{"id":58,"date":"2020-02-16T19:25:11","date_gmt":"2020-02-16T19:25:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/cleanthehousatonic.com\/?page_id=58"},"modified":"2020-03-05T19:48:22","modified_gmt":"2020-03-05T19:48:22","slug":"ge-pcbs","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/cleanthehousatonic.com\/?page_id=58","title":{"rendered":"GE & PCBs"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

This is the story of Berkshire County\u2019s experience with PCBs, a man-made toxic chemical that was used by the General Electric Company (GE) in its transformer and capacitor divisions in Pittsfield, Massachusetts.\u00a0<\/span>Unfortunately, massive amounts of these PCBs made their way into the Berkshire environment, contaminating homes, schools, Pittsfield\u2019s groundwater, and the Housatonic River.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Since 1992, the Housatonic River Initiative (HRI), a broad-based coalition of Massachusetts and Connecticut environmentalists, sportsmen and women, small business owners, and contaminated property owners has been working for a fishable, swimmable Housatonic River, and PCB-free communities.<\/span><\/p>\n

Before we tackle the issues of PCB contamination, it’s important to mention some very basic social and economic history. Since the turn of the century, General Electric, or “the GE” as most local people refer to it, was the very heart of Pittsfield, Massachusetts, and to some extent Berkshire County.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\" \"\"<\/p>\n

GE was the very linchpin of the County’s economy, and Pittsfield was a company town, employing more than 13,000 during World War Two and as many as 6,500 during the EPA’s site assessment in 1988. For most of the workforce, GE was the employer of choice. And few people were able or willing to confront GE on the issues of industrial contamination. Only recently as GE’s gradual abandonment of the city continued, and with its sale of its defence facility to Martin Marietta, have more people become vocal about a comprehensive cleanup. Even so, there are still many people who hesitate to come forward because they are worried they might endanger their GE pension.<\/span><\/p>\n

The GE facility is comprised of 250 acres with five million square feet of building space. Part of the facility lies within the 100-year floodplain of both the Housatonic River and the Unkamet Brook, a tributary of the Housatonic which flows through the GE plant. At the facility’s southern border the ground surface slopes towards the Housatonic River. For many years an underground lake of PCB-contaminated oil has infiltrated the river system, and the neighborhood bordering the facility.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

GE began to manufacture electrical capacitors and transformers at the Pittsfield plant beginning in 1903. PCBs, or polychlorinated biphenyls, are a group of distinct chemical compounds, none of which occur naturally. While first synthesized in 1881, they were produced commercially by Swann Chemical Company beginning in 1929. During the 1930s and 1940s, PCBs were often combined with “chlorinated napthalenes” manufactured by the Halowax Company. Swann was purchased in 1935 by the Monsanto Industrial Chemical Company. Monsanto produced PCBs at plants in Sauget, Illinois and Anniston, Alabama until 1978. PCBs were used in capacitors, transformers, hydraulic fluids, lubricants, carbonless copy paper, inks, pesticide extenders, sealants and flame retardants. Monsanto used the trademark \u201cAroclor\u201d for its PCBs. (For more information on Monsanto and the terrible price some of the people of Anniston have paid see the website of the Environmental Working Group, www.ewg.org, and the website of The Center for Health, Environment and Justice, www.chej.org.)<\/span><\/p>\n

There are 209 distinct chlorinated biphenyl \u201ccongeners\u201d \u2013 two phenyl rings with differing amounts of chlorine atoms. Monsanto\u2019s different Aroclors are differentiated by a four-digit number, first by its 12 carbon atoms, then by the weight of the chlorine in the mixture. Aroclor 1260, for example, is 60% chlorine.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Both GE and Westinghouse used massive amounts of PCBs in their transformers, insulators, and capacitors. Westinghouse called its product \u201cInerteen;\u201d. while GE used the trade name \u201cPyranol\u201d to denote its version of the Monsanto-produced PCBs. The Transformer Manufacturing Division of GE manufactured large and medium-sized AC and DC power transformers. Pyranol was used by GE from 1932 until 1977 when they stopped due to the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposed regulations banning the manufacture of PCBs.”<\/span><\/p>\n

According to the August 1988 RCRA Facility Assessment prepared for the US EPA: “Prior to 1977, synthetic oil containing PCBs were used as the electrical insulating medium in transformers. Before shipment, transformers were filled, pressurized, and tested under load … After testing, the oil was drained. Both new and used oil had to be stored and piped to various areas of the plant, mainly between storage tanks and transformer assembly\/testing areas.”\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

By 1936, there were already reports of serious health effects amongst workers who were exposed to these chemicals. Dr. Louis Schwartz, Senior Surgeon with the United States Public Health Service wrote an article in which he discussed treating not only workers who had been contaminated but a wife and child who had developed chloracne, a severe skin rash, from contact with work clothes. Dr. Schwartz wrote:<\/span><\/p>\n

“In addition to these skins lesions, symptoms of systemic poisoning have occurred among workers inhaling these fumes. Those working with the chloro diphenyls (PCBs) have complained of digestive disturbances, burning of the eyes, impotence and hematuria. The latter symptoms\u00a0<\/span>developed among a number of men making amino diphenyl, which is used in the manufacture of a rubber antioxidant. Causes of death from yellow atrophy of the liver have been reported among workers exposed to the fumes of the chloro naphthalenes.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

“Patch tests performed with Halowax and with the chloro diphenyls (PCBs) have yielded negative results. The skin lesions probably result from the mechanical plugging up of the follicles of the skin with the waxes as the fumes solidify on the skin.* The chlorine present in the waxes may have an irritating effect on the plugged follicles and cause suppuration.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"GE Worker Bill Kowalski and his chloracne<\/span><\/p>\n

PREVENTION <\/span><\/p>\n

The protection of the workers from the irritating chemicals that compose the resins and waxes from the resins and waxes themselves. To do this, the process should be totally enclosed. If this is not possible, hoods with suction exhaust should be placed over open processes that dust and fumes are pulled away from the worker and out of the room.<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

The workrooms themselves should be ventilated by intake and exhaust fans to remove dust and fumes.<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

The floors, walls, and ceilings should be washed down at frequent intervals to keep them free of dust. <\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/span>Two lockers should be furnished to each worker. One for his street clothes and one for his work clothes. The lockers for street clothes and work clothes should be in separate rooms, with the shower baths between the locker rooms. The worker coming to work enters the locker room for street clothes, takes them off, and puts them in the locker and goes into the locker where his clothes are kept and dons them. From this room he goes to the workrooms through a connecting door. At the end of his shift, he goes through this door to the work clothes locker room, takes off his work clothes and leaves them on the floor or bench to be washed and then goes to the shower baths and bathes and dries. Then he goes to the street clothes locker room, puts on his clothes and goes out of the door leading to the street. It has been estimated at one point that 6 cents a day per worker will take care of furnishing clean clothes each day.<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

I have recently seen the wife and child of a worker who had developed comedones and pustules from contact with his work clothes which were saturated with halowax and which he was accustomed to wear at home. … “<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

There should be periodic medical examination of workers to detect cases of dermatitis and workers in chlorinated napthalenes and diphenyls (PCBs) should be periodically examined for symptoms of systemic poisoning. (emphasis added.)<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

Laws should be passed making it compulsory for factories where there are skin hazards to adopt these measures.”<\/em> (pp. 591-592)<\/span><\/p>\n

And in a second article “Skin Hazards in American Industry Part II”: No. 229 Public Health Bulletin, U.S. Treasury Department, Public Health Service (September, 1936), Schwartz states:<\/span><\/p>\n

“Workers in chlorinated naphthalenes and diphenyls (PCBs) should be periodically examined for symptoms of systematic poisoning.”<\/em> (p. 10)\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

In September 1937, Dr. Cecil Drinker published an article entitled \u201cThe Problem of Possible Systemic Effects From Certain Chlorinated Hydrocarbons.\u201d Dr. Drinker of Harvard University had been hired by the Halowax Corporation to investigate mounting health problems among its workers exposed to chlorinated napthalenes and diphenyl. Halowax used these chemicals to coat electric wire. And GE began using Halowax\u2019s products.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Drinker\u2019s article quoted extensively from a conference held by the Harvard School of Public Health attended by representatives from Halowax, Monsanto, GE and the U.S. Public Health Service. Dr, Drinker wrote: \u201c\u2026 the chlorinated diphenyl is certainly capable of doing harm in very low concentrations and is probably the most dangerous \u2026 These experiments leave no doubt as to the possibility of systemic effects from the chlorinated napthalenes and chlorinated diphenyls.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

At the conference, Mr. F. R. Kaimer, the Assistant Manager of GE\u2019s York Wireworks in Pennsylvania reported about his experience with these chemicals:<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cIt is only 1 1\/2 years ago that we had in the neighborhood of 50 to 60 men afflicted with various degrees of this acne about which you all know. Eight or ten of them were very severely afflicted \u2013 horrible specimens as far as their skin conditions was concerned. One man died and the diagnosis may have attributed his death to exposure to halowax vapors but we are not sure of that \u2026 we had 50 other men in very bad condition as far as the acne was concerned. The first reaction that several of our executives had was to throw it out \u2013 get it out of our plant. They didn\u2019t want anything like that for treating wire. But that was easily said but not so easily done. We might just as well have thrown our business to the four winds and said, \u201cWe\u2019ll close up,: because there was no substitute and there is none today in spit of all the efforts we have made through our own research laboratories to find one.\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

Mr. Kaimer then went on to discuss the routine they developed at the plant to treat these problems with two local physicians and a nurse, the use of x-rays, surgery, and an improved ventilation system, showers, and clean work clothes.<\/span><\/p>\n

GE’s medical director, Dr. B.L. Vosburgh of Schenectady, New York was present and stated: “About the time we were having so much trouble at our York factory some of our customers began complaining. We thought we were having a hysteria of halowax mania throughout the country.”<\/span><\/p>\n

Monsanto was represented by Dr. R. Emmet Kelly who said “I can’t contribute anything to the laboratory studies, but there has been quite a little human experimentation in the last several years, especially at our plants where we have been manufacturing this chlorinated diphenyl … A more or less extensive series of skin eruptions which we were never able to attribute as to cause, whether it was impurity in the benzene we were using or to the chlorinated diphenyl.”<\/em> (The Journal of Industrial Hygiene and Toxicology Vol. 19 (September 1937), pp. 283-311)<\/span><\/p>\n

Attorney David S. McCrea of McCrea & McCrea of Bloomington, Indiana spent many years investigating the health effects of PCBs of the workers who were employed at the Westinghouse plant there. One of the reports he and his researchers discovered was a 1938 document by Dr. W.P. von Oettingen, the Director of the Haskell Laboratory of Industrial Toxicology. vi<\/span><\/p>\n

Dr. von Oettingen wrote: \u201cThe contact of Inerteen with the skin causes dryness of the skin, thickening and scaling, and it appears that sufficient quantities may be absorbed in this way to cause damage of the liver.\u201d<\/em> Dr. von Oettingen echoed Dr. Schwartz\u2019s call for preventive measures.<\/span><\/p>\n

According to interviews with Pittsfield workers, GE never provided the comprehensive safeguards suggested by Drs. Schwartz and von Oettingen, and some Pittsfield workers routinely worked up to their armpits in PCBs. Oftentimes the transformers, filled with PCBs, were put to pressure and PCB-laden oil spilled to the floor. Workers walked through small pools of PCBs. Some workers were extremely sensitive to the fumes and had to be transferred to other divisions. Workers routinely went home with their clothes soaked with PCB-oil.<\/span><\/p>\n

David McCrea also found a September 20, 1955 letter written by Dr. R. Emmet Kelly of Monsanto Chemical Company (MCC) to a Dr. J.W. Barret of London about Aroclor Toxicity:<\/span><\/p>\n

“MCC’s position can be summarized in this fashion. We know Aroclors are toxic but the actual limit has not been precisely defined. It does not make too much difference, it seems to me, because our main worry is what will happen if an individual developes any type of liver\u00a0<\/span><\/em><\/strong>disease and gives a history of Aroclor exposure. I am sure the juries would not pay a great deal of attention to MACs.”<\/em><\/strong> (emphasis added.\u00a0<\/span>MAC = maximum allowable concentrate.)<\/span><\/p>\n

By the mid-1960s, Swedish scientist Dr. Soren Jensen found levels of PCBs in fish throughout Sweden and discovered that PCBs level increase or \u201cbioaccumulate\u201d as they move up the food chain and get absorbed in fat tissue. Human beings, and animals like whales, polar bears, and dolphins who eat other animals or fish or contaminated plant life end up having highly concentrated PCB levels.<\/span><\/p>\n

In 1968, 1,300 people in Kyushi, Japan used rice oil contaminated by PCB oil. Many got seriously ill with chloracne, developed tumors, and scientists soon discovered that PCBs can damage the immune system. The Kyushi victims developed liver cancer at rates 15 times higher than usual.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

On March 18, 1975 W.B. Papageorge, Manager of Product Acceptability, Specialty & Process Chemicals, Monsanto Company, St. Louis, Missouri responded to a series of questions from Dan A. Albert, Staff Supervisor, Personnel Relations at Westinghouse Electric Corporation in South Boston, Virginia about health problems possibly caused by PCBs. Papageorge writes:<\/span><\/p>\n

“Question: Does Inerteen have permanent effects on the human body? If so, what type of permanent damage and how long a period of time does it take for this to develop? If not, explain why, if possible.<\/span><\/p>\n

“The polychlorinated biphenyls in Inerteen can have permanent effects on the human body. \u2026 There is a potential real effect to humans – including death – as discussed in answer to Question 1.<\/strong> (emphasis added.)<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

In 1981 there was an electrical fire in a state office building in Binghamton, New York. When a transformer cracked, approximately 180 gallons of PCB oil escaped, and an oily soot coated much of the18 stories of the building, which was closed during a four year cleanup.<\/span><\/p>\n

Peter Montague, writing for Rachel\u2019s Environment & Health Weekly compiled a remarkably useful guide to the history of PCBs.<\/span><\/p>\n

Here’s his history from 1865 to 1972:<\/span><\/p>\n

The History of PCBs 1865-1972<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

And the continuation from 1973 to 2001:<\/span><\/p>\n

The History of PCBs 1973-2001<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

In 1990, HRI Board Member Mickey Friedman, interviewed Ed Bates and Charles Fessenden for a proposed documentary film on GE and Pittsfield.<\/span><\/p>\n

Ed Bates: \u201cWe were in the Power Transformer sub-section. Power Transformers when they’re sold are sold under the NEMA standards, National Electric Manufacturers Association standards, and as such we have to meet certain limits and standards of performance on it. This was whether it was a $7,000 transformer or $1,500,000 transformer. We were the official test department that made all the tests. Charlie was the Supervisor of Calculations, which is probably the most critical because probably half of the customers at the time would send in their engineers to discuss these tests, and Charlie would have to sit with them and explain it, and cover any of our defects up (laughs) as we went along.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Putting Transformers Under Test<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cI was the Manager of the department at the time. And I can honestly say I knew everybody that worked for me by their first name, who was married, who wasn’t, whether they were having problems … This was a thing that you had and this is where you got the output from the people. … we were the Quality Control essentially is what we did. We determined if the product met with what the customer specified. …<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Charles Fessenden and Ed Bates<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cAnd a transformer does just what it says: it transforms. They put electricity in at what say thirteen thousand volts and they would step it up to two hundred and thirty thousand, transmit it 250, 300 miles for North Chicago, down in Joliet and this was a very demanding … and of course this is where Charles and I started to get involved with Pyranol because it was back in 1934 when we were just grammar school children that the U.S. government said any transformer that goes inside a building must have a non-ignitable fluid in it, and the GE scientists and engineers in 1936 came out with Pyranol which had polychlorinated biphenyls in it. \u201cAnd people don’t realize that Pyranol is twice as heavy as water. You put a gallon of Pyranol in water and it sinks right to the bottom. Within that twelve and a half pounds of Pyranol weighs, seven pounds of every gallon is PCBs. We used to use an average of 20,000 gallons of Pyranol a week. And this is, if you did simple mathematics, this is 140,000 pounds of Pyranol, of PCBs a week that we were handling. And we had a loss rate, spillage, over-filling of about 3% so this says that every week, we would lose between 4,000 and 5,000 pounds of PCBs that would go down the drain and into the river.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

It’s important to stress how critically important Ed and Charlie’s information was. From the very beginning the US EPA accepted GE’s analysis and accounting of the PCB contamination of the Housatonic River, all based on the Stewart Report they commissioned. Here’s how EPA described the problem in its official Site Assessment of the GE Facility:<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

For years, the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality and Engineering, and the US EPA and even local agencies like the Berkshire County Regional Planning Commission accepted this nonsensically low estimate of the PCB problem. <\/span><\/p>\n

Here are excerpts from 1982 study from EPA’s Water Quality Management Program:<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

The above document in so many ways reveals the sad reality we at HRI and others who cared about the health of the Housatonic faced. An EPA that had deferred its responsibility and mistakenly believed what GE and the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality and Engineering told them about how many PCBs had escaped their plants and where they had gone. Ironically the Consent Decree they signed was hardly worth the paper they signed. And they so terribly misinterpreted the spirit of GE, Stewart Laboratories, and Steve Joyce of DEQE. \u00a0As for the commitment of the Berkshire County Regional Planning Commission to provide an open and cooperative effort, that seemed to work best for\u00a0the folks from GE and Mr. Joyce and the DEQE we’d see leave together after the meetings at Western Mass Electric for celebratory drinks. As for optimism and a fishable river they were only off by oh so many decades that so many of us will never see.<\/span><\/p>\n

You can download and read the document here:<\/span><\/p>\n

1982EPAWaterQuaityHR<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

And so it was that HRI time and time again insisted on a new regime of systematic testing of the river sediments and river bank soil. Testing under the auspices not of GE’s consultant, Stewart Laboratories, but the environmental agencies.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

This is an illustration of the underground plumes of contaminated oil that moved from GE’s factories to nearby businesses and homes on East Street and to the Housatonic<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

GE Plant, Silver Lake, Housatonic River and surrounding Pittsfield neighborhoods<\/span><\/p>\n

Here is Ed’s more detailed description of how the GE workers handled the PCB oil:<\/span><\/p>\n

“The Pyranol was manufactured by Monsanto Company and came from Love Canal.\u00a0 And it came into the back of Building 12Y, which was one of the Test buildings, and it shipped in 7,000 gallon tank cars rather than 10,000 because of the heavier weight.\u00a0 Pyranol weighs 12 and 1\/2 pounds a gallon and oil 7.45 pounds per gallon.\u00a0 The 7,000 gallon raw Pyranol as we called it would then be unloaded into holding tanks and there were 50 to 70 foot distances from the bottom of the tank car to the holding tanks that we would use a unloading apparatus for, pipe and so forth, and the remainder would spill on the ground, whatever was left in there.\u00a0 After it was unloaded it would then be combined with a substance called tintetrylphenol, which would uhh form of PCBs that would be added to the initial one to prevent arcing, electrical arcing within the Pyranol.\u00a0 And at that stage of the game, it would be combined and then tested and combined and tested until it met the required electrical strength, and at that point it would generally contain about 6 lbs of PCBs in the Pyranol, compared with the total weight of Pyranol of 13 lbs, 12 and 1\/2 lbs, so it was approximately 50% of the weight of the Pyranol.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

“Pyranol was then brought to various stations on Power Transformer Department which made apparatus transformers and Distribution Transformer, nominally called the North Side and South Side, where it was used to do two things: one, it was used to fill the transformers for test, and then it was also used to fill up and put units on pressure, which would invariably leak and have to be welded and so forth and we\u2019d have it dripping on the floor and, and things like that.\u00a0 If a unit did not pass test, the Pyranol was uh returned into tank cars and uh these were small 500 gallon cars that were mobile, that moved around but a lot of times you would have a flood or one of the seams would leak or a valve would let go and you would have a spill of maybe a 1,000 or 1,200 gallons of Pyranol, and this would eventually go down to the sump and go out to the river.\u00a0 Well that doesn\u2019t sound like much but a 1,000 gallons of uh Pyranol was \u2026 6,000 pounds of PCBs, so we were on a daily basis discharging PCBs in the river,<\/em><\/strong> and by we I mean the GE company I don\u2019t mean just the Power Transformer Department, but also the Distribution Transformer and until 1948 that the Capacitor Department was on was in Building 43 which later moved to Hudson Falls, New York, where they have a problem with uh with PCBs at Hudson Falls.<\/span><\/p>\n

“Uh this was a continuous process that uh we would in some cases use 35-40,000 gallons of Pyranol a week, other weeks we\u2019d use 10 depending on the types of units.\u00a0 There[ were] some apparatus transformers that would hold up to 3,000 gallons of Pyranol.\u00a0 Uh this means that the transformer would have anywhere from 15 to 20,000 pounds of PCBs in it.\u00a0 And if anything happened to it, if there was a failure, we\u2019d have to drain this, all this Pyranol back which would result in spillage and loss of\u00a0 \u2013 the engineering standards called for a 4% loss and the total volume that went into each transformer.\u00a0 Now I\u2019m not sure what Distribution was, Distribution Transformer which was an entirely different department, but Power Transformer we used to use a loss ratio of 6% for oil and 4% for Pyranol.<\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Large GE Pittsfield Transformer – Photo: Engineering & Technology Wiki<\/span><\/p>\n

“So it was a continuous process with the Pyranol coming in from Love Canal and we adding the tintetrylphenol to get the desired solution, then it would go through the factory, at both the South Side and the North Side, and the Pyranol would be shipped with the transformer.<\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

“But one of the things that we always had to do was we had to meet the pressure requirements so we had to bring the Pyranol up and put the unit on pressure for 24 hours, so it would stand the pressure of maybe 6 pounds, 10 pounds, 15 pounds.\u00a0 At the end of 24 hours you\u2019d draw that Pyranol back down and theoretically you\u2019d put it in a container, but there were a lot of cases if the container wasn\u2019t available and you\u2019d say, it was 50 gallons or a 100 gallons, a lot of times, they would just drain it, let it go down the sump …<\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

“Did they ever tell you it was dangerous?”<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Ed Bates: “No … neither of us blame the GE for that. Any fluid or anything that you used in those days, you’d run a two-week test on it and if you didn’t break out in welts or your eyes didn’t water too bad, they would use it. And it turns out that Charlie and I feel, from our observation, the latency period of Pyranol, PCB Pyranol is around fifteen to twenty years. You really got to be exposed to it, and you did get itching out of it and you got sore eyes out of it, remember Charlie (Charles Fessenden: Oh sure). We’d heat it up, and this we would heat up to 55 degrees C or around 120 degrees when we were running tests on transformers. And the odor of it was unbelievable. It’d choke you but , you know, there was nothing published. And if a guy didn’t break out from hives or something you didn’t worry about it. Or I, people would come into me as the Manager and say, it’s bothering me, and I’d say fine and I’d put them in another area. It wasn’t until 1969 that it became noted, and it was noted by the GE in a document, that it was a real problem and they would start reviewing what they could use in order to go out of the use of Pyranol, PCBs, but it wasn’t until 1975 and ’76 that they started to use silicon and phase out Pyranol.”<\/span><\/p>\n

Especially vulnerable were the crane operators. There was a pervasive mist formed by the oil being put under pressure, and the fumes were rise to where the crane operators were working:<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

“We had a meeting last Sunday, a forum where the head of the … Massachusetts DEQE talked and he said that they’d been trying from 1981 to now, which is 1990 to get a agreement of consent from the GE. He was very indefinite as the time on it. The Eagle said they had put these special cylinders in the water, didn’t they, Charlie for three years , so this means it’s been since 1981 to 1993 before they’ll decide to do anything about the Housatonic River. In the meantime about a million and a half pounds of PCBs have been plowed into that river. I imagine a good 30% is left.\u201d <\/strong>(Emphasis added.)<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Ed Bates and Charles Fessenden deserve great credit for alerting the Berkshire community to the dangers of PCBs, not only to those who inhabit the river systems but to the men and women who worked hard for GE and paid a great price:<\/span><\/p>\n

“Charles and I\u2019ve been very close since we were in school and it would seem to me that every other week Charlie would say \u201cOK we got to go to a funeral (CF: a wake) a wake\u201d or we’d end up going to a funeral.\u00a0 And it wasn’t just the Tests where we worked, the building itself where we used to mix the Pyranol, and deliver it out through a series, a system of pipes.\u00a0 There was a Shipping group.\u00a0 There was a Maintenance group.\u00a0 There was an Assembly group.\u00a0 There was a Test group.\u00a0 All these people were in the same building and it seemed to me that we were – you know, it started to get on you.\u00a0 Charlie and I had reached the age of 40 and 50 and say, gee why come all these people are dying, but we didn’t do anything about it.\u00a0 Maybe we were wrong …<\/i><\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

“You get a little resentful at times because people are paying attention to the environment.\u00a0 They should.\u00a0 But here\u2019s \u2013 one of the big things is PCBs \u2013 they put yellow stripes up and you can\u2019t go near it and so forth.\u00a0 And yet our people worked in it.\u00a0 They would have to reach in it up to their arms and change links and everything.\u00a0 And, you know, ‘Oh, that\u2019s tough, that\u2019s in the past! You know.’ \u00a0And then it gets indefinite \u2013 is it a cancer-causing \u2013 does it cause cancer or not?\u00a0 You got about eight studies that say yes and about four studies who are indefinite, so you take the studies that are indefinite, say they\u2019re gospel and the ones that say there is a real problem are tended to be discarded.”<\/i><\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

In 1982 Massachusetts noted that Pittsfield recorded 35% higher numbers of male bladder cancer than other towns and cities in the Commonwealth.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Lakewood resident checks out neighborhood cancer map<\/span><\/p>\n

Here\u2019s how the EPA describes GE’s use of PCBs:<\/span><\/p>\n

“Since the early 1900s, GE operated a large-scale industrial facility including the manufacturing and servicing of power transformers, defense and aerospace (ordnance) and plastics, and used numerous industrial chemicals at its Pittsfield facility. From 1932 through 1977, General Electric manufactured and serviced electrical transformers containing PCBs. Years of PCB and industrial chemical use, and improper disposal, led to extensive contamination around Pittsfield, MA as well as down the entire length of the Housatonic River … approximately 150 miles from its headwaters on the East Branch in Hinsdale, MA and flows through Connecticut into Long Island Sound.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThe 254-acre GE plant in Pittsfield has historically been the major handler of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in western Massachusetts, and is the only known source of PCBs found in the Housatonic River sediments and floodplain soils in Massachusetts. Although GE performed many functions at the Pittsfield facility throughout the years, the activities of the Transformer Division, including the construction and repair of electrical transformers using dielectric fluids, some of which contained PCBs (primarily Aroclors 1254 and 1260), were one likely significant source of PCB contamination. According to GE’s reports, from 1932 through 1977, releases of PCBs reached the waste and storm water systems associated with the facility and were subsequently conveyed to the East Branch of the Housatonic River and to Silver Lake.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cDuring the 1940s, efforts to straighten the Pittsfield reach of the Housatonic River by the City of Pittsfield and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) resulted in 11 former oxbows being isolated from the river channel. The oxbows were filled with material that was later discovered to contain PCBs and other hazardous substances.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\" \"\"<\/p>\n

“Upon learning of the chemical’s ability to harm wildlife and human health,\u00a0EPA banned the production of PCBs\u00a0in 1979. The cleanup areas in Pittsfield join numerous PCB sites throughout the country in size and clean up challenges.<\/span>\u00a0After testing groundwater, river sediment, soil, and wildlife, it was clear that the contamination needed to be addressed. PCBs do not readily break down in the natural environment, if left untouched at this site they would continue to pose a risk.<\/span>
\nThe build-up of PCB levels within animals is known as ‘bioaccumulation’. PCBs do not break down quickly once consumed; instead they are carried up the food chain.\u00a0Health effects from PCBs\u00a0have been linked to cancer and other serious effects on the immune system, reproductive system, nervous system, endocrine system and other organs.<\/span><\/p>\n

“EPA’s greatest concern in the area is the possibility of coming into direct contact or ingesting PCB contamination. Since 1977 there has been a ban on fishing \/ consumption of fish from areas of the Housatonic River. These restrictions will remain in place until PCB levels decrease. Data are collected to ensure that the current restrictions protect human health.”<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

After interviewing Ed and Charlie, Mickey Friedman videotaped Remo DelGallo, the former Mayor of Pittsfield and owner of DelGallo’s, the restaurant\/bar across from the GE plant on Newell Street. Remo was one of the first people in Pittsfield to realize how serious the PCB problem was. Here’s his short history:<\/span><\/p>\n

“My involvement goes back to January 1980 when I saw a group of people drilling test wells in the road, and uh I was wondering what they were doing so I called the Commissioner of Public Works at that given time, and the Commissioner of Public Works at that time was Gerry Doyle, Senior, the Mayor\u2019s father. \u00a0 <\/span>And he said to me, \u2018Remo, I can only tell you what they told me.\u00a0 <\/span>They\u2019re looking for the location of the water table and the flow of water in the water table.\u2019\u00a0 <\/span>We knew that wasn\u2019t what they were looking for.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

“And uh that\u2019s when we became directly involved in what was going on and in the meantime they drilled approximately 200 test wells in this given area, bordering Newell Street, East Street, and Fasce Place, all the way to the Housatonic River.\u00a0 <\/span>And uh, now what we were primarily concerned about was \u2013 is the liquid waste and uh you know I\u2019ve mentioned time and again Pittsfield is a city but it\u2019s still a village.\u00a0 <\/span>Everybody knows what\u2019s going on.\u00a0 <\/span>I can go back 50, 60 years if need be that when the General Electric Company had the oil tanks, the oil house up on the northerly side of the railroad tracks next to Peck\u2019s Bridge, those tanks leaked for years and years and years and I don\u2019t know why they never took corrective measures and the oil flowed down the embankment, under the railroad tracks and then into East Street and what was said uh created a plume and when they say a plume, they\u2019re talking about an underground lake of oil \u2026<\/span><\/p>\n

“We saw the oil \u2013 there was a tremendous amount of oil even in those days.\u00a0 <\/span>Now you have to remember, inside the General Electric Company \u2013 it\u2019s an old plant located in the center of the city of Pittsfield and there were umpteen drains all over the place.\u00a0 <\/span>And they dumped a voluminous amount of oil in those drains.\u00a0 <\/span>Nobody even knew where the drains went.\u00a0 <\/span>Some leeched into Silver Lake; a good number of them went into the Housatonic River.\u00a0 <\/span>But my real concern at the time was, when I say credibility gap, I say it for a given reason because the gentleman who was a personal friend of mine, a fellow by the name of George Rousseau, was in charge of all liquid waste disposal for the General Electric Company since 1936 and he is the one that informed as to where the liquid waste was being dumped \u2013 four given sites on General Electric property \u2013 and you probably don\u2019t understand what they mean by waste oil. \u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

“It came in 30 gallon barrels and 55 gallon barrels, some two-thirds Pyranol, one-third oil; two-thirds water, one-third Pyranol.\u00a0 <\/span>And when I say disposed, we\u2019re talking about thousands and thousands and thousands of gallons of oil.\u00a0 <\/span>We\u2019re not talking about crank-case oil, a hundred and fifty gallons.\u00a0 <\/span>We\u2019re talking about thousands and thousands of gallons of oil, including that oil tank that they had up on what is known as Peck\u2019s Bridge, 550,000 gallons of oil, that\u2019s how much – it held that capacity \u2013 and it leaked for years and years and years, before 1964 and after 1964.<\/span><\/p>\n

“Now I\u2019ll go back to 1980 when we contacted Angelo Inatosca and he had an associate, Walter Schwartz, they worked for what we called the DEQE, the Department of Environmental Quality Engineering, and they stated that it never penetrated, the plume, the oil never penetrated the southerly side of East Street.\u00a0 <\/span>So I took it upon myself to take them up to a place known as Bardo\u2019s Bakery and now we have Hiser, H&S Automotive up there and uh Bardo\u2019s Bakery, I remember he had a sump pump at the bottom of the stairs and I said to Angelo Inatosca at the time and representatives of the General Electric Company and EPA, if there\u2019s no oil in that sump pump I\u2019ll agree with you it never penetrated the southerly side of East Street.\u00a0 <\/span>And now when we went up there and uh we checked that sump pump, it was loaded with oil, loaded with oil.<\/span><\/p>\n

“And the sump pump was emptying into the city sewer line and I explained it to them what happens when you empty that sump pump into the city sewer line from there it goes down to the sewer treatment plant and from the sewer treatment plant into the Housatonic River, from the Housatonic River into Lenoxdale uh Wood\u2019s Pond \u2026 \u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

“And they also stated and when I say they I\u2019m talking about representatives of the General Electric Company and Angelo Inatosca it did not touch the Housatonic River and yet we did find out it did penetrate the Housatonic River.\u00a0 <\/span>They said it did not contaminate Goodrich Pond and since then we found out that it also contaminated Goodrich Pond.”<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

One of the first organized responses in the neighboring Lakewood neighborhood to this concern\u00a0\u00a0for public health was\u00a0spearheaded by Remo DelGallo and the late Bernie Kleban of Monterey,\u00a0\u00a0MA and the\u00a0Massachusetts Coalition of Occupational Safety and Health. With the help of local\u00a0nurses and Dr. K. D. Rosenman of New York,\u00a0\u00a0they organized a program of serum PCB\u00a0testing. Bear in mind that we all have PCBs in our body and blood. Based on a nationwide analysis, health experts have determined a background level for those live away from contaminated sites and have no occupational exposure. The recent background level is 0.9 to 1.5 parts per billion (ppb) in the blood. Here’s what Dr. Rosenman found:<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

As for some of the severe consequences of GE’s irresponsible misuse of PCBs on the environment: a fish consumption advisory for the Housatonic River was issued by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MADPH) in 1982 from Dalton, MA, to the Connecticut border as a result of the PCB contamination in the river sediments and fish tissue. It was later amended to include frogs and turtles. The State of Connecticut also posted a fish consumption advisory for most of the Connecticut section of the river in 1977.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

For years HRI had been hearing about the toll working at GE, and living in Lakewood had taken on the health of the community. For years HRI had been advocating for the MDPH to come and perform a comprehensive health assessment.to follow up on the Rosenman study. Sadly, this was a clear example of unfortunately getting what you wished for. The MDPH turned out to tragically misrepresent the real dangers the Pittsfield community faced.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

First, HRI argued during the planning stages that this study was poorly designed and\u00a0would not attract those with the most likely history or opportunity for exposure to PCBs. We argued as well that the study should include serum testing of individuals from neighboring hilltown communities in Berkshire County without opportunities for exposure to PCBs to establish a more local and more valid background level. Our suggestions were ignored.<\/span><\/p>\n

The MDPH Housatonic River Area PCB Exposure Assessment Study explained: “Residents of eight communities that live within one-half mile of the Housatonic River were randomly chosen to participate in the exposure assessment study … \u00a0Of the total 1529 participants enrolled in the household screening survey …<\/span><\/p>\n

“Finally, 69 individuals of the 1529 participated in blood testing. \u201cTotal serum\u00a0PCBs, which were classified as Aroclor 1260, ranged from non-detectable to 35.81 ppb, with a mean of 5.44 ppb and a median of 3.93 ppb.”<\/span><\/p>\n

The Public Health Assessment continues: \u201cIn addition, residents who were not chosen for the study but who were concerned about exposure to PCBs were offered the opportunity to volunteer to participate in a separate effort …\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

MDPH\u2019s stated: \u201cThe serum PCB levels found among participants of both studies were generally within typical background estimates for a non-occupationally exposed U.S. population. ATSDR reports that, for U.S. populations without occupational exposure, mean serum PCB levels were usually between 4 and 8 ppb, with 95% of the individuals having concentrations less than 20 ppb. Since the results of this study represented individuals with the highest risk of exposure, it is reasonable to assume that serum PCB levels of most non- occupationally exposed residents in the HRA communities are within the US background range, though individual differences may likely occur. \u201d<\/strong>\u00a0 (Page 2, emphasis added.)<\/span><\/p>\n

After reassuring the Berkshire community that serum PCB level were in normal background levels for the United States, MDPH went on to conclude there was no need for future epidemiological studies:<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Except MDPH mischaracterized the background level for PCBs in human blood for those who aren’t exposed to PCBs in the workplace or live beside a toxic waste dump. HRI then contested the use of what we regarded as the outdated background range data for non-occupationally exposed individuals of 4 \u2013 8 ppb. In several health forums, HRI consulted with nationally-known PCB researchers, including Drs. Deborah Rice and James Cogliano of the USEPA, and Dr. David Carpenter of the School of Public Health at the State University of New York, Albany, all of whom have stated that a more accurate figure for a background range for non-occupationally exposed individuals is significantly lower. Dr. Carpenter recently reported that the latest ATSDR estimate for background levels lies between 0.9 \u2013 1.5 ppb. And Dr. Rice and others have spoken about recent studies in both the United States and Europe that suggest possible adverse developmental effects occurring among individuals with serum levels in this background range.<\/span><\/p>\n

GE seized on the MDPH studying its series of full page ads in the Berkshire Eagle to downplay the PCB problem and in particular to insist there was no real or valid health concerns:<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Spurred by our concerns about the MDPH Study and GE\u2019s interpretation of the study\u2019s results to\u00a0\u00a0claim that Pittsfield\u2019s\u00a0residents had average PCB levels and there was therefore no cause for\u00a0\u00a0public concern, the\u00a0Attorney-General of Massachusetts, Scott Harshbarger, convened a workshop\u00a0\u00a0on\u00a0February 5, 1998 to discuss \u201cHealth Concerns Relating to PCB Contamination in\u00a0Pittsfield\u00a0\u00a0and Southern Berkshire County.\u201d The group included representatives from\u00a0HRI, the USEPA, the\u00a0\u00a0Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, MDPH,\u00a0Drs. Richard Clapp and David\u00a0\u00a0Osonoff of Boston University and Dr, David Gute of Tufts\u00a0University.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

The group agreed that the ATSDR figure is based on data that\u00a0is at least a decade old, and\u00a0\u00a0therefore it may no longer be accurate. In addition, neither\u00a0the ATSDR figure, nor the DPH\u00a0\u00a0results, were \u201ccongener specific.\u201d Because the PCBs at\u00a0issue in Pittsfield are of the relatively\u00a0\u00a0toxic variety, while the ATSDR figure is for all varieties (including the much more prevalent\u00a0\u00a0congeners of lesser toxicity), the\u00a0comparison to the ATSDR figures may not be \u201capples to\u00a0\u00a0oranges,\u201d\u00a0\u00a0but it may be \u201capples\u00a0to mixed fruit salad.\u201d\u00a0\u00a0\u2026\u00a0\u00a0In\u00a0\u00a0light of such\u00a0\u00a0problems, many\u00a0\u00a0workshop attendees questioned\u00a0why the blood study did not include for comparison purposes a\u00a0\u00a0\u201ccontrol group\u201d of people\u00a0in Berkshire County who had likely not been exposed to PCBs. The\u00a0\u00a0DPH response was\u00a0again that \u00a0the\u00a0\u00a0agency did not have the resources available to do what it\u00a0\u00a0would have\u00a0liked.\u201d\u00a0\u00a0(Report Relative to the Workshop Regarding PCB Contamination,\u00a0\u00a0pp.\u00a0\u00a07-9)<\/span><\/p>\n

MDPH convened an Expert Panel which included 11 nationally and internationally known\u00a0\u00a0experts on the\u00a0health effects of PCBs. Unfortunately the MDPH charged the panel with a broad,\u00a0\u00a0general\u00a0mission and, as a result, the panel failed to look specifically at our experience in\u00a0\u00a0Pittsfield\u00a0and Berkshire County.<\/span><\/p>\n

On December 19, 2000 members of the Expert Panel met with the public. The panel agreed with\u00a0\u00a0us at HRI that the MDPH range of\u00a0\u00a04-8 ppb in blood for\u00a0people not exposed to PCBs at the workplace is not current, and that the range is\u00a0probably significantly lower.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Smoke From GE’s PCB incinerator – Puff The Magic Dragon over Newell Street<\/span><\/p>\n

One of\u00a0the most interesting aspects of the meeting was the interchange between residents and\u00a0panel members. The more the panel members learned about the various ways people in\u00a0our area\u00a0\u00a0have been exposed to PCBs \u2013 working at GE; exposure to PCB-contaminated fill\u00a0at home, or at\u00a0\u00a0Allendale School; exposure in Lakewood to PCB-oil plumes; eating contaminated fish or\u00a0ducks;\u00a0\u00a0or\u00a0\u00a0airborne exposure via the GE PCB-incinerator or volatilization \u2013 the more\u00a0several panel\u00a0\u00a0members supported the idea that additional, better designed studies made\u00a0sense. Two local\u00a0\u00a0doctors, Dr. Charles Wohl and Dr. Siobhan McNally, a pediatrician,\u00a0emphasized the need for\u00a0\u00a0more information. Dr. McNally stressed the importance of\u00a0gathering specific information about\u00a0\u00a0the risk to children. And several members of the\u00a0Expert Panel agreed with her that because of\u00a0\u00a0the multiple pathways of exposure, and the\u00a0high levels of PCB-contaminated soil in residential\u00a0\u00a0areas, they thought it appropriate to design a serum PCB study of children and young people in\u00a0\u00a0Pittsfield.<\/span><\/p>\n

Then, in 1999, MADPH issued a waterfowl consumption advisory from Pittsfield to Great Barrington due to PCB concentrations in wood ducks and mallards collected by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from the river. Concerns expressed by local residents regarding possible health effects resulting from exposure to PCB contamination are being investigated by the MADPH.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\u201cWhile the two miles downstream from the facility have historically been channelized, the river’s course is relatively unaffected (with the exception of the numerous dams downstream) in areas south of Pittsfield. The approximately 10 miles of river from the confluence of the East and West Branches of the Housatonic to the headwaters of Woods Pond in Lenox are bordered by extensive floodplains (up to 3,000 feet wide), ranges from 45 to 100 feet in width, and has a meandering pattern with numerous oxbows and backwaters.\u00a0 Woods Pond, a shallow 56-acre impoundment, was formed by the construction of a dam in the late 1800s.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Not only did massive amounts of PCB oil leak from the factories into the river but GE employed an absorbent material – Fuller’s earth – to soak up the large amount of oil that spilled from the transformers under test to the factory floors. <\/span><\/p>\n

Here’s what Ed and Charlie had to say about that:<\/span><\/p>\n

“CF: Sure, well look at Kelly<\/span>
\nEB: Yeah, Niederjohn …<\/span>
\nCF: He was terrible, you know.<\/span>
\nEB: And now he’s concerned about the Fullers Earth … which, you know, there’s a million and a half pounds of Fullers Earth buried somewhere around Pittsfield.<\/span>
\nCF: You bet, well they’re digging that up little by little.<\/span>
\nEB: Little by little …<\/span>
\nCF: They’re finding the sites.<\/span>
\nEB: Well if I were them I’d be worried about where the Stop N’ Shop is because there used to be a big dump right in back of the Stop N’ Shop.\u00c2\u00a0 Remember there used to be an outdoor movie there.”<\/span>
\nCF: That\u2019s a wetlands area too …”<\/span><\/p>\n

There was more oil-soaked Fuller’s earth than GE knew what to do with. Tractor trailer loads were taken to the Pittsfield City dump. <\/span>GE’s utilized other off-site dumping grounds. GE gave away barrels to its employees to fill in their wet backyards. In addition the company gave away oil-soaked flooring that employees used to build outdoor decks on their homes.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Here’s testimony from the deposition of Gerald Doyle Sr., the then Mayor’s father, and former head of the Pittsfield Department of Public Works. On\u00a0December 7. 1997 he was asked about GE\u2019s use of the Pittsfield\u00a0landfill:<\/span><\/p>\n

Deposition, Gerald Doyle, Sr., December 9, 1997, Caroline Church vs. General Electric Co.<\/b><\/span>
\nQuestion: Were you at any point familiar with how much stuff came out\u00a0of the General Electric facility and was put in the landfill?<\/span>
\nAnswer: A shit load.<\/span>
\nQuestion: What do you mean by that?<\/span>
\nAnswer: A bundle.<\/span>
\nQuestion: How many truckloads a day?<\/span>
\nAnswer: I would say they would bring in, and I am guessing, maybe six truckloads a day. You know, ten wheeler dump.<\/span>
\nQuestion: Six ten wheeler dump trucks a day.<\/span>
\nAnswer: Every.<\/span>
\nQuestion: Every day?<\/span>
\nAnswer: Every day.<\/span>
\nQuestion: For the life of the landfill?<\/span>
\nAnswer: Yes.<\/span>
\nQuestion: And there was no tax payment to the city?<\/span>
\nAnswer: I don\u2019t believe so, no.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Just some of the GE contaminated waste Pittsfield found when it began to excavate the city landfill.<\/span><\/p>\n

Several critical documents emerged that showed how extensive GE’s use of PCBs was, and how GE had hid its extensive and irresponsible dumping practice. The Niederjohn memos, sparked by Kelly Niederjohn’s concern for future generations, reinforced what Ed Bates and Charlie Fessenden and HRI had been telling the community:<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

When the City of Pittsfield was constructing its new Allendale Elementary School much of that land was filled in with contaminated material from GE.<\/span><\/p>\n

It turns out a former dump favored by contractors hired to dispose of GE waste was later used for the Dorothy Amos Children’s Park.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

When the whole issue of PCB contamination became a major public issue – thanks in large part to HRI. Because several former truckers came fro HRI with detailed information about where they had disposed of GE waste. Unfortunately, both the Massachusetts’ Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) and the EPA were skeptical about this information. Because we were now learning that GE waste had been widely distributed throughout the city and beyond.<\/span><\/p>\n

HRI pressured the DEP to set up an anonymous 800 phone number for truckers and present and former GE employees to report on how and where PCB-contaminated materials had been disposed on. Needless to say, DEP received many invaluable leads.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

2007 cleanup of PCB contaminated fill at the Allendale School – Photo EPA<\/span><\/p>\n

HRI discovered from various truckers how often\u00a0they had dumped in residential areas. As we talked to more and more homeowners in the Lakewood neighborhood – a neighborhood bordering the GE facility and home to many GE employees, we discovered that GE had homeowners fill out a contract absolving the company of any liability. Claiming that they had received “clean fill.”<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

HRI’s continuous advocacy with local homeowners resulted in hundreds of home being tested for PCBs by GE under the supervision of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection. Pittsfield homeowners were up in arms, vigorously demanding that GE clean their homes.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

HRI helped to organize the neighborhood:<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

While initially resistant to the notion that so many Lakewood homes had received GE contaminated fill, MDEP began to give into the building public pressure to insist that GE test homes.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Not surprisingly GE mounted a massive public relations campaign to deny the seriousness of the problem. Taking full paid ads in The Berkshire Eagle:<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

The testing also revealed that river front homes had exceedingly high levels of PCB in their backyards:<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

It became increasingly apparent how very contaminated these homes were. In response to the growing realization of the scale of the problem, Lakewood neighbors expressed their anger with the state, GE, and local government:<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

It got to the point where whole streets were being remediated:<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

GE’s PCBs had made their way to backyards in residential neighborhoods, to a children’s park, and the Allendale Schoolyard. The Pittsfield softball field was built over barrels filled with PCB waste. GE had used the city’s landfill as their own toxic waste dump. GE had polluted Silver Lake and Goodrich Pond and both the east and west branches of the Housatonic River. GE had also filled in the land adjacent to the River, now the home of a series of small businesses:<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Vinnie Stracuzzi protests his poisoned land, Newell Street<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Following extensive remediation of backyards, DEP issued some statistics:<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

The Housatonic River clean up began adjacent to Building 64. GE workers had told us they routinely dumped barrels of oil and Fuller’s earth on GE land alongside the river. But the EPA was stunned when initial tests revealed how terribly contaminated that section of the river was.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

According to the EPA: “In December 1996, EPA issued GE a Unilateral Order to remove highly contaminated sediments and bank soils in the area adjacent to Building 68. As a result, in 1997 and 1998 GE excavated and disposed of 5,000 cubic yards of heavily contaminated sediments (average PCB concentration of approximately 1,534 ppm) from a 550-foot section of the river and 2,230 cubic yards of heavily contaminated bank soils (average concentration of surficial soils of 720 ppm and average concentration of subsurface soils of 5,896 ppm) from a 170-foot stretch of the riverbank. Sediment removal activities were performed “in the dry;” that is by installing sheetpile into the river and diverting the flow of the river around the sheetpile, dewatering small sections, and removing the sediments with standard excavating equipment located on top of the riverbank.”<\/span><\/p>\n

For those of you unfamiliar with PCB levels and measurements, it might be helpful to appreciate that Massachusetts DEP has determined that the safe level (though there is no safe level) for PCBs for soils in a residential setting is 2 parts per million (ppm). So here the average levels in the river sediment was 5,896 ppm and on the river bank an average of 720 ppm. \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Quite frankly the remediation of the Building 64 site was a resounding vindication for HRI:\u00a0If\u00a0\u00a0GE\u2019s estimated average concentration of 1,550 parts per million for the\u00a0sediments in the hot spot\u00a0\u00a0is even close, then at least 10 tons of pure PCBs were removed\u00a0from the river bed off Building\u00a0\u00a064. \u00a0That would represent more than half of the 39,000 or 40,000 pounds a GE\u00a0study \u00a0estimated \u00a0was in the Housatonic River sediments above the\u00a0Connecticut border in 1983. This is but one\u00a0\u00a0example of a massive failure to adequately\u00a0represent the scope and amount of contamination.\u00a0\u00a0And it is important to note that Ed\u00a0Bates\u2019 figures included only the daily loss rate at Power\u00a0\u00a0Transformer. We have learned\u00a0over the years that there were continuing additional sources of\u00a0\u00a0PCB oil, including at the\u00a0GE Axe Yard on the plant and leakage of the extraordinary numbers of\u00a0\u00a0barrels in which GE stored\u00a0its waste oils.<\/span><\/p>\n

Negotiations and more negotiations between GE and the EPA and MDEP and studies and more studies. And HRI meetings and workshops and official comments and responses to all these studies and proposals.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Here’s how the EPA summarized the results of these negotiations:<\/span> “On October 7, 1999, representatives of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; U.S. Department of Justice; the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, Office of the Attorney General and Executive Office of Environmental Affairs; the State of Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection and Office of the Attorney General; the U.S. Department of Interior; the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; the City of Pittsfield; the Pittsfield Economic Development Authority and the General Electric Company (GE) reached a comprehensive agreement relating to the cleanup of GE’s Pittsfield facility, certain off-site properties and the Housatonic River …<\/span><\/p>\n

“The Consent Decree provides for cleanup of the Housatonic River and associated areas, cleanup of the General Electric Plant facility, environmental restoration of the Housatonic River, compensation for natural resource damages, and government recovery of past and future response costs … That agreement will become effective upon entry of the Consent Decree.”<\/span><\/p>\n

As for the Housatonic River:<\/span>
\nHousatonic River – Upper \u00bd Mile Reach<\/strong><\/span>
\nObjective: to achieve a clean-up that is protective of human health and the environment within the Upper \u00bd Mile Reach and to prevent further downstream migration of contaminants.<\/span><\/em>
\nGE will undertake the following in the Upper \u00bd Mile Reach (Newell Street Bridge to the Lyman Street Bridge):<\/span><\/em>
\nRemove and restore sediments per final design work plan already submitted by GE and approved by EPA.<\/span><\/em>
\nRemove and restore bank soils to achieve 10 ppm average in top foot and 15 ppm average at 1-3 feet.<\/span><\/em>
\nHousatonic River – Next 1 \u00bd Mile Reach from the Lyman Street Bridge to the Confluence of the East and West Branches (includes sediments and riverbanks)<\/strong><\/span><\/em>
\nObjective: to achieve a clean-up that is protective of human health and the environment within the 1 \u00bd Mile Reach and to prevent downstream migration of contaminants …<\/span><\/em>
\nEPA will select response actions for the1 \u00bd Mile Reach after the completion of the EE\/CA and after consultation with GE, affected property owners in the 1 \u00bd Mile Reach floodplain, and the Citizens’ Coordinating Council, and review by EPA’s National Remedy Review Board.<\/span><\/em>
\nEPA will implement the selected response action. The costs will be shared by GE and EPA with the amount of funding dependent on the overall costs:<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n