HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 03181997 - D4 DA
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on March 18, 1997 by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Rogers, Uilkema, Gerber, Canciamilla and
DeSaulnier
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
This is the time noticed by the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors for hearing on
the annual compliance review for Shell Oil Company's Clean Fuels Project,
Martinez Refining Company (County File LUP #2009-92).
Debra Sanderson, Community Development Department, gave the staff report.
And Chairman DeSaulnier opened the.public hearing. The following persons
commented on the issue:
Ed Swiesczcz, Shell Martinez Refining, 217 Sharon Court, Martinez;
Tom Adams, Building Trades, 651 Gateway #900, South San Francisco;
Donald R. Brown, Communities for a Better Environment, 1801 Sonoma
Blvd #117, Vallejo.
Following discussion of the matter, Supervisor Gerber moved the hearing be
continued to April 8, 1997, at 4:30 p.m., Board of Supervisor's meeting.
Supervisor Canciamilla seconded the motion.
The Board took the following action:
IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the above hearing is
CONTINUED to April 8, 1997, at 4:30 p.m. in the Board Chambers.
The foregoing is a true and correct copy of an action taken
and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors
on the date sh{�wgy .
�,
ATTESTED: ��
Phil Batchelor, Clerk of the Board of
Su ervisors and County ministrator
arbara S. Grant,"tt
►erk
c.c. Debra Sanderson (CDD)
Shell Oil Company (via CDD)
T•r
Contra
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS �/{ Costa
FROM: HARVEY E. BRAGDON - County
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DATE: March 18, 1997
SUBJECT: ANNUAL COMPLIANCE REVIEW FOR SHELL OIL COMPANY'S CLEAN FUELS PROJECT
(LAND USE PERMIT #2009-92)
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS :
1 . Accept the report from the Community Development Department
Director regarding Shell Oil Company' s compliance with their
land use permit conditions .
2 . Accept any public testimony regarding Shell Oil Company' s
compliance with their land use permit .
3 . Find that Shell Oil :
A. has submitted an acceptable schedule for completing
compliance with Condition 35B for the Hydrogen Plant; and
B. has submitted reports/materials that are currently being
reviewed to determine compliance with Conditions 423, 24,
35B, 36A1 and 36B1; and
C. is in compliance with all remaining permit conditions .
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: XX YES SIGNATURE
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMIT EE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE (S)
ACTION OF BOARD ON �_ APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHE
VOTE OF SUPERVISO
I BY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A
UNANIMOUS (ABSENT - - - UE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
AYES: NOE ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
Contact: Debra Sanderson -10/335 208) ATTESTED _
cc: Community Developm Departm t PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF
Shell Oil (via ) T BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AND UNTY ADMINISTRATOR
BY , DEPUTY
DRS:aw
j:\aud she13-18.bo
Shell Oil' s Annual Compliance Review
March 18, 1997
Page 2
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS :
Condition #77 of Shell' s land use permit requires the Board of
Supervisors to hold public hearings at a frequency of once per year
during the first five years and every three years thereafter for
the sole purpose of determining their compliance with the land use
permit conditions .
Condition #78 of Shell' s land use permit requires Shell to submit
to the Director of Community Development an annual report on the
facility' s compliance with the conditions of approval . Community
Development Department staff has reviewed Shell' s annual report and
their compliance with the permit conditions . The permit' s 102
conditions have been divided into six categories :
1 . Conditions met and closed;
2 . Conditions met - Compliance ongoing;
3 . Conditions met - County Public Works is implementing;
4 . Conditions not met;
5. Compliance not yet required; and
6. Submittals under review/work in progress .
Included with this Board Order are the following documents : (1) a
summary of the staff review (Exhibit A: Condition Compliance
Summary) , (2) a more detailed staff review (Exhibit B: Shell' s
Clean Fuels Project 1996 Annual Report -- Staff Review) , and (3)
Shell' s 1996 Annual Report (Exhibit C) .
As summarized in Exhibit A, 31 Conditions have been met and closed.
Thirty-nine conditions have been met but additional compliance
review will be necessary as the project proceeds . Compliance is not
yet required for 8 conditions . Pursuant to an agreement between
Shell and the County, the Public Works Department is completing the
work specified by an additional 20 permit conditions . These
conditions relate to roadway and other infrastructure requirements
for which the County received funding from Shell .
For five conditions, either work is underway or submittals are
under review. For two of these conditions (#23 and #35B) staff is
reviewing routine submittals made as units became operational .
Three conditions (#24, #36A1, and #36B1) require input from several
agencies to establish appropriate compliance procedures, which are
very close to completion. For one condition -- 35B, Noise
Monitoring, for the Hydrogen Plant -- work is underway at Shell,
consistent with Condition 35B and the Noise Monitoring Protocol, to
ensure that the unit meets the County' s noise performance standard.
Shell has committed to completing this work by May 15, 1997 and to
submitting a noise monitoring report that demonstrates compliance
with the noise performance standard by June 15, 1997 .
A. Overall Project Status:
In October, 1996, Shell completed its third year of the Clean
Fuels Project. The project includes 21 units or portions of
units, twenty tanks, and three buildings . By the end of the
project' s third year (October, 1996) , fourteen of the twenty-
one proposed units were built and thirteen units were
operating. The fourteenth unit, the Delayed Coker, began
operating in December, 1996, and will be reported in Shell' s
next Annual Report. Eight of the proposed tanks have been
Shell Oil' s Annual Compliance Review
March 18, 1997
Page 3
built and all eight are operating. Only one of the three
proposed buildings has been built and it is operating.
Construction is essentially finished on all project elements
begun thus far.
In October, 1996, Shell reported that it expected to start
construction on the remaining units from early 1997 through
mid-1998 . However, Shell is currently reevaluating its
schedule for constructing the remaining units and will file a
revised Development Plan, as required by its land use permit,
by mid-April, 1997 .
B. Submittals Under Review or Work in Progress:
1 . Condition 35B, Noise Monitoring for Operatina Units :
Condition 35B requires Shell to submit a Noise Monitoring
Plan, to demonstrate that operating units meet the noise
performance standard. The County has approved Shell' s
Noise Monitoring Plan. This plan requires Shell to
monitor operating units when they reach normal operating
capacity, to submit the monitoring results to the County
to review and approve, and to retrofit units, if
necessary, to insure compliance with the County' s noise
performance standard.
Shell has been submitting monitoring reports regularly,
as units reached full operating' capacity. The Hydrogen
Plant did not initially meet the noise performance
standard, especially during start up and shut down.
Shell has installed two noise control devices, which have
reduced the noise to a level slightly above the standard.
Shell plans to build an acoustical wall just south of the
Hydrogen Plant, to ensure that the noise stays well
within the standard. Shell has committed to completing
the wall by May 15, 1997 and to submitting noise
monitoring reports demonstrating compliance with the
noise performance standard by June 15, 1997 .
2 . Condition #24 : Future modifications, CFP Units :
Condition 24 requires Shell to notify the County prior to
modification of a Clean Fuels Project unit, if the
modifications might generate an off-site hazard from
process upset. The Zoning Administrator must then decide
if the proposed change warrants preparation of a Hazards
and Operability Study and an accident consequence
analysis .
The Community Development Department and the Health
Services Department staff are working with Shell to
confirm the process for making these notifications .
3 . Condition #36: Bicycle Trail (Marina Vista) :
This condition requires Shell to provide a trail easement
from the Bay Trail to Marina Vista and to submit a plan
to improve bicycle use on Marina Vista during the
construction and operation phases of the project. Shell
previously drafted a bicycle plan and easement offer and
submitted them to the County Public Works Department, the
County Community Development Department, the City of
Martinez and the East Bay Regional Park District . These
parties are discussing the most appropriate manner to
Shell Oil' s Annual Compliance Review
March 18, 1997
Page 4
improve bike use along this route, in light of potential
future changes on Interstate-680 ramps and the Benicia
Bridge.
C. Summary
Our staff review has confirmed that Shell Martinez Refining
Company has submitted an acceptable schedule completing work
necessary to comply with Condition 35B for the Hydrogen Plant,
and has submitted materials currently being reviewed by staff
for Conditions 23, 24, 35B, and 36. Staff review further
finds that Shell is in compliance with all remaining
conditions of approval . Staff recommends Board adoption of
the recommendations 3 .A. through 3 .C. listed above.
DRS:aw
j:\audrey\she13-18.bo