Category Archives: Benicia Planning Commission

Another go-round: Valero environmental report due Monday, Aug. 31

Repost from the Benicia Herald
[Editor: CONFIRMED: the first Planning Commission hearing will be on Tuesday, September 29, 6:30pm at City Hall Council Chambers.  If additional speakers wish to offer public comments, subsequent hearings will be held on Wednesday, September 30, Thursday, October 1 and Thursday, October 8 (presumably at the same time and location?).  The 45-day public comment period will close on October 15.  – RS]

Another go-round: Valero report due

By Donna Beth Weilenman, August 26, 2015

Public to have 45 days to comment after Aug. 31 release of review of Crude-by-Rail Project

A revised version of the Valero Crude-by-Rail Draft Environmental Impact Report is due to be released Monday, Principal Planner Amy Million said.

The revision is the latest step in a series of actions that began in early 2013, when Valero Benicia Refinery applied for a use permit to extend Union Pacific Railroad lines into its property so crude oil could be delivered by rail car.

That oil would replace the same volume of barrels brought in by tanker ship, the refinery said, and no other operations would be changed.

The project involved other modifications, such as adding an off-loading rack that would remove oil from parallel rows of rail cars; adding pipeline; and employing other methods to reduce the chance of spillage.

The refinery said it expected 50 to 100 additional rail cars to arrive up to twice a day, brought in at a time of day when there would be little impact on traffic. The trains would carry 70,000 barrels of North American crude each day, replacing shipped barrels from foreign sources, the refinery said in its use permit application.

The refinery also said that increases in emissions from locomotives would be more than offset by the reduction in emissions from oceanic tanker ships.

At the time, Charlie Knox, the city’s former director of community development, said if the permits were approved quickly, the project could be operational by early 2014.

However, during subsequent Planning Commission and City Council meetings, enough members of the public asked for a more comprehensive environmental impact report (EIR) to dig deeper than the mitigated negative declaration report that had been presented as a way to comply with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act.

The initial draft, or DEIR, of the document initially was expected to be completed before the end of 2013, but extensive public comment from those on both sides of the issue delayed its completion, and the document wasn’t released until June 17, 2014.

After many residents said 45 days wouldn’t be enough to examine and offer comments on the DEIR, the Planning Commission extended the official public review period on the hefty document.

That panel also conducted several hearings of its own, giving the public a chance to speak in person in addition to offering written comments. The hearings filled the Council chamber, and overflow seating was arranged in the City Hall courtyard, Commission Room and several conference rooms.

Nor were Benicia residents the only ones to weigh in on the topic. Representatives of cities uprail from Benicia told the Planning Commission that locomotives going through their communities en route to Benicia would emit greenhouse gases that wouldn’t be offset by reduced shipping.

Others expressed fear that rail cars weren’t strong enough to prevent explosions should those carrying volatile Bakken crude get overturned in a derailment, and questioned whether emergency preparations have been sufficient.

State Sen. Lois Wolk, D-Davis, said Benicians were “wise” to demand the EIR, but said the first draft wasn’t adequate.

Writing a letter after the public comment period had closed, Attorney General Kamala D. Harris urged a rewrite of the DEIR, too.

While U.S. Rep. Mike Thompson, D-Napa, hasn’t commented directly on the project, he and other members of Congress have asked Secretary of Transportation Anthony Foxx to make crude shipments by rail safer.

Some residents used the opportunity to complain about conventional-fuel vehicles and the traffic the additional rail cars would create in Benicia’s Industrial Park. Others spoke about the importance of Valero to Benicia, as an employer, taxpayer and donor to community causes.

The controversial project also touched Mayor Elizabeth Patterson.

City Attorney Heather McLaughlin worried about the mayor’s email alerts, to which some residents subscribe, that Patterson used to provide information about the Crude-by-Rail Project and other subjects of interest to Benicians.

Last year, McLaughlin urged Patterson to recuse herself from participating in any decision-making on the topic, pointing to the potential of a later lawsuit on the basis of possible bias on the part of the mayor.

Patterson, citing advice from her lawyer, refused to recuse herself.

Since the original application and subsequent debate, both official and otherwise, environmental interest groups as well as the refinery have conducted public meetings about the project; those opposed have staged protests and assembled periodic marches that went through Pittsburg, Martinez, Richmond and other cities.

Such public participation isn’t unusual, Amy Million said: “I was not involved in prior EIRs with the city. I believe the Arsenal and Benicia Business Park generated a good amount of public interest.”

Public comments as well as answers to questions have been incorporated in the DEIR that will be released Monday, she said. The Recirculated DEIR (RDEIR) is a new document that only addresses the portions of the original DEIR that needed to be rewritten.

Million said it’s not a complete DEIR rewrite. In fact, it’s less than 300 pages, she said, including appendices that make up a third of the document.

The DEIR in total is 1,470 pages.

“The RDEIR includes additional risk analysis of transporting crude by rail and addresses comments regarding impacts beyond Roseville, which were not included in the DEIR,” Million said Tuesday.

It will be released for a new 45-day comment and circulation period, Million said. As with the original DEIR, this document will be presented to the Planning Commission for review, and that panel will accept comments at its public hearing and add observations of its own.

When those comments are collected, they’ll be incorporated into the final version of the environmental report, Million said.

“Once the Final EIR is ready, it will go before the Planning Commission for certification,” she said. “The use permit and EIR only go to the City Council on appeal.”

She said 20 paper copies of the document will be made available at no charge on a first-come, first-served basis.

Copies also will be placed at Benicia Public Library, 150 East L St., and at the Community Development Department at Benicia City Hall, 250 East L St., where individuals can read it.

In addition, a PDF copy that can be downloaded as well as read will be added to the city website, www.ci.benicia.ca.us.

Valero Benicia oil train hearing – September 29

By Roger Straw, Editor
[Editor: UPDATE ON 8/26/15: CONFIRMED: the first Planning Commission hearing will be on Tuesday, September 29, 6:30pm at City Hall Council Chambers.  If additional speakers wish to offer public comments, subsequent hearings will be held on Wednesday, September 30, Thursday, October 1 and Thursday, October 8 (presumably at the same time and location?).  The 45-day public comment period will close on October 15.  – RS]

Benicia Planning Commission hearings will likely begin on Tuesday, September 29, 2015

The City of Benicia posted a notice on August 13 that the next Planning Commission hearing on Valero’s proposed Crude by Rail project will be held on Tuesday, September 29, 2015.   If the hearing is held on that date, the Commissioners and public will begin their review of the RECIRCULATED Draft Environmental Impact Report, time and location yet to be announced.

The Planning Division’s 8/13/15 listing of Current Planning Projects shows a Planning Commission meeting on 9/29, designated for review of Valero’s Use Permit, and notes, “Railway extension inside refinery. Recirculated Draft EIR anticipated to be released for public review period on August 31, 2015.”

The meeting does not yet appear on the City’s Planning Commission webpage.  Nor has it been posted on the Valero Crude By Rail page on the City’s website.

As of today according to the City’s Planning Department, the R-DEIR will be released as scheduled, on August 31, 2015.  (Note correction: previously published information that the release would be on 8/29 was in error.)

We will let you know when dates and locations of future hearings are confirmed.

Roger Straw: Crude by rail is dangerous — and dirty!

Repost from the Benicia Herald

Crude by rail is dangerous — and dirty!

By Roger Straw, August 2, 2015
Roger Straw

BACK IN JUNE OF 2013, I was alarmed to discover that Valero had plans to make me and all of Benicia complicit in the massive destruction taking place in the pristine forests of Alberta, Canada. With city Planning Commission approval, Valero planned to purchase crude oil taken from strip mines in Canada that are the dirtiest producers of oil on earth, then ship it on dangerous trains all across the West to our back yard.

Since then, Benicians have learned much more about Valero’s proposal. We’ve learned that Valero would also like to ship volatile Bakken crude oil, taken from fracking facilities in North Dakota and the Upper Midwest, on these trains. Bakken oil has proven different from most other crude, based on the eight accidents since July 2013 involving derailed trains that carried Bakken oil and resulted in massive fires and explosions. Several explosive train derailments have also been loaded with diluted tar sands crude.

Benicians have also learned much more about the trains themselves. Now we know how weak the train cars are, and how the federal government has established new rules that give industry years to strengthen them. Old DOT-111 tank cars still roll down our tracks. Updated — but still highly inadequate — DOT-1232 cars continue to roll, and retrofits of the older cars are to be spread out over the next decade. The railroads circumvent reporting requirements on their shipments to our state and county emergency responders by assembling trains that carry less than a million gallons of crude oil. And even when everything else goes right, aging railroad ties and rails will break, bridges will fail, and there aren’t enough inspectors. The accidents will continue.

Americans are sick of seeing the huge balls of fire on TV. We pray that the next BIG ONE will not be in a highly populated area — but we can’t reasonably pray there will be no next BIG ONE. It’s a matter of when, not if.

Finally, even if all the public safety issues could be solved, Valero’s proposal does far more harm to the environment than the company would have us think. Beginning at the source, production of these North American “extreme crudes” is beyond ugly: oil companies strip and gouge and pollute the soil, destroy wildlife habitat and contribute to soaring cancer rates in human communities. They foul the social fabric of small towns and farming communities with a disruptive boom-and-bust economy. Then come the trains, polluting the air from the upper Midwest all the way to Benicia, clattering over mountains and through gorgeous river passes and right through the hearts of our cities and towns, rattling and clattering near our schools, retirement villages, commercial and industrial centers and homes. In all this (if we give our permission), at every step along the way, the oil and rail industries contribute mightily to the warming of planet Earth.

Valero would like us to think that crude oil trains will save on air pollution by cutting back on the number of marine oil tankers. This may hold for a small region like the San Francisco Bay Area, but the city of Benicia’s own study showed that there would be “significant and unavoidable” impacts to air quality outside the Bay Area. Experts add that there would be “toxic plumes” all along the rail lines: “This thing called ‘crude shrinkage’ happens during transport, where entrained gases escape, leading to a 0.5- to 3-percent loss of crude oil. It’s a big problem for volatile crude oils like Bakken, and coupled with the high benzene levels found in some North American crudes (up to 7 percent) …we estimate over 100 pounds per day of excess benzene emissions from the Valero proposal in the Bay Area (or 1800 times more than the draft EIR reports),” said NRDC Senior Scientist Diane Bailey. Read her blog here: http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/dbailey/valeros_promise_to_benicia_wel.html.

In short, oil trains are dangerous AND dirty.

The city of Benicia will release a revised draft environmental impact report on Valero’s proposal at the end of August. Everyone should stay tuned. Be prepared to study the document, read critical reviews, and share a comment with our Planning Commission. Together, we can make a difference.

City of Benicia provides answers on recirculation process

By Roger Straw, March 27, 2015

On March 12, 2015, Marilyn Bardet represented Benicians For a Safe and Healthy Community (BSHC) at the Benicia Planning Commission meeting, reading a lengthy list of questions concerning the City’s process as it determined to recirculate Valero’s Crude By Rail proposal.

Today, the City of Benicia sent the following announcement by email, responding to the BSHC letter:

On March 12, 2015, Benicians For a Safe and Healthy Community provided a letter to the Planning Commission (c/o Benicia City Hall) on behalf of the public with questions regarding the City’s process for the Valero Crude by Rail Project EIR. This letter and staff’s response has been uploaded onto the City’s Valero Crude by Rail Project webpage under “Miscellaneous Information” located at the bottom of the page.

The PDF letter and response by Principal Planner Amy Million can be viewed here.  (Note that I have requested the City provide a version of the document in searchable text.)

An analysis of the City’s response will be forthcoming.