polychlorinated-biphenyl

San Diego sues Monsanto for bay pollution & persistent contamination

Agrochemical giant Monsanto has been sued by the City of San Diego and the San Diego Unified Port District for selling chemicals the multinational knew were harmful to the ecology, including that of the now heavily polluted San Diego Bay.

According to the San Diego Reader, city agencies filed suit  on Monday, alleging Monsanto hid its knowledge of the toxicity of  polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Despite being aware of these  facts, the company peddled its chemical compounds for industrial  use, including shipbuilding, electrical component manufacture,  food packaging and paint plasticizers.

A wristband for a different kind of cause — environmental health

A wristband for a different kind of cause — environmental health

Silicone Wristbands as Personal Passive Samplers

From “Livestrong” to “Purple Paws,” trendy wristbands have come to represent causes from cancer to ending cruelty to animals. Add a new wristband of a different sort: one that could close the loop on determining the potential disease risks of exposure to substances like pesticides. Scientists reported the development in the ACS journal Environm…

View On WordPress

UI engineers find switchgrass removes PCBs from soils

UI engineers find switchgrass removes PCBs from soils

Public Release: 17-Feb-2015

Environmentally friendly method neutralizes dangerous chemicals

University of Iowa researchers have found a type of grass that was once a staple of the American prairie can remove soil laden with PCBs, toxic chemicals once used for cooling and other industrial purposes.

The researchers report that switchgrass successfully removed up to 40 percent of the PCBs from…

View On WordPress

Smokers with high levels of PCB in the blood have a 640% increased risk of dying over 8 years.

Smokers with high levels of PCB in the blood have a 640% increased risk of dying over 8 years.

PUBLIC RELEASE DATE:

14-May-2014

PCB increases harmful effects of smoking

It is well known that exposure to asbestos or radon drastically increases the injurious effects of smoking. In the present study, led by Uppsala University, the scientists have investigated whether high blood levels of the environmental contaminant PCB (polychlorinated biphenyls) reinforces the harmful effect of smoking.

Th…

View On WordPress

Closing the circle on splitting the atom

http://ping.fm/digqI

Closing the circle on splitting the atom

Closing the Circle on the Splitting of the Atom

6061

Contamination and Cleanup

E

very site in the complex is contaminated to some extent with radioactive or

other hazardous materials. This contamination occurs not only in buildings; it is also

found in soil, air, ground water, and surface

water at the sites. Some sites and many of the

buildings that were used during the Manhattan Project have already been cleaned up.

However, most sites have significant and

complicated problems that have been compounded over several decades.

For example, at the Hanford Site in the

State of Washington, tritium has been detected in ground water, and high-level waste

has leaked from storage tanks. At Oak Ridge,

Tennessee, an estimated 1,000 tons of mercury have been released into the environment.

At Fernald, Ohio, several hundred tons of

uranium dust were emitted into the atmosphere, and drinking-water wells were

contaminated with uranium.  Traces of

plutonium have been found in the soil and

sediments around the Rocky Flats site in

Colorado.

Fallout from aboveground nuclear tests

in the United States and other countries has

radioactively contaminated the atmosphere

surrounding the entire Earth. Contamination

with radioactive iodine released from early

operations  at the Hanford Site in Washington was also widespread.  The large buildings used for reprocessing spent fuel at the

Hanford Site and the Savannah River Plant

in South Carolina are so contaminated with

radioactive materials that decontamination

must be done by remote control to protect

the workers.

Every site in the complex is

contaminated to some extent

with radioactive or other

hazardous materials.

Decontamination worker at Hanford’s UO3

 Plant scrapes down a

workshop interior to remove low-level radioactive contamination on floor

surfaces. UO3

 Plant, Hanford Site, Washington.  July 11, 1994.

IV.  CONTAMINATION AND CLEANUPClosing the Circle on the Splitting of the Atom

62

Workers are decontaminating equipment used to move contaminated soil at the Weldon Spring site.  Facilities at this site once

performed many of the same functions as the Fernald Plant.  Weldon Spring site, Missouri. January 29, 1994.

Actions in Cleanup

To understand environmental remediation, it is

useful to look at the sequence of actions that are

undertaken at contaminated sites:

1. A site is “characterized” by collecting data

from soil and sampling wells, for example, in

order to understand the nature and extent of

contamination, its potential consequences, and

the response alternatives. Computer modeling

is often used to help estimate the spread of

contamination.

2. The spread of contaminants is contained by

using proven methods to slow or stop it.

3. Buildings are decommissioned and decontaminated.  The first priority is safely maintaining

the buildings before final disposition. When

resources are available, the buildings are

cleaned and then, in most cases, demolished.

4. The site and land are cleaned up by removing,

consolidating, and stabilizing contaminants;

the site is then prepared for future use.

In daily practice, contamination is

addressed first through prevention, including

the sound management of waste and other

contaminants. When contamination does occur,

cleanup options must be evaluated to avoid

actions that might compound the problem.

Finally, decontamination is undertaken where

practical.

Deciding When and How To Take Action

    The Department of Energy is committed to

“moving dirt more than paper” and making

progress. It is also committed to investing in

technology that leads to more effective and

efficient treatment. Although aggressive action

sounds appealing, cleanup and decontamination

are not so simple.

For example, while cleaning up contaminated

soil, water, or buildings, workers will likely

generate huge amounts of new waste that will

require adequate storage, treatment, and disposal.

  Another problem is that, by their very nature,

radioactive materials and heavy metals cannot be63

Contamination and Cleanup

destroyed.  Over time–from fractions of a second

to tens of thousands of years–radioactivity decays

naturally. Meanwhile, radioactive wastes must be

contained, stabilized, or moved to a safer place.

If contamination is not removed or stabilized,

workers or the public could be exposed to radiation and other hazards.  In some cases greater

hazards can result from cleanup.  One of the

largest offsite releases of plutonium from the

Rocky Flats Plant stemmed from an effort to

scrape up contaminated soil on a hillside where

drums filled with plutonium-contaminated waste

had leaked. While the area was being scraped,

strong winds carried plutonium-contaminated dust

across a large area of nearby land.  Cleanup

workers were especially at risk.

Finally, some sites appear too severely or

broadly contaminated to be cleaned up by the

methods, resources, and funds currently available.

Although technology development might help, no

cost-effective remedies are on the horizon. Moreover, at many sites the benefits of cleanup are not

worth the additional damage that might be inflicted on the environment or the potential risks to

cleanup workers.

The Department has

made significant

progress.  Many

Manhattan Project

facilities and 5,000

vicinity properties have

already been cleaned up.

The White Oak Creek embayment is sited where the Clinch River meets White Oak Creek, whose waters flow through the site of

the Oak Ridge National Laboratory.  When creek waters leave the site, they are contaminated with cesium 137, strontium 90, and

PCBs.  Until 1991 there was a cable with a warning sign at this point.  In 1992 the Department constructed a state-of-the-art

sediment-retention dam that uses interlocking sheets of metal driven into bedrock to retard the flow of water so that contaminated

sediments can settle behind the dam.  Oak Ridge, Tennessee.  January 11, 1994.

Specific sites that fit these categories cannot be

easily listed, but they clearly exist. For example,

hundreds of nuclear detonations left residual

radioactivity at the Nevada Test Site. Most of this

radioactivity is in highly inaccessible underground

locations. There is no cost-effective technology

for decontaminating such sites. Other facilities

face similar difficulties. Many such sites will be

isolated and monitored until practical cleanup

methods are developed or until risks from the

contaminants have diminished to a point where

the land can be used again.Closing the Circle on the Splitting of the Atom

64

It is also true that while cleaning up some parts

of sites will benefit ecosystems, other remediation

efforts might damage them.  At the Savannah

River Site, a 2,600-acre lake used for cooling a

production reactor became contaminated, primarily with cesium 137, a highly radioactive isotope.

One remedy would be to drain the lake, then

scrape up and contain the contaminated sediments.

However, that action would destroy a valuable

habitat for migratory birds and other animals. It

would also expose workers and the public to

greater risks. A better approach in this case might

be to fence off an area around the lake for 100 to

200 years, allowing the sediment’s radioactivity to

decline by 10 to 100 times.

Progress in Cleanup

The Department has made significant progress in

cleaning up sites and facilities. Many of the sites

involved in the early stages of the Manhattan

Project have been cleaned up and their buildings

have been decontaminated or demolished under

the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action

Program. Although most of these facilities are

relatively small, some had been heavily contaminated. Cleanup has been completed at 21 such

formerly used plants in Illinois, New York, New

Jersey, and elsewhere.

Other contaminated sites have demanded an

immediate response because people live in or on

them, or because large concentrations of hazardous material were exposed to the elements.

For example, uranium-mill tailings emit radon

gas, an identified health hazard. Large volumes of

sandy radioactive tailings were left in open piles,

subject to rain and wind, and some of this material

was used for constructing roads, houses, schools,

and other buildings. About 5,000 of these vicinity

properties have been cleaned up under the

Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Program.

This program has made steady progress in

consolidating and capping huge tailings piles at

dozens of former mill sites in several western

states. Sixteen of the 24 mill sites have been

remediated to date.

At the Y-12 site in Oak Ridge, Tennessee,

several large settling ponds were part of a wastewater-treatment facility for acids and organic

wastes containing uranium. Beginning in 1985 the

liquid in these ponds was treated to remove

contaminants and the ponds were drained and

During the cleanup of mercury contamination, this worker uses a special suit and respirator for protection against mercury-vapor

poisoning. Many tons of mercury were released to the environment at Oak Ridge’s Y-12 Plant during lithium-enrichment

operations. Enriched-lithium targets are needed to make tritium, a radioactive gas used in nuclear weapons.  Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

January 11, 1994.65

Contamination and Cleanup

capped. Since 1990 the area has been

safely used as a parking lot (see page

69).

A hillside, called the 881 Hillside,

within the site boundaries of the

Rocky Flats Plant in Colorado, was

contaminated with a variety of

radioactive isotopes, toxic metals,

solvents, and petroleum products.

The Department of Energy installed

monitoring wells that identified the

potential for releasing contaminants

into offsite ground water and surface

streams. Along the downhill edge of

the site, an impermeable barrier and

a “french drain” collection system

were installed. Contaminated ground

water has been pumped out of the

collection system and treated.

Cleanup workers also removed “hot

spots” of radioactively contaminated

soil and stored it in drums.

Challenges To Be Met

The Department faces more-expensive, longer-term decontamination

challenges than the examples given

above.  Decontamination is needed at

several thousand facilities that have

been declared surplus.  These include

more than a dozen large reactor

buildings, nine chemical separation

plants, three vast uranium-enrichment complexes, and an array of

smaller plants. The interiors of some

of these buildings are too radioactive

for unshielded workers to enter them.

Robotics technology once used for

production is now being adapted for

decontamination and dismantlement

work in these plants.

Cleanup planning goes hand-inhand with facility transition and

maintenance. To prevent accidental

releases of radioactive materials, and

to minimize hazards to cleanup

workers, it is important to keep these

buildings in stable condition as cost

effectively as possible.

The sealed door to an “infinity room” at Rocky Flats.  More than 20 such rooms

have been contaminated by releases during plutonium operations at the site.  The

rooms are called “infinity rooms” because the rates of alpha radiation are too high

for standard monitoring equipment to measure.  The radioactivity in these rooms is

nearly 25,000 times natural background.   Building 776/777, Rocky Flats Plant,

Colorado.  March 18, 1994.

Although aggressive action

sounds appealing, cleanup

and decontamination

are not so simple.Closing the Circle on the Splitting of the Atom

66

Ventilation ducts contaminated with plutonium in dust, oxides, and smoke exhausted from gloveboxes in the pyrochemistry area

of Rocky Flats.  When a buildup of plutonium becomes too great, it can pose a criticality threat.  The buildup in these ducts was

close to the limit for such a threat.  Building 776, Rocky Flats Plant, Colorado.  December 20, 1993.

Health-physics technician conducts a whole-body survey for potential radioactive contamination.  She slowly moves a detection

instrument over a worker, holding the meter within a quarter of an inch of his body.   Plutonium Finishing Plant, Hanford Site,

Washington.  December 20, 1993.67

Contamination and Cleanup

Wastes from the earliest days of the Manhattan Project were buried in a 21.7-acre field just north of the St. Louis Airport,

starting in 1946 and continuing for about 10 years.  Today water draining from the field into a ditch bordering the site gives

radiation readings 10 to 15 times higher than the natural background.  Certain contaminants, such as thorium 230, tend to cling to

the sediments in these ditches and have accumulated to significantly greater concentrations than in the water.  St. Louis Airport

FUSRAP Site, Missouri.  January 30, 1994.

Improving Performance

Along with radioactive isotopes, toxic metals and

organic chemicals can also be difficult to remove

from facilities, soils, and ground water. Some

large buildings at Oak Ridge, Tennessee, became

heavily contaminated with mercury during lithium

enrichment operations. The leftover mercury used

in this process is being gradually accounted for

and stabilized. Because high concentrations of

mercury are very toxic, workers in the area must

wear special clothing and respirators, and they

must proceed cautiously. The environmental

management program at Oak Ridge is mapping

this contamination and taking steps to prevent its

further spread.

As workers and contractors become more

proficient at environmental restoration, they are

finding creative ways to improve performance.  A

good example is Hanford’s T Plant, which was a

reprocessing plant that extracted the plutonium

used for the Trinity test, the Nagasaki bomb, and

other early weapons. This huge building is now

being used for cleaning equipment with highactivity contamination. Using an already

contaminated building for such a purpose avoids

the costly construction and decontamination costs

of a new facility.

The Department is investing in technologies to

make cleanup more effective. In this new era of

openness and public involvement, citizens and the

government can work together to ensure that

progress continues and that environmental and

public-health risks are reduced and workers

are protected.

As workers and

contractors become

more proficient at

environmental restoration,

they are finding

creative ways to

improve performance.Closing the Circle on the Splitting of the Atom

68

AFTER – The Shippingport site after decontamination and decommissioning by the Department of Energy in 1990.  This was

the first complete decontamination and decommissioning of a power-producing reactor in the nation. Shippingport, Pennsylvania.

BEFORE – The Shippingport atomic power station before decomissioning.  Built in 1957, Shippingport was the first large-scale

nuclear power plant in the world. Shippingport, Pennsylvania.69

Contamination and Cleanup

BEFORE – These four ponds received wastewater until 1985 from operations at the Y-12 Plant. Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

AFTER – A parking lot is now located where the four ponds shown above once stood.  The liquids in these ponds were treated to

remove contaminants beginning in 1985; the ponds were then drained and capped with asphalt.  The project was completed in 1990.

Oak Ridge, Tennessee.Closing the Circle on the Splitting of the Atom

70

Moving Forward

The Department of Energy is decontaminating and

demolishing old buildings, pumping and treating

contaminated ground water, packaging

contaminated soils, capping old dumping grounds

to keep rainwater out, and moving drums of waste

into sheltered structures. Many of these activities

do not provide permanent solutions. Often they

are the least costly and least risky means of

holding contamination in place while priorities are

set and decisions are made for the long term.

Affected citizens and workers, the Congress,

Native American Tribes, and State and Federal

regulatory agencies are actively participating in

these decisions. They are addressing some of the

following difficult questions:

How clean is clean?  Given that radiation is

everywhere, how do we decide when additional

manmade radiation is a problem and when it is

not? There is no universal right answer. This

decision depends on site characteristics, the costs

of remediation, and the use of the land. However,

many immediate hazards are recognized, and the

Department of Energy is addressing urgent risks

on the basis of what is known rather than waiting

for more information at the risk of increasing

potential adverse impacts.

Should we decontaminate sites now or wait for

better technology?  The Department of Energy is

working to evaluate emerging cleanup methods. It

supports reseach and development in cases where

both risks and current remediation costs are high,

and it is developing contract incentives to encourage innovation and efficiency.  However, some of

the best technologies currently available preclude

further treatment in the future.

How much scientific certainty is needed?  Risk

assessment is subject to many unknowns. How

much additional research is needed to reduce

uncertainty? How do we decide what to do with

imprecise data? When do we stop studying and

start acting?

What are the benefits of cleanup?  While the

financial cost of responsible environmental

management can be calculated, its benefits are

difficult to put in dollar terms. The positive results

of cleanup can include reductions in worker and

public risk as well as the value of land and facilities turned over to public or private use.

The Department owns

more than 2,000

contaminated facilities

that will require

decontamination and

decommissioning.

Robotics

technology once

used for production

is now being

adapted to clean up

contaminated

facilities.71

Contamination and Cleanup

Demolition of a 456-foot-long structure built in 1943 brings an end to one of the original buildings at the Hanford Site. The

building housed 1.7-million-gallon water-storage tanks that fed the cooling pumps of the Hanford B Reactor. Decommissioning

crews removed the tanks, knocked down concrete walls, took out underground piping, filled in piping tunnels, and then collapsed

the steel structure with explosive charges. Demolishing this building reduced hazards as well as surveillance and maintenance costs.

Noncontaminated concrete and steel are recycled. Hanford Site, Washington.  December 1993.

Workers remediate the 881 Hillside at Rocky Flats, an area that became heavily contaminated with toxic and radioactive

substances.  As part of the remediation action at the site, workers cleaned up six “hot spots” of highly radioactive contaminated soil.

Rocky Flats Plant, Colorado.  September 1994.Closing the Circle on the Splitting of the Atom

72

This exhaust stack was used to control emissions from the Plant 9 facility, where enriched uranium materials were processed. The

malfunctioning of systems like this resulted in several releases of uranium dust, totalling several hundred tons, to the environment

outside the plant buildings over the course of operations.  Fernald Plant, Ohio.  December 30, 1993.

Lisa Crawford’s husband Ken worked at a General Motors

plant in rural Ohio outside Cincinnati. The Crawfords, with

their two-year-old son Kenny, moved to Fernald in 1979.

They rented a farmhouse across the road from a plant with

red-and-white checkered water towers called the “Feed

Materials Production Center.” “Like a lot of people around

here,” Lisa said, “we thought it made cattle feed or

dog chow.”

In late 1984, a local journalist reported that the plant

had released a large amount of radioactive dust into the

air and that three local wells were contaminated with

uranium. One of the wells served the Crawford farmhouse.

L i s a   a n d   h e r   h u s b a n d   l e a r n e d   t h a t   t h e   F e e d

Ma t e r i a l s   P r o d u c t i o n   C e n t e r  ma d e   c omp o n e n t s   f o r

nuclear weapons. They also found out that the Department

o f   E n e r g y   h a d   b e e n   a w a r e   t h a t   t h e i r   w e l l   w a s

contaminated as early as 1981–yet sent annual reports

to their landlord saying tests had proved the water safe.

Soon after discovering that her family had been using

contaminated well water for years, Lisa helped found a

community organization called Fernald Residents for

Environmental Safety and Health, or FRESH. In January

1985 she and her husband filed a $300 million classaction suit on behalf of the 14,000 citizens living within

5  mi l e s   o f   t h e   p l a n t   a g a i n s t   t h e   c o n t r a c t o r   f o r   t h e

Department of Energy site, National Lead of Ohio.

T h r e e   y e a r s   a f t e r   t h e   l a w s u i t   w a s   f i l e d ,   t h e

Department of Energy acknowledged that there had

been uranium leakage at the plant since it had opened

in 1951. In all, more than 100 tons of uranium dust had

been released into the air, and more than 70 tons had been

dumped into a local river. The ground water was found

to be contaminated with chlorides, nitrates, fluorides,

and uranium. In 1989, the lawsuit was settled, and

the Department paid $78 million in damages to the

citizens of Fernald.

In the late 1980s, the Fernald site shut down its

weapons-production operations completely, and a new

contractor took over the site. The Department of Energy

has begun to clean up the site, a task expected to take

several years.

Lisa Crawford and FRESH have been instrumental in

shaping public involvement at Fernald.  Working with site

personnel, thay have found innovative ways to achieve

meaningful public participation. “Once trust is taken away,”

Crawford said, “it’s very hard to get it back. DOE must

continue to work cooperatively with the community and

clean up the Fernald site. Then, and only then, will the

possibility of trust be restored.”

Lisa Crawford: A Citizen of Fernald, Ohio73

Contamination and Cleanup

Spreading tritium contamination at the Hanford Site in

Washington. The shaded areas on these maps show how tritium

contamination in concentrations above safe drinking-water

standards has spread over time.

     Releases of radioactive materials associated with

nuclear weapons production at sites throughout the

weapons complex have aroused concern about potential public-health consequences.  No one knows exactly

who among the general public was exposed to how

much radioactivity during the Cold War or what actual

health impacts resulted. The Centers for Disease Control has undertaken “dose reconstruction” studies

around several major Department of Energy facilities

to gain a clearer understanding of potential health effects through epidemiological research. Efforts begin

with trying to determine how much radiation was received by citizens living near nuclear weapons sites.

One of the earliest and most extensive research

efforts began at Hanford in Washington in 1986.  After

the DOE assembled hundreds of documents addressing the environmental impacts of its operations from

1945 to 1985, a committee of represenatives from

Washington, Oregon, the Yakima Indian Nation, the

Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, and the Nez Perce Tribe concluded that radioactive releases and biological pathways should be studied in order to “reconstruct” potential radiation doses

to the public.  The objectives of the Hanford Environmental Dose Reconstruction Project are to estimate the

radiation doses that populations could have received

from nuclear operations at Hanford since 1944, and to

make public all the information used in the project.  In

order to obtain dose estimates from past radioactive

releases, historical data are being identified, reviewed,

and analyzed in order to understand atmospheric, river,

and ground-water conditions that affected the transport of radioactivity from operating facilities to offsite

populations. The types and quantities of radioactive materials emitted by Hanford’s operations are also being

evaluated.  As information on population distributions,

agricultural practices, and eating habits is obtained,

the migration of radionuclides through environmental

pathways to regional populations will be modeled.

To provide independent technical direction  to the

effort, professors from area universities selected a

Technical Steering Panel from a list of candidates.  The

technical steering panel currently has nine members

and includes representatives from a range of organizations.  All project reports that have been approved

by the technical steering panel and references used in

the reports are being placed in a local public reading

room.

Dose reconstruction studies at Hanford and other

sites will help build the informational foundations for

sound risk assessment.  The experience gained in these

pioneering efforts should be valuable in a wide range

of environmental projects.

Dose Reconstruction:

Estimating Past

Hanford Site Human Exposures

Boundary

Benton Pasco

Kennewick

1

Yakima

1964

1974

1983

1993

kilometers

Miles

0

0

4 8

2 4  6 8

Legend:

Tritium

Chemical  Processing

and High-Level Waste Tank

Production Reactor

Columbia

River

River

RichlandClosing the Circle on the Splitting of the Atom

74

NONDEFENSE  SITES

Alaska

Cape Thompson (Project Chariot)

California

Stanford Linear Accelerator, Stanford

Energy Technology Engineering Center (ETEC),

Santa Susanna

General Atomics, La Jolla

General Electric Vallecitos Nuclear Center, Vallecitos

Laboratory for Energy-Related Health Research

(LEHR), Davis

Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley

Rockwell International (Formerly Atomics

International), Canoga Park

Santa Susanna Field Laboratory, Santa Susanna,

Colorado

Project Rio Blanco peaceful nuclear explosion site, Rifle

Project Rulison peaceful nuclear explosion site,

Grand Valley

Idaho

Argonne National Laboratory-West, Idaho Falls

Illinois

Argonne National Laboratory-East, Lemont

Dow Chemical Co., College & Weaver Streets, Madison

Fermilab, Batavia

Site A/Plot M, Palos Forest Preserve, Cook County

Kentucky

Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Paducah

Mississippi

Salmon peaceful nuclear explosion site, Hattiesburg

Montana

Component Development and Integration Site, Butte

Nebraska

Hallam Nuclear Power Facility, Lincoln

Nevada

Project Faultless peaceful nuclear explosion site,

Central Nevada Test Area Tonopah

Project Shoal peaceful nuclear explosion site, Fallon

New Jersey

Maywood Chemical Works, Maywood

Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, Princeton

Wayne Interim Storage Site, 868 Black Oak

Ridge Rd., Wayne

New Mexico

Project Gnome peaceful nuclear explosion site, Carlsbad

Project Gasbuggy peaceful nuclear explosion

site, Farmington

New York

Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton (Long Island)

West Valley Demonstration Project, West Valley

Ohio

Battelle Columbus Laboratories, Columbus

Piqua Nuclear Power Facility

Pennsylvania

Shippingport Atomic Power Station

Puerto Rico

Center for Energy & Environmental Research, Mayaguez

New York

Ashland Oil Co., Tonawanda

Baker and Williams Warehouses, New York

Bliss & Laughlin Steel, 110 Hopkins St. Buffalo

Colonie Interim Storage Site, Central Ave., Colonie

Separations Process Research Unit, Knolls

Atomic Power Laboratory, Schenectady

Linde Air Products, Tonawanda

Niagra Falls Storage Site, Lewiston

Niagra Falls Storage Site Vicinity Properties, Lewiston

Seaway Industrial Park, Tonawanda

North Dakota

Belfield (uranium mill tailings)

Bowman (uranium mill tailings)

Ohio

Alba Craft, 10-14 West Rose Ave, Oxford

Associated Aircraft and Tool Manufacturing,

3660 Dixie Highway, Farfield

B&T Metals, 425 West Town St. Columbus

Baker Bros., 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo

Fernald Environmental Management Project,

Fernald (formerly Feed Materials Production

Center)

HHM Safe Site, Hamilton

Luckey Site, 21200 Luckey Rd., Luckey

Mound Plant, Miamisburg

Painesville Site, 720 Fairport-Nursery Rd., Painesville

Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant

Reactive Metals, Inc. (RMI), Ashtabula

Oregon

Albany Research Center, Albany

Lakeview (uranium mill tailings)

Pennsylvania

Aliquippa Forge, Aliquippa

Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory, West Mifflin

Canonsburg (uranium mill tailings)

C.H. Schnoor, Springdale

South Carolina

Savannah River Site, Aiken

South Dakota

Edgemont Vicinity Properties (uranium mill tailings)

Tennessee

Elza Gate Site, Melton Dr., Oak Ridge

Oak Ridge K-25 Site, Oak Ridge

Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge

Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge

Texas

Falls City, (uranium mill tailings)

Pantex Plant, Amarillo

Utah

Green River (uranium mill tailings)

Mexican Hat (uranium mill tailings)

Monticello Millsite and Vicinity Properties

(uranium mill tailings)

Salt Lake City (uranium mill tailings)

Washington

Hanford Site, Richland

Wyoming

Riverton (uranium mill tailings)

Spook (uranium mill tailings)

South Pacific Ocean

Bikini Island

Enewetak Atoll

This remediated railroad spur in Maywood, New Jersey was

radioactively contaminated with thorium unloaded at the site and

taken to a nearby factory in Wayne.  The thorium was used to

produce mantles for gas lanterns.  December 10, 1993.

DEFENSE  SITES

Alaska

Amchitka Island Test Site, Amchitka Island

Arizona

Monument Valley (uranium mill tailings)

Tuba City (uranium mill tailings)

California

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore

(Main site and Site 300)

Oxnard Site, Oxnard

Salton Sea Test Base, Imperial County

Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore

University of California, Gilman Hall, Berkeley

Colorado

Durango (uranium mill tailings)

Grand Junction (uranium mill tailings)

Grand Junction vicinity properties

(uranium mill tailings)

Gunnison (uranium mill tailings)

Maybell (uranium mill tailings)

Naturita (uranium mill tailings)

New Rifle Mill, Rifle (uranium mill tailings)

Old Rifle Mill, Rifle (uranium mill tailings)

Old North Continent, Slick Rock (uranium mill tailings)

Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site,

Golden (formerly Rocky Flats Plant)

Union Carbide, Slick Rock (uranium mill tailings)

Connecticut

Combustion Engineering Site, Windsor

Seymour Specialty Wire Co., Ruffert Building, Seymour

Florida

Peak Oil Petroleum Refining Plant, Largo

Pinellas Plant, St. Petersburg

4.5 acre site, St. Petersburg

Hawaii

Kauai Test Facility, Kauai

Idaho

Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, Idaho Falls

Lowman (uranium mill tailings)

Illinois

Granite City Steel, 1417 State St., Granite City,

  (Formerly General Steel Castings Corp.)

Illinois National Guard Armory, 52nd Street &

Cottage Grove Ave., Chicago

University of Chicago: New Chemistry Laboratory

and Annex, West Stands (Stagg Field), Ryerson

Physical Laboratory, Eckhart Hall, Kent Chemical

Laboratory and Annex, Ricketts Laboratory

Iowa

Ames Laboratory, Ames

Kentucky

Maxey Flats, Hillsboro (LLW Disposal Site)

Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant

Maryland

W.R. Grace & Co., Building No. 23, Curtis Bay

Massachussetts

Chapman Valve Building 23, Indian Orchard

Shpack Landfill, Norton and Attleboro

Ventron Corp., Beverly (formerly Metal Hydrides Corp.)

Michigan

General Motors, 1450 East Beecher St., Adrian,

(Formerly

Related articles

CITY OF SAN DIEGO SUES MONSANTO FOR POLLUTING BAY WITH CANCER-CAUSING CHEMICAL

Chemical giant flooded San Diego’s bay and tidelands with PCBs

The City of San Diego and the San Diego Unified Port District filed suit against chemical giant Monsanto Monday for polluting the city’s bay and tidelands.

According to the lawsuit, Monsanto knowingly hid the well-documented health issues linked to polychlorinated biphenyls, commonly referred to as PCBs, in order to continue using compounds such as Aroclor.

“PCBs manufactured by Monsanto have been found in Bay sediments and water and have been identified in tissues of fish, lobsters, and other marine life in the Bay,” the complaint reads. “PCB contamination in and around the Bay affects all San Diegans and visitors who enjoy the Bay, who reasonably would be disturbed by the presence of a hazardous, banned substance in the sediment, water, and wildlife.”

As noted by the San Diego Reader, internal Monsanto documents reveal the company has been well aware of the risks associated with PCBs for years.

“There is little probability that any action that can be taken will prevent the growing incrimination of specific polychlorinated biphenyls as nearly global environmental contaminants leading to contamination of human food (particularly fish), the killing of some marine species (shrimp), and the possible extinction of several species of fish eating birds,” the document states.

If the lawsuit is successful, the city, which was also sued in 2012 for polluting the San Diego bay, hopes to use the much needed funds to increase the chemical cleanup budget.

“In 2012, the San Diego Regional Water Control Board found the city and port responsible for pollution of San Diego Bay, namely in what has become known as the Shipyards Sediment Site,” the San Diego Reader article states. “In 2014, the City of San Diego agreed to pay $949,634 in fines for permitting the dumping of hazardous chemicals into the bay. The city also allocated $6.45 million to clean the Shipyards Sediment Site.”

Regardless of the lawsuit’s outcome, the revelation will likely only serve to further dismantle Monsanto’s hemorrhaging popularity among the public.

In fact, a 2014 Nielsen poll found the agricultural giant to be the third most-disliked company in America, an unsurprising discovery given the company’s $156 million fourth quarter loss from last year.

The latest US Geological Survey published in the journal Enviromental Toxicology and Chemistry also found that 75 percent of rain and air samples collected in Mississippi in 2007 were contaminated with the company’s infamous Roundup herbicide.

#union #iww #occupy #ows #p2 #p21 #tlot #tcot #teaparty

San Diego’s New Lawsuit Shows Just How Hard It Is To Hold Polluters Accountable

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/03/25/3635657/shocker-monsanto-in-trouble-again/

In a 1970 internal memo, agrochemical giant Monsanto alerted its development committee to a problem: Polychlorinated Biphenyls — known as PCBs — had been shown to be a highly toxic pollutant.

PCBs — sold under the common name Aroclor — were also huge business, raking in some $10 million in profits. Not wanting to lose all of these profits, Monsanto decided to continue its production of Aroclor while alerting its customers to its potentially adverse effects. Monsanto got out of the PCB business altogether in 1977 — two years before the chemicals were banned by the EPA — but just because the company no longer produces the toxic substances doesn’t mean it can forget about them completely…

Research shows how PCBs promote dendrite growth, may increase autism risk

Research shows how PCBs promote dendrite growth, may increase autism risk

April 24, 2012

(SACRAMENTO, Calif.) —

New research from UC Davis and Washington State University shows that PCBs, or polychlorinated biphenyls, launch a cellular chain of events that leads to an overabundance of dendrites — the filament-like projections that conduct electrochemical signals between neurons — and disrupts normal patterns of neuronal connections in the brain.

Isaac Pessah © 2012 UC…

View On WordPress

San Diego Suing Monsanto Over Cancer-Causing Chemical Found in Bay

" San Diego, CA — The Unified Port District, along with the City of San Diego, launched a lawsuit yesterday against chemical giant Monsanto and its subsidiaries. The lawsuit alleges that Monsanto is responsible for massive amounts of PCB (polychlorinated biphenyls)… http://dlvr.it/91RmXF

San Diego Suing Monsanto Over Cancer-Causing Chemical Found in Bay

San Diego, CA — The Unified Port District, along with the City of San Diego, launched a lawsuit yesterday against chemical giant Monsanto and its subsidiaries. The lawsuit alleges that Monsanto is responsible for massive amounts of PCB (polychlorinated biphenyls)… http://goo.gl/w1VtK4

San Diego Sues Monsanto for Polluting Bay with Cancer-Causing Chemical

San Diego Sues Monsanto for Polluting Bay with Cancer-Causing Chemical

Chemical giant flooded San Diego’s bay and tidelands with PCBs

Mikael Thalen | Infowars.com

The City of San Diego and the San Diego Unified Port District filed suit against chemical giant Monsanto Monday for polluting the city’s bay and tidelands.

According to the lawsuit, Monsanto knowingly hid the well-documented health issues linked to polychlorinated biphenyls, commonly referred…

View On WordPress

SAN DIEGO SUES MONSANTO FOR POLLUTING BAY WITH CANCER-CAUSING CHEMICAL

Chemical giant flooded San Diego’s bay and tidelands with PCBs

The City of San Diego and the San Diego Unified Port District filed suit against chemical giant Monsanto Monday for polluting the city’s bay and tidelands.

According to the lawsuit, Monsanto knowingly hid the well-documented health issues linked to polychlorinated biphenyls, commonly referred to as PCBs, in order to continue using…

View On WordPress

Watch on healthresearchreport.tumblr.com

PCB increases harmful effects of smoking

PCB increases harmful effects of smoking - The study was performed within the framework of the so-called PIVUS study, which comprehends some 1,000 70-year-old men and women in Uppsala.

Monsanto: Pay for damaging San Diego
See on Scoop.it - Sustain Our Earth


The City of San Diego and San Diego Unified Port District want chemical agricultural giant Monsanto to pay for its role in polluting San Diego’s bay and tidelands with polychlorinated biphenyls, commonly known as PCBs.

On March 16, the municipal agencies sued Monsanto for concealing the hazards associated with PCBs, despite being aware of the health risks associated with ingesting and inhaling the chemical compounds since the 1930s.


See on sandiegoreader.com