Ventura County Air Pollution Control District 

FINAL STAFF REPORT – February 29, 2008 

REVISIONS TO RULE 74.29 

SOIL DECONTAMINATION OPERATIONS 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Rule 74.29 was originally adopted on October 19, 

1995, and revised on January 8, 2002. The rule 

applies to situations where gasoline, diesel fuel or jet 

fuel has leaked into soil. Usually, defective storage 

tanks (either underground or above ground) or 

defective piping cause the leaks. The rule establishes 

procedures by which reactive organic compound 

(ROC) emissions are minimized during the aeration, 

treatment or removal of this soil. Treatment usually 

involves bioremediation or vapor extraction. Bioremediation is the use of biological agents to degrade 

soil contaminants. Vapor extraction removes and 

routes contaminants from in-place or excavated soil 

using air injection and/or suction. The 2002 revision 

corrected EPA deficiencies and other minor issues. 

In this revision, the rule is being expanded to include 

requirements for the excavation, transportation, and 

handling of active and inactive contaminated soil. 

Many of the proposed revisions appear in the May 

11, 2001, revision to South Coast Air Quality 

Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 1166, 

Volatile Organic Compound Emission from 

Decontamination of Soil. Other material was taken 

from Bay Area Air Quality Management District 

(BAAQMD) Rule 8-40, Aeration of Contaminated 

Soil and Removal of Underground Storage Tanks

(last amended 12/15/99). The revisions are required 

because, under the provisions of Health and Safety 

Code section 40914(b)(2), staff is required to 

demonstrate that the District's plan to attain the 

California ambient ozone standard provides for 

expeditious implementation of "every feasible 

measure" to reduce ozone precursor emissions 

(including ROC). In addition, staff proposes to 

improve Rule 74.29 by clarifying language and 

adding definitions where necessary. Revisions to 

Rule 23.F.23 and Rule 44.B.4 are also proposed. 

The proposed revision to Rule 74.29 is expected to 

reduce ROC emissions by approximately 50 tons per 

year. The cost-effectiveness of covered storage piles 

is estimated to be approximately $1399 per ton of 

ROC removed county-wide. 

BACKGROUND

Historical

Rule 74.29 is based on Further Study Control 

Measure R-606 from the 1991 Air Quality Management Plan (see Appendix A). The measure codified 

existing District policies on soil aeration, bioremediation, and soil vapor extraction operations for the 

clean-up of contaminated soil. In 1995, these 

policies resulted in the reduction of an estimated 65 

tons per year of vented ROC from 52 decontamination sites. The 1995 rule limited aeration, established 

limits on vented gas emissions, and required both the 

covering of exposed soil and notice of excavation. 

Revisions to Rule 74.29 in 2002 corrected EPA 

deficiencies and other minor issues. 

Other District Rules 

SCAQMD Rule 1166, Volatile Organic Compound 

Emission from Decontamination of Soil, originally 

went into effect on August 5, 1988, and was last 

revised on October 11, 2001. In that revision, 

requirements for excavation , grading and the 

handling of soil in stockpiles were added. A 

"mitigation plan" was added as well, intended to help 

minimize ROC emissions from the decontamination 

process. Also added were increased recordkeeping 

requirements and testing information. 

BAAQMD Rule 8-40, Aeration of Contaminated Soil 

and Removal of Underground Storage Tanks, was 

last revised on December 15, 1999. In this revision, 

uncontrolled aeration was prohibited, a 50 ppm (by 

weight) threshold for contaminated soil was added, 

and provisions were added for real time monitoring 

with an organic vapor analyzer. Emission reduction 

measures for the excavation and removal of 

contaminated soil were also added, as well as 

reporting requirements, definitions and additional 

exemptions. 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Revisions to Rule 74.29 Page 2 

February 29, 2008 

PROPOSED RULE REVISIONS

The proposed revisions to Rule 74.29 involve a 

number of new requirements. The rule is being 

expanded to include requirements for the excavation, 

transportation, and handling of active and inactive 

soil. The thresholds for two of the exemptions in 

Section C are being lowered. Specific recordkeeping 

requirements are being added to Section D. In 

addition, language is being clarified and definitions 

are being added when necessary. 

Section B, Requirements 

Subsection B.1 is being revised to more uniformly 

address certified portable organic vapor analyzer 

measurements. The other subsections are being 

written in a similar fashion. The measurement 

procedure added below is moved from Subsection 

F.5. Subsection F.4 is modified as well to specify 

EPA Method 21 for OVA certification. 

1. No person shall cause or allow the aeration of 

soil that contains gasoline, diesel fuel, or jet 

fuel, if such aeration: 

a. Emits reactive organic compounds 

(ROC), as measured by a certified 

organic vapor analyzer, organic vapors 

sufficient to cause a calibrated organic 

vapor analyzer meeting the 

specifications of EPA Method 21 to 

register in excess of 50 parts per million 

by volume (ppmv) above background, 

as hexane, or more, except 

nonrepeatable momentary readings, as 

determined by the method specified in 

Subsection F.5. In determining 

compliance, a portion of soil measuring 

three inches in depth and no less than 

six inches in diameter shall be removed 

from the soil surface and the probe inlet 

shall be placed near the center of the 

resulting hole, level with the soil surface 

surrounding the hole; or 

Offsite aeration is prohibited.

New Subsection B.2 requires an approved portable 

measurement device (see Subsection F.4) for ROC 

emission measurements at excavation sites. ROC 

emissions may not exceed 50 ppm by volume, as 

hexane. Measurements are taken every 15 minutes. 

2. No person shall excavate an underground 

storage tank and/or transfer piping currently 

or previously used to store an applicable 

compound, or excavate or grade soil 

containing an applicable compound, unless 

ROC emissions are monitored with a 

certified organic vapor analyzer at least once 

every 15 minutes during the excavation 

period commencing at the beginning of 

excavation or grading. Soil with emission 

measurements in excess of 50 parts per 

million by volume (ppmv), as hexane, shall be 

considered contaminated.

During excavation, all inactive exposed 

contaminated soil surfaces shall be treated 

with a vapor suppressant or covered with 

continuous heavy duty plastic sheeting (4 mil 

or greater) or other covering to minimize 

emissions of ROC to the atmosphere. 

Covering shall be in good condition, 

overlapped at the seams, and securely 

anchored to minimize headspace where 

vapors may accumulate.

Renumbered Subsections B.3 and B.4 are being 

revised for clarity. Subsection B.3 will refer to "total 

system flow rate" rather than "maximum rating of the 

system's blower or fan" to account for systems that 

use more than one fan. A "certified organic vapor 

analyzer," as defined in revised Subsection F.4, is 

referenced. Subsection B.4 covers "in situ," or "in 

place," remediation equipment, and Subsection B.3 

covers other vapor extraction equipment. Subsection 

B.3. and Subsection B.4 are proposed for revision as 

follows: 

32. No person shall operate a vapor extraction, 

bioremediation, or bioventing system unless 

any gasses vented to the atmosphere have an 

ROC concentration ROC emissions, as 

measured by a certified organic vapor 

analyzer, are less than or equal to 100 ppmv, 

measured as methane. If the total system 

flow rate maximum rating of the system's 

blower or fan is greater than 300 standard 

cubic feet per minute (scfm) and the system 

would emit ROC at a rate greater than 0.08 

lb/hour, a Health Risk Assessment shall be 

required. 

43. No person shall operate an in situ soil 

bioventing or bioremediation system that 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Revisions to Rule 74.29 Page 3 

February 29, 2008 

emits fugitive gasses to the atmosphere if 

such gasses contain organic compounds 

sufficient to cause a calibrated organic vapor 

analyzer meeting the specifications of EPA 

Method 21 to register unless ROC emissions, 

as measured by a certified organic vapor 

analyzer, are less than or equal to 50 ppmv 

above background, as hexane, or more, 

except nonrepeatable momentary readings, 

when measured at a distance of three inches 

from the soil surface. 

Renumbered Subsection B.5 is modified to specify 

that notice shall be required for the excavation of 

gasoline, diesel and jet fuel storage tanks and transfer 

piping. 

54. The owner or operator of any applicable

underground storage tank shall notify the 

District Enforcement Section Compliance 

Division at least 24 hours prior to beginning 

the excavation of said storage tank and/or 

transfer piping. 

New Subsections B.6, B.7. B.8 and B.9 are being 

added to specify requirements for active and inactive 

storage, treatment and transportation of contaminated 

soil. The intent is to minimize ROC emissions. 

6. Contaminated soil in active storage piles 

shall be kept visibly moist by water spray, 

treated with a vapor suppressant, or covered 

with continuous heavy duty plastic sheeting 

(4 mil or greater) or other covering to 

minimize emissions of ROC to the 

atmosphere. Covering shall be in good 

condition, overlapped at the seams, and 

securely anchored to minimize headspace 

where vapors may accumulate. For any 

active storage pile, the surface area not 

covered by plastic sheeting or other covering 

shall not exceed 6,000 square feet.

7. Contaminated soil in inactive storage piles 

shall be with covered with continuous heavy 

duty plastic sheeting (4 mil or greater) or 

other covering to minimize emissions to the 

atmosphere. The covering shall be in good 

condition, overlapped at the seams, and 

securely anchored to minimize headspace 

where vapors may accumulate.

8. If not removed within 30 days of excavation, 

on-site treatment to remove contamination 

from contaminated soil at an excavation or 

grading site shall be initiated. The treatment 

of contaminated soil shall be subject to all 

applicable District Rules and Regulations.

Originally, Subsection B.8 required the removal of 

contaminated soil after 30 days of storage. The onsite treatment now specified requires a District Permit 

to Operate, which must be in place before work can 

begin. Permits are not typically issued within 30 

days. However, as a policy, it is possible for on-site 

remediation activity to commence after the District 

receives a complete permit application. 

Subsection B.9 establishes requirements for truck 

transport of contaminated soil. 

9. Trucks used to transport contaminated, and 

associated trailers, shall be tarped prior to 

leaving the site. Contaminated material shall 

not be visible beyond the tarp and shall not 

extend above the sides or rear of the truck or 

trailer.

A former subsection requiring the cleaning of trucks, 

trailers and tires prior to leaving the work site has 

been deleted. These requirements will be covered by 

new District Rule 55, Fugitive Dust. 

Section C, Exemptions 

Subsection C.2 is proposed for deletion. No owner or 

operator is known to have taken advantage of the 

exemption during its existence. Other exemptions to 

the aeration restrictions in Subsection B.1.a will 

remain available in Subsection C.3 (renumbered C.2). 

2. Subsection B.1.a shall not apply to any soil 

aeration project where the owner or operator 

demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Air 

Pollution Control Officer that the following 

two requirements are satisfied:

a. The project is not located within 1,000 

feet of the outer boundary of a school, 

and

b. The project will result in the emission of 

less than 200 pounds of ROCs per 

rolling twelve month period.

Renumbered Subsection C.2 (formerly C.3) is being 

restructured. Also, two of the thresholds in Subsection C.2 are being significantly revised. The threshold in Subsection C.2.d is being reduced from 10 

cubic yards to 1 cubic yard. This corresponds to a 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Revisions to Rule 74.29 Page 4 

February 29, 2008 

similar requirement in SCAQMD Rule 1166. As 

revised, a soil aeration project of less than 1 cubic 

yard is exempt from the 50 ppmv ROC emission 

limitation in Subsection B.1.a. 

d. Any To any soil aeration project involving 

less than 1 cubic yard 10 cubic yards of 

contaminated soil, provided the soil contains 

less than 0.8 percent by weight contaminant, 

as analyzed in accordance with Subsection 

F.2; or 

The threshold in Subsection C.2.e is also being 

reduced. In this case, soil contamination situations 

involving less than 5 gallons of applicable material 

are exempt from the 50 ppmv ROC emission 

limitation in Subsection B.1.a. The previous 

threshold was one barrel (55 gallons). This 

corresponds to a similar requirement in SCAQMD 

Rule 1166. 

e. Situations where Where the soil 

contamination resulted from a spill or release 

of less than five (5) gallons one barrel of 

diesel fuel, jet fuel, or gasoline; or 

Staff is also taking the opportunity to update the 

references in Subsection C.3.f, as follows. [The 

amendment changed; see page 13]: 

f. Contaminated To contaminated soil used as 

daily cover at permitted Class III Solid 

Waste Disposal Sites if such soils do not have 

a gasoline an ROC concentration exceeding 

100 parts per million by weight (ppmw) or a 

diesel fuel concentration exceeding 1,000 

ppmw as determined by the method specified 

in Subsection F.1 F.2. 

Section D, Recordkeeping 

The recordkeeping requirements in Section D are 

being expanded to include specific information. The 

requirements for aeration projects remain the same. 

As noted above, the latest revision to SCAQMD Rule 

1166 added a mitigation plan. The requirements for 

this plan appear in Appendix B. A few of the 

recordkeeping requirements from the mitigation plan 

have been included in Section D. 

For any soil aeration project subject to this rule, 

the records specified in Subsection D.1 shall be 

made available to the Air Pollution Control 

Officer upon request for at least two years after 

initial entry. 

For any other soil aeration decontamination

project subject to this rule, records showing each 

date that soil was aerated and the quantity of soil 

aerated on each date the following information

shall be made available to the Air Pollution 

Control Officer upon request for at least two 

years after initial entry. 

1. All dates that soil was disturbed and the 

quantity of soil disturbed on each date.

2. Reasons for excavation or grading. 

3. Cause of ROC soil contamination and history 

of the site.

4. Description of tanks or piping associated 

with the soil contamination.

5. Description of mitigation measures employed 

for dust, odors and ROC emissions.

6. Details of treatment and/or disposal of ROC 

contaminated soil, including the ultimate 

receptor.

7. Description of monitoring equipment and 

techniques.

8. All ROC emission measurements shall be 

recorded on a continuous permanent stripchart or in a format approved by the Air 

Pollution Control Officer (APCO).

9. A map showing the facility layout, property 

line, and surrounding area up to 2500 feet 

away, and including any schools, residential 

areas or other sensitive receptors such as 

hospitals or locations where children or 

elderly people live or work.

Section F, Test Methods 

As noted above, the 200 pounds per 12 rolling month 

exemption in Subsection C.2.b is proposed for deletion (see page 3). Therefore, the related calculation 

method in Subsection F.1 is proposed for deletion. 

Renumbered Subsection F.4 (now F.3) below is being 

revised for clarification and to specify that EPA 

certified organic vapor analyzers are required. 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Revisions to Rule 74.29 Page 5 

February 29, 2008 

Figure 1 

Proposed New and Revised Definitions (Section G) 

(10/3/07) 

1. "Active": A work site to which soil is currently being added or from which soil is currently being removed. 

Activity must occur within one hour to be current.

5. "Certified organic vapor analyzer": An applicable instrument meeting the specifications and performance 

criteria in Section 6.0 of EPA Method 21.

75. "Contaminated": Containing diesel fuel, gasoline, or jet fuel Emitting ROC in excess of 50 parts per 

million by volume (ppmv), as hexane. 

10. “Excavation”: The process of digging out and removing soil. Included is the digging out and removal of 

any material necessary to expose the contaminated soil, such as asphalt or concrete.

12. “Grading”: The process of leveling off material to produce a smooth surface. Included is the removal of 

any material necessary to expose soil, such as asphalt or concrete.

14. "Jet Fuel": A kerosene-based product having a maximum distillation temperature of 400 degrees 

Fahrenheit at the 10 percent recovery point and a final maximum boiling point of 572 degrees Fahrenheit 

and meeting the American Society of Testing and Materials Specification D 1655 and Military 

Specifications MIL-T-5624P and MIL-T-83133D (Grades JP-5 and JP-8), used for commercial and military 

turbojet and turboprop aircraft engines.

1915. "Soil Aeration Project": One or more operations conducted at a stationary source over any 12-month 

rolling period, in which excavated and contaminated soil is exposed to the atmosphere without the use of 

air pollution control equipment or a vapor extraction, bioremediation, or bioventing system. 

34. The organic vapor ROC concentration 

measurements required in Subsections B.1, 

B.2, B.3, B.4 and B.6 shall be made using an 

organic vapor analyzer certified according to 

the requirements in the exhaust of a vapor 

extraction, bioventing, or bioremediation 

system shall be determined using an 

instrument that meets the specifications of 

EPA Method 21. For stack measurements, 

the The probe inlet of such instrument the 

analyzer shall be placed on the centerline of 

the exhaust or vent, upstream of the point 

where the exhaust gasses meet the 

atmosphere. 

The soil contamination measurement procedure in 

Subsection F.5 is being moved to Subsection B.1. 

Section G, Definitions 

The proposed revisions to Section G, Definitions, 

appear in Figure 1. The new definition of "Active" is 

adopted from Bay Area AQMD Rule 8-40. The 

definitions of "Excavation" and "Grading" are from 

SCAQMD Rule 1166. The definition of 

"Contaminated" is being revised to be more 

consistent with other concentration thresholds in the 

rule. A definition of "Certified organic vapor 

analyzer" is being added. A definition of “Jet Fuel” 

is also being added. Because Section B now includes 

specific requirements for the containment of ROC 

emissions from active and inactive storage piles, the 

definition of "Properly Covered" is no longer needed. 

Note that the definition of "Soil Aeration Project" in 

Subsection G.19 now excludes consideration of a "12 

month rolling period." The language is no longer 

necessary because Subsection C.2, which contains 

similar language, is proposed for deletion. 

Other Rule Revisions 

Rule 23 – Exemptions from Permit

As noted above, the exemption in Subsection C.2 is 

proposed for deletion. As a result, Rule 23.F.23 must 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Revisions to Rule 74.29 Page 6 

February 29, 2008 

be revised to reflect the change; the reference to 

Subsection C.2 will be deleted, as follows: 

23. Any soil aeration project exempt from the 

soil aeration limit in Rule 74.29 pursuant to 

Subsection C.1 or C.2 , C.2, or C.3 of Rule 

74.29. 

Also, Rule 23.J.10, is being amended to exempt only 

cooling towers and ponds that are not in contact with 

contaminated process water. Rule 23.J.12, an 

exemption for nuclear activity, is being reworded and 

updated. 

Rule 44 – Exemption Evaluation Fee

As noted above, the exemption in Subsection C.2 is 

proposed for deletion. As a result, the fee in Rule 44, 

Subsection B.4, that is applied to defray the cost of 

calculating compliance with the exemption is no 

longer necessary. This fee is proposed for deletion. 

4. For Rule 74.29, any person requesting an 

exemption from the soil aeration 

requirements pursuant to Subsection C.2 of 

Rule 74.29 shall be assessed an evaluation fee 

of $250.

EMISSION REDUCTIONS / COST EFFECTIVENESS

The proposed revisions to Rule 74.29 include 

requirements for the excavation, transportation, and 

handling of active and inactive soil. Most of the 

changes involve covering exposed contaminated soil. 

Because the concentration of ROC in contaminated 

soil varies considerably, emissions (and emission 

reductions) are difficult to predict. In 19951

, staff 

estimated that an individual soil cleanup operation 

may take three years to complete and involve the 

destruction or treatment of a total of about 7,500 

pounds of ROC (2,500 lb per year). 

In the 1995 staff report, the cost effectiveness of 

covering a contaminated soil pile was estimated.3

 

The following assumptions were made: 

1. The soil contains 5,000 ppmw gasoline. 

2. Gasoline contaminated soil weighs 92.6 lbs/ft3

3. Without covering the soil, all contaminants are 

emitted into the atmosphere, 

4. The cover is 50% effective at controlling 

gasoline vapor escape. 

5. 20' by 100' polyethylene sheets cost $80 each 

(contractor charges extra 15 percent for sheets). 

6. Contractor costs are: Technician $35/hr (2 hrs 

maximum for 2 technicians), Drive time costs 

$35/hr (1 hour maximum each way). 

7. Soil pile dimensions are: height - 5 feet, width 

60 feet, and length 40 feet. 

Costs:

Drive time: ($35/hr)(1 hr)(2)............................. $70 

Materials: ($80/sheet)(3 sheets) + (15%) ........ $276 

Labor: ($35/hr)(2 hrs)(2)................................. $140

TOTAL: $486 

If we assume that covers are changed four times a 

year, the total annual cost is $1944. 

ROC Emissions Reduced:

(5 ft)(60 ft)(40 ft)= 12,000 ft3

 of soil 

(12,000 ft3

)(92.6 lbs/ft3)(5,000/106)(0.5) = 2,778 lbs 

If we assume an average of 36 decontamination sites 

per year, 50.0 tons per year of ROC is reduced. 

Cost-effectiveness:

For an individual unit: 

($1944) / (2,778 lbs ROC) = $0.70 /lb ROC removed 

Assuming 36 decontamination sites per year, the 

county-wide cost-effectiveness of covered piles is: 

($1944*36)/(2,778 lbs)(36)/(2000 lb/ton) = $1399.60 

per ton of ROC removed. These results relate well to 

the District's Best Available Control Technology cost 

effectiveness threshold of $9.00 per pound and 

$18,000 per ton of ROC reduced. 

In the 2001 staff report for the proposed revisions to 

Rule 11662

, SCAQMD stated that 300 mitigation 

plans were issued in 2000. A mitigation plan is 

issued for each soil decontamination project. 

"Uncontrolled [ROC] emissions from these activities 

are about 5 tons per year. The estimated reduction 

ensured by the current rule is 27 pounds per day, 

assuming the proposed amendments will achieve 

about 90% reduction." This translates to about 33 

pounds of ROC per year for every project, 

considerably less that the 1995 VCAPCD estimate. 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Revisions to Rule 74.29 Page 7 

February 29, 2008 

SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS 

Assembly Bill 2061 (Polanco), which went into 

effect on January 1, 1992, requires that the APCD 

Board consider the socioeconomic impact of any new 

rule or amendment to an existing rule if air quality or 

emission limits are affected. The proposed amendments to Rule 74.29 may affect both air quality and 

emission limits, so the requirements of the bill must 

be evaluated. The evaluation focuses on the actual 

cost of the amended rule on affected businesses. 

The Board must evaluate the following socioeconomic information on the proposed amendments 

to Rule 74.29: 

(1) The type of industries or business, including 

small business, affected by the rule or 

regulation.

 The adoption of amended Rule 74.29 will 

directly affect approximately 36 facilities per 

year in Ventura County. These facilities include 

primarily retail gasoline dispensing facilities 

and other operations where gasoline, diesel fuel, 

or jet fuel is dispensed. Some of these facilities 

can be considered small businesses. 

(2) The impact of the rule or regulation on 

employment and the economy of the region 

affected by the adoption of the rule or 

regulation. 

 The adoption of amended Rule 74.29 is 

expected to have no impact on either employment or the economy of Ventura County. 

(3) The range of probable costs, including costs to 

industry or business, including small business, 

of the rule or regulation. 

The cost to comply with the proposed covering 

requirement is estimated to be 70 cents per 

pound, or, county-wide, $1399 per ton of ROC 

removed. The proposed revisions codify 

existing practice and are expected to result in no 

significant additional cost to any business in 

Ventura County. 

(4) The availability and cost effectiveness of 

alternatives to the rule or regulation being 

proposed or amended. 

 There are no alternatives to the proposed 

amendments to Rule 74.29. 

(5) The emission reduction potential of the rule or 

regulation. 

 The proposed revision is expected to result in a 

50.0 ton per year ROC emission reduction in 

Ventura County. 

(6) The necessity of adopting, amending, or 

repealing the rule or regulation in order to 

attain state and federal ambient air standards 

pursuant to Chapter 10 (commencing with 

Section 40910). 

 The proposed amendments to Rule 74.29 are 

needed because, under the provisions of Health 

and Safety Code section 40914(b)(2), staff is 

required to demonstrate that the District's plan 

to attain the California ambient ozone standard 

provides for expeditious implementation of 

"every feasible measure" to reduce ozone 

precursor emissions. ROC is an ozone 

precursor pollutant. 

The proposed amendments to both Rule 23 and Rule 

44 affect neither air quality nor emission limits, so a 

socio-economic impact analysis is not required. 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF METHODS OF COMPLIANCE / CEQA

California Health and Safety Code Section 21159 

requires the District to perform an environmental 

analysis of the reasonably foreseeable methods of 

compliance. The analysis must include the following 

information on proposed Rule 74.29: 

(1) An analysis of the reasonably foreseeable 

environmental impacts of the methods of 

compliance.

(2) An analysis of the reasonably foreseeable 

mitigation measures. 

(3) An analysis of the reasonably foreseeable 

alternative means of compliance with the rule 

or regulation.

The proposed revision includes requirements for the 

excavation, transportation, and the handling of 

contaminated and uncontaminated soil. The 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Revisions to Rule 74.29 Page 8 

February 29, 2008 

reasonably foreseeable methods of compliance 

include covers, timed exposure periods and additional 

ROC measurements. No reasonably foreseeable 

mitigation measures or reasonably foreseeable 

alternative means of compliance with the rule are 

known. The Notice of Exemption prepared for the 

revisions to SCAQMD Rule 1166 on May 11, 2001, 

states that "the proposed project has no potential to 

adversely effect air quality or any other environmental area." Because the proposed revisions to Rule 

74.29 are based on revisions to Rule 1166, no averse 

environmental impact is expected. 

The proposed amendments to both Rule 23 and Rule 

44 do not include emission limits or compliance 

criteria, so analysis is not required. 

CEQA Requirements 

Staff has determined that the adoption of the 

proposed revisions to Rule 74.29 is within the scope 

of the categorical exemptions from the California 

Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under state 

CEQA Guideline Sections 15307, Protection of 

Natural Resources, and 15308, Protection of 

Environment, and no exception to these categorical 

exemptions applies. In addition, staff has determined 

that adoption of the proposed revisions to both Rule 

23 and Rule 44 are exempt from CEQA under 

Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines 

because it can be seen with certainty that there is no 

possibility that these changes may have a significant 

effect on the environment. 

ANALYSIS OF EXISTING FEDERAL AND DISTRICT REGULATIONS

California Health & Safety Code Section 40727.2(a) 

requires districts to provide a written analysis of 

existing regulations prior to adopting, amending or 

repealing a regulation. Section 40727.2(a) states: 

 In complying with Section 40727, the district 

shall prepare a written analysis as required by 

this section. In the analysis, the district shall 

identify all existing federal air pollution control 

requirements, including, but not limited to, 

emission control standards constituting best 

available control technology for new or 

modified equipment, that apply to the same 

equipment or source type as the rule or 

regulation proposed for adoption or 

modification by the district. The analysis shall 

also identify any of that district's existing or 

proposed rules and regulations that apply to the 

same equipment or source type, and all air 

pollution control requirements and guidelines 

that apply to the same equipment or source type 

and of which the district has been informed 

pursuant to subdivision (b). 

Aside from Rule 74.29 and the VCAPCD permit 

rules, no other known state or federal air pollution 

control regulations apply to soil decontamination 

operations in Ventura County. However, these 

operations may be subject to federal Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) regulations 

for underground storage tanks (USTs) in 40 CFR Part 

280 and 40 CFR Part 281. In addition, the California 

State Water Resources Control Board operates a UST 

Cleanup Program in conjunction with the Ventura 

County Environmental Health Division's Leaking 

Underground Fuel Tank (LUFT) program. 

The proposed amendments to both Rule 23 and Rule 

44 include no emission control standards; therefore, 

the requirements of Health & Safety Code § 

40727.2(a) are satisfied pursuant to Health & Safety 

Code § 40727.2(g). 

COMMENTS AND MEETINGS

Public Workshop 

November 7, 2006 

Staff stated that the rule applies only to gasoline, 

diesel and jet fuel. Aeration is permitted if the soil 

contains these compounds in concentrations less than 

50 ppmv ROC. The following questions and 

comments from attendees were addressed: 

1. Why does Subsection B.1.a (and former 

Subsection F.5) require operators to dig a small 

hole in a pile of soil to measure ROC 

concentration? Staff stated that volatiles at the 

surface of a pile can evaporate. By digging the 

prescribed hole, the ROC concentration of the 

soil is determined more accurately. 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Revisions to Rule 74.29 Page 9 

February 29, 2008 

2. In Subsection B.6, what does "continuous" 

mean with respect to heavy duty plastic 

sheeting? It was stated that covering large areas 

in plastic sheeting is difficult. For hazardous 

pollutants, two sided sticky-tape is sometimes 

required to join sheets. 100 foot by 100 foot 10 

mil plastic sheets cost $1600 - $2000. Staff 

stated that piles must be covered with overlaps, 

but bonding is not required. In the staff report, 

a 50 percent emission reduction efficiency is 

assumed in the cost-effectiveness calculations. 

3. Water spraying for ROC suppression may cause 

run-off problems. There is no definition of 

"visibly moist" in Subsection B.6. Also, an 

attendee asked for the origin of the 6000 square 

foot active work area specification. Staff agreed 

to look into this issue. [Staff believes "visibly 

moist" requires no definition. BAAQMD Rule 

8-40-304 limits active storage piles to 6,000 

square feet.] 

4. Is the requirement for "permanent strip charts" 

in Subsection D.8 necessary? Many analyzers 

have only a digital screen. Staff stated that both 

strip charts and field notes are acceptable and 

that the proposed rule will be revised. 

5. The definition of "active storage pile" in 

Subsection G.1 specifies that active piles 

become inactive after one hour of no activity. 

An attendee commented that productivity could 

be lost if work occurs around a lunch hour. 

Staff agreed to discuss this issue. [No change to 

the rule is proposed] 

The Boeing Company 

November 27, 2006 

1. Under Section B.l.a., "In determining 

compliance, a portion of soil measuring three 

inches in depth and no less than six inches in 

diameter shall be removed from the soil surface 

and the probe inlet shall be placed near the 

center of the resulting hole, level with the soil 

surface surrounding the hole." By creating a 

hole, is the OVA concentration being artificially 

increased? It is not clear whether the 

requirement to dig a hole is consistent with U.S. 

EPA RCRA SW846 Sampling Plan for 

evaluating solid waste, physical/ chemical 

method 

(http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/test/in

dex.htm). It seems that measuring the surface 

of the soil pile is more consistent with R C R A . 

Since reactive organic compound (ROC) material 

may evaporate from the surface of a storage pile, the 

measured concentration at the surface could be 

artificially low. We believe the three inch hole 

enables a more accurate measurement of the 

contamination within a storage pile. 

2. It is not clear what the monitoring frequency for 

measuring ROC's is under Section B.1.a. For 

example, if a company is aerating multiple piles 

of soil, is every soil pile that is generated 

required to be monitored for ROC's using an 

Organic Vapor Analyzer (OVA)? If so, that 

would pose an undo burden for large jobs 

involving the aeration of 15,000- 20,000 cubic 

yards of soil. 

Aeration is prohibited for soils that emit ROC in 

excess of 50 parts per million by volume. Once it is 

established that the threshold has not been exceeded 

in a particular situation, aeration may commence. 

ROC emissions are not expected to increase after the 

commencement of aeration. 

3. In Section B.6., the requirement that 

contaminated soil in active storage piles be kept 

visibly moist by water spray or treated with a 

vapor suppressant would seem to cause a 

surface water runoff problem. On the other 

hand, the requirement to cover and securely 

anchor piles with heavy duty plastic sheeting 

such that the surface area not covered by the 

plastic sheeting does not exceed 6,000 

square feet would potentially cause numerous 

interruptions. (Refer to comment #9 also.)

We assume that work is occurring at an active storage 

pile and that 6,000 square feet is an adequate area 

within which to work. To minimize ROC emissions, 

the remaining contaminated soil must be covered. 

SCAQMD Rule 1166 requires operators to "spray 

VOC-contaminated soil stockpiles with water and/or 

approved vapor suppressant and cover them with 

plastic sheeting for all periods of inactivity lasting 

more than one hour" [§(c)(2)(B)]. BAAQMD 

Regulation 8, Rule 40, requires "contaminated soil 

shall be kept visibly moist by water spray, treated 

with a vapor suppressant, or covered with continuous 

heavy duty plastic sheeting" [8-40-304]. We agree 

that vapor suppression with water must be done in a 

way to either minimize or prevent runoff problems. 

However, we are reluctant to eliminate water as a 

vapor suppression material. The covering 

requirements in Subsection B.6 are necessary to 

minimize ROC emissions into the atmosphere. 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Revisions to Rule 74.29 Page 10 

February 29, 2008 

4. Section B.6. and B.7., requires that coverings 

"be joined at the seams." Please explain the 

intent of joined at the seams. Materials such as 

Visqueen, which are commonly used in these 

types of jobs, cannot be seamed. Cover 

materials that can be seamed such as 

Pondliner are cost prohibitive for temporary 

jobs such as soil aeration.

"Joined at the seams" means that the sheets must 

overlap and be secured to prevent the exposure of 

contaminated soil to the air. It is not necessary to 

clip, bind, or permanently seam the sheets. 

5. Under Section B.8., if contaminated soil is not 

removed within 30 days of excavation, on-site 

treatment must be initiated. We believe that it 

would be very difficult to meet the 30-day 

period for soil off-site removal. For 

example, once it is determined that the soil is 

contaminated, a sample must be taken to a 

laboratory for analysis which takes several 

weeks. Please ensure that the 30-day period is 

not more stringent than the hazardous waste 

rule requirement.

According to Lori Wynd, the hazardous waste rules 

referenced above appear 40CFR262.34, which allows 

a hazardous waste "generator" to wait 90 days before 

disposing of waste placed in containers, tanks, drip 

pads or containment buildings. This is very different 

from the requirements of Rule 74.29, which applies 

to soil containing either gasoline, diesel fuel or jet 

fuel. Contaminated soil is removed from the area of 

a leaking tank or piping and stored in piles on the 

ground. Contamination is easily determined. 

SCAQMD Rule 1166 also requires treatment or 

removal of VOC contaminated soil within 30 days 

[§(c)(2)(F)]. 

6. Under Section D, Recordkeeping Requirements, 

the rule indicates that recordkeeping is required 

"for any soil decontamination project subject to 

this rule..." However, in the definitions section 

there is no definition of "decontamination." 

Therefore, it is unclear whether records are 

needed for soil aeration in which ROC level are 

less than 50 ppm. Please define 

decontamination.

Aeration decontaminates soil by evaporation. 

Aeration is allowed only for situations where the 

ROC concentration is less than 50 ppmv (Subsection 

B.1). Recordkeeping is required for all operations 

subject to the rule. 

7. Section D lists the following recordkeeping 

requirements as: all dates that soil was 

disturbed and the quantity of soil disturbed on 

each date; reasons for excavation of grading; 

cause of VOC soil contamination and history of 

the site; description of tanks or piping 

associated with the soil contamination; 

description of mitigation measures employed 

for dust, odors and ROC emissions; details of 

treatment and/or disposal of ROC contaminated 

soil, including the ultimate receptor; 

description of monitoring equipment and 

techniques; all ROC emission measurements 

from the strip chart; and a facility map. These 

requirements seem excessive for a soil aeration 

job. Can the recordkeeping requirements for 

aeration be reduced?

We agree that reduced recordkeeping requirements 

for soil aeration are appropriate. We propose to 

require for soil aeration only the information 

specified in Subsection D.1. 

8. Section F.2. requires the use of an "OVA with a 

strip chart recorder." Most OVA's do not have 

strip charts but rather digital readings that 

are recorded by hand. Would a handrecording meet with VCAPCD's approval?

Subsection D.8 requires the use of either a strip chart 

recorder or "a format approved by the Air Pollution 

Control Officer." The latter specification can include 

field notes in an approved format. 

9. Under Section G., Definitions, the definition of 

"Active Storage Pile," seems to be unnecessarily 

stringent, particularly for large aeration jobs. 

Active storage pile is defined as "a storage pile 

to which soil is currently being added or from 

which soil is currently being removed. Activity 

must occur within one hour to be current." We 

recommend that a more realistic activity period 

of three to four hours to be used to define 

"current," rather than the one hour proposed in 

the rule. A one-hour period does not take into 

account crew breaks and unforeseen obstacles.

As noted above, SCAQMD Rule 1166 requires 

operators to "spray VOC-contaminated soil stockpiles 

with water and/or approved vapor suppressant and 

cover them with plastic sheeting for all periods of 

inactivity lasting more than one hour [§(c)(2)(B)]. 

BAAQMD Regulation 8, Rule 40, states that 

"contaminated soil shall be covered during periods of 

inactivity longer than one hour" [8-40-305]. We are 

reluctant to deviate from this regulatory standard. In 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Revisions to Rule 74.29 Page 11 

February 29, 2008 

addition, we believe the one hour threshold will limit 

ROC emissions from storage piles by minimizing the 

size of working area. 

10. Under Section G.4., the definition of 

contaminated is "emitting ROC's in excess of 50 

ppmv, as hexane." This definition of 

contaminated seems to be inconsistent with the 

definition in 40 CFR Subpart CC: 

application of air controls for contaminated 

soils where the threshold is 500 ppmw.

According to Lori Wynd, the referenced regulations 

(40 CFR 264.182) apply "to the management of 

hazardous waste in tanks, surface impoundments, and 

containers..." Contaminated soil is not mentioned. 

Gasoline, diesel fuel and jet fuel do not appear to be 

listed as hazardous waste. In addition, contaminated 

soil is removed from the area of a leaking tank or 

piping and stored in piles on the ground. Because 

these regulations appear to be unrelated, we believe 

no conflict exists. 

Advisory Committee 

January 23, 2007 

After a staff presentation, the Committee posed 

questions and discussed the following issues: 

• What is the purpose of the 30 day restriction in 

section B.8? It is inconsistent with hazardous 

waste laws that allow on-site storage for 180 

days. Does section B.8 conflict with the 

requirements of other government agencies? If 

emissions are being managed by plastic 

sheeting, why should there be a time limit? 

Could the language be revised to say 

"commence treatment or remove within 30 

days?" How is the 30-day limit related to the 

amount of time it takes to issue an APCD 

permit? At the end of 30 days, how much of the 

VOC has already evaporated and how is this 

related to the 50% assumed control efficiency of 

the plastic sheeting? 

• Why was the 0.08 pound per hour threshold in 

section B.2 deleted? Was a toxicologist 

consulted? Why is the 100 ppm limit in section 

B.2 independent of flow rate? 

• Should a definition be added for "heavy duty" 

plastic sheeting? 

• If contaminated soil is removed to comply with 

the 30-day limit, where is it taken? 

• Why does the rule apply only to gasoline, diesel 

and jet fuel? Why not all VOC-contaminated 

soil like the SCAQMD rule? How much is 

emitted from contaminated soil in oilfields? 

Should they be regulated too? 

• Should agricultural sources continue to be 

exempted? 

• The rule seems to apply only to emissions from 

the storage pile. Can emissions from the 

excavated hole be controlled while it remains 

open? 

• Does the District issue a permit for the location 

of the soil, or for the contractor 

decontaminating the soil? For excavations of 

un-permitted tanks, is an APCD permit issued 

to implement the rule? 

After discussion , the Committee voted unanimously 

to direct staff to reconsider all comments and report 

back with revised rule amendments. The Committee 

specifically directed staff to reexamine the following 

issues. 

1. Section B.8 requires sources to remove 

contaminated soil within 30 days. Determine if 

on-site treatment should be allowed and 

whether it is possible to have VCAPCD permits 

in place for such treatment. 

2. In (renumbered) Subsection C.2.a, the aeration 

prohibition does not apply to soil excavation 

activities provided the exposed soil is covered 

within one hour of terminating activity. 

Proposed a definition for "excavation activity." 

3. As noted above, Subsection C.2.a says exposed 

soil must be covered within one hour of 

terminating activity. Propose a definition for 

"terminating activity." 

4. The rule currently applies to soils containing 

gasoline, diesel or jet fuel. Explore the 

feasibility of expanding the rule to apply to soil 

containing any ROC. 

5. Add a definition for "jet fuel" to Section G. 

Responses to these comments appear in Appendix C. 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Revisions to Rule 74.29 Page 12 

February 29, 2008 

Advisory Committee 

January 29, 2008 

After two staff presentations, a general presentation 

on the proposed revisions and a second presentation 

on the issues raised on January 23, 2007, the 

Committee unanimously recommended the proposed 

revisions to the Air Pollution Control Board. This 

included a late revision to Rule 74.29 based on a 

comment from the Air Resources Board. In 2007, 

Subsection C.2.f appeared as follows: 

23. The requirements of Subsection B.1.a shall 

not apply to: 

f. Contaminated To contaminated soil 

used as daily cover at permitted Class 

III Solid Waste Disposal Sites if such 

soils do not have a gasoline an ROC

concentration exceeding the limit 

specifed by the Los Angeles Regional 

Water Quality Control Board 

(RWQCB), as determined by RWQCB 

methods.100 parts per million by weight 

(ppmw) or a diesel fuel concentration 

exceeding 1,000 ppmw as determined by 

the method specified in Subsection F.2.

Although a representative from the Los Angeles 

Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) 

has stated that "historically, a limit of 100 mg/kg 

[ppm] for gasoline and/or diesel has been used ... [as 

a] soil screen level for shallow groundwater sites" 

such as regional landfills4

, no RWQCB regulation 

could be located to definitively establish this limit. 

Therefore, staff has agreed to revise the proposed 

revision to Subsection C.2.f as follows: 

f. Contaminated To contaminated soil 

used as daily cover at permitted Class 

III Solid Waste Disposal Sites if such 

soils do not have a gasoline 

concentration exceeding 100 parts per 

million by weight (ppmw) or a diesel 

fuel concentration exceeding 1,000 

ppmw as determined by the method 

specified in Subsection F.1 F.2. 

In addition, Subsection F.2 (renumbered F.1), for the 

calculation of soil contamination, is no longer 

proposed for deletion. 

See Appendix D for an RWQCB chart on allowable 

contamination levels. 

REFERENCES 

1. Staff Report - Proposed Rule 74.29, Soil 

Decontamination Operations, Final, David 

Martinez, October 10, 1995, page 15 

2. Staff Report for Proposed Amended Rule 1166 – 

Volatile Organic Compound Emissions From 

Decontamination of Soil, Moustafa Elsherif, 

SCAQMD, April 5, 2001 

3. Staff Report - Proposed Rule 74.29, Soil 

Decontamination Operations, Final, David 

Martinez, October 10, 1995, page 18 

4. Telephone and email conversation with Mr. 

Enrique Casas, Los Angeles Regional Water 

Quality Control Board, January xx, 2008. 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Revisions to Rule 74.29 Page 13 

February 29, 2008 

APPENDIX A 

1991 VCAPCD Air Quality Management Plan 

Appendix H-91, Stationary Source Control Measure Documentation 

Further Study Control Measure R-606, Page H-290

R-606, Soil Decontamination Containing ROCs: The purpose of this control measure is 

to limit ROC emissions from soil contaminated with organic liquids such as gasoline. 

The Ventura County APCD does not have a control measure or a specific rule that 

regulates soil decontamination operations. However, the Ventura County APCD 

regulates soil decontamination activities through APCD Rule 10, Permits Required. Rule 

10 requires that any person conducting activities that may release air contaminants shall 

apply for and obtain an APCD permit prior to conducting such activities. Permits issued 

for soil decontamination operations contain conditions to minimize the release of organic 

compounds to the atmosphere. The conditions are based on the requirements of Bay Area 

AQMD's Rule 40, Aeration of Contaminated Soil and Removal of Underground Storage 

Tanks and Rule 47, Air Stripping and Soil Vapor Extraction Operations. 

The South Coast AQMD also has a rule that regulates soil decontamination operations. 

South Coast AQMD Rule 1166, Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from 

Decontamination of Soil, requires, in part, implementation of contaminated soil 

mitigation measures that reflect BACT during all decontamination operations. BACT for 

soil decontamination operations includes, but is not limited to, installation and operation 

of an underground ROC collection and disposal system, and collection and disposal of the 

ROC from the excavated soil. 

This control measure is being recommended for inclusion in the 1991 Ventura County 

AQMP as a further study measure pending evaluation of the South Coast and Bay Area 

AQMD rules to determine applicability to Ventura County. 

Consideration Date: 06/30/94 

Implementation Date: Not determined 

Control Efficiency Estimate: Unknown 

Emission Reduction Potential: Unknown 

Cost Effectiveness: Unknown 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Revisions to Rule 74.29 Page 14 

February 29, 2008 

APPENDIX B 

SCAQMD Mitigation Plan Requirements 

(Rule 1146, May 11, 2001) 

VOC Contaminated Soil Mitigation Plans shall be written to minimize VOC emissions to the atmosphere during 

excavation, grading, handling and treatment of VOC contaminated soil. VOC Contaminated Soil Mitigation Plans 

shall consist of three types: Various Locations, Site Specific and Facility Treatment. 

(1) General Requirements 

(A) A plan is not transferable. 

(B) A person responsible for the excavation, grading or handling of VOC contaminated soil must be 

completely familiar with the plan and must adhere to the plan requirement. The APCO may 

require that the plan be signed by the owner and/or operator. 

(C) A plan may be amended upon renewal. 

(D) Permission to excavate, grade or handle VOC contaminated soil may be withdrawn by the District 

upon a finding by the APCO that the excavation, grading or handling of the VOC contaminated 

soil is causing a public nuisance or violating other District rules or regulations. 

(2) Various Location Plans: 

(A) Shall be limited to the excavation of 2000 cubic yards or less of VOC contaminated soil in any 

consecutive 12 month period at the same site. 

(B) Shall not be used in conjunction with any other various location plan at the same site within a 

consecutive 12-month period. 

(C) Shall expire after one year from issuance unless renewed. 

(D) Shall not be issued for nor used for operations that involve grading, soil treatment or remediation, 

or landfills. 

(3) Site Specific Plans: 

(A) Shall be for excavation of greater than 2000 cubic yards of VOC contaminated soil. 

(B) Shall be issued for specific excavation or grading locations for a period not to exceed two years. 

(C) Shall not be renewable. 

(4) Facility Treatment Plans: 

(A) Shall be issued for a treatment facility at a permanent location. 

(B) Shall expire after one year from issuance unless renewed. 

(5) Applications for Site Specific Plans shall contain as a minimum: 

(A) Reasons for excavation or grading. 

(B) Cause of VOC soil contamination and history of the site. 

(C) Description of tanks or piping associated with the soil contamination. 

(D) An estimate of the amount of contaminated soil. 

(E) The operating schedule for excavation and removal. 

(F) Description of how the excavation or grading will be conducted. 

(G) Description of mitigation measures for dust, odors and VOC. 

(H) Details of disposal of VOC contaminated soil, including the ultimate receptor. 

(I) Description of monitoring equipment and techniques. 

(J) A map showing the facility layout, property line, and surrounding area up to 2500 feet away, and 

including any schools, residential areas or other sensitive receptors such as hospitals or locations 

where children or elderly people live or work. 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Revisions to Rule 74.29 Page 15 

February 29, 2008 

(K) Designation of a person who can conduct a site inspection with the APCO prior to issuance of the 

plan. 

(6) Applications for Facility Treatment Plans shall at a minimum: 

(A) Include a list of all District permits to construct or operate which have been issued for that 

treatment and control equipment. 

(B) Provide for the implementation of VOC-contaminated soil decontamination measures, as approved 

by the APCO in writing, which result in Best Available Control Technology during all operations. 

(C) Provide a map showing the facility layout including the location of all proposed VOC and nonVOC contaminated soil stockpiles. 

(D) Specify the total amount of VOC contaminated soil proposed to be stockpiled on site. 

(E) Provide for VOC contaminated soil stockpiles to be kept moist with water or suppressant and be 

covered to prevent fugitive emissions. 

(F) Provide for VOC contaminated soil stockpiles to be segregated from non-VOC contaminated soil 

stockpiles. 

(G) Provide for maintenance of records for stockpiles according to the source name, address and dates 

of reception. 

(H) Provide for records of the generator, transporter and storage/treatment facilities and indicate their 

identification and business addresses. Such records shall be signed by each party at the time 

custody is transferred. 

(I) Provide a map showing the facility layout, property line, and surrounding area up to 2500 feet 

away, and including any schools, residential area or other sensitive receptors such as hospitals, or 

locations where children or elderly people live or work. 

(J) Designation of a person who can conduct a site inspection with the APCO prior to issuance of the 

plan. 

(K) Specify the operating schedule and maximum amount of VOC contaminated soil proposed to be 

remediated on a daily basis. 

(7) In approving a plan, the APCO require reasonable conditions deemed necessary to ensure the operations 

comply with the plan and District rules. The conditions may include, but shall not be limited to, procedures 

for ensuring responsibility for the implementation of the plan, accessibility to the site for District staff, 

notification of actions required by the plan, identification of emission receptors, monitoring and testing, 

suppression and covering of stockpiles, prevention of public nuisance from VOC or dust emissions, 

prevention of fugitive emissions of VOC contaminated soil, loading of truck trailers, and disposal and 

treatment. 

(8) In approving a plan, the APCO may require any records deemed necessary to be maintained by the operator 

to demonstrate compliance with the plan. Such records shall be retained for at least 2 years and be made 

available to the APCO upon request. 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Revisions to Rule 74.29 Page 16 

February 29, 2008 

APPENDIX C 

Response to Advisory Committee Issues on January 23, 2007 

(October 24, 2007)

DISCUSSION

At the Committee meeting on January 23, 2007, a number of questions were posed and several 

issues with the proposed rule were discussed. Responses to these questions and issues are 

discussed below. There is no change to the proposed revisions to Rule 23 and Rule 44. 

• What is the purpose of the 30 day restriction in Subsection B.8? 

The 12/19/06 version of the proposed rule limited contaminated soil storage at a site to no 

more than 30 days. Subsection B.8 has been replaced as follows: 

8. If not removed within 30 days of excavation, on-site treatment to remove 

contamination from contaminated soil at an excavation or grading site shall be 

initiated. The treatment of contaminated soil shall be subject to all applicable 

District Rules and Regulations.

The purpose of the subsection is to reduce ROC emissions by preventing contaminated 

soil from sitting on the ground for extended periods of time. 

 It is inconsistent with hazardous waste laws that allow on-site storage for 180 days. 

Written comments referenced hazardous waste rules in 40CFR262.34, which allows a 

hazardous waste "generator" to wait 90 days before disposing of waste placed in 

containers, tanks, drip pads or containment buildings. This is very different from the 

requirements of Rule 74.29, which applies to soil containing either gasoline, diesel fuel or 

jet fuel. Contaminated soil is removed from the area of a leaking tank or piping and 

stored in piles on the ground. Contamination is easily determined. SCAQMD Rule 1166 

also requires treatment or removal of VOC contaminated soil within 30 days [§(c)(2)(F)]. 

Does section B.8 conflict with the requirements of other government agencies? 

See above. 

If emissions are being managed by plastic sheeting, why should there be a time limit? 

Even properly applied plastic sheeting, in good condition, joined at the seams, and 

securely anchored, emits some ROC. 

How is the 30-day limit related to the amount of time it takes to issue an APCD permit? 

A Permit to Operate must be in place before treatment to begin. Permits are not typically 

issued within 30 days. However, as a policy, activity may commence after the District 

receives a complete permit application. 

At the end of 30 days, how much of the VOC has already evaporated and how is this 

related to the 50% assumed control efficiency of the plastic sheeting? 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Revisions to Rule 74.29 Page 17 

February 29, 2008 

We believe our contaminated storage pile estimate of 1.4 tons of ROC per year is a 

reasonable estimate of emissions from each storage pile. For a 30 day period, an 

estimated 228 pounds of ROC is emitted (0.114 tons). 

• Why was the 0.08 pound per hour threshold in section B.2 deleted? 

This threshold is being retained. The threshold is the same as 100 ppmv at 300 scfm. 

 Why is the 100 ppm limit in section B.2 independent of flow rate? 

It is not independent of flow rate; a flow of 300 scf is assumed. 

• Should a definition be added for "heavy duty" plastic sheeting? 

The proposed rule now specifies that sheeting must be 4 mil or greater; see Subsections 

B.2, B.6 and B.7. 

• If contaminated soil is removed to comply with the 30-day limit, where is it taken? 

There are at least three alternatives. The most contaminated soil can be taken to a 

hazardous waste dump. Under certain conditions, contaminated soil can be used for daily 

cover at a landfill. Additionally, an contaminated soil may be treated offsite. 

• Why does the rule apply only to gasoline, diesel and jet fuel? Why not all VOCcontaminated soil like the SCAQMD rule? 

The proposed rule continues to apply only to gasoline, diesel and jet fuel. In our analysis 

of this issue, we discovered that most soil decontamination cases are managed locally by 

the Ventura County Environmental Health LUFT (Leaking Underground Fuel Tank) 

program. The LUFT program manual describes oversight jurisdiction as follows: 

"The LUFT Program is the local oversight program and lead agency that regulates 

soil and groundwater cases involving releases from USTs that contain gasoline, 

diesel, waste oil, and other petroleum hydrocarbons within Ventura County. The 

LUFT Program does not regulate the cleanup of home heating oil or farm tanks 

with capacities of 1,100 gallons or less, or non-tank sources such as sumps or 

flow-through clarifiers. The cleanup and closure of sites with home heating oil, 

farm tanks, or non-tank sources may, however, be locally overseen by the 

VCEHD’s Voluntary Cleanup Program; otherwise, these types of sites will be 

overseen by another State agency such as the Regional Water Quality Control 

Board – Los Angeles (RWQCB), the Department of Toxic Substances Control 

(DTSC), or the Department of Health Services (DHS)." 

Non-petroleum releases are handled by local regional water quality control boards under 

the SLIC (Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups) program, which is described as 

follows: 

"Sites in the SLIC program are generally small to medium-sized industrial sites 

with non-fuel contamination. Many of these sites are regulated under Site 

Cleanup Requirements, which are issued by the Regional Board. Site Cleanup 

Requirements generally mandate a time schedule for specific tasks that must be 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Revisions to Rule 74.29 Page 18 

February 29, 2008 

performed by the responsible party(ies) to investigate and cleanup the site. The 

SLIC Program is managed by the Toxics Cleanup Division." 

The local regional water quality control boards also work with the Department of 

Defense (DOD) as follows: 

"Decades of defense activities have degraded water quality on and around 

federally-owned facilities. Working with other agencies, the Regional Board is 

involved with remedial investigation and cleanup action [at a number of] U.S. 

Department of Defense (DOD) sites. Agreements with the DOD provide for 

accelerated cleanups at military bases and other Defense sites scheduled for 

closure and reuse. Site investigation and cleanup procedures are consistent with 

State laws and regulations as well as applicable provisions of CERCLA." 

CERCLA is the federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 

Liability Act, commonly known as Superfund. 

The State Water Quality Control Board (SWQCB) keeps a database of all remediation 

cases statewide, called the LUST database (http://geotracker.swrcb.ca.gov/data/). Based 

on the above, we assume that LUFT (or LUST, Leaking Underground Storage Tank) 

cases involve only gasoline, diesel or jet fuel. According to the SWQCB LUST database, 

more than 90 percent of the remediation cases in Ventura County are LUST cases (see 

chart below). We also assume that SLIC cases involve only non-petroleum materials, 

which account for less than 2 percent of all cases in Ventura County. Both DOD and 

"Local Non-LUST" cases can be either petroleum or non-petroleum. 

Program Ventura County State-wide 

 Count Percentage Count Percentage 

LUFT/LUST 1373 92.40 39038 87.19 

SLIC 26 1.75 1039 2.32 

DOD 77 5.18 2290 5.11 

Local Non-LUST 10 0.67 2224 4.97 

Other 0 0.00 184 0.41 

TOTAL 1486 100 44775 100 

This data indicates that few contamination sites are non-petroleum. Complicated nonLUFT contamination sites in Ventura County are under the jurisdiction of the Los 

Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (LARWQCB). The Water Board 

typically includes an air monitoring plan in their project requirements. VCAPCD permits 

reference LARWQCB documents for ROC and toxics air issues on these projects. 

There are other reasons for limiting the rule to petroleum-based compounds. Non-petroleum contamination sites tend to be unique; staff believes that District Rule 51, Nuisance, 

and Rule 36, toxics new source review, are handling these sites on a case-by-case basis. 

Also, it would be difficult to specify test methods for all compounds that would be 

covered by an “all ROC” rule; test methods must be specified to establish compliance. 

Finally, the District does not have the equipment necessary to deal safely with staff 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Revisions to Rule 74.29 Page 19 

February 29, 2008 

exposure to the toxic compounds that would be subject to Rule 74.29 in an “all ROC” 

scenario. 

How much is emitted from contaminated soil in oilfields? Should they be regulated too? 

The Ventura office of the California Division of Oil and Gas has no records of the 

amount of contaminated soil generated in the oil fields. 

• Should agricultural sources continue to be exempted? 

As noted above, the LUFT program does not regulate "farm tanks with capacities of 

1,100 gallons or less." Without this regulatory framework, enforcement of Rule 74.29 at 

farm sites will be very difficult. 

• The rule seems to apply only to emissions from the storage pile. Can emissions from the 

excavated hole be controlled while it remains open? 

Subsection B.2 covers the excavation of transfer piping and tanks. "Excavation" is 

defined in Subsection G.10. 

• Does the District issue a permit for the location of the soil, or for the contractor 

decontaminating the soil? For excavations of un-permitted tanks, is an APCD permit 

issued to implement the rule? 

Soil decontamination sites must comply with the provision of Rule 74.29; no Permit to 

Operate is required. However, a permit is required for on-site treatment; permits are 

issued for each treatment location. 

RESPONSE TO MOTION adopted by the committee on January 23, 2007: 

1. Section B.8 requires sources to remove contaminated soil within 30 days. Determine if 

on-site treatment should be allowed and whether it is possible to have VCAPCD permits 

in place for such treatment.

Subsection B.8 has been revised to allow onsite treatment of contaminated soil that has 

not been removed within 30 days, as noted above. 

2. In (renumbered) Subsection C.2.a, the aeration prohibition does not apply to soil 

excavation activities provided the exposed soil is covered within one hour of terminating 

activity. The definition of "excavation activity" as it relates to section C.2.a.

The 12/19/06 version of the proposed rule included a definition of “Excavation” in 

Subsection G.10. A definition of “Active Storage Pile” was also included as Subsection 

G.1 in the 12/19/06 rule; this definition has been changed to a definition of “Active,” as 

follows: 

1. "Active": A worksite to which soil is currently being added or from which soil is 

currently being removed. Activity must occur within one hour to be current.
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Revisions to Rule 74.29 Page 20 

February 29, 2008 

3. Subsection C.2.a says exposed soil must be covered within one hour of terminating 

activity. Propose a definition of "terminating activity." 

Subsection C.2.a. provides an exemption for certain excavation activities that have been 

“covered within one hour of terminating the activity.” To clarify this subsection, the 

following is proposed: 

a. Soil To soil excavation activities necessary for the removal of in situ soil 

such as in the removal of an underground storage tank, pipe or piping 

system, provided the exposed soil is properly covered as specified in 

Subsection B.7 while inactive within one hour of terminating the activity; 

or 

The proposed definition of “Active” noted above establishes when activity is current. 

4. Add a definition of "jet fuel" to Section G.

A definition of “Jet Fuel” has been added to the proposed rule as Subsection G.14, as 

follows: 

14. "Jet Fuel": A kerosene-based product having a maximum distillation temperature 

of 400 degrees Fahrenheit at the 10 percent recovery point and a final maximum 

boiling point of 572 degrees Fahrenheit and meeting the American Society of 

Testing and Materials Specification D 1655 and Military Specifications MIL-T5624P and MIL-T-83133D (Grades JP-5 and JP-8), used for commercial and 

military turbojet and turboprop aircraft engines.

5. The rule currently applies to soils containing gasoline, diesel or jet fuel. Explore the 

feasibility of expanding the rule applicability to soil containing any ROC. 

See discussion above. 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Revisions to Rule 74.29 Page 21 

February 29, 2008 

APPENDIX D 

Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board Soil Screening Levels 

(received January 2X, 2008)