The Vieques Problem By Monique Latalladi

Table of Contents Background / History Definition of Problem ATSDR findings Documentation Analysis Conclusion

Background / History Puerto Rico located southeast of Miami, Florida Vieques Island located 7 miles east of PR

Background / History Vieques is 20 mi long, 4.5 mi wide 33,000 acres of land In path of the easterly trade winds Temperature ranges from 76 to 83 F Land use is residential and agricultural

Background / History Navy property 11,000 acres of land in eastern half of Vieques, therefore rest of island affected by easterly trade winds.

Background / History U.S. Navy use of land: combat training with use of live ordinances, arms training Navy owns property since In 1960 Navy began bombing practices Exercises conducted between 159 to 228 days per year. Highest between February and August Between 1983 and ,862 tons of ordinances with an avg of 353 tons of high explosives

Background / History Ordinances contain varying degrees of metallic compounds: As, Cd, Cr, Fe, Mn, Hg, Pb, V, Al, Co, Ni Contain pyrotechnic devices: illuminating flares, white phosphorus mortar rounds which becomes phosphoric acid when wet. Contain organic nitrated compounds: Ammonia, hydrogen cyanide, methane, methyl alcohol, formaldehyde, etc. Weaponry includes: napalm, agent orange, depleted uranium, etc

Definition of Problem Cancer rate is 27% higher than in rest of PR Study hair study showed 44% had toxic levels of mercury, 83% civilians working for Navy had toxic levels Half of children have significant health problems: asthma, cancer, etc. No natural source of pollution other than the U.S. Navy

ATSDR Findings ATSDR: Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry PHA: Evaluate problems in Vieques associated with potential releases of hazardous substances from military training activities Finding: Eight metals were detected above health- based comparison values. Finding: “Exposure to from air contaminants potentially releases from Navy property on Vieques poses no apparent health hazard.” Exposure doses for children were above health guidelines for all metals. “Calculated doses do not mean harmful effects will occur.”

ATSDR Analysis Health based standards compared to EED Estimated exposure dose, EED EED = Conc x IR x EF x ED BW x AT  IR: Ingestion Rate  EF: Exposure Frequency  ED: Exposure Duration  BW: Body Weight  AT: Average Time Note: Exposure factors set to EPA recommended mean values.

ATSDR Analysis Causes for overestimation –ASTDR did not adjust exposure doses to account for bioavailability –Averages calculated using detected concentrations only

ATSDR Analysis Causes of underestimation –Chemicals with no health-based standards. Assumed “if no standard exists it could suggest no one has determined these chemicals are harmful.” –Exposure to multiple chemicals were not expected to be of health concern.

Conclusions Site-specific conditions, individual lifestyle, and genetic factors affect route, magnitude and duration of actual exposure. ATSDR only evaluated incidental exposure from ingestion or dermal contact with soil only. Needs to evaluate cummulative effects of ingestion from bioaccumulated chemicals in fauna/flora, that from rainwater/private wells. ATSDR needs to evaluate effect of radioactive materials found in topsoil.