Truth About Toxics

This letter is to respond to your April 13 article regarding the report of the Environmental Health Coalition regarding hazardous materials stored in San Diego County (“Study Points to the Toxics Among Us”). The EHC has done the community a service by bringing this information to the public’s attention. However, it goes too far by suggesting the data requires significant, and undoubtedly costly, changes in present law to protect the public health.

While there are many chemicals that would be hazardous if released, the real issue is whether there is a risk of such release. As the EHC’s own report points out, there have been only 79 incidents of exposure to people (the public and workers) in the past seven years for the entire county. No data are presented as to the number, type or extent of injuries that have occurred.

The EHC confuses several distinct issues. There is substantial difference between the risks of (1) workplace exposure, (2) a massive release of chemicals (such as in Bhopal, India) and (3) the management of waste, which may be hazardous only if there is a long-term exposure.

Public policy considerations for each of these issues are enormously different. Not all toxic chemicals pose the same forms of risks. As the EHC is well aware, there has been massive legislation and regulation at the federal, state and local levels addressing each of these independent risks.

One must also question statements by Joy Williams (the EHC report author) such as “There are really no good ways to dispose of hazardous wastes at this time.” As Diane Takvorian, EHC executive director, is well aware from her service on the county’s Hazardous Waste Management Plan Advisory Committee, on which we both serve, there are a variety of ways that are safe and effective for handling the large majority of hazardous wastes in a manner that poses little or no risk to the people or the environment.

Before the city or any other agency undertakes further regulation of materials that may be toxic, the true risks to public health must be identified and, more important, quantified to assess whether that risk is significant. Imposing additional, costly restrictions based on undifferentiated and unbased fears is both poor science and bad public policy.

I trust that our public officials will resist any temptation to bash a toxic “straw man” for some perceived short-term political gain at the expense of sound policy.

STEVEN McDONALD

San Diego