INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ORDINANCE

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW

AND EVALUATION REPORT

February 26, 2013
2

Table of Contents

Executive Summary............................................................................................................................................................................... 3

Public Participation........................................................................................................................................................................ 4

Audits............................................................................................................................................................................................... 4

Major Chemical Accidents or Releases........................................................................................................................................ 5

Conclusion....................................................................................................................................................................................... 5

Introduction............................................................................................................................................................................................ 6

Annual Performance Review and Evaluation Report....................................................................................................................... 7

Effectiveness of Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Programs’ Implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance........... 7

Effectiveness of the Procedures for Records Management....................................................................................................... 8

Number and Type of Audits and Inspections Conducted........................................................................................................ 8

Number of Root Cause Analyses and/or Incident Investigations Conducted by Hazardous Materials Program........... 9

Hazardous Materials Programs’ Process for Public Participation ......................................................................................... 9

Effectiveness of the Public Information Bank............................................................................................................................ 9

Effectiveness of the Hazardous Materials Ombudsperson..................................................................................................... 12

Other Required Program Elements Necessary to Implement and Manage the Industrial Safety Ordinance................ 12

Regulated Stationary Sources Listing................................................................................................................................................ 12

The Status of the Regulated Stationary Sources’ Safety Plans and Programs...................................................................... 12

Locations of the Regulated Stationary Sources Safety Plans.................................................................................................. 12

Annual Accident History Report and Inherently Safer Systems Implemented as Submitted by 

the Regulated Stationary Sources............................................................................................................................................... 12

Status of the Incident Investigations, Including the Root Cause Analyses Conducted by 

the Regulated Stationary Sources............................................................................................................................................... 15

Major Chemical Accidents or Releases...................................................................................................................................... 17

Legal Enforcement Actions Initiated by Hazardous Materials Program............................................................................. 19

Penalties Assessed as a Result of Enforcement ................................................................................................................................ 19

Total Fees, Service Charges and Other Assessments Collected Specifically for the Industrial Safety Ordinance ................ 19

Total Personnel and Personnel Years Used by Hazardous Materials Program to Implement the Industrial Safety 

Ordinance..............................................................................................................................................................................................20

Comments from Interested Parties Regarding the Effectiveness of the Industrial Safety Ordinance ....................................20

The Impact of the Industrial Safety Ordinance on Improving Industrial Safety .......................................................................20

City of Richmond Industrial Safety Ordinance...............................................................................................................................22

ATTACHMENT A—HAZARDOUS MATERIALS OMBUDSMAN REPORT........................................................................23

Hazardous Materials Ombudsman Evaluation—October, 2011 through November, 2012 ......................................................24

ATTACHMENT B—REGULATED SOURCES ANNUAL PERFORMANCE WITHACCIDENT HISTORY

ANDINHERENT SAFETY IMPLEMENTATION........................................................................................................................28

Attachment 1—Tank 294 Overpressure Summary.................................................................................................................. 37

Attachment 1—Tank 294 Overpressure Summary (continued)............................................................................................ 38

Attachment 2................................................................................................................................................................................. 39

Table 1. Summary of Implemented ISS .....................................................................................................................................44

Table 2. ISO-only Recommendations Implemented (not required by CalARP)................................................................45

Table 2. (continued)......................................................................................................................................................................46

Inherently Safer Designs Implemented .....................................................................................................................................49
3

Executive Summary

On December 15, 1998, the Contra Costa County Board of 

Supervisors adopted a landmark Industrial Safety Ordinance 

requiring regulated facilities in the County to implement 

a multitude of safety programs aimed to prevent chemical 

accidents that could have detrimental impacts to the surrounding 

communities. The requirements of the Industrial Safety Ordinance 

are some of the most stringent in the United States, if not the world. 

Additionally, the Industrial Safety Ordinance is mandated to 

include participation from all stakeholders, including industries, 

agencies, elected officials and the public at large.

There has been over a 10-year period a trend of fewer and less severe 

Major Chemical Accidents or Releases (MCAR) incidents in the 

County since the adoption of the Ordinance. However, there were 

several Community Warning System (CWS) Level II incidents and 

one CWS Level III incident this year. This is causing some concern; 

however, CCHMP believes that this is not directly reflective of the 

effectiveness of the Industrial Safety Ordinance requirements, but 

serves as a reminder that we all have to stay vigilant in ensuring safe 

facility operations and that implementation of mature prevention 

programs are challenging. 

The Accidental Release Prevention Program Engineers in the 

Hazardous Materials Division of Contra Costa Health Services 

have oversight of the Industrial Safety Ordinance and are 

continuing to explore ways to improve the overall implementation 

of the Industrial Safety Ordinance and the prevention program 

elements. The staff continues to work with other agencies such 

as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the California 

Occupational Safety and Health Administration and other local 

program agencies for sharing of regulatory interpretations and 

inspection results. The staff also cooperated with the U.S. Chemical 

Safety and Hazard Investigation Board’s (CSB) investigation of the 

No. 4 Crude Unit fire at Chevron that occurred August 6, 2012.
4

Public Participation

The Hazardous Materials Programs have an established 

public outreach process and is continually looking at ways 

to improve. The following items have been implemented 

based on recommendations from stakeholders and the 

actions taken this year:

•	 Public outreach information booths at existing 

venues

» Air Products’ and Shell Martinez Refinery’s 

Safety Plans were shared at the John 

Muir Birthday/Earth Day celebration 

at the John Muir National Historic 

Site in Martinez on April 21, 2012

» Tesoro Golden Eagle Refinery’s Preliminary 

Audit Findings and Safety Plan were 

shared at the Concord Emergency 

Preparedness Fair at Todos Santos Park, 

Concord on September 6, 2012

•	 Presentations to Interested Groups

» Shell Martinez Refinery’s preliminary 

audit results and general Industrial Safety 

Ordinance information to Shell Community 

Advisory Panels (CAP) members at the 

Shell Club House on March 5, 2012

» General Chemical Bay Point Works 

preliminary audit findings were presented to 

the Bay Point Municipal Advisory Council 

(MAC) and the public at Ambrose Community 

Center in Bay Point on October 2, 2012

» Tesoro Golden Eagle Refinery’s Preliminary 

Audit Findings and general Industrial Safety 

Ordinance information were presented 

to CAP members October 24, 2012

•	 Attend public meetings after major incidents: 

» CCHMP hosted a joint public meeting 

with Supervisor Glover and Phillips 66 

to address public concern at the Crockett 

Community Center on July 2, 2012 regarding 

the June 15, 2012 sour water tank incident

» CCHMP presented and gathered information 

about the Phillips 66 June incident at 

that Rodeo Community Advisory Panel 

meeting on July 23, 2012 in Rodeo 

•	 Most recent audit findings summarized in an easily 

read format in English and Spanish

•	 Information on regulated businesses in an easily 

read format in English and Spanish

•	 Industrial Safety Ordinance Information Sheet in 

English and Spanish

The Board of Supervisors also requested that staff provides 

copies of the Annual Report to communities through the 

Community Advisory Panels (CAP). CCHMP provided 

copies of the 2010 and 2011 ISO Annual Reports to CAP 

representatives for distribution for Phillips 66, General 

Chemical Bay Point Works, General Chemical Richmond, 

Shell Martinez Refinery and Tesoro Golden Eagle Refinery. 

This 2012 Annual Report is available on our website and 

will be sent to CAP representatives for distribution. 

Audits

Audits of the regulated businesses are required at least 

once every three years to ensure that the facilities have 

the required programs in place and are implementing the 

programs. We completed two ISO audits this year:

•	 Shell Martinez Refinery – February 2012

•	 Air Products at Shell and Air Products at Tesoro – 

April 2012 
5

Major Chemical Accidents or Releases

Since the 2011 report to the County Board of Supervisors, 

there were three Major Chemical Accidents or Releases 

(MCAR) with a severity level I and one MCAR with a 

severity level II for the County Industrial Safety Ordinance 

facilities that occurred from October 2011 to October 

2012 which were captured in this reporting period. It is 

unsettling to report that there has been one severity level 

III incident at the Chevron Refinery which is under the 

jurisdiction of the Richmond Industrial Safety Ordinance. 

Conclusion

Up until the summer of 2012, the number and severity 

of the Major Chemical Accidents or Releases have been 

in a general declining trend since the implementation of 

Industrial Safety Ordinance. The implementation of the 

Industrial Safety Ordinance has improved safety programs 

and operations at the facilities that are regulated. However, 

CCHMP will seek assistance from stakeholders including 

the regulated facilities, workers and community members 

to explore additional measures that can be taken that will 

further reduce likelihood of chemical accidents at these 

industrial facilities. CCHMP will also work closely with 

the CSB on any recommendations that they may have 

to strengthen the County’s and the City of Richmond’s 

Industrial Safety Ordinances.
6

Introduction

The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors passed 

the Industrial Safety Ordinance due to accidents that 

occurred at oil refineries and chemical plants in Contra 

Costa County. The effective date of the Industrial Safety 

Ordinance was January 15, 1999. The ordinance applies 

to oil refineries and chemical plants with specified North 

American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes 

that were required to submit a Risk Management Plan to 

the U.S. EPA and are program level 3 stationary sources as 

defined by the California Accidental Release Prevention 

(CalARP) Program. The ordinance specifies the following:

•	 Stationary sources had one year to submit a 

Safety Plan to Contra Costa Hazardous Materials 

Programs stating how the stationary source is 

complying with the ordinance, except the Human 

Factors portion (completed January 15, 2000)

•	 Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Programs 

develop a Human Factors Guidance Document 

(completed January 15, 2000)

•	 Stationary sources had one year to comply with 

the requirements of the Human Factor Guidance 

Document that was developed by Contra Costa 

Hazardous Materials Programs (completed January 

15, 2001)

•	 For Major Chemical Accidents or Releases, the 

stationary sources are required to perform a root 

cause analysis as part of their incident investigations 

(ongoing)

•	 Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Programs may 

perform its own incident investigation, including a 

root cause analysis (ongoing)

•	 All of the processes at the stationary source are 

covered as program level 3 processes as defined 

by the California Accidental Release Prevention 

Program

•	 The stationary sources are required to consider 

Inherently Safer Systems for new processes or 

facilities or for mitigations resulting from a process 

hazard analysis

•	 Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Programs will 

review all of the submitted Safety Plans and audit/

inspect all of the stationary sources’ Safety Programs 

within one year of the receipt of the Safety Plan 

(completed January 15, 2001) and every three years 

after the initial audit/inspection (ongoing)

•	 Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Programs will 

give an annual performance review and evaluation 

report to the County Board of Supervisors

The 2006 amendments to the Industrial Safety Ordinance 

require or expand the following:

1. Expand the Human Factors Program to include 

Maintenance 

2. Expand the Management of Organizational 

Change to include Maintenance and all of Health 

and Safety positions

3. Require the stationary sources to perform 

Safety Culture Assessments one year after the 

Hazardous Materials Programs develop guidance 

on performing a Safety Culture Assessment 

(November 2009)

4. Perform Security Vulnerability Analysis

The seven stationary sources now covered by the Industrial 

Safety Ordinance are:

1. Air Products at the Shell Martinez Refining 

Company

2. Air Products at the Tesoro Golden Eagle Refinery

3. Shell Martinez Refining Company

4. General Chemical West in Bay Point

5. Phillips 66 Rodeo Refinery

6. Tesoro Golden Eagle Refinery

7. Air Liquide Rodeo Hydrogen Plant

The Air Liquide Rodeo Hydrogen Plant began operation 

in July 2009 and is located adjacent to the Phillips 66 

Rodeo Refinery. The facility produces purified hydrogen 

for Phillips 66 Refinery and other industrial customers, 

and also produces steam and electricity for the Phillips 

66 Refinery. Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Programs 

completed the CalARP/ISO audit of this facility June 29, 

2010, and made the audit report available to the public 

at local libraries and at the Rodeo-Hercules Fire District 

Open House in October 2011.

Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Programs completed 

and issued the first Contra Costa County Safety Program 

Guidance Document on January 15, 2000. The stationary 

sources were required to comply with the Human Factors 

section of this guidance document by January 15, 2001. 
7

Hazardous Materials Programs staff has worked with the 

stationary sources to develop a Safety Culture Assessment 

Guidance Document, which was finalized and issued 

November 10, 2009. Staff began reviewing these Safety 

Culture Assessments in December 2010. Additionally, 

staff issued a revised Safety Program Guidance Document 

to reflect the ISO amendments, and clarifications based 

on the audit findings in July 2011.

Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Programs reviewed all 

Safety Plans submitted to the Department and started the 

fifth round of audits of the stationary sources, as required 

by the ordinance. In addition, Contra Costa Hazardous 

Materials Programs performed a specialized audit for all the 

stationary sources for their Human Factors programs and for 

Inherently Safer Systems in 2002. The status of the reviews 

and all audits are discussed in Table I within the report.

Annual Performance Review and 

Evaluation Report

The Industrial Safety Ordinance specifies that the contents 

of the annual performance review and evaluation report 

contain the following:

•	 A brief description of how Hazardous Materials 

Program is meeting the requirements of the 

ordinance as follows:

» Effectiveness of the Department’s 

program to ensure stationary sources 

comply with the ordinance

» Effectiveness of the procedures 

for records management

» Number and type of audits and inspections 

conducted by Hazardous Materials 

Programs as required by the ordinance

» Number of root cause analyses and/

or incident investigations conducted 

by Hazardous Materials Programs

» Hazardous Materials Programs’ 

process for public participation

» Effectiveness of the Public Information Bank

» Effectiveness of the Hazardous 

Materials Ombudsperson

» Other required program elements necessary to 

implement and manage the ordinance

•	 A listing of stationary sources covered by the 

ordinance, including for each:

» The status of the stationary source’s 

Safety Plan and Program

» A summary of the stationary source’s 

Safety Plan updates and a listing of where 

the Safety Plans are publicly available

» The annual accident history report 

submitted by the regulated stationary 

sources and required by the ordinance

» A summary, including the status, of 

any root cause analyses and incident 

investigations conducted or being conducted 

by the stationary sources and required 

by the ordinance, including the status of 

implementation of recommendations

» A summary, including the status, of any 

audits, inspections, root cause analyses and/

or incident investigations conducted by 

Hazardous Materials Programs, including the 

status for implementing the recommendations

» Description of Inherently Safer Systems 

implemented by the regulated stationary source

» Legal enforcement actions initiated by 

Hazardous Materials Programs, including 

administrative, civil and criminal actions

•	 Total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of 

the ordinance

•	 Total fees, service charges and other assessments 

collected specifically for the support of the 

ordinance

•	 Total personnel and personnel years used by the 

jurisdiction to directly implement or administer the 

ordinance

•	 Comments that raise public safety issues from 

interested parties regarding the effectiveness of the 

local program 

•	 The impact of the ordinance in improving industrial 

safety

Effectiveness of Contra Costa 

Hazardous Materials Programs’ 

Implementation of the Industrial 

Safety Ordinance

Hazardous Materials Programs has developed policies, 

procedures, protocols and questionnaires to implement the 

California Accidental Release Prevention Program and the 

Industrial Safety Ordinance. The policies, procedures, protocols 

and questionnaires for these programs are listed below:
8

•	 Audits/Inspections Policy

•	 Conducting the Risk Management Plan/Safety Plan 

Completeness Review Protocol

•	 Risk Management Plan Completeness Review 

Questionnaires

•	 Safety Plan Completeness Review Questionnaires 

•	 Conducting Audits/Inspections Protocol

•	 Safe Work Practices Questionnaires

•	 CalARP Program Audit Questionnaires

•	 Safety Program Audit Questionnaires

•	 Conducting Employee Interviews Protocol

•	 Employee Interview Questionnaires

•	 Public Participation Policy

•	 Dispute Resolution Policy

•	 Reclassification Policy

•	 Covered Process Modification Policy

•	 CalARP Internal Performance Audit Policy

•	 Conducting the Internal Performance Audit

•	 CalARP Internal Audit Performance Audit 

Submission

•	 Fee Policy

•	 Notification Policy

•	 Unannounced Inspection Policy

•	 Risk Management Plan Public Review Policy

Hazardous Materials Programs has developed the Contra 

Costa County CalARP Program Guidance Document and the 

Contra Costa County Safety Program Guidance Document 

including the Safety Culture Assessment. An updated Contra 

Costa County Safety Program Guidance Document, which 

incorporated updates from the ISO amendments and 

additional clarifications from all the audits, was issued 

July 22, 2011, to the regulated facilities. These documents 

give guidance to the stationary sources for complying with 

the Industrial Safety Ordinance. The policies, procedures, 

protocols and questionnaires are available through 

Hazardous Materials Programs. The guidance documents 

can be downloaded through Health Services’ website: 

http://www.cchealth.org/groups/hazmat/california_

accidental_release_prevention_guidance_document.php

and http://www.cchealth.org/groups/hazmat/industrial_

safety_ordinance_guidance.php

Effectiveness of the Procedures for 

Records Management

Hazardous Materials Program has set up hard copy and 

digital files for each stationary source. The files include the 

following folders:

1. Annual status reports

2. Audits & Inspections

3. Communications

4. Completeness Review

5. Emergency Response

6. Incident Investigation

7. Trade Secret Information

Hard copy files for the stationary sources are kept in a 

central location. Digital copies of the files are stored on the 

Hazardous Materials Programs network and are accessible 

to the Accidental Release Prevention Programs Engineers, 

Supervisor and the Environmental Health and Hazardous 

Materials Chief. Portable document format (PDF) of these 

files is also available at the Hazardous Materials Programs 

office for public access and viewing. The Accidental 

Release Prevention Program files contain regulations, 

policies, information from the U.S. EPA, the Governor’s 

Office of Emergency Services, the U.S. Chemical Safety 

and Hazards Investigation Board, and other information 

pertinent to the engineers. The risk management and 

safety plans received are kept at the Hazardous Materials 

Programs office.

Number and Type of Audits and 

Inspections Conducted

The Hazardous Materials Programs staff was required to 

audit and inspect all seven regulated stationary sources 

that were required to comply with the Industrial Safety 

Ordinance within one year after the initial submittal 

of their Safety Plans. Hazardous Materials Programs 

reviewed all of the Safety Plans and audited/inspected 

all of the stationary sources’ Safety Programs within that 

year (2000). Hazardous Materials Programs performed 

focused audits of the stationary sources for their Human 

Factors Programs (this was not included in the original 

audit/inspection, since the stationary sources were not 

required to have their Human Factors Program in place 

until January 2001) and Inherently Safer Systems in 2001 

and 2002. Additional focused audits were performed 

to look at how two stationary sources would manage 

the organizational change in case there was a strike and 

non-striking personnel were used instead of the striking 

personnel (2002). Hazardous Materials Programs 

completed the second round of audits for all of the 

Industrial Safety Ordinance stationary sources in 2003 

and 2004 and began a third round of audits in the autumn 
9

and inspections of their Safety Programs.

Number of Root Cause Analyses and/

or Incident Investigations Conducted by 

Hazardous Materials Program

The Hazardous Materials Programs staff has not performed 

any root cause analyses or incident investigations this 

past year. The Hazardous Materials Programs staff did 

work closely with the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard 

Investigation Board, Cal/OSHA, US EPA, and the Bay 

Area Air Quality Management District during their 

investigations and follow-up audits and inspections. A 

historical listing of Major Chemical Accidents or Releases 

starting in 1992 is on the Health Services website at www.

cchealth.org/groups/hazmat/accident_history.php. This 

list includes major accidents that occurred prior to the 

adoption of the Industrial Safety Ordinance.

Hazardous Materials Programs’ Process 

for Public Participation 

Hazardous Materials Programs in 2005 worked with 

the community and developed materials that would 

describe the Industrial Safety Ordinance using a number 

of different approaches. The community representatives 

suggested that the Hazardous Materials Programs staff 

look at existing venues that are attended by the public that 

the Hazardous Materials Programs staff can share and 

receive comments on Preliminary Audit Findings and the 

stationary source’s Safety Plans.

 

Effectiveness of the Public 

Information Bank

The Hazardous Materials Programs section of Health 

Services website www.cchealth.org/groups/hazmat/

includes the following information:

•	 Industrial Safety Ordinance

» Description of covered facilities

» Risk Management Chapter discussion

» Copy of the ordinance

» Land Use Permit Chapter discussion

» Copy of the ordinance

» Safety Program Guidance Document

» Frequently Asked Questions

» Public Outreach strategies

•	 California Accidental Release Prevention (CalARP) 

Program

» Contra Costa County’s California 

Accidental Release Prevention 

of 2005, which were completed in the spring of 2007. The 

fourth round of audits was completed in August 2009. Air 

Liquide submitted a Risk Management Plan and Safety 

Plan to Hazardous Materials Program in July 2009 and 

was audited in June 2010. CCHMP began the fifth round 

of audits in spring of 2011 and completed these audits in 

spring of 2012. 

When the Hazardous Materials Programs staff reviews 

a Safety Plan, a Notice of Deficiencies is produced that 

documents what changes to a Safety Plan the stationary 

source is required to make before Hazardous Materials 

Programs determines that the Safety Plan is complete. The 

stationary source has 60 to 90 days to respond to the Notice 

of Deficiencies. When the stationary source has responded to 

this Notice of Deficiencies, the Hazardous Materials Programs 

staff will review the response. Hazardous Materials Programs 

will either determine that the Safety Plan is complete or will 

work with the stationary source until the Safety Plan contains 

the required information for it to be considered complete. 

When the Safety Plan is deemed complete, Hazardous 

Materials Programs will open a public comment period on 

the Safety Plan and will make available the plan in a public 

meeting or venue. The Hazardous Materials Programs staff 

will respond to all written comments in writing and when 

appropriate use the comments in the audit/inspection of the 

regulated stationary sources.

The Hazardous Materials Programs staff will issue 

Preliminary Audit Findings after an audit/inspection is 

complete. The stationary source will have 90 days to respond 

to these findings. Hazardous Materials Programs will review 

the response from the stationary source on the Preliminary 

Audit Findings. When the stationary source has developed 

an action plan to come into compliance with the regulations, 

the Hazardous Materials Programs staff will issue the 

Preliminary Audit Findings for public comment and will 

make available the findings in a public meeting or venue. The 

Hazardous Materials Programs staff will consider any public 

comments that were received during the public comment 

period and if appropriate will revise the Preliminary Audit 

Findings. When this is complete, the Hazardous Materials 

Programs staff will issue the Final Audit Findings and will 

respond in writing to any written public comments received. 

Table I lists the status of the Hazardous Materials Programs 

staff review of each stationary source’s Safety Plan, and audit 
10

Program Guidance Document

» Program Level description

» Discussion on Public Participation 

for both CalARP Program and the 

Industrial Safety Ordinance

» A map locating the facilities that are subject 

to the CalARP Program and are required 

to submit a Risk Management Plan to 

Hazardous Materials Program. The map 

links to a description of each of the facilities 

and the regulated substances handled.

•	 Hazardous Materials Inventories and Emergency 

Response Program

» Descriptions

» Forms

•	 Underground Storage Tanks

» Description of the program

» Copies of the Underground Storage 

Tanks Health & Safety Code sections

» Underground Storage Tanks forms

•	 Green Business Program

» Description of the Green Business 

Program with a link to the Association 

of Bay Area Government’s website 

on the Green Business Program

•	 Hazardous Materials Incident Response Team

» Including information of the Major Chemical 

Accidents or Releases that have occurred

» The County’s Hazardous Materials 

Incident Notification Policy

•	 A link to the Phillips 66 Fenceline Monitors

•	 Hazardous Materials Program Incident Search

» Online search of the hazardous materials 

incident database for incidents that occurred 

from 1993 to present by entering a date 

range, address, city or facility name

•	 Facility Search

» Online search of the facilities that 

handle hazardous materials by name 

of the facility, street name and city, 

or any combination of the three

•	 Unannounced Inspection Program

» Lists the facilities that are subject to 

unannounced inspections under the 

Unannounced Inspection Program

•	 Hazardous Materials Interagency Task Force

» Includes a matrix of who has what hazardous 

materials and regulatory responsibilities

» Minutes from past meetings

» Presentations from past meetings

•	 Incident Response

» Accident history that lists summaries of major 

accidents from industrial facilities in Contra 

Costa County from most recent to 1992

» Additional resource links for more information

•	 Incidents

» Information on the June 15, 2012 Phillips 

66 incident, including the follow-up 

reports and the public meetings

» Information on the August 6, 2012 Chevron 

Crude Unit fire, including the followup reports and the public meetings
11

TABLE I

INDUSTRIAL SAFETY ORDINANCE STATIONARY SOURCE STATUS

name safety plan (sp) 

received

notice of 

deficiencies 

(nod) issued-sp

safety plan 

complete

sp public 

meeting date

audit/ 

inspection

audit public 

meeting

Air Liquide 

Rodeo 

Hydrogen Plant

7/10/09

7/14/2010

6/1/2010 10/8/11

Air Products – 

Shell & Tesoro

1/14/00

1/16/01 (HF 

update)

6/26/03

7/14/05

12/01/06

6/20/2008

6/30/2010

6/15/00

5/10/01 (HF 

update)

8/24/07

3/14/2011

8/30/00

6/19/01 (HF 

update)

9/14/07

7/1/2008

9/13/00

5/8/03

9/23/07

6/19/2010

4/21/2012

11/22/00

5/3/02 (HF) 

2/27/04

1/22/07

7/20/09

4/16/2012

5/8/03

9/24/06

9/23/07

6/19/2010

General Chemical/

Bay Pt. Works

1/14/00

1/15/01 (HF 

update)

12/10/03

10/9/07

10/24/2011

6/12/00

7/23/01 (HF 

update)

7/28/2008

12/20/00

11/16/01 (HF 

update)

3/17/04

12/13/08

9/20/2012

1/2/01

5/1/03

11/16/05

1/31/06

11/04/08

10/2/2012

8/11/00

5/20/02 (HF) 

6/20/03

8/29/05

1/7/08

3/21/11

1/2/01

5/1/03

11/16/05

1/31/06

11/8/06

1/2/07

11/04/08

10/2/2012

Phillips 66 

(formerly Conoco 

Phillips) – Rodeo

1/15/00

1/12/01 (HF 

update)

8/10/05

8/7/09

3/14/00

9/10/01 (HF 

update)

3/28/06

11/22/2010

5/30/00

3/18/02 (HF 

update)

8/9/02

11/5/07

1/27/2011

6/15/00

5/9/02

10/7,13/07

10/8/2011

6/30/00

11/5/01 (HF) 

8/1/03

8/15/06

10/6/08

8/1/11

4/9/02

6/22/04

7/8/04

10/7,13/07

7/18/10, 

10/9/10

10/8/11

General Chemical/

Bay Pt. Works

1/14/00

1/15/01 (HF 

update)

12/10/03

10/9/07

10/24/2011

6/12/00

7/23/01 (HF 

update)

7/28/2008

9/10/2012

12/20/00

11/16/01 (HF 

update)

3/17/04

10/30/08

9/20/2012

1/2/01

5/1/03

11/16/05

1/31/06

11/04/08

10/2/2012

8/11/00

5/20/02 (HF) 

6/20/03

8/29/05

1/7/08

3/21/11

1/2/01

5/1/03

11/16/05

1/31/06

11/8/06

1/2/07

11/04/08

10/2/2012

Shell Martinez 

Refinery

1/14/00

1/16/01 (HF 

update)7/22/02

1/11/06

9/3/2010

7/19/00

11/9/01 (HF 

update)

3/21/03

8/15/06

10/25/2011

4/9/01

1/3/02 (HF 

update)

9/15/03

11/2/06

3/27/2012

5/8/03

9/24/06

9/23/07

4/21/2012

10/31/00

4/29/02 (HF)

11/26/04

10/23/06

4/30/09

2/13/2012

5/8/03

9/24/2006

9/23/07

6/19/2010

Tesoro Golden 

Eagle Refinery

1/14/00

1/12/01 (HF 

update)

6/21/02

6/22/07

12/11/09

6/1/2012

8/16/00

9/18/01 (HF 

update)

7/30/07

8/6/2012

1/31/01

12/14/01 (HF 

update)

6/21/03

11/5/07

6/4/10

8/27/2012

5/6/03

9/23/07

6/10/10

9/6/2012

9/15/00

12/3/01 (HF)

9/8/03

11/07/05

8/18/08

4/18/2011

5/6/03

9/24/06

9/23/07

6/10/2010

9/6/2012
12

Effectiveness of the Hazardous Materials 

Ombudsperson

The County Board of Supervisors created the Hazardous 

Materials Ombudsperson position in 1997. This position 

was filled in April 1998. The Board believed that the 

ombudsperson would be a conduit for the public to express 

their concerns about how Hazardous Materials Programs 

personnel are performing their duties. Attachment A is a 

report from the Hazardous Materials Ombudsperson on 

the effectiveness of the position.

Other Required Program Elements 

Necessary to Implement and Manage the 

Industrial Safety Ordinance

The California Accidental Release Prevention (CalARP) 

Program is administered in Contra Costa County by the 

Hazardous Materials Division of Contra Costa Health 

Services. The Industrial Safety Ordinance expands on this 

program. Stationary sources are required to submit a Risk 

Management Plan that is similar to the Safety Plans that 

are submitted. Hazardous Materials Programs reviews 

these Risk Management Plans and perform the CalARP 

Program audit simultaneously with the Industrial Safety 

Ordinance audit.

Hazardous Materials Programs performs Unannounced 

Inspections of stationary sources that are part of the CalARP 

Program and are also required to submit a Risk Management 

Plan to the U.S. EPA. These inspections look at a focused 

portion of the CalARP Program or Industrial Safety 

Ordinance requirements, as well as elements from the other 

Hazardous Materials Programs.

Regulated Stationary 

Sources Listing

The Status of the Regulated Stationary 

Sources’ Safety Plans and Programs

All of the stationary sources regulated by the Industrial 

Safety Ordinance were required to submit their Safety 

Plans to Hazardous Materials Program by January 15, 

2000 and to have their Safety Programs completed and 

implemented. The stationary sources were also required 

to have a Human Factors Program in place that follows the 

County’s Safety Program Guidance Document by January 

15, 2001. The status of each of the regulated stationary 

sources is given in Table I and includes the following:

•	 When the latest updated Safety Plan was submitted

•	 When the Notice of Deficiencies was issued

•	 When the plan was determined to be complete by 

Hazardous Materials Programs

•	 When the public meeting was held on the Safety 

Plan

•	 When the audits were complete

•	 When the public meetings were held on the 

preliminary audit findings

•	 When the Human Factors to the Safety Plan were 

revised

•	 When the Notice of Deficiencies was issued for the 

Human Factors revised Safety Plan

•	 When the Human Factors Safety Plan was 

determined to be complete

•	 When the Audit/Inspection was completed

•	 When the Human Factors Audit preliminary 

findings Public Meeting was held

Locations of the Regulated Stationary 

Sources Safety Plans

Each of the regulated stationary sources was required to 

submit a Safety Plan to Hazardous Materials Program on 

January 15, 2000 and an updated Safety Plan that includes 

the implementation of the stationary source’s Human 

Factors Program by January 15, 2001. The regulated 

stationary sources are required to update their Safety Plan 

at least once every three years. These plans are available 

for public review at the Hazardous Materials Programs 

Offices at 4585 Pacheco Blvd., Suite 100, Martinez. When 

Hazardous Materials Programs determines that the Safety 

Plan is complete, and prior to going out for a 45-day public 

comment period, Hazardous Materials Programs will 

place the plan in the library(ies) closest to the regulated 

stationary source. Table II lists the regulated stationary 

sources with the location of each Safety Plan. 

Annual Accident History Report and 

Inherently Safer Systems Implemented as 

Submitted by the Regulated Stationary 

Sources

The Industrial Safety Ordinance requires the stationary 

sources to update the information on their accident 

history in their Safety Plans and include how they have 

used inherently safer processes within the last year. Table 

III lists some of the Inherently Safer Systems that have been 

implemented by the different stationary sources during 

the same period. Attachment B includes the individual 

reports from the stationary sources.

 
13

TABLE II

LOCATION OF SAFETY PLANS - LIBRARIES

regulated stationary source location 1 location 2 location 3

Air Liquide Large Industries Hazardous Materials 

Programs Office

Air Products at Shell Hazardous Materials 

Programs Office

Martinez Public Library

Air Products at Tesoro Hazardous Materials 

Programs Office

Martinez Public Library

Shell Refining – Martinez Hazardous Materials 

Programs Office

Martinez Public Library

General Chemical West

Bay Point Works

Hazardous Materials 

Programs Office

Bay Point Public Library

Phillips 66 (formerly 

ConocoPhillips) Rodeo Refinery 

Hazardous Materials 

Programs Office

Rodeo Public Library Crockett Public Library

Tesoro Golden Eagle Refinery Hazardous Materials 

Programs Office

Martinez Public Library
14

TABLE III

INHERENTLY SAFER SYSTEMS

regulated stationary 

source

inherently safer system implemented

design 

strategy

category

Air Liquide Large 

Industries

No new inherently safer systems have 

been implemented (in this period)

Air Products at Shell 

Martinez Refinery

No new inherently safer systems have 

been implemented (in this period)

Air Products at Tesoro No new inherently safer systems have 

been implemented (in this period)

General Chemical West 

Bay Point Works

Reduction of chemical inventory from 

elimination of process equipment. (9 times)

Inherent Elimination

Phillips 66 (formerly 

ConocoPhillips)- 

Rodeo Refinery

Reduced inventory by combining or removing 

equipment from the process (3 times)

Inherent Minimization

Reduced number of chemicals by consolidation 

of chemical usage (1 time)

Inherent Simplify

Upgraded equipment metallurgy, or design to 

reduce potential of a hazard (11 times)

Passive Moderate

Reduced the potential of a hazard by using 

a less corrosive chemical (1 time)

Passive Moderate

Shell Martinez Refinery Reduction of inventory by removing equipment 

and piping or deinventory (3 times)

Inherent Minimization

Reduced potential of exposure by changing 

equipment metallurgy or design (3 times)

Passive Moderate

Change equipment configuration to reduce 

potential of a hazard (4 times)

Passive Simplify

Reduced the potential of a hazard by adding 

equipment, or controls (6 times)

Active Moderate

Reduced potential of error by standardizing 

into procedure (10 times)

Procedural Simplify

Tesoro Golden 

Eagle Refinery

Eliminated hazardous materials storage, 

equipment or off-site transporation (6 times)

Inherent Minimization

Reduced hazardous conditions or impact of exposure 

by equipment design features. (7 times)

Passive Moderate

Reduced potential of the hazardous condition 

by using smaller amounts (2 Times)

Passive Minimization

Reduced frequency of exposure by changing 

equipment design (1 time)

Passive Simplify
15

Status of the Incident Investigations, 

Including the Root Cause Analyses 

Conducted by the Regulated Stationary 

Sources

The Industrial Safety Ordinance requires the regulated 

stationary sources to do an incident investigation with a 

root cause analysis for each of the major chemical accidents 

or releases as defined by the following: “Major Chemical 

Accident or Release means an incident that meets the 

definition of a Level 3 or Level 2 incident in the Community 

Warning System incident level classification system defined 

in the Hazardous Materials Incident Notification Policy, as 

determined by Contra Costa Health Services; or results in 

the release of a regulated substance and meets one or more 

of the following criteria:

•	 Results in one or more fatalities

•	 Results in greater than 24 hours of hospital treatment 

of three or more persons

•	 Causes on- and/or off-site property damage 

(including cleanup and restoration activities) initially 

estimated at $500,000 or more. On-site estimates 

shall be performed by the regulated stationary source. 

Off-site estimates shall be performed by appropriate 

agencies and compiled by Health Services

•	 Results in a vapor cloud of flammables and/or 

combustibles that is more than 5,000 pounds” 

The regulated stationary source is required to submit a 

report to Hazardous Materials Programs 30 days after the 

root cause analysis is complete. There were four Major 

Chemical Accidents or Releases that occurred within 

the last year in Contra Costa County. Major Chemical 

Accidents or Releases that occurred within the last year 

and the status of each of these incidents investigations are 

included in Table IV. The 72-hour reports related to these 

four incidents are available at the Hazardous Materials 

Programs office and website. 

TABLE IV

facility

mcar 

date cws severity mcar description onsite impact offsite impact

ShellFlexicoker 

PRV Release

Aug 14, 

2012

2 1 A PRV on a distillation column 

in the Flexicoker failed open at 

1230 hours. A Level 1 was issued 

through the CWS at 1241 hours. 

A level 2 was issued at 1334 hours 

as a result of flaring activity. The 

PRV was isolated at 1425 hours. 

Flaring took place as the column 

was depressured and the flare 

had intermittent black smoke.

No injuries 

or equipment 

damage were 

reported

Odors of mercaptans and H2S 

were detected in Martinez, 

Concord, Bay Point, Pittsburg, 

Antioch and Clayton. A number 

of complaints were received 

from the community. Flaring 

had intermittant black smoke 

and loud rumbling noises. 

The following materials were 

estimated as released: 7700 lbs 

hydrocarbon, 6 lbs mercaptans, 

24 lbs H2S, 17 lbs SO2.

Shell-Hydrocracker Lube 

Oil Fire

Aug 13, 

2012

2 1 A compressor in the first stage of 

the Hydrocracker tripped off-line 

due to an external lube oil fire at 

1400 hours. The fire was put out 

by onsite personnel within 15 

minutes. Flaring was performed 

as the 1st stage was brought down. 

CCHMP was notified of the event 

through the CWS by 1408 hours.

A small fire 

resulted in 

slight damage 

to ancillary 

tubing and 

electrical lines.

The fire sent a visible black 

cloud up into the air that 

drifted south down Pacheco 

Blvd as far as CCHMP’s 

offices. The Shell community 

sampling team detected no 

H2S or benzene. The refinery 

estimated that approximately 

580 pounds of SO2 was 

released through the flare. 7 

community calls were made to 

the refinery during the flaring.
16

facility

mcar 

date cws severity mcar description onsite impact offsite impact

Chevron-#4 

Crude fire

Aug 6, 

2012

3 3 # 4 Crude Unit Fire. An 8” line 

from the atmospheric distillation 

column, number 4 Side Cut, 

with hot diesel like material, 

leaked and caught fire.

5 Chevron 

emergency 

responders 

were treated for 

minor burns, and 

received first aid.

Between 400 and 900 people 

sought medical attention.

Phillips 

66-Sour 

Water Tank

June 15, 

2012

2 2 A sour water tank (T-294) was over 

pressured resulting in a split in the 

top seam of the fixed roof tank. 

Vapors left the tank through the 

opening until it could be sealed. 

Chemicals involved included H2S, 

other sulfur compounds, natural 

gas, light hydrocarbons, nitrogen.

Since the seam of the tank was 

ruptured, the repairs took some 

time to complete. The event started 

at 7:10am on 6/15/12 and continued 

as a Level 2 until approximately 

12:05am on 6/17/12 when it was 

downgraded to a Level 1. The event 

was determined to be a Level 0 

at around 8:30am on 6/17/12 and 

then closed. During this time, 

various actions were performed 

to empty the tank, inert the 

tank with nitrogen to minimize 

flammable hazards, connect odor 

abatement equipment to control 

vapors, and to patch the tank. 

CCHMP performed monitoring 

in the community, staffed the 

Hazmat DOC, and was present 

at Phillips 66 EOC continuously 

for 36 hours. Staff rotated shifts 

to cover all necessary positions.

Atmospheric 

tank T-294 was 

overpressured 

resulting in a 

rupture along 

approximately 20 

feet of the top seam 

of the roof. The 

rupture allowed 

vapors from the 

tank to exit into the 

surrounding area. 

H2S was one of the 

chemicals detected 

onsite although 

many other sulfur 

compounds 

were present. 

Operations were 

modified to remove 

the tank from 

active service. 

Various actions and 

repairs were made 

to the vessel. After 

approximately 36 

hours temporary 

patches were 

positioned over 

the ruptured seam 

using heavy plastic 

tarping, gorrilla 

tape, and magnets. 

Eventually the tank 

was re-connected 

to the odor 

abatement system.

Strong sulfur odors were 

detected by Hazmat IR 

personnel on Friday in areas 

from I-80 and the surrounding 

communities. The highest 

readings were approximately 

1 ppm (as H2S) on I-80, which 

is a few hundred feet from the 

storage tank. Readings from 5-20 

ppb (as H2S) were detected by 

Hazmat IR personnel around 

the town of Crockett on 6/15/12. 

On 6/16/12 concentrations 

from 1-5 ppb (as H2S) were 

found in Rodeo, Hercules, 

and Crockett. Numerous calls 

and complaints were received 

at Hazmat throughout the 

weekend regarding the odor 

(from skunk to rotten eggs 

to natural gas type odors).
17

Major Chemical Accidents or Releases

Hazardous Materials Programs analyzed the Major 

Chemical Accidents or Releases (MCAR) that occurred 

since the implementation of the Industrial Safety 

Ordinance. The analysis includes the number of MCARs 

and the severity of the MCARs. Three different levels of 

severity were assigned:

•	 Severity Level III – A fatality, serious injuries or 

major on-site and/or off-site damage occurred

•	 Severity Level II – An impact to the community 

occurred, or if the situation was slightly different the 

accident may have been considered major, or there 

is a recurring type of incident at that facility

•	 Severity Level I – A release where there was no or 

minor injuries, the release had no or slight impact 

to the community, or there was no or minor onsite 

damage 

Below are charts showing the number of MCARs from 

January 1999 through October 2012 for all stationary 

sources in Contra Costa County, the MCARs that occurred 

at stationary sources regulated by the County’s Industrial 

Safety Ordinance, and a chart showing the MCARs that 

have occurred at the County and the City of Richmond’s 

Industrial Safety Ordinance stationary sources. The charts 

also show the number of severity level I, II and III MCARs 

for this period. NOTE: The charts do not include any 

transportation MCARs that have occurred.
18

A weighted score has been developed giving more weight 

to the higher severity incidents and a lower weight to 

the less severe incidents. The purpose is to developed 

a metric of the overall process safety of facilities in the 

County, the facilities that are covered by the County and 

the City of Richmond Industrial Safety Ordinances, and 

the facilities that are covered by the County’s Industrial 

Safety Ordinance. A severity level III incident is given 9 

points, severity level II is given 3 points and severity level I 

is given 1 point. Below is a graph of this weighted scoring.
19

Total Fees, Service Charges and 

Other Assessments Collected 

Specifically for the Industrial 

Safety Ordinance

The fees charged for the Industrial Safety Ordinance are 

to cover the time that the Accidental Release Prevention 

Engineers use to enforce the ordinance, the position of the 

Hazardous Materials Ombudsperson, outreach material 

and to cover a portion of the overhead for the Hazardous 

Materials Programs. The fees charged for administering 

this ordinance and the Richmond Industrial Safety 

Ordinance for the fiscal year 2011–12 is $442,713.

Legal Enforcement Actions Initiated by 

Hazardous Materials Program

As part of the enforcement of the Industrial Safety 

Ordinance and the CalARP Program, Hazardous Materials 

Programs issues Notices of Deficiencies on the Safety and 

Risk Management Plans and issues Audit Findings on 

what a stationary source is required to change to come into 

compliance with the regulations. Table I shows the action 

that has been taken by Hazardous Materials Programs. 

Hazardous Materials Programs has not taken any action 

through the District Attorney’s Office for noncompliance 

with the requirements of the Industrial Safety Ordinance.

Penalties Assessed as a Result of 

Enforcement

No penalties have been assessed this year for 

noncompliance with the Industrial Safety Ordinance.
20

Total Personnel and Personnel 

Years Used by Hazardous 

Materials Program to Implement 

the Industrial Safety Ordinance

The Accidental Release Prevention Programs Engineers 

have reviewed resubmitted Safety Plans, prepared and 

presented information for public meetings, performed 

audits of the stationary sources for compliance with both 

the California Accidental Release Prevention Program 

and Industrial Safety Ordinance and did follow-up work 

after a Major Chemical Accident or Release. The following 

is a breakdown of the time that was spent on the County’s 

and the City of Richmond’s Industrial Safety Ordinances:

•	 Three ISO/CalARP Program facility audits were 

done between November 2011 and October 2012. It 

takes four to five engineers four weeks to perform 

the on-site portion of an ISO/CalARP Program 

audit. The audit process encompasses off-site time 

that includes a quality assurance process, working 

with the facility to address any questions, posting 

public notices, attending a public forum to share 

audit findings, addressing any questions from the 

public and issuing the final report. The total time 

taken to perform these audits in 2012 was 3,000 

hours. Approximately one-third of the time was 

dedicated to the Industrial Safety Ordinance, for a 

total of 1,000 hours.

•	 Updating Audit questionnaire to reflect revised 

Safety Program Guidance document – 300 hours

•	 Reviewing information for the website – 99 hours

•	 Reviewing Safety Plans and following up with the 

facilities on any deficiencies – 200 hours

•	 Review root cause analysis and proposed 

recommendations – 202 hours

•	 Health Services Community Education and 

Information Office or the Accidental Release 

Prevention Engineers prepare material for 

presentations and public meetings – total 

approximately 400 personnel hours.

•	 Total of 2,201 hours is the approximate personnel 

time spent on the Industrial Safety Ordinance.

This is not including the Ombudsperson time spent 

helping prepare for the public meetings, working with the 

engineers on questions arising from the Industrial Safety 

Ordinance, and answering questions from the public on 

the Industrial Safety Ordinance.

Comments from Interested 

Parties Regarding the 

Effectiveness of the Industrial 

Safety Ordinance

No comments were received on the County’s or the City of 

Richmond’s Industrial Safety Ordinances during the last year. 

The Impact of the Industrial 

Safety Ordinance on Improving 

Industrial Safety

Four programs are in place to reduce the potential of 

an accidental release from a regulated stationary source 

that could impact the surrounding community. The four 

programs are the Process Safety Management Program 

administered by Cal/OSHA, the federal Accidental 

Release Prevention Program administered by the U.S. 

EPA, the California Accidental Release Prevention 

Program administered locally by the Hazardous Materials 

Programs staff, and the Industrial Safety Ordinance 

administered by the Hazardous Materials Programs staff. 

Each of the programs is very similar in requirements, with 

the Industrial Safety Ordinance being the most stringent. 

The prevention elements of the program level 3 regulated 

stationary sources under the federal Accidental Release 

Prevention Program is almost identical to the Process 

Safety Management Program. The main differences 

between the federal Accidental Release Prevention and 

the CalARP Programs are:

•	 The number of chemicals regulated

•	 The threshold quantity of these chemicals

•	 An external events analysis, including seismic and 

security and vulnerability analysis, is required

•	 Additional information in the Risk Management Plan

•	 Hazardous Materials Program is required to audit 

and inspect stationary sources at least once every 

three years

•	 The interaction required between the stationary 

source and Hazardous Materials Program

The differences between the CalARP and the Industrial 

Safety Ordinance Safety Programs are:

•	 Stationary sources are required to include a root 

cause analysis with the incident investigations for 

Major Chemical Accidents or Releases

•	 The stationary sources are required to consider 

inherently safer systems
21

•	 All of the processes at the regulated stationary 

sources are covered 

•	 Managing changes in the organization for 

operations, maintenance and emergency response

•	 The implementation of a Human Factors Programs

The Board of Supervisors amended the County’s 

Industrial Safety Ordinance to expand the requirement of 

the ordinance in 2006. These amendments are:

•	 Expand the Human Factors section of the Industrial 

Safety Ordinance to include the following:

» Maintenance procedures

» Management of Organizational Changes

– Maintenance personnel

– A job task analysis for each of the 

positions that work in operations, 

maintenance, emergency response and 

Health and Safety

– Include temporary changes in the 

Management of Organizational Change

•	 A requirement that the stationary sources perform 

a Security and Vulnerability Analysis and test the 

effectiveness of the changes made as a result of the 

Security and Vulnerability Analysis

•	 The stationary sources perform a Safety Culture 

Assessment

The Safety Culture Assessment guidance chapter was 

finalized in November 2009. The Industrial Safety 

Ordinance Guidance Document is being updated to 

include the remaining changes to the ordinance and a draft 

was issued in September 2010. The Accidental Release 

Prevention Engineers have participated with the Center 

for Chemical Process Safety on developing the second 

edition of the “Inherently Safer Chemical Processes” book 

that is referenced in the ordinance and with the Center 

for Chemical Process Safety on developing process safety 

metrics for leading and lagging indicators.

All of these requirements will and have lowered the 

probability of an accident occurring. Contra Costa County 

has been recognized in the Chemical Safety and Hazard 

Investigation Board Report on the BP March 23, 2005 Texas 

City Investigation as an alternative model for doing process 

safety inspections. The report states “Contra Costa County 

and the U.K. Health and Safety Executive conduct frequent 

scheduled inspections of PSM and major hazard facilities 

with highly qualified staff.” This was done to compare to the 

number of OSHA process safety management audits. Carolyn 

W. Merritt, the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation 

Board Chair at that time, also recognized Contra Costa 

County in testimony to the House of Representatives 

Committee on Education and Labor chaired by U.S. Rep. 

George Miller. U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer, during a hearing to 

consider John Bresland’s nomination to the Chemical Safety 

and Hazard Investigation Board as the Chair (replacing 

Carolyn Merritt), asked Mr. Bresland about the Contra 

Costa County program for process safety audits of refineries 

and chemical companies. The Chemical Safety and Hazard 

Investigation Board also mentions Contra Costa County in 

a DVD “Anatomy of a Disaster: Explosion at BP Texas City 

Refinery” on the resources given to audit and ensure facilities 

are complying with the regulations. The Chemical Safety 

and Hazard Investigation Board made a recommendation in 

their final investigation report on an incident that occurred 

at the Bayer CropScience Institute, West Virginia facility 

that West Virginia or the Kanawha Valley adopts a process 

of auditing their chemical facilities using the Contra Costa 

County auditing process. The Hazardous Materials Programs 

staff and a representative from the local United Steelworkers 

Union were part of a panel when the Chemical Safety and 

Hazard Investigation Board presented this report to the 

Kanawha Valley community.

Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Programs was asked 

to give testimony at the hearing on “Work Place Safety 

and Worker Protections in the Gas and Oil Industry” 

before the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, 

Labor, and Pensions Subcommittee on Employment and 

Workplace Safety. The testimony was on the success of the 

Accidental Release Prevention Programs that are in place 

in Contra Costa County. The hearing was specific on two 

major incidents that occurred in Anacortes, Wash. at a 

Tesoro Refinery and the Deepwater Horizon incident in 

the Gulf of Mexico. A link to the testimony is posted on 

the Health Services website and can be found at http://

help.senate.gov/hearings/hearing/?id=fe34048f-5056-

9502-5d69-2609a5d5501a.

In September 2012, Contra Costa Hazardous Materials 

Programs was asked to be a presenter at the “Expert Forum 

on the Use of Performance-based Regulatory Models in 

the U.S. Oil and Gas Industry: Offshore and Onshore” 

in Texas City, Texas to share the regulatory experience at 

Contra Costa County. And give testimony on how local, 

state and Federal agencies can work together and have an 

unprecedented alignment on regulations that is required 

for the same facilities. This informational meeting was 
22

spearheaded by Federal Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration and attended by Bureau of Safety and 

Environmental Enforcement, United States Coast Guard, 

United States Environmental Protection Agency, Pipeline 

and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, United 

Steelworkers, American Petroleum Institute, academia 

and industry representatives.

City of Richmond Industrial 

Safety Ordinance

The City of Richmond on December 18, 2001 passed its 

version of the Industrial Safety Ordinance, which became 

effective January 17, 2002. Richmond’s Industrial Safety 

Ordinance (RISO) mirrors the County’s Industrial Safety 

Ordinance, with the exception of the 2006 amendments 

to the County’s Ordinance. Richmond adopted the 

County’s 2006 amendments in October 2012. Richmond’s 

Industrial Safety Ordinance covers two stationary sources: 

Chevron Richmond Refinery and General Chemical West 

Richmond Works.

Chevron and General Chemical West Richmond Works 

submitted their Safety Plans to Hazardous Materials 

Programs, which have been reviewed and considered 

complete. The public comment period for these plans ended 

in January 2004. Public meetings held in 2004 in North 

Richmond and Richmond discussed Chevron and General 

Chemical West Richmond Works audit findings. The 

second Richmond Industrial Safety Ordinance/CalARP 

Program audits for these facilities occurred in 2006 and 

public meetings were held in June 2007 at Hilltop Mall at 

“Lessons from Katrina,” the 2007 Neighbor Works Week 

Homeownership Faire & Disaster Preparedness Expo. 

Hazardous Materials Programs followed up on the 

January 15, 2007 fire at the Chevron Refinery. The followup included a public meeting, City Council meetings, 

meetings with Chevron on the investigation and the root 

cause analysis. Chevron Richmond Refinery was audited 

for the third time for RISO/CalARP program in April 2008 

The report was finalized and results were available at the 

Recycle More Earth Day Event in Richmond in June 2009. 

Copies of the audit results are available at the Richmond 

Library and a summary of the audit is also available on 

Hazardous Materials Programs’ website.

CCHMP performed an RISO/CalARP program audit 

at General Chemical Richmond in January 2012 and is 

working with General Chemical on the proposed remedies 

to the audit actions. The final report from the 2009 audit was 

shared in a public event in Richmond in September 2010. 

CCHMP performed the fifth RISO/CalARP program audit 

at Chevron Richmond Refinery in February 2011. The final 

audit report was shared at the West County Emergency 

Preparedness Fair in El Cerrito in September 2011. CCHMP 

also made presentation to Point Richmond Neighborhood 

Council at the Point Richmond Firehouse about General 

Chemical Richmond Works and Chevron Richmond 

Refinery’s audit history, incidents and general Industrial 

Safety Ordinance information on January 25, 2012. 

Hazardous Materials Programs followed up with Chevron 

Richmond Refinery and worked each with U.S. EPA, 

Cal OSHA, BAAQMD and CSB in their independent 

investigation of the August 6 2012 fire at the No. 4 Crude 

Unit. At the time of this report, none of the investigations 

are finalized. To date, CCHMP co-hosted two public 

meetings in conjunction with the City of Richmond to 

share information regarding this severity level III incident. 

CCHMP, City of Richmond and representatives of the 

agencies performing the investigation shared preliminary 

results and addressed public issues and concerns. Written 

comments were gathered and are posted on the Health 

Services’ website.

CCHMP presented the 2010 annual RISO report to the 

Richmond City Council on July 26, 2011. Copies of the 

2011 RISO report were submitted to the Richmond City 

Council and posted on cchealth.org. Select community 

members were also included in the distribution.
23

ATTACHMENT A

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

OMBUDSMAN REPORT
24

Hazardous Materials Ombudsman Evaluation 

 October, 2011 through November, 2012

I. Introduction

On July 15, 1997 the Contra Costa County Board of 

Supervisors authorized creation of an Ombudsman 

position for the County’s Hazardous Materials Programs. 

The first Hazardous Materials Ombudsman began work 

on May 1, 1998. The Contra Costa County Board of 

Supervisors adopted an Industrial Safety Ordinance 

on December 15, 1998. Section 450-8.022 of the 

Industrial Safety Ordinance requires the Health Services 

Department to continue to employ an Ombudsman for 

the Hazardous Materials Programs. Section 450-8.030(B)

(vii) of the Industrial Safety Ordinance requires an annual 

evaluation of the effectiveness of the Hazardous Materials 

Ombudsman, with the first evaluation to be completed on 

or before October 31, 2000.

The goals of section 450-8.022 of the Industrial Safety 

Ordinance for the Hazardous Materials Ombudsman are:

1) To serve as a single point of contact for people 

who live or work in Contra Costa County 

regarding environmental health concerns, and 

questions and complaints about the Hazardous 

Materials Programs.

2) To investigate concerns and complaints, facilitate 

their resolution, and assist people in gathering 

information about programs, procedures, or 

issues.

3) To provide technical assistance to the public.

The Hazardous Materials Ombudsman currently 

accomplishes these goals through the following program 

elements:

1) Continuing an outreach strategy so that the 

people who live and work in Contra Costa 

County can know about and utilize the program.

2) Investigating and responding to questions and 

complaints, and assisting people in gathering 

information about programs, procedures, or issues.

3) Participating in a network of environmental 

programs for the purpose of providing technical 

assistance.

This evaluation covers the period from October, 2011 

through November, 2012 for the Hazardous Materials 

Ombudsman program. The effectiveness of the program 

shall be demonstrated by showing that the activities of 

the Hazardous Materials Ombudsman meet the goals 

established in the Industrial Safety Ordinance.

II. Program Elements

1. Continuing an Outreach Strategy

This period efforts were focused on maintaining 

the outreach tools currently available. Copies of the 

Ombudsman Brochure were translated into Spanish and 

were distributed to the public at meetings, presentations, 

public events, and through the mail. A contact person was 

also established in Public Health that could receive calls 

from the public in Spanish and serve as an interpreter to 

respond to these calls. In addition to explaining the services 

provided by the position, the brochure also provides the 

phone numbers of several other related County and State 

programs. The web page was maintained for the program 

as part of Contra Costa Health Services web site. This 

page contains information about the program, links to 

other related web sites, and information about upcoming 

meetings and events. A toll-free phone number is 

published in all three Contra Costa County phone books 

in the Government section. 

2. Investigating and Responding to Questions 

and Complaints, and Assisting in Information 

Gathering

During this period, the Hazardous Materials Ombudsman 

received 188 information requests. Over 95 percent of 

these requests occurred via the telephone, and have been 

requests for information about environmental issues. 

Requests via e-mail are slowly increasing, mainly through 

referrals from Health Services main web page. Most of 

these requests concern problems around the home such 
25

as asbestos removal, household hazardous waste disposal, 

pesticide misuse, mold and lead contamination. 

Information requests about environmental issues received 

via the telephone were generally responded to within one 

business day of being received. Many of the information 

requests were answered during the initial call. Some 

requests required the collection of information or 

written materials that often took several days to compile. 

Telephone requests were responded to by telephone unless 

written materials needed to be sent as part of the response. 

Complaints about the Hazardous Materials Programs can 

also be received via telephone and in writing. Persons 

that make complaints via telephone are also asked to 

provide those complaints in writing. During this period, 

the Hazardous Materials Ombudsman did not receive any 

complaints about the Hazardous Materials Program. 

The Ombudsman facilitated a meeting with small 

businesses to discuss potential hazardous materials 

program fee increases. 

This year, the Ombudsman facilitated community meetings 

after two major accidents at local oil refineries. On June 

15, 2012 at the Phillips 66 oil refinery in Rodeo, a large 

quantity of hydrogen sulfide was released from a storage 

tank after the tanked ruptured due to being over-pressured. 

While a Shelter-in-Place was not advised for the downwind community of Crockett, many people were impacted 

by the strong odors from the release. On July 2, 2012 the 

Ombudsman organized and facilitated a community 

meeting in coordination with County Supervisor Glover’s 

staff at the Crocket Community Center. Representatives 

from the refinery, the County’s Hazardous Materials 

Program and the Public Health Department responded to 

questions from the audience of over 100 individuals. The 

Ombudsman also helped facilitate follow-up responses 

to questions raised at the meeting that were posted at the 

Health Department’s web site.

On August 6, 2012 a large fire broke out at the Chevron 

refinery in Richmond after petroleum leaking from a pipe 

in the crude oil processing unit ignited. A Shelter-inPlace advisory was issued for Richmond, San Pablo and 

North Richmond. Over the next two weeks approximately 

15,000 people sought medical attention as a result of the 

fire. On September 24, 2012 the Ombudsman facilitated a 

community meeting at the Richmond auditorium which 

he helped plan with the Staff from Supervisor Gioia’s 

office and other agencies where representatives from the 

refinery, the Hazardous Materials Program, the Bay Area 

Air Quality Management District, Cal OSHA, the US EPA, 

the US Chemical Safety Board, the Community Warning 

System and the Public Health department responded to 

questions from an audience of over 100. The Ombudsman 

also helped facilitate follow-up responses to questions 

raised at the meeting that were posted at the Health 

Department’s web site, and participated in debriefings 

about the emergency response efforts. 

3. Participating in a Network of Environmental 

Programs for the Purpose of Providing 

Technical Assistance.

Technical assistance means helping the public understand 

the regulatory, scientific, political, and legal aspects of 

issues. It also means helping them understand how to 

effectively communicate their concerns within these 

different arenas. This year, the Ombudsman continued 

to staff a number of County programs and participate in 

other programs to be able to provide technical assistance 

to the participants and the public. 

•	 CAER (Community Awareness and Emergency 

Response) - This non-profit organization addresses 

industrial accident prevention, response and 

communication. The Ombudsman participated 

in the Emergency Notification subcommittee of 

CAER. 

•	 Hazardous Materials Commission – In 2001, the 

Ombudsman took over as staff for the commission. 

As staff to the commission, the Ombudsman 

conducts research, prepared reports, writes letters 

and provides support for 3 monthly Commission 

meetings. In addition, during this period the 

Ombudsman made a presentation to the Contra 

Costa Pharmacist Association concerning the 

proper disposal of unused pharmaceuticals and 

tracked the development of the Alameda County 

Pharmaceutical Disposal Ordinance, worked with 

the Department of Toxic Substances Control to 

develop a method for the County to be able to tract 

5-year reviews at contaminated sites.
26

•	 Public and Environmental Health Advisory Board – 

As staff to the Environmental Health subcommittee 

of PEHAB, the Ombudsman keeps the committee 

informed on issues they are interested in such as 

refinery flaring, contaminated fish consumption, 

climate change, and Integrated Pest Management.

•	 Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee 

- During this period the Ombudsman represented 

the Health Department on, and was elected to 

be chairperson of, the County Integrated Pest 

Management Advisory Committee. This Committee 

brings Department representatives and members of 

the public together to help implement the County’s 

Integrated Pest Management policy.

•	 Asthma Program – The Ombudsman participated 

in the Public Health Department’s asthma program 

as a resource on environmental health issues. The 

Ombudsman represented the Asthma program 

in two regional collaboratives related to asthma 

issues, particularly diesel pollution – the Ditching 

Dirty Diesel Collaborative and the Bay Area 

Environmental Health Collaborative. 

•	 Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s 

Community Air Risk Evaluation Program

During this period the Ombudsman represented the 

Public Health Division on the advisory board to this Air 

District program. This advisory board meets quarterly to 

discuss implementation of this program that identifies and 

creates strategies to address health risks in communities 

with high air pollution emissions in the Bay Area. Two of 

these areas are in Contra Costa County.

•	 Richmond General Plan Health Element 

During this period the Ombudsman provided technical 

assistance to the City of Richmond as part of an effort to 

implement the new Health and Wellness Element of their 

updated General Plan. 

•	 Climate Change

During this period the Ombudsman worked with staff 

from the Community Wellness and Prevention Program 

of the Public Health Department to prepare an evaluation 

of the health co-benefits of the proposed greenhouse 

gas reduction measures contained in the County’s Draft 

Climate Action Plan. This evaluation is part of the draft 

County Climate Action Plan and is scheduled to be 

adopted in 2013.

The Ombudsman also worked with Contra Costa 

Climate Leaders to put on a workshop for local planning 

department officials about the health benefits of climate 

mitigation measures. 

•	 San Francisco Bay Stakeholder Advisory Group 

for Contaminated Fish Consumption

The Ombudsman was invited to serve on the California 

Department of Public Health’s San Francisco Bay 

Stakeholder Advisory Group for Contaminated Fish 

Consumption. This was a two year effort to develop 

updated and effective public messaging for the new fish 

consumption advisories for San Francisco Bay that have 

been developed by the State, which ended in November.

The Hazardous Materials Ombudsman also attended 

workshops, presentations, meetings and trainings on 

a variety of environmental issues to be better able to 

provide technical assistance to the public. Topics included 

Environmental Justice, Cumulative impacts assessment, 

emergency management practices, health mitigations for 

consumption of contaminated fish, and land-use planning 

for greenhouse gas reduction.

III.Program management

The Hazardous Material Ombudsman continued to 

report to the Public Health Director on a day-to-day 

basis during this period, while still handling complaints 

and recommendations about the Hazardous Materials 

Programs through the Health Services Director. The 

Ombudsman also was a member of Health Services 

Emergency Management Team and participates on its 

HEEP management team. 

IV. Goals for the 2012/13 period

In this period, the Ombudsman will provide essentially 

the same services to Contra Costa residents as was 

provided in the last period. The Ombudsman will continue 

respond to questions and complaints about the actions 
27

of the Hazardous Materials Programs; answer general 

questions that come from the public and assist them in 

understanding regulatory programs; staff the Hazardous 

Materials Commission and the Public and Environmental 

Health Advisory Board; represent the Public Health 

Department as part of the Ditching Dirty Diesel 

Collaborative and the Bay Area Environmental Health 

Collaborative; represent the Health Department on the 

Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee and 

the Air District CARE Advisory Board; and participate in 

the CAER Emergency Notification committee.

During this period the Ombudsman will continue to 

work with the Public Health Department on finalizing 

the evaluation of the co-health benefits of the County’s 

Climate Action Plan and begin to develop a strategy to 

determine the Health Department’s role in adapting to 

climate change. 
28

ATTACHMENT B

REGULATED SOURCES ANNUAL

PERFORMANCE 

WITH ACCIDENT HISTORY 

AND INHERENT SAFETY IMPLEMENTATION
29

Annual Performance Review and Evaluation Submittal

June 30, 2012

*Attach additional pages as necessary

1. Name and address of Stationary Source: Air Liquide Rodeo Hydrogen Plant, 1391 San Pablo Blvd., Rodeo, California 94572

2. Contact name and telephone number (should CCHMP have questions): Jared Wittry 510-245-7285 ext 2204 

3. Summarize the status of the Stationary Source’s Safety Plan and Program (450-8.030(B)(2)(i)): The plan was submitted to Contra 

Costa County in July of 2010. Waiting on results review. 

4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): There have been 

no updates to the plan in 2011. 

5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide 

individuals with copies of the document (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCHMP Office at 4585 Pacheco Boulevard, Suite 100, Martinez, CA 

94553; Rodeo Public Library; Crockett Public Library (library closest to the stationary source). 

6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e. updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(E)(2) of County 

Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(E)(1) for all major chemical 

accidents or releases occurring between the last annual performance review report and the current annual performance review 

and evaluation submittal (12-month history)): An RCFA was performed on the PG&E voltage sag which occurred October 19, 

2011. 

7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of implementation 

of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B)(2)(iv)): On October 19, 2011 the feed compressor shutdown 

due to a voltage sag from a PG&E transmission fault. The action items formulated for PG&E were scheduled for implimentation 

in December of 2011 to prevent reoccurance. 

8. Summary of the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or 

Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(v)): The RCFA action items for PG&E were scheduled for 

completion in December of 2011. Audit action items from the 2011 audit are currently being implimented. See section 15 and 

16 for details. The current action plan has completion of the 2011 items in August. 

9. Summary of inherently safer systems implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., 

intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi)): No new inherently safer systems have been implimented. 

 

10. Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra 

Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 98-

48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(vii)): There were no enforcement actions during this period. 

11. Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)): No penalities have been assessed 

against this facility. 

12. Summarize the total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ISO (450-8.030(B)

(4)): The total CalARP Program fees for the nine facilities subject to the Industrial Safety Ordinance was $463,493. The total 

Industrial Safety Ordinance program fees for these nine facilities was $442,713. (NOTE: These fees include those for the 

County and City of Richmond ISO facilities) 

13. Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter 

(450-8.030(B)(5)): 2,201 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of the Industrial 

Safety Ordinance. 

14. Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness 

of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)):None 

15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450-8.030(B)(7)): This chapter has prompted us 

to improve safety culture through SafeStart training. All personnel have been trained through 2 of 5 program units with all 

units to be covered by calendar end 2013. SafeStart is the most successful training process in the world for developing personal 
30

safety skills both on and off the job and has proven to reduce injuries 30%-70% in 6-18 months by more than 2,500 clients in 50+ 

countries. Air Liquide Large Industries also devoloped Fundamental Safety Rules requiring 100% compliance of employees and 

contractors to 6 key rules selected due to their potential to cause serious injury, quality or reliability loss including Standard 

Operating Procedures, Work Permitting, Management of Change, Safety System Override, Energy Control and Isolation and 

Fall Protection. The source has also improved contractor safety through requiring contractors to attend local safety councils 

for required safety training prior to beginning work at the site. Furthermore, all contractor companies working on-site during 

turn around activity will be assessed through a standard contractor safety checklist. The Rodeo Hydrogen Facility was audited 

to an internal quality audit protocal named IMS which includes a safety component and is scheduled to undergo an annual 

Health, Safety, Environmental and Security Audit in September 2012. A hydrogen safety committee was developed last year 

and one operations employee from the Rodeo facility is a Co-Chair to the committee as well as the new safety champion to 

the location. The safety champion process was developed in 2011 and is comprised of a multidisciplinary network of nonmanagement volunteers chartered to enhance our safety culture and create safe environments for our employees, contractors 

and visitors. All employees at the Rodeo facility were also retrained in the LIVES safety program which includes components 

such as Hot Work, Confined Space, Energy Control and Isolation and Safe Working Conditions. 

16. List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., 

recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; 

recommendations from RCA’s) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases: The stationary 

source has implemented a Latent Conditions program that focuses on reducing the potential human error associated with 

Management of Change, procedure development and modification, Incident Investigation and Process Hazard Analysis. 

The stationary source has implemented a Management of Organization Change process to better manage changes to ensure 

process safety activities are accomplished. In addition, the stationary source has conducted procedural HAZOPs on including 

Reformer Emergency Shutdown, Reformer Trip Checklist Emergency Shutdown, Reformer Normal Shutdown, Ammonia 

Unloading, Natural Gas System Initial Start-Up and Reformer Normal Start-Up which will help operations run our facility 

in a reliable and safe manner. Stationary source completed its 5-year Process Hazard Analysis revalidation using the HAZOP 

methodology. Findings will be risk ranked and entered into our internal PHA action tracking system (Simon) to be tracked to 

closure. 

17. Summarize the emergency response activities conducted at the source (e.g., CWS or TEN activation) in response to major chemical 

accidents or releases: None 
31

Annual Performance Review and Evaluation Submittal

June 30, 2012

*Attach additional pages as necessary

1. Name and address of Stationary Source: Air Products 

Shell Martinez Refinery, 110 Waterfront Road, Martinez, CA 94553 

2. Contact name and telephone number (should CCHMP have questions): Eric Schneider (925) 372-9302 

3. Summarize the status of the Stationary Source’s Safety Plan and Program (450-8.030(B)(2)(i)): The stationary Source’s Safety 

Plan is complete per the CCHS requirements.. The program was audited in the past year by CCHS as part of the three year 

CCHS site audit . The Safety Cultral Survey was completed with follow actions underway. Iimprovement comments were received 

from CCHS on the Cutural Survey also during the recent audit and these will be implemented in the coming year.. CCHS’s 

unannounced Inspection of CalARP Program, Hazardous Materials Business Plan and Hazardous Waste Generator Inspection at 

Tesoro Martinez--July 11, 2011, have been completed.. 

4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): No planned 

changes at this time. The three year periodic aduit of the site safety program by CCHS , will require some updates of the 

Plan. 

5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide 

individuals with copies of the document (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCHMP Office at 4585 Pacheco Boulevard, Suite 100, Martinez; 

Martinez Library (library closest to the stationary source). 

6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e. updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(E)(2) of County 

Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(E)(1) for all major chemical 

accidents or releases occurring between the last annual performance review report and the current annual performance review 

and evaluation submittal (12-month history)): There were no major chemical accidents or releases to report. 

 

7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of implementation 

of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B)(2)(iv)): A potential MCAR near miss occurred on January 

27, 2012. The incident involved a ruptured furnace tube that led to an energy release contained wihtin the furnace. Immediate 

response was to remove ruptured tube and an additional tube with similar MI inspection results to reduce the risk of another 

ruptured tube. A systems change to reduce the potential for a subsequent energy release should a rupture tube occur is pending.

8. Summary of the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or 

Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(v)): Air Products and CCHS completed the formal (3

year) CalARP ISO audit in May, 2012 action items are under review. RMP Plan actionitems have been reviewed and presented

to CCHS along with this annual update. Action actionitems from the CCHS Unannounced Inspection of CalARP Program,

Hazardous Materials Business Plan and Hazardous Waste Generator Inspection at Shell Martinez--July 11, 2011, have been

completed.

9. Summary of inherently safer systems implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., 

intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi)): None 

10. Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra 

Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 98-

48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(vii)): There were no enforcement actions during this period. 

 

11. Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)): No penalities have been assessed 

against this facility. 
32

12. Summarize the total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ISO (450-8.030(B)(4)): 

The total CalARP Program fees for the nine facilities subject to the Industrial Safety Ordinance was $463,493. The total Industrial 

Safety Ordinance program fees for these nine facilities was $442,713. (NOTE: These fees include those for the County and City of 

Richmond ISO facilities) 

13. Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter (450-

8.030(B)(5)): 2,201 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of the Industrial Safety 

Ordinance. 

14. Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness 

of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)): None 

15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450-8.030(B)(7)): Air Products is committed 

to the safer operation of our facilities and has implemented applicable requirements outlined in the ISO and CalARP regulations. 

Both the ISO and Human Factors programs are an integral part of our five year Operating Hazard Review revalidations and ongoing management of change process. This has helped the site maintain a safety record of no recordable or Lost Time Injuries since 

the last plan submittal. There have been no incidents resulting in an offsite impact. The Chapter has helped reinforce the need to 

maintain and follow a structured safety program to help ensure the safety of our employees and the communities in which we 

operate 

16. List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., 

recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; 

recommendations from RCA’s) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases: Air Products has 

continued to refine the Tier IV site specific documents at the request of CCHS to clarify ISO requirements, The implementation 

of the ISO standards, the Safety Cultural Survey and the recent 3 year audit have resulted in ongoing improvement of our, RMP 

plan and Safety Plan and Standard work instruction documentation, contributing to our ongoing safe operation.. 

17. Summarize the emergency response activities conducted at the source (e.g., CWS or TEN activation) in response to major chemical 

accidents or releases: There were no emergency response activities to this site since the previous Annual Performance Review and 

Evaluation submittal 
33

Annual Performance Review and Evaluation Submittal

June 30, 2012

*Attach additional pages as necessary

1. Name and address of Stationary Source: Air Products 

Tract 1, Tesoro Refinery (Golden Eagle - Avon), Solano Way, Martinez, CA 

2. Contact name and telephone number (should CCHMP have questions): Eric Schneider (925) 372-9302 

 

3. Summarize the status of the Stationary Source’s Safety Plan and Program (450-8.030(B)(2)(i)): The stationary Source’s Safety Plan 

is complete per the CCHS requirement.. The program was audited in the past year by CCHS as part of the three CCHS site audit . 

The Safety Cultral Survey was completed with follow actionunderway and improvement comments were received from CCHSon the 

Cutural Survey during the recent audit and these will be implemented in the coming year. 

4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): No updates are 

planned at this time. The periodic three year audit of our safety programs was completed in May of this year. Action items identified 

as a result of the audit will be completed. 

5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide 

individuals with copies of the document (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCHMP Office at 4585 Pacheco Boulevard, Suite 100, Martinez; 

Martinez Library (library closest to the stationary source). 

6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e. updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(E)(2) of County 

Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(E)(1) for all major chemical 

accidents or releases occurring between the last annual performance review report and the current annual performance review 

and evaluation submittal (12-month history)): No evnets 

 

7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of implementation 

of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B)(2)(iv)): No events 

 

 

8. Summary of the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or 

Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(v)): Air Products and CCHS completed the formal (3 year) 

CalARP ISO audit in May, 2012 action items are under review. RMP Plan actionitems have been reviewed and presented to CCHS 

along with this annual update. Action actionitems from the CCHS Unannounced Inspection of CalARP Program, Hazardous 

Materials Business Plan and Hazardous Waste Generator Inspection at Tesoro Martinez--July 11, 2011 , have been completed.

9. Summary of inherently safer systems implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., 

intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi)): None 

 

10. Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra 

Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 98-

48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(vii)): There were no enforcement actions during this period. 

 

11. Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)): No penalities have been assessed 

against this facility. 

12. Summarize the total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ISO (450-8.030(B)(4)): 

The total CalARP Program fees for the nine facilities subject to the Industrial Safety Ordinance was $463,493. The total Industrial 

Safety Ordinance program fees for these nine facilities was $442,713. (NOTE: These fees include those for the County and City of 

Richmond ISO facilities) 
34

13. Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter (450-

8.030(B)(5)): 2,201 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of the Industrial Safety 

Ordinance. 

14. Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness 

of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)): None 

 

15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450-8.030(B)(7)): Air Products is committed to 

the safer operation of our facilities and has implemented applicable requirements outlined in the ISO and CalARP regulations. Both 

the ISO and Human Factors programs are an integral part of our five year Operating Hazard Review revalidations and on-going 

management of change process. This has helped the site maintain a safety record of no recordable or Lost Time Injuries since the last 

plan submittal. There have been no incidents resulting in an offsite impact. The Chapter has helped reinforce the need to maintain and 

follow a structured safety program to help ensure the safety of our employees and the communities in which we opera 

16. List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., 

recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; 

recommendations from RCA’s) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases: Air Products has 

continued to refine the Tier IV site specific documents at the request of CCHS to clarify ISO requirements, The implementation of 

the ISO standards, the Safety Cultural Survey and the recent 3 year audit have resulted in ongoing improvement of our, RMP plan 

and Safety Plan and Standard work instruction documentation, contributing to our ongoing safe operation. 

17. Summarize the emergency response activities conducted at the source (e.g., CWS or TEN activation) in response to major chemical 

accidents or releases: There were no emergency response activities to this site since the previous Annual Performance Review and 

Evaluation submittal 
35

Annual Performance Review and Evaluation Submittal

June 25, 2012

*Attach additional pages as necessary

1. Name and address of Stationary Source: Phillips 66 Rodeo Refinery, 1380 San Pablo Avenue, Rodeo, CA. 94572 

 

2. Contact name and telephone number (should CCHMP have questions): Jim Ferris: 510-245-4517 

3. Summarize the status of the Stationary Source’s Safety Plan and Program (450-8.030(B)(2)(i)): The Safety Plan was last revised in 

July 2009 per the required 3 year schedule. CCHMP reviewed and the changes they requested were completed on 11-4-2010. Safety 

Plan is next due for update in August 2012. 

 

4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): The original Safety 

Plan for this facility was filed with Contra Costa Health Services on January 14, 2000. A revised plan was filed on April 7, 2000 

with the updated recommendations requested by CCHS. A Human Factors Amendment was submitted on January 15, 2001. In 

conjunction with CCHSs required 2nd public meeting on our plan and audit findings, we submitted a complete revision of the plan 

to reflect the change in ownership of our facility and to update where needed. We took this opportunity to include Human Factors 

within the plan instead of having it as an amendment. On August 9, 2002 the plan was resubmitted. Public meetings for our plans 

were held on June 22, 2004 in Rodeo and July 8, 2004 in Crockett. As required the Plan was fully updated in August 2005 on the 

3 year cycle. The Plan was reviewed by CCHS and was revised on July 28, 2006 with recommended changes. The last update to the 

Safety Plan was in July 2009. Recommendations requested by CCHMP were incorporated into the Safety Plan 11-4-2010. Safety 

Plan is due for update per the 3 year cycle in August 2012. 

5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide 

individuals with copies of the document (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCHMP Office at 4585 Pacheco Boulevard, Suite 100, Martinez; 

Rodeo Public Library; Crockett Public Library (libraries closest to the stationary source). 

6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e. updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(E)(2) of County 

Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(E)(1) for all major chemical 

accidents or releases occurring between the last annual performance review report and the current annual performance review 

and evaluation submittal (12-month history)): 6-15-12 Tank 294 Overpressure —See Attachment 1. 

 

7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of implementation 

of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B)(2)(iv)): 6-15-12 Incident is under investigation at this time. 

 

 

8. Summary of the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or 

Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(v)): The 2011 CalARP/ISO audit fiinding action items 

were submitted in May 2012 for County review. Action items are being worked per their target dates. 

 

9. Summary of inherently safer systems implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., 

intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi)): See Attachment 2 

 

10. Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra 

Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 98-

48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(vii)): There were no enforcement actions during this period. 

 

11. Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)): No penalities have been assessed 

against this facility. 
36

12. Summarize the total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ISO (450-8.030(B)(4)): 

The total CalARP Program fees for the nine facilities subject to the Industrial Safety Ordinance was $463,493. The total Industrial 

Safety Ordinance program fees for these nine facilities was $442,713. (NOTE: These fees include those for the County and City of 

Richmond ISO facilities) 

13. Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter (450-

8.030(B)(5)): 2,201 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of the Industrial Safety 

Ordinance. 

14. Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness 

of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)): No comments have been received. 

 

15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450-8.030(B)(7)): In addition to the Phillips 66 

Corporate Health Safety Environment Management Systems the ISO provides another tool for the continuation of improvement 

of health and safety performance. 

16. List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., 

recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; 

recommendations from RCA’s) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases Units not covered by RMP, 

CalARP, and PSM are covered under the ISO and PHAs are scheduled and performed on all these units. Recommendations from 

the PHAs are implemented at an accelerate rate. A list of inherently safer systems as required by the ISO for PHA recommendations 

and projects are listed in Attachment 2. 

17. Summarize the emergency response activities conducted at the source (e.g., CWS or TEN activation) in response to major chemical 

accidents or releases: See item #6 and Attachment 1. 
37

Attachment 1

Tank 294 Overpressure Summary

At 7:10 AM on June 15, 2012, an over-pressure occurred on Tank 294 causing an approximately twenty-foot 

separation in the roof-shell seam. Tank 294 stores “sour water” (dissolved ammonia and sulfur compounds) and 

light hydrocarbon. The opening released a combination of the natural gas blanket, hydrocarbons and hydrogen 

sulfide vapors into the air. Phillips 66 initiated its emergency response procedures, which included emergency 

response team members responding directly to Tank 294 and activation of the Refinery Incident Management 

Team (IMT) and Emergency Operations Center (EOC). We also made all required agency notifications

The Community Warning System was activated for a Level 1 incident at 7:40 AM and the following agencies were notified:

•	 Contra Costa Health Services Department

•	 Bay Area Air Quality Management District

•	 Rodeo Hercules Fire Protection District

•	 Contra Costa County Sherriff’s Office

At 08:00 AM the Incident was up-graded to a CWS Level-2 and the following additional agency notifications were 

subsequently made:

•	 Cal OES 

•	 National Response Center 

•	 CA Dept of Public Health 

•	 CARB – Office of Emergency Response 

The following agencies responded:

Contra Costa Health Services – Hazmat 

Bay Area Air Quality Management District

The day was Clear, Warm, and Sunny with Wind from the SW @ 3-8 mph and the Temperature was 650 F.

The Refinery Incident Management Team and the Emergency Operations Center were activated to manage 

the incident in conjunction with agency representatives. Representatives from the Contra Costa County 

Health Services Hazmat Division and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District participated in the 

ICS-201 development, Incident Objectives and strategic decisions made to manage the incident.

Throughout the day on June 15th and 16th, various actions were taken to mitigate the release and reduce odors, including:

•	 Atmospheric monitoring was conducted in the local community to assess whether the incident impacted 

human health and/or the environment. Direct readings were taken downwind of the release location 

in the town of Crockett and along I-80 between Cummings Skyway and Willow Avenue exits

•	 Providing a nitrogen supply to the tank to purge the tank vapor space with nitrogen gas to 

replace the natural gas blanket and maintain the oxygen-free atmosphere inside the tank.

•	 Applying a water spray to the tank opening to suppress vapors.

•	 Removing the remaining material in the tank as rapidly as possible.

•	 Mutual Aid was requested to provide an aerial foam truck. This truck was used to provide a 

water suppressing spray and then to apply foam into the tank to further suppress vapors.

•	 A specialty contractor and materials were mobilized and a repair plan was developed to apply a patch 

to the roof-shell opening. The patch was completed at approximately 11:00 p.m. on June 16th.
38

Attachment 1

Tank 294 Overpressure Summary (continued)

At 8:30 am on June 17th, 2012 the Incident was downgraded to a CWS Level-0 and emergency response 

operations were suspended. Activities will continue to further remove sour water and hydrocarbons from the 

tank in a safe manner until the tank can be taken out of service and ultimately cleaned and repaired.

Our refinery Ground Level Monitoring system recorded the following maximum levels: Crockett 

GLM Max 3-Minute Average 0.215 ppm and Max 1-Hour Average 0.068 ppm, East Refinery 

GLM Max 3-Minute Average 0.105 ppm and Max 1-Hour Average 0.036 ppm. 

Representatives from the refinery Health & Safety Department conducted offsite monitoring using a 

RAE Systems Multi-RAE 5-gas meters. Odors were detected in the surrounding community; however 

measured levels of VOCs (Volatile Organic Compounds) and H2S were low. Additional measurements 

were taken by BAAQMD and CCHS-Hazmat. All off-site measured levels of H2S were below 1.0 

ppm and were most often below 0.1 ppm. Measured levels of VOCs were below 2.0 ppm.

Natural gas, hydrogen sulfide and naphtha vapors were released. Calculations 

are being compiled to estimate release quantities.

No Injuries Occurred.

The refinery received approximately 100 odor complaints. The BAAQMD and Contra 

Costa Health Services also received numerous odor complaints.

A formal incident investigation is underway to determine the cause(s) of the incident and corrective actions.
39

Attachment 2

June 2011 - May 2012 ISS improvements

Reference Type

ISS 

category Description

M2007344-001 Project Passive Upgraded tank metallurgy

M2008757-001 Project Passive Upgraded tank metallurgy

M2008891-001 Project Passive Upgraded piping metallurgy

M2009968-001 Project Passive Upgraded piping metallurgy

M20101599-001 Project Passive Upgraded piping metallurgy

M20101754-001 Project Passive Upgraded tank wall thickness.

M20101983-001 Project Passive Upgraded piping metallurgy

M20102325-001 Project Passive Upgraded piping metallurgy

M2010642-001 Project Passive Upgraded piping metallurgy

M2011255-001 Project Inherent Modified piping layout to eliminate dead legs.

M20112623-001 Project Passive Upgraded to a less corrosive chemical.

M2011528-001 Project Inherent Modified piping layout to eliminate dead legs.

M2011569-001 Project Inherent Replaced unused heat exchanger with piping.

M2011870-001 Project Inherent Consolidated chemical usage

M20112094-001 Project Passive Upgraded piping metallurgy

M20111151-001 Project Passive Upgraded piping metallurgy
40

Annual Performance Review and Evaluation Submittal

June 30, 2011

*Attach additional pages as necessary

1. Name and address of Stationary Source: General Chemical West LLC, Bay Point Works, 501 Nichols Rd., Bay Point, CA 

94565 

2. Contact name and telephone number (should CCHMP have questions): Jim Craig, 925-458-7363 

3. Summarize the status of the Stationary Source’s Safety Plan and Program (450-8.030(B)(2)(i)): The facility’s safety plan has been 

updated as of May 31, 2011. 

4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): There have been 

numerous revisions to the plan during 2011 (rev date 5/31/11) as well as corresponding revisions to the other safety manual chapters 

to reflect current ISO compliant practices. 

5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide 

individuals with copies of the document (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCHMP Office at 4585 Pacheco Boulevard, Suite 100, Martinez, CA 

94553; Bay Point Library (library closest to the stationary source). The plan is located at the Bay Point Works office complex as well 

as electronically, it was signed and approved by the Director of Manufacturing on 6/28/11. 

6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e. updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(E)(2) of County 

Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(E)(1) for all major chemical 

accidents or releases occurring between the last annual performance review report and the current annual performance review 

and evaluation submittal (12-month history)): There have been no MCAR events since last update. 

7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of 

implementation of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B)(2)(iv)): There have been no MCAR 

events, thus no root cause analyses were required to be performed. 

8. Summary of the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or 

Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(v)): At this time 46 (78%) of the 59 recommendations as 

result of the 2011 triannual ISO Audit are considered by the facility to be closed with the remainder in progress. 

9. Summary of inherently safer systems implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., 

intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi)): The facility has reduced overall regulated hazardous material inventories 

by 47% or 1,711,792 pounds since its prior submission. Notable specifics include: NH3 < 30%, NH4F <17%, NH4F/H3PO4 Blends 

<93%, NH4OH <85%, HCl <92%, AHF <4%, HNO3 <82%, and Mixed Acid Etchants <43%. Additionally the facility used its’ ISS 

worksheets and checklists for the 2 PHA’s conducted this year to ensure ISS is considered. 

10. Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra 

Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 98-

48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(vii)): There were no enforcement actions during this period. 

11. Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)): No penalities have been assessed 

against this facility. 

12. Summarize the total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ISO (450-8.030(B)(4)): 

The total CalARP Program fees for the nine facilities subject to the Industrial Safety Ordinance was $568,631. The total Industrial 

Safety Ordinance program fees for these nine facilities was - $713,631. (NOTE: These fees include those for the County and City of 

Richmond ISO facilities) 

13. Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter (450-

8.030(B)(5)): 1510 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of the Industrial Safety 

Ordinance. 

14. Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness 

of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)): No comments were received since the last update. 

 
41

15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450-8.030(B)(7)): By providing regulatory 

guidance and supprt when it is requested and through thorough compliance audits that are conducted triannually. 

16. List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., 

recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; 

recommendations from RCA’s) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases: Improved analyses of 

processes at the facility in regards to continuous improvement of the physical units as well as internal program oversight. 

17. Summarize the emergency response activities conducted at the source (e.g., CWS or TEN activation) in response to 

major chemical accidents or releases: No emergency response activities took place since the last update. 

 
42

Annual Performance Review and Evaluation Submittal

June 30, 2011

*Attach additional pages as necessary

1. Name and address of Stationary Source: Shell Oil Products U.S. Martinez Refinery , 3485 Pacheco Blvd., Martinez, CA 94553

2. Contact name and telephone number (should CCHMP have questions): Ken Axe; 925-313-5371 

3. Summarize the status of the Stationary Source’s Safety Plan and Program (450-8.030(B)(2)(i)): SMR’s Safety Plan was last updated 

in September 2010. SMR’s Safety Program is being implemented. SMR’s Safety Program was most recently reviewed by CCHS 

during the CalARP/ISO audit conducted in May 2009. 

4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): Updates to SMR’s 

Safety Plan submitted in September 2009 address comments from CCHS generated during the May 2009 CalARP/ISO Audit. 

While some of the comments pertained specifically to the Safety Plan document, others pertained directly to program elements, 

which were subsequently documented in the Safety Plan. 

5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide 

individuals with copies of the document (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCHMP Office at 4585 Pacheco Boulevard, Suite 100, Martinez; 

Martinez Public Library (library closest to the stationary source). 

6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e. updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(E)(2) of County 

Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(E)(1) for all major chemical 

accidents or releases occurring between the last annual performance review report and the current annual performance review 

and evaluation submittal (12-month history)): There were no MCAR’s in the current reporting period (July 1, 2010 to June 

30, 2011), and therefore no updates to the Accident History. 

7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of implementation 

of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B)(2)(iv)): There were no MCAR’s in the current reporting period 

(July 1, 2010 to June 30, 2011), and therefore no RCA’s were required. 

8. Summary of the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, 

or Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(v)): 52 of 55 action items arising from the May 2009 

CalARP/ISO Audit have been closed, and none of the remaining action items are overdue. There have been no RCA’s or Incident 

Investigations conducted by the Department. 

9. Summary of inherently safer systems implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., 

intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi)): See Attachment 1, Table 1. 

 

10. Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra 

Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 98-

48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(vii)): There were no enforcement actions during this period. 

 

11. Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)): No penalities have been assessed 

against this facility. 

12. Summarize the total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ISO (450-8.030(B)(4)): 

The total CalARP Program fees for the nine facilities subject to the Industrial Safety Ordinance was $568,631. The total Industrial 

Safety Ordinance program fees for these nine facilities was - $713,631. (NOTE: These fees include those for the County and City of 

Richmond ISO facilities) 

13. Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter (450-

8.030(B)(5)): 1510 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of the Industrial Safety 

Ordinance. 

14. Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness 

of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)): None received. 

 
43

15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450-8.030(B)(7)): SMR has integrated 

requirements of the Industrial Safety Ordinance into our Health, Safety, and Environment Management System; in the context of 

our HSE MS, the ISO requirements help drive continual improvement in our HSE performance. 

16. List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., 

recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; 

recommendations from RCA’s) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases: See Attachment 1, Table 

2. 

17. Summarize the emergency response activities conducted at the source (e.g., CWS or TEN activation) in response to major chemical 

accidents or releases: There were no MCAR’s in the current reporting period (July 1, 2010 to June 30, 2011). 
44

Attachment 1

Table 1. Summary of Implemented ISS

ISS Item Number ISS Type Source/Study Description

M20101614-001

M20103368-001

M20103367-002

Minimize ISS Review of 

Existing Process

Seal Weld Shut Furnace Explosion Doors per LFI 2009AC04. 

Martinez furnaces built prior to 1995 have explosion 

doors; which have been shown in the industry and within 

Shell to provide no meaningful protection for furnace 

overpressure. The LFI describes a hazard inherent to 

these doors as a result of air leakage which has resulted 

in misleading flue gas O2 measurements. As a result the 

LFI requires all Manufacturing locations to seal heater 

explosion doors to prevent the hazard described in the LFI.

M2011950-001 Minimize ISS Review of 

Existing Process

Remove Alky Caustic Washout Line from Settler 1. Line 

had not been used for several years and it was a dead leg.

M2011740-001 Minimize ISS Review of 

Existing Process

Upgraded EB-860 tube bundle from Carbon 

Steel to 316L Stainless Steel.

M20113043-001 Minimize ISS Review of 

Existing Process

Upgraded SWS-7 Reflux Pump P-14591 

Outlet Piping to Alloy material.

M20112934-001 Minimize ISS Review of 

Existing Process

Added valve to SCOT-1 absorber drain pipe 

to remove a dead-leg, which becomes plugged 

with corrosion products in the MDEA.

R2010020-001 Minimize ISS Review of 

Existing Process

Installed Dual Class 1 check valves on pump P-12564/5 

discharge to mitigate reverse flow scenarios.
45

Table 2. ISO-only Recommendations Implemented 

(not required by CalARP)

Recommendation 

Number Source/Study Description

R2012002-003

2012 OPCEN 

Flare PHA

Configured a high level alarm on V-17399 and V-1074, OPCEN FLARE KO 

POT to provide warning of high liquid level in the OPCEN Flare KO Pot. 

M20112390-001

2011 VGT PHA 

Revalidation 

Replaced VGT SP-498 (untreated gas liquid trap) with a pipe spool. 

The system is no longer used because there is not much liquid 

entrainment and a downstream knock-out vessel is sufficient for 

liquid removal. Because this trap is no longer used; there is potential 

to create a deadleg condition with potential hazardous release 

R2011020-001

2011 CR2 PHA 

Revalidation Installed label on discharge header from P-14469/70 to avoid incorrect line-up 

R2010050-001

2010 LOP Flare 

PHA Revalidation

Added signs along the fence lines around our flare area and informed 

all our contractors of the requirement to evacuate this area in the event 

of a flaring incident to minimize personnel exposure to heat fluxes 

R2010045-007

2010 ETP PHA 

Revalidation

Added strapping level information to work instruction for operator 

use while writing safe work permits for offloading ferric chloride. 

R2010045-006

2010 ETP PHA 

Revalidation

Added strapping level information to work instruction for operator 

use while writing safe work permits for offloading caustic. 

R2010045-005

2010 ETP PHA 

Revalidation

Added strapping level information to work instruction for operator 

use while writing safe work permits for offloading sulfuric acid. 

R2010045-002

2010 ETP PHA 

Revalidation Installed overfill controls on API Separator. 

R2010044-005

2010 Recovered 

Oil System PHA 

Revalidation

Updated training manuals for Recovered Oil Coordinator 

to meet current Shell L&D requirements. 

R2010044-003

2010 Recovered 

Oil System PHA 

Revalidation

Sulfuric acid system at the Recovered Oil facilities has 

been deinventoried. Idle signs are on the tank. 

R2010035-017

2010 COGEN PHA 

Revalidation

Critical equipment has been identified with normally on and normally 

off labels in the PECC and at the STG lube oil skid. In addition to the 

labels a gas turbine diagram was posted in each PECC identifying 

normally on equipment and their location on the gas turbine. 

R2010035-016

2010 COGEN PHA 

Revalidation

Added valve extensions to bypass valves around 650 psig 

steam non-return valve to safely access valves. 

R2010035-015

2010 COGEN PHA 

Revalidation

Reviewed and documented Mark V instrument alarms for 

operator response actions (include in ESP Variables Table). 

R2010035-014

2010 COGEN PHA 

Revalidation Added Ejector downstream block valves to CSO checklist. 

R2010035-010

2010 COGEN PHA 

Revalidation

Added Car Seal Open to 2” block valves; N2 & N3 

entering Degasser from Natural Gas Scrubbers. 

R2010035-009

2010 COGEN PHA 

Revalidation Added Car Seal to block valves in the Battery Limit flare lines. 
46

Recommendation 

Number Source/Study Description

R2010035-007

2010 COGEN PHA 

Revalidation

Added the 4” block valves where the condensate from V14825 

and V14925 ties in to the continuous blowdown bypass lines 

to V14829 and V14929 to COGEN Call Card No. 20. 

R2010035-002

2010 COGEN PHA 

Revalidation

Car Sealing Closed the PSV14821 & PSV14921 bypass 

valves and including on car seal checklist. 

R2009159-006

2009 Spent Caustic 

Neutralizer PHA 

Revalidation

Replaced SCN AR-637 Time Tank to meet pressure 

equipment rated vessel code requirements 

R2008309-006

2008 HP-1 PHA 

Revalidation Installed more reliable level transmitters on V-500, V-501, and V-502. 

R2008309-003

2008 HP-1 PHA 

Revalidation

Disconnected the instrument air supply to the HV891 valve 

actuator so that the valve cannot be moved. Chained locked 

valve open to prevent overpressure of upstream equipment. 

Table 2. (continued)
47

Annual Performance Review and Evaluation Submittal

June 30, 2011 *Attach additional pages as necessary

1. Name and address of Stationary Source: Tesoro Golden Eagle Refinery, 150 Solano Way, Martinez, CA 94553 

2. Contact name and telephone number (should CCHS have questions): Claire Spencer at (925) 370-3274, Rich Leland at (925) 370-

3264 or Sabiha Gokcen at (925) 370-3620. 

3. Summarize the status of the Stationary Source’s Safety Plan and Program (450-8.030(B)(2)(i)): An updated Safety Plan was submitted 

to Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Program on December 10, 2009. Contra Costa Health Services has completed five audits on 

the safety programs. The first audit was in September, 2000 on the safety programs. The second audit was in December, 2001 and 

focused on Inherently Safer Systems and Human Factors. An unannounced inspection occurred in March, 2003. CalARP/ISO 

audits were conducted in August, 2003, November-December, 2005, August-October, 2008 and most recently April-May 2011. All 

safety program elements required by the ISO have been developed and are implemented. 

4. Summarize Safety Plan updates (i.e., brief explanation of update and corresponding date) (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): The original Safety 

Plan for this facility was filed with Contra Costa Health Services on January 14, 2000. An amended plan, updated to reflect CCHS 

recommendations and ownership change, was filed on November 30, 2000. A Human Factors Amendment was submitted on 

January 15, 2001. A Power Disruption Plan was submitted, per Board of Supervisor request, on June 1, 2001. An amended Safety 

Plan, updated to reflect ownership change was submitted on June 17, 2002. 

 

The Safety Plan for this facility will be updated whenever changes at the facility warrant an update or every three years from June 

17, 2002. In addition, the accident history along with other information is updated every year on June 30. Most recently, updated 

Safety Plan was submitted to Contra Costa Health Services on December 10, 2009. 

5. List of locations where Safety Plans are/will be available for review, including contact telephone numbers if the source will provide 

individuals with copies of the document (450-8.030(B)(2)(ii)): CCHS Office, 4585 Pacheco Boulevard Ste 100 Martinez CA, 

Martinez library 

6. Provide any additions to the annual accident history reports (i.e. updates) submitted pursuant to Section 450-8.016(E)

(2) of County Ordinance 98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(iii)) (i.e., provide information identified in Section 450-8.016(E)(1) for all 

major chemical accidents or releases occurring between the last accident history report submittal (January 15) and the 

annual performance review and evaluation submittal (June 30)): There have been three accidents meeting the major chemical 

accident or release criteria during this reporting period. The root cause analysis reports for two are attached to this filing.

October 10, 2010 – Tank 650 Seal Fire (report attached) 

November 9, 2010 – Refinery-wide Power Outage (still under investigation) 

December 10, 2010 – Refinery-wide Power Outage (report attached) 

7. Summary of each Root Cause Analysis (Section 450-8.016(C)) including the status of the analysis and the status of implementation 

of recommendations formulated during the analysis (450-8.030(B)(2)(iv)): Status of Root Cause Analysis Recommendations: 

For the March 24, 2006 #2HDS fire investigation, one recommendation remains open. It is a long-term recommendation updating 

the P&IDs to include metallurgy on the P&IDs. It is on target for its completion date. 

 

For the October 10, 2010 Tank 650 Seal Fire and the December 10, 2010 Power Outage, all recommendations are on target for 

resolution on the dates submitted to Contra Costa Health Services in the root cause analysis reports. 

 

8. Summary of the status of implementation of recommendations formulated during audits, inspections, Root Cause Analyses, or 

Incident Investigations conducted by the Department (450-8.030(B)(2)(v)): “CCHS Information”: CCHS completed an audit on 

September 15, 2000, December, 2001, August, 2003, November/December, 2005, August-October, 2008, and April-May 2011. There 

are no RCA or Incident Investigations that have been conducted by the Department. 

 
48

Facility status of audit recommendations: All recommendations from CCHS audits prior to 2008 are closed. For the 2008 audit, 

there are 73 recommendations total in the audit and all are closed. 

9. Summary of inherently safer systems implemented by the source including but not limited to inventory reduction (i.e., 

intensification) and substitution (450-8.030(B)(2)(vi)): Golden Eagle is submitting a list of the Inherently Safer Systems (ISS) that 

meet the criteria for Inherent or Passive levels only and that were completed within the last year (see attached). 

10. Summarize the enforcement actions (including Notice of Deficiencies, Audit Reports, and any actions turned over to the Contra 

Costa County District Attorney’s Office) taken with the Stationary Source pursuant to Section 450-8.028 of County Ordinance 

98-48 (450-8.030(B)(2)(vii)): “CCHS Information”: none 

11. Summarize total penalties assessed as a result of enforcement of this Chapter (450-8.030(3)): “CCHS Information”: No penalties 

have been assessed against this facility. 

12. Summarize the total fees, service charges, and other assessments collected specifically for the support of the ISO (450-8.030(B)(4)): 

“CCHS Information”: The total CalARP program fees for the nine facilities subject to the Industrial Safety Ordinance was $568,631. 

The total Industrial Safety Ordinance Program fees for these nine facilities was $713,631. Note: these fees include those for the 

County and City of Richmond ISO facilities. 

13. Summarize total personnel and personnel years utilized by the jurisdiction to directly implement or administer this Chapter (450-

8.030(B)(5)): “CCHS Information”: 1510 hours were used to audit/inspect and issue reports on the Risk Management Chapter of 

the Industrial Safety Ordinance. 

14. Copies of any comments received by the source (that may not have been received by the Department) regarding the effectiveness 

of the local program that raise public safety issues(450-8.030(B)(6)): This facility has not received any comments to date regarding 

the effectiveness of the local program. 

15. Summarize how this Chapter improves industrial safety at your stationary source (450-8.030(B)(7)): Chapter 450-8 improves 

industrial safety by expanding the safety programs to all units in the refinery. In addition, the timeframe is shorter to implement 

recommendations generated from the Process Hazard Analysis (PHA) safety program than state or federal law. This has resulted 

in a faster implementation of these recommendations. 

Chapter 450-8 also includes requirements for inherently safer systems as part of implementing PHA recommendations and new 

construction. This facility has developed an aggressive approach to implementing inherently safer systems in these areas. 

Chapter 450-8 has requirements to perform root cause analyses on any major chemical accidents or releases (MCAR). This facility 

has applied that rigorous methodology to investigate any MCARs that have occurred since January, 1999. 

Chapter 450-8 requires a human factors program. This facility has developed a comprehensive human factors program and is in 

the process of implementing the program. 

16. List examples of changes made at your stationary source due to implementation of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (e.g., 

recommendations from PHA’s, Compliance Audits, and Incident Investigations in units not subject to CalARP regulations; 

recommendations from RCAs) that significantly decrease the severity or likelihood of accidental releases. 

 

This question was broadly answered under question 15 above. Some examples of changes that have been made due to implementation 

of the ordinance are as follows. There are some units that were not covered by RMP, CalARP or PSM. Those units are now subject 

to the same safety programs as the units covered by RMP, CalARP and PSM. They have had PHAs performed on them according 

to the timeline specified in the ISO and the PHA recommendations have been resolved on the timeline specified in the ISO. A list 

of inherently safer systems as required by the ISO for PHA recommendations and new construction is attached to this filing as 

mentioned in the response to question 9. With respect to Compliance Audits, there was a compliance audit performed in April, 

2009 in addition to the CCHS audits mentioned above. All audit findings are being actively resolved. Root Cause Analysis findings 

and recommendations for MCARs are listed in the response under question 6. 

17. Summarize the emergency response activities conducted at the source (e.g., CWS or TEN activation) in response to major chemical 

accidents or releases: Please refer to #6 which has the CWS classifications for the major chemical accidents and releases as well as 

any information regarding emergency responses by agency personnel. 
49

Inherently Safer Designs Implemented

Item Identifier Implementation 

Category

Risk Reduction 

Category Risk Reduction Strategy - Description

ARO 044 Project Inherent Eliminate – Demolished a hazardous 

materials storage vessel.

ARO 209 Project Inherent Eliminate – Demolished a hazardous 

materials storage vessel.

ARO 269 Project Inherent Eliminate – Demolished a hazardous 

materials storage vessel.

ARO 271 Project Inherent Eliminate – Demolished a hazardous 

materials storage vessel.

ARO 367 Project Inherent Eliminate – Demolished a hazardous 

materials storage vessel.

ARO 374 Project Inherent Eliminate – Demolished a hazardous 

materials storage vessel.

ARO 377 Project Inherent Eliminate – Demolished a hazardous 

materials storage vessel.

ARO 378 Project Inherent Eliminate – Demolished a hazardous 

materials storage vessel.

ARO 588 Project Inherent Eliminate – Demolished a hazardous 

materials storage vessel.

PTS 12106 Project Inherent Eliminate – Demolished a hazardous 

materials storage vessel.

PTS 11870 Project Passive Moderate – Reduction of hazardous 

conditions by process design features.

PTS 12136 Project Passive Moderate – Reduction of hazardous 

conditions by equipment design features. 

PTS 12144 Project Passive Moderate – Reduction of hazardous 

conditions by equipment design features.

PTS 12161 Project Passive Moderate – Reduction of hazardous 

conditions by equipment design features.

Item Identifier Implementation 

Category

Risk Reduction 

Category

Risk Reduction Strategy - Description

A005-2008-001 PHA Passive Simplify – Used alternate design features 

that make operating errors less likely.

A011-2004-256 PHA Passive Simplify – Used alternate design features 

to reduce the frequency of the hazard.

A013-2004-103 PHA Passive Simplify – Used alternate design features 

to reduce the frequency of the hazard.

A016-2001-056 PHA Inherent Eliminate – Demolished a hazardous 

materials storage vessel.

A022-2010-001 PHA Passive Moderate – Reduction of hazardous conditions 

by process and equipment design features. 

A054N-2004-010 PHA Inherent Eliminate – Demolished two hazardous 

materials storage vessels.
50

Item Identifier Implementation 

Category

Risk Reduction 

Category Risk Reduction Strategy - Description

A054N-2004-085 PHA Passive Moderate – Reduction of hazardous 

conditions by process design features.

A060-2007-004 PHA Passive Moderate – Reduction of hazardous 

conditions by equipment design features.