600 Neighbors of Oil Refinery in Torrance File Suit Against Mobil

More than 600 people who live or work near Mobil Oil’s Torrance refinery filed suit against the company Tuesday, claiming they have suffered serious health problems and their property has decreased in value because of excessive air emissions, fires, explosions, noise and soot spawned by the giant facility.

In an unusual move, attorneys Christopher Angelo and Robert Mars recruited plaintiffs for the lawsuit by sending them postcards bearing a skull and crossbones.

The suit, filed Tuesday in Torrance Superior Court, seeks unspecified damages. It alleges that the refinery has caused people to suffer nausea and respiratory problems.

Mobil spokesman Tom Collins said the suit is “completely unnecessary” because Mobil has responded to all claims by neighbors. He asserted that no general health problems can be traced to the refinery.

“It is too bad that the residents’ attorney chose this legal action instead of presenting their clients’ claims to us directly,” Collins said.

But Angelo said the lawsuit “hits Mobil in the pocketbook.”

“No longer should the neighbors bear the burden of excess emissions,” he said.

The suit is the latest in a series of legal, political and regulatory problems troubling the sprawling 750-acre facility and follows a string of fatal accidents and explosions.

Last April, the city of Torrance filed suit alleging that the refinery is a potential hazard and a public nuisance. The suit seeks increased regulatory power over the refinery, but no damages.

Angelo, however, said that because his suit seeks substantial damages, it is more likely to move Mobil to stricter adherence to health and safety regulations than the city’s suit.

In addition to the two lawsuits, Mobil is facing an initiative ballot measure in Torrance on March 6 that would effectively eliminate the refinery’s use of acutely hazardous hydrofluoric acid.

Critics contend that a major release of the acid could lead to a dense, ground-hugging cloud of acid vapors that could prove lethal as far as five miles downwind.

Hydrofluoric acid is used to boost the octane of the unleaded gasoline refined at the plant.

Mobil contends that it knows how to use the acid safely and has adequate equipment to control any reasonably foreseeable release.

Despite the large number of plaintiffs accusing the refinery of mishandling the acid, Mobil spokesman Collins said the lawsuit does “not represent a setback” to the oil company’s campaign to defeat the ballot initiative.

“In fact,” he said, “it is a separate issue.”

Refinery manager Wyman Robb has said Mobil is prepared to spend more than $500,000 to defeat the measure.

The latest lawsuit accuses Mobil of discharging “harmful and offensive substances into the atmosphere at night . . . in an effort to avoid environmental regulation.”

Among the emissions is soot from Mobil that the lawsuit alleges has fallen on nearby homes and businesses, lowering property values.

Moreover, leaking pipes that had been “poorly designed, corroded and inadequately maintained and supervised” have contaminated the water table with hydrocarbons, the suit alleges.

The suit criticizes Mobil’s safety record, citing a 10-year chronology of accidents, including a major explosion in November, 1987, in the unit using hydrofluoric acid.

The lawsuit also cites a safety report produced for Torrance city officials by the consulting firm of Gage-Babcock & Associates that said Mobil had too many accidents. The report said many of the 127 incidents reported to the Torrance Fire Department in the last 10 years stemmed from poor quality work, carelessness and failure to follow refinery safety programs and procedures.

Angelo said that several thousand people contacted his office after the postcards were sent out to refinery neighbors advising them of the potential of filing suit against Mobil.

Angelo said his office selected as plaintiffs those who lived or worked closest to Mobil, had been exposed to emissions near the refinery, had experienced nausea, dizziness or respiratory distress and/or those with limited insurance coverage.

Mobil’s spokesman said the company is not aware of the complaints cited in the lawsuit, but will investigate them.