Chemical discharge into river alleged
Times Dispatch - April 22, 2006
An environmental group and a union representing DuPont workers claimed yesterday they have evidence that the company's Spruance plant is discharging a potentially harmful chemical into the James River.
The Virginia Chapter of the Sierra Club and the United Steelworkers union said a water sample they collected at the Chesterfield County plant's river discharge site contained PFOA. The chemical has sparked lawsuits against the company after it was found in the blood of Midwest employees and in the groundwater near a West Virginia plant.
In a statement yesterday, DuPont said the union's claims are "unverified."
"There is no way to confirm whether or not the data the Steelworkers claim to have collected are valid," the company said. "We simply don't know what methods the Steelworkers used to obtain, handle or test their water samples."
DuPont has suggested that the union is pressuring the company over PFOA to force better contract bargaining terms.
PFOA, short for perfluorooctanoic acid, is used to make Teflon, an ingredient in nonstick cookware and all-weather clothing. There is no proof that PFOA causes health problems, but the Science Advisory Board for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has called it a "likely" cancer-causing agent.
The local Spruance plant did not make PFOA but used it in Teflon manufacturing. The company has said only small amounts of PFOA were present in dispersions and its use was discontinued at the plant in 2004.
Representatives of the Sierra Club and the union said the water sample throws doubt on that. "It raises questions about whether the chemical is still being used at the plant," said Joshua Low, conservation coordinator for the Virginia Chapter of the Sierra Club.
Rick Abraham, an environmental consultant working for the Steelworkers, said he and Low paddled a canoe to the discharge site and collected the water sample in March. A copy of the sample results lists Axys Analytical Services, a laboratory in British Columbia, Canada, as performing the test. An executive with Axys Analytical said yesterday that the company's policy is not to comment on the testing it performs without approval from clients.
The Sierra Club and the union said the test showed a level of PFOA of 7 parts per billion. The EPA has not set standards for what amount of PFOA is considered safe in water.
The Steelworkers union represents about 1,800 DuPont workers at other plants. It has criticized the company's handling of PFOA at other sites.
Representatives of the Sierra Club and the Ampthill Rayon Workers Union, which represents about 1,100 local DuPont employees, were expected to meet with Virginia Department of Environmental Quality officials yesterday.
"We have been communicating with the Sierra Club because they have expressed concern about it," said Bill Hayden, a spokesman for DEQ. "We have told them we want to look into it and learn if there is anything more about the use of PFOA than the limited information we have."
Hayden said the agency has a "rigorous monitoring program" to test toxins in the river but does not test for PFOA.
DuPont said its representatives met this month with federal and state environmental officials to discuss a groundwater sampling plan. The company said it also is working to eliminate sources of exposure to PFOA from its manufacturing operations and products by 2015.
"Based on health and toxicological studies conducted by DuPont and other researchers, DuPont believes the weight of evidence indicates that PFOA exposure does not pose a health risk to the general public," the company said in its statement.
In December, DuPont agreed to pay a $16.5 million penalty to the EPA for allegedly withholding information about the potential health and environmental risks posed by PFOA after the chemical was found in the blood of workers and in groundwater around a plant in Parkersburg, W.Va. The company also agreed last year to pay $107 million to settle a lawsuit filed by residents near the plant.
Owners of Teflon-coated pots and pans are seeking class-action status for lawsuits claiming the company failed to disclose possible health risks from the cookware.
SOURCE:
http://tinyurl.com/jkmlx