Stolen Inventory (California): News Release

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: April 17, 2006

CONTACT: Bill Walker, EWG, (510) 444-0973, ext. 301
Tracy Fairchild, office of Sen. Jackie Speier, (916) 651-4008

Bush Plan To Hide Data on 1.5M Lbs. of Toxic Chemicals in California

State Legislation Would Protect Californians' Right to Know About Pollution in Their Communities

(SACRAMENTO, April 17) - A Bush Administration proposal to roll back Americans' right to know about chemical hazards in their neighborhoods would let California industries handle almost 1.5 million pounds of toxic chemicals a year without telling the public, according to an investigation of federal data by Environmental Working Group (EWG).

Currently, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) program requires industrial facilities to report annually the release, disposal, incineration, treatment or recycling of 500 pounds or more of 650 chemicals covered by the law. But last fall the EPA proposed sharply raising the reporting threshhold so that only releases of 5,000 pounds or more would be reported, and reports would only be required every other year.

"The right to know what hazardous chemicals are coming out of the smokestack across the street from your child's school is essential," said EWG Vice President Bill Walker. "The Administration's proposal makes it easier for industries to pollute our communities with hazardous chemicals—in secret."

EWG's report, "Stolen Inventory," lists all facilities in California that would be allowed to stop or cut back on reporting chemical releases, broken down by county, city and chemical. It is available at www.ewg.org.

EPA will announce later this year whether it plans to adopt the proposed rollback. But two California legislators, Sen. Jackie Speier of San Francisco/San Mateo and Assemblymember Ira Ruskin of Redwood City, have introduced bills to establish a state-level TRI, to ensure that complete reporting of toxic chemical releases would continue. Speier's bill (SB 1478) will be heard at 1:30 p.m. today by the Senate Environmental Quality Committee, and Ruskin's (AB 2490) will be heard at 9:30 a.m. Tuesday by the Assembly Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee.

"Californians' right to know about the dangerous chemicals to which they are exposed is in jeopardy," said Speier. "Since 1988, the public's access to information in the federal Toxics Release Inventory has given industry the incentive to cut emissions—by 65 percent to date—and helped local communities remove toxic manufacturing plants from their neighborhoods. We must protect Californians' access to this powerful tool."

EWG's investigation found that the EPA rollback would deal a crippling blow to Californians' access to information about toxic chemicals in their communities:

• The rollback would allow 384 industrial facilities to stop reporting the use or release of 1,449,479 pounds of hazardous chemicals a year. In Los Angeles County alone, 629,328 pounds of chemicals a year, from 160 facilities, would no longer be subject to reporting.
• The proposal would allow 101 facilities to stop reporting any details of their use or release of toxic chemicals. These facilities would be allowed to handle 249,433 pounds of toxic chemicals a year without public disclosure. In Los Angeles County alone, 44 facilities that in 2003 handled 93,975 pounds of chemicals would no longer be subject to reporting.
• Chemicals for which reporting would be slashed or curtailed are among the most hazardous to human health. The rollback would end annual reporting in California of more than 64,000 pounds of ethylbenzene, 62,000 pounds of styrene, almost 30,000 pounds of benzene and more than 56,000 pounds of chromium and chromium compounds—all known or suspected carcinogens.

Although facilities in 37 counties would be allowed to cut back or curtail reporting, a study by Environment California and the National Environmental Trust found that the rollback would hit Los Angeles particularly hard. Communities in more than 90 zip codes in Los Angeles County would lose some or all of the publicly reported pollution information about chemical releases in their neighborhoods.

The EWG report is based on TRI figures from 2003. Just last week, the EPA released the 2004 TRI, which showed an 18 percent overall decrease in toxic releases in California. The EPA said the "TRI helps all of us—regulators, emergency responders, businesses and communities—remain aware of the types and amounts of chemicals being used"—even as they are considering the proposal to roll back reporting requirements.

"Requiring facilities to report their pollution through the TRI program creates an incentive for them to reduce their pollution," said Rachel Gibson, Environment California staff attorney. "Without a strong TRI program, the incentive is gone."

The TRI is the nation's premiere pollution reporting and citizens' right-to-know program. The TRI is the only source of chemical-specific information on industrial pollution at the facility level. It is an essential source of information for public health officials, emergency responders, planners, and a powerful tool for grassroots community groups fighting pollution in their neighborhoods.

In Los Angeles, Communities for a Better Environment (CBE) used TRI data to show that more than 80 percent of facilities that release toxic chemicals in L.A. County were located in areas where a large majority of residents were people of color. Three industrial recycling facilities relocated to appropriately zoned areas, and the South Coast air quality district guidelines to ensure that diverse community voices are heard in regulatory decisions.

In Oakland, the Chester Street Block Club Association, Citizens for West Oakland Revitalization and Greenaction used TRI data in a campaign against Red Star Yeast, whose plant was emitting tens of thousands of pounds of acetaldehyde, a carcinogen, into the neighborhood's air. The community pressured authorities to fine Red Star for pollution violations and fought against renewal of the plant's operating permit, prompting the company to shut it down.

# # #

The Environmental Working Group and Environmental Working Group Action Fund are nonprofits that use the power of information to protect public health and the environment.