BLM Right-of-Way Complaint Filed

To the Attention: Steve Cohn - Alaska State Director
Via Email: blm_ak_state_director@blm.gov

CC: Tracy Stone-Manning - BLM Director
Via Fax: 970-256-4997

Dear State of Alaska Director Steve Cohn;

On or about November 26^th back in 2002, the BLM then under Alaska State Director Henri R. Bisson, it released the Final Environmental Impact Statement(FEIS) consistent with the ROW renewal for the Trans-Alaska-Pipeline-System(TAPS). Upon completion, that FEIS allowed for the Secretary of the Interior to then honor the renewal, for many years to come so there may not come another “renewal cycle” in my lifetime to use any “Public Comment” period to lodge a complaint and or concern. But a complaint should not have to rely on a timeout, especially when time is of the essence in defense something cannot wait. To begin with, and maybe this has nothing to do directly upon my concern, yet the latter the reason for this correspondence, that the FEIS was “flawed” to the point it could prove dire consequences for wherein the FEIS finds such fault. I will get to the specifics, but in a nutshell wherein the FEIS is questionable, upon a very serious issue that involving “health risk” information associated with “Air Quality” with respect to the ROW that which was “flawed” and such relied upon by the BLM. In that category, information utilized in statement was found “deficient”, through 3^rd party expert reasoning. So there exists the possibility that the use of such unreliable data received by the BLM from another source, but taken for granted, it could prove to be detrimental in consideration the health and well-being of those of us that rely on such an EIS, and the precipice instigating my concern in questionable - that it is “flawed”. Garbage in garbage out scenario ring a bell? Said again, that which could then prove to be detrimental to the health and well-being of the citizens that live in close proximity to that ROW, especially at the end of the TAPS in Valdez, Alaska.

But not trying to get off subject in that to begin with, as a nation we are starting to come to grips with the horrendous “Student Loan” debt, that was made possible by denying students hit with compound interest “loan sharking”, denied forever the right to surrender and thus consider “bankruptcy” the “law of the land” an Uncle Sam helping hand – such motions denied through two lonely words added to a 1998 Education bill signed into effect by then President William Clinton. Those two words, as in “undue hardship”, meant a solid enough verdict to deal a blow to any righteousness this nation finds in contribution the wherewithal of bankruptcy proceedings, in efforts to give those in debt a second chance. It is a life support option proven to work, yet a once upon-a-time student now at age 50 and $120000 in debt cannot see the light at the end of that “debtor’s prison” conviction tunnel, of ever getting ahead of that debt because of those two words denying any starting over with bankruptcy. The sad fact of this matter coming to light, the government official that found reason to add the language of “undue hardship” to that “bill”, that which would forever deny any bankruptcy proceedings moving forward dealing with a student’s dept, it was based on a bogus report covering “Student Loans in Arrears”. In efforts that report cosponsoring the “undue hardship” entertainment, targeting those that received such high interest loans that in promissory they were not being faithful in paying back such loans. And that report was found to be in error, yes here we are again on the subject of “flawed” - yet the official did not let that discourage his attitude to deny any starting over again. So it was all based on a false pretense and it was something that went out of control, because no one was watching what was going on - as everyone involved was more interested to get the “bill” completed so President Bill could sign it into law. Two words, that is all it required to “taint” what was a good “bill”, to cause such a predicament today with dire consequences beyond belief, based on a bogus report to begin with!

What I am getting at, it appears that in those numerous volumes with thousands of pages behind the BLM TAPS FEIS, there is a similar misguidance, that has allowed the aspects of health concerns in risks to be gambled away in the same fashion, that it is based on “false premise”. Because someone was not paying attention to what this FEIS gave away to the agent that operates the TAPS for the ROW holder – basically a license to harm! I am talking the negative side-effects of “Air Quality” burdened by cancer-causing “Benzene” in release as a normal everyday reality, through ambient air exposure, that is wherein the FEIS finds itself at fault - in issuing questionable ending statements like “it is concluded that current TAPS associated emissions are not likely to lead to adverse human health impacts”[V2, 3.17-10]. That is an untrue statement of fact, that cannot be backed up by any BLM data that is valid and sound. The data relied upon for the FEIS with respect to “Air Quality” finds no second motion that it is valid. I challenge the BLM to prove me wrong on the latter! And upon another statement that is sinister, “Since the Valdez Marine Terminal only contributes about 10% to the outdoor residential area VOC concentrations…”[same section as above], well someone should be held accountable for this blatant disregard of facts in TRUTH, that which allowed for a “flawed” report to allow the BLM to make such an assessment that “associated emissions are not likely to lead to adverse human health impacts” as it is pure unadulterated BS. This is how humans are placed in harm’s way! And for real, anybody that works for the BLM that made an assessment that the Valdez Marine Terminal contributes so little to background VOC  emissions, it is like selling a bridge to nowhere.

So I went off basis my concern for a reason, to emphasize how easy it is for things to get out of control when so many individuals are part of a project, as this FEIS for the TAPS was one considerable “project” with many irons in the fire, many hands in the pot.

To get to my point, to begin with I worked for the Alyeska Pipeline Service Company(APSC), the agent that operates and maintains the TAPS for the ROW holders – that being “Big Oil”. I was one of the many workers that was subject to continuous “exposure” to “Benzene” as a condition of continued employment. I can still smell that sweet odor today, very inviting it was at the same time through exposure it was hiding away in our bone marrow as a silent but deadly “KILLER”. C₆H₆, a nasty constituent found everywhere in the oil & gas industry, and per EPA guidelines in awareness and a beware, listed as a Hazardous Air Pollutant(HAP) - that which is listed also as a cancer-causing agent, again through the auspices of the EPA. And today, I watch in horror as each and everyday it seems, another one of my pipeline co-workers trying to enjoy retirement succumbs to suffering from the devastation consistent with long-term “Benzene” exposure. Today, seeing a life expectancy at best early 70s. So it is with great displeasure in concern that the BLM may have jumped to a conclusion on “Air Quality” that is misleading, in that FEIS. That FEIS prepared based on a report authored by a Mr. Goldstein(et.el. 1992) for the Alyeska Pipeline Service Company – that which has drawn ridicule from experts, that is was a report filled with nonsense and was basically a cover-up scam with no credibility from a professional scientific and/or medical standpoint. Yes, the experts shot it full of holes, but that kind of bogus like report from the APSC does not surprise me, as when I worked for that company, anything to pull the wool over the regulators was how the executives found smiles. And praytell if a person, if a worker tried to call out that bluff, well it meant being labeled a “whistleblower” best find a new job! I spent many, many, many hours in interview with the BLM “Special Agents” in Alaska when I was witness to questionable activity on the TAPS – but was it criminal? So nothing happened, and I lost my job and when we see how the parties responsible for the EXXON Valdez “wreck” got away with a slap…need I say more as it appears there exists no “take responsibility” with the players involved in Alaska’s “Black Gold”. That is exactly what we see today in the way “Benzene” is allowed to enter the ambient air we breathe, and when an EIS says everything is hunky dory, the workers and the citizens are the ones disadvantaged and suffer the harm of such irresponsibility - when at the same time the Oil Barons, that which includes the State of Alaska due its share of “Royalty Oil”, a “$Trillion$ dollar venture doesn’t care about the fact I have to urinate every two hours as my body tries to reject the effects of “polluted” white blood cells causing infections. Beating on a Deadhorse?

With the BLM FEIS, it begins in Volume 2. I have taken the liberty to reproduce the FEIS findings that are of interest to my concern, so it makes it easier to get to the point quicker, to get the troubling point across, here it is front and center for your undivided attention – no need to go looking for something hard to find. The “Boldface/Underlined” is what is questionable, followed by what a 3^rd party expert considered serious deficiencies in the Goldstein Report, and what was referenced by the BLM for the TAPS FEIS.

~~~~~ From the 2002 BLM TAPS FEIS(Listed Tables not reproduced)

 

3.13.1.2 Hazardous Air Pollutants

In addition to emitting criteria pollutants, TAPS facilities also emit hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), as ozone depleting substances (ODSs), and greenhouse gases (GHGs). Sources of HAPs at TAPS facilities include flaring of vapor released from crude oil tanks, the combustion of the displacement vapors from the vapor recovery system in the power boilers, as well as the incineration of any excess vapors in the vapor incinerators at the Valdez Marine Terminal, releases from breakout tanks, exhausts from combustion equipment, and leaks from various pieces of equipment. Table 3.13-6 lists the potential annual emission rates of various HAPs from TAPS facilities. As the table indicates, the largest HAPs emitter among all TAPS facilities is the Valdez Marine Terminal (123 tons/yr), followed by PS 8 (13 tons/yr). The single HAP with the largest potential emission rate is benzene (50 tons/yr), followed by hexane (44 tons/yr) and toluene (42 tons/yr). All TAPS facilities except the Valdez Marine Terminal are classified as "minor sources" of HAPs; the annual potential emission rate of any individual HAP is less than 10 tons/yr and for all HAPs combined is less than 25 tons/yr.

 

3.13.2.2 Hazardous Air Pollutants

Table 3.13-11 listed data on the ambient concentrations of six HAPs as collected at four monitoring stations in the Valdez area during the period November 1990 through October 1991, when the average TAPS crude oil throughput was about 1.8 million bbl/d (Goldstein et al. 1992). The data for benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene, m,p-xylene, o-xylene, and n-hexane indicate that ambient concentrations of these HAPs were highest at the East Gate station located near the eastern boundary of the Valdez Marine Terminal for all averaging periods. This finding reflects the fact that the Valdez Marine Terminal is a major emission source of these HAPs in the Valdez area (Table 3.13-6). Ambient concentrations of HAPs at the Old Valdez station were substantially lower than those at the East Gate station; in general, they were higher than those at the High School and Spit stations.

The HAPs concentration data in Table 3.13-11 were collected during the 1990-1991 period before the installation of the tanker vapor recovery system at the Valdez Marine Terminal in March 1998. It was estimated that recovery of VOCs by the tanker vapor recovery system and subsequent destruction of collected VOCs in incinerators or power boiler furnaces would result in elimination of about 27,600 tons per year of VOCs containing the above-mentioned HAPs (Fluor and TRC 1995), about eight times the current estimate of potential VOC emissions from the Valdez Marine Terminal. Therefore, it is estimated that current ambient HAPs concentrations in the Valdez area would be substantially lower than the values listed in Table 3.13-11.

Neither the EPA nor the State of Alaska has established ambient HAP standards. The EPA guideline levels for these HAPs that were used to rank HAPs toxicity under the Clean Air Act and potential health effects due to exposures to these HAPs are discussed in Section 3.17 .2.4.

 

3.17.2.4 Hazardous Air Pollutants in Ambient Air and Potential Health Hazards

Table 3.13-4 lists major facilities located near the TAPS and gives estimates of annual emissions of VOCs from those facilities. Total VOC emissions may be considered an indicator for emissions of hazardous air pollutants, which are components of VOCs. As shown in the table, annual operational emissions of VOCs from the Valdez Marine Terminal are more than 4 times higher than emissions in other areas (i.e., North Slope, Fairbanks area, or Fort Greely). To address the potential for health hazards from exposure to TAPS-associated VOCs, a comparison of ambient VOC levels in the Valdez area with risk-based guidelines has been conducted and is discussed below. Health risks along other TAPS ROW areas would be less than those near the Valdez Marine Terminal, both because VOC emissions are lower and because the pump stations are located farther from residential areas than is the Valdez Marine Terminal.

The Valdez Air Health Study was conducted to estimate the health risks associated with the inhalation of VOCs by Valdez residents, and the portion of that risk attributable to Valdez Marine Terminal emissions (Goldstein et al. 1992). The study measured ambient air concentrations of five VOCs at four Valdez locations in 1990 and 1991, when the throughput rate for the pipeline was higher than the present rate, about 1.8 million bbl/d. Subsequent to the study, in 1998, a vapor-recovery system was installed on two of the four tanker berths at the Valdez Marine Terminal, substantially decreasing VOC emissions. Therefore, current Valdez Marine Terminal-attributable ambient air VOC concentrations would be expected to be much lower than those measured in the Valdez Air Health Study because of the reduced emission levels. However, the Valdez Air Health Study risk estimates are of interest for the purpose of bounding the potential risks from TAPS emissions (that is, current risks would be lower than those measured in the study).

The VOCs included in the Valdez Air Health Study were benzene (the only known carcinogen), toluene, xylenes, ethylbenzene, and n-hexane. (Cyclohexane, n-heptane, naphthalene, n-octane, and styrene were also measured on personal exposure monitors for Valdez residents, but not in ambient air samples.) The specific VOCs measured were selected on the basis of their presence in Prudhoe Bay crude oil, emission rates from the Valdez Marine Terminal, and their known toxicity at high doses. Of the four locations selected for ambient air monitoring, one (East Gate) was near the boundary of the Valdez Marine Terminal and was chosen to represent the highest ambient concentrations from the terminal. The other three sites were located in Valdez residential areas. The location nearest to the Valdez Marine Terminal consistently had the highest measured VOC concentrations.

In addition to measurement of ambient air concentrations of VOCs, the Valdez Air Health Study estimated the portion of VOCs in ambient air attributable to the Valdez Marine Terminal by releasing a tracer gas from the Valdez Marine Terminal. The gas released was not otherwise present in Valdez and allowed the determination of when terminal emissions were present in the residential areas and how concentrated those emissions were. The study found that only about 1 to 10% of the VOC exposures of Valdez residents (as measured using personal monitoring devices) were attributable to Valdez Marine Terminal emissions. This would be true for two main reasons. First, VOC concentrations are actually higher in indoor air than outdoor air (also a finding of the Valdez Air Health Study), indicating that several indoor sources such as heating fuel, solvents, or cigarette smoke are significant sources of VOC exposures. Second, approximately 50 to 60% of the time, the wind flow patterns in the Valdez basin transport terminal emissions away from the residential areas.

The ambient concentrations of VOCs measured at the Valdez Marine Terminal fence line location and the maximum concentrations of three Valdez residential area locations are presented in Table 3.17-4, along with a risk based guideline level the EPA uses to rank hazardous air pollutants (Smith et al. 1999). Table 3.17-4 also includes levels of five other VOCs measured on personal monitoring devices of Valdez residents and the risk-based guideline levels for these VOCs. The fence line ambient level of benzene somewhat exceeded the comparison level (ambient level of 22jlgfm3, upper end comparison level of 13 !lgfm3); the ambient benzene level at residential locations, however, was lower, within the 10-6 to 10-4 (1 in 1 million to 1 in 10,000) increased cancer risk range level used by the EPA as an indicator of risks generally not requiring mitigating actions (EPA 1990). In addition, the ambient naphthalene level measured on personal monitors just exceeded the comparison level (3.0 versus 3.3 jlg/m3) and could be associated with adverse effects. The Valdez Marine Terminal may not be the major source of naphthalene in the residential areas; another possible source could be combustion of home heating fuel.

Since the Valdez Marine Terminal only contributes about 10% to the outdoor residential area VOC concentrations, and since VOC emissions from the Valdez Marine Terminal have decreased substantially since the time of the study, it is concluded that current TAPS associated emissions are not likely to lead to adverse human health impacts.

~~~~~3^rd Party Expert Evaluation of the Goldstein Report

What deficiencies are there in the data collected to date?

PWSRCAC’s expert, Dr. Cohen, was concerned with the very high percentage of missing data for the one-year monitoring period. He noted that EPA typically requires high quality CEMS monitoring data to yield data for at least 75% of the operating time period. Alyeska’s CEMS data was missing for an average of 40-49% of the data. The significance of the “missing” data is not known, since it was not clear whether the missing data would have represented periods of high or low emissions that would have changed the final average benzene estimate for each monitoring site.

 

Benzene levels obtained from the personal monitoring study averaged 7.7 ppb in outdoor residential air, yet there is no logical explanation as to why the residential benzene concentrations are 4-7 times larger than the CEMS monitoring data, which only showed 1-2 ppb in the City of Valdez. Although Alyeska attributed the higher residential benzene levels to other non-terminal sources of data, that explanation doesn’t add up. Benzene associated with vehicle emissions would have yielded correspondingly elevated levels of carbon monoxide. If benzene associated with other industrial emissions, such as the Petro-star Refinery, was the source it should have resulted in elevated levels of benzene at the Valdez High School and Valdez Spit CEMS, rather than the measured high levels of benzene at neighborhoods such as the Robe River Subdivision, Mineral Creek Loop Road or Alpine Woods Estates. Indoor residential levels of benzene of 20.2 ppb seem questionable. A recent study in Anchorage investigated indoor benzene levels at approximately 3ppb (which is about double what they measured outdoors.)24 Using that as a benchmark, the 20 ppb number looks very high.

 

PWSRCAC’s review of the personal monitoring study concluded Alyeska’s study was flawed, and that their analysis showed that the terminal contributed to about 30-90% of the indoor exposures and 30-60% of the personal exposure to benzene.

 

PWSRCAC argued that Alyeska’s study came to an illogical conclusion since the VMT was one of the largest emitters of benzene in the nation, contributing over a million pounds of benzene to the Valdez air shed on an annual basis prior to 1996. PWSRCAC hired a team of experts to review Alyeska’s Valdez Air Health Study. The team attributed over 90% of the Valdez benzene emission to the terminal.

 

The Valdez Air Study Review (VASR) Committee identified several flaws in Alyeska’s study, strongly criticizing the fact that the tracers were not co-mingled with the terminal sources of emissions under study, were not released from the same location at the terminal, and were not released while collecting meteorological data which would demonstrate that the tracer releases were conducted on days representative of Valdez basin conditions. VASR criticized Alyeska’s use of future oil throughput estimates that were below the state oil forecasts. VASR disagreed with Alyeska’s approach to limiting the exposure estimate to a period of 23 years (assuming the terminal would shut down in 2015), rather than the traditional 70-year lifetime exposure risk used by EPA and other scientists. VASR also criticized Alyeska’s study for not examining the cancer

risk for those Valdez residents working at the terminal. VASR argued that since Alyeska employees and contract employees make up a large percentage of the Valdez population, control of benzene at the terminal would significantly improve reduce the cancer risk for many of the Valdez citizens. PWSRCAC’s summary reports also reflect that EPA concurred with many of VASR’s concerns; however, a report documenting EPA’s findings has not been located at this time.

 

VASR also issued a report which refuting the indoor benzene monitoring data reported by Alyeska. VASR was critical of the personal monitoring population (less than 1.5% of the Valdez population) and make-up (e.g. 67% females in study vs. 45% females in Valdez population). The high indoor benzene levels were questioned. It is interesting to note the very high level of benzene reported by Alyeska on indoor residential air, at 20ppb. From that data, Alyeska concluded that the terminal contributed only 1% of benzene and that the remaining 99% came from non-terminal sources (especially indoor sources of benzene such as smoking). By comparison, a recent study in Anchorage investigated indoor

benzene levels at approximately 3ppb (which is about double what they measured outdoors.) Using that as a benchmark, the 20 ppb number looks very high. It is also noteworthy that the CEMS in Valdez yielded 1-2ppb benzene, but the outdoor residential personal monitoring data yielded around 8 ppb. Once again, Alyeska attributes the high residential benzene to vehicle emissions and smoking in residential areas.

 

~~~End

 

There is much more bothersome back and forth on this subject matter, enough that it opens up the door for disagreements on what is really going on in Valdez, at the VMT and how that operation with respect to “Air Quality” causes a risk to the workers and the citizens alike of Valdez. In caution, when the authorities we place our trust in are in disagreement and cannot get on the same page upon important matters like “Air Quality”, it spells doom! And as a Simple Simon side note as to how the TAPS oversight is also at odds with one another with respect to the simplicity of a proper “Air Quality” program, wherein the BLM report states that “50 to 60% of the time, the wind flow patterns in the Valdez basin transport terminal emissions away from the residential areas.” as wind direction is a critical element in any “Air Quality” assessment, that line of sight targeted audience in mind. But the report also states that the prevailing wind direction in the Valdez Basin is 60(NEE), which means the “Benzene” exposure burden is skirting the town’s fence-line and heading then directly towards the residential area in the Robe River part of the Valdez city proper, and does it also mean then that the remaining 40% to 50% of the time not a big deal? And wait there is more, the ADEC(Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, the state entity that issues out “Air Quality” permits and oversees the EPA oversight), it said the prevailing wind in Valdez was from the West half the time and from the East the other half, which means that cancer-causing “Benzene” would then be headed towards Alpine, a Valdez community outside the city limits so targeted in the summertime, just in-time for barbecue season. And does it really matter, what the wind does, as in any direction it still carries away the “Benzene” and in its pathway there are humans subject to possible exposure. Not hard to see the confusing factor herein a simple subject - cannot even get it straight with the wind. So wind direction should not be used as a ways and means to lessen the potential of a serious cancer-causing agent effect, through exposure. An interesting tidbit fact, just outside the VMT above the power plant smoke-stack a mountain top slope named “Benzene Alley”! Yes, on some days one could see the “Benzene” blue-wake coming from those pollution abating stacks, but don’t let that interfere as it was a place considered the best “ski to sea” terrain in the world! Now a bone of contention, that which would clear up this matter of the wind for that matter all bones of contention as to how this “Benzene” can create problems, the refusal by the TAPS owners to allow for “Continuous Air Quality Monitoring” systems, once a requirement upon start-up of the TAPS, to be still in operation today around Valdez.  For heaven’s sake, for our protection! That is what is done in the “normalcy” in areas that are questionable with respect to “Air Quality”, but the reason behind the regulators in time-after-time in balk at this fundamental reasoning for “continuous testing” as a readily available means to detect something that can cause harm, it means someone cannot stand the truth. And what sickens me in this report, one must realize that when a crude oil tanker is unleashed from the VMT loading berths, it sails through Prince William Sound in even closer proximity to Valdez in slow motion in escort and because that crude oil that was just loaded is at its most volatile “out-gassing” state, the “hot” vapors in transport for the time that tanker passes alongside Perkin’s Cove, well gag me with a “Benzene Spoon” to what is coming out of that vapor mist mast, as then that 60NEE brings that cancer-causing constituent right back home, a direct hit on the town of Valdez. I was there, you could smell it! So it is easy to see that two different authorities that provided information about the effects of “Benzene” releases from the VMT, they were at opposite ends, not even a close call any bilateral acknowledgment, and that is suspect that someone is not telling the truth – or hiding it in a ways and means that may not make us aware of hazards that may cause harm, to the workers and citizens alike in the short-term and of a higher degree of concern, in the long-term. But don’t need a weatherman to tell which way the wind blows, as the Goldstein Report was indeed flawed and should not have been used by the BLM in the Final EIS. NOT without that Goldstein Report carefully analyzed by BLM experts, or the use of outside experts, as to just use that information on the fly, it demonstrates an irrational and irresponsible approach to an EIS that is supposed to be worthwhile. And when used to renew the ROW, it is something we must then live with for another 30-years! And I ask, why did not the BLM use instead or for comparison the likes of a Cohen study(PWSRCAC - Air Monitoring Options for Measuring Benzene Concentrations in Valdez Contract 557.03.1 – Valdez Air Quality Recommendations Regarding Valdez Air Monitoring Options for Benzene – March 2003), as it was a better fit for what was and is going on with respect to “Benzene” releases affecting the town of Valdez. At best, the BLM should have used both the Cohen and Goldstein study, and then rendered a non-conclusive end result, to at least allow the BLM a safe haven. Which reminds me, the BLM FEIS seems to provide a safer haven for the ROW wildlife then it does a safe harbor for the humans in the line of sight of that “Benzene” plume through exposure. But who cares about the kids at the playground in Valdez!

 

That said, I am requesting that the BLM resend that FEIS, only on the aspects of “Air Quality” until such time a valid “Air Quality” assessment can be accomplished, by instituting an additional oversight through an “Advisory Committee”. To provide for a valid assessment, that which includes unflawed up-to-date air sampling, as the Goldstein Report was already 10-years old when it was utilized by the BLM in the TAPS FEIS - sampling requirements at both the VMT job site and for those kindergarten kids in Valdez just trying to have fun on the playground at recess, while being bombarded by “Benzene” released from the TAPS Alyeska Pipeline Service Company’s “major VOC/HAPS generator” Valdez Marine Terminal, just a shy 3-miles away. In request, that the BLM instigate the formation of and establish this much needed “Advisory Committee”, which should be funded by the TAPS Owners and thereafter remains open-for-business in action, to focus and conduct periodic audits. In the FEIS, the BLM states the following: “The BLM determined not to analyze in detail this alternative(Advisory Committee) that would require periodic audits of the operation of the TAPS. Under such an alternative, the TAPS Owners would be required to fund an independent audit of TAPS at specified intervals, for example, every five years. Under this alternative, continued authorization of the TAPS ROW would be contingent upon the results of these periodic audits.” See, without such the concept of “contingent on results” as policy, it allows for inferior Goldstein like reports to pollute the wherewithal of a valid undertaking, that seems to thrive but for a single desire, an ongoing addiction to hide the truth in this matter, to fool most of the people all of the time. In apology for my rudeness, my charge of the might brigade for my fellow co-workers no longer enjoying life, either in that grave or like myself living with the side effects of that Hazardous Air Pollutant in bombardment and no idea how much longer to see the light of day another day. But place yourself in my shoes, in realization we were subjected to “Benzene” exposure, over-exposure wherein the amounts that went released from the VMT a mindboggling sin, because nothing was done about it for way too long. And then when there was some semblance of a maybe enough is enough, the damn SOA bends over even more, for the TAPS polluters club.

Had the BLM chose for such an Advisory Committee, I would not be writing to you today and maybe we would have by now seen some semblance of appreciation an oversight that gave a damn about our health – all around it does not seem to want to be bothered with the TRUTH! See, soon after the ROW was renewed, the ADEC gave into the APSC, and allowed a pollution abatement system that once demonstrated a 99.9999% Destructive Rated Efficiency, so as to protect the Valdez Basin from “Benzene” annihilation through a  “Total Removal” requirement that “Benzene” along with the other BETX family members considered debilitating constituents, well the oversight caved in and lowered that to a 98% chance of living a long life free of leukemia. And that “Total Removal” criteria, please take it seriously, as that aspect and requirement is demanded in the USC Title 43 Chapter 34 – Trans-Alaska Pipeline as a key element of the ROW! Wherein “Total Removal” of pollutants, as is “Benzene” so defined, it exists as a condition of the ROW. And it appears nobody has ever read that far into the rules and regulations, as there exists no bother to want to accomplish what was deemed necessary when all this TAPS was front and center of the U.S, Congress. Title 43 Chapter 34 §1653 is recited herein, just so you can get a grasp, take away an understanding what I am talking about – as someone has failed miserably to make damn sure “We the People” are safe from “Benzene” invasion revenge.

Title 43 Chapter 34 in Section §1653 (b): “Control and removal of pollutants at expense of right-of-way holder - If any area in the State of Alaska within or without the right-of-way or permit area granted under this chapter is polluted by any activities related to the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System, including operation of the terminal, conducted by or on behalf of the holder to whom such right-of-way or permit was granted, and such pollution damages or threatens to damage aquatic life, wildlife, or public or private property, the control and total removal of the pollutant shall be at the expense of such holder, including any administrative and other costs incurred by the Secretary or any other Federal or State officer or agency. Upon failure of such holder to adequately control and remove such pollutant, the Secretary, in cooperation with other Federal, State, or local agencies, or in cooperation with such holder, or both, shall have the right to accomplish the control and removal at the expense of such holder.”

It appears that “Total Removal” criteria is merely a suggestion. While I am at it, herein what the State of Alaska says about that “Benzene” poisoning: 18 AAC 50.110 – Air Pollution Prohibited. “No person may permit any emission which is injurious to human health or welfare, animal or plant life, or property, or which would unreasonably interfere with the enjoyment of life or property.”

I could go on in ridicule upon statements in that BLM FEIS, that are either misleading or questionable, but only on the aspects of that report’s “Air Quality” merits, as the rest of the “report” in its entirety seems safe and sound, so what went wrong in the “Air Quality” district…go on I will. In efforts to help you out, so you don’t make the same mistake again, when the TAPS ROW comes up for another renewal in 2034. Yes, like in the Educational bill mess-up mentioned earlier on, through the inclusion of only two destructive words, one small dent makes for “it’s totaled” is what I am getting at, that is what this “Air Quality” conundrum ignites that “taints” the entire BLM report. So on another instance that points to how the TAPS operator cajoles the regulators, once again right after the ROW was renewed, another cave-in. Now this cave-in is mentioned in the FEIS, in a statement with respect to operational guideline conditions that would not take place until 2005, so how the BLM came to this conclusion maybe a crystal ball. “All TAPS facilities except the Valdez Marine Terminal are classified as "minor sources" of HAPs; the annual potential emission rate of any individual HAP is less than 10 tons/yr and for all HAPs combined is less than 25 tons/yr.” But the APSC did not apply for these “minor permits” through “Owner Requested Limits(ORL)” applications until October of 2003, and such requests were not finalized until August of 2005, for a “synthetic minor” which then defined the other TAPS facilities as “minor sources” of pollutants. So until that time, the report is again “flawed” as those facilities still came under the definition of a “major source” with a 250 Ton-Per-Year potential to emit “Benzene” and/or other related cancer-causing “HAPS, like n-Hexane – why did the BLM jump the gun? And the way the regulators allowed for the APSC to apply and get access to a “synthetic minor” it begs…it reeks in environmental ethics abandoned and begs the question just how low a regulatory agency will go, to satisfy the hand that feeds. Look, the State of Alaska and its government workforce relies on the TAPS for income, so it has always been very careful in the way it handles oversight upon “Big Alaskan Oil”. Had there been a proper treatise, wherein there would come no interference from “Big Oil” the wherewithal of ethical environmental stewardship all parties involved, the EXXON Valdez would never have happened. See, the only way the ADEC would grant such a “synthetic minor”, because the ADEC is the oversight for the EPA in the permitting stage, it was to have the APSC “fib” on the application for these less restrictive environmental responsibility ORL’s at Pump Stations 1,3,4,5 and 9. Yes “fib” by purposedly extending the Potential to Emit(PTE) to a point that was an impossibility, but as long as the APSC facilities then stayed 90% below that limit, then it can be considered a “minor” abuser of the environment. The fact that the upper limit, that the PTE “fibbed” upon in the ORL application was an impossibility, someone should have called out the APSC to prove it – it did not have to because the regulators bend over backwards for the TAPS owners. And as a getting a point across bone in contention some more, the only way the ORL limit of 25-TPY could be achieved, if a Pump Station blew up! These are the solemn reasons so many of my close associates today are competing with roses in that life after garden. And one last thing, the “Air Quality” permit for the VMT, it has expired some 2240-days ago. Matter of fact, the 5-year “Draft Permit” has also expired because the APSC is trying to once again cajole the regulators, that the VMT is a small “Benzene” generator. At one point in time, the VMT was considered the largest “Benzene” emission source in the nation, when once upon a time not too long ago 450 tons of cancer-causing “Benzene” went routinely released into the ambient air in the Valdez Basin. And what is really interesting, in the most recent publications by the EPA of “fence-line” monitoring for entities that emit “HAPS”, the VMT is AWOL from the mapping. In conscious, one would have to ask how come we do not see the VMT on that map? Because over the years the APSC through its masterful legal staff has all but gutted “Good Air Pollution Practices” to nothing left and has relied on the generosity of the State of Alaska through the ADEC to bend over as an accomplice to forgive any and all “Air Quality” difficulties. Don’t believe me, look at what is happening today with the OSHA/DOL with respect to worker “Benzene” exposure penalties upon the APSC and its 3^rd party contractors at the VMT. Over 50 “Serious Violations” from 2020 still being negotiated and all the APSC can do is spend time and effort to move the DOL to allow for the APSC to contest the $fines$. Instead of just admitting for once it gives not a rat’s ass about exposing the workers to cancer-causing “Benzene”. So why should it care about the kindergarten kids in Valdez, it doesn’t that’s my point. And with respect to how the APSC relied upon the ADEC for this fake-out over “synthetic permits” and thus re-defined as a “minor source” of pollutants when before the 25-TPY limits were imposed the facilities were permitted at 250-TPY, one hell of a reduction, well the Office of the Inspector General is now challenging the EPA on this “synthetic minor” abuse: “EPA Should Conduct More Oversight of Synthetic Minor-Source Permitting to Assure Permits Adhere to EPA Guidance.” Look, the EPA has lost touch with how a state can take over the environmental responsibilities of Uncle Sam and at the same time the misfit regulators make air pollution happen as when the regulators are asleep at the wheel-house, the cause and effect of lesser environmental responsibilities grows, it consumes “Good Air Pollution Practices” to a worst case enemy approach. It morphs out-of-control like a cancer just like the caner in destruction those of us that were exposed to overdoses of “Benzene”, just to keep American energized with crude oil, so we could fuel those gas guzzling traffic jams.

The reason an “Advisory Committee” is long overdue. The concept of an Advisory Committee, as was outlined in Section (5) of the FEIS, denied maybe based on the fact it was not needed? It is needed, more then ever today. With the discrepancies on the data that was used by the BLM with respect to “Air Quality” regards, it was in the end a totally flawed and a dangerous disposition to be taken on the “Air Quality” merits, the TRUTH lost its way in the FEIS. Especially without a valid verification, as to what the BLM saw as fit to use as a basis for its decision making process, to rely on the Goldstein Report, it is bothersome. So please take my advice and form an “Advisory Committee” that can then get to the bottom of what is killing the TAPS workers, as there appears to be but for one reason, “Benzene” over-exposure. There really is no option as we rely on the BLM to protect us, when it issues such an EIS report – that is indeed flawed because the BLM used flawed data. It is that simple, else the workers and citizens alike will continue to suffer if a lackadaisical attitude persists.

We cannot wait until 2034, when the ROW is again in the renewal stage, to use the “Public Comment” arena to then try to get this point across, as it is a health risk of yesterday, a health risk of today and a health risk of tomorrow. An ongoing health risk made possible by a report made possible through the generosity of the APSC, who believes that only 1% of the “Benzene” detected in the city of Valdez was from the VMT operation - when it also admits that it released over 900000 pounds of raw cancer-causing “Benzene” into the ambient air in a good year, without any concern, because someone in the authoritative oversight did not care! And today, ex-Alyeskans and some Valdez citizens that were subject to this “guinea pig” experiment, to see just how much “Benzene” abuse a human can withstand, they are dying at too, too young an age, when just trying to enjoy retirement the fruits of their labors, living in fear as many of their coworkers are now deceased – as this is what happens when a company like the Alyeska Pipeline Service Company would rather pay for a staff of attorneys that thrive on fighting away righteousness, because that is how they make their bread and butter and the workers and the nearby citizens of Valdez then suffer the agony of defeat and the BLM can then publish a report that tells us it is all safe and sound when I can assure you, it is not!

In ending, to reiterate, the Goldstein Report was seriously “flawed”, and the BLM FEIS relied on that “flawed” report in recommendation the Secretary of the Interior honor a renewal of the TAPS ROW, and it means another 30-years of “Benzene” abuse.

Mike Kelley(Contact Michael.kelley.tmkf@gmail.com)

Noteworthy Note: Today(November 3,2022), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced four community air pollution monitoring projects in Alaska will receive $1,357,563 in funding to enhance air quality monitoring. The projects are among 132 air monitoring projects in 37 states to receive $53.4 million in funding from the Inflation Reduction Act and the American Rescue Plan, with an emphasis on underserved, historically marginalized, and communities overburdened by pollution.

Sad fact of the matter, not included the “marginalized” Valdez Basin as the oversight is afraid to go there, to perform long over-due testing as the liability factor could find enormous repercussions, based on the fact for some 45-years gone bye by now, we realize that the “Total Removal” of “pollutants” criteria found in Title 43 Chapter 34 has been well hidden away, abandoned for convenience. And that places the blame game on the perpetrators along with those that were supposed to care in oversight but instead went along for the joy ride. Maybe through that Title 43 and the stated liability of $350,000,000 a “Benzene Bandits Trust Fund” can be established to help out the “guinea pigs” that were part of an irresponsible experiment and today live in fear that another day in retirement means spending way too much time in the urinal, trying to piss away that “Benzene” annihilating our health until such time the morgue is our only remaining companion for that next life, hopefully void of that “Benzene” poisoning. Happy Holiday!

Response from BLM: