Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 06061995 - 1.87 T0: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra FROM: HARVEY E. BRAGDON Costa DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - (wry �� DATE: June 6, 1995 �lVu SUBJECT: Ratification of Zoning Administrator's Decision Regarding Shell Oil Company's Compliance with Conditions of Approval (LUP 2009-92) SPECIFIC REQUXST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS f Ratify the Zoning Administrator' s decision that Shell Oil Company has complied with Conditions #18, 19 and 21 of their land use permit. FISCAL IMPACT None BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS Condition #18 This condition requires Shell Oil Company to provide evidence that the program to reduce nitrogen oxide emissions to below the level of significance through urea injection control technology has been implemented. The total expected nitrogen oxide emissions from the project, as reflected both in the Draft EIR and the final Air District permit, is 231 . 5 tons per year. The standard of significance is 27 tons per year. Therefore, Shell must demonstrate a 204 . 5 tons per year reduction to maintain emissions below the County' s standard of significance. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) approved Shell ' s Authority to Construct (ATC) permit on ril 3, 1995. Permit Condition Number 85 and 86 require SheA o m lement urea injection control technology to reduce nit o n e ssions CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNAT RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR OMMEND IO OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S) : ACTION OF BOARD ON June 6 , 1995 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED x OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A x UNANIMOUS (ABSENT TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. Contact: Catherine Kutsuris (510/646-2036) ATTESTED June 6 , 1995 cc: - Community Development Department (CDD) PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF Shell Oil (via CDD) THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BY DEPUTY CK: drb CK1\bo\Shl Shell Oil Company June 6, 1995 Page Two from its three existing CO boilers by 563 . 7 tons per year, and to operate continuous emission monitors to demonstrate compliance on a daily basis . This emission reduction required by the BAAQMD permit will reduce nitrogen oxide emissions to a level that is "less than significant" by our County' s standards . The BAAQMD permit includes a monitoring program to ensure that the nitrogen oxide reduction program has been implemented and that the required reductions are met . Condition #19 This condition requires Shell Oil Company to provide evidence that the program to reduce sulfur oxide emissions below a level of significance has been approved by the BAAQMD and has been implemented. The total expected sulfur oxide emissions from the project, as reflected in the BAAQMD permit, is 210 tons per year. The standard of significance used for the environmental impact report is 27 tons per year. Thus, Shell must demonstrate a 183 ton per year reduction in sulfur oxide emissions to meet this condition of their land use permit. Shell ' s Authority to Construct permit was approved by the BAAQMD on April 3, 1995. Conditions Number 90 and 95 require a 255.2 ton per year reduction in sulfur oxides from Shell ' s existing three CO Boilers, upon start up of the Distillate Hydrotreater. This reduction far exceeds the 183 tons per year reduction needed to reduce sulfur oxide emissions to a level that is less than significant. For approximately one year, seven other Clean Fuels project units will be brought on line prior to the operation of the Distillate Hydrotreater. As required by the BAAQMD permit, Shell Oil will incrementally reduce existing on-site sulfur oxide emissions enough to offset project emissions to below the 27 ton per year standard. The last of these units to come on line (sulfur recovery unit) may cause an exceedance of the standard for the two to four week period prior to the start up of the Distillate Hydrotreater. However, the long term net reduction in sulfur oxide emissions due to the Clean Fuels Project would more than offset this temporary exceedence. Condition #21 This condition requires Shell Oil Company to provide confirmation that their proposed PM10 control measures will be sufficient to reduce PM10 emissions to below a level of significance. The total expected particulate emissions from the project, as reflected both in the Draft EIR and the final BAAQMD permit, is 63 .2 tons per year. The standard of significance is 15 tons per year. Therefore, Shell must demonstrate at least a 48 . 2 ton per year reduction to maintain emissions below the County' s standard of significance. The BAAQMD has confirmed that reducing nitrogen oxide emissions leads to a reduction in particulates (PM10) , at a six to one ratio. That is, every six tons per year reduction in nitrogen oxide will result in a one ton per year reduction in particulates (PM10) . In this case, Shell expects a 563 . 7 tons per year reduction in nitrogen oxide emissions from its existing CO Boilers, due to urea injection. Less than half this amount -- 204 . 5 tons per year -- is needed to satisfy Condition of Approval #18, reducing nitrogen oxide emissions to below the level of significance . The remaining 359.2 tons per year reduction in nitrogen oxides can be used to calculate the reduction in particulates (PM10) . Using the 6: 1 ratio, 359.2 tons per year of nitrogen oxide reduction is expected to Shell Oil Company June 6, 1995 Page Three reduce particulates by 59. 9 ton per year. Thus, the urea injection technology will result in a 59. 9 tons per year reduction in particulates (PM10) , which exceeds the 48 .2 ton per year reduction needed to meet Condition of Approval #21 . Shell ' s emission reduction program and the analytic technique used to demonstrate compliance have been approved by the BAAQMD. When the Board of Supervisors approved the land use permit for Shell Oil Company' s Clean Fuels Project (County Land Use Permit #2009-92) , the Board specified that the Zoning Administrator' s decision regarding several conditions of approval be placed on the Board' s consent calendar for ratification. As directed by the Board at the October 4, 1994 meeting, the County Zoning Administrator' s decisions discussed herein have been placed on the Zoning Administrator' s agenda for June 5, 1995. Any comments received at that meeting will be forwarded to the Board.