The URL can be used to link to this page

Hazards and Hazardous MaterialsLSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS This section describes hazards and hazardous materials' issues related to development of the 176 -acre project site that could potentially pose a significant threat to human health or the environment. The setting section describes existing conditions at the project site and vicinity, as well as the pertinent federal, State, and local laws and regulations related to hazards and hazardous materials. The impacts and mitigation measures section identifies the criteria of significance and potential impacts and mitigation measures related to hazards and hazardous materials for the project. 1. Setting This section describes the current use and storage of hazardous materials at the project site and adjacent properties, and summarizes the regulatory framework for hazardous materials and hazardous waste; lead, asbestos, and other hazardous building materials; and applicable worker health and safety requirements. a. Hazardous Conditions on the Project Site. The condition of soil, soil gas, and groundwater that may have been affected by hazardous materials at the project site and vicinity has been evaluated based on a review of regulatory databases and previous environmental investigations performed at and near the project site. Land uses associated with hazardous materials on the project site have included manufacture of computer, video, and microprocessor equipment; and computer software research, development, and sales. Prior to the development of commercial and industrial land uses, the area was used for agricul- ture. Land adjacent to or near the project site has been used for semiconductor manufacturing and automobile fueling stations. (1) Agricultural Pesticides. The project site was used for agriculture as early as the 1850s. Between about 1968 and 1985, the site was redeveloped in phases for commercial and industrial purposes. Prior to 1950, inorganic pesticides that contained elevated concentrations of heavy metals, such as arsenic, were commonly used in California agriculture. After 1950, organochlorine pesticides (e.g., DDT and chlordane) were commonly used in California agriculture until about the mid-1970s. Residues from inorganic and organochlorine pesticides used in the past have the potential to persist for many decades in shallow soils and can affect human health or the environment Pesticides were analyzed in more than 25 soil samples taken from four locations within the project site in 2006 (10435 North Tantau Avenue, 10400 Ridgeview Court, 10450 Ridgeview Court, and 19310-19320 Pruneridge Avenue) and the pesticides were either not detected or were detected at low concentrations well below Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Environmental Screening Levels (ESLs) for commercial land uses. 1 The California Health and Safety Code defines a hazardous material as "... any material that, because of its quan- tity, concentration, or physical or chemical characteristics, poses a significant present or potential hazard to human health and safety, or to the environment. Hazardous materials include, but are not limited to, hazardous substances, hazardous waste, radioactive materials, and any material which a handler or the administering agency has a reasonable basis for believing that it would be injurious to the health and safety of persons or harmful to the environment if released into the workplace or the environment." (Health and Safety Code, Chapter 6.95,Section 25501). 2 California Department of Toxic Substances Control, 2008. Interim Guidance for Sampling Agricultural Properties (Third Revision). August 7. P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5h-Hazards.doc (06/03/13) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 321 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS (2) Hazardous Materials Release Sites. The provisions of Government Code 65962.5 require the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DISC), the State Water Resources Control Board, the California Department of Health Services, and the California Integrated Waste Manage- ment Board to submit information pertaining to sites associated with solid waste disposal, hazardous waste disposal, and/or hazardous materials releases. A review of regulatory databases, including listed hazardous material release sites compiled pursuant to Government Code 65962.5 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR), identified hazardous materials releases at four facilities within the project site and ten facilities within'/4-mile of the project site.' A summary of the sites listed on regulatory databases on-site and within'/4-quarter mile of the project site and the status of those sites are presented in Table V.H-1, and the facilities are shown in Figure V.H-1. A discussion of each of the sites is provided, below, for parcels located on- and off-site. Hazardous Materials Release Sites Within the Project Site. Numerous investigations regard- ing hazardous materials have been performed for individual parcels within the project site since about 2006. Figure V.H-2 shows the approximate aerial extent of each of the on-site investigations (Inves- tigation Areas 1 through 13). One investigation was conducted for the entire area north of Pruneridge Avenue, while eight separate investigations were conducted for portions of the project site south of Pruneridge Avenue and four separate investigations were performed for the areas east of Tantau Avenue. A summary of the findings of each of the investigations follows. Areas North ofPruneridge Avenue. Phase I and Phase II investigations were completed for parcels located north of Pruneridge Avenue in 2010 and again in 2011 (see Figure V.H-2).4,5,6'' North of Pruneridge Avenue, there are three specific hazardous waste facilities located at 10900 and 11000 North Wolfe Road and 19111 Pruneridge Avenue. 3 Environmental Data Resources Inc., 2011. The EDR Radius Map Report with GeoCheck, fipple Campus 2, 10900 North Wolfe Road, Cupertino, California, 95014, Inquiry Number 3176121.1 s. September 29. 4 Stantec Consulting Corporation, 2010. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Hewlett-Packard Company Cupertino, North Campus, Cupertino, California, Buildings 42 through 48. September 28. 5 Erler & Kalinowski, Inc., 2011a. Site Investigation Report, 10900 North Wolfe Road, Cupertino, California, Buildings 42 through 48. January 20. 6 Stantec Consulting Corporation, 2011a. Sub -Surface Investigations, Hewlett-Packard Company, Cupertino North Campus, Buildings 42 through 48. April 25. 7 Stantec Consulting Corporation, 201 lb. Additional Sub -Surface Investigation, Hewlett-Packard Company, Cupertino North Campus, Buildings 42 through 48. April 28. P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5h-Hazards.doc (06/03/13) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 322 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JUNE 2013 APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Table V.H-1: Properties on Reeulatory Databases of Hazardous Materials Releases Within '/4 -Mile of the Proiect Site Table notes included on nextpage. P:\COC1101 Apple 2 CampusTRODUCTS/DEIR/Public�5h-I l zards.doc (06/03/13) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 323 Direction and Site Potential or Confirmed Approximate Distance Regulatory Agency ID Name & Location Listing Contaminant of Concern from Pro'ect Site Oversi ht Status 1 Hewlett- Packard Company Federal CERCLIS NFRAP, RCRA 14 USTs with waste solvent, On-site Closure with regard to 10900 Wolfe Road, Cupertino SQG, FINDS, EMI, SWEEPS UST, waste acid, diesel, unleaded VOC releaseb CORTESE, HIST CORTESE gasoline, unknown waste SLIC SLIC - PCE, TCE, freon SLIC case closed 2 Hewlett Packard Manzanita Caf6/ LUST Diesel On-site Completed, case closed Strocal Inc. HAZNET, HIST CORTESE Unspecified organic liquids and None 19111 Pruneridge Avenue, Cupertino solids, no violations reported 3 Ampex Cupertino Facility HAZNET,CERCLIS, FINDS, PCE, TCE, freon, toluene, On-site Inactive. RWQCB Site 10435 N. Tantau Avenue, Cupertino ENVIROSTOR xylenes Cleanup Requirements Order rescinded in 1993. 4 Vallco Building 80 ENVIROSTOR Not reported On-site RWQCB issued closure 10432 N. Tantau Avenue, Cupertino letter in 1994. 5 Siemens Components, Inc. SLIC, EMI, ENVIROSTOR TCA, TCE, freon East, Adjacent Open - remediation Opto Electronics 19000 Homestead Road, Cupertino 6 Intersil Inc./Siemens Components Federal CERCLIS, NPL, RCRA-SQG, PCE, TCE, TCA, DCE, TCB, East, Adjacent Open - remediation 10900 N. Tantau Avenue, Cupertino US Eng Controls, ROD, FINDS, Hist TOMB, toluene, xylenes, butyl Cal -Sites, NPDES, WDS, Cortese, acetate, methanol SLIC, HAZNET, ENVIROSTOR, CA BOND EXP PLAN 7 Siemens (SMI Holding LLC) SLIC Not reported East, Adjacent Active - remedial action 10950 N. Tantau Avenue, Cupertino underway 8 American Microsystems RCRA-SQG, FINDS, NPDES, SLIC, PCE, TCE, TCA, DCB, freon, East, approximately Open - verification 3800 Homestead Road, Santa Clara RESPONSE, EMI, ENVIROSTOR xylenes 1,200 feet monitoring 9 Former Tandem/Apple GEOTRACKER PCE South, approximately Completed, case closed 19333 Vallco Parkway, Cupertino 1,200 feet 10 Cupertino Village Cleaners VCP, ENVIROSTOR PCE Adjacent to NNW Active 10989 North Wolfe Road, Cupertino 11 Vallco Village Cleaners RCRA-SQG, FINDS Not reported Adjacent to NNW No violations 10989 North Wolfe Road, Cupertino 12 Shell/Vallco Shell HIST CORTESE, LUST, HIST UST Leaded and unleaded gasoline, Adjacent to NNW Completed, case closed 11111 Wolfe Road, Cupertino waste oil 13 Mobil/BP TOSCO/Z&A HIST CORTESE, LUST, HIST UST, Gasoline, unspecified oil- Adjacent to NNW Completed, case closed MOBIL/TOSCO Northwest Co RCRA-SQG, FINDS containing waste 1698 Wolfe Road, Sunnyvale 14 Arco/ BP West Coast Products LUST, UST, CA FID UST, Leaded and unleaded gasoline, Adjacent to NNW Completed, case closed LLC/Paul's Arco HAZNET, HIST UST, SWEEPS waste oil 1697 Wolfe Road, Sunnyvale UST, HIST CORTESE Table notes included on nextpage. P:\COC1101 Apple 2 CampusTRODUCTS/DEIR/Public�5h-I l zards.doc (06/03/13) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 323 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2013 V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Notes: a Sites listed by EDR, 2011 and State Water Resources Control Board, 2011 n Erler & Kalinowski, 2011. Chemical Abbreviations: DCE = dichloroethene TCE= trichloroethylene TCA = trichloroethane TCB = trichlorobenzene PCE = tetrachloroethene TCMB = trichlorofluoromethane Database Listing Explanation: CA BOND EXP. PLAN = sites subject to a site-specific expenditure plan for appropriation ofthe Hazardous Substance Cleanup Bond Act funds. CERCLIS = Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System (Superfund database) contains data on potentially hazardous waste sites that have been reported to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). CERC-NFRAP = No Further Remedial Action Planned sites; these sites have been archived from the CERCLIS inventory. Cortese = a list of sites designated by the State Water Resources Control Board (LUST), the Integrated Waste Board (SWF/LS), and the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) (Cal -Sites). This listing is no longer updated by the State agencies. ENVIROSTOR = a DTSC list of sites that have known contamination or sites for which there may be reasons to investigate further. EMI = California Air Resources Board list of pollutant emissions data. FINDS = EPA list of Facility Index System/Facility Registry System sites. GEOTRACKER = State Water Resources Control Board environmental database of leaking underground storage tanks and non -UST cleanup sites. HAZNET = California EPA list of sites with hazardous waste manifests. HIST Cal -Sites = DTSC database containing both known and potential hazardous substances sites. This database is no longer updated by the State agency. It has been replaced by ENVIROSTOR. HIST CORTESE = a listing of sites designated by the State Water Resources Control Board, the Integrated Waste Board, and the DTSC. This listing is no longer updated by the State agencies. HIST UST = a database of historical underground storage tanks (USTs). LUST = State database of leaking petroleum underground storage tank sites. NPDES = State Water Resources Control database of sites with NPDES permits, including stormwater. NPL= EPA National Priorities List (Superfund), a subset ofthe CERCLIS list. RCRA SQG - EPA list of small quantity hazardous waste generators that generate between 100 to 1,000 kilograms of hazardous waste per month. RESPONSE = Identifies confirmed release sites where DTSC is involved in remediation, either in a lead or oversight capacity. These confirmed release sites are generally high-priority with a high potential risk. ROD = EPA list of NPL (Superfund) sites with documentation of a permanent remedy, or Record of Decision. SLIC = a database of sites under the State Water Resources Control Board's Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanup program. SWEEPS UST = State Water Resources Control Board list of sites with underground storage tanks in the early 1990's. This list is no longer updated. US Eng Controls = an EDR listing of sites with federal institutional environmental controls. VCP = cleanup of low -threat sites under the DTSC's Voluntary Cleanup Program. WDS = State Water Resources Control Board list of site that have been issued waste discharge requirements. P:\COC1101 Apple 2 CampusTRODUCTS/DEIR/Public�5h-I l zards.doc (06/03/13) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 324 L S A""""""" n Property on Regulatory Database FIGURE V. H-1 III „ Apple Campus 2 Project Site O under Active Regulatory Oversight National Priority List Site Boundary Identified by EDR (EDR, 2011) N IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Approximate one-quarter mile radius from project boundary 0 500 1000O Property on Regulatory Database FEET with Record of Hazardous Materials Release SOURCES: GOOGLE EARTH, JUNE 2011, LSAASSOCIATES, INC., NOVEMBER 2011. I:ACOCII01 Apple Campus 21,figures\Fig VHI.ai (6/3/13) Apple Campus 2 Project EIR Properties on Regulatory Databases of Hazardous Materials Releases within 1/4 -Mile L S A FIGURE V.H-2 Apple Campus 2 Project Site Properties within Project Area that have had a Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessment 0 300 600 FEET SOURCE: GOOGLE EARTH, JUNE 2011, LSAASSOCIATES, INC., NOVEMBER 2011. I:ACOCII01 Apple Campus 21,figures\Fig VH2.ai (6/3/13) Apple Campus 2 Project EIR Properties within Project Site with Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessments LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JUNE 2015 APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 10900 Wolfe Road and 11000 North Wolfe Road, Cupertino (Building 42 and Former Building 41). EDR reported 10900 Wolfe Road on multiple environmental lists, including the Superfand (CERCLIS) database "no further remedial action planned" list. This site is listed as Site 1 on Figure V.H-1 and Table V.H-1. Hewlett-Packard is listed as the permittee for 14 underground storage tanks (USTs) previously located at 10900 Wolfe Road and reported to contain diesel fuel, regular unleaded gasoline, and "unreported" substances. The site was listed as a large -quantity generator of hazardous waste in 1990, and a small -quantity generator of hazardous waste in 1996. A release of PCE, TCE, and Freon was reported at an unlisted date. Subsurface investiga- tions at this site began in 1983, and indicated soil vapor and groundwater in the vicinity of former USTs had been affected by volatile organic compounds (VOCs), including TCE, PCE, and Freon 113. Remedial action, including soil vapor extraction and groundwater monitoring, resulted in issuance of a "no further action letter" (indicating case closure) with regard to the VOC release by the RWQCB in 2001.8°9 Notwithstanding the "no further action" determination/closure referenced above, a Phase I investigation completed in 2010 identified Building 42 and the formerly adjacent Building 41 as an area of potential concern due to former property use for semiconductor manufac- turing in the 1970s and 1980s.1ONo significant impacts were identified in soil or ground- water in the vicinity of former known or suspected petroleum USTs based on sampling performed in 2010.11 A Phase II investigation completed in 2011 at Building 42 identified PCE and TCE in groundwater in a limited number of samples and locations. TCE and total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) as diesel in soil, and PCE and TCE in soil vapor were at concentrations above their respective ESLs.12,13 Recommendations provided in the Phase II report included preparation of a soil management plan, performance of a vapor intrusion assessment for Building 42 if it is redeveloped with an occupied building, and undertaking proper abandonment of irrigation wells. Implementation of these recommendations would be required by Mitigation Measures HAZ-2b and HAZ-2c, below. • 19111 Pruneridge Avenue, Cupertino. EDR identified this site (Site 2 on Figure V.H-1 and Table V.H-1) on a number of databases. A leaking 5,000 -gallon UST containing TPH as diesel was listed as having been located at the site. The case was closed by the Santa Clara County Local Oversight Agency (LOP) and the RWQCB in 1996 after removal of 180 cubic yards of backfill material and post-removal soil sampling .14 8 Erler & Kalinowski, Inc., 201 la, op. cit. 9 California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region, 2001. Order No 01-114: Rescission of Site Cleanup Requirements Order No 96-085 for the Property at 10900 North Wolfe Road, Cupertino, Santa. Clara County. 25 October. 10 Stantec Consulting Corporation, 2010, op. cit. 11 Erler & Kalinowski, Inc., 201 la, op. cit. 12 Stantec Consulting Corporation, 201 lb, op. cit. 13 Erler & Kalinowski, Inc., 201 la, op. cit. 14 Stantec Consulting Corporation, 2010, op. cit. P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5h-Hazards.doc (06/03/13) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 327 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JUNE 2015 APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS In 2003, Strocal, Inc. manifested off-site disposal of unspecified organic liquids and solids, with no violations listed. No further information was available from EDR, and the site was not included on the Geotracker database.15 Areas South ofPruneridge Avenue. Nine areas south ofPruneridge Avenue were the subject of Phase I and Phase II investigations for hazardous materials in 2006 (see Figure V.H-2). 10435 North Tantau Avenue, Cupertino. This site was occupied by Ampex Corporation (Ampex) from approximately 1974 through 1986 and was used for the manufacture of computer and video -related equipment and cameras (Site 3 on Figure V.H-1 and Table V.H-1 and Area 9 on Figure V.H-2). The site is listed on the State of California HAZNET database. This listing may be due to the removal and off-site disposal of 650 gallons of ethylene glycol by Hewlett-Packard in 2002 following a spill. The property is also listed on other databases, including the Superfand database, due to soil and groundwater investiga- tions and soil remedial actions conducted on the property between 1986 and 1992.16 PCE, TCE, and Freon, in addition to other VOCs, were identified in the soil in 1986, and some soil was subsequently remediated in 1987 and 1988. The maximum detected concen- trations of PCE and TCE remaining in soil outside of the former excavation areas at that time were below ESLs .17 There is some possibility that residual PCE and TCE may remain in soil beneath the location of the former maintenance shed, as excavation below the shed was determined to be infeasible in the 1980s. Groundwater monitoring was conducted between 1988 and 1992 under RWQCB Site Cleanup Requirements Order 88-042. The Order was rescinded in 1993, and the RWQCB indicated that all requirements of the Order had been "complied with" and that "no further pollution is known or suspected to be at the site." Soil, groundwater, and sub -slab soil vapor samples were collected and analyzed in 2006. PCE, Freon 113, toluene, and xylenes were detected in soil vapor samples, and PCE and TCE were detected in soil samples, all at concentrations below current commercial ESLs. Freon was also detected in the groundwater sample at a concentration that was not expected to pose a health risk concern for future commercial site users.18 10400 and 10450 Ridgeview Court, Cupertino. This site (Area 4 on Figure V.H-2) was not listed on agency environmental databases. A Phase I and Phase II investigation was conducted in 2006. No VOCs were detected at concentrations above ESLs in sub -slab soil vapor samples, and VOCs, pesticides, and PCBs were not detected in any soil samples. TPH as diesel was detected in two shallow soil samples at concentrations below ESLs. Metal concentrations were either less than ESLs or within typical background concentra- 15 State Water Resources Control Board, 2011. Geotracker Environmental Database. Website: �zeotrackenwaterboards.ca.zov (accessed October 5, 2011). 16 Erler & Kalinowski. Inc., 2006a. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Subsurface Investigations Report, 10435 North Tantau Avenue, Cupertino, California. April 24. 17 California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region, 2008. Screening for Environmental Concerns at Sites with Contaminated Soil and Groundwater, Interim Final. November 2007 (as revised May 2008). 18 Erler & Kalinowski, Inc., 2006a, op. cit. P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5h-Hazards.doc (06/03/13) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 328 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JUNE 2015 APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS tions for the Bay Area. Chromium and cobalt concentrations, which were above ESLs, may reflect naturally -occurring concentrations in serpentinite-bearing fill soils.19 10480 and 10500 Ridgeview Court, Cupertino. This site (Area 6 on Figure V.H-2) was not listed on agency environmental databases. A Phase I and Phase II investigation was conducted in 2006. The property was historically used by several companies for the manufacture of microprocessors. Facility closures of these operations were performed in 1992 and 1999 under regulatory agency oversight. Several Phase II investigations were performed at the site in the 1980s and 1990s. The results of these prior investigations did not identify the presence of significant concentrations of chemicals of concern in soil, soil gas, or groundwater. In the most recent investigation performed in 2006, soil gas samples near one sanitary sewer lateral contained VOCs (i.e., PCE, ethylbenzene, xylenes, and toluene) at concentrations below ESLs. Soil and groundwater sample results for VOCs, semi -volatile organic compounds (SVOCs), and metals were below laboratory reporting limits with the exception of chromium in soil. Chromium was reported in shallow soil beneath the chemical storage rooms at concentrations above ESLs and above typical back- ground concentrations for the Bay Area. Below a depth of 5 feet, chromium concentrations in soil were within typical background concentrations. According to EKI, the presence of elevated chromium did not appear to be due to releases of chromium from the chemical storage rooms but were likely due to the presence of naturally occurring serpentinite in the fill soils.20 10501 North Tantau Avenue, Cupertino. This site (Area 8 on Figure V.H-2) was not listed on agency environmental databases. A Phase I and Phase II Investigation was conducted in 2006. The site was used for offices, administrative activities, and research and develop- ment. Sub -slab soil vapor samples were reported with PCE and TCE at maximum concen- trations below the ESLs. The source of these VOCs was not identified. VOCs and SVOCs were not detected in soil samples, with the exception of chlorobenzene and TPH as diesel at concentrations well below ESLs. Metals concentrations were within typical background concentrations for the Bay Area. Chromium and cobalt were above ESLs, but were likely due to the presence of naturally occurring serpentinite in the fill soils 2J 10555 Ridgeview Court, Cupertino. This site (Area 3 on Figure V.H-2) was not listed on agency environmental databases. A Phase I and Phase II investigation was conducted in 2006. The site was historically used by various technology companies for development, sales, and operation of high-tech security and business software products. Soil samples collected near diesel generators, storm drain inlets, chemical and waste storage sheds, and transformers were reported not to contain detectable concentrations of TPH and VOCs, and the sample collected near a transformer pad did not contain PCBs. Metals concentrations were within typical background concentrations for the Bay Area. Chromium and cobalt 19 Erler & Kalinowski, Inc., 2006b. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Subsurface Investigations Report, 10400 and 10450 Ridgeview Court, Cupertino, California. May 12. 20 Erler & Kalinowski, Inc., 2006d. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Subsurface Investigations Report, 10480 and 10500 Ridgeview Court, Cupertino, California. July 12. 21 Erler & Kalinowski, Inc., 2006e. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Subsurface Investigations Report, 10501 North Tantau Avenue, Cupertino, California. April 20. P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5h-Hazards.doc (06/03/13) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 329 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JUNE 2015 APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS were above ESLs, but were likely due to the presence of naturally occurring serpentinite in the fill soils.22 10600 Ridgewood Court, Cupertino. This site (Area 5 on Figure V.H-2) was not listed on agency environmental databases. A Phase I and Phase II investigation was conducted in 2006. The site was historically used for offices and administrative activities. Soil samples collected near a diesel generator, storm drain inlet, and transformers were reported not to contain detectable concentrations of TPH and VOCs. Soil samples collected near the transformer pads did not contain detectable concentrations of PCBs. Metals concentrations were below ESLs or within typical background concentrations for the Bay Area. Chromium and cobalt were above ESLs, but were likely due to the presence of naturally occurring serpentinite in the fill soils.23 19050 Pruneridge Avenue, Cupertino. This site (Area 7 on Figure V.H-2) was not listed on agency environmental databases. A Phase I and Phase II investigation was conducted in 2006. The site was historically used for offices and administrative activities. Soil samples collected near storm drain inlets and a transformer pad were reported not to contain detectable concentrations of TPH or VOCs, with the exception of freon in one sample at a concentration well below the ESL. Metal concentrations were either below ESLs or within typical background concentrations for the Bay Area. Chromium and cobalt were above ESLs, but were likely due to the presence of naturally occurring serpentinite in the fill soils. Grab groundwater samples were reported not to contain VOCs, SVOCs, or elevated metals, with the exception of trace concentrations of toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes in one sample .24 19310 and 19320 Pruneridge Avenue, Cupertino. This site (Area 2 on Figure V.H-2) was not listed on agency environmental databases. The site was historically used for light manufacturing of electronics. A 4,000 -gallon gasoline UST was removed from the property in 1988. Petroleum -impacted soil was excavated and disposed off-site. The tank site was closed by the Santa Clara County Fire Department, acting as local oversight agency as a Participating Agency in the Certified Unified Program. A Phase I and Phase II investigation was conducted in 2006. Sub -slab soil vapor samples were reported in one sample with a PCE concentration exceeding the ESL. VOCs, including PCE and TCE, were reported in several soil samples at concentrations below ESLs. These detections indicate a release of VOCs to soil; EKI recommended additional investigation in this area to try to identify the source. The results of any additional testing were not known or available as of June 2012. Grab groundwater samples did not contain VOCs and SVOCs at concentrations above ESLs. Residual TPH concentrations heavier than diesel were reported in several soil samples at low concentrations. EKI concluded that these concentrations did not indicate widespread significant TPH contamination. Molybdenum was reported in grab groundwater 22 Erler & Kalinowski, Inc., 2006f. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Subsurface Investigations Report, 10555 Ridgeview Court, Cupertino, California. April 26. 23 Erler & Kalinowski, Inc., 2006g. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Subsurface Investigations Report, 10600 Ridgeview Court, Cupertino, California. April 28. 24 Erler & Kalinowski, Inc., 2006h. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Subsurface Investigations Report, 19050 Pruneridge Avenue, Cupertino, California. June 8. P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5h-Hazards.doc (06/03/13) P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 330 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JUNE 2015 APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS samples at concentrations slightly above the ESL, which was attributed to naturally - occurring metals in suspended sediment as Areas East of North Tantau Avenue. Four areas east of North Tantau Avenue were the subject of Phase I and Phase II investigations for hazardous materials between 2007-2011 (see Figure V.H-2). 10670 and 10700-10710 North Tantau Avenue, Cupertino.) These addresses (Area 10 on Figure V.H-2) were not listed in agency environmental databases. A Phase I investigation and sub -slab soil gas sampling was reported in 2011. The 10700-10710 North Tantau Avenue building was used in the past by Intersil for assembly operations and by Tandem for photo -processing and reproduction. Alcohols and solvents were reportedly used at the property. Results of sub -slab soil gas samples did not identify the presence of VOCs above ESLs, with the exception of benzene in one sample. The Phase I ESA concluded that the subsurface did not appear to be significantly affected by VOCs. The 10670 North Tantau Avenue building was not used for industrial purposes in the past, and no potential environ- mental concerns were identified by the Phase I ESA. Concentrations of Freon, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes were reported at low concentrations in groundwater upgradient and downgradient of the sites. These concentrations were not expected to result in vapor intrusion concerns for future building occupants .26 10590-10596 and 10600 North Tantau Avenue, Cupertino. These addresses (Area 11 on Figure V.H-2) were not listed in agency environmental databases. A Phase I and subsurface investigation was reported in 2010. Past reported uses of the site buildings include machine shops, research and development laboratories, and a kidney dialysis clinic. Chemical use and storage included potassium hydroxide, acids, alcohols, diesel fuel, and potentially solvents. The Phase I investigation reported that there were no visible indications of spills or releases. Diesel fuel was not detected in soil samples collected near the emergency diesel generator. The sub -slab soil gas sample collected in the chemical storage area of the kidney dialysis clinic did not contain concentrations of VOCs above relevant ESLs. Groundwater in the site vicinity was reported with concentrations of Freon, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes below relevant ESLs .27 10400 and 10432 N. Tantau Avenue, Cupertino. In August 1989, the Vallco Building at this site (Site 4 on Figure V.H-1 and Table V.H-1 and Area 12 on Figure V.H-2) was identified as a potential chemical release site due to manufacturing activities, and was reported to be on the ENVIROSTOR list by EDR. Site screening was completed and further sampling was recommended by the DTSC Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program. The current site status is listed by EDR as "inactive needs evaluation." In the early 1990s a facility closure was performed that included removal of the acid neutralization system and associated sumps, as well as the performance of soil sampling for VOCs and metals. A groundwater investigation was performed at the site in 1993. In July 1994, the RWQCB issued a closure letter indicating that no further action related to the acid neutralization 25 Erler & Kalinowski, Inc., 2006c. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Subsurface Investigations Report, 19310 and 19320 Pruneridge Avenue, Cupertino, California. April 14. 26 Erler & Kalinowski, Inc., 201 lb. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Results of Sub -Slab Soil Gas Sampling, 10670 and 10700-10710 North Tantau Avenue, Cupertino, California. January 26. 27 Erler & Kalinowski, Inc., 2010. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Results of Subsurface Investigations at Property Located at 10590-10596 and 10600 North Tantau Avenue, Cupertino, California. November 3. P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5h-Hazards.doc (06/03/13) P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 331 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS system was required. Soil vapor samples collected in 2007 as part of a Phase I and subsur- face investigation indicated TCE, PCE, and Freon 113 were present in sub -slab soil vapor. TCE concentrations in sub -slab vapor were reported above ESLs, suggesting a potential concern for intrusion of TCE vapors into the building as This concern will be addressed with an additional soil vapor intrusion assessment and the Environmental Site Management Plan required by Mitigation Measures HAZ-2a and HAZ-2b. 10300 North Tantau Avenue, Cupertino. This site (Area 13 on Figure V.H-2) was not listed in agency environmental databases. A Phase I and subsurface investigation was reported in 2007. The southern building on the site was formerly used for research and development. Chemicals used included VOCs, acids and caustics, alcohols, paints, petroleum hydrocar- bons, and adhesives. No significant chemical use was reported in the northern building. The Phase I concludes that the source areas of these chemicals were not identified, and may be identified once the building is removed as part of future redevelopment activities. Sub -slab soil gas sampling conducted in 2007 reported Freon 113 and TCE below their respective ESLs. Groundwater sample results from one location reported Freon 113 at a concentra- tions below the ESL .29 b. Hazardous Materials Release Sites Adjacent to the Project Site. The following discussion describes potential hazardous materials releases from areas adjacent to the project site that could affect the project site. (1) 10900 N. Tantau Avenue, 19000 Homestead Road, and 10950 N. Tantau Avenue, Cupertino. Intersil Inc./Siemens is on the Superfund database and is an active National Priority List (NPL) site (Sites 5, 6, and 7 on Figure V.H-1 and Table V.H-1). The western extent of the NPL site, as identified by EDR, includes the northeast corner of the project site.30 However, VOCs were not detected in groundwater samples from two Intersil wells located on the northeastern boundary of the project site, indicating that significant migration of VOCs onto the project site has not occurred.31 In addition, the Fourth Five -Year Review Report prepared by the RWQCB for the Intersil/Siemens site shows that VOCs in the upper -most (A) groundwater zone are not migrating onto the project site. Groundwater affected by VOCs in the next deeper (B) groundwater zone, primarily TCE with concen- trations just above cleanup standards, extend from the Intersil Inc./Siemens site onto the extreme northeast corner of the project site .32 The portion of the project site above deeper (B) groundwater with VOCs is northeast of the proposed Main Building, in an area where structures are not proposed. Only the uppermost water bearing zone has the potential to produce a vapor intrusion risk because upward 28 Erler & Kalinowski, Inc., 2007a. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Subsurface Investigations Report, 10400 North Tantau Avenue, Cupertino, California. April 24. 29 Erler & Kalinowski, Inc., 2007b. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Subsurface Investigations Report, 10300 North Tantau Avenue, Cupertino, California. April 24. 30 Environmental Data Resources Inc., 2011, op. cit. 31 Erler & Kalinowski, Inc., 201 la, op. cit. 32 California Regional Water Quality Control Board, 2010. San Francisco Bay Region. Fourth Five -Year Review, Intersil Inc./Siemens Components Superfund Site, 10900 and 10950 North Tantau Road, Cupertino, Santa Clara County, California. September 30. P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5h-Hazards.doc (06/03/13) P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 332 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS chemical migration is blocked by shallower water bearing zones.33 Therefore, the potential for a soil vapor intrusion concern on the project site from the Intersil Inc./Siemens site is low. Groundwater is currently being remediated using groundwater extraction and treatment under over- sight by the RWQCB. Over 20 years of groundwater extraction has resulted in a decrease in the size of the contaminated plume. 14,11 (2) 3800 Homestead Road, Santa Clara. American Microsystems leased this site (Site 8 on Figure V.H-1 and Table V.H-1) from 1966 to 1988 and operated the facility as a semiconductor fabrication plant. The property is located approximately 1,200 feet east of the project site (adjacent to the Siemens facility, discussed above) and is under active oversight by the RWQCB due to a release of VOCs to groundwater. A chemical release was reported in 1981, and investigation and cleanup has been ongoing. Chemicals released to soil and groundwater include 1,1,1 -TCA, 1,2 -DCB, PCE, TCE, freon, and xylenes. Soil vapor extraction was conducted from 1990 to 1993, and groundwater extrac- tion and treatment were conducted from 1993 to 2000. In 2004, a risk assessment concluded that site soil and groundwater conditions do not represent an unacceptable risk to human health and the envi- ronment except for the use of on-site groundwater as a drinking water source. Kaiser Permanente, the current property owner, recorded a deed restriction for the site to prohibit the use of groundwater as a drinking water source. Groundwater monitoring is on-going.36 (3) 19333 Vallco Parkway, Cupertino. This former Tandem/Apple site (Site 9 on Figure V.H-1 and Table V.H-1) is located approximately 1,200 feet south of the project site. Although the site was not listed by EDR, information was available on Geotracker. A release of PCE affected soil to depths of approximately 15 to 17 feet below the ground surface. Affected soil was excavated, and post -remediation soil vapor sample results were below ESLs. The case was closed by the regulatory agency in August 2010.37 (4) 10989 North Wolfe Road, Cupertino. Cupertino Village Cleaners (Sites 10 and 11 on Figure V.H-1 and Table V.H-1) was listed by EDR as a dry cleaner with a release of PCE to soil. Vallco Village Cleaners formerly occupied the site and was listed as a large -quantity and small - quantity generator of hazardous waste in 1986 and 1996, respectively. Soil, groundwater, and soil vapor sampling have been conducted. The vapor plume is migrating off-site, and was reported to present an elevated human health risk to that site. Contamination remediation has been required, and the site is under active oversight by the DISC. 33 Department of Toxic Substances Control, 2011, Final Guidance for the Evaluation and Mitigation of Subsurface Vapor Intrusion to Indoor Air (Vapor Intrusion Guidance, October. 34 California Regional Water Quality Control Board, 2010, op. cit. 35 California Regional Water Quality Control Board, 2006. San Francisco Bay Region. Fact Sheet, Status of Environmental Cleanup, 3800 Homestead Road, Santa Clara, Santa Clara County. February. 36 Ibid. 37 California Regional Water Quality Control Board, 2009. San Francisco Bay Region. Approval ofRemedial Action Completion Report, Addendum to Remedial Action Completion Report, and Second Addendum to Remedial Action Comple- tion Report for the Former Tandem Computers Facility, 19333 Vallco Parkway, Cupertino, Santa Clara County. October 14. P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5h-Hazards.doc (06/03/13) P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 333 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS (5) 11111 Wolfe Road, Cupertino. Shell is listed by EDR at this site (Site 12 on Figure V.H-1 and Table V.H-1) with four USTs for gasoline and a waste oil tank. Gasoline was reported to have leaked from a UST in 1992. The case was closed by the Santa Clara County LOP in 1993. (6) 1698 Wolfe Road, Sunnyvale. Gasoline was reported to have leaked from a UST to soil at this Mobil facility in 1989 (Site 13 on Figure V.H-1 and Table V.H-1). Affected soil was exca- vated, and the site was closed by the Santa Clara County LOP in November 1990. BP/TOSCO was also listed at this site with a gasoline release to soil, and the site was closed again in 1996 by the Santa Clara County LOP. TOSCO Northwest Company was listed by EDR as a small quantity generator of hazardous waste in 1995 with no violations. (7) 1697 Wolfe Road, Sunnyvale. Gasoline was reported by EDR to have leaked from a UST at this ARCO facility (Site 14 on Figure V.H-1 and Table V.H-1). The case was closed in April 1991 by the Santa Clara County LOP with no further action required. Paul's ARCO and BP West Coast Products LLC were listed by EDR as small -quantity generators of hazardous waste from 2000 through 2010, with no violations reported. C. Hazardous Building Materials. Hazardous building materials in structures proposed for demolition could pose a threat of a hazardous materials release if not handled properly. Building materials installed in buildings prior to 1981 may contain asbestos.38 Asbestos, used to provide strength and fire resistance, was frequently incorporated into insulation, roofing, and siding, textured paint and patching compounds used on wall and ceiling joints, vinyl floor tiles and adhesives, and water and steam pipes. Prior to 1978, lead compounds were commonly used in exterior and interior paints. Lead compounds may be present in interior and exterior paints used for commercial buildings, regardless of construction date.39 Lead and asbestos are State -recognized carcinogens.40 Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) have been used as coolants and lubricants in transformers, capac- itors, heating/cooling equipment, and other electrical equipment. PCBs have not been manufactured in the United States since 1977, but may still be found in older electrical equipment and other building materials, like light ballasts. PCBs have been associated with acne -like skin conditions in adults and changes in the nervous and immune system in children. PCBs are also known to cause cancer in laboratory animals and are probable human carcinogens .41 PCB or PCB -contaminated items require proper off-site transport and disposal at a facility that can accept such wastes. Fluorescent lighting tubes and ballasts, mercury thermometers, and several other common items containing hazardous materials are regulated as "universal wastes" by the State of California. 38 California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 5208. 39 California Department of Toxic Substances Control, 2006. Interim Guidance Evaluation of School Sites with Potential Soil Contamination as a Result ofLead from Lead -Based Paint, Organochlorine Pesticides from Termiticides, and Polychlorinated Biphenyls from Electrical Transformers. June 9 (Revised). 40 California Environmental Protection Agency, 2012. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, Chemicals Known to the State to Cause Cancer or Reproductive Toxicity. March 16. Website: oehha.ca.gov/prop65/prop65_list/Newlist.html (accessed March 20, 2012). 41 Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 2001. Toxic FAQs for Polychlorinated Biphenyls. Website: www.atsdr.cdc.�zov/toxfNs/tf.asp?id=140&tid=26 (accessed March 20, 2012). P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5h-Hazards.doc (06/03/13) P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 334 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Universal waste must be recycled to be managed under the simple, streamlined universal waste handler standards for the State of California.42 The Phase I ESAs completed in 2006 for the portion of the project site south of Pruneridge Avenue, discussed above, reported that several asbestos surveys and partial abatements had been completed. Comprehensive asbestos and lead paint surveys have not been reported for all project site facilities. Impacts associated with lead and asbestos on the project site are discussed under "Impacts and Mitigation Measures," below. d. School Land Use. Children are more susceptible to health effects from hazardous materials than adults. Hazardous materials use near schools and day care centers must occur with consideration of the potential health effects to sensitive populations of these facilities. The Making Friends Preschool is located adjacent to the project site at the intersection of Pruneridge Avenue and Wolfe Road. The Good Samaritan Preschool is located approximately 0.09 miles northwest of the project site. School - related hazards impacts are discussed under "Impacts and Mitigation Measures," below. e. Airport Land Use Protections. Development near airports and heliports can pose a potential hazard to people and property on the ground, as well as create obstructions and other hazards to flight. The Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) provide criteria for evaluating the potential effects of obstructions on the safe and efficient use of navigable airspace. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requires notification of proposed construction or building alteration projects identified by the following airspace obstruction criteria provided in FAR Part 77: • Any construction more than 200 feet in height above ground level; • Any construction or alteration of greater height than an imaginary surface extending outward 100 feet and upward 1 foot for a horizontal distance of 20,000 feet from the nearest point of the nearest runway of a public -use or military airport with at least one runway more than 3,200 feet in actual length; • Any construction or alteration of greater height than an imaginary surface extending outward 50 feet and upward 1 foot for a horizontal distance of 10,000 feet from the nearest point of the nearest runway of a public -use or military airport with its longest runway no more than 3,200 feet in actual length; and • Any construction or alteration of greater height than an imaginary surface extending outward 25 feet and upward 1 foot for a horizontal distance of 5,000 feet from the nearest point of the nearest landing and takeoff area of a public -use heliport. San Jose International Airport is the closest airport to the project site, and is located approximately 5 miles east of the project site. The Santa Clara County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) has adopted a Land Use Plan for areas surrounding San Jose International Airport, which incorporates the airspace protection criteria provided in FAR Part 77. The project site is not located within any protected airspace zones defined by the ALUC43 and has no heliports listed by the FAA .44 42 California Code of Regulations, Title 23, Article 3, Section 66273. 43 Santa. Clara County Airport Land -Use Commission, 2011. Comprehensive Land Use Plan, Santa Clara County, Norman Y. Mineta, San Jose International Airport. May 25. as Federal Aviation Administration, 2011. Airport Facilities Data. Website: www.faa.�zov/airports/ aiMort_safety/airportdata 5010/ (accessed March 21, 2012). P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5h-Hazards.doc (06/03/13) P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 335 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS f. Emergency Response Plans. The City of Cupertino Office of Emergency Services is responsi- ble for coordinating agency response to disasters or other large-scale emergencies in the City of Cupertino with assistance from the Santa Clara County Office of Emergency Services and Santa Clara County Fire Department (SCCFD). Overall emergency response is governed by the City of Cupertino45 and Santa Clara County Emergency Operations Plans (EOP)46 and coordinated with other local, regional, State, and federal agencies. The EOP uses the Standardized Emergency Management System as required by California Government Code Section 8607(a) for managing responses to multi -agency and multi -jurisdiction emergencies in California. g. Wildland Fire Protections. The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) has mapped areas in Santa Clara County with significant fire hazards based on fuels, terrain, weather, and other relevant factors. These zones, referred to as Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones, are classified by the CAL FIRE Director in accordance with Government Code Sections 51175-51189 to assist responsible local agencies, and identify measures to reduce the potential for losses of life, property, and resources from wildland fire. CAL FIRE has determined that the project site is not located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone.47 Because the project site is located in a highly urbanized area at a distance from regional open space areas, it is not subject to wildland fires. h. Regulatory Framework. The following section discusses the federal, State, and local regula- tory framework for hazardous materials, hazardous waste, and hazardous building materials that could be encountered during building demolition activities. (1) Hazardous Materials and Hazardous Waste. The use, storage, and disposal of hazard- ous materials, including management of contaminated soils and groundwater, is regulated by numer- ous local, State, and federal laws and regulations. The U.S. EPA is the federal agency that administers hazardous materials and hazardous waste regulations. State and local agencies include the California EPA (Cal/EPA), which includes DISC, the RWQCB, CARB, the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), and Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health. A description of each federal, State, and regional/local agency's jurisdiction and involvement in the management of hazardous materials and wastes is provided below. Federal. The U.S. EPA is the federal agency responsible for enforcement and implementation of federal laws and regulations pertaining to hazardous materials and hazardous waste. The federal regulations are primarily codified in Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR). The legislation includes the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA), the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Acts of 1986 (SARA), and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA). The U.S. EPA provides oversight 45 Cupertino, City of, 2005. Office of Emergency Services. Emergency Operations Plan. September. 46 Santa. Clara County, 2008. Operational Area Emergency Operations Plan. March. 47 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, 2008. Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA, As Recommended by CAL FIRE, Cupertino Map. P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5h-Hazards.doc (06/03/13) P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 336 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS for site investigation and remediation projects, and has developed protocols for sampling, testing, and evaluation of solid waste S.48 State. Three State agencies, described below, regulate hazardous materials and waste that may occur on or around the project site. Department of Toxic Substances Control. In California, DTSC is authorized by the U.S. EPA to enforce and implement federal hazardous materials laws and regulations. California regulations pertaining to hazardous materials are equal to or exceed the federal regulation requirements. Most State hazardous materials regulations are contained in Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR). DTSC generally acts as the lead agency for soil and groundwater cleanup projects that affect public health, and establishes cleanup levels for subsurface contamination that are equal to, or more restrictive than, federal levels. DTSC has also developed land disposal restrictions and treatment standards for hazardous waste disposal in California. In addition, DTSC has developed guidance on soil vapor concentrations that would be protective of indoor air quality. State Water Resources Control Board. The State Water Resources Control Board enforces, among other regulations, those regulations pertaining to implementation of UST programs. It also allocates monies to eligible parties who request reimbursement of State funds to clean up soil and groundwater pollution from UST leaks. The State Water Resources Control Board also enforces the Porter -Cologne Water Quality Act of 1969 through its nine regional boards, including the RWQCB, described below. California Air Resources Board. This agency is responsible for coordination and oversight of State and local air pollution control programs in California, including implementation of the California Clean Air Act of 1988. CARB has developed State air quality standards, and is responsible for monitoring air quality in conjunction with the local air districts. Regional and Local Agencies. The following regional and local agencies have regulatory authority over the management of hazardous materials and waste on the project site. San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. The RWQCB can act as lead agency to provide oversight of sites where the quality of groundwater or surface waters is threatened, and has the authority to require investigations and remedial actions. The RWQCB has also developed ESLs for residential and commercial land uses to help expedite the assessment of sites where contam- inated soil and groundwater have been identified and evaluate the need for remediation. Data collected at a site can be directly compared to ESLs for various chemical compounds so that need for additional work can be evaluated.49 Bay Area Air Quality Management District. The BAAQMD has primary responsibility for control of air pollution from sources other than motor vehicles and consumer products (which are the responsibility of U.S. EPA and CARB). BAAQMD is responsible for preparing attainment plans for non -attainment criteria pollutants, control of stationary air pollutant sources, and the issuance of 48 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2008. Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical Chemical Methods, SW -846. Website: www.0a.�zov/e]2awaste/hazard/testmethods/index.htm (accessed March 21, 2012). 49 California Regional Water Quality Control Board, 2008, op. cit. P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Riblic\5h-Hazards.doc(06/03/13) P UB%IC REVIEW DRAFT 337 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS permits for activities including asbestos demolition and renovation activities (District Regulation 11, Rule 2). Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health. The routine management of hazard- ous materials in California is administered under the Unified Program, and most of the City of Cupertino's hazardous materials programs are administered and enforced under the Unified Program.so The Cal/EPA has granted responsibilities to the Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health Hazardous Materials Compliance Division (HMCD) for implementation and enforcement of hazardous material regulations under the Unified Program as a Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA). The HMCD also enforces additional hazardous materials storage requirements in accordance with the Santa Clara County Hazardous Materials Storage Ordinance and Toxic Gas Ordinance.51 Through a formal agreement with the HMCD, the SCCFD implements hazardous materials programs for the City of Cupertino as a Participating Agency within the Unified Program .52 The HMCD also enforces storage, handling, and dispensing requirements for hazardous materials and other regulated materials according to the City of Cupertino Hazardous Materials Storage Ordinance." Under authority from the RWQCB, the Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health implements the LOP to oversee the investigation and remediation of leaking USTs in Santa Clara County, including the City of Cupertino. Businesses storing hazardous materials over threshold quantities are required to submit Hazardous Materials Business Plans (HMBPs) to the HMCD. A HMBP must include measures for safe storage, transportation, use, and handling of hazardous materials. A HMBP must also include a contingency plan that describes the facility's response procedures in the event of a hazardous materials release. (2) Lead, Asbestos, and Other Hazardous Building Materials. The removal of hazardous building materials prior to demolition and renovation is governed by federal and State regulations. Section 19827.5 of the California Health and Safety Code requires that local agencies not issue demolition or alteration permits until an applicant has demonstrated compliance with certain notification requirements. Regulations pertaining to demolition and renovation of structures with asbestos -containing materials (ACMs) are promulgated by EPA, the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH), DISC, and the California Air Resource Board (CARB). For the City of Cupertino, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), under authority of CARB, would be the lead agency overseeing hazardous air emis- sions. Emissions of asbestos to the atmosphere during demolition or renovation must be controlled, and waste disposal procedures must be followed in accordance with BAAQMD Regulation 11, Rule 2. All friable (crushable by hand) ACMs or nonfriable ACMs subject to damage must be abated prior to demolition in accordance with applicable requirements. Friable ACMs must be disposed of at an approved facility. Nonfriable ACMs may be disposed of as nonhazardous waste at landfills that will 50 California Health and Safety Code, Chapter 6.11, Sections 25404-25404.8. 51 Santa. Clara County Ordinance Code, Division B 11, Chapters XIII - XIV. 52 Unidocs, 2011. Who Regulates What in Santa Clara County. Website: www.unidocs.or�z/members/ whommlateswhat.html (accessed September 26). 53 Cupertino City Code, Chapter 9.12. Hazardous Materials Storage. P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5h-Hazards.doc (06/03/13) P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 338 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS accept such wastes. Workers conducting asbestos abatement must be trained in accordance with State and federal OSHA/DOSH requirements. Regulations pertaining to demolition and renovation of structures with lead-based paint are promul- gated by EPA, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, DOSH, DISC, and the BAAQMD. Loose and peeling lead-based paint must be disposed of as a State and/or federal hazardous waste if the concentration of lead equals or exceeds applicable waste thresholds. State and federal construction worker health and safety regulations require a supervisor who is certified to identify existing and predictable lead hazards to oversee air monitoring and other protective measures during demolition activities where lead-based paint may be present. Special protective measures and notification to DOSH are required for highly hazardous construction tasks related to lead, such as manual demolition, abrasive blasting, welding, cutting, or torch burning of structures where lead- based paint is present. 14 Discharges of lead emissions to the atmosphere are regulated by the BAAQMD, Regulation 11, Rule 1. Fluorescent lighting tubes and ballasts, computer displays, and several other common items contain- ing hazardous materials (including mercury, a heavy metal) are regulated as "universal wastes" by the State of California. Universal waste regulations allow common, low -hazard wastes to be managed under less stringent requirements than other hazardous wastes. Management of other hazardous wastes is governed by DTSC hazardous waste rules. (3) Worker Health and Safety. Worker health and safety is regulated at the federal level by OSHA. The Federal Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 authorizes states (including Califor- nia) to establish their own safety and health programs with OSHA approval. Worker health and safety protections in California are regulated by the California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR). The DIR includes DOSH, which acts to protect workers from safety hazards through its California OSHA (Cal/OSHA) program, and provides consultant assistance to employers. California standards for workers dealing with hazardous materials are contained in CCR Title 8 and include practices for all industries (General Industrial Safety Orders), and specific practices for construction, and other industries. Workers at hazardous waste sites (or workers who may be exposed to hazardous wastes that might be encountered during excavation of contaminated soils) must receive specialized training and medical supervision according to the Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) regulations." Additional regulations have been developed for construction workers potentially exposed to lead 16 and asbestos .17 Cal/OSHA enforcement units conduct on-site evaluations and issue notices of violation to enforce necessary improvements to health and safety practices. i. City of Cupertino General Plan. The following policies from the Health and Safety Element of the City of Cupertino General Plan are relevant to the proposed project. 54 California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 5198. 55 California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 5192. 56 California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 1532.1. Website: www.sjsu.edu/hr/docs/risk/info/ lead construction osha.pdf (accessed March 20, 2012). 57 California Code of Regulations, Title 17, Section 93105. P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5h-Hazards.doc (06/03/13) P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 339 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Policy 6-28: Hazardous Materials Storage and Disposal Require the proper storage and disposal of hazardous materials to prevent leakage, potential explosions, fire or the release of harmful fumes. Policy 6-29: Proximity of Residents to Hazardous Materials Assess future residents' exposure to hazardous materials when new residential development of childcare facilities is proposed in existing industrial and manufacturing areas. Do not allow residential development if such hazardous conditions cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level of risk. Policy 6-30: Electromagnetic Fields Consider potential hazards from Electromagnetic Fields in the project review process. Policy 6-31: Alternative Products Encourage residents and businesses to use non- and less -hazardous products, especially less toxic pest control products, to slow the generation of new hazardous waste requiring disposal through the county -wide program. Policy 6-33: Hazardous Waste Dumping Inform the residential and business communities about the illegality and danger of dumping hazardous material and waste in the storm drain system or in creeks. 2. Impacts and Mitigation Measures This section analyzes impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials that could result from implementation of the proposed project. This section begins with the criteria of significance, which establish the thresholds for determining whether an impact is significant. The latter part of this section presents the hazards and hazardous materials impacts that could result from development of the proposed project. Mitigation measures are identified to avoid, minimize, or mitigate such impacts, where possible. a. Criteria of Significance. A significant hazards and hazardous materials impact would occur if the proposed project would: • Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, handling or disposal of hazardous materials; • Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment; Emit hazardous emissions or handling of hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances or waste within 1/4— mile of an existing or proposed school; • Be located on or adjacent to a site which is included on a list of hazardous material sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, creates a significant hazard to the public or the environment; • Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan; P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5h-Hazards.doc (06/03/13) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 340 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas, or where residents are intermixed with wildlands; • Result in a safety hazard for people residing or working within an airport land use plan are or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport; or Result in a safety hazard for people residing or working within the vicinity of a private airstrip. b. Less -Than -Significant Impacts. A description of less -than -significant hazards and hazardous materials impacts is provided below. (1) Routine Transport, Storage, Use, and Disposal of Hazardous Materials. Following construction, the proposed project would not result in significant impacts from the routine transport, use, or disposal of significant quantities of hazardous materials. While commercially -available hazardous materials (e.g., fuels, solvents, paints, and some consumer electronics) would be used on the site and may generate small amounts of hazardous waste similar to Apple's existing facilities in Cupertino, they would be handled in accordance with the law. As a general matter, the project would not include manufacturing or research processes that generate substantial quantities of hazardous materials. Only small volumes of commercially -available hazardous materials would be used on the site, and compliance with existing hazardous materials regulations would ensure that such use would not result in significant impacts. The SCCFD and City of Cupertino Building Division coordinate the review of building permits to ensure that hazardous materials requirements are met prior to construction, including required separation between hazardous materials and sensitive land uses, and proper hazardous materials storage facilities. Any businesses that transport, generate, use, and/or dispose of hazardous materials within the project site would also be subject to existing hazardous materials regulations, such as those implemented by HMCD (see Regulatory Framework, above) and hazardous materials permits from the SCCFD. The SCCFD also conducts inspections for fire safety and hazardous materials management of businesses and multi -family dwellings, in accordance with the City of Cupertino Hazardous Materials Storage Ordinance. The risks associated with release of hazardous materials into the environment from the routine transport, use, storage, or disposal of hazardous materials following construction are therefore considered a less -than -significant impact. The use of hazardous materials by proposed office and research and development uses would be conducted in accordance with existing hazardous materials regulations. (2) Airport Proximity. San Jose International Airport is the closest airport to the project site, and is located approximately 5 miles east of the project site. The Santa Clara County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) has adopted a Land Use Plan for areas surrounding San Jose Interna- tional Airport, which incorporates the airspace protection criteria provided in FAR Part 77. The project site is not located within any protected airspace zones defined by the ALUC and has no heliports listed by the FAA. Therefore, development of the proposed project would have a less -than - significant impact on airport safety operations. (3) Emergency Response Plan. Development of the proposed project would not be expected to conflict with the City of Cupertino EOP or the Santa Clara County EOP because emergency P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5h-Hazards.doc (06/03/13) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 341 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS evacuation routes are not specified in the EOPs due to emergencies being situation-specific.58 Therefore, the project would have a less -than -significant impact on an adopted emergency response plan. Pruneridge Avenue would be vacated as part of the project; the impact of the closure on emergency access is discussed in Section V.I, Transportation and Circulation. (4) Wildland Fires. According to CAL FIRE, the project site is not located within or adjacent to a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. Therefore, development of the project would have no impact related to wildland fire hazards. C. Significant Impacts. Implementation of the proposed project could result in four significant impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials, as discussed below. Impact HAZ-1: Upset and accidents involving hazardous materials releases and transport and use during construction activities could result in adverse effects to public health or the environ- ment. (S) Hazardous materials (e.g., fuels, lubricants, paints, adhesives) would be transported and used on-site for proposed construction activities. In addition, construction vehicles would be used on-site that could accidentally result in the release of hazardous materials, such as oils, grease, or fuels. It is likely that the construction contractor(s) would store these hazardous materials and vehicles on-site during the duration of construction activities. Accidental releases of hazardous materials could affect soil and/or groundwater quality, or could result in adverse health effects to construction workers, the pub- lic, and the environment. The following two-part mitigation measure would reduce this potential impact to a less -than -significant level: Mitigation Measure HAZ-la: The contractor(s) shall designate storage areas suitable for material delivery, storage, and waste collection. These locations must be as far away from catch basins, gutters, drainage courses, and Calabazas Creek as feasible. All hazardous materials and wastes used or generated during project site development activities shall be labeled and stored in accordance with applicable local, State, and federal regulations. In addition, an accurate up- to-date inventory, including Material Safety Data Sheets, shall be maintained on-site to assist emergency response personnel in the event of a hazardous materials incident. All maintenance and fueling of vehicles and equipment shall be performed in a designated, bermed area, or over a drip pan that will not allow runoff of spills. Vehicles and equipment shall be regularly checked and leaks shall be repaired promptly at an off-site location. Secon- dary containment shall be used to catch leaks or spills any time that vehicle or equipment fluids are dispensed, changed, or poured. Mitigation Measure HAZ-lb: Emergency preparedness and response procedures shall be developed by the contractor(s) for emergency notification in the event of an accidental spill or other hazardous materials emergency during project site preparation and development activities. These procedures shall include evacuation procedures, spill containment procedures, and required personal protective equipment, as appropriate, in responding to the emergency. 58 Grey, Miguel R., 2011. Senior Emergency Services Coordinator, Santa. Clara County Fire Department. Email communication with Cheri Page, Baseline. November 16. P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5h-Hazards.doc (06/03/13) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 342 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS The contractor(s) shall submit these procedures to the City of Cupertino for approval prior to demolition, site preparation, or development activities. Compliance with these mitigation measures may occur in coordination with compliance with the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan and Best Management Practices required for the proposed project (see Section V.G, Hydrology and Water Quality, for additional detail). (LTS) Impact RAZ -2: Exposure of construction workers and the public to existing or previously unknown contamination in soil and/or groundwater, other safety hazards encountered during site grading and excavation activities, or exposure to hazardous materials following project development could result in adverse health effects. (S) Hazardous materials are known to be present in soil, soil gas, and/or groundwater at the project site from past and current land uses. Direct contact, inhalation, or ingestion of hazardous materials could potentially cause adverse health effects to construction workers and future site users. The severity of health effects would depend on the contaminant(s), concentration, use of personal protective equip- ment during construction, and duration of exposure. The disturbance and release of hazardous materials during earthwork activities, if present, could pose a hazard to construction workers, nearby receptors, and the environment. The 2006, 2010, and 2011 Phase I and II investigations identified certain chemicals in the subsurface within the project site both north and south of Pruneridge Avenue. South of Pruneridge Avenue, chemicals included freon 113 and molybdenum in groundwater; PCE, TCE, chromium, and cobalt in soil; and PCE, TCE, and freon 113 in soil vapor. Most of these chemicals were reported at concentra- tions below ESLs. Further investigation was recommended to evaluate PCE in soil vapor and VOCs in soil at the 19310 Pruneridge Avenue, and 10432 North Tantau sites (see Areas 2 and 12 on Figure V.H-2).59,60 Further evaluation of these areas would be performed and documented, as required below in Mitigation Measure HAZ-2a. VOCs in soil and in soil vapor could affect the indoor air quality of buildings located in these areas. North of Pruneridge Avenue, chemicals reported at concentrations above their respective ESLs included PCE, TCE, benzene, TPH as diesel, molybdenum, copper, and nickel in groundwater; TCE and TPH as diesel in soil; and PCE and TCE in soil vapor. Recommendations provided in the Phase II site investigation reports included preparation of a vapor intrusion assessment if future buildings are planned in the Building 42 area, proper abandonment of irrigation wells, and preparation and implementation of a soil management plan for all parcels north of Pruneridge Avenue before developing the area.61 Implementation of the following two-part mitigation measure would reduce impacts associated with potential hazardous materials in soil, soil gas, and groundwater at the project site to a less -than -sig- nificant level: 59 Erler & Kalinowski, Inc., 2006c, op. cit. 60 Erler & Kalinowski, Inc., 2007a, op. cit. 61 Erler & Kalinowski, Inc., 2011, op. cit. P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5h-Hazards.doc (06/03/13) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 343 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JUNE 2015 APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Mitigation Measure HAZ-2a: Construction at the project site shall be conducted under a project -specific Environmental Site Management Plan (ESMP) that is prepared in consultation with the RWQCB. The purpose of the ESMP is to protect construction workers, the general public, the environment, and future site occupants from subsurface hazardous materials previously identified at the project site and to address the possibility of encountering unknown contamination or hazards in the subsurface. The ESMP shall summarize soil and groundwater analytical data collected on the project site during past investigations; identify management options for excavated soil and groundwater, if contaminated media are encountered during deep excavations; and identify monitoring, irrigation, or other wells requiring proper abandonment in compliance with local, State, and federal statutes and regulations. The ESMP shall include measures for identifying, testing, and managing soil and groundwater suspected of or known to contain hazardous materials. The ESMP shall: 1) provide procedures for evaluating, handling, storing, testing, and disposing of soil and groundwater during project excavation and dewatering activities, respectively; 2) describe required worker health and safety provisions for all workers potentially exposed to hazardous materials in accordance with State and federal worker safety regulations; and 3) designate personnel responsible for imple- mentation of the ESMP. Mitigation Measure HAZ-2b: For areas at the project site with potential residual VOCs in soil, soil gas, or groundwater that are planned for redevelopment with an overlying occupied build- ing, a vapor intrusion assessment shall be performed by a licensed environmental professional. These areas include the northwestern corner of the site at the Hewlett-Packard Building 42 area and the 10400 North Tantau Avenue property. If the results of the vapor intrusion assessment indicate the potential for significant vapor intrusion into an occupied building, project design shall include vapor controls or source removal, as appropriate, in accordance with regulatory agency requirements. Soil vapor mitigations or controls could include passive venting and/or active venting. The vapor intrusion assessment and associated vapor controls or source removal can be incorporated into the ESMP (Mitigation Measure HAZ-2a). (LTS) Impact 111AZ-3: Demolition activities at the project site could result in exposure to hazardous building materials. (S) Hazardous materials may be present in building materials at the project site. The release of hazardous building materials during demolition activities, if present, could pose a hazard to construction workers, nearby receptors, and the environment. The Phase I investigations performed in 2006 for the project site parcels south of Pruneridge Avenue reported that several asbestos surveys and partial abatements had been completed. However, comprehensive asbestos and lead paint surveys have not been reported for all project site facilities. Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce potential impacts associated with hazardous building material releases for the proposed project to a less -than -significant level: Mitigation Measure HAZ-3: Hazardous building materials surveys shall be conducted by a qualified and licensed professional for all structures, not previously inspected or abated, pro- posed for demolition or renovation at the project site. ACM shall be included in the hazardous materials building surveys for buildings constructed prior to 1981. Lead-based paint shall be included in all hazardous material surveys. All loose and peeling lead-based paint and ACM P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5h-Hazards.doc (06/03/13) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 344 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS shall be abated by certified contractor(s) in accordance with local, State, and federal require- ments. All other hazardous materials, such as "universal wastes," shall be removed from buildings prior to demolition in accordance with DOSH regulations. The completion of the abatement activities shall be documented by a qualified environmental professional(s) and submitted to the City of Cupertino prior to the issuance of construction and demolition permits. (LTS) Impact HAZ-4: The proposed project involves hazardous or acutely hazardous materials within 1/4 -mile of a school. (S) The Making Friends Preschool and the Good Samaritan Preschool are located within'/4-mile of the project site. Compliance with existing regulations and implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZ-1 and HAZ-2, as discussed above, would reduce the potential for a hazardous materials release during construction activities. The SCCFD and City of Cupertino Building Division coordinate the review of building permits to ensure that hazardous materials use requirements are met prior to construction, including required separation between hazardous materials and sensitive land uses, and proper hazardous materials storage facilities. The proposed project could use hazardous materials; however, the project would be required by the HMCD and the City of Cupertino to store, manage, and dispose of the materials in accordance with the Unified Program. Therefore, compliance with existing regulations and implementation of Mitiga- tion Measures HAZ-1 and HAZ-2 would reduce the potential for school children to be exposed to hazardous materials from the project to a less -than -significant level. Mitigation Measure HAZ-4: Implement Mitigation Measures HAZ-1 and HAZ-2. (LTS) d. Cumulative Impacts. Development of the project site could expose construction workers and the public to hazardous materials releases during and following demolition and construction activities. Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects in the vicinity of the site may also result in similar releases. However, the implementation of standard mitigation measures regulating construc- tion practices and the requirements for individual site assessments and abatement activities, where necessary, would ensure that hazardous materials releases occurring during construction periods, if any, would not combine to create a cumulatively considerable effect. The project also would not make a significant contribution to such an effect, after implementation of the mitigation measures identified above. P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5h-Hazards.doc (06/03/13) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 345 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JUNE 2015 This page intentionally left blank. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS P:\COC1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5h-Hazards.doc (06/03/13) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 346