March 1, 2006
In a major legal victory for the Southland’s air quality agency, the
state appeals court has rejected arguments by oil companies and upheld a
significant regulation requiring the region’s oil refineries to reduce their
emissions of smog-forming emissions.
“This court ruling is good news for the region and especially communities
surrounding oil refineries,” said Barry Wallerstein, executive officer of
the South Coast Air Quality Management District. “Oil refineries are the
largest regulated source of particulate matter emissions – emitting more
than 400,000 newer, diesel-powered school buses.”
In an opinion authored by Judge Earl Johnson Jr. on Feb. 15, the
California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, rejected a lawsuit by
the Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA) seeking to overturn AQMD’s
Rule 1105.1. (Case
No. B181303)
Rule 1105.1, adopted by AQMD’s Governing Board in November 2003,
required the region’s six major oil refineries to reduce their emissions of
PM10 (particulate matter) and ammonia. Judge Johnson rejected WSPA’s
arguments that emission reductions required by AQMD’s rule were not
technically feasible, that the rule was not cost-effective and that AQMD did
not prepare an adequate environmental assessment under the California
Environmental Quality Act.
The six refineries affected by the rule are: ExxonMobil in Torrance, BP
in Carson, Chevron-Texaco in El Segundo, and Shell, ConocoPhillips and
Valero in Wilmington.
Under the rule, refineries must reduce PM10 and ammonia emissions from
their fluid catalytic cracking units by the end of this year.[1]
Fluid catalytic cracking units “crack” heavy crude oil into lighter
petroleum products including gasoline, butane and propane. Refineries may
file for a two-year extension if needed to synchronize installation of
pollution control devices with operational needs.
In developing its rule, AQMD documented that one refinery had met the
proposed rule emission requirements since the mid-1990s through the use of
commercially available electrostatic precipitation devices. WSPA argued in
court that emission reductions achieved at that one refinery could not be
duplicated at other refineries in the region for technical reasons. The
court rejected WSPA’s argument as baseless.
WSPA also argued in court that AQMD failed to perform an adequate cost
analysis for the rule proposal because AQMD did not look at costs specific
to each refinery. The appeals court disagreed and Judge Johnson noted in
his opinion that AQMD had hired a consultant who visited each of the six
refineries and collected site-specific information on costs of installing
and operating the needed air pollution control equipment.
Finally, the court rejected WPSA’s argument that AQMD’s environmental
analysis was inadequate.
AQMD estimates it will cost the six refineries a total of between $88
million and $100 million to install pollution control devices needed to
comply with the rule. The cost of the rule, on a per-ton-reduced basis, is
considerably less than some previously adopted AQMD rules including those
affecting composting and petroleum coke storage facilities.
The rule will reduce directly emitted PM10 by an estimated 0.5 tons per
day. It will also reduce 1.5 tons per day of ammonia, which if released in
the atmosphere would react with other pollutants to form between 1.5 tons
per day and 6 tons per day of PM10. Particulate pollution including PM10 is
considered one of the most serious air pollutants, causing a myriad of
health effects ranging from exacerbation of respiratory diseases to
premature deaths.
WSPA originally filed a lawsuit in Los Angeles County Superior Court
(Case No. BS087190) in December 2003 seeking a writ to overturn AQMD’s
rule. AQMD won the case in December 2004, and WSPA appealed to the state
Court of Appeal in February 2005.
AQMD is the air pollution control agency for Orange County and major
portions of Los Angeles, San Bernardino and Riverside counties.
-#- |
