BRIGHTON, Colo. (CN) — Suncor Energy says the Colorado Water Quality Commission's new requirements for water discharge permits, intended for monitoring and water pollutant reductions, are unnecessary and unlawful in a lawsuit filed Tuesday.
Based in Calgary, Canada, Suncor owns two petroleum refineries in Commerce City, Colo., which produce 98,000 barrels of oil a day. The refineries’ location on Brighton Boulevard is less than a mile from Denver and residential homes.
Suncor needs discharge permits from the state to release waste into Sand Creek, a 15-mile-long tributary flowing from Arapahoe County into the South Platte River south of Denver.
The Water Quality Control Division — housed under the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment — published its final discharge renewal permit requirements on March 6, with the requirements set to go into effect on May 1.
“Suncor supports many of terms and conditions in the renewal permit that are reasoned, fact-driven requirements designed to ‘achieve the maximum practical degree of water quality in the waters of the state consistent with the welfare of the state,’” the company said in the 35-page lawsuit filed in the District Court for Adams County.
“However, the renewal permit contains numerous terms and conditions that are arbitrary, capricious, unlawful, unsupported by the record, and unnecessary to protect water quality, including permit conditions that were not in the draft permit and had not been addressed in public comments," Suncor argued.
Suncor opposed nearly a dozen of the state's requirements, starting with a specification to reduce salt levels in runoff. In addition to arguing that the creek already meets required standards, Suncor claimed it will cost more than $191 million to build the necessary equipment to meet the agency's new salt level rules.
Suncor, represented by Boulder-based attorney Gabe Racz of Vranesh and Raisch, also challenges the state’s arsenic standards, which are currently under state review.
The company also opposes additional requirements for conducting monitoring “at a frequency that is unreasonable and unnecessary to protect water quality," as well as an expanded public comment process.
The suit from Suncor comes after the state rejected Suncor’s request to stay contested portions of the new permits while its appeal pends before the state. The company is now hoping the court will halt the new permit requirements.
The oil refinery's operations have been met with increased scrutiny from community, health and environmental advocates in recent years.
"We're happy to see the state finally issue these permits, and they were definitely a step in the right direction, but they needed improvement,” said Jeremy Nichols, a senior advocate at the Center for Biological Diversity. “We were hoping to see more action to both prevent the release of PFAS, but also clean up existing PFAS contamination.”
PFAS, or per- and polyfluorinated substances, are linked to cancer, birth defects and other health issues. They are also known as "forever chemicals" because they do not break down in the environment.
“It seems like Suncor as a company will go to every end to try to secure a free pass to pollute,” Nicholas added.
In November 2023, the Center for Biological Diversity filed a petition with the 10th Circuit challenging ozone permits issued to Suncor by the Environmental Protection Agency, which the environmental group says violate the Clear Air Act's standards.
In February, the state levied a $10.5 million fine against Suncor for air pollution violations dating back to 2019.
Representatives for the state agencies did not immediately respond to inquiry for comment.
Follow @bright_lamp
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
