Valero Raises Objections to Proposed Benicia Industrial Safety Ordinance

By BenIndy and Claude,* August 23, 2024

Valero Refining Company has submitted a 34-page, comprehensive letter to Benicia city officials in the form of a public comment objecting to the draft Industrial Safety Ordinance (ISO) proposed for adoption in Benicia before the end of the year. The letter notes the Texas-based fossil fuel giant’s concerns regarding the draft ordinance, which City leaders hope to use to strengthen local oversight of industrial facilities within city limits.

This post offers a brief overview of Valero’s key objections as well as legal challenges it may be considering to fight the implementation of safety and health provisions for Benicia residents.

This should be obvious by now, but here’s a disclaimer if you need one: This post will be demonstrating strong bias in support of the adoption of a robust and comprehensive local ordinance for our health and safety.

The following represents the commentary and opinions of its authors, and no other group or individual.

Key Objections

Valero’s objections encompass a range of issues, but these are probably the biggest, with initial commentary:

• Regulatory Redundancy: Valero argues that the ISO unnecessarily replicates existing federal, state, and local regulations, including those enforced by Solano County CUPA, CalOSHA, federal OSHA, BAAQMD, CARB, CalEPA, and the EPA.
  • • And Valero definitely isn’t leaning into the complex network of agencies and acts and acronyms to scare us away from scrutinizing their letter, not at all. 
• City’s Expertise: The company contends that Benicia lacks the necessary expertise to manage complex industrial safety regulations.
  • • Way to have confidence in our awesome City staff and Fire Department, boys. Way to think about leveling up our own local resources through investment and training. Team work makes the dream work! 
• Legal Concerns: The letter outlines potential preemption issues with state and federal laws, along with constitutional concerns.
  • • Oh, my heavens!! The constitution, too!?! 
• Air Quality Monitoring: Valero opposes the new air quality monitoring requirements proposed in the ordinance, citing them as duplicative and ambiguous.
  • • Definitely a terrible idea to have more than the air monitoring stations the refinery runs and “monitors” active in our community. Definitely a terrible idea to have community or third-party oversight. What a very bad, very stupid idea.
• Public Participation: The company raises concerns about the increased public involvement in safety reviews and incident investigations.
  • • LOL!!! We are not making this up! That’s the good neighbor we all know and love. 
• Taxation Issues: Valero claims that some fees outlined in the ordinance could be considered illegal taxes under California law.
  • • First the constitution, now tax law?! Dang. Those lawyers be pullin’ out all the stops to earn those billable hours. Is maritime law next? 
• Impact on Cooperation: The company warns that the ordinance could undermine the current cooperation and partnership between Valero and the City.
  • • The one that is working so well that 44.4% of respondents in the City survey about the ISO stated they wanted “significantly more oversight” over industrial facilities in Benicia. Definitely. We all have SO much confidence in the cooperation agreement and would not want to undermine it, no never. 

Legal Implications

While Valero’s letter stops short of threatening legal action, it (AHEM AHEM) cautions (COUGH) that the City may face significant legal challenges if the ordinance is adopted as currently written.

These potential challenges include:

• Preemption issues due to conflicts with state and federal regulations
• Constitutional claims related to takings, due process, and equal protection
• Possible violations of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
• Challenges to the fee structure as potentially constituting illegal taxation

Valero argues that these issues could render the ordinance unenforceable and financially burdensome for both the City and Valero. The company suggests that, rather than adopting the ordinance, the City should focus on renewing its existing Cooperation Agreement with Valero…which is absolutely perfect, and was written by geniuses, and there was a parade, and cake, and nothing bad ever happened again in Benicia after it was adopted, at all, ever!

Yeah. Definitely no years and years of failing to disclose issues and failures and no leaks and no emissions scandals and no wild flaring and no smoke billowing scarily and no weird noises and no weird smells and no non-public, half-hidden, barely promoted meetings with a so-called oversight body effectively run by the refinery and no schools closing and no neighborhoods being evacuated and no people getting sick and no increased asthma rates and no families literally moving away when incidents occur because they are scared for their safety, their lives, and their community. None.

Obviously, an ISO won’t help with all of that. But it could help with some.

And we at the BenIndy believe in an ISO for Benicia. We believe our City leaders will deliver the health and safety guardrails residents need to feel safe and to thrive in this amazing community.

We also believe there’s a reason to support the sustenance of the refinery and the employees it supports. We believe in collaboration in support of the health and safety of not just Benicia residents but also the many staff and contractors Valero employs, and we believe in the shared responsibility Benicia have over the sustainability and longevity of Benicia – our community, our culture, and our economy – without the 34 pages.

As of the time of posting, the City of Benicia has not officially responded to Valero’s objections. BenIndy did not seek comment from any affiliated parties.

Also at the time of posting, the authors of this piece would like to acknowledge the beauty of the delicate and incredibly intricate crane-mating dance Valero managed to pull off in this letter, what with the “We’re not saying we’ll sue, just that, y’know, someone might, haha. We’re not saying it’s us, right? We are definitely not threatening to sue you. But, you know. Someone might sue you, and we wanted to warn you. Because we’re just such good friends and neighbors! xoxo”

Weirdos. Stay tuned.

---

*The development of some content for this article was assisted by Claude, an artificial intelligence created by Anthropic, then heavily edited and adjusted, with new content added. If using AI to parse a 34-page public comment from a fossils fuels giant, written by busloads of lawyers and bursting with acronyms and legalese and posturing and much other silliness is bad, or if you don’t think AI should help parents and grandparents run free blogs serving a small city with big problems, please know that there was a call made today and it may not be made the same way tomorrow. This was a needs-must situation, and we are disclosing the assistance we received from this program. Thank you for understanding.