Figure 1.3-1gSite Aerial Photograph -- 1967
Revised Feasibility Study
Ascon Landfill Site, Huntington Beach, California September 2007 NORTH
Pits
Lagoon Borders
Former Lagoon Boundaries in 1958
Ascon Landfill Site Boundaries
Legend
H
A
B L4 L5
L3
L2
L1
F
E
C D G
0 100 200 400 600 800
Feet
SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION - Meeting Date: 5/5/2026 Item No. 14 (26-279) Figure 1.3-1hSite Aerial Photograph -- 1972
Revised Feasibility Study
Ascon Landfill Site, Huntington Beach, California September 2007 Figure 1.3-1iSite Aerial Photograph -- 1976
Revised Feasibility Study
Ascon Landfill Site, Huntington Beach, California September 2007 NORTH
Pits
Lagoon Borders
Former Lagoon Boundaries in 1958
Ascon Landfill Site Boundaries
Legend
H
A
B L4 L5
L3
L2
L1
F
E
C D G
0 100 200 400 600 800
Feet
Figure 1.3-1jSite Aerial Photograph -- 1979
Revised Feasibility Study
Ascon Landfill Site, Huntington Beach, California September 2007 Figure 1.3-1kSite Aerial Photograph -- 1983
Revised Feasibility Study
Ascon Landfill Site, Huntington Beach, California September 2007 NORTH
Pits
Lagoon Borders
Former Lagoon Boundaries in 1958
Ascon Landfill Site Boundaries
Legend
H
A
B L4 L5
L3
L2
L1
F
E
C D G
0 100 200 400 600 800
Feet
Figure 1.3-1lSite Aerial Photograph -- 1999
Revised Feasibility Study
Ascon Landfill Site, Huntington Beach, California September 2007 NORTH
Pits
Lagoon Borders
Former Lagoon Boundaries in 1958
Ascon Landfill Site Boundaries
Legend
H
A
B L4 L5
L3
L2
L1
F
E
C D G
0 100 200 400 600 800
Feet
Figure 1.3-1mSite Aerial Photograph -- 2003
Revised Feasibility Study
Ascon Landfill Site, Huntington Beach, California September 2007 NORTH
Pits
Lagoons Borders
Former Lagoon Boundaries in 1958
Ascon Landfill Site Boundaries
Legend
H
A
B L4 L5
L3
L2
L1
F
E
C D G
Pits
Lagoon Borders
Former Lagoon Boundaries in 1958
Ascon Landfill Site Boundaries
Legend
0 100 200 400 600 800
Feet
Figure 1.3-1nSite Aerial Photograph -- 2006
Revised Feasibility Study
Ascon Landfill Site, Huntington Beach, California September 2007 NORTH
H
A
B L4 L5
L3
L2
L1
F
E
C D G
0 100 200 400 600 800
Feet
Pits
Lagoons Borders
Former Lagoon Boundaries in 1958
Ascon Landfill Site Boundaries
Legend
Pits
Lagoon Borders
Former Lagoon Boundaries in 1958
Ascon Landfill Site Boundaries
Legend
Cannery Street
Disposal SiteCannery Street
Disposal Site
Ascon Landfill Site
Ascon Landfill Site
1961 1967
Cannery Street Disposal Site Figure 1.3-2
Revised Feasibility Study
Ascon Landfill Site, Huntington Beach, California September 2007 Figure 1.4-1Site History - Site Aerial Characteristics with Hauler and Waste Manifest Time Frames Revised Feasibility Study
Ascon Landfill Site, Huntington Beach, California September 2007 1938
1940 1950 1970 1980 1990
Steverson Brothers’ Records
and Documents Destroyed
by Fire (1970)
1947
1953
1959
1983
1976
1999
20001960
Steverson BrothersGarrish
Brothers
Ascon Landfill was operational between 1938 and 1984
DTSC
ASCON NESI 1 2 3
Managed by Developers 1985 - 2001 4
REGULATOR
OWNER
OPERATION
4 Surviving manifests
time window
1. 1993-1995: Signal Mortgage Co.
2. 1995-2001: Signal Mortgage Co. & Savannah Resources Corp. – Agreement between companies to do RI/FS and RAP
3. 2001-2003: Beach Coast Properties ’96 L.P. & Beach Coast Properties ’98 L.P. – Ownership divided between two entities related to Signal Mortgage
4. May 2003 to Present: Cannery Hamilton Properties, LLC – LLC owned by Chevron and ConocoPhillips
Waste Disposal
Ended in 1984
3 2006
Figure 1.7-1The Feasibility Study Process
Revised Feasibility Study
Ascon Landfill Site, Huntington Beach, California September 2007
1. Define Remedial Action
Objectives and ARARs
2. Define Waste Units
and Their Volumes
3. Identify Remedial
Technologies and
Their Process Options
4. Perform Screening of
Process Options
Based on
Effectiveness,
Implementability, and
Cost
5. Perform Treatability
Investigations and
Pilot Testing for
Certain Retained
Process Options
6. Determine Representative
Process Options for Use in
Remedial Alternatives
7. Assemble Retained
Process Options into
Remedial Alternatives
8. Perform Detailed and
Comparative Evaluations of
Remedial Alternatives Based
on Nine NCP Criteria
9. Identify Preferred
Alternative(s)