|
|
(For a larger, readable version of the map, click on it. Then click on it once more)
![]()
HEIGHT=50% WIDTH=50% HSPACE=20 VSPACE=20 src=”http://www.cancerincheshire.com/Cheshiremap.jpg” />
Key to the map:
- Black arrows point to EPA ID’d hazardous waste sites.
- Green circles represent areas around the sites where toxic plume
migration may have occurred and where vapor intrusion may be a concern
(Note: Obviously toxins don’t spread in perfect circles. This is not intended to portray the exact migration of Cheshire’s plumes.)
- Red numbered circles represent areas where cancer reports rec’d
through Cancerincheshire.com appear most greatly concentrated.
The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM) has released a video about the brain cancer investigation/study of Pratt & Whitney workers in CT.
Though the video suggests various chemicals may have been at play, the investigation has focused on exposure to TCE.
See the video here. Also be sure to visit Worked to Death for more on the P & W investigation and study.
The following meeting announcement was recently posted to the Worked to Death website, a resource for information about the investigation/legal efforts and scientific study surrounding an outrageously high incidence of brain cancer (particularly glioblastoma multiforme) across Connecticut’s Pratt and Whitney Aircraft plants where trichloroethylene is one of the main toxins of concern.
WORKED TO DEATH ANNUAL MEETING NOTICE
BRAIN TUMOR CLUSTER STUDY
WHEN: WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 18, 2006, 7:00 PM TO 10:00 PM
WHERE: THE CROWNE PLAZA HOTEL, 100 BERLIN ROAD,
CROMWELL CT (860-635-2000)
OPEN TO THE PUBLIC PLEASE ATTEND
By way of background, the following introduction can be found on the recently updated Worked to Death website:
Hi, let us introduce ourselves, we are Carol Shea and Kate Greco, wives of John Shea and John Greco. Our husbands were friends and co-workers for over 30 years at Prattt and Whitney Aircraft. They both lost their lives within one month of each other to a VERY RARE form of brain cancer, GLIOBLASTOMA MULTIFORME.
The Glioblastoma Multiforme (GBM) primary brain tumor is one of the most malignant and difficult brain tumors to treat. It is also a very rare type of tumor. According to the Central Brain Tumor Registry of the United States, www.cbtrus.org, GBM’s strike an average of 2.96 people per 100,000 – less than .003 percent – every year. The State Health Department, in consultation with federal health and safety experts, is investigating the possibility of a brain tumor cluster at Pratt & Whitney’s Connecticut plants. We have, with the help of local newspapers and TV stations running our story, compiled a list of over 87 confirmed Glioblastoma cases, we have an additional 41 confirmed cases with other forms of brain tumors at Pratt & Whitney. THIS IS WELL BEYOND THE PERCENTAGES!!!!!!!
We hope to inform you and engage your support for our efforts to help clean up this toxicity which we feel caused our husbands and many other deaths. We hope you will read on to see what our efforts have uncovered. We are involved in the largest study of its type in history which is being undertaken by the Universities of Pittsburgh and Chicago, under the direction of Dr. Gary Marsh, Dr. Frank S. Lieberman, both of the University of Pittsburgh and Dr. N.A. Esmen of the University of Illinois at Chicago with the cooperation of the State of Connecticut Department of Public Health through William Gerrish its Director of Public Health Communications.
For more information and background on the Pratt and Whitney situation, please also see this series of articles by the New Haven Advocate, including the initial piece from which the families’ website takes it’s name: Worked to Death: Pratt and Whitney Leaves Behind a Trail of Cancer
From a 2003 South Central Connecticut Regional Water Authority presentation:

NORTH Cheshire well data (click to enlarge)
SOUTH Cheshire well data (click to enlarge)
Often I’m asked why I started the TCE Blog in the first place.
Part of the reason is that my former hometown had a TCE-contaminated public water supply. Since 80% of the town was served water from the TCE-contaminated public supply wells, tens of thousands of Cheshire citizens were exposed to dangerous levels of TCE via public water for decades. Residents and workers weren’t warned at the time except for a handful of families who were given bottled water to drink because of contaminated private water supply wells. To this day, polluters have never been held accountable.
When a public health assessment in 2004 finally revealed the truth about contamination and cancer, officials not only tried to stifle more inquiry, they refused to share with residents what was known about TCE and cancer. They also didn’t bother to mention the other VOC’s (PCE, Benzene, TCA) still migrating under the town.
Without help from the town or the state, citizens like me were left to find information on our own. Though there was plenty to be found on the web, three things became abundantly clear after months of additional, independent research:
1. There appeared to be no central place for finding information about TCE, its health affects, and the impact it has on communities. Information was/is scattered about.
2. Other communities across the country were struggling to find the same information and answer the very same questions as Cheshire…also without help from their local and state officials. Very few of these communities knew about one another.
3. We were amassing so much information about TCE and its impact on communities nationwide, this information just had to be consolidated, preserved, and shared.
From this, the TCE Blog was born.
–
Now, evidence suggests there is still significant VOC contamination underground in Cheshire. Astonishingly, state and local leaders/officials have refused to act.
See, I don’t just write about contaminated communities. I’m from one:
———- Forwarded message ———-
From: neil fischbein [fischbein@...]
Date: May 31, 2006 9:36 PM
Subject: When are we going to meet?
To*: [Town Manager, Town Council member, State representative]
cc*: [Senator Dodd's office, Senator Lieberman's office, Governor Rell's office, Representative Amann's office, local press, etc.]
D, M, A -
For the past several years, and after having reviewed ~16,000 pages of
Cheshire documents obtained via Freedom of Information Act request to
the EPA, I have shared with town officials evidence of multiple plumes
of cancer-causing toxins under Cheshire and the current risks they may
pose to workers and residents. As you know, these cancer-causing
toxins emanate from some of the 16 EPA-identified hazardous waste
sites in Cheshire that have NEVER been fully cleaned-up. Some of
these toxic underground plumes are over 25 years old and have been
migrating all this time. As we’ve discussed many times, [state] officials
have lost track of (or simply failed to map) these toxic plumes and
have admitted to us they can’t rule out the newly understood risks
these toxins pose to human health. Now, as documented by state and
federal officials in 2004, Cheshire suffers from nation-leading cancer
rates.
These cancer-causing plumes must be found. Risks from them must be ruled out.
Do we need help from state representatives/legislators to move on this?
Do we need help from attorneys?
When are we going to finally meet to do something about this?
thanks, neil
* Actual names and email addresses have been removed to protect the innocent guilty innocent.
We are concerned that Connecticut applies significantly less stringent standards than EPA recommends when deciding to investigate vapor intrusion of trichloroethylene (TCE) and tetrachloroethylene (PCE). Following is the disparity that concerns us:
EPA’s safety threshold for vapor intrusion investigation of TCE (set in 2002):
5 ppb (this includes residential and industrial settings)
CT DEP’s threshold (RSR) for vapor investigation of TCE (proposed in 2003):
Residental: 27 ppb (5X less protective than federal guidelines)
Industrial: 67 ppb (13X less protective)
EPA’s safety threshold for vapor intrusion investigation of PCE (set in 2002):
5 ppb (this includes residential and industrial settings)
CT DEP’s threshold (RSR) for vapor investigation of PCE (proposed in 2003):
Residental: 340 ppb (68X less protective than federal guidelines)
Industrial: 810 ppb (160X less protective)

Connectict’s current vapor intrusion guidelines (click image to enlarge)
According to these Connecticut regulations, before Connecticut will investigate the potential for TCE or PCE vapor intrusion, Connecticut’s residents and workers may be subjected to 5-160 times more TCE and PCE exposure than federal guidelines recommend.
Connecticut must revise these inadequate regulations and re-open old hazardous waste and contamination site investigations to rule-out vapor intrusion as dictated by (at least) current federal guidelines. More on this to come…
Here’s another important piece on TCE From the LA Times (CA) with national scope/importance. This was on Thursday’s front page:
Cancer Stalks a ‘Toxic Triangle’
Scientists disagree about the risks of TCE. But residents near a former air base are dead certain.
By Ralph Vartabedian
Times Staff Writer
March 30, 2006
SAN ANTONIO — On nearly every block surrounding the former Kelly Air Force Base, small purple crosses sprout from front lawns, marking the homes where cancer has struck.
The residents call their neighborhood the “toxic triangle,” alleging that the Air Force poisoned it with an industrial solvent, trichloroethylene, or TCE. It was casually dumped at the base for decades and spread for miles through a shallow aquifer under 22,000 nearby houses.
Texas health authorities have found elevated rates of liver cancer among residents, as well as higher-than-normal rates of birth defects. Though state health officials say it is impossible to prove that TCE causes the sickness here, this blue-collar community has little doubt about the connection.
“We are dying day by day,” said Robert Alvarado Sr., who has lived in a small clapboard home for 36 years that sits about 14 feet over the TCE plume. “I have kidney failure, my wife has thyroid cancer, my neighbor just died of breast cancer.”
What’s happening in this neighborhood of modest low-slung homes, crisscrossed by railroad tracks and dominated by aircraft hangars on the horizon, has been playing out for years at other cities that are home to military bases, industrial plants, nuclear weapons laboratories and NASA centers.
Hundreds of communities with major TCE contamination have waited more than a decade for scientists to explain the cancer risks created by exposure to TCE. The clear solvent used to take grease off metal parts is officially branded as a probable carcinogen by half a dozen state, federal and international agencies. It is most often linked to liver and kidney cancer, as well as birth defects and childhood leukemia.
But scientists representing major polluters, particularly the Department of Defense, have successfully delayed action on scientific assessments that TCE is a far graver threat to public health than recognized by federal standards. When the Environmental Protection Agency drafted a TCE assessment in 2001, finding that it was far more toxic than originally believed, the issue was wrested from the EPA’s control.
A panel of elite scientists organized by the National Academy of Sciences will issue a report this summer that is supposed to shape government policy on TCE. The report is all but certain to intensify the battle — no matter what it says.
If the academy endorses the view that TCE is a big risk, it would lay the groundwork for stricter cleanup standards across the nation and probably lower permissible levels of TCE in the environment. If it rejects the EPA’s earlier research, it will trigger a political rebellion by exposed communities.
“If the national academy comes out with some kind of a weaker standard, it is going to ignite this all over again,” said Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), who has fought regulatory delays along with other Democrats and Republicans in Congress. “We are headed for a battle.”
The national academy has been working on its report for more than a year and is now as much as six months behind schedule. One member of the group, Harvard University professor Thomas J. Smith, said the group was dealing with many missing pieces of a difficult puzzle and many bits of data that don’t seem to fit anywhere. “It is a complicated picture,” Smith said.
Even after the national academy issues its report, the matter will go back to the EPA for another risk assessment that could take another two years. Any further regulatory action to reduce public exposure to TCE could take several more years. The EPA first began amassing scientific data in the mid-1990s and began assessing the risks in 1997.
It is a pace that has left TCE exposure victims disheartened and angry.
Anne Elizabeth Townsend died a month ago in Moscow, Idaho, the result of liver disease and TCE exposure, according to her death certificate and a liver biopsy.
She was married to Tom Townsend, a former major in the Marine Corps who was based at highly polluted Camp Lejeune in North Carolina, after returning seriously injured from combat duty in Vietnam in 1965.
The Townsends lived at the Paradise Point housing complex, which was served by a base water-supply system that carried 1,400 parts per billion of TCE, a later investigation by the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry would disclose.
The current EPA limit on TCE in drinking water is 5 ppb. The standard might have dropped to 1 ppb had the risk assessment conducted by the EPA in 2001 been adopted, experts say.
In 1967, the Townsends had a son born with cardiovascular birth defects. He lived only three months.
“We had an autopsy done and there wasn’t a system in his body that wasn’t screwed up,” said Townsend, a retired college administrator and a former city councilman. “That autopsy report had 10 pages of findings. It was a mercy that he didn’t last.
“They wiped out two members of my family,” Townsend, 75, added. “I am proud that I served in the Marines, but there are some days I want to forget that I did.”
The Marine Corps was alerted to the TCE contamination in 1980, but did not disclose the pollution or make any changes to its water system until 1985. It was a five-year period in which thousands of Marines were exposed.
At the request of Sen. Elizabeth Dole (R-N.C.), the Government Accountability Office is investigating whether the Marine Corps covered up the TCE problems at the base.
“Nearly 20 years have elapsed since the last contaminated well was closed at Camp Lejeune, and we are still unable to address the related concerns of former residents,” Dole wrote in 2004.
“We have an obligation to provide them with definitive answers to their questions regarding the circumstances and extent of the contamination as well as the likely adverse health effects.”
Among Dole’s concerns is the slow pace of a study by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, part of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. A still-incomplete study of 12,598 children born at the base from 1968 to 1985 found 103 cases of cancer and birth defects, including 22 cases of leukemia, double the national average. No studies have been conducted of the adult men or women who drank the base water.
Jerry Ensminger, a former Marine drill sergeant, lived at the base in the 1970s and his wife gave birth to a daughter in 1976. Their daughter, Janey, died of leukemia at age 9.
He has been fighting to force the Marine Corps to notify tens of thousands of Marines, their families and civilian employees exposed to TCE. He formed a group, “The Few, The Proud, The Forgotten,” — along with a website (www.tftptf.com) — to reach out to Marine families.
“The Marine Corps has done everything in its power to not notify the people who were exposed,” Ensminger, 53, said. “There is something wrong with our government.”
TCE is the most widespread water contaminant in the nation, present at 1,400 Defense Department pollution sites, according to Air Force documents.
The Defense Department contends that scientific evidence that TCE causes cancer is weak and that the EPA needs to conduct more studies before tightening its standards or ordering tougher cleanups.
Certainly, not all TCE contamination was caused by government agencies. It is estimated that at least hundreds, perhaps thousands, of current and former industrial sites across the nation have TCE pollution.
When the National Academy of Sciences held a public hearing at UC Irvine last year, Amanda Evans showed up carrying an urn with her father’s ashes. Gary Evans died of liver cancer in 2002, after working as a vice president at a View-Master factory in Beaverton, Ore., owned by Mattel Inc. The company acquired the manufacturing plant in its 1997 merger with Tyco Toys and closed the factory in 2001.
The plant used TCE extensively to degrease metal parts for the stereoscopic viewers produced there, though TCE use had ceased long before Mattel acquired the plant. The TCE was released into the soil, where it contaminated an aquifer that supplied the plant’s drinking water. A later government investigation found the aquifer had TCE levels of 1,670 ppb.
As many as 25,000 workers were exposed to TCE at the plant since the mid-1960s, according to a 2004 report by the Oregon Department of Human Services. Based on a list of about half of those workers, the study found nearly triple the expected rate of kidney cancer and double the expected rate of pancreatic cancer.
Evans, who works in the entertainment industry, founded Victims of TCE Exposure and hopes to produce a documentary on TCE. When she showed up in Irvine with her father’s ashes and what she calls the “Wall of 300 Victims at View-Master,” national academy officials refused to allow her to set it up.
“I told them I don’t have a PowerPoint presentation, I have this wall,” Evans said. Campus police were called but declined to take any action.
Evans said she was suing Mattel, but the matter must first go through a workers compensation claim. Donald Stewart, a former U.S. senator from Alabama representing Evans, acknowledged that such toxics litigation was complex and not always successful. “But you have good people on juries who recognize that these substances do cause harm,” Stewart said.
Civil suits involving TCE have typically wilted because it is difficult to prove that illnesses result directly from exposure.
In “A Civil Action,” author Jonathan Harr recounted the prodigious efforts of an attorney from a small Boston law firm who tried — but largely failed — to prove two major U.S. corporations had caused health havoc in a New England town after releasing TCE into the water supply. The story was later made into a movie starring John Travolta as attorney Jan Schlichtmann.
In San Antonio, the former Kelly Air Force Base ranks among the nation’s largest TCE sites, with contamination that migrated several miles past the base boundary.
So far, the Air Force has spent more than $300 million on the cleanup and expects to spend another $155 million over the next 15 years. Residents want the cleanup completed much sooner, though Air Force officials say the plume is shrinking.
The community that lives over the contaminated water has about double the expected rate of liver cancers, said Melanie Williams, senior cancer epidemiologist at the Texas Department of State Health Services. A twofold rate of excess cancer is “not a huge margin,” Williams said, but she noted that the excessive cancers have continued for 10 years.
“The consistency is a concern,” she said.
Despite the huge petrochemical industry in Texas and all of the environmental health issues that go with it, Kelly is one of the highest-priority toxics sites in the state, Williams said.
In addition to cancer, the department has found excessive rates for three types of birth defects involving the heart, stomach and lungs, according to Peter Langlois, a birth defects epidemiologist at the department. The birth defect rates range from two to three times higher than expected.
But Williams and Langlois said they could not establish any definitive link to the TCE contamination in the community. Kelly was a major repair depot for the Air Force and used TCE to clean oil and grease from metal parts. Giant tanks of TCE were drained directly into the ground, former workers have said.
The TCE contaminated a shallow aquifer about 14 feet below the surface. The aquifer is not used by the city and little proof has surfaced that the TCE-tainted water ever penetrated down to the 1,000-foot-deep water drawn for the municipal drinking supply, said Dr. Fernando A. Guerra, director of the San Antonio Metropolitan Health District.
Mark A. Weegar, senior project manager at the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, said it was impossible for the contaminated water to migrate from the shallow aquifer into the city’s water supply.
But residents say Guerra and Weegar have consistently underestimated their exposure. Dozens of unauthorized shallow wells were sunk into the TCE-contaminated water and used for drinking, bathing and gardening, according to residents and federal officials. The Air Force has capped 75 such wells in the last decade.
“We know that people used the wells in the shallow aquifer for drinking water,” said George Rice, a hydrologist who has studied the neighborhood’s problems. “You have to assume that people used those wells to water their lawns, wash their cars and the children used those hoses the way kids use hoses.”
The Air Force also dumped TCE and other chemicals into open pits on the base for years, which periodically flooded during heavy Texas rainstorms and sent the overflow through surrounding neighborhoods that lacked storm drains, said Yolonda Johnson, a community activist who lives a few blocks from the base boundary. Johnson’s daughter and two of her granddaughters have kidney disease.
No air monitoring tests inside homes have been conducted for TCE, even though the contamination is in a shallow aquifer. Soil tests for vapors indicated there was no cause for concern, Texas authorities concluded.
Outside health experts say the shallow contamination alone should have prompted air monitoring tests long ago.
Adam G. Antwine, the civilian who manages the local cleanup for the Air Force, suggested that some “pathways” might have potentially exposed the community to TCE.
“I don’t know that we want to totally dismiss any potential pathways,” he said.
“This is a low-income minority population and that raises concerns of environmental justice.”
The base shut down in 2001 after 80 years of operation. Because the latency period for many cancers is 10 years or more, higher TCE levels long ago might only now be causing illness.
Former Kelly workers describe conditions inside the base during its heyday as an abysmal toxic nightmare.
Mary Lou Ornelias, a frail 59-year-old woman, worked in the Kelly plating shop for 18 years.
With her bare hands, she would dip cotton cloths into buckets of TCE and then wipe grease from aircraft parts. The air in the plating shop was a steamy, solvent-rich brew that turned the walls yellow and had a stench that made visitors wince, she said. The exposure made her dizzy and caused outbreaks of scaly rashes.
“I would scratch and scratch the sores,” recalled Ornelias, who has no claims or suits against the government.
The sores would not be her last or biggest problem. Ornelias tires easily, looks gaunt and sometimes falls down — all part of her life with liver cancer.
“In 2002, I started throwing up blood,” she said.
Outside the plant, community activists have pushed for a faster cleanup, but say progress has been slow and the problems have festered.
“Living in this contamination area is a miserable burden,” said Armondo Quintanilla, a former employee at Kelly who has spent most of his life in the neighborhood. “It is shameful. People deserve better.”
Waste News has picked up the story
October 5, 2005
The Honorable Stephen L. Johnson
Administrator
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Ariel Rios Building – 1101A
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Dear Mr. Johnson:
We are writing to urge the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to establish health-protective “interim standards” for vapor intrusion of trichloroethylene, better known as TCE. TCE is a widespread contaminant found in at least 325 of the 1,242 EPA-listed Superfund sites, and is known to cause cancer and damage the nervous and immune systems. Children and seniors are especially vulnerable to TCE’s toxic effects.
As you are aware, the EPA’s Office of Research and Development (ORD) published a TCE Health Risk Assessment report in August 2001, which included a reassessment of existing and recent scientific studies. This report, which was peer reviewed and lauded by the EPA’s own Science Advisory Board, found that TCE is considerably more harmful to human health than previously believed and proposed to increase protections against TCE. The EPA incorporated the Assessment’s findings into its Draft Guidance for Evaluating the Vapor Intrusion to Indoor Air in November 2002. Unfortunately, the EPA appears to have abandoned the 2002 TCE Vapor Intrusion Guidance recommendations. Instead, the EPA is in the process of again reevaluating TCE’s toxicity through the National Academies of Science, which may take years.
Delaying a national standard is a major constraint in evaluating potential health concerns at toxic waste sites. Some current federal and state TCE standards are more than two orders of magnitude less protective than the EPA’s 2001 reassessment concluded was needed to protect human health. Today, thousands of Americans may be exposed to unhealthful levels of TCE.
We, therefore, strongly urge the EPA to adopt health-protective “interim standards,” or provisional screening levels set forth in the 2002 Draft Guidance and use technologies that detect TCE at such levels. The EPA should protect public health by eliminating TCE resulting from vapor intrusion in homes, as field experience suggests that the costs of mitigation and monitoring are comparable.
TCE is a widespread pollutant in the United States and vapor intrusion is known to be a significant pathway of exposure. Guidelines have been established to address this important environmental and health problem. The EPA needs to act now to establish safe, protective “interim standards” in order to ensure the health and safety of our children and our communities.
Thank you very much for your attention in this matter. We look forward to your response and action.
Sincerely,
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Barbara Boxer
Christopher J. Dodd
Frank Lautenberg
Joseph I. Lieberman
Gordon Smith
Ron Wyden
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 5, 2005
Contact: Press Office
202-224-2243
SENATOR CLINTON URGES EPA TO ISSUE PROTECTIVE STANDARD FOR TCE
Washington, DC—Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton sent a letter to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today calling on them to issue a health-protective “interim standard” for trichloroethylene (TCE) vapor intrusion in order to protect the health and well-being of our communities. Endicott, Hopewell Junction and Ithaca are known to be contaminated with volatile organic compounds where TCE is also known to be present.
In addition to Senator Clinton, six other senators signed onto this letter including Senators Barbara Boxer, Christopher Dodd, Frank Lautenberg, Joseph Lieberman, Gordon Smith, and Ron Wyden.
[Please see attached letter]
Though this news is several weeks old, it relates to our concern that Connecticut residents and workers are not being adequately protected by officials and agencies who have decided to keep quiet (and in some cases, threatened citizens who have inquired) about known TCE contamination and exposure risks.
As reported by the New Haven Register (CT):
Amann calls for criminal probe
Brian McCready , Milford Bureau Chief
MILFORD — State Speaker of the House James Amann, D-Milford, said Thursday he believes there are enough “unanswered questions” concerning Trichloroethylene contamination in the area near Shelland Road for a criminal probe to be launched.
Amann, who last week wrapped up a series of legislative hearings on the contamination issue, said he believes there are enough questions remaining that Attorney General Richard Blumenthal and the chief state’s attorney’s office investigate.
[...]
Blumenthal said late Thursday that while he had not yet received a request from Amann, he considers the speaker’s concerns “serious and significant.”
“We will respond as soon as possible with every and any action we can take to determine who is responsible and how they can be held accountable,” Blumenthal said.
Amann said that among unknowns is the origin of the contamination, and with whom responsibility for the pollution lies. Also, he said it’s vital that an entity with legal clout ascertains why Milford officials and workers were not made aware of the contamination when it was first discovered in 1999.
“The question is, were they understaffed, or was someone inept, or did someone look the other way?,” Amann said.
The DEP [Department of Environmental Protection] was lambasted after revelations that contamination was found in the late 1990s in the area of Milford Power Co., as city officials were not initially told about toxic chemicals at the site. DEP officials have routinely apologized to city officials, and blamed the lack of reporting on being understaffed.
[read more]
Funny. In a recent conversation with a DEP representative about failure to notify residents and workers of current contamination and risks in Cheshire, CT, the representative told me very directly “We never use lack of resources as an excuse [for not doing our jobs]“. It seems this representative was grossly misinformed (which I politely told her at the time).
Either way, we hope the criminal probe proceeds and extends to DEP and other agencies who have failed and are failing to protect CT residents and workers. There is simply no excuse for allowing people to remain exposed to toxins like TCE without any warnings when officials are aware of this risk.
As more develops, we’ll keep you posted.
What will it take to protect public health and safety in a town with nation-leading cancer rates, decades of confirmed townwide TCE exposure, and persistent decades-old contamination?
The second in a series.
When the ATSDR/DPH Public Health Assessment (PHA) was conducted, the report described several contaminated sites in Cheshire that were named as concerns by residents. Residents knew about these sites because they were on a list obtained from EPA. One of these sites was the Ball and Socket Lagoon/Manufacturing company.
What’s so strange is that the characterization of the site in the PHA seems to differ significantly from EPA’s own current site description and a 2005 EPA publication. What do you think?
From pg. 53 of Cheshire PHA (authored by Connecticut Department of Public Health, 2003/2004):
Ball and Socket Lagoon, which was purchased by Dalton Enterprises in 1996, is located on Willow Street in Cheshire. This site was used for disposal of untreated wastes from Ball and Socket Manufacturing Company from 1958-1970. Typical discharges included copper, zinc, iron, nickel, cyanide, and unknown VOC’s. In 1984, the CT DEP, Water Compliance Unit asked Ball and Socket to remove contaminated soils from the site. The excavation was completed in November 1984 and the soils were placed in the Cheshire Municipal landfill.Ball and Socket also implemented a groundwater recovery program (pump and treat) system to controll offsite migration of groundwater contaminants. Ball and Socket contracted a consulting company to do soil sampling and groundwater monitoring in 1983, which indicated levels of VOC’s above current drinking water standards and in soil above Connecticut Remedial Standard Regulations (CT RSR’s). Ball and Socket continued to monitor groundwater onsite until it was purchased by Dalton Enterprises in 1996. Dalton Enterprises continus to monitor groundwater from this site. Water sampling indicates that levels of VOC’s in the groundwater have continued to decline over time. In addition, in 1994, the EPA determined that a “no further action at this time” decision be made for his site. That means the site was not judged to be a potential National Priority List (NPL) or Superfund site. Off-site, nearby private residential well testing in 1994 of physical/chemical and metal parameters indicated that all analytical results did not exceed current drinking water standards. After 1994, residents in the nearby community were not exposed to the contaminated drinking water, but it is unknown whether the off-site residential private wells nearby were contaminated with VOC’s from this site from before that date. This site has no effect on the public water supply because it is in a different watershed from Cheshire’s public water supply well fields.
Let’s recap: Some contaminated soil removed to the municipal landfill (remember this, the landfill will come into play in future installments). Unknown whether off-site properties or private wells in the neighborhood were contaminated. No mention of air testing for vapor intrusion.
In spite of these and other similar revelations, officials declared “[these] were not remarkable findings warranting follow-up.”
Fast forward to 2005.
Here’s what the EPA’s website says today:
“BALL & SOCKET
Cheshire, Connecticut
New Haven County
Street Address: 493 W. Main St
Zip Code: 06410
Congressional District(s): 05
EPA ID #: CTD001167493
Current Human Exposures Under Control = NO,
Groundwater Release Under Control = NO
… In 1997 EPA conducted an evaluation that determined that there
currently existed unacceptable exposures to humans from site
contaminants in groundwater, soils, surface water, etc. under current
site uses.”
Here’s what we learn today from an EPA online newsletter:
“…He was instrumental in securing Superfund funding at the Ball &
Socket site in Cheshire, CT, which should result in its achieving the
environmental indicators by the end of FY 2005. With help from legal
interns and a staff lawyer, Edgar drafted an innovative Section 3013
Order. The order utilizes the deadlines set out in the statute to
expeditiously characterize the facility and emphasizes actions that
will achieve the Human Health Environmental Indicator. Edgar plans on
using this facility to pilot electronic data transfer for the review
and interpretation of chemical and geological data.”
Hooray for Edgar. But seriously… Achieving Environmental Indicators by the end of 2005? Does that mean the target is to have human exposures and groundwater releases from the site under control by the end of this year? That’s a bit unsettling…
Why the discrepancy between the PHA’s data and the EPA’s? Is this a matter of actual conflicting data? Is it a communication issue? Is it a (gasp) truthfullness issue?
More importantly and more immediately, has anyone in Cheshire been warned about the site’s current risk level? Has neighborhood soil, groundwater, and air contamination/exposure been ruled out with certainty?
I intend to get answers to these questions. For the moment, without evidence to the contrary, I believe the answer to the last two questions is, “No.”
more to come…
What will it take to protect public health and safety in a town with nation-leading cancer rates, decades of townwide toxic exposure, and persistent decades-old contamination*?
The first in a series.
The following 2002 report on the EPA’s website describes an ongoing history of (undisclosed?) contamination at a Cheshire, CT business and nearby properties, some never-before identified as contaminated by the Department of Environmental Protection, Department of Public Health, nor EPA.
The report reveals triple-digit TCE levels (nearly 80 times the federal safety threshold) and quadruple-digit PCE levels (nearly 400 times the federal safety threshold) detected in Cheshire soil and groundwater at least as recently as 2001. Both poisons were detected in soil gas tests. Contamination levels were on the rise at the time of sampling in 2001 (some perhaps due to a suspected, off-site and migrating plume that nobody seems to have mapped). The same monitoring wells and test locations detected similar contamination at least as early as 1987. In 1994, a sump well on site was detected with 20,000 ppb of TCE but appears never to have been sampled again.
The report confirms that soil, groundwater, and air (indoor/outdoor) in 2002 are contaminated above safety levels and that employees and construction workers are at risk of current exposure. The report also details a long history of contamination at this site and others (namely two nearby properties identified as being historically contaminated, but oddly don’t show up on DEP, DPH, nor EPA’s contaminated site lists; and places where TCE and PCE were coming out of “kitchen faucets” in the late 90’s…).
State DPH knows very little about this site. Without knowing much more, DEP reports that the site was referred to them as a hazard in 1998 and remains one to this day.
To my knowledge, nobody has ever been warned. Nor have these myriad plumes ever been mapped. Virtually no air in nearby buildings has been tested.
And somehow, none of this ever made it into the 2003/2004 Public Health Assessment *about which public health officials finally declared “[these] were not remarkable findings warranting follow-up.”
Microtech report, part 1
Microtech report, part 2
Microtech report, part 3
Microtech report, part 4
Microtech report, part 5
Microtech report, part 6
…to keep people safer from TCE, please encourage them to contact:
Jody Milanese (millaneese) in Congresswoman Sue Kelly’s office at 202-225-5441
PRESS ADVISORY
COMMUNITIES CALL FOR PROTECTIVE TCE TOXIC STANDARD
A press conference – featuring representatives of impacted communities and cancer victims – will be held outside the National Academy of Sciences Beckman Center in Irvine, California, on Thursday, June 9, 12:00
noon.
The pervasive toxin, trichloroethylene (TCE), will be under discussion at the Beckman Center. A recent U.S. Environmental Protection Agency health assessment found TCE to be 65-times more toxic than previously
assumed. At the request of the Department of Defense, Department of Energy, EPA and NASA, a National Academy committee is reviewing the science underlying the 2001 study. (In 2002, an independent review
found the EPA study to be sound.)
TCE pollutes the soil and groundwater at sites in many Southern California communities, including Irvine, Newport Beach, Norco, Maywood, South Gate, Lynwood, Torrance, Santa Susana, Pacoima, Pasadena, Glendale, Burbank, Sierra Madre, Baldwin Park, Redlands, San Bernardino, thousands of other sites across the country. “TCE polluters are looking for ways to escape their cleanup responsibilities, and they’re trying to use the National Academy to do their dirty work,” asserts Neil Fischbein of Cheshire, Connecticut – a community blighted with TCE in the drinking water and an alarmingly-high cancer rate. “People’s lives,” Mr. Fischbein continues, “must not be sacrificed just to save polluters money.” At the Thursday press conference, Mr. Fischbein, founder of TCE Blog, will release U.S. Air Force documents showing financial calculations as a major consideration in factoring a TCE cleanup standard.
“The polluters are attempting to distort the scientific process to avoid liability,” says Jonathan Parfrey, executive director of Physicians for Social Responsibility-Los Angeles. “The National Academy must not
buckle to the overweening influence of the nation’s largest institutions – who also happen to be the worst TCE polluters.”
Event: Press Conference – Communities Call for Protective TCE Standard
Date/Time: Thursday, June 9 • 12:00 noon
Place: Arnold and Mabel Beckman Center • 100 Academy Drive, Irvine
Directions: The Center is located at the corner of University Dr. and California Ave.; entrance is on Academy.
Visuals: Large multi-panel photographic display of Beaverton, Oregon victims of TCE which shows adverse health affects experienced by over 300 workers and their children who over three decades drank water contaminated with TCE at 1670 parts-per-billion.
# # #
From Environmental Valuation and Cost-Benefit News:
The Navy has already spent $57.6 million cleaning Groton, which also is a Superfund site. Officials have sealed landfills, cleaned acres of wetlands and hauled away tons of contaminated soil.
[...]
And while the Navy pledges $23.9 million [more] toward cleaning the base it opened in 1868, they said Wednesday that cleanup will only be to industrial standards. State officials fear the money won’t be nearly enough to make the land fit for waterfront homes, condominiums or recreational facilities.
“That’s not a redevelopment opportunity, that’s a minefield of contamination,” said Gina McCarthy, commissioner of the state Department of Environmental Protection. “And that’s our dilemma.”
|
|