-B utyl Alcohol (p91L) 1,2,4- Tdmethylb enzene (pg/L) 1,3,5- Trimethyl benzene Oa) _ RWQCB-ES1:° Vapor inin is108 NE NE _ NE NE - 270' ' NE 1.600 5.100 - NE . 1001000 NE NE _ NE • NE- NE NE ._ - NE-_. 2,2E+06 _ NE NE NE _ RWQCB 551, Aquatic Habitat.. - : :0.64 . 4184 1:84 500 48 130 ' 24 . 43 100 6.000 1;500 -- . 1.100 NE NE NE _ NE (4F. 14,509 NE _NE • 18.000 NE .. .N E MCL - 0,64" - . 554 /104' 600' 1, - - 165 .900 4.750 13 . 1600 1500' -. 1100•. : NE NE__ .._.. .. yE NE NE 14000' NE totsos' ,,.,,. .NE_ N= Tank Farm SB-2-GW 9/242 012 <0.050 <0.10. <0,050• <25 <0 .20 <0.20 <0.50 <0 .20 <0.46 <0 .20 8.3J <0.22 <0.20 <0 .20 <0.28 <0.20 <0.20 <2.0 <0.20 <2.4 <0 .20 <0 .20 S8 -3-G W 9/24/2012 0.0977 ° ,.1 < 0.12 <0. 058 ° 3,760 ° 3.9 2.9 <1.3 26.6 13.3 <0 .50 20.4 .1 <0.55 <0.50 <0 .50 3.6 J 3 .2 <0.50 <5.0 1.5 J 43.3 6.2 ' 0 .99', J SB-4-GW ° 9242 012 <0.052 <0.10 <0. 052 • 47.5 `, J <0.20 <0.20 <0 .50 <0,20 <0,46 <0 .20 <4.0 <0.22 <0.20 <020 <028 <0 .20 <0.20 <2.0 <0.20 2 .7 J <0.20 <0.20 0B-17-GW ° 7/3/2013 < 0.052 <0.10 0.366 < 28.5 J 0.73 J <0 .20 0 .82.1 1 .2 <0 .46 <0.20 7 .5 .1 <0.22 1.1 J 0 .96 J <0.28 2.8 0.73 J <2.0 3.6 <2 .4 2.2 6.8 SB-18-GW ° 7/3/2013 0.213 I 0.188 J < 0.76 <25 <0.20 <0 .20 <0.50 <0.20 <0.46 0 .34 J 8.9 J <0 .22 <0 .20 <0 .20 <0.28 <0 .20 <0 .20 <2.0 <0,20 <2.4 <0.20 <0 .20 Notes: Water concentrations measured In milligrams per liter (mg/L) and micrograms per liter (pg/L) TPH-d = Total Petro leu m Hydrocarbons as diesel TPH-mo = To ta l Petrole um Hydro carbons as moto r a il TPH-k = To tal Pe tro leum Hydroca rbons as kerosene TPH-g = Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as gasoline ESL = Environmental Screening Level where gro undwater is NOT a potential drinking water sou rce in a Commercial/Industrial setting, as set forth by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board in May 2013 (Vapor Intrusion Table E-1; Aquatic Habitat Table F -4A) MCL = Ma xlmum contamina nt lev el fo r drinking wate r, California Department of Public Health (Octo ber 2008) = MCL not established. Final ESL for drinking water shown instead (RWQCB 2008; Table F-3) NE = Not established -= Not tested J = Estimated value. The definitions for the superscript footnotes below applicable to tables only and do not correlate to laboratory analytical reports ° = Continuing calibration verificatio n outside of contro l limits; associated result may be biased high. ° = Pattem mo re closely re sembles aviation gas standard; possible presence of lower concentrations of unleaded gasolin e. ` =Pa ttern rese mbles aviation gas standard. ° = Resembles laboratory diesel standard; does no t resemble standa rd pro vided by client. = No Jet A pattern found. '= Atypical Diesel pattern; heavier hydrocarbons contributing to quantilation. ° = Sample vial contained more than 0. 5 cm of sediment. " = Pattem Is consistent with Jet A. BOLD denote concentration levels at or above any ESL presented. Table 2 Polo <lle Airpo rt CW Teble.a lea Pegs 1 of 1 St ant.. Consulting Service. In c. 2013 Palo Alto Airport Levee Inspection Report ISO 9001 :2000 F577212 January 2014 Created and Compiled By : Ray Bramer Rebecca Wolff Under The Direction of: Chris Elias ISO 14001 EMS 77213 January 30, 2014 Palo Alto Airport Levee Inspection Background This inspection of Palo Alto Airport Levee was completed in accordance with the "Agreement Relative to Baylands Levees" (Agreement) entered into on August 22 , 1979 between the Santa Clara Valley Water District, the City of Palo Alto , and the County of Santa Clara . Section 1 of the Agreement stipulates that the Water District shall conduct visual inspections of Baylands levees annually, and report all findings which show the need for preventative maintenance to the appropriate agency. A copy of the original agreement is located in section 2 of this report. Pursuant to section 5 of the agreement, "each party accepts the responsibility of maintaining levees within its jurisdiction". The Palo Alto Airport Levee field inspection was conducted on September 25,2013 by the Santa Clara Valley Water District. Please find in this report an overview of general fmdings, a map with assigned stationing of the Palo Alto Airport Levee, a copy of the original 1979 Agreement, a list of the categories and ratings which were applied to the items identified during the field inspection, and an individual inspection sheet for each item recorded during the field inspection. Summary of Findings and Recommendations Per the Agreement, all deficiencies identified during this inspection and subsequent maintenance required fall under County of Santa Clara's responsibility . Refer to the Levee Maintenance Responsibility map included in the Agreement within this report. Other than some surface mowing on a portion of the outboard (airport side) of the levee, no other maintenance work was evident since the previous inspection in January 2013 . The same deficiencies were identified during the September 2013 inspection as in previous inspections. The following paragraphs are a general summary of identified deficiencies and recommended maintenance. Grassy slopes and general woody vegetation on both the inboard and outboard slopes of the levee makes a visual inspection of the levee difficult as one cannot clearly see the actual levee surface . There also are areas where woody vegetation is encroaching onto the crest of the levee . It is recommended that the grasses on the levee slopes be mowed and all woody vegetation be cut back and/or removed. Burrowing animal activity along the entire reach of the levee was observed . Burrow holes ranging in size from a few inches to over a foot wide were identified . These are on both the inboard and outboard sides of the levee. Based on the visual inspection, several of the holes appear to cross perpendicularly through the levee. If these outboard and inboard holes are connected it would allow a high water event to spill thereby causing the levee to be breached. It is recommended that additional field investigations be taken to inspect these holes to verify if they have impacted the overall integrity of the levee. We also recommend some action be taken to control the burrowing rodent population within the levee area to potentially reduce the amount of burrowing within the levee in the future. January 30, 2014 A portion of the levee is inaccessible both by foot or vehicle . This area is located from station 28+00 to 35+00 and is just before the airport landing strip begins (see attached map). A general visual inspection from outside the fenced area is not possible due to the heavy vegetation present on this section of levee. It is recommended that the vegetation be removed so that a thorough inspection can be performed . Some other minor deficiencies include rutting and evidence of standing water on the levee access road in the northwest portion of the levee. There is a drainage swale structure at the end of the runway near station 35+00 which should be cleared of vegetation and sediment to insure proper drainage. It also appears that this drainage structure is cracking and separating from itself. Without some type of remedial action, this degradation may cause eventual failure of this structure . More detailed information including location, description, and photos of each item identified is found on the individual inspection sheets located at the end ofthis report. Overall, the maintenance issues that we recommend be addressed include removing overgrowth of vegetation on the slopes and crest of the levee, institution of a rodent abatement program to address the abundance of rodent burrows, and repairing the damage caused by burrowing rodents which is likely affecting the function of the levee. Please contact us at (408) 265-2600 with any questions or concerns regarding this inspection report. Thank you, ~~ Scott Katric, PE Engineering Manager Watersheds Operations and Maintenance Engineering Support Santa Clara Valley Water District --Creek Route • 1000 Foot Stations · r ... ...:.c.t O:·gi:1~' --' AGREEMENT RELATIVE TO BAYLANDS LEVEES COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, a subdivision of the State of .Cali£ornia, hereinafter "County"~ and CITY OF PALO ALTO, .a .municipal. corporation of the .. State -of California, hereinafter nCity"~ and SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRI8T".a ·local.public agency of the State of California, hereinafter "District"~ AGREE this c2:J..vJ.. as follows: ~~~~~---------day of _%.,..;. '-=7<rt""~. "--__ , 1979 RECITALS: A. "Exhibit A," so marked, hereunto attached and made a part hereof, shows certain San Francisco bay lands levees arid indicates as to such levees the ' maintenance responsibility of County, City and District. B. District is able to survey and establish elevations of levees and is prepared to perform ' such a service for County and City pursuant to this agreement. C. In emergencies County, City and District are prepared to take necessary maintenance and repair ' action without re gard to jurisdiction, adjusting the cost thereof in accord ance with this agreement. AGREEMENT: l.At least once each year District shall make vi sua l ._i nspections. of County's and City's said levees.· District· may enter upon lands of County or City, shown on said '. Exhibi t .A, . for' such purpose. Dis trict will report all findings which show the need for prevQlltive .... mainteDAACe to the appropriate agency. 2. From time to time District may . notify .County or City . that . there is a need to establish by appropriate ,survey , the ... ele.vation. of County's or City's said .levees •. If.County ·or . City ... shall.thsll .. provide written authority so to do, ·.District ·.may · make .. aueh.8urvey. and shall provide County or City with ·the'data s()found •. Upon .District certification, County or City shall promptiy repay. to. District the actual and necessary cost of .said .work.·.·.City· or ' County may elect to perform the survey work with their own' personnel .. ,or .. by . others if they believe it is more appropriate to do so. 3. If County, City Ol; District reasonably perceive the necessity of immediate .emergency repair.' upon theother .',s: levees, such work may be done without prior permission,' p-roV'i'deg, that the Qarty so acting shall notify the others of the work at the earliest possible time, whether before, during or after the prosecution thereof. Such notice shall be given to the individual and at the telephone numbers which each party will from time to time supply to the others in writing. The party performing suohemergency ··work may oertify to the party on whose levee work was done the actual and necessary cost thereof, which cost shall be promptly repaid. 4. Costs, repayable under paragraphs 2 and 3 above shall include labor, materials, use of equipment and services and supplies secured .. · ," p ' " from vendors or contractors. Each party shall keep proper and suf ficient records of such costs which records shall be open to inspec tion by the others at all convenient times. 5. Except as noted above for situations of emergency, each party accepts the responsibility of maintaining the levees within its jurisdiction as indicated on said Exhibit A. 6. During any period when a party is on the property of another doing work pursuant to this agreement, the party so working shall save, defend and hold harmless the other from damage or loss or claim thereof howsoever arising by reason of such work. 7. District shall apply to the Corps of Engineers and to San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission for a general period to cover maintenance of District levees and levees of City and County in San Francisco Baylands areas. District shall request that such general permit pertain to all permittees of District. 8. Until such time as the above-mentioned general permit is obtained, City and County shall be responsible for obtaining all necessary permits for such levee maintenance. 9. If the above-mentioned permit is obtained, City and County shall thereafter obtain a permit only from District for levee main tenance. 10. This agreement may be terminated as to -anYl'arty. upon . written notification to the others given thirty (30) days .before the date of such termination. Such notice shall be directed to the County Executive of County at its business address or to the City Manager of City at its business address and to tb~ General Manager of District at its business address. WITNESS OUR HAND, the day and year first hereinabove set forth. COUNTY .. C~~Y OF PALO ALTO Mayor ; I I/J APPRO D: J'~ '. 'eP ic?fIA-.- -2 - •. V' .......... ." " ATTEST: APPROVED ~ TO FORM: WATER DISTRICT AUG 1 4 1979 t-~~~~~~~~~~~~ __ ~.~ChairmM - 3 - r 'I J' I -t ' " ~ III g >-2 o :.J ~ ;! Z < :J 15 ~ t 8 ~ m ~ 5 ~ ~ ~ 0 i ~ ~ o It · , · , · , · , · , · , · , · , · , · , ... .... /~ .. ' / ./' .,.,' ~. . ..... ...... ~\·t. .,,~ ", .... ", " "',:> ":..' •.•• > ". -......... ,~ .,.~~. ,,-/>. Inspection Categories and Ratings CONDITION CODES A = As bui ItlNew B = Good C = Requires FOA Evaluation or Monitoring D = Requires Corrective Action (Le . Work Order, Violation , Engineer Review, Notification, etc .) E = Requires Immediate Action FACILITY TYPES Levee Landside (Outboard) Bridge Levee Waterside (Inboard) Cellular Concrete Mat Levee Crown or Road Outfall Earth Channel Slide Gate Concrete Lined Channel Flap Gate Overflow Channel Culvert (Box, Rep, CMP,etc.) Access Road Fish Structure Fence Landscaping Gate Recreational Trail Riprap(RockorSack) Revegetation Site Gabions Miscellaneous CATEGORIES (Maximo Job Plan & Other) Emergency Debris Removal (EMR) Misc. Property Maintenance (MSC) Pier NosefTrash RacklFlapgate Erosion (ERO) Cleaning (PTF) Fence/Gate Work (FEN) Sediment (SED) Fish Structure Maintenance (FSH) Sign Work (SGN) Good Neighbor Maintenance Tree (TRE) (GNM) Graffiti Removal (GRF) Trash and Debris (TRS) Ground Squirrel/Rodent Control (GSC) Overhanging Growth (VWG) Hazardous Materials (HAZ) Typical (TYP) In Stream Vegetation (ISV) Violation (VIO) Motor Grading (MGR) Direction of Photo -Upstream (U/S), Downstream (DIS) or At Location (AT) Watershed Operations -Photo Library Inspector Facility Name Northwest Zone Maximo Facility Number 1000000 Maximo Workorder Facility Number 1000 Purpose Inspection Facility Type Levee Santa (\QrQ Vcley Water rYtstitd O Photo Id 44741 . Date Taken 25-SEP-13 Os Stati o n 0+00 Us Station 0+00 Jurisdiction None Category Typical(TYP) St reet Address Cross Street DIS Geng Rd City Name PALO ALTO APN Di rection Across L ooki n g U/S Middle Rati ng B(Good) Photo Oeser Typical at the Palo Alto Airport Levee Qty Units Watershed Operations -Photo Library Inspector Facility Name Northwest Zone Maximo Facility Number 1000000 Maximo Workorder Facility Number 1000 Purpose Inspection Facility Type Levee Sonte <Jcro Veley Water fJrJ.rid O Photo Id 44740 Date Taken 25-SEP-13 Os Station 0+00 Us Station 0+00 Jurisdiction None Category Typical(TYP) Street Address Cross Street DIS Geng Rd City Name PALO ALTO APN Direction Across Looking U/S Middle Rating B(Good) Photo Descr Typical at the Palo Alto Airport Levee Qty Units Watershed Operations -Photo Library Inspector Facility Name Northwest Zone Maximo Facility Number 1000000 Maximo Workorder Facility Number 1000 Purpose Inspection Facility Type Levee Photo Id 44742 Date Take n 25-SEP-13 Os St ati o n 0+57 Us Station 0+57 Jurisdiction None Category Rodent Control Needed(GSC) Street Address Cross Street DIS Geng Rd City Name PALO ALTO APN Direction Across Looking U/S Left,Right Rating D(Requires Corrective Action) Photo Descr Burrowing typical for reach, many voids -needs engineer review Qty Units Watershed Operations -Photo Library Ins pector Facility Name Northwest Zone Maximo Facility Number 1000000 Maximo Workorder Facility Number 1000 Purpose lnspection Facility Type Levee Photo Id 44744 Date Taken 25-SEP-13 Os Station 9+00 Us Station 9+00 Jurisdiction None Category Rodent Control Needed(GSC) Street Address Cross Street DIS Geng Rd City Name PALO ALTO APN Direction Across Looking U/S Left,Right Rating D(Requlres Corrective Action) Photo Descr Burrowing in Reach Qty Units Watershed Operations -Photo Library I nspecto r Facility Name Northwest Zone Maximo Facility Number 1000000 Maximo Workord er Facility Number 1000 Pu rpose Inspection Facility Type Levee Photo Id 44743 Dat e Take n 25-SEP-13 Ds St ati o n 9+00 Us Station 9+00 Jurisdiction None Category Vegetation - Herbaceous(VGH) Street Address Cross Street DIS Geng Rd City Name PALO ALTO APN Direction Across Looking UlS Left,Right Rating D(Requires Corrective Action) Photo Descr Grassy Slopes, airport side appears to have been mowed. Vag makes visual inspection Qty Units difficult Watershed Operations -Photo Library Ins pector Facility Name Northwest Zone Maximo Facility Number 1000000 Maximo Workorder Facility Number 1000 Purpose Inspection Facility Type Levee Soria <Ioro Voley Woter Dlstrid O Photo Id 44746 Date Taken 25-SEP-13 Os Station 10+50 Us Station 10+50 Jurisdiction None Category Rodent Control Needed(GSC) Street Address Cross Street DIS Geng Rd City Name PALO ALTO APN Direction Across Looking U/S Left,Right Rating D(Requires Corrective Action) Photo Descr Burrowing in reach Qty Units Watershed Operations -Photo Library Inspector Facility Name Northwest Zone Maximo Facility Number 1000000 Maximo Workorder Facility Number 1000 Pu rpose Inspection Facility Type Levee Santo Claro Voley Wo~r fIlsVtd O Photo Id 44745 Date Taken 25-SEP-13 Os Station 10+50 Us Station 10+50 Jurisdiction None Category Motor Grading(MGR) Street Address Cross Street DIS Geng Rd City Name PALO ALTO APN Direction Across Looking UlS Middle Rating C(Requires FOA Evaluation or Monitoring) Photo Descr Minor rutting in access road -monitor Qty Units Watershed Operations -Photo Library Ins pe ctor Facility Name Northwest Zone Maximo Facility Number 1000000 Maximo Workorder Facility Number 1000 Purpose Inspection Facility Type Levee Sonta CIota Voley Water 01strid.O Photo Id 44747 Date Taken 25-SEP-13 Os Station 11 + 70 Us Station 11 + 70 Jurisdiction None Category Vegetation - Woody(VGW) Street Address Cross Street DIS Geng Rd City Name PALO ALTO APN Direction Across Looking U/S Left Rating D(Requlres Corrective Action) Photo Descr Woody growth on levee Qty Units Watershed Operations -Photo Library In spe ctor Facility Name Northwest Zone Facility Number 1000 Maximo Facility Number 1000000 Maximo Workorder Photo Id 44749 Date Taken 25-SEP-13 Os Station 16+00 Us Station 16+00 Jurisdiction None Purpose Inspection Facility Type Levee Category Rodent Control Street Address Cross Street DIS Geng Rd Needed(GSC) City Name PALO ALTO APN Direction Across Looking U/S Left,Right Rating D(Requires Corrective Action) Photo Descr Burrowing getting heavy in reach -no treatment noticed Qty Units Watershed Operations -Photo Library In spe ctor Facility Name Northwest Zone Maximo Facility Numb er 1000000 Maximo Workorder Facility Number 1000 Purpose lnspection Facility Type Levee Photo Id 44748 Date Tak en 25-SEP-13 Os Station 16+00 Us Station 16+00 Jurisdiction None Category Rodent Control Needed(GSC) Street Address Cross Street DIS Geng Rd City Name PALO ALTO APN Direction Across Looking U/S Left,Right Rating D(Requlres Corrective Action) Photo Oeser Burrowing getting heavy in reach -no treatment noticed Qty Units Watershed Operations -Photo Library In s pector Facility Name Northwest Zone Maximo Facility Number 1000000 Maximo Workordar Facility Number 1000 Purpose Inspection Facility Type Levee Sorio (\QrQ Voley Water fftstrid O 25 2013 Photo Id IN: 122"06' AG. :30" N' OS7' :;7' 38 44" 44750 Date Ta ke n 25-SEP-13 Os Station 20+00 Us Station 20+00 Jurisdiction None Category Vegetation - Woody(VGW) Street Address Cross Street DIS Geng Rd City NamePALO ALTO APN Direction Across Looking UiS Left,Right Rating O(Requires Corrective Action) Photo Oescr Woody growth heavy to sta . 30+00 Qty Units Watershed Operations -Photo Library In spec tor Facility Name Northwest Zone Maximo Facility Number 1000000 Maximo Workorder Facility Number 1000 Purpose lnspection Facility Type Levee Soria <Jara VQIEr14 WQ~r fftsbid O Photo Id 44751 Date Tak en 25-SEP-13 Os St ation 29+00 Us Station 35+00 Jurisdiction None Category Vegetation - Woody(VGW) Street Address Cross Street DIS Geng Rd City Name PALO ALTO APN Direction Across Looking U/S Left,Middle,Ri fjhtt ing C(Requires FOA Evaluation or Monitoring) Photo Descr No access to 35+00 Qty Units Watershed Operations -Photo Library Ins p ector Facility Name Northwest Zone Maximo Facility Number 1000000 Maximo Workorder Facility Number 1000 Pu rpose Inspection Facility Type Levee So~Q CIoto Veley Waler Oisbid O Photo Id 44753 Date Taken 25-SEP-13 Os Station 35+00 Us Station 35+00 Jurisdiction None Category Trash & Debris(TRS) Street Address Cross Street DIS Geng Rd City Name PALO ALTO APN Direction Across Looking U/S Middle Rating D(Requires Corrective Action) Photo Oeser Concrete swale needs cleaning of debris Qty Units Watershed Operations -Photo Library Inspector Facility Name Northwest Zone Maximo Facility Number 1000000 Maximo Workorder Facility Number 1000 Purpose Inspection Facility Type Levee Santo Clora VQUey Water OlstIid O 2013 Photo Id 44752 Date Taken 25-SEP-13 Os Station 35+00 Us Station 35+00 Jurisdiction None Category Cracking(CRK) Street Address Cross Street DIS Geng Rd City Name PALO ALTO APN Direction Across Looking U/S Middle Rating D(Requlres Corrective Action) Photo Oescr Concrete swale has cracking Qty Units Watershed Operations -Photo Library In s pector Facility Name Northwest Zone Maximo Facility Number 1000000 Maximo Workorder Facility Number 1000 Purpose Inspection Facility Type Levee Photo Id 44754 Date Taken 25-SEP-13 Os Station 35+20 Us Station 35+20 Jurisdiction None Category Typicai(TYP) Street Address Cross Street DIS Geng Rd City Name PALO ALTO APN Direction Across Looking UlS Middle Rat i ng B(Good) Photo Oeser typical looking Southeast Qty Units Watershed Operations -Photo Library Inspector Facility Name Northwest Zone Maximo Facility Number 1000000 Maximo Workorder Facility Numbe r 1000 Purpose Inspection Facility Type Levee Soria CIoto Voley Water Distrid 6 Photo Id 44755 Date Taken 25-SEP-13 Os Station 36+00 Us Station 36+00 Jurisdiction None Category Rodent Control Needed(GSC) Street Address Cross Street DIS Geng Rd City Name PALO ALTO APN Direction Across Looking U/S Left ,Right Rating D(Requires Corrective Action) Photo Descr Burrowing in reach Qty Units Watershed Operations -Photo Library In s pector Facility Name Northwest Zone Maximo Facility Number 1000000 Maximo Workord e r Facility Number 1000 Purpose Inspection Facility Type Levee Sorie CIato Veley Wa~r rMitd O ,'" Photo Id 44756 Date Take n 25-SEP-13 Os Station 37 +50 Us Station 37+50 Jurisdiction None Category Vegetation - Woody(VGW) Street Address Cross Street DIS Geng Rd City Name PALO ALTO APN Direction Across Looking U/S Left,Right Rating D(Requires Corrective Action) Photo Descr woody growth that was cut in the past is growing back Qty Units Watershed Operations -Photo Library Inspector Facility Name Northwest Zone Maximo Facility Number 1000000 Maximo Workorder Facility Number 1000 Purpose inspection Facility Type Levee Photo Id 44757 Date Taken 25-SEP-13 Os Station 40+35 Us Station 40+35 Jurisdiction None Category Vegetation - Woody(VGW) Street Address Cross Street DIS Geng Rd City Name PALO ALTO APN Direction Across Looking U/S Left,Right Rating D(Requires Corrective Action) Photo Descr Woody vegetation and trees growing on levee Qty Units Watershed Operations -Photo Library Inspector Facility Name Northwest Zone Maximo Facility Number 1000000 Maximo Workorder Facility Number 1000 Purpose Inspection Facility Type Levee Somo <Iota Voley Water fllstitd O Photo Id 44758 Date Taken 25-SEP-13 Os Station 41 +00 Us Station 41 +00 Jurisdiction None Category Miscelianeous(MSC) Street Address Cross Street DIS Geng Rd City Name PALO ALTO APN Direction Across Looking UlS Middle Rating O(Requires Corrective Action) Photo Oescr Christy boxes need to be re-set, see burrowing near boxes Qty Units Watershed Operations -Photo Library Inspec tor Facility Name Northwest Zone Maximo Facility Number 1000000 Maximo Workorder Facility Number 1000 Purpose Inspection Facility Type Levee Soria (Ioro \foley Woker rYtstitdO Photo Id 44759 Date Taken 25-SEP-13 Ds Station 43+00 Us Station 43+00 Jurisdiction None Category Rodent Control Needed(GSC) Street Address Cross Street DIS Geng Rd City Name PALO ALTO APN Direction Across Looking UlS Left Rating D(Requires Corrective Action) Photo Oescr burrowing in reach to end -no treatment Qty Units Watershed Operations -Photo Library Inspector Facility Name Northwest Zone Maximo Facility Number 1000000 Maximo Workorder Facility Number 1000 Purpose Inspection Facility Type Levee Sorio (\Q(o Valey Wo~/ fftsUid O Photo Id 44760 Date Taken 25-SEP-13 Os Station 43+50 Us Station 43+50 Jurisdiction None Category Rodent Control Needed(GSC) Street Address Cross Street DIS Geng Rd City Name PALO ALTO APN Direction Across Looking UlS Middle Rating B(Good) Photo Oescr Typical at end at Embarcadero Qty Units 1 Mitchell, Karen From:Swanson, Andrew Sent:Monday, April 28, 2014 11:39 AM To:Mitchell, Karen Subject:FW: Recurring PAO meeting with County of Santa Clara & City of Palo Alto Attachments:PAO - County Comments on Draft TAAA 2-13-14.pdf ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: Michael Murdter [mailto:Michael.Murdter@rda.sccgov.org] Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2014 9:47 PM To: Swanson, Andrew Cc: Carl Honaker; Eric Peterson; Ray.Ruiz@cco.sccgov.org; Kolling, Grant; Sartor, Mike Subject: RE: Recurring PAO meeting with County of Santa Clara & City of Palo Alto Andy, Attached please find the County's initial review comments on the draft agreement. I'm sorry this took longer than anticipated. As we reviewed the draft agreement prepared by the City, it became apparent that we (County and City) need to first reconcile our respective conceptual approaches to the airport transfer. Once we do that, I think it will be a relatively straightforward matter to hammer out the details. We look forward to continuing our discussions and moving the issue forward as expeditiously as possible. Thanks, Michael ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: Swanson, Andrew [mailto:Andrew.Swanson@CityofPaloAlto.org] Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2014 11:39 AM To: Michael Murdter Cc: Carl Honaker; Eric Peterson; Ray.Ruiz@cco.sccgov.org; Kolling, Grant; Sartor, Mike Subject: RE: Recurring PAO meeting with County of Santa Clara & City of Palo Alto Hi Michael, Just checking to see if your initial review comments are in the mail? Also thank you for the below update. Regards, Andy ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: Sartor, Mike Sent: Saturday, February 08, 2014 9:16 AM To: Michael Murdter; Swanson, Andrew Cc: Carl Honaker; Eric Peterson; Ray.Ruiz@cco.sccgov.org; Kolling, Grant Subject: RE: Recurring PAO meeting with County of Santa Clara & City of Palo Alto 2 Thanks for your update Michael. I am fine moving our meeting out a couple weeks and would like to see your initial review comments so we can get going with moving the agreement forward. I appreciate your efforts to include the DEH closure letter and any info on the AIP grant in the agreement as well. Palo Alto is very motivated to get this done so we can move on with our management of PAO. Thanks, Mike ________________________________________ From: Michael Murdter [Michael.Murdter@rda.sccgov.org] Sent: Friday, February 07, 2014 9:51 PM To: Swanson, Andrew Cc: Sartor, Mike; Carl Honaker; Eric Peterson; Ray.Ruiz@cco.sccgov.org; Kolling, Grant Subject: RE: Recurring PAO meeting with County of Santa Clara & City of Palo Alto Andy, I was hoping to achieve a final resolution regarding the AIP grant as well as the environmental remediation issue so that we could fold that info into our response. We did get the closure letter from County DEH today regarding the remediation but are still working to resolve the grant issue with the FAA. We have a meeting next week with FAA staff and are hopeful that a resolution is not far off. On Monday I will send you what we've got in the way of review comments so far. Since I'm behind schedule, perhaps we could push next week's regular coordination meeting out a couple of weeks to Feb. 25 if that works for your schedules, or just regroup at the next meeting on Mar. 11. Have a good weekend, Michael From: Swanson, Andrew [mailto:Andrew.Swanson@CityofPaloAlto.org] Sent: Monday, February 03, 2014 2:09 PM To: Michael Murdter Cc: Sartor, Mike; Carl Honaker; Eric Peterson; Ray.Ruiz@cco.sccgov.org; Kolling, Grant Subject: RE: Recurring PAO meeting with County of Santa Clara & City of Palo Alto Good afternoon Michael, As of today we are still awaiting the County of Santa Clara's review of the draft Assignment and Assumption Agreement. Can you please update us on when we can expect to see draft comments? Regards, Andy From: Swanson, Andrew Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2014 6:54 AM To: 'Michael Murdter' Cc: Sartor, Mike; Carl Honaker; Eric Peterson; Ray.Ruiz@cco.sccgov.org<mailto:Ray.Ruiz@cco.sccgov.org>; Kolling, Grant Subject: RE: Recurring PAO meeting with County of Santa Clara & City of Palo Alto Michael, Thank you for the update and look forward to meeting with you in February. Regards, Andy 3 From: Michael Murdter [mailto:Michael.Murdter@rda.sccgov.org] Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 7:18 PM To: Swanson, Andrew Cc: Sartor, Mike; Carl Honaker; Eric Peterson; Ray.Ruiz@cco.sccgov.org<mailto:Ray.Ruiz@cco.sccgov.org> Subject: RE: Recurring PAO meeting with County of Santa Clara & City of Palo Alto Andy, Thanks for your kind wishes regarding Carl. We are still reviewing the draft Agreement. I expect to forward the County's comments no later than Jan. 28. I propose that we cancel this month's meeting and plan on having our regular monthly meeting on Feb. 11. Does that work for you? Michael From: Swanson, Andrew [mailto:Andrew.Swanson@CityofPaloAlto.org] Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2013 8:48 AM To: Michael Murdter Cc: Sartor, Mike; Carl Honaker; Eric Peterson Subject: Recurring PAO meeting with County of Santa Clara & City of Palo Alto Good Morning Michel, First of all we were sorry to hear about Carl and wish him a speedy recovery. We would like to cancel our monthly meeting, as we are awaiting the County of Santa Clara's review of the draft Assignment and Assumption Agreement. Please advise when we can expect to see draft comments. Regards, Andy [Description: Description: cid:image001.jpg@01CD0081.14A23B90] Andrew J. Swanson | Airport Manager 250 Hamilton Avenue | Palo Alto, CA 94301 D: 650.329‐2688| E: andrew.swanson@cityofpaloalto.org<mailto:andrew.swanson@cityofpaloalto.o rg> Please think of the environment before printing this email ‐ Thank you! In reviewing the Transfer Agreement, the County observes that the current draft does not comport with the County’s conceptual understanding of the proposed transaction. Consistent with the direction of the Board of Supervisors, the County envisions the proposed transaction would reflect the following general parameters: First, the parties’ obligations, duties,and benefits would remain consistent with the Lease.The County is unable to provide the City financial assistance or share in the ongoing risks and potential liabilities of operating PAO beyond the termination of the Lease.Stated another way, the County is unable to agree to any new obligations not supported by the existing Lease.Second, to the greatest extent possible, following termination of the Lease and the City’s acceptance of airport operations, the City shall be fully responsible for PAO, including operations, maintenance, and funding. Moreover, we note that the draft Transfer Agreement predates the resolution of, or progress toward resolving, key issues. For example, on January 31, 2014, the Santa Clara County Department of Health (“DEH”) issued a letter completing its environmental investigation of PAO and concluding no further action related to the release of waste is required. Additionally, the County is working with the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) toward releasing grant funding that would be assigned to the City for the benefit of PAO. In light of the foregoing, the comments below focus first on achieving consensus regarding the essential terms of the proposed transaction.The County offers the following suggestions for efficiently working toward the execution and consummation of transaction. Term/Issue City Version County Version and Comments Transaction Structure Tripartite agreement by and among FAA, County, and City. To simplify the transaction and facilitate the FAA’s review, the County suggests two separate agreements. First, an Assignment and Assumption Agreement, by and among the FAA, County, and City solely relating to those issues that may require FAA approval. Under this agreement, where necessary, the FAA would (1) release the County from the Grant Assurances, (2) approve the City’s assumption of control, and (3) authorize the transfer of the grant assurance and other obligations to the City. Second,a Lease Termination Agreement, by and between the County and the City, to address the parties’ contractual matters, including the lease, the levee agreements, and the disposition of personal property. Bayland Levee Agreements Transfer Agreement Sections 1.4, 1.6, 1.7, and 1.9. provide that the levee agreements shall be assigned to the City and require the County to perform obligations arising from such agreements to maintain and repairs the levees. If not performed prior to the closing, the County shall pay the lump sum of $8,000,000 as provided in Section 1.9. The County intends to perform its obligations under the 1979 Levee Agreement prior to executing the transfer agreements. County staff is currently reviewing the most recent Levee Inspection Report prepared by the Santa Clara Valley Water District and is in the project planning process. As the parties previously discussed, upon completion of the work, the County will terminate its participation in the 1979 Levee Agreement. Maintenance and Repairs of Pavement Section 1.6 provides the County shall restore pavements to a specified ASTM rating. If not performed prior to the closing, the County shall pay the lump sum of $8,000,000 as provided in Section 1.9. The County is in compliance with the Lease requirements relating to the condition of the airport. Environmental Remediation Transfer Agreement Sections 1.8/1.8.1/1.8.2 provide that the County shall complete its obligations under the Remedial Action Agreement (RAA), indemnify the City for environmental matters, and procure an environmental insurance policy with limits not less than $3,000,000.If not performed prior to the closing, the County shall pay the lump sum of $8,000,000 as provided in Section 1.9. The County views any and all environmental matters at PAO as resolved. On January 31, 2014,DEH issued a letter closing the Voluntary Cleanup Program case related to environmental contamination. As set forth in the letter, no further action by the County is required. To the extent the City desires to protect against further risk related to the above, we refer the City to the terms and conditions of the assigned and assumed FBO leases. Lease/Permit (CSLC Permit) dated July 19, 1971, by and between California State Land Commission (CSLC) and County. A CSLC permit is required for the City to operate PAO with proper title to the state- encumbered land. County suggests a mutual commitment to terminate the CLSC Permit and enter into new permit for the operation of PAO following the transfer. Good title is required for any airport sponsor. STATE OF C ALIF ORNIA~CALIFORNIA STATE TRANSPORT A nON AGENCY EDMUND G BRO WN JR. Govern or DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT A TION DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS -M .S. # 40 •..... _ ..... . . ... 1120 N STREET, SUITE 3300 P. O. BOX 942874 Flex yo ur p ower ! SACRAMENTO , CA 94 274·0001 Be energy effic ienr ! PHONE (916) 654-4959 FAX (916) 653·9531 TTY 711 ww w.doLca .gov January 23 , 2014 Mr. Eric Peterson, As s istant Din;ctor Department of Airports County of Santa Clara 2500 Cunninghan1 Avenue San Jose, CA 95148-1001 Dear Mr. Peterson: The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Division of Aeronaut ics , conducted a State permit compliance inspection and Feder al Aviation Administration (FAA) Airport Master Record (5010) update at Palo Alto Airport of Santa Clara County (FAA Site N o. 02022. * A) on January 14 ,2014. We appreciate the a ss istanc e and cooperation provided durin g the inspection. T he updated information will be entered into our records. Our inspection revealed the following items , which we bring to your attention: 1. Numerous tre es on the west side of the airport, located on the Palo Alto Gol f Course, have been allowed to grow to a height that exceeds the Federal Aviation Regulations (F AR) Part 77 ,7:1 Transitional Surface. These trees were detailed in prior inspection s dated July 30, 2009, and January 19,2012 , along with a request to respond with a plan to addre s s and correct this safety issue. Ho w ever, we have failed to receive a respon se and to date substantial penetrations of the Tran s itional Surface continu e to be an ob struction hazard. Caltrans understands the pending tran sfer of d ay -to -day m an agem e nt fr om the County of Santa Clara to the City of Palo Alto in th e near futur e co uld fu rth er complicate corrective actions. However, Caltrans mu st recei ve a de fini t ive p lan le a din g to tangible progress within 90 days of receipt of thi s letter, to a ddr ess and m ain ta in o b struction-free FAR Part 77 imaginary surfaces to the airport to p rese r ve th e public u se o f the airport and continue to operate at night. Failure to compl y m ay le ad to ini t iation of action to suspend night operations. 2. Numerous concrete bases (supporting Precision Approach Path Indicators, Runway End IdentifYing Lights , Runway /Taxiway lights , Levee obstruction lights , and RunwaylTaxiw ay guidance signs) in the Runway Safety Area (RSA), Taxiway Safety Area (T SA), and FAR Part 77, Primary Surface rise above their surrounding soil surfaces more than three inches (please see enclosed Photographs 1, 2, and 3). These concrete pads present hard-stop obstructions to an aircraft during an excursion from the runway or taxiway and must be lowered, or additional soil must be furnished and compacted flush to the pad e dges , in accordance with (lAW) FAA Adv isory Circular (Ae) 150/5300-13A, Airport Design. This is a repeat item. "Cat/r ans improves mobility across California " Mr. Eric Peterson January 23 , 2014 Page 2 3. Brush located 175 feet east of the approach end of Runway 31 (please see enclosed Photograph 4) is an obstruction within the Runway Object Free Area (ROFA) and the FAR Part 77, Primary Surface and must be removed . The ROFA for your airport is 250 feet wide (125 feet either side of the runway centerline) and extends 240 feet beyond each end of the runway. The ROFA standards require clearing of above-ground objects protruding above the runway safety edge, except for frangible navigation aids that need to be located in th e ROFA because of their function. 4. An abandoned li g ht assembly/fixture located in the infield so uth east of Taxiway Bravo r (please see enclosed Photograph 5) is an obstruction within the ROFA and FAR Part 77, Primary Surface and must be removed. 5. An outdated nonstandard green informational sign located southeast of Taxiway Bravo (please see enclosed Photograph 6), is an obstruction within the ROF A and FAR Part 77 , Primary Surface and needs to be relocated outside the ROFA and Primary Surface IA W FAA AC 150 /5300 -13A, Airport Design. Additionally, all informational signs should have black inscriptions on ye llow backgrounds, and be retro-reflective and frang ible mounted as required by FAA AC 150/5340-18F, Standardsfor Airport Sign Systems. 6. Gopher holes in the RSA located on both sides of th e runway (please see enclosed Photograph 7) must be fill ed and compacted flush-to-grade , lAW FAA ACI50 /5300-13A , Airport Design. This is an ongoing project, and we strongly encourage a regular, diligent inspection and maintenance program in an effort to reduce a nd eliminate new and ex istin g potential hazards. 7. Nonstandard and confusing group s of surface markings are located n ear the nonmovement area boundary marking (please see enclosed Photograph 8). Ple ase determine and clarify the meaning of the se markings, particularly for pilots, a nd mark them lAW FAA AC 150/5340- lL , Standards for Airport Markings. 8. The nonmove ment area boundary marking and portions of parked aircraft wingtip s (please see enclosed Photograph 9) do not meet the set-back requirements IA W with the taxiway or taxilane centerline to fixed/moveable object criteria of FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Airport D esign . The taxiway or taxilane centerline to fixed/moveable object clearance criteria for your airport is 44.5 feet and 39.5 feet respectively. Consideration mu st be g iven to relocate parked aircraft so no portion of an aircraft wingtip penetrates/overhangs the protected area of the taxiway/tax ilane s. We recommend th e following items be performed to enhance operational safety and meet current State and FAA airport design standards: • A +8-foot-high levee containing a public-use pedestrian/bicycle pathway, loc ated 300 feet from the approach end of Runway 13 (please see enclosed Photograph 10), and a +6-foot high levee , located 250 feet from the approach end of Runway 31 penetrate the FAR Part "Ca.ltrans improves mobility across California" Mr. Eric Peterson January 23, 2014 Page 3 77,20:1 Approach Surface . We recommend a project to relocate the levees in order to establish clear 20: 1 Approach Surfaces. Additionally, it would be prudent to allow greater separation for pedestrian and bicyclist traffic. In order to do this, airport management must coordinate with the FAA to determine the feasibility of relocating the levee and acquiring the necessary land to ensure a clear Approach Surface to the runways. If the levee relocation and land acquisition are not feasible , a modification to the FAR Part 77 Approach Surfaces to establish a displaced threshold, must be approved by the FAA and appropriately identified on the Airport Layout Plan (ALP). • The wingtips of critical design aircraft on the parallel Taxiway Zulu penetrate the ROF A and the Runway Holding Position boundary marking (please see enclosed Photograph 11). Additionally, the ROFA (125 feet either side of the runway centerline) and Taxiway Safety Area (25 feet either side of the taxiway centerline) overlap. Projects to realign the parallel taxiway so that the TSA (25 feet either side of the taxiway centerline) and aircraft wingtips are located beyond the ROFA (125 feet either side of the runway centerline) would enhance operational safety, pro v ide a more uniform taxiway, and meet FAA design standards. • In variou s locations along Taxilane Golf, the Taxilane Object Free Area (44 .5 feet either . side of the taxi lane centerline) is penetrated by parked aircraft and hangers which could become obstructions to safe aircraft movement. Projects to reconfigure or realign Taxilane Golf would enhance operational safety, provide a more uniform taxilane, and meet FAA design standard s . • A 7-foot-tall white shed containing electrical controls for runway/taxiway lights and nearby air monitoring equipment (please see enclosed Photograph 12) located 50 feet from the edge of the FAR Part 77 Primary Surface should be relocated farther away from the runway and aircraft movement areas. Consideration shou ld be given to relocation of this equipment to alleviate this potential hazard should an aircraft undershoot, overshoot, or deviate from the runway/taxiway. • The pavement in a number of locations on the taxi lane s, tie downs , and parking ramp areas is failing, producing pot holes, pea gravel, severe alligator cracking and preventing standing water on the taxilanes from draining away. W e recomm end the airport coordinate with the FAA to identify needed project funding to establish an ongoing taxi lane and ramp area rehabilitation project. In addition, we recommend the airport establish an "Airport Pavement Management Program " in the near future , to assist in making cost-effective decisions about pavement man ageme nt and rehabi lit ation to areas that are currently in fair or poor condition . It is Caltrans' objective to ensure that airports meet all current applicable FAA minimum design safety standards and AC criteria, FAR, California Public Utility Code, section 21001 et seq., the California Code of Regulation Title 21 , sections 3525-3560, and all required conditions depicted in your State Airport Permit issued by Caltrans. All referenced publications in thi s letter, including many FAA ACs, may be found on our website at www.dot.ca.gov/aeronautics. "Caltrans improves mobility across California " Mr. Eric Peterson January 23, 2014 Page 4 We are pleased to support and assist you in enhancing safety and utility at your airport and look forward to continuing a cooperative relationship with the Pa lo Alto Airport of Santa Clara County . Plea se notifY us by February 24 , 2014, of your intended or completed action s concerning the items listed above and provide photographic evidence documenting the results. If you have question s or require assistance , please contact me at (916) 654 -5174 or via email at don .haug@ dot.ca.gov. Aviation Safety Officer Enclosures c : Andy Swanson, Airport Manager, Department of Public Works , City of Palo Alto Phillip Logan , FAA , SFO ADO "Ca.ltrans impro ves mobi lity ac ross Ca li fornia:' Mr. Eric Peterson January 23, 2014 Page 5 Concrete base exceeds three inches above grade. "Caltrans improves mobility across California" Mr. Eric Peterson January 23, 2014 Page 6 Ph t h 3 - I v , _,~ .~f L-~ ,'" • "" .... ~ •• ..,..~~'-< ... ""~~".' -,,,' .. ' ~~~, .... 'Itt, .... ,.".~ .. ; ::: ..... ljI Brush located in the ROFA and FAR Part 77 Primary Surface «Caltrans improues mobility across California" Mr. Eric Peterson January 23 , 2014 Page 7 Photogra h 5 An abandoned light assembly/fixture located in the ROF A Nonstandard informational sign located in the ROF A and FAR Part 77 Primary Surface. "Calt r an s impro ves mobility ac ross Californ ia " Mr. Eric Peterson January 23, 2014 Page 8 Photograph 7 Numerous golfer holes in the RSA Nonstandard confusing groups of markings "Caltrans improves mobility a cross Californ ia " Mr. Eric Peterson January 23, 2014 Page 9 Nonmovement area boundary marking "Caltrans improves mobility across California» Mr. Eric Peterson January 23,2014 Page 10 11 1>ll\..l<1U wing tips penetrate runway protected areas. Electrical shed and monitoring equipment located near runway/taxiway. "Caltrans improves mobility across California» PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF PO Box 10250 PALO Palo Alto, CA 94303 ALTO 650.329.2151 March 7, 2014 Michael Murdter, Director County of Santa Clara Roads and Airports Department 101 Skyport Drive San Jose, CA 95110 RE: County's February 13, 2014 Comments to Draft Agreement Dear Mr. Murdter: The City of Palo Alto (the "City") acknowledges receipt of the County of Santa Clara's (the "County") initial comments, dated February 13, 2014, concerning the draft Termination, Assignment and Assumption Agreement (the "Draft Agreement") that pertains to the transfer of rights and obligations regarding the Palo Alto Airport. The purpose of this letter is to respond to the County's several comments in advance of our next meeting, scheduled for Tuesday, March 11, 2014, at 2:00 PM. The City hopes this written exchange will clarify our respective positions in order that we may move forward expeditiously on finalizing the Draft Agreement and accomplishing an orderly transfer of the management and control of the Palo Alto Airport (the "Airport"). Transaction Structure The County expressed concerned with the number of agreements and the parties to each agreement. The City is prepared to revise the Draft Agreement by creating two agreements. The City agrees that the one agreement, to be signed by the City, the County and the FAA, would concern the transfer of the Grant Assurances, recognition by the FAA of the City's role as the airport sponsor, and release of the County from the Grant Assurance obligations. The other agreement, to be signed by the City and the County, would concern the termination of the Airport ground lease (the "Lease"), the assignment of existing FBO leases, subleases and related contracts to the City, the disposition of the County's personal property used in connection with the Airport's operations, and other matters of mutual interest concerning the transfer. The City initially hoped the Draft Agreement's covenants, terms and conditions could be placed in a single agreement, for ease of use and implementation, though the transfer has numerous facets, only some of which concern the FAA. Once we have agreement on the other items listed in the County's comments, the City will begin work immediately on separating the respective covenants, terms and conditions and transferring them to two agreements. CityOfPaloAlto.org Printed with soy -based nks on 100% recycled paper processed without chlorine. Michael Murdter, Director March 7, 2014 Page 2 Baylands Levee Agreements The County has indicated it presently is working to address the findings and recommendations of the 2013 Palo Alto Airport Levee Inspection Report, attached, prepared by the Santa Clara Valley Water District (the "Water District") and dated January 30, 2014. While the City appreciates the County's expression of interest and intention to complete the required levee maintenance and repair work prior to the effective date of transfer, the City is most concerned about the timing of the County's work on the levee. The County is aware that the early termination of the Lease has been a longstanding m utual goal of ours. The City does not wish to delay the transfer on account of the levee work, in particular, in light of the Water District's observation that the deficiencies were identified in prior inspections, yet those deficiencies still have not been addressed by the County. The City would like to discuss at our March 11 meeting how we can achieve or create some certainty around the schedule and completion of the County's work on the levee. At a minimum, the City requests that the County provides the City with a current report regarding its levee work plan and schedule as soon as possible, and also provide the City with future updates before or as soon as they are made publicly available. The City is very interested to know if the County has developed or adopted additional ideas, approaches or plans to ensure the levee work is completed without causing delay, either in the timing of the transfer or exposing the City to the financial risk of having to assume the County's obligation under the 1979 Levee Agreement (to perform the required correction of previously - identified deficiencies). Maintenance and Repairs of Pavement The County has objected to the provision of the Draft Agreement that requires the County to return the Airport runway, taxiways and apron to good condition or transfer funds to the City in order for the City to do so. It is apparent that the pavements are not presently in good condition. In the latest inspection performed by the California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics ("CalTrans"), dated January 23, 2014, attached, CalTrans found, "The pavement in a number of locations on the taxilanes, tie downs, and parking ramp areas is failing, producing pot holes, pea gravel, severe alligator cracking and preventing standing water on the taxilanes from draining away." Though the County asserts it currently is in compliance with the Lease, the City calls to the County's attention the requirements of Section 14(a) of the Lease, which requires the County to "assure that the capital improvements installed by the County are in reasonably good condition, and at the expiration of the term, the County shall quit and surrender the premises and the capital improvements in as good state and condition as reasonable use and wear thereof will permit." The County is undoubtedly aware that the ASTM Pavement Condition Index is the industry standard for measuring pavement condition. The Draft Agreement reflects the requirement of the Lease to surrender the Airport in "good" condition; it has construed this Lease condition as equivalent to a PCI value (85 or higher). The City also notes that the County is obligated under Grant Assurance 11, to implement an effective pavement maintenance -management program, and under Grant Assurance 19, to suitably operate and maintain the Airport. While the Grant Assurance obligations generally are a matter between the County, as the current airport sponsor, and the FAA, the City notes that, as Section 13 of the Lease requires, the County "shall conduct the .. airport facilities in conformity with all rules, regulations and standards prescribed by the [FAA]". Stated simply, the City expects to receive the Airport in good condition, without the onus placed on the City to assume the financial responsibility for deferred maintenance that should have been routinely 140307 dm 00710356 Michael Murdter, Director March 7, 2014 Page 3 addressed over the past several years by the County. The City would be pleased to discuss alternate mechanisms to ensure that this work will be accomplished in a timely manner. Environmental Remediation The County has objected to the requirement of the Draft Agreement concerning environmental conditions on and under the Airport. Although the City acknowledges the County's Roads and Airports Department is in receipt of a "no further action" letter from the County's Department of Environmental Health ("DEH"), dated January 31, 2014, attached, the City does not believe or acknowledge that the DEH letter resolves all environmental issues. Thus, the City believes and maintains the requirement to secure environmental insurance is reasonable and appropriate under the circumstances. Section 5(b) of the Lease provides, the County "shall have full power, authority and responsibility in regard to the operation, management, and maintenance of the airport as though it were the sole owner thereof." By law, this language (indeed, the overall structure of the Lease) imposes upon the County the responsibility for the environmental condition of the Airport property. The City believes and maintains the "no further action" DEH letter does not conclusively resolve the matter for several reasons. Firstly, the DEH letter acknowledges the presence of hazardous substances and concludes, "Residual contamination in soil and groundwater remains at the site that could pose an unacceptable risk under certain site development activities such as site grading, excavation, or the installation of water wells." The possibility of new site development is not merely theoretical; the City expects new site development will occur on one or both of the current FBO leasehold sites in the years immediately following the Airport's transfer. Although the City intends to abide by site management requirements and conduct any necessary mitigation measures specified in the "no further action" letter, additional steps to sample, assess, and mitigate residual contamination during development will increase costs. The City will bear these costs, directly or indirectly, through the FBO leases. Secondly, the DEH letter also is predicated on a Phase 11 Environmental Site Assessment, prepared by the County's environmental consultant in August 2011. The DEH letter states explicitly that "any additional or previously unidentified contamination at this site might require further investigation or cleanup." This language clarifies that it is not reasonable to eliminate this possibility of additional remediation work, in particular, at a site subject to decades -long airport use. Stated simply, the City does not agree that the "no further action" letter unconditionally resolves the City's ongoing concerns regarding the environmental condition of the Airport property. Indeed, as a practical matter, the environmental insurance policy and indemnity proposed in the Draft Agreement are the appropriate mechanisms to address the potential liability and cost to the City implicated by the residual and unidentified contamination acknowledged in the DEH letter. The City expects that any environmental insurance policy will cover third party liability and cleanup costs associated with unidentified contamination. However, a policy is likely to exclude coverage for known residual contamination, at least to the extent costs or liability is triggered by development activities. Therefore, an insurance policy alone may not be sufficient to address the City's exposure. A separate indemnity from the County is essential and necessary to fully address its responsibilities under the Lease. 140307 dm 00710356 Michael Murdter, Director March 7, 2014 Page 4 Thirdly, with respect to the FBO leases, the County has been administering those contracts and is in a better position to assess the extent to which the leases and/or any subleases would provide sufficient protection to the City, concerning the environmental conditions on and under the leasehold premises. Unless and until the City is satisfied that the FBOs would be liable under most or all circumstances, the City will continue to expect the County to assume full responsibility for any adverse environmental conditions at the Airport consistent the terms and conditions of the Lease. Lease Permit with the California State Lands Commission The County has expressed its interest in terminating the California State Lands Commission ("CLC") lease and having the City enter into a new lease with the CLC. In that regard, the City intends to obtain good title to the Airport in order to secure the FAA's recognition that the City can assume the role of airport sponsor. The City is prepared to discuss whether and how to document our mutual commitment to the termination of the CLC/County lease and the execution of a new CLC/City lease. As with the items discussed above, the process and timing of these actions are critically important due to their potential effects on the schedule for the transfer of management and control of the Airport. As a general matter, the City is interested in a smooth transition of management responsibility and operational control over the Airport. As well, the City is interested in having the County resolve as many of the 'open items' as soon as possible and well prior to the proposed effective date of the transfer. The City is committed to working with the County to conclude this transition process in a comprehensive and expeditious manner. However, the City does not believe that the transfer can be accomplished, as the "clean break" that is implied or suggested in the County's comments, in particular, in light of the environmental condition of the Airport property. The City trusts that this letter better clarifies and articulates the City's position reflected in the Draft Agreement and on the key points presented in the County's comments. City staff and counsel look forward to the discussion of these items at our March 11, 2014 meeting and to the continued cooperation on the Airport transfer in the ensuing months. Sincerely, J. Michael Sartor Director of Public Works Attachments Copy: Jeffrey Smith, County Executive Carl Honaker, Director of Airports Eric Peterson, Assistant Director of Airports Ray Ruiz, Deputy County Counsel James Keene, City Manager Andy Swanson, Airport Manager Molly Stump, City Attorney Grant Kolling, Senior Assistant City Attorney 140307 dm 00710356 ISO 9001:2000 FS 77212 Sonia doravalley Water DisbidO 2013 Palo Alto Airport Levee Inspection Report January 2014 Created and Compiled By: Ray Bramer Rebecca Wolff Under The Direction of: Chris Elias ISO 14001 EMS 77213 SLATE OF CAL ORMA—CALIFORNIA STATE TRANSPORTATION AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS — M.S. # 40 1120 N STREET, SUITE 3300 P_ O. BOX 942874 SACRAMENTO, CA 94274-0001 PHONE (916) 654-4959 FAX (916) 653-9531 TTY 711 www_dot.ca.gov January 23, 2014 Mr. Eric Peterson, Assistant Director Department of Airports County of Santa Clara 2500 Cunningham Avenue San Jose, CA 95148-1001 Dear Mr. Peterson: EDMUND G. BROWN IR. Governor Flex your power! Be energy efficient! The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Division of Aeronautics, conducted a State permit compliance inspection and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Airport Master Record (5010) update at Palo Alto Airport of Santa Clara County (FAA Site No. 02022.*A) on January 14, 2014. We appreciate the assistance and cooperation provided during the inspection. The updated information will be entered into our records. Our inspection revealed the following items, which we bring to your attention: 1. Numerous trees on the west side of the airport, located on the Palo Alto Golf Course, have been allowed to grow to a height that exceeds the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77, 7:1 Transitional Surface. These trees were detailed in prior inspections dated July 30, 2009, and January 19, 2012, along with a request to respond with a plan to address and correct this safety issue. However, we have failed to receive a response and to date substantial penetrations of the Transitional Surface continue to be an obstruction hazard. Caltrans understands the pending transfer of day-to-day management from the County of Santa Clara to the City of Palo Alto in the near future could further complicate corrective actions. However, Caltrans must receive a definitive plan leading to tangible progress within 90 days of receipt of this letter, to address and maintain obstruction -free FAR Part 77 imaginary surfaces to the airport to preserve the public use of the airport and continue to operate at night. Failure to comply may lead to initiation of action to suspend night operations. 2. Numerous concrete bases (supporting Precision Approach Path Indicators, Runway End Identifying Lights, Runway/Taxiway lights, Levee obstruction lights, and Runway/Taxiway guidance signs) in the Runway Safety Area (RSA), Taxiway Safety Area (TSA), and FAR Part 77, Primary Surface rise above their surrounding soil surfaces more than three inches (please see enclosed Photographs 1, 2, and 3). These concrete pads present hard -stop obstructions to an aircraft during an excursion from the runway or taxiway and must be lowered, or additional soil must be furnished and compacted flush to the pad edges, in accordance with (IAW) FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5300-13A, Airport Design. This is a repeat item. "Caltrans improves mobility across California" County of Santa Clara Department of Environmental Health 1555 Berger Drive, Suite 300 San Jose, California 95112-2716 (408) 918-3400 www.EHinfo.org January 31, 2014 Mr. Chris Ellsbury County of Santa Clara Roads and Airports Department 1505 Schallenberger Road San Jose, California 95131 (chris. e llsbury@rda. sccgov. org) Ms. Patricia Roy PA Fuel Service Tank Farm 1901 Embarcadero Road Palo Alto, California 94303 SCCo Case No. 05S2W31H02s APN <008-06-001> Mr. Andrew Swanson Public Works City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, California 94301 (andrew. swanson@cityofpaloalto.org) Rossi Aircraft Inc. 1903 Embarcardero Road Palo Alto, California 94303 Subject: Voluntary Cleanup Program Case Closure: Palo Alto Airport, 1901, 1903, 1925 Embarcadero Road, Palo Alto, California Ladies and Gentlemen: This letter confirms the completion of site investigation and remedial action activities for the release of waste formerly located at the above -described location. Thank you for your cooperation throughout this investigation. Your willingness and promptness in responding to our inquiries concerning the release of waste are greatly appreciated. Based on information in the above -referenced file, and with the provision that the information provided to this agency was accurate and representative of site conditions, this agency finds that the site investigation and remedial action carried out at the above -referenced site satisfies the cleanup goal requirements of the remedial action agreement between the responsible party and the Department of Environmental Health as outlined in Section 101480 of the Health and Safety Code, and that no further action related to the release of waste at the site is required. It should be noted that any additional or previously unidentified contamination at this site might require further investigation or cleanup. The data collected at the site and presented in the case closure summary, Section 3, indicates the following conditions were reported at the site at the time of closure: - Soil - 1,700 parts per million (ppm) Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) as Gasoline (TPHg), 160 ppm TPH as Diesel (TPHd), 4.1 ppm TPH as Aviation Gasoline (TPHav), Board of Supervisors: Mike Wasserman, Cindy Chavez, Dave Cortese, Ken Yeager, S. Joseph Simitian County Executive: Jeffrey V. Smith Palo Alto Airport January 31, 2014 Page 2 of 2 5,900 ppm TPH as Motor Oil (TPHmo), 149 ppm TPH as Kerosene (TPHk), 11 ppm Ethylbenzene, 35 ppm Xylenes, 0.72 ppm Methyl tert Butyl Ether (MtBE), 0.018 ppm DDE and 0.0075 ppm Alpha Chlordane. Groundwater — 3,750 parts per billion (ppb), TPHg, 0.213 ppb TPHd, 1,200 ppb TPHag, 3.9 ppb Benzene, 2.9 ppb Toluene, 26.6 ppb Ethylbenzene, 17.1 ppb Xylenes, 21 ppb MtBE, 43.3 ppb Tert Butyl Alcohol (TBA), 56.7 ppb Acetone, and 11.1 ppb Methyl Ethyl Ketone (MEK). Residual contamination in soil and groundwater remains at the site that could pose an unacceptable risk under certain site development activities such as site grading, excavation, or the installation of water wells. The County and the appropriate planning and building department shall be notified prior to any changes in land use, grading activities, excavation, and installation of water wells. This notification shall include a statement that residual contamination exists on the property and list all mitigation actions, if any, necessary to ensure compliance with this site management requirement. This notice is issued pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 101480 of the Health and Safety Code. Please contact our office if you have any questions regarding this matter. Sincerely, Jim Blamey Director Attachment: Case Closure Summary cc: Nathan King, Regional Water Quality Control Board (nking@waterboards.ca.gov) Mark Piros, Department of Toxic Substances Control (mpiros@dtsc.ca.gov) Jack Hardin, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (Jack.Hardin@stantec.com) Carl Honaker, County Airport Administration, County of Santa Clara, Roads and Airports Department (carl.honaker@rda.sccgov.org) Dennis Laduzinsky, Northgate Environmental Management, Inc. (dennis@ngem.com) Michael Murdter, Director, County of Santa Clara, Roads and Airports Department (Michael.Murdter@rda.sccgov.org) J. Michael Sartor, Director, Public Works Department, City of Palo Alto, P.O. Box 10250, Palo Alto, CA 94303 File cc (without enclosure): City of Palo Alto, Building & Planning Department, 250 Hamilton Ave., Palo Alto, CA 94301 ACIP SUMMARY SHEET PALO ALTO AIRPORT (PAO) FAA/CALTRANS ACIP (2015-2020) SUMMARY FISCAL YEAR Project #PROJECT TOTAL COST FEDERAL SHARE STATE SHARE LOCAL SHARE 2015 15-1 Apron Rehabilitation - Design and Construction 1,000,000$ 900,000$ -$ 100,000$ 1,000,000$ 900,000$ -$ 100,000$ 2016 16-1 Airport Master Plan 550,000$ 495,000$ -$ 55,000$ 550,000$ 495,000$ -$ 55,000$ 17-1 Apron Reconstruction - Preliminary Design 400,000$ 360,000$ -$ 40,000$ 17-2 Airfield Electrical Improvements - Design 100,000$ 90,000$ -$ 10,000$ 500,000$ 450,000$ -$ 50,000$ 2018 18-1 Apron Reconstruction, Phase 1 - Final Design 175,000$ 157,500$ -$ 17,500$ 18-2 Airfield Electrical Improvements - Construction 1,000,000$ 900,000$ -$ 100,000$ 1,175,000$ 1,057,500$ -$ $117,500 2019 19-1 Apron Reconstruction, Phase 1 - Construction 5,000,000$ 4,500,000$ -$ 500,000$ 19-2 Apron Reconstruction, Phase 2 - Final Design 175,000$ 157,500$ -$ 17,500$ 5,175,000$ 4,657,500$ -$ 517,500$ 20-1 Apron Reconstruction, Phase 2 - Construction 5,000,000$ 4,500,000$ -$ 500,000$ 20-2 Apron Reconstruction, Phase 3 - Final Design 100,000$ 90,000$ -$ 10,000$ 5,100,000$ 4,590,000$ -$ 510,000$ Total 2017 Total 2018 Total 2019 2020 Total 2020 Prepared April 2014 Total 2015 Total 2016 2017 1/1/2014 1/1/2015 2/1 3/1 4/1 5/1 6/1 7/1 8/1 9/1 10/1 11/1 12/1 5/28 Federal Aviation Administration Review and Approval Process Palo Alto Airport Transfer Timeline 2/24 State Lands Commission Quitclaim Deed sent to County 5/22 City Budget Hearing 8/4 Transfer Agreement to Council 8/5 Transfer Agreement to Board of Supervisors 4/29 Santa Clara County Quitclaim to Board of Supervisors 12/3 120-day County Operational Staff