Category Archives: Clean Water Action

Benicia CA, Clean Water Action, EPA, Travis Air Force Base, Valero Benicia Refinery

Travis Air Force Base ordered to address dishonorable discharges

[BenIndy Contributor Nathalie Christian – Here’s more on the latest EPA action in Solano County, this time at Travis Air Force Base. Travis AFB’s 6,368-acre site is located in Fairfield, California. Cheeky headlines aside, jet fuel spilling into creeks and contaminating groundwater is no joke. These spills represent a tremendous danger most immediately to Union Creek’s delicate ecosystem and could create public health impacts down the road. – N.C.]

EPA Orders U.S. Air Force to Address Oil Discharge at Travis Air Force Base

May 4, 2023

Contact Information: John Senn (senn.john@epa.gov)

SAN FRANCISCO – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today issued an emergency order to the U.S. Air Force to enhance and expedite measures to address an ongoing oil discharge into Union Creek from the Travis Air Force Base (Travis AFB) in Solano County, Calif. EPA has determined that a substantial threat exists to local waterbodies and shorelines because of the ongoing discharge and previous similar incidents on Travis AFB.

“This order is critical for ensuring that the Air Force addresses the oil discharge into Union Creek in a thorough and timely manner, and that no impacts to public health occur,” said EPA Pacific Southwest Regional Administrator Martha Guzman. “EPA is committed to fully utilizing our authorities to make sure that the current oil discharge is stopped and similar incidents are prevented.”

The order, issued under the Clean Water Act, compels the Air Force take a series of steps to mitigate the oil discharge, including:

  • Utilizing oil spill recovery equipment and techniques to limit the spread of oil in Union Creek;
  • Investigating and mitigating the source of the oil;
  • Collecting and analyzing water and sediment samples in Union Creek; and
  • Implementing actions to prevent oil from entering the storm drain and creek.

The order also requires the Air Force to enter into a unified command structure that brings together the oil spill response expertise of federal, state and local governments to address the discharge. Agencies actively engaged in the response include EPA, the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Office of Spill Prevention and Response, and Solano County.

Oil discharges to Union Creek from Travis AFB were first identified by the Air Force as early as October 2021, but were not reported to EPA or the National Response Center until February 4, 2022. Since that time, the Air Force has made numerous notifications to the National Response Center regarding an oil sheen on Union Creek, including reporting a spill of jet fuel from a pipeline on the base on August 4, 2022. These spill notifications have continued to occur in 2023. EPA analyses of samples collected from the pipeline spill area and from the sheen on Union Creek indicate the contamination at both areas are likely from a common source. On December 21, 2022, the San Francisco Bay Water Quality Control Board sent the Air Force a notice of noncompliance for discharges of jet fuel to Union Creek.

The Air Force has yet to take action to identify and address the source of the oil discharge to Union Creek. The initial oil spill response efforts implemented by the Air Force at Travis AFB were limited, and these efforts were only upgraded after input from EPA and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Office of Spill Prevention and Response.

Learn more about EPA’s work at Travis Air Force Base.

Learn more about EPA’s Pacific Southwest Region. Connect with us on Facebook and on Twitter.

Baltimore MD, Clean Water Action, Crude By Rail, Crude Oil, Derailment, Explosion, Keeping Watch on Earth News, Local land use authority, Local Regulation, Oil refineries

Baltimore council members propose ban on new crude oil facilities

From an email by Jennifer Kunze, Maryland Program Organizer, 
Clean Water Action
[See also the Baltimore Sun story, below]

Thu, Oct 19, 2017

Hi everyone,

Just wanted to share the exciting news that the Baltimore zoning code change to prohibit new or expanded crude oil terminals has been officially introduced!  You can download the bill here, and here is some coverage of it in the Baltimore Sun and our local NPR station.  Taylor and I would be happy to answer any questions about it!

Have a great day,

Jennifer Kunze
Maryland Program Organizer
Clean Water Action
Website – Facebook – Twitter

Repost from The Baltimore Sun

Baltimore council members propose ban on new crude oil facilities

By Ian Duncan, October 16, 2017

Two members of the Baltimore City Council want to ban new crude oil terminals from the city as part of an effort to limit the number of oil trains traveling through the area.

Council members Mary Pat Clarke and Ed Reisinger introduced a proposed change to the city’s zoning laws Monday that would add the oil terminals to a list of banned facilities, ranking them alongside nuclear power plants and incinerators.

“Crude oil shipments are potential hazards to residents and entire neighborhoods,” Reisinger said in a statement.

The council members said they were turning to the zoning code because federal law stops city authorities from directly regulating rail. They hope limiting the terminal capacity will mean there will be less interest in sending oil trains to Baltimore.

Two existing facilities in Baltimore would be allowed to stay but could not expand in any way under the proposal.

For years environmental activists have been sounding the alarm about crude oil that is transported by rail, which can lead to deadly explosions in the case of an accident. In 2013, 47 people died when a train carrying crude oil exploded in Canada.

Precise details of the shipments are scarce, but with the price of oil low, the practice is widely believed to currently be at a low ebb. Rob Doolittle, a spokesman for CSX Transportation, said no oil trains have operated in Baltimore or anywhere else on the company’s network for months. Doolittle also said the company has never run dedicated oil trains through the city, but had moved small amounts of crude on mixed trains.

Clarke said the dip in the market meant it was the right time for the council to take up the proposed restrictions.

“It doesn’t put jobs in jeopardy,” she said. “We don’t know when the marketplace may change. If it does we want to have already capped out the capacity of Baltimore facilities.”

The operator of one of the existing terminals declined to comment; the other did not respond to questions.

Environmental groups say there’s reason to think that if the price of oil picks up again, companies would seek to expand the number of terminals in Baltimore. That’s what happened during the last boom several years ago, but the plans were blocked.

Jennifer Kunze, an organizer with Clean Water Action, said it makes sense to put limits in place now.

“This is really a preventative measure,” she said.