Daily Freeman (Kingston, NY)

A year later, Texas regulators move against Harvey polluters

-

More than a year after Hurricane Harvey slammed into the Texas coast, state environmen­tal authoritie­s have only just begun enforcemen­t actions against a handful of companies deemed responsibl­e for some of the most massive air and water pollution incidents reported during and immediatel­y after the storm.

Two petroleum tanks located in a sprawling terminal along Buffalo Bayou in Galena Park, 8 miles (13 kilometers) southeast of downtown Houston, first sprung leaks on Aug. 31 of last year when the tanks shifted on their foundation­s during days of heavy rainfall during Harvey, according to documents and a statement from Magellan.

Those broken-down tanks spilled gasoline and ultimately spawned a leak that lasted for more than 12 days and created more than 2 million pounds (0.91 million kilograms) of air pollution — the storm’s largest pollution incident, the Houston Chronicle reports .

But it took another 295 days before the Texas Commission on Environmen­tal Quality sent its first notice of enforcemen­t to that company — Magellan Terminal Holdings LP’s Galena Park Terminal — on July 6, state records show.

The Houston Chronicle and The Associated Press teamed up in March to describe the impact of 100 major releases and hazardous waste spills that socked Houston alone — most of which were underrepor­ted and went without investigat­ion for months as state and federal agencies scrambled to react to the environmen­tal damage that accompanie­d Harvey’s floods.

Harris County pollution control officials so far have cited eight of the biggest Harvey-related polluters, including the Magellan terminal. They sent out most notices only days after the series was published, records show.

State environmen­tal proceeded more slowly. This week, TCEQ spokesman Brian McGovern said the agency has issued notices of enforcemen­t to 68 Harvey polluters.

About 14 of those notices went to refineries and chemical plants, according to a list provided by McGovern. At least five of those industrial polluters were specifical­ly cited for Harvey-related violations, but others received notices for pollution problems that predated or followed the storm, records show.

Most of the state’s Harvey-related enforcemen­t actions came after April 6, when Gov. Greg Abbott lifted a 7-month-long emergency order that had suspended most of the state’s environmen­tal reporting rules, according to lists provided by the state.

Juan Sierra lives in a residentia­l neighborho­od where the only way out was blocked for days by Harvey’s floods. His home sits less than a mile from the Magellan terminal.

He’s glad to hear that environmen­tal regulators are starting to take action in response to the large pollution event reported so near his home. But he still wants to know why he and his wife and four children were not warned about the potential for explosions or about the health impacts from the air pollution either during the spill or after.

“Nobody ever notified us,” he said. “To me, it’s a big issue.”

Sierra is hoping that officials will learn something from Harvey’s environmen­tal damage, what some activists call the second storm of pollution. He hopes next time, massive tank farm releases can be avoided — and government responses can be faster.

During a hearing in April, members of the state House’s environmen­tal enforcemen­t committee asked TCEQ Commission­er Bryan Shaw to review Harvey-related pollution, identify its major contributo­rs and suggest ways to prevent failing tanks, overflowin­g wastewater ponds and other potential pollution problems before future hurricanes and floods. That report is due in October.

Abbott’s emergency order, which suspended most of the state’s environmen­tal rules, was meant to give companies flexibilit­y and leeway. Harvey was, after all, a nearly unpreceden­ted flooding event even in a flood-prone Gulf Coast state. But under his order, many companies delayed or amended their Harvey-related air pollution reports without explanatio­n. Many never reported how much wastewater they spilled, according to a recent report by the nonprofit Environmen­tal Integrity Project.

State and county environmen­tal inspectors and regulators, faced with a huge workload of Harvey-related pollution reports, were left to try to sort through conflictin­g and incomplete informatio­n and determine what pollution was truly an “act of God” — as many companies have claimed — and what was avoidable environmen­tal damage.

A few trends are showing up in environmen­tal notices issued by TCEQ and Harris County so far:

• Statewide, dozens of chemical plants and refiners released massive amounts of air pollution during the shutdowns or startups that occurred as Harvey’s record rains swept northeast 160 miles (260 kilometers) from the Rockport area toward Houston, then curved east about 90 miles (145 kilometers) to hit the Beaumont-Port Arthur refinery complex. In all, the state says it has cited 18 chemical plants or refineries for Harvey-related pollution reasons; only two of those facilities are in the Corpus Christi area, 180 miles (290 kilometers) southwest of Houston, where operators prepared for a Category 4 hurricane to strike and generally shut down more slowly than in the Houston and Beaumont-Port Arthur metro areas.

Some companies on the state’s list of polluters during the storm were cited for failing to obtain the proper permits or for leakage or equipment problems reported before Harvey or after the storm passed, including Exxon Mobil’s Beaumont refinery, one of the world’s largest, and Arkema’s Beaumont plant.

• Operators of the Phillips 66 Sweeny Refinery, in rural Brazoria County 54 miles (87 kilometers) southwest of Houston, were cited for failing to report a wastewater spill that occurred during Harvey’s floods. Magellan was cited both for its major air pollution event, and for failing to report a smaller release associated with attempts to use vacuum trucks to clean up spilled gas and move it into another tank.

• Several small sewage and water treatment plants were cited by TCEQ because of Harvey spills or because they continued to report leaks well after Harvey. The small Houston suburb of Nassau Bay was among those cited for persistent leaks that bubbled up through its manhole covers, though eventually the coastal city was able to resolve those issues, documents show.

• Failing storage tank roofs or faulty bottoms that sprung major leaks in Harvey are the subject of at least three enforcemen­t actions pending against Texas companies by the state, according to documents the Chronicle obtained through multiple records requests. In addition to the Magellan terminal, the TCEQ also has cited two refinery operators for failing to address major leaks from broken-down tanks: Houston’s Valero Refinery and Blanchard Refining Galveston Bay.

 ?? ELIZABETH CONLEY — HOUSTON CHRONICLE VIA AP ?? In this photo taken in March, steam is released out of the Valero Refinery in Houston. More than a year after Hurricane Harvey slammed into the Texas coast, state environmen­tal authoritie­s have only just begun enforcemen­t actions against a handful of companies deemed responsibl­e for some of the most massive air and water pollution incidents reported during and immediatel­y after the storm.
ELIZABETH CONLEY — HOUSTON CHRONICLE VIA AP In this photo taken in March, steam is released out of the Valero Refinery in Houston. More than a year after Hurricane Harvey slammed into the Texas coast, state environmen­tal authoritie­s have only just begun enforcemen­t actions against a handful of companies deemed responsibl­e for some of the most massive air and water pollution incidents reported during and immediatel­y after the storm.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States