| Volume 7 | March 1999 |
| Volume 7 | March 1999 |
IMPORTANT: Residents who do not sign up for the air duct cleaning will not have the air ducts cleaned in their homes. YOU MUST SIGN UP TO GET THIS SERVICE!!
There are an estimated 1,800 homes in the QPC study area. No one is required to get their air ducting cleaned, however. Due to the urgings of Mike Popps, EPA will also be in contact with the four schools within the study area boundaries to offer the same air duct cleaning. Concerned residents with school-age children may want to contact the school to make sure the school will take advantage of this no-cost to the school offer. Nancy Riveland-Har, EPA QPC Project Manager, stated, "We were asked back in '96 by the community to see if there were any lingering contaminants in the neighborhood from the QPC fire, so that's what we did." She presented a brief overview of what contaminants were found above the levels found in homes that were outside the area where the smoke from the QPC fire went. Indoor settled dust in study area homes had higher levels of boron, lead, nickel, and nitrates. In the ventilation ducts, the dust there had higher levels of boron, copper, tin, fluoride, and PAHs (poly-aromatic hydrocarbons). Evaporative cooler pads had higher levels of boron. (A large amount of Fluoboric Acid burned during the QPC fire. Fluoboric acid degrades, or turns into, Hydrogen Fluoride and Boron when burned.) In view of the chemical testing, Ms. Riveland-Har stated, "Taking all that into account, EPA has decided that we will have ventilation ducts cleaned in the homes of the study area.' She added, "And the reason that we are doing that is, based on [the chemical testing], we saw there was a statistical difference." EPA thought the air duct cleaning was "the cautious thing to do." It is very difficult to measure the "risk" to people caused by contaminants in air ducting because people do not normally come into direct contact with the ductwork. Sampling and analysis of indoor air showed not additional or higher levels of these contaminants.
After Ms. Riveland-Har's announcement about air duct cleaning, the focus of the two-hour meeting went mostly to issues regarding public health and local area residents' complaints of on-going symptoms and illnesses, and the increased death rate in the area. Vicki Rosen of EPA noted that it was always hard to correlate contaminants with adverse health symptoms. She added that EPA is not a "health" agency, and cannot help with those types of issues. The ATSDR had representatives at the meetings, and they talked about some of these issues. (See related article in this newsletter.) About fifty local area residents attended the meeting. There were thanks to the EPA for conducting the investigation and deciding to clean the air ducts when there was a question regarding public health and safety. EPA was not required to clean the air ducts, but decided to do so anyway. Many people at the meeting openly expressed their dissatisfaction with the lack of response to the problem by the City of Phoenix, Maricopa County, and the State of Arizona, and their collective failure to be accountable. Also in attendance at the meeting were Karen O'Regan of the City of Phoenix Environmental Programs Department, an employee of the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, representatives of the Maricopa County Health Department, and others. Two representatives from TOSC from Oregon State University were also in attendance. Greg Coleman of Congressman Pastor's office was also seen at the meeting.
Dr. Kess stepped to the microphone after local resident, Geneva Farthing, asked, "What about the peoples' health? If you're going to have a clean house, you're going to need a clean body, too. I was tested for aluminum, copper, and zinc. And as far as I know, it's still there, because no one has done anything about it, and my regular doctors don't know what to do." She brought up the elevated death rate in the affected area, and the lingering health complaints in the area, and asked, "If chemicals aren't high enough to affect your health, then what is doing it? If it's not the chemicals, then what?"
Dr. Kess explained, "I came here to answer some of these really difficult questions that you have about your health." "We know that you have been exposed. We know that this fire was highly contaminated and the smoke that got into your homes. And we know that a number of you had been affected pretty significantly back when the fire started, and continued to have health problems. And we know the course of the kinds of chemicals that were in the fire. We know the kinds of things that are generally in fires and the kinds of compounds that you would have been exposed to. And we also asked you what kinds of health problems that you have been having. And we've talked to your physicians about that." "Most of the health problems that we saw, the respiratory problems, allergy, asthma, skin conditions, all of those can certainly be caused by being exposed to a fire, let alone a fire that has contaminants in it that are serious toxins, like some of these were."
Dr. Kess pointed out that the EPA investigation was about how much of these chemicals were still in homes. The testing indicated to her that those compounds from the fire were there in homes, but not at levels that should make people sick. But she added, "Some people will continue to have health problems quite a long time after a fire." She made reference after that to "the kinds of exposures that you've had." Elder For'e White asked Dr. Kess a host of questions that prompted her to respond in general to those in attendance about continuing health concerns in the community.
Dr Kess further stated, "What we know is, that there was a fire, and a number of days that that smoke was in peoples' homes, and fire was burning, and that compounds got into your homes. They were on all your surfaces, everywhere. It was on everything, basically. And got into your duct system, etc. We know that that was there. We know that people got sick from that. And we got a pretty good idea how sick some people got and some people don't get as sick. There's a whole spectrum of how sick people get."
Dr. Kess said that we can assume the levels of what chemicals were in homes from the fire were higher back when the fire just happened, but cleaning and vacuuming homes will slowly get rid of it. And breathing and touching contaminants causes some of the contaminants to get into the body, which then gets rid of the contaminants. She said, "Anything that you were exposed to in the past, your body gets rid of; there's no reason for it to still be in your body." "I don't need you guys to go out and be tested. I know that you were exposed. I talked to a number of you. I got histories from you. I know that you were exposed." Geneva Farthing demanded, "Do everything you can that is humanly possible that you can do so that we can live!" Later she added, "The leading society has not admitted the problem."
Dr. Kess said, "I know that you are asking about what we can do about your health. I'm trained in this area to deal with these kinds of things, and what your doctors are doing now...When you get exposed to compounds like this, there isn't an antidote. There isn't any way to speed up your recovery. There isn't any way to make you better, except what your doctors are already doing. There isn't anything that we can do differently--I wish that there was." "There isn't anything in your body that we need to get out." "We can't make you healthier." "We can't give you a pill; we can't treat you any differently than the doctors that you have are treating you."
Ray Ferguson of the Arizona Time for Truth organization pointed out the original problems with the QPC matter were the responsibilities of the city, the county and the state. He later brought up the inventory of chemicals that were destroyed in the fire. One resident asked about the cancer she had been diagnosed with. Dr. Kess answered, "There were a number of compounds that can contribute to cancer. They can also suppress your immune system so that if you had a cancer that it might take hold in your body." "Most of the things that cause cancer that are chemicals or metals that were in the fire don't cause cancer until ten to twenty years later, sometimes thirty years." When asked about tests to determine of these chemicals were still in peoples' bodies, Dr. Kess pointed out that she was properly trained and had experience in this area, and answered, "99% of the time, I can make the diagnosis and tell you what went on with you by doing a thorough history. I don't need the testing to tell me that you had problems with your respiratory system, etc." "There's not any doubt in my mind that people have been affected. And a good history and evaluation from a physician is going to be helpful in that area." She suggested an AOC clinic does this kind of work, but they are expensive, and people would have to pay for that themselves.
About this time in the meeting, Jonathan Weisbuch, Chief Health Services Officer of Maricopa County's Department of Health stepped forward. He said he had moved here two years ago, and didn't know much about the fire, the black cloud, and the health concerns that all the residents have. But he said the county is still asking the questions about "what are the things that the county can do to answer the co cerns that you've all expressed tonight?"
He then said, "As health officer, I'm not sure I can solve your health problems. As a matter of fact, I'm pretty sure I can't solve the coughing or the lung problems, or the cancers that have been described. That isn't my job either. But what is my job is to listen to the concerns and make sure that our people, the people who work for my department, will be here and look at the health-related issues, all of them, not just the ones from the fire." "It is our responsibility as a community to make sure that no community is sicker than any other, and that's my job." When Dr. Weisbuch was asked about providing funds for a clinic where people can go and get medical attention with doctors who will actually consult with ATSDR about how best to diagnose and treat their conditions, he responded with, "I can't do that now and I'll tell you why I can't do that now. Because it's not within the purview of the Public Health Department to build a clinic. I don't have the resources to build a clinic."
When it was clarified to Dr. Weisbuch that just funding to provide medical attention at an existing South Phoenix clinic was requested, he still turned the idea down. He did add: "We can begin to think in terms of what might we do to intervene in that particular problem." At that, someone called out to Weisbuch, "People will all be dead before that!" Among the lingering health-related issues is this: The federal environmental law that established the ATSDR is CERCLA. In 42 USCA 9604, titled "Response authorities," under section (i), which established the ATSDR, are sections (D) and (E).
Section (D) states, "[In addition, the ATSDR Administrator shall] in cases of public health emergencies caused or believed to be caused by exposure to toxic substances, provide medical care and testing to exposed individuals, including but not limited to tissue sampling, chromosomal testing where appropriate, epidemiological studies, or any other assistance appropriate under the circumstances;" Section (E) states, "[In addition, the ATSDR Administrator shall] either independently or as part of other health status survey, conduct periodic survey and screening programs to determine relationships between exposure to ttoxic substances and illness. In cases of public health emergencies, exposed persons shall be eligible for admission to hospitals and other facilities operated and provided by the Public Health Service." But there are no such hospitals and other facilities operated and provided by the Public Health Service. Dan Strausbaugh of ATSDR was contacted regarding this, and he said the law might be referring to clinics or special hospitals set up specifically during a chemical emergency. Another issue related to the ATSDR is the apparent about-face in its assessment and view of the QPC fire. Earlier, before Dr. Kess was involved, the community had petitioned ATSDR for help in 1993 and was never responded to until Congressman Pastor's office intervened. ATSDR did nothing to link the health complaints to the fire, conduct health surveys, or provide any health care or health assessment. To the contrary, ATSDR information and letters were used against the community by the local agencies to deny their health problems. To now hear from Dr. Kess of ATSDR's Atlanta office that there is "no doubt" that the chemicals from the fire affected people and their homes would appear to be quite a different matter. Perhaps this is because she is actually a qualified physician, and the ATSDR staff involved in the earliest stages of the QPC fire matter were not.
This edition of the Environmental Justice Explorer will serve dually as information to the South Phoenix community and as a Superfund newsletter to the area of the 52nd Street Superfund Site. It contains information made available from the Gateway Neighborhood Technical Assistance Grant (TAG) Committee. This edition is also designed to help inform those local residents and businesses that there are other opinions as to the progress and effectiveness of the groundwater cleanup efforts that should be implemented in this very large and technically complex Superfund site. (CERCLA continued on page 4)
CERCLA, also known as the Superfund law, deals with responding to and cleaning up "uncontrolled (unpermitted and unplanned) releases" of certain hazardous chemicals to the environment and waste from past practices (before the current chemical waste disposal laws were enacted). Facilities are required to notify the federal government when substantial amounts of certain hazardous chemicals have been released into the environment. There is an emergency response and cleanup component to CERCLA when hazardous substances are released into the environment that pose an immediate threat to human health and the environment.
(This CERCLA emergency response and cleanup component is especially relevant to South Phoenix because of EPA's recent announcement of plans to clean potentially affected air ducts.)
Also, the Superfund law has been used to detect contaminated sites and investigate the sources or causes of the contamination. If a company dumped the chemicals, or if it shipped waste chemicals to another company that released the chemicals into the environment, the first company could be held responsible for the contamination caused by the released chemicals. Using Superfund enforcement authority, EPA locates the "Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs)," the owners, operators, generators, and transporters of the chemical in question and negotiates for the cleanup. Those PRPs who contributed only minimal amounts or low-toxicity wastes can "cash-out" by putting their proportional share of the costs of cleanup into a trust fund for the cleanup, or EPA can order non-cooperative PRPs to conduct the cleanup work. Cleanup doesn't have to wait until all the legal and financial issues are cleared up. EPA can stabilize the site and then pursue PRPs to recover costs and commit to longterm remediation (cleanup) actions.
The funding for the Superfund program comes from a trust fund supported primarily by a tax on the petroleum industry and chemical manufacturers. A federal Superfund Site is a contaminated site that has been placed on the EPA's National Priorities List (NPL). (This tax has expired in December 1995, and may only be renewed by Congress.)
This fund also pays for EPA staff assigned to work with the local community to reach decisions related to site cleanup activities. EPA is required to make site-related information accessible to the public, usually at the local library. The Superfund law has a very significant community involvement requirement, unlike other federal environmental laws.
The Superfund law has some controversial elements. One of these is "joint and several liability," which means that if several companies were found to have released contaminants into the environment, any or all of them could be held financially liable for the entire costs of cleanup. This strategy came about partly because it could be very difficult to determine each company's contribution to the pollution cleanup problem. This strategy also came about because some companies deliberately shipped their hazardous chemicals to facilities that just dumped the wastes illegally, but the original company did not want to be held liable for what had been the fate of the chemicals. This "cradle to grave" responsibility strategy also forced companies to be concerned about the types of facilities their wastes were shipped to because they were ultimately responsible for the cleanup costs if a problem developed later. Congress did not want the large corporations to "pass the buck" to some company that merely disappeared after receiving large amounts of wastes. At the time of the passing of the Superfund law, it was not uncommon that hazardous waste sites were abandoned by private waste companies, with the costs of cleanup and disposal being passed onto the taxpayers and not to the companies that had created the hazardous wastes. This joint and several liability approach also spawned many lawsuits, resulting in long court battles over who had to pay what percentage or amount for the cleanup of a site. If a company went bankrupt, the costs could be forced onto other facilities that did not cause most of the problem. Some businesses did not have the funds to fight all this out in court, much less pay for a cleanup.
Although all Superfund sites are in the process of being cleaned up, there are many Superfund sites that have not been cleaned up. Many of them will still take a long time to clean up.
The Superfund law also made companies responsible for the cleanup of chemicals that were dumped in the past because there were no regulations prohibiting this dumping. There were many objections to this retroactive liability. Many facilities did not know that the chemical being dumped would prove to be a hazard to the environment at the time these chemicals were dumped or disposed of. It would have been much less expensive to have known that all along and have had the choice of just disposing of a chemical the way it is today. For example, if a carton of milk leaks into the refrigerator, there is much more time and effort involved with cleaning up the mess than if the carton could just be thrown away intact. Imagine the problems associated with cleaning up a chemical spill that has seeped down into the ground and has moved into the groundwater several hundred feet down, and then has traveled for miles away from the spill! Also, underground, there are the same sort of complex topographical features that are above the ground. There can be mountains, cliffs, valleys, underground waterways, etc. that are buried in different types of soils. Where and how contaminants can flow can be very expensive to determine, and often there is little or no data, even contradictory data, to use to make decisions about this. There are problems with the types of technologies or methods used to clean up a contaminated site. Sometimes the spill has moved or spread over a very large area for a long time before it was detected.
But if a company is responsible for a release of hazardous chemicals directly or indirectly through a waste facility it used for disposal, it can be held liable for the costs of cleaning up the spill. Of course, this Superfund investigation, decision, and cleanup process can take many years, even decades or centuries. When the law was passed, EPA suddenly was burdened with hundreds, even thousands of contaminated sites to manage. This, at the time, was a new and enormous administrative undertaking that EPA has by now somewhat come to grips with. Some cleanups don't take so long. CERCLA has special "emergency response" sections that allow EPA to take action quickly to clean up contamination. Other sections of CERCLA require a facility to report a "release" of certain chemicals into the environment to the National Response Center, using a special toll-free number. When this call is made, the name and amount of the chemical released and other information is needed to assist with an emergency response.
WHERE DID THE 52ND STREET SUPERFUND SITE CONTAMINATION OCCUR?
Since the early 1950s, TCE, short for trichloroethylene, and other toxic solvents have been leaching into our groundwater supplies from the Motorola 52nd Street plant and other manufacturing and industrial facilities in the east Phoenix area. Some of this came fromwaste chemicals dumped at the Motorola facility and some came from leaking storage tanks. The Superfund investigation of the area also identified an AlliedSignal facility near the Sky Harbor Airport as responsible for the TCE contamination problem in the area. The City of Phoenix is also "responsible" by way of being an owner of part of the property where AlliedSignal is located. Some private water wells were affected and thousands of people live and work over this pollution.
Click on the map for a better view.
The map shows the Motorola 52nd Street Superfund Site and a few of the numerous state Superfund sites in the Phoenix area. These state Superfund sites are called WQARF sites. The state Superfund law is named the Water Quality Assurance Revolving Fund, or WQARF (pronounced wharf). The map of the East Washington and West Van Buren Areas shows the extent of the very large "plume" of groundwater contaminated with the industrial chlorinated solvent TCE. The cleanup of this plume won't be complete until the level of TCE is no higher than 5 parts per billion (ppb) in the groundwater. This amount of 5ppb is like a drop of water in an Olympic-sized swimming pool. The 5ppb standard is the maximum level allowed currently in drinking water. There aren't any final cleanup standards that have actually been determined for this Motorola 52nd Street Superfund Site yet. The Interim Record of Decision (ROD), which is part of the formal decision-making process for a Superfund site, has left the final cleanup standards for the Final ROD. The Interim ROD defines the plume by the 5ppb level and states that the plume needs to be "contained."
This cleanup could take decades or longer unless the pace speeds up dramatically, or unless some new technology emerges that will help the TCE cleanup go much, much faster.
WHAT TYPE OF CLEANUP IS OCCURRING AT THE MOTOROLA 52ND STREET SUPERFUND SITE?
There are several types of cleanup (remediation) technologies used for cleaning up the Motorola 52nd Street Superfund Site. There are many different types of cleanup technologies that can clean the water, but the following types have been "chosen" for this site. One type that is used at Operable Unit One (OU#1), located at the Motorola facility, is called "pump and treat." (Operable Unit is the term or name used for a cleanup unit and does not mean a specific type of remediation.) TCE-contaminated groundwater is pumped out of the ground, much like a straw being put into the bottom of a swimming pool. The pumped water is then put through a tumbler and blower system that causes the TCE to vaporize out of the water. (TCE wants to escape from the water naturally.) The tumbler and blower system works very much like the way an evaporative cooler works. The TCE vapors are then blown into and captured in a type of activated charcoal filter, a "granular activated carbon." Some of the filter is regenerated on-site by Motorola using steam and reused. The TCE is collected and sent off-site for incineration.