Yesterday's two episodes highlight the need for good information at the time of release.
With real time data, residents can make their own informed decisions.
Murphy Oil's 125,000 barrel per-day Meraux refinery and our neighborhoods around Murphy have a similar yet very different history from that of the EPA Region 9 Featured Story linked below. The same solutions should be sought in all of our community's fenceline neighborhoods.
""The unprecedented Good Neighbor Agreement mandated not only state-of-the-art, real-time, 24-hour optical sensing of dozens of chemicals, but also required the sharing of all data with the community, and placement of a real-time computer monitoring screen in the home of a local resident. ""
http://www.epa.gov/region09/features/tosco/history.html
http://www.epa.gov/region09/features/tosco/index.html
Thursday, February 26, 2009
February 25, 2009 incident
Some St. Bernard Parish residents report heavy smoke from Murphy refinery stack
by The Times-PicayuneWednesday February 25, 2009, 2:51 PM
This yellowish discharge was brought down to street level in yesterday's variable winds.
The last photograph was taken around 5:15PM presumably during the subsequent startup.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
benzene saturation unit
Murphy Oil USA, Inc. submitted a significant modification application for The Meraux Refinery Title V/Part 70 air quality permit on February 25, 2009 in Vol. 1 and Vol. 2. The application is to construct and operate a benzene saturation unit to produce low benzene gasoline products. The proposed pollution permit seeks to use gasoline tanks with fixed roof(s), to route the "BenFree Unit" (BFU) to an inadequate gas recovery system, and to route H2S rich vent streams to the flare. To protect public health and safety, Louisiana DEQ must require stringent application of the best available controls to achieve the lowest emissions into the air we breathe.
The minimum minor modification fee was assessed, since there was no increase in the capacity at the facility.
Additionally, an air toxins surcharge was applied to the permit fee, since some emission rates will increase by an amount greater than the regulatory minimum emission rate for known carcinogens, human reproductive toxins, or known and probable carcinogens.
The minimum minor modification fee was assessed, since there was no increase in the capacity at the facility.
Additionally, an air toxins surcharge was applied to the permit fee, since some emission rates will increase by an amount greater than the regulatory minimum emission rate for known carcinogens, human reproductive toxins, or known and probable carcinogens.
Friday, February 6, 2009
February 6 2009
Opinion of Mike Sherwood submitted to resident members of the Buffer zone
committee
Because the term “buffer zone” has not been defined or agreed on by the
residents and Murphy representatives, I cannot include or exclude parks, parking
lots or buildings as acceptable contents of this buffer zone.
Presently the empty space is somewhat of an effective buffer between the
residential neighborhoods and the refinery.
A master plan was requested (from Murphy Oil) by residents and our Parish
President and remains unavailable. A master plan in our opinion should include
the entire buffer zone plan, or projected plan by Murphy officials, from the
forty arpent canal to the Mississippi River. It should include their intentions
for the long term use of the entire buffer zone property insofar as expansion
or in utilizing buffer zone property to relocate existing facilities within
their present day fence line to buffer zone property accommodating further
expansion of refining processes.
The present offer by Murphy officials was to exchange a portion of buffer zone
property for the right to remove several residential streets in order to build
a parking area for temporary/contract Murphy employees. The property (received
by the Parish) was intended by Murphy officials to be used as a residential park
built and maintained with parish funds and funds donated by unspecified
organizations. It is my opinion that, while parks seem on the surface to be
desirable, Val Reiss park potentially fills the need of park facilities in this
neighborhood. Furthermore, since funds are not available presently to refurbish
our existing parks, building another park might prove to be an excessive burden
on the parish and otherwise unnecessary. There were other concerns regarding the
traffic flow on the one remaining street and other associated logistic issues
resulting from the street removal.
Residents in the area are skeptical and untrusting due to the lack of
information. Residents appear to view a “buffer zone” as an empty area devoid of
any structures or use other than forest . The residents are not in favor of
changing zoning in the buffer zone from residential to any other zoning
designation at this time.
While Murphy officials presented a generous offer, at this time there are too
many unanswered questions. Murphy officials stated on several occasions at the
most recent Buffer zone Committee meeting that their stance was that if the
committee members did not accept this suggested plan, there was no other plan
and that the property would remain as it is. Or to be more succinct Murphy
representatives comment was interpreted by several residents and members as this
or nothing. As previously stated above, empty space is a buffer.
I remain encouraged by the dialogue over the past few months and appreciate the
effort put forth by all parties. I recommend to committee members that the offer
on the table today by Murphy USA be rejected. I again ask Murphy USA to provide
a comprehensive master plan for the buffer zone and that the council place a
moratorium on any further use of the buffer zone property until such a plan is
presented to this committee.
I would ask the parish council to formally adopt the definition of the buffer
zone in Chalmette adjacent to the Murphy Oil plant as an area devoid of all
structures or use by residents or Murphy with the exception of forest.
Mike Sherwood
Buffer Zone Committee Chair
.
Opinion of Mike Sherwood submitted to resident members of the Buffer zone
committee
Because the term “buffer zone” has not been defined or agreed on by the
residents and Murphy representatives, I cannot include or exclude parks, parking
lots or buildings as acceptable contents of this buffer zone.
Presently the empty space is somewhat of an effective buffer between the
residential neighborhoods and the refinery.
A master plan was requested (from Murphy Oil) by residents and our Parish
President and remains unavailable. A master plan in our opinion should include
the entire buffer zone plan, or projected plan by Murphy officials, from the
forty arpent canal to the Mississippi River. It should include their intentions
for the long term use of the entire buffer zone property insofar as expansion
or in utilizing buffer zone property to relocate existing facilities within
their present day fence line to buffer zone property accommodating further
expansion of refining processes.
The present offer by Murphy officials was to exchange a portion of buffer zone
property for the right to remove several residential streets in order to build
a parking area for temporary/contract Murphy employees. The property (received
by the Parish) was intended by Murphy officials to be used as a residential park
built and maintained with parish funds and funds donated by unspecified
organizations. It is my opinion that, while parks seem on the surface to be
desirable, Val Reiss park potentially fills the need of park facilities in this
neighborhood. Furthermore, since funds are not available presently to refurbish
our existing parks, building another park might prove to be an excessive burden
on the parish and otherwise unnecessary. There were other concerns regarding the
traffic flow on the one remaining street and other associated logistic issues
resulting from the street removal.
Residents in the area are skeptical and untrusting due to the lack of
information. Residents appear to view a “buffer zone” as an empty area devoid of
any structures or use other than forest . The residents are not in favor of
changing zoning in the buffer zone from residential to any other zoning
designation at this time.
While Murphy officials presented a generous offer, at this time there are too
many unanswered questions. Murphy officials stated on several occasions at the
most recent Buffer zone Committee meeting that their stance was that if the
committee members did not accept this suggested plan, there was no other plan
and that the property would remain as it is. Or to be more succinct Murphy
representatives comment was interpreted by several residents and members as this
or nothing. As previously stated above, empty space is a buffer.
I remain encouraged by the dialogue over the past few months and appreciate the
effort put forth by all parties. I recommend to committee members that the offer
on the table today by Murphy USA be rejected. I again ask Murphy USA to provide
a comprehensive master plan for the buffer zone and that the council place a
moratorium on any further use of the buffer zone property until such a plan is
presented to this committee.
I would ask the parish council to formally adopt the definition of the buffer
zone in Chalmette adjacent to the Murphy Oil plant as an area devoid of all
structures or use by residents or Murphy with the exception of forest.
Mike Sherwood
Buffer Zone Committee Chair
.
Monday, December 15, 2008
Emissions Increase Requested
Murphy Oil's Meraux refinery has applied for an expedited air permit from the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality. The December 5, 2008 application and request for expedited permit processing is for "Maintaining tank capacity availability by replacement of existing tanks that are no longer in service with tanks with more stringent emission controls."
"MOUSA is undertaking this project to replace previously existing tanks and to address post-Katrina storage capacity shortages. The use of domed internal floating roofs on Tanks 80-9 and 80-10A, as well as an internal floating roof on Tank 1-3A, will result in significant reductions in VOC emissions versus the previously existing tanks. The construction of Tank 80-5A will enable tank farm changes to accommodate the future BenFree Unit, which must be built and operational by January, 2010 to satisfy the Mobile Source Air Toxics rule." (emphasis added)
However, embedded in the application, documents report Murphy Oil "intends to submit a permit modification application to the LDEQ Permits Division by December 31, 2008 to incorporate the appropriate emissions limits..." (emphasis added) (EDMS document #38894488 page 297)
Murphy Oil's Meraux refinery looms over our little residential neighborhoods and simple compliance with the existing emission limits agreed to when applied for will result in immediate and significant improvements to the quality of life and air quality in Meraux and Chalmette.
Murphy Oil requests interim emission limits, noting "the current 5.3 lb/hr maximum limit for SO2 cannot be achieved and was established based upon erroneous flow information. More accurate flow monitoring has demonstrated higher flows to the flare than were used in the permit calculations." (EDMS document #38894488 pages 304, 305)
Emission changes for the North Flare are listed in the following table from EDMS Document 37782719 dated 07/31/2008.
Murphy Oil is also expected to request emission limit changes for H2S for the North and South Flares from 50 TPY to 50 lb/day. As part of a" flare gas recovery system intended to achieve long-term reductions of H2S to the flares with corresponding SO2 emissions reductions" Murphy Oil intends to submit a feasibility study to the LDEQ by June 20, 2009. (pages 296, 304, 305 EDMS document # 38894488)
.
Residents also have a growing concern about VOC emissions from Tank 200-7, located within hundreds of feet of residential homes and school bus stops along Ohio Street and Despaux and Jacob Drives.
"Since Tank 200-7 is a group 2 tank, it does not currently have any controls." As with all of Murphy Oil's storage tanks, residents have previously requested independent monitoring of VOC releases to protect public health and continued compliance assurance measures to guarantee Murphy Oil's emissions are within the existing permitted levels.
VOC emissions from Tank 200-7 were listed at nearly 500 times the permitted amounts (page 286 EDMS document # 38894488), however, as Murphy reports in its response (page 297 EDMS document #38894488) " the emissions estimates provided in the March 2008 notification were conservative high estimates and that subsequent investigation indicates that the emissions are much lower."
Murphy Oil is continuing its review, however any changes to storage tank controls or processing improvements may not be implemented until mid 2009 or later. Murphy Oil "is also investigating control methods" for the heavy oil storage tank and the feasibility of processing changes for the No. 6 Fuel Oil stream. "Current efforts are focused at improving operations to reduce the vapor pressure of the No. 6 Oil." "The higher vapor pressure results in higher estimated emissions. " (pages 297, 298 EDMS document # 38894488)
Murphy Oil has "indicated that the vapor pressure of the No. 6 Oil managed in Tank 200-7 and at the dock was greater than previously believed during the permitting of such units" and that at times its No. 6 Fuel Oil's vapor pressure exceeds the storage tank's permitted vapor pressure of less than 1.5 psia. (EDMS document # 36833563, dated March 4, 2008, EDMS document # 38894488, dated December 5, 2008 , page 286, 287)
Emissions Increase Requested
Residents are concerned about the omnipresence Tank 200-7, located within hundreds of feet of residential homes and school bus stops along Ohio Street and Despaux and Jacob Drives.
"Since Tank 200-7 is a group 2 tank, it does not currently have any controls."
VOC emissions from Tank 200-7 were listed at nearly 400 times the permitted amounts (page 286 EDMS document # 38894488).
As with all of Murphy Oil's storage tanks, residents have previously requested independent monitoring of VOC releases to protect public health.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
