Category Archives: Crude By Rail

Benicia City Council, Carbon emissions, Crude By Rail, Environmental Impacts, Environmental review, Local Regulation, Public Health, Refinery emissions, Valero Crude By Rail

LETTER OF OPPOSITION: Greg Karras, Senior Scientist for Communities for a Better Environment

By Roger Straw, March 31, 2016

This morning, Greg Karras, Senior Scientist for Communities for a Better Environment (CBE) sent the Benicia City Council a 15-page Expert Report, Regarding the Appeal of Planning Commission Actions on the Valero Benicia Crude by Rail Project and Environmental Impact Report (EIR).

For Mr. Karras’ lengthy attachments, see the City of Benicia’s posting of letters received March 25-31.

SIGNIFICANT EXCERPT:

Valero’s appeal asserts … that: “All of the public discussion about the Project has focused on the impacts of rail operations.” …The assertion that “[a]ll public discussion about the Project has focused on the impacts of rail operations”2 is inaccurate and misleading. Goodman and Rowan (2013) showed that the project could change the refinery’s crude slate.3 Fox (2013) showed this could cause significant impacts from refining operations.4 By 1 July 2013 at least eleven groups, including CBE and the refinery workers union United Steelworkers (Local 675), sought full disclosure and analysis of the changes in refinery oil feedstock and emissions that could result from the project.5 The EIR identified this potential for project-driven changes in its crude slate to cause impacts in the refinery as an “area of controversy.”6 Fox (2014),7 Pless (2014),8 Karras (2014),9 Fox (2016),10 Pless (2016)11 and others12 commented in detail on the EIR’s failure to evaluate these and other refining impacts of the proposed project. Valero is on record acknowledging this focus of independent public comment on refining impacts of the project, as shown by the company’s attempt, at the Planning Commission’s Public Hearing, to rebut comments regarding these refinery impacts of the project,13 in direct contradiction to its position on appeal.

Benicia City Council, Crude By Rail, Health and safety impacts, Rail accidents, Sacramento CA, Significant and unavoidable risks, Uprail communities, Valero Benicia Appeal, Valero Benicia Refinery, Valero Crude By Rail

LETTER OF OPPOSITION: Sacramento County Supervisor Phil Serna

By Roger Straw, March 31, 2016

This morning, Sacramento County Supervisor Phil Serna sent the Benicia City Council this letter of opposition to Valero’s oil trains project.

SIGNIFICANT EXCERPT:

The EIR identifies that trains accessing the project would traverse Sacramento, including the heavily populated downtown area that I represent. It would cross numerous creeks and rivers, and run immediately adjacent to and through vulnerable residential neighborhoods. A rail accident resulting in oil spills, fire or a toxic explosion could have disastrous life safety, health, environmental and economic consequences. For these reasons, I believe an increase in oil train traffic from this project poses an unacceptable risk to Sacramento County residents and the environment.

Benicia City Council, Crude By Rail, Local Regulation, Public Comment, Public permitting, Valero Benicia Appeal, Valero Benicia Refinery, Valero Crude By Rail

Benicia City Council hearings – additional meeting date: Monday, April 18

By Roger Straw, March 29, 2016
[Editor:  UPDATE – Note additional hearing date of Monday, April 18. This new date is IN ADDITION TO the previously scheduled hearings.  – RS]

Benicia City Council dates for hearings on Valero Crude by Rail appeal

Hearings began on March 15 and will continue for public comment on April 4, 6, 18 and 19

Benicia city staff has recommended that an additional day of public hearings be scheduled for Monday, April 18, 7pm at City Hall. This will be IN ADDITION TO previously scheduled hearings on Monday, April 4, Wednesday, April 6 and (if needed) Tuesday, April 19. Note that these dates for public hearings are NOT CONSECUTIVE EVENINGS as was the case in previous hearings.

On these dates, Council will hear comments on Valero’s appeal of the Benicia Planning Commission’s unanimous February 11 decision to deny Valero Crude By Rail.  Council will also hear public comment on Valero’s March 15 request to delay hearings.

Documents relating to the hearings include:

Written public comments are encouraged now!  Send your thoughts to the City Council by email directed to Amy Million, Principal Planner, Benicia Community Development Department:amillion@ci.benicia.ca.us. You may also send your letter Amy Million by mail to 250 East L Street, Benicia, CA 94510, or by Fax: (707) 747-1637.

And mark your calendar now, so you don’t forget.  Please plan to attend on Tuesday, March 15 for the presentations, and again on Monday, April 4, Wednesday, April 6 and Tuesday, April 19.  All meetings will be held at 7:00 p.m. in City Hall Council Chamber, 250 East, L Street, Benicia.

Benicia City Council, Crude By Rail, Local Regulation, Public permitting, Valero Benicia Appeal, Valero Benicia Refinery, Valero Crude By Rail

City of Benicia Agenda for April 4: staff recommends no delay

By Roger Straw, March 28, 2016

Benicia, CaliforniaToday the City of Benicia posted the much anticipated AGENDA and STAFF REPORT for the April 4th City Council hearing on Valero Crude by Rail proposal. The staff report recommends denial of Valero’s petition to “continue” – or delay – the hearings. The staff also recommends that public comment on April 4 should be open on the EIR, the Use Permit AND Valero’s request for delay.

“Procedurally, staff recommends that the Council open the public comment period and take comment on the EIR, the Use Permit and the request for continuance together. Then direct staff to track Council questions as they occur during the public hearing and to respond to those questions in full at the conclusion of public comment..”

Staff’s reasoning for denial of the delay was multi-faceted, but begins with a financial argument:

There is no budgetary impact if the request for continuance is denied. If the Council approves the request for continuance, there may be additional costs associated with potential re-noticing of the project, as well as additional staff time in reviewing any STB opinion, as well as additional staff time should updates or revisions to the EIR be necessary.

Benicia staff maintains its strong recommendation that the City Council overturn the Planning Commission’s decision and approve Valero’s dirty and dangerous proposal. Additional information can be found in the staff report AND in the FULL AGENDA PACKET.