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.