EPA calls for Zero Dioxin Discharge from Tosco Oil Refinery

[Neil Tangri <ntangri@essential.org>]

For immediate release Tuesday, November 23, 1999

For more information contact:
Greg Karras, CBE:  415/ 243-8373 ext. 206 or Denny Larson, 925-202-5698
Henry Clark, West County Toxics Coalition: 510/ 232-3427
Mike Lozeau, San Francisco BayKeeper: 415/ 561-2299 ext. 15

 EPA calls for Zero Dioxin Discharge from Tosco Oil Refinery
to San Francisco Bay - Precedent Could Affect Other Polluters

San Francisco:  The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has said that
it will object to continued permission for the Tosco Corp. oil refinery
near Martinez to discharge waste water into San Francisco Bay unless
Tosco’s discharge of deadly dioxin and related chemicals is restricted
to an enforceable discharge limit of zero.  EPA1s letter, dated November
12, 1999 from Alexis Strauss, Director of the Water Division, EPA Region
9, formally objecting to a draft proposal by the State Regional Water
Quality Control Board could result in the first Clean Water Act permit
mandating zero dioxin in the nation, and is based on reasoning that
would lead to zero discharge limits on all bay dioxin discharges.

“EPA has become the first public health agency with enforcement powers
to join in the realization that zero dioxin is the only viable course”
said Greg Karras of Communities for a Better Environment (CBE).  “This
is a priority now, before more people in fishing families face more
dangerous exposures,” he said.

Dioxin is an industrial by-product, a known carcinogen and among the
most toxic chemicals known.  Subsistence anglers are exposed to dioxin
toxicity above levels that can cause childhood learning problems,
soaring cancer risk, and other health effects.  However, because it is
toxic in tiny amounts, long lasting in the environment and
bioaccumulative, the only effective way to prevent exposure is to
prevent creation of dioxin to zero out its production.

EPA’s new action follows growing community calls to zero out dioxin at
the Chevron and Tosco refineries and the I.E.S. medical waste
incinerators, EPA’s May 1999 ruling that dioxin in bay fish causes high
priority1 health threats to anglers, zero dioxin resolutions by Oakland
and San Francisco, and a November 10, 1999 letter from nine Bay Area
Congress members asking Governor Davis to establish enforceable
standards for dioxin elimination.

In its letter objecting to the Tosco permit EPA explains that, given the
evidence that the
bay cannot accommodate more of this pollution without further harm, the
only effluent limit that would assure the discharge does not cause or
contribute to [water quality violations] is a loading of zero.  The
letter states EPA believes that this position is
mandated by the Clean Water Act, and that EPA will remove its objection
if Tosco’s permit includes an ultimately enforceable zero discharge
limit, among other conditions.  EPA has the duty and authority to veto
permits that would violate the Clean Water Act.

“EPA has finally got the message,” said San Francisco BayKeeper Mike
Lozeau.  “Prohibiting dioxin, PCBs, mercury, selenium and other
bioaccumulative pollutants is the only way we are going to protect the
health of our community and Bay,” he said.

A landmark report released by CBE last year uncovered evidence that
while some industries have already eliminated dioxin cost effectively,
direct measurements and pollution gradients indicate dozens of Bay Area
industries still cause significant dioxin pollution of S.F. Bay.  The
report recommended applying the same reasoning of a cumulative dioxin
overload cited by EPA1s letter, in order to effect dioxin elimination at
all bay sources.

The Tosco Avon Refinery has exceeded its existing dioxin discharge limit
for several years, according to EPA and State findings.  State tests of
one Tosco smoke stack found twenty times more dioxin release than the
amount that would violate its effluent limit in the bay discharge.  CBE
and San Francisco Baykeeper put the refiner on notice regarding the
alleged violations in August of this year.  The company responded by
filing a lawsuit against the groups last month, seeking to block citizen
enforcement against the violations.

###