Category Archives: Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD)

Air District fines Valero for recent emission release violations

Repost from KQED News
[Editor: Significant quote: “The risk of these tiny particles getting into people’s lungs is yet another example of the dangers of living near a dirty refinery,” said Hollin Kretzmann, a staff attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity. “Communities should not have to be afraid of breathing in pollution that could affect their health.”  – R.S.]

Air District Hits Valero With Violations Over Benicia Refinery Releases

By Ted Goldberg, Mar 15, 2019
A sooty plume, containing petroleum coke particulates, emerging from flare stacks this week at Valero’s Benicia refinery. (Solano County Department of Resource Management)

Local air regulators have issued seven notices of violation against the Valero Energy Corp. over a malfunction at its Benicia refinery that has led to the release of petroleum coke dust from the facility since Monday.

The problem has led to a response by four agencies: the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and Solano County health officials have launched investigations into the releases; the U.S. Environmental Protection Administration and the Benicia Fire Department are monitoring the situation.

It’s unclear how long the problem will last.

“Valero is telling us they are unable to give an estimate of when it will be resolved,” said Benicia Fire Chief Josh Chadwick.

A Valero representative says the malfunction is tied to a device that removes particulates during a process that takes place inside the refinery.

“We have been experiencing operational issues with the flue gas scrubber,” said company spokeswoman Lillian Riojas.

That led to so-called coke fines — very small carbon particulates that are a byproduct of the oil refining process — being released from the refinery’s flare stacks.

Normally, warm water vapor moves through the refinery’s towers and exits the stacks as steam, but the petcoke particulates make the plume appear dark and sooty.

“The fines remained in the raw exhaust gas,” said Professor Eric Smith, associate director of the Tulane Energy Institute, specializing in refinery operations.

“The dark smoke will continue until all of the fines in the lines leading to the exhaust stack have been cleared from the system,” Smith said.

While the material is not hazardous, the releases could include trace amounts of heavy metals, according to Terry Schmidtbauer, Solano County’s assistant director of resource management.

Valero’s Riojas did not respond to follow-up questions about the status of the scrubber that led to this week’s releases, but Benicia Fire’s Chadwick said Friday that “the maintenance issue has been resolved.”

So far, air tests have not raised concerns among the agencies monitoring the site. Crews have not detected high levels of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide or particulate matter, according to Chadwick.

And Schmidtbauer says the situation is slowly improving — the amount of coke dust coming from the facility has been lessening.

Nevertheless, the air district has issued four notices of violation against Valero for visible emissions and three for public nuisance,  agency spokesman Ralph Borrmann said.

The U.S. EPA says significant quantities of dust from pet coke can present a health risk.

“The risk of these tiny particles getting into people’s lungs is yet another example of the dangers of living near a dirty refinery,” said Hollin Kretzmann, a staff attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity. “Communities should not have to be afraid of breathing in pollution that could affect their health.”

The problem represents one of the more extensive malfunctions at the refinery since it lost all power on May 5, 2017, an event that led to a major release of pollution, shelter-in-place and evacuation orders.

From California to Alberta: we must stand against tar sands

Repost from STAND.earth
[Editor: STAND is asking for your signature on a petition.  Go here.  – R.S.]

NO MORE TAR SANDS TANKERS IN CALIFORNIA

The science is in— tar sands oil is much dirtier than conventional crude. It has an outsized climate impact, is terrible for air quality, and when it spills it’s much harder to clean up than conventional crude oil. And now Phillips 66 wants to expand its refinery to process more tar sands in the San Francisco Bay Area.

This would significantly increase the amount of oil tankers coming into the Phillips 66 refinery in the bay! In addition to its negative impacts on California,increasing tar sands production is bad for indigenous communities at the source in Alberta, and transporting it via oil tankers threatens devastating oil spills in the waters of British Columbia, Washington, and Oregon as well.

It’s important that the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors, Gov. Newsom, and other key decision makers do everything they can to stop Phillips 66 from completing this expansion project.

Thanks to public pressure from people like you, in 2017 we defeated Phillip 66’s plan to build an oil train terminal in San Luis Obispo that would have also imported tar sands. Phillips 66’s marine terminal and refinery expansion is their last ditch effort to bring more dangerous and dirty tar sands to their Bay Area refinery and we need your help. Will you join us in urging Gov. Newsom and other key decision makers to reject this harmful proposal?

To BAAQMD, Contra Costa Board of Supervisors, Gov. Newsom, and other key decision makers in California:

Tar sands oil harms our air, water, climate, and indigenous communities. We respectfully urge you to reject Phillips 66’s refinery expansion that would double the number of tankers delivering to their refinery and allow them to process tar sands.

To add your voice, click here.

MUST SEE: All about particulate matter air pollution in the Bay Area

From James Leach of Lafayette, CA, on YouTube
[Editor: This is a really important, really helpful, informative and challenging video. I thought I knew all about air pollution, but I learned a lot here.  It’s 38 minutes, so get comfortable or bookmark and come back when you have a little time.  – R.S.]

Clearing the air

By James Leach, published on Aug 19, 2018
Solving the particulate matter air pollution problem in Lafayette, California and the San Francisco Bay Area Region.

Valero to pay huge fines – again – for air quality violations

Repost from the Vallejo Times-Herald
[Editor: These fines are routinely written off by giant Valero as a cost of doing business.  Examples from recent years: Valero Benicia Refinery fined $122,500 in 2016.  And fined $183,000 in 2014.  IMPORTANT: Benicia Mayor Patterson and residents have repeatedly petitioned the Bay Area Air District to channel at least SOME of these fines to the affected community.  The District has suggested responsiveness, but failed to engage meaningfully.  Again in today’s news, the District will keep the fines for its own use, leaving the polluted community adrift in the wind (as it were).  – R.S.]

Valero paying $266,000 for air quality violation

By John Glidden, October 10, 2018 5:45 pm | UPDATED: 7:38 pm
A photo of the Valero Benicia Refinery taken at night in May 2014.

BENICIA — Valero Refining Co. will pay $266,000 to settle 22 air quality violations that took place mostly in 2016 at the Valero Benicia Refinery, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) announced this week.

“This settlement helps to ensure that Valero remains vigilant in running its operations according to all air quality regulations,” said Jack Broadbent, executive officer of BAAQMD, in a district news release. “Our air district enforcement and source testing teams, together with a variety of other tools are in place to ensure refineries comply with their permits.”

Eleven of the violations were for exceeding emission limits, with nine of them being detected by monitors which measure emissions from refinery equipment, the air district said in a news release. Officials said the other two violations were discovered by a source test conducted by the facility’s contractor and by a BAAQMD inspector.

Seven additional violations were recorded for hydrocarbon leaks from storage tanks or lines, while two violations were given because there were errors in an inspection database which resulted in missed leak inspections for valves omitted from the database, officials explained in the same release.

Single violations were assessed for a missed calibration on an emissions monitor and a failed monitor accuracy test, officials said.

The Air District said in the same release that violators must respond to a violation notice within ten days and further submit a detailed description of what actions they will take to correct the problem.

Officials said the settlement funds will be by the air district to fund future inspection and enforcement activities.

A representative with Valero couldn’t be reached for comment prior to press deadline.