News


New laws target toxic chemicals in Palo Alto

Proposed ordinances would amortize CPI's plating shop; update city's hazardous-materials ordinance

As Barron Park residents know all too well, residential streets and industrial operations often make for a toxic mix when it comes to neighborhood harmony.

A decade ago, residents of Chimalus Drive became alerted to that fact when they detected a noxious odor in the air. The smell turned out to be nitric-acid gas that was released by Communications & Power Industries (CPI), a manufacturer of microwave- and radio-frequency products that operates a plating shop on Hansen Way. Residents became further alarmed in March of 2008, when the company spilled about 20 gallons of hydrochloric acid into its rear driveway, and again two months later, when 50 gallons of wastewater containing copper and nickel were inadvertently released into Matadero Creek.

Though there haven't been any reported incidents at CPI since 2008 and the company has significantly reduced the quantity of deadly chemicals it uses, concerns about the toxins being stored so close to homes remain widespread in Barron Park. On Monday night, the City Council will consider the most dramatic action to date to address this concern: a law that would require businesses using high quantities of hazardous materials to be located at least a football field away from residences, schools, day care centers and other areas where occupants may be particularly susceptible to the effects. In addition, council members will consider a separate ordinance that would require CPI to relocate or close its plating shop by 2026.

The council's Nov. 16 discussion will follow years of studies and counter-studies, pleas from residents and protests from CPI. In 2012, CPI argued in a letter that its recent facility upgrades and its March 2012 decision to reduce the quantities of stored hazardous materials have greatly enhanced safety. According to CPI, processing tanks were equipped with seismic anchors, certain storage tanks were relocated and an assortment of sensors, scrubbers and monitoring systems were installed to create what the CPI report calls "an advanced, state-of-the-art facility with layers of redundant safety technologies."

Given these proactive steps, CPI argued in a letter, "There is no rational or reasonable basis for the city to consider the termination of CPI's vested use of its property by way of a zoning amendment and then amortizing its use."

"CPI has a tremendous investment in its facility and an ongoing interest in operating safety for the benefit of its employees, nearby residents, other users of Stanford Research Park and the community at large," the letter states. "CPI will not abandon a facility that has served as the headquarters for its business for almost 60 years and where it conducts the majority of its most important manufacturing."

Over the past five years, both the city and CPI commissioned further studies followed by supplemental studies in hopes of determining just how dangerous the facilities are. The city's consultant, AECOM, evaluated five different hypothetical disaster scenarios, including two "extreme" situations. The only one that was shown to pose a potential problem was the release of nitric acid, which could affect people's health up to 92 feet from the release point. Then last year, in response to Barron Park residents' concerns, AECOM did additional analysis that considered a massive earthquake that could result in a damaged building and a mixing of chemicals at the CPI site. The scenario, which AECOM deemed "highly unrealistic," was shown to potentially affect residences up to 616 feet away.

CPI's consulting firm then came back with its own analysis showing that an earthquake of this magnitude has a 0.75 percent chance of occurring over the next 50 years. In its August 2014 report, the firm Albus-Keefe and Associates noted that this probability is well below the state code, which requires similar structures to be designed for earthquake events "with a probability of exceedance equal to 2 percent in 50 years."

These assurance, have done little to assuage concerns from the community and the council, which decided in October 2014 to move ahead with the amortization. In addition, the council directed staff to put together a broader ordinance that would regulate hazardous materials in close proximity to residential zones.

The decision came despite assurances from CPI President Bob Fickett that "we are not the enemy" and that CPI "take(s) the health of the community and our employees very seriously."

"In the 60 years, there's never been any harm to any community members," Fickett said.

On the other side of the debate were the roughly 20 residents from Barron Park who came to support the amortization. Lydia Kou framed it as an issue of health and told the council that "it's time to put the residents first," while Samir Tuma called the existing proximity between the plating shop and the neighborhood an "unsafe situation." Ultimately, the council voted 8-0 to move ahead with amortization.

"In the end, it comes down to the safety of the people who live in our community, and we're in charge of that safety," Councilwoman Liz Kniss said during the October 2014 hearing.

Now, the council will have a chance to review and possibly approve the two proposed ordinances, which were the subject of a community meeting last month. If it votes to support both, it would spell the beginning of the end for CPI's plating shop as well as the beginning of a new process for reviewing manufacturers looking to set up shop near schools and homes.

The most significant change in the broader hazardous-materials ordinance is a new tier, called "Tier 2," for companies that use toxic materials in quantities that exceed the city's threshold and that use substances deemed as "toxic" or "extremely hazardous" by state and federal regulators. This tier would include 14 facilities in Palo Alto, four of which are buildings on the CPI campus. The change would reform the current system, which includes two tiers but in which every one of the more than 400 companies with hazardous materials is classified in the lower tier.

In addition to the CPI buildings, the list of facilities that would fall under the new Tier 2 includes buildings operated by Genencor International, Hammon Plating, Hewlett Packard, ONED Materials, the Palo Alto Research Center, Space Systems Loral and Target Discovery.

Aside from CPI, none of the companies that would be classified as Tier 2 are located close enough to residential areas for concern, based on the proposed ordinance. But the new law would ensure that new Tier 2 facilities would not be allowed within 300 feet of "residences, schools, daycare facilities, homes for the elderly, convalescent homes and similar uses whose occupants may be more susceptible than the general population to adverse effects of exposure to toxic chemicals and other pollutants."

Similarly, schools, residences and other such organizations would be prohibited from locating in industrial zoning districts within 300 feet of Tier 2 facilities.

The new ordinance would also have a third tier, which would cover users whose hazardous materials exceed even higher thresholds the ones outlined in the California Accidental Release Program. Currently, no facilities of this sort exist in Palo Alto, according to a report from the Department of Planning and Community Environment.

An inventory put together by the Palo Alto Fire Department and its consultant, AECOM, shows that while CPI isn't the only facility with high levels of hazardous materials, it has by far the the greatest variety of toxic chemicals. Between them, CPI's four Tier 2 buildings house 36 chemicals that are deemed "toxic" or "highly toxic." One of these buildings, the plating shop, uses 18 such chemicals. The shop is also the only one of the four that is listed as having "extremely hazardous substances." Another CPI facility, known as Building 1B, is listed as using 15 chemicals deemed "toxic" or "very toxic." No other building on the 14-facility list uses more than four such chemicals.

If the council approves the new ordinance, the three CPI buildings that stand within 300 feet of the Barron Park homes would be deemed "legal and non-conforming," which means they once complied with the city's zoning laws but no longer do so. However, CPI would not need to relocate them.

The new ordinance would also categorize 419 companies under Tier 1, a list that includes gas stations, nail salons, paint retailers and manufacturing businesses. Unlike Tier 2 companies, these businesses use hazardous materials that are not deemed "toxic or highly toxic by the state Fire Code" or classified as using "extremely hazardous substances" by federal regulators. Tier 1 companies would continue to be governed under the city's existing program, which requires each of the facilities that store, use or handle more than 55 gallons, 500 pounds or 200 cubic feet of regulated material to submit to the city a "Hazardous Materials Business Plan" that lists the inventory of chemicals used.

The ordinance calling for CPI to phase out its plating shop by 2026 could mean the shop's closure or relocation to a different part of the campus that its at least 300 feet away from residents. The deadline is based on an amortization study that the city commissioned in 2012, which concluded that 20 years would be a reasonable termination date, with the countdown starting in 2006, when CPI last made a major upgrade to the plating shop.

CPI, for its part, argued that amortization should be based on at least a 40-year period. In its own study, the company argued in 2012 that it can "neither move its plating process from its current campus location, outsource its plating process to another location/vendor, nor move its entire manufacturing plant elsewhere without significant detrimental financial loss in investment to CPI."

Comments

6 people like this
Posted by Steve Raney
a resident of Crescent Park
on Nov 13, 2015 at 11:56 am

Gennady,

This risk of accidental airborne toxic releases will be a topic of interest in future discussions of in-filling Stanford Research Park with housing. There is some past PA history on this topic and Joe Simitian might be a go-to person.

From pages 169-178 of my masters thesis (Web Link )

Alza Corporation's Influential Experience in the 80's.

Alza Corporation, an international pharmaceutical company, was a long time SRP tenant. In the 80's Alza planned to expand within SRP. Alza operated an older hazardous materials (hazmats) storage facility and trucked out hazardous waste products past neighboring residences. Alza proposed to simultaneously upgrade to a higher capacity hazmats facility with augmented safety technology and to eliminate trucked waste. The plan backfired.

The adjacent "College Terrace" neighborhood had been oblivious to the old hazmat facility. Once public hearing notices went out for the new facility, "residents went berserk." A petition campaign attempted to stop the new facility. Residents also suddenly became more cognizant of noise, generating many noise-related complaints. With their newfound hazmat awareness, residents demanded to know if Alza "was poisoning their kids" any time steam escaped from the plant. Palo Alto's Fire Department, the party responsible for hazmats in the city, experienced a huge increase in workload caused by citizen requests for reports.

During public outreach sessions, Alza explained one industrial process that produced methylene chloride, a carcinogen. The alternative was to produce acetone, an explosive. Alza preferred producing the carcinogen with tight controls. Residents made what were perceived by Alza to be unreasonable demands, "you have smart scientists, you should figure out how to not use either.” Alza's attorneys spent a year on the project, but, in the end, decided to never attempt to locate close to residences again. Alza moved their hazmat plant to Mountain View's Shoreline Office Park, farther away from residents. They felt "driven out of Palo Alto," and moved all of their operations out of SRP.

In addition, locating hazards near sensitive populations such as children increases reporting requirements, producing substantial cost increases. A State of California Risk Mananagement and Prevention Plan (RMPP) is required whenever a hazard is located with 1,000 feet of a school or day car center. Furthermore, Accidental Release Prevention Program paperwork must be filed. In addition, residents must be notified about certain corporate actions. Public notifications generate time-consuming questions from concerned local residents and increase the risk of lawsuits.

For Alza's Vallejo hazmat plant, the company purchased open space as a buffer zone to ensure that residential development could not approach their plant.

Alza's representative, Nancy Noe, a former SVLG committee member, explained further reservations to placing residents near industrial uses. "People who move next to an airport can become strident NIMBYs a few years later. The same could very easily be true for housing in the office park. Existing companies don’t want new limits placed on their activities. Proximity to children adds significant Hazmat reporting, safety redundancy, specialty insurance, and public interaction costs."

Effects of the Alza experience

As a result, SVLG has adopted a blanket policy against adding children anywhere near hazard producing facilities. Says an SVLG committee chair, "There is a huge compatibility issue with adding housing to SRP because of hazardous point sources. Folks have been beaten up over this issue in the past – no one is looking to take this on again.”

Likewise the Palo Alto Fire Department prohibits in-fill housing, but does admit to some discretion:
In general the Fire Department does not support the placement of day care facilities or housing in areas zoned for industrial uses that could include the use and storage of hazardous materials. There are zoning restrictions that may apply. Additionally, such an arrangement could create emergency response or evacuation issues. It’s possible that these and other concerns could be mitigated, but it would depend on the circumstances.


15 people like this
Posted by mauricio
a resident of Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
on Nov 14, 2015 at 6:36 am

Gasoline leaf blower release tremendous amounts of hazardous materials into the air and into our lungs and blood stream. Their use is nominally prohibited in Palo Alto, but the police won't force the law.


Like this comment
Posted by Bill Kelly
a resident of Barron Park
on Nov 15, 2015 at 10:02 pm

There is no legitimate reason for a 40 amoritization plan. No plating facility can last 40 years, this is a negotiating tactic by CPI, their lease with Stanford runs out in 2040 and they are just trying to run the clock out while using open vats of highly toxic chemicals on a 2nd floor of a building 60 feet from residences.


8 people like this
Posted by concerned
a resident of Downtown North
on Nov 16, 2015 at 10:52 am

How hypocritical!!!! I went to the hearing on putting 19 cell towers 1.5 blocks from where i live, and the Palo Alto Council could care less. When health issues were brought up, the council was so unconcerned they would not even acknowledge it.

On December 17 th, there will be a lecture at Cubberly, 7 pm on the health effects. (Silicon Valley Health Institute), come learn how our town council is deliberately putting our health in jeopardy.


6 people like this
Posted by Amoritization
a resident of Palo Verde
on Nov 16, 2015 at 12:04 pm

Bill Kelley said:
"There is no legitimate reason for a 40 amoritization plan. No plating facility can last 40 years, ..."

I am not disputing your concerns. However, I do dispute your assertion.
The article indicated the CPI had been in their location for almost 60 years. Why won't they exist for another 40+ years? Even if they have not been doing (the same) plating at that location for the past 60 years, who is to legitimately say that their business as well as technology in general will not change to allow them to be a viable business for another 40 years?
Kicking them out in only 10 years does not seem appropriate. For example, manufacturing businesses (now gone) in the Middlefield/Loma Verde area had 25+ years to vacate.


Like this comment
Posted by Bill Kelly
a resident of Barron Park
on Nov 16, 2015 at 3:52 pm

Amoritization said:

"The article indicated the CPI had been in their location for almost 60 years. Why won't they exist for another 40+ years? Even if they have not been doing (the same) plating at that location for the past 60 years, who is to legitimately say that their business as well as technology in general will not change to allow them to be a viable business for another 40 years?
Kicking them out in only 10 years does not seem appropriate. For example, manufacturing businesses (now gone) in the Middlefield/Loma Verde area had 25+ years to vacate."

CPI was created in 1995 in by a private equity fund. They took over processes put in place by Varian. In 1985 Varian had a release that required significant PAFD response including some commercial evacuation. CPI expanded the plating shop in 2005 to make it 4 times bigger, all without neighborhood input. The plating shop is 60 feet from houses. Since CPI was created in 1995 it has had two accidents at the site. This plant should NEVER have been permitted so close to residential neighborhoods. The average length of a useful plating operation is 20 years. While it's irritating to live with the City's zoning error 20 years is better than 40.


Like this comment
Posted by Bill Kelly
a resident of Barron Park
on Nov 16, 2015 at 3:59 pm

Steve Rane said:

"The adjacent "College Terrace" neighborhood had been oblivious to the old hazmat facility. Once public hearing notices went out for the new facility, "residents went berserk.""

Long term neighbors on Chimalus drive purchased houses with the benign faith that HAZMAT facilities would be regulated. A trust in government, given the nit picky nature of the Palo Alto building process that many of us experienced it was inconceivable that a major HAZMAT site would be literally in our backyards. When we read about a toxic release from the plant was when we all found out what was happening in Stanford Business Park. Epic zoning failure on the part of Palo Alto.


Like this comment
Posted by UdyRegan
a resident of another community
on Oct 26, 2016 at 1:08 am

UdyRegan is a registered user.

This is really why zoning is an important part of expanding and constructing a city. If you thought that garbage disposal and storage was hard then you obviously didn't know that the toughest storage job is actually associated with industrial waste rather than domestic and residential rubbish. A community needs to do its own part to make sure that they comply with the rules and regulations to keep the neighbourhood and city safe for everyone!


3 people like this
Posted by Reprehensible
a resident of Midtown
on Oct 26, 2016 at 1:44 pm

Reprehensible is a registered user.

Garbage disposal and storage is obvious by its odor. If you smell it, bacteria is in the air!

However, toxic chemicals are so insidious that you may breathe in their fumes and suffocate to death, never knowing what hit you!

This city has Superfund cleanup sites that have yet to be dealt with. THIS is just one more case of far too little waaaaay too late!


Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

El Camino: Another scheme to increase congestion?
By Douglas Moran | 12 comments | 2,115 views

Post-election reflections -- and sponges
By Diana Diamond | 13 comments | 1,688 views

Couples: Philosophy of Love
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 1,399 views

Trials of My Grandmother
By Aldis Petriceks | 1 comment | 941 views

Lakes and Larders (part 2)
By Laura Stec | 0 comments | 309 views