Transcript Document
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 1941. In 1960
Navy began bombing practices
Exercises conducted between 159 to 228
days per year. Highest between February
and August
Between 1983 and 1998 1,862 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 healthbased 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.