Maker of Deadly Gases Loses Fight to Keep Operating
Phoenix Research Corp., the La Mesa company that manufactures two of the deadliest gases used in industry, has lost its hard-fought battle to obtain an operating permit from San Diego County air quality officials.
Because the three-member hearing board of the county Air Pollution Control District failed to reach agreement Thursday on whether a permit should be granted, the company’s appeal of an earlier decision barring it from doing business has automatically failed.
Representatives of the firm, a subsidiary of Union Carbide, immediately announced they will seek a variance from the board’s decision that would allow business to continue until a likely hearing in San Diego Superior Court.
“The company has been operating for 14 years without a peep, without a problem and this all comes as quite a surprise,” said Betty-Jane Kirwan, an attorney for Phoenix. “We will have to look at our options and decide how to proceed.”
Effect Unclear
It was unclear how Thursday’s decision affects a court injunction that has enabled the company to continue operating pending an outcome of the appeal. Deputy County Counsel Barbara Baird, who represented the district, said she would have to evaluate that question before issuing an opinion.
Phoenix produces arsine and phosphine, two colorless, extraordinarily toxic gases that are staples of the semiconductor industry. Exposure to as little as 500 parts per million of arsine is almost instantly lethal, destroying red blood cells by freeing the hemoglobin.
Opponents of the plant pronounced Thursday’s decision a victory but expressed regret that Phoenix had escaped the detection of regulators for so many years and was ever allowed to open in the midst of a suburb.
“It’s just absurd that there ever had to be this hearing, this lengthy process, in the first place,” said Ruth Duemler, a spokeswoman on air quality issues for the Sierra Club. “A residential community is no place for the manufacturing of these incredibly toxic gases. Industry needs to develop a moral consideration for human lives and not put the public at risk this way.”
Explained Positions
The emotional tenor of the dispute over Phoenix was illustrated by statements made by board members as they explained their position on the issue Thursday. Although the central question at hand was whether the air pollution control district had the authority to regulate Phoenix, most of the debate focused on the specter of a possible release of the deadly gases into the atmosphere.
Member Eric Grant said he believed the district lacked the legal authority to regulate Phoenix because it produces no ongoing pollutants. But Grant called it “an absolute crime” that the company has operated near homes, businesses and a hospital and said he wanted it relocated “to the middle of the Mojave Desert” immediately.
“I do not see how it is possible that such a facility . . . has been allowed to operate in that community for 14 years,” Grant said. “I think it’s absolutely incredible. If there were an accidental release then there is the potential for massive physical problems in the community.”
Chairwoman Laura Engelberg, the only member who felt the district has jurisdiction to regulate Phoenix, said it was the board’s duty to enter the fray and take action to prevent a “catastrophic event in our community.”
‘Moot Point’
“No one expected Bhopal,” Engelberg said. “No one ever expects an emission . . . We have to act now before it’s too late. Because once it’s in the air, (the question of who should be the watchdog) is a moot point.”
The third board member, F.A.M. Buck, accused his colleagues of being alarmist and said he believed Phoenix could safely operate in La Mesa under certain conditions.
“I don’t think there was any evidence that in the event of a release we would not be here to adjudicate the matter,” Buck said. “I accept the fact that it is a problem but I do not by any means believe it to be unmanageable.”
Buck also expressed concerns about the loss of about 20 jobs caused by relocation of the company, saying “there’s a public health effect from that, too.”
But Engelberg countered that the “health threat to 75,000 people” living in and near La Mesa far outweighed the employment consequences of the plant’s closure.
Moved Here in 1973
Phoenix moved from New Jersey to La Mesa in 1973 in order to be nearer its clients. The company operated quietly and apparently without serious incident in a small warehouse on Alvarado Road until late 1985, when an article in The Times brought it to the attention of regulators and La Mesa officials.
Over the years, there have been minor mishaps within the plant, including a small fire, but company officials say there has never been an accidental release of gas either in or outside the plant.
In January, 1986, La Mesa Mayor Fred Nagel asked Union Carbide executives to relocate the innocuous-looking, low-slung plant. The company agreed to leave town before its lease expires in 1991.
So far, one relocation attempt--to Washington state--has failed, apparently due to public opposition. Phoenix President Randall Kelley said Thursday that the company still plans to leave La Mesa “at the earliest possible moment” but declined to identify any potential relocation sites.
“We’re getting out, but it takes time,” Kelley said. “We’re looking at a number of options I’m not free to discuss.”
Entered Skirmish
The Air Pollution Control District entered the skirmish over Phoenix in December, when a staff analysis concluded that the company had failed to prove it could effectively protect the public health in the event of a release of gas.
The agency moved to close the plant in January. But Phoenix sued the district, contending that it had no right to regulate the firm because it does not emit measurable amounts of contaminants into the air. A judge subsequently ruled that the district does, indeed, have jurisdiction over the company but barred closure of the plant pending the outcome of the firm’s appeal to the hearing board.
Thursday’s decision capped a series of long and complex hearings that spanned seven months. The debate has included conflicting testimony from respected toxicologists who differed radically over the danger posed by the presence of such a plant in a congested community.
One expert argued that even the worst conceivable accident at the plant would not harm people living nearby, while another equally credible witness insisted that the manufacturing of such deadly gases does not belong in La Mesa.
The district’s hearing board is composed of members appointed by the county Board of Supervisors. Currently, there are only three members sitting on the panel, as two supervisors have failed to make appointments.
