Accidents Turn Toxic-Waste Plant Into a Burning Issue

Tucked behind a grassy hill a few miles north of the Mexican border, it seemed to be a perfect place to handle and treat toxic wastes when Appropriate Technologies II moved there in 1981.

Residents could dispose of unused pool chemicals, discarded motor oil and rusty cans of paint at no charge through a city- and county-funded program. And many local industries could ship toxic wastes from the manufacturing of plastics and metals, thereby trimming their transportation costs.

But three accidents at the 2-acre site in less than two months--including two recent fires--have brought the company’s plant unwanted publicity and concerned calls from Chula Vista officials.

Council members say they want the plant moved, and residents living less than a mile from the plant fear a disaster.

Both camps, however, face considerable opposition and sharp division among the myriad agencies and elected officials who could meet as early as next month to discuss a relocation of the plant.

County health officials disagree with the notion that the plant is suddenly unsafe and argue that its 40 workers are trained to handle toxics.

“In this case, you have a requirement that the people who handle the chemicals are trained,” said Gary Stephany, deputy director of county Environmental Health Services.

“My position is that we need this type of facility, and, if they are operated correctly, they can be just as safe as a store like K mart, which handles chemicals without trained help.”

Residents near the plant, however, bristle at Stephany’s analogy.

“That’s an oversimplification and pure crap,” said Bill McBreen, who lives the closest to the plant--about 2,000 feet, a buffer that Stephany says is sufficient.

“There is no law you can pass that will prevent human error,” McBreen, 66, said. “If I was younger and had kids here, I would be a lot more militant than I’ve been. We want that (plant) put in a place that is safe--in a place that provides a buffer for people.”

“As far as relocating, it’s about eight years too late,” said Guy Lichty, another resident.

The plant’s neighbors fear not only a larger-scale accident at the plant, but that trucks bringing in the wastes could collide with one of the many trash trucks that travel daily to the Otay landfill next to the plant at the end of Maxwell Road.

In the February fire, six containers of chlorine ignited while workers were moving them in the plant’s yard. The blaze spewed a toxic cloud overhead. A few days earlier, chlorine leaked from a container in the plant’s yard.

Earlier this month, a barrel of resin aboard a 40-foot trailer being pulled by a truck ignited outside the plant’s entrance. The resin was bound for another treatment site and was part of a 70-container load containing wastes headed for Appropriate Technologies.

In both fires, the county’s hazardous materials team was called in. During the chlorine fire, the Chula Vista fire marshal posted a lookout on a nearby hill to monitor the prevailing westerly winds in case they shifted and the cloud wafted north toward Chula Vista Community Hospital.

Although there were no injuries, both blazes--in which the materials were generated by Los Angeles-based companies--are under investigation by the state. But their causes may never be determined because tests from

samples taken showed no incompatible materials in the containers.

“The evidence may have burned,” said Jim Marxen, spokesman for the state Department of Health Services.

Despite the company’s agreement to join with federal, state, county and city officials to seek a site to relocate, they contend that the accidents are hardly ample reason for moving out.

“Whether people will admit it or not, toxic wastes will continue to be generated and transported on city streets and highways, whether it is to Appropriate Technologies or not,” said Tim Sparks, the plant’s general manager.

The plant’s lease, which is held by the county, comes up for renewal before the county Board of Supervisors in the fall of 1990.

District 1 Supervisor Brian Bilbray, whose district includes the plant, says Appropriate Technologies should be moved for a number of reasons.

“It’s kind of hard to be favorably impressed at the existing plant after the three or so fires,” Bilbray said. “And it’s really absurd to ship the wastes to the southern part of the county and then out of the county either east or north. It means double exposure to all county residents.”

One Chula Vista councilman, David Malcolm, was more graphic in his comment:

“The whole thing stinks.”

Dangers Due to Growth

The council has unanimously passed a resolution urging state and county officials to close the plant or relocate it.

“At one time, this was a perfect location. The area was once isolated,” Malcolm said. “But growth occurred, and we’re not going to tear down the hospital and the new homes.”

About 1,000 homes are within a mile of the plant, which is in Otay Valley near auto salvage yards and industrial complexes. The first homes were built in 1977.

County health officials have recommended that the state Department of Health Services conduct an environmental report on the plant and also a health-risk assessment, which would consider a worst-case scenario in the event of a disaster.

Besides industrial chemicals, the plant also treats illegal drug-lab wastes seized by law enforcement agencies. All the materials are treated, then transferred to toxic-waste landfills.

About 85% of the nearly 20,000 tons of waste treated per year at the plant is from local industries. Most of the rest comes from Los Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardino counties, Sparks said.

That points to another problem: controlling the labeling and packaging of the toxic materials shipped, Stephany says.

Under current law, toxic materials are loaded on the shipping company’s truck and not checked to see if they have been properly packaged or labeled until they reach their destination, he said.

Stephany said improperly shipped materials “could start reacting or explode on the highway.” A law calling for fines for improperly shipped wastes would probably result in costs being passed on to consumers, he said. “What’s a fine,” he asked, “compared with a human life?”