 | |
Federal authorities have opened a criminal investigation of
Chevron after discovering that the company detoured pollutants around
monitoring equipment at its Richmond refinery for four years and burned
them off into the atmosphere, in possible violation of a federal court
order, The Chronicle has learned.
Air
quality officials say Chevron fashioned a pipe inside its refinery that
routed hydrocarbon gases around monitoring equipment and allowed them
to be burned off without officials knowing about it. Some of the gases
escaped into the air, but because the company didn't record them,
investigators have no way of being certain of the level of pollution
exposure to thousands of people who live downwind from the plant.
"They were routing gas through that pipe to the flare that they were not monitoring," said Jack Broadbent, executive director of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, whose inspectors uncovered what Chevron was doing and ordered the bypass pipe removed.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's
criminal enforcement unit opened an investigation in early 2012, more
than two years after the local inspectors made their discovery,
according to air-quality officials and others familiar with the probe.
The investigation is still open, and Chevron employees have
been interviewed.
Who knew what
Federal
criminal investigators are trying to determine who at Chevron was aware
of the bypass pipe and whether the company used it intentionally to
deceive air-pollution regulators. Chevron says its use was inadvertent
and that it estimates that the amount of released sulfur dioxide - one
of the major components of flaring gas pollution - was minimal.
In a statement, Chevron said it was informed in March of a federal
investigation "that appears to be related to flaring at the Richmond
refinery." It said it was cooperating with the probe.
The chairman of the Bay Area air-quality district's board, Contra Costa County Supervisor John Gioia,
said that if Chevron intended to deceive regulators, its actions raised
"extremely serious" questions about the company's credibility.
"That's a criminal act, intentionally bypassing the monitoring," Gioia
said. "The rule is designed to reduce flaring, and refineries are
supposed have a responsibility to abide by it."
The criminal probe
came to light after The Chronicle obtained citation data from the
air-quality district under a state Public Records Act request, following
the Aug. 6 fire that destroyed part of the Richmond refinery. The probe
is unrelated to that blaze.
Health risks
The
federal investigation centers on Chevron's burning, or flaring, of
gases created during the superheating needed to generate fuels from
crude oil. Although flaring burns most gases, environmental groups have
long maintained that residual gases blowing away from the refinery pose a
risk of cancer and respiratory ailments.
Under a 2005 settlement
of a lawsuit filed against it by the Environmental Protection Agency,
claiming that Chevron violated federal environmental rules, the company
agreed to limit flaring at Richmond and its other refineries and account
for each flaring event.
The Bay Area air-quality district, which
enforces federal air standards, ordered Chevron to install monitors at
the Richmond refinery to measure pollutants in the gases burned off
during flaring, and to report all instances of flaring.
Spotted by inspectors
Wayne
Kino, an enforcement manager for the air-quality district, said two
inspectors with the agency became suspicious Aug. 17, 2009, when they
saw steam from a flare coming from a high-pressure, high-temperature
hydrocracking complex in Richmond called the Isomax unit, where 62,000
barrels of oil a day are converted into gasoline and jet fuel.
The inspectors asked to see Chevron's pollution-monitoring equipment, and discovered "it wasn't recording anything," Kino said.
Chevron had installed more than 100 feet of 3-inch pipe, linking the
vessel where oil is processed to the flare tower, and bypassing two sets
of monitoring equipment, Kino said. When an operator activated the
bypass pipe, the gases were sent up the flare stack without
being recorded.
Chevron said the pipe was designed to balance
pressure in the refining process, but investigators could find no
legitimate use for it, Kino said.
Bypassed 27 times
During
a two-year investigation that involved examination of refinery
surveillance tapes, Kino said, the air-quality district determined that
Chevron used the pipe bypass 27 times from April 2005 to August 2009. He
called the violations "very serious."
In August 2011, Chevron
agreed to a settlement with the agency in which it paid a $170,000 fine
for two violations. That same month, the air-quality agency renewed
Chevron's permit for operating the Richmond refinery for five years.
In
September 2010 - a year into the agency's investigation - Environmental
Protection Agency officials expressed concerns that Chevron was flaring
at the Richmond refinery as a matter of routine. The air-quality
district, however, dismissed the suggestion.
"There is no
evidence that the flares at the Chevron refinery are being used as
control devices," the district said. It cited "flaring reports from this
refinery covering the period from 2004 to the present show no instances
of 'routine' flaring."
Kino said the agency official who wrote
the response hadn't known about the investigation. He said the federal
agency was ultimately notified of the violations in May 2011.
The environmental agency issued a statement saying it "does not comment on ongoing investigations."
Workers interviewed
Officials
of the union that represents workers at the refinery said Chevron
employees had been questioned by the environmental agency investigators.
"The union is aware that there is an ongoing investigation," said Jeff Clark, a field representative with the United Steelworkers Local 5. "Our members have been interviewed as part of it, and we cannot comment further at this time."
The
investigators have also questioned air-quality agency officials about
what they knew about the bypass system. Kino said his inspectors have
cooperated with the criminal probe.
Gioia, the air-quality board
chairman, said he was upset that the agency's staff didn't tell him and
other district directors about the $170,000 fine before it was issued.
The fine was the most Chevron has paid in the past decade for
air-quality violations at the Richmond refinery.
"It's serious
under any circumstances for a refinery to bypass the collection
monitors," Gioia said. "It's a pretty large fine, and that means it's a
large incident."
He added, "We have gone around as a district
declaring that the flare-monitoring rule has been a success and has
reduced emissions. But if we are not capturing all the emissions, it's
hard to judge how effective it has been."
Chevron had installed more than 100 feet of 3-inch pipe, linking the
vessel where oil is processed to the flare tower, and bypassing two
sets of monitoring equipment, Kino said. When an operator activated the
bypass pipe, the gases were sent up the flare stack without
being recorded.
Chevron said the pipe was designed to balance
pressure in the refining process, but investigators could find no
legitimate use for it, Kino said.
Bypassed 27 times
During
a two-year investigation that involved examination of refinery
surveillance tapes, Kino said, the air-quality district determined that
Chevron used the pipe bypass 27 times from April 2005 to August 2009. He
called the violations "very serious."
In August 2011, Chevron
agreed to a settlement with the agency in which it paid a $170,000 fine
for two violations. That same month, the air-quality agency renewed
Chevron's permit for operating the Richmond refinery for five years.
In
September 2010 - a year into the agency's investigation - Environmental
Protection Agency officials expressed concerns that Chevron was flaring
at the Richmond refinery as a matter of routine. The air-quality
district, however, dismissed the suggestion.
"There is no
evidence that the flares at the Chevron refinery are being used as
control devices," the district said. It cited "flaring reports from this
refinery covering the period from 2004 to the present show no instances
of 'routine' flaring."
Kino said the agency official who wrote
the response hadn't known about the investigation. He said the federal
agency was ultimately notified of the violations in May 2011.
The environmental agency issued a statement saying it "does not comment on ongoing investigations."
Workers interviewed
Officials
of the union that represents workers at the refinery said Chevron
employees had been questioned by the environmental agency investigators.
"The union is aware that there is an ongoing investigation," said Jeff Clark, a field representative with the United Steelworkers Local 5. "Our members have been interviewed as part of it, and we cannot comment further at this time."
The
investigators have also questioned air-quality agency officials about
what they knew about the bypass system. Kino said his inspectors have
cooperated with the criminal probe.
Gioia, the air-quality board
chairman, said he was upset that the agency's staff didn't tell him and
other district directors about the $170,000 fine before it was issued.
The fine was the most Chevron has paid in the past decade for
air-quality violations at the Richmond refinery.
"It's serious
under any circumstances for a refinery to bypass the collection
monitors," Gioia said. "It's a pretty large fine, and that means it's a
large incident."
He added, "We have gone around as a district
declaring that the flare-monitoring rule has been a success and has
reduced emissions. But if we are not capturing all the emissions, it's
hard to judge how effective it has been." |