| Volume 2 Number 1 | Winter 1998 |
The November 13, 1997, Design for the Environment (DfE) Meeting was conducted in South Phoenix at the request of the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition and the Environmental Protection Agency to provide this community with the results of the DfE's circuit board manufacturing project. Because there had been a devastating chemical fire at a circuit board manufacturing facility located in this community a few years earlier, this community's opinions were of particular interest to the DfE. Over 3,000 notices of the meeting were distributed in the first Environmental Explorer, and the Arizona Informant also provided notice to the African-American community. As a result, about 100 people attended, mostly people who live in close proximity to the site of the devastating chemical fire and other "high tech" industries in South Phoenix which use and emit these chemicals. In all other DfE events, the most that ever attended were ten people, so there was obvious extremely keen interest in the event from this community.
What was very startling to attendees was that the new process being touted still uses the same exact chemicals that were burned and released during that disastrous chemical fire of 1992. These chemicals, including Sulfuric and Hydrochloric Acids, and Fluoboric Acid, which degraded during the fire into Hydrogen Fluoride and Boron, have been suspected by locals as the cause of widespread death, illness, and lingering contamination from the fire. The sentiment immediately was that this new, "improved" DfE process still does not belong anywhere near our homes, schools, hospitals, nursing homes, or any other vulnerable facilities. The attendees also decided that the issues of the skyrocketing death rate, lingering contamination, and illness from the fire of 1992 are of far more concern and relevance to this community's survivors than the DfE agenda. And with that, the entire focus of the meeting changed to an ad hoc gathering to decide what the community needs to do to resolve this problem. The majority of the DfE presenters slipped out the back door while the meeting became chaotic, then coalesced again into a call for deliberation, organizing, and action. Some wondered out loud why EPA has money for this "bogus" DfE project and others like it, but not money to decontaminate the homes and to provide proper medical attention to the public.
Another issue that came out during this meeting was that people reported that their physicians had STILL not been contacted by ATSDR. (See related ATSDR article.) The DfE event did give the community the impetus and anger to start discussing and planning a massive civil/human rights demonstration and to seriously consider and discuss actions such as occupying the federal building or state capitol until affected homes are decontaminated and a clinic established for those chemically injured from the fire. There was also talk of contacting the United Nations to file a human rights complaint against EPA for failing to act properly upon the knowledge of the excess deaths, illness, and lingering contamination from the fire. Also, the ad hoc committee plans to form the South Phoenix Action Committee to work on this and other environmental issues in South Phoenix.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter. We look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
| Christina Hankins Chair Concerned Residents of South Phoenix | Stephen M. Brittle President Don't Waste Arizona, Inc. |
At this time, the labs are analyzing the samples and data should begin coming to EPA in late January to early February. This data will then go to our quality assurance staff who perform "data validation". This means that they review all documentation from the lab on the analyses performed and they verify that the lab performed the analyses properly. If all goes well and there is no unforseen delay this will take us into late February or early March. We will then need to get this "raw data" into a format that is usable and understandable for us and the community. We will then analyze the data to determine what the results mean and then send copies out to the residents whose homes were sampled and then prepare for and hold a community meeting. This community meeting would probably take place in late March or sometime in April.
I also wanted to respond to your email message entitled "You can't be serious". In this message you expressed your dissatisfaction with the EPA web site that discussed how people could clean their ventilation ducts. As I mentioned in my previous email message (the one you quoted virtually verbatim in your environmental justice newsletter), this duct cleaning guidance would not be QPC specific, but it would be general guidance for people to use while we are still obtaining the additional data we need. Even though this guidance is not QPC specific, it still applies to residents in the affected community. You also mention in your message that you want to know how to "neutralize the chemical contaminants that have indeed been found there". As you may recall, we did determine the pH of the ventilation ducts and they were all determined to be in a neutral range of pH (5.4 - 8.9) and therefore it would not be possible or necessary to further neutralize them. The types of chemicals that we found at statistically higher levels (copper, boron, fluoride, tin and PAHs) are not chemicals that need to be "neutralized". All of these chemicals adhere to dust particles and therefore if the dust is removed in the ventilation ducts you will automatically remove the chemicals that are adhered to the dust. If you have any additional questions, please let me know.
EDITOR'S NOTE: Christina Hankins and Betty and Moses Brown have had the air ducts in their homes "professionally cleaned" by professional air duct cleaning companies. The air duct cleaners at Ms. Hankins wore masks and moon suits, used strong neutralizing chemicals, so strong that she had to stay away from her home while the cleaning happened. Ms. Hankins had to have her air ducts cleaned twice because some strange chemical residue reappeared after the first, and now the second cleaning. She reports feeling ill and getting strange skin eruptions when her home's cooling system is turned on. The Browns also had their entire air ducting "professionally cleaned." While the symptoms of wheezing and burning eyes aren't as bad as before the cleaning, there is still a problem, and their grandchild was diagnosed with "chemical asthma" by a physician. Both sets of homes were tested by ADEQ and EPA and still show signs of contamination, despite the cleaning. This is why Ms. Riveland-Har received an e-mail from me entitled "You can't be serious." It is my belief that a "normal" air duct cleaning is not going to do the job here. Curiously enough, when a well-respected, Tempe-based, environmental cleanup contractor, one that was involved with the baseball stadium's site cleanup, was asked to look at these same air ducts, the firm proposed a specialized cleanup method that was rejected by USEPA.
With this understanding I'd like to pose the following solution to this issue: TOSC could draft a generalized letter explaining our interests, and requesting permission to identify residence numbers and their associated addresses. We would share drafts with EPA until we all agreed on a final wording. At that point TOSC would send two of these letters to each sampled residence. If approval is to be granted, an adult (head of household) resident could then sign both copies, sending one to EPA and one to TOSC, in self addressed stamped envelopes which TOSC would provide. Any reports or drafts which TOSC might create from these data would be structured in such a way as to uphold a confidentially standard that EPA could help to design and approve.
Please understand that we are not attempting to undermine EPA's protocols, but merely devise an acceptable methodology for conducting meaningful third party research aimed at educating the community. I look forward to hearing from you regarding this rather brief proposal towards a solution. Please be aware that I will be out of the office for Christmas vacation from the 22nd to the 30th. You're welcome to contact me at your convenience, and if I'm out I'll get back to you ASAP upon my return.
Happy Holidays Nancy!
Sincerely,
Christopher Blakeman
Technical Outreach Specialist
TOSC Program
Oregon State University
I am a bit dubious about this all now, but all I can recommend now is that you contact your physician to see if the consultation has finally taken place and/or try again if your physician hasn't been consulted yet. If you are experiencing health problems that you feel may be associated with exposure to chemicals resulting from the 1992 fire at QPC, and would like ATSDR to offer a medical consultation to your physician(s), then please contact ATSDR Region IX offices at (415) 744-1774. You may also call toll-free at 1-800-447-4784, then dial mailbox 329-1839 and leave a message that includes your name, telephone number and your mailing address. An ATSDR Regional Representative in San Francisco, California will mail you a medical consultation request form. You are encouraged to advise your physician(s) of your chemical exposure concerns and your requests regarding ATSDR medical consultations.
EDITOR'S NOTES: The ATSDR has sent out new letters to physicians informing them of this service offered by ATSDR when they had the correct name, address, and phone number for the resident AND the physician. There had been some problems with the ATSDR phone system at first, so new letters were sent out as a follow-up. And some people gave ATSDR incorrect or incomplete addresses for themselves or their physicians, so they may have hindered the process of getting help for themselves. Take the time to fill out the request forms correctly.
On revisiting the fire, the then-governor said the city should have evacuated the community. I maintained that same opinion viewing the multi-colored smoke on the day of the fire from my residence at 28th and Chipman Streets.
Meetings after meetings have been held and due to a lack of leadership in the affected area, the fact that the true liability lies with our city, county, and state agencies is unaddressed. It's going to take going back and suing the source of our death and health issues.
The last newsletter covered the long fight of Don't Waste Arizona with the various agencies about the fire. The constant backtracking of officials has lead to only one conclusion--"Sue the Rascals!" We sick people had to pay for a ball stadium we don't need. In South Phoenix, where we already have Sky Harbor Airport, the Suns Arena, numerous industries and industrial businesses, and now a BankOne ballpark, what do we get for our children but a 24-hour pollution diet of chemicals from these facilities that include toxic, hazardous, and irritating agents!
The federal EPA has been testing homes and soil for some time and still finding chemicals from the QPC fire. These chemicals have no business in your house, or your property, or in you! So we should SUE THEM to remove these chemicals. Let's let the world know we love our children too and stand up for them. There are now signs of learning problems in our area that were not so bad before the fire and there will be more unexplained deaths, I'm sure. Read closely the newsletters and ask Councilman Williams about some of this, and what he is going to do about it.
Mr. Ferguson served on the EPA-funded, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality's High Risk/High Priority Committee, a study of the 85040 zip code and emergency preparedness and response issues. He is on the Board of Directors of the Black United Fund/Kids' Place. Mr. Ferguson regularly attends and comments at the meetings of the Maricopa County Local Emergency Planning Committee. He works closely with Don't Waste Arizona and other environmental groups. He has a serious concern about what we breathe and his own asthma-related conditions.
We are searching for health care for our chemical exposure, health care that will honor our Medicare, HMO's, FHP's, Humana's, Cigna's, and other supplemental insurance benefits. We are asking for a meeting with Governor Jane D. Hull in the interest of this neglected community.