Bill to Ease Refinery Curbs Hit

A group of environmentalists and community leaders gathered in this oil refinery town Monday to blast major oil companies for seeking to eliminate environmental review of plant renovations that are needed to produce cleaner gasoline.

At a news conference in front of an elementary school overlooking a sea of refinery storage tanks on the shore of San Francisco Bay, several speakers urged the defeat of legislation to exempt the construction from review under the California Environmental Quality Act.

A bill to allow the exemption, sponsored by Senate Minority Leader Ken Maddy (R-Fresno), is to be heard by the Senate Government Operations Committee today.

Similar legislation, sponsored by Assemblyman Richard Polanco (D-Los Angeles), was to have been heard by the Assembly Natural Resources Committee on Monday but was removed from the agenda at the last minute.

Several major oil companies say they cannot meet new state standards for reformulated, cleaner-burning gasoline by the 1996 deadline if they have to comply with environmental law requirements.

Terry Frost, a spokesman for the Western States Petroleum Assn., said the companies plan $5 billion to $9 billion in new and expanded facilities, at 15 to 17 locations around the state, in the next four years. But, he said, an industry technical review committee has concluded that the work cannot be completed on time if the 1970 environmental law is followed.

“They are concerned about the frivolous challenges that happen under CEQA,” Frost said.

Frost said the companies already are required to obtain several local and state environmental permits before proceeding with construction, making environmental quality review unnecessary.

But environmentalists believe the oil companies are using the “cleaner gasoline” argument in order to weaken environmental controls.

“Yes, we want cleaner-burning gasoline but we can’t let them make an end run around the review process,” Nora Chorover, of Citizens for a Better Environment, said at the news conference overlooking the Unocal refinery.

Helene Wilson of the Committee for a Safer Environment in nearby Martinez said, “We have a right to know what the impact of these projects will be and we have a right to participate in the review process.”

Bob Carlson of Port Richmond said the state environmental quality law “provides one of the few ways for citizens to find out what’s in these compounds that come spewing out of the refineries.”

Carlson said there have been several serious pollution incidents at the refineries in recent years, causing nausea, diarrhea, asthma, skin rashes and other health problems for refinery workers and people living nearby.

Dan Cardozo, an attorney representing the California Pipe Trades Council, said the process of making reformulated gasoline will involve “processing highly combustible materials” that are “even more dangerous than the ones workers face now.”

“We don’t buy the argument that emissions requirements are in conflict with jobs and a healthy economy,” said Cardozo, whose unions represent plumbers and pipe fitters who would work on the construction projects.

However, the Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers union, whose members work inside the refineries, is not opposed to the Maddy bill.