MINUTES OF THE meeting
of the
ASSEMBLY Committee on Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Mining
Seventy-First Session
February 14, 2001
The Committee on Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Miningwas called to order at 1:00 p.m., on Wednesday, February 14, 2001. Chairman Marcia de Braga presided in Room 1214 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Guest List. All exhibits are available and on file at the Research Library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mrs. Marcia de Braga, Chairman
Mr. Tom Collins, Vice Chairman
Mr. Douglas Bache
Mr. David Brown
Mr. John Carpenter
Mr. Jerry Claborn
Mr. David Humke
Mr. John J. Lee
Mr. John Marvel
Mr. Harry Mortenson
Mr. Roy Neighbors
COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:
Ms. Genie Ohrenschall
GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:
Assemblywoman Sharron Angle, District 29
Assemblywoman Merle Berman, District 2
Assemblywoman Vivian Freeman, District 24
Assemblywoman Dawn Gibbons, District 25
Assemblywoman Ellen Koivisto, District 14
Assemblywoman Sheila Leslie, District 27
Assemblyman Mark Manendo, District 18
Assemblywoman Kathy McClain, District 15
Assemblywoman Bonnie Parnell, District 40
Assemblywoman Debbie Smith, District 30
Assemblywoman Sandra Tiffany, District 21
Assemblyman Wendell Williams, District 6
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Linda Eissmann, Committee Policy Analyst
Marla McDade Williams, Committee Policy Analyst
June Rigsby, Committee Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT:
Glen Anderson, Policy Specialist, National Conference of State Legislators
Dr. Thomas Sinks, Epidemiologist, Center for Disease Control
Dr. Allan Smith, Arsenic specialist, University of California, Berkeley
Brenda Gross, Fallon parent of a leukemia victim
Dr. James Forsythe, Medical Oncologist, Reno
Dr. Gary Ridenour, Fallon Physician
Diane Hansen, Fallon citizen
Peter Washburn, Attorney, Senator Harry Reid’s Office
Jerry Buk, University of Nevada, Reno, Cooperative Extension
Juanita Cox, Citizen Lobbyist
Robert Sonderfan, Citizen Lobbyist
Chairman de Braga called the Assembly Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Mining Committee to order. Roll was called, and a quorum was judged to be in place. All members were present except for Assemblywoman Ohrenschall who was noted as an excused absence. Chairman de Braga welcomed as guests the Assembly Committee on Health and Human Services. Roll was called, and all members were present.
Chairman de Braga, in her opening statements, remarked that this was the third and final day of hearings on the Fallon leukemia cluster. As with the previous two days, a balance of expert testimony and public input was scheduled.
Expert testimony commenced with the introduction of Glen Anderson, Policy Specialist, National Conference of State Legislators (NCSL). The role of the NCSL was described as providing assistance to state legislators on environmental health issues. Mr. Anderson distributed two handouts that outlined a list of environmental disease registry legislation by state (Exhibit C) and NCSL environmental projects (Exhibit D).
Mr. Anderson commenced his testimony with an overview of what was known about the link between environmental agents and cancer. Scientific investigation of childhood cancer was complicated by the relative rarity of cases as well as by the difficulty of estimating past exposure levels for young victims after they developed cancer.
What had been established was that children had less developed immune systems and were therefore more susceptible to the effects of toxic exposure (e.g., mercury, lead, pesticide). Childhood cancer was described as the second leading cause of death in children under age 14, with leukemia the most common type of cancer.
Human research on the link between the environment and cancer lagged behind animal research. To date, clear causes had evaded scientists in cancer cluster investigations. An extensive list of variables under investigation included long latency periods between exposure and onset of disease, the plethora of potential chemical agents, and the tendency of families to change residency often.
Disease tracking registries were described as offering the greatest hope for closing the information gap between exposure data and the cancer data. Nationwide, state disease registry information would be combined with background data on environmental exposure to promote understanding of cancer causes.
Mr. Anderson reviewed innovations made in other states. Geographic mapping was described as a significant enhancement to some state registries and promised to aid in more expeditious detection of future cancer clusters. Some states had taken a preventative approach through the introduction of children’s environmental health legislation. Because most law had been designed around protection of adult health, Maryland and California were cited as two states that enacted specific health guidelines for children.
Federal efforts in the areas of children’s health, the environment, and disease tracking (e.g. Center for Disease Control) had paralleled and supported the states’ disease registry efforts. The Food Quality and Protection Act of 1996 resulted in the restriction of pesticide use that might cause childhood disease. The Children’s Health Act of 2000 addressed childhood cancer through the requirement of the study of environmental and other risk factors for diseases such as leukemia. A uniform reporting system to track epidemiological data was described as an essential success factor.
Mr. Anderson added that the clean up of identified environmental hazards would always be a positive side benefit to all cancer cluster investigations, even when a definitive cause for the cluster had never been found.
Chairman de Braga requested recommendations on methods for facilitating the sharing of registry data between the states. Mr. Anderson explained that there had not been a lot of work done to connect cancer cluster data. He was unsure of how a streamlined system would be designed. Chairman de Braga posed a question on the prevalence of backlog in state registries across the nation. Mr. Anderson clarified that all states had registries in place, however it was unknown about how vigilant each state was in monitoring their registry data. The scrutiny of data by any state, including the integration of geographical mapping information, would take a much greater investment of time and resources.
Mr. Anderson reassured Chairman de Braga that his agency did track the research on registry efforts in each state. Most states had not done a lot to make connections between a cancer cluster and environmental exposures. Legislative bills had been introduced, however few had been passed. On a positive note, Mr. Anderson added that awareness of the need was increasing.
Chairman de Braga expressed her appreciation to Mr. Anderson for his testimony. Before introducing the next expert, Chairman de Braga made several announcements to the committees. Senator Harry Reid’s Office let it be known that a $500,000 federal fund would be available to help enhance the cancer registry data gathering. The second announcement was regarding the Nevada GOLD (Guarding Our Local Drinking Water) program. Jerry Buk would address a positive breakthrough on the future of this program later in the hearings.
Dr. Thomas Sinks, an Epidemiologist with the Center for Disease Control (CDC), distributed a 6-page handout (Exhibit E) that contained his testimony on the epidemiology of Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia (ALL) and the work of the CDC and their sister agency, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). Dr. Sinks commenced testimony with his assurance to the residents of Fallon of the CDC’s deep concern over the leukemia cluster. Although causes had rarely been identified in cluster studies, the survival rate for ALL of 80 percent was judged to be a significant milestone in the cancer battle.
Dr. Sinks emphasized that the highest priorities remained the need to identify causes and prevent future occurrences. Although described as a relatively rare diagnosis in children, the national rate was known to be one case of ALL per 6,600 children. This translated to an estimated 2,400 new cases of ALL each year in the United States. Gender, age, race, and socio-economic status were highlighted as significant factors in the profile of a leukemia victim. The peak age was reported for children between the age of 2 and 5 years, with boys known to be 30 percent more likely to develop ALL. Genetic and environmental factors were judged to play a significant, but unexplained role, in the development of ALL.
Dr. Sinks continued with a list of suspected cancer-inducing factors, which included ionizing radiation, certain medical conditions (e.g., Down’s Syndrome), high birth weight, maternal history of fetal loss, and birth order. Other inconsistent evidence included parental smoking, parental occupation exposure, and postnatal infection. In-utero exposure to ultrasound examinations had not been associated with ALL.
In terms of cancer prevention and control programs at CDC, support of population-based cancer registries and cancer screening efforts were described as in place across the country. The compilation of the various state registries enabled some longitudinal oversight capabilities by the CDC. Federal support in Nevada was further illustrated by $1.4 million of funding of the Nevada Cancer Registry between 1994 and 2000.
Dr. Sinks reported that CDC had participated in 108 cancer cluster field investigations, convened a national conference on the clustering of health events, published recommendations, and provided technical assistance to health departments nationwide. He expressed his concern over the tremendous amount of time and money required to conduct field investigations, with most studies revealing no conclusive findings. Positive remedial steps, however, were reported as implemented in most cases.
Chairman de Braga requested clarification of the definition of a cluster and the number of years typically involved. Dr. Sinks explained that the word cluster, from an epidemiological point, was defined as being a greater number of cases than expected statistically. The word cluster did not necessarily imply that there would be a unifying cause. He further emphasized that statistical tests looked only at probabilities of chance occurrence and did not address the likelihood of cause. CDC treated each suspected cluster as a unique situation.
Assemblywoman Berman requested clarification of the term “panel of experts” on page 6 of the handout (Exhibit E) and why the federal government was not involved in the testing. Dr. Sinks defended the practice of assembling a wide variety of medical, academic, and scientific experts for purposes of peer review. In response to the issue of federal involvement, Dr. Sinks explained that the CDC responded to numerous requests by the invitation of states facing a public health problem. The CDC role was described as being supportive, but was not one of assuming ownership of the problem.
Assemblywoman Leslie expressed her concern that there was no formal national tracking system in place for cancer clusters. Dr. Sinks agreed that there was need for a national tracking system, but it would require higher review and authority. Additionally, it would be a difficult process to implement because of the variability of defining and identifying clusters. In response to Assemblywoman Leslie’s question about a cluster being simply one of a high number of cases in a specific geographic area, Dr. Sinks explained that defining a cluster would only be the first step. It would be followed by the challenge of establishing the corrective steps needed to deal with the problem.
Dr. Sinks elaborated that, unlike breast cancer screening programs, there was no health screening program for childhood ALL. He stated that requests for cancer cluster investigations were predominantly for the more common, screenable cancers and, therefore, targeted the adult population.
To Assemblywoman Leslie’s inquiry about the role of arsenic, Dr. Sinks stated that it would be impossible to say definitively that it would be associated with the Fallon cluster. It had been established that the levels exceeded acceptable amounts and that arsenic was known to be a human carcinogen. He encouraged the investigative team to pursue the examination of other agents, such as volatile organic chemicals and ionizing radiation.
Assemblywoman Gibbons expressed concern as to whether everything was being done to minimize risk and exposure. She also asked for clarification on the 20 percent mortality rate among ALL victims and the significance of the demographics (e.g., age, gender). Dr. Sinks responded that it was unknown if all preventative and remedial steps were in place. It had been established that the 20 percent mortality was seen in older victims where chemotherapy was less effective. Late diagnosis was also a negative for survival.
Clarification was requested by Assemblywoman McClain on whether the $500,000 federal fund would be enough to bring the Nevada Cancer Registry up to date. She also expressed concern over the reported two-year lag in the registry data and the possibility that there could be other undetected clusters. Dr. Sinks stated that the Nevada registry was average for reporting lag in comparison to other states. There were some state-of-the-art systems developed in other states. Dr. Sinks cautioned that having up-to-date cancer registries would not necessarily be the answer to early detection of cancer clusters. It would likely result in a multitude of unnecessary investigations. Generally, the registry data had been judged most useful after attention had been drawn to a suspected cluster.
Assemblywoman McClain commented on the fact that the current ALL cluster in Fallon had been identified by the smallness of the community and not by the cancer registry. Dr. Sinks concurred and added that the current study would likely spur the Nevada Health Division to look at the occurrence of ALL across the entire state. The most difficult challenge was described as being able to take data from the cancer registry and tie it directly to environmental agents.
In response to Assemblywoman Berman ‘s question regarding statistical chance, Dr. Sinks clarified that nobody ever developed cancer because of chance. There was always a cause, and the challenge in Fallon would be to discover the common denominator among the 11 children. The unifying cause was not yet known, but eventually science would identify the commonality. The probability of the Fallon cluster being a chance event was described by Dr. Sinks as being unlikely.
Chairman de Braga raised a question about ALL cases that occurred outside of the identified cluster timeframe of 1995-1999. She requested clarification about the upcoming assignments of the panel of experts and whether two 1992 cases would be considered for inclusion in the panel’s discussions. Dr. Sinks explained that the panel of experts had been assembled by the Nevada Health Division. As such, the Nevada Health Division would charge the panel with direction and recommendations for action. Dr. Sinks did agree that it would be reasonable to look at the 1992 cases to determine if inclusion would be appropriate. He referred the Chairman to Dr. Guinan for specific answers.
Assemblyman Collins posed a question about the thoroughness of the health division’s investigation. In response, Dr. Sinks stated that it would be virtually impossible to look at all suspected agents. The accepted process was to narrow the list of hypotheses to a testable number and then prioritize them based on probability of involvement.
Assemblyman Collins, using the example of PCB contamination cleanup, reiterated his concern that limiting the investigation could limit the answers. Dr. Sinks stated that it would be imperative to separate the things that had been known to be hazardous but had remedial solutions versus the need to answer scientific questions that could not be answered. Preventing the next case of leukemia would remain the primary goal.
Dr. Allan Smith, an arsenic specialist with University of California, Berkeley, commenced testimony with a review of various domestic and international arsenic research programs. Dr. Smith reported on his eight-year research project in Nevada, which included a bladder cancer study. The Nevada Tumor Registry was utilized in this study as well as in a childhood cancer study.
Dr. Smith explained that most of his cancer research had been with adults and included cluster investigative work. A leukemia cluster in North Carolina was determined to be related to solvents in a tire producing plant. Most of his cluster investigations did not, however, result in the discovery of a definitive agent.
In his review of the Nevada tumor registry data for Churchill County for the years 1979 to 1999, Dr. Smith detected only two cases of leukemia. With those statistics in mind, Dr. Smith characterized the current cluster as “remarkable.” Armed with the knowledge of Fallon’s levels of arsenic for decades, Dr. Smith stated emphatically that it would be highly unlikely that arsenic would be the cause of the leukemia cluster.
In response to a question about handouts, Dr. Smith replied that he had not prepared written testimony, and he referred the committees to his Web site www.socrates.berkeley.edu/-asrg/ .
Chairman de Braga inquired about Dr. Smith’s choice of Fallon for his research studies on bladder cancer. Dr. Smith explained that Fallon was selected because the area was known to have some of the highest arsenic levels in the nation. The Fallon population was judged to be a highly exposed group. His researchers looked for genetic damage in bladder cells associated with high cancer rates.
Chairman de Braga asked if his research included the effects of arsenic on the immune system. Dr. Smith replied that it did not. His research instead focused on the end result of the cancer. He added that if he had judged it to be a high priority research question, it would have been done. The evidence was not there to support arsenic and an adverse effect on the immune system.
In response to Assemblyman Collins’ question regarding the difficulty of discovering combinations of causal agents, Dr. Smith acknowledged that this was a significant challenge. The synergy between two agents had been investigated, an example being the combination of smoking and arsenic. He made the distinction, however that the sudden onset of a cancer cluster was different and did not fit the classic profile of long-term synergistic effects. The sudden introduction of an environmental co-factor suggested an infectious agent, for example.
Assemblywoman Gibbons requested clarification of the list of suggested questions that was included in their information packet. Chairman de Braga explained that these were supplied as a guideline to the committee members.
Assemblywoman Gibbons posed a question about the levels of arsenic, bladder cancer rates, and cure rates in Churchill County compared with other areas. Dr. Smith clarified that typical arsenic levels in the U.S. were 2 micrograms per liter. Fallon, Lyon County, and Kings County, California had always tested at 90 to 100 micrograms per liter. The private wells in Churchill County revealed some of the highest arsenic levels in the world.
In response to the subject of bladder cancer incidence and cure rates, Dr. Smith described his long-term study as still in the analysis phase. A proposal for the study of lung cancer in Nevada had recently been submitted to the National Institutes for Health (NIH). Using a method called “rapid case ascertainment” with data from the Nevada Tumor Registry, Dr. Smith was optimistic of a more rapid identification of lung cancer.
Assemblywoman Gibbons requested clarification on the extremely high levels of arsenic in Fallon’s private wells and the interplay between dosage and individual immunity. Dr. Smith explained that he had deliberately studied wells with the highest levels of arsenic, selecting 11 families whose wells exceeded 1,000 micrograms per liter.
Chairman de Braga added that a recurring question among the committees was the threshold amount at which arsenic became a problem. Dr. Smith elaborated that in their risk assessment studies, at 50 micrograms per liter, there was an estimated probability of 1 in 100 people dying of cancer. He concluded that it was an acceptable fact that consumption of water with 90 to 100 micrograms of arsenic was detrimental to public health.
Brenda Gross, a Fallon resident and mother of one of the leukemia victims, commenced testimony. Mrs. Gross shared the heartbreak and stress of dealing with a devastating illness in the family. She acknowledged the involvement of the Nevada Health Division and their sharing of information. Her specific concerns were centered on the difficulty of making treatment choices for her son, constantly having to weigh the side effects of treatment against the chances of death. Mrs. Gross addressed a further concern regarding the tendency to dismiss a cause, such as arsenic. She emphasized that investigation into combination agents (e.g., arsenic plus another environmental agent) would be imperative.
Mrs. Gross expressed her certainty that there was a definitive cause in Fallon, and she hoped that the Nevada Health Division would be aggressive in their pursuit of common denominators. She concluded by saying that, with only one of her four children affected, she was baffled by what would be so unique about her one son (e.g., genetic).
On behalf of both committees, Chairman de Braga expressed her sincere appreciation to Mrs. Gross for sharing her personal story. Assemblywoman Leslie reiterated her appreciation and asked Mrs. Gross if, in her judgment, the state of Nevada could be doing more for the families and the community. Mrs. Gross added that testing of private well water, soil testing, jet fuel studies and air quality studies in surrounding areas might be helpful.
Assemblywoman Leslie added that, as a minimum, establishing a central place for questions would be warranted for the community. It was emphasized that recommendations would be most welcome from the families of Churchill County.
In response to Assemblywoman Gibbons, Mrs. Gross explained that her son’s chemotherapy was being done in Fallon on a weekly basis and at the University of California, Davis on a monthly basis.
Dr. James Forsythe, Reno Oncologist, was introduced as the next presenter. He distributed a handout (Exhibit F), a 1979 newspaper article which described a suspected cancer cluster in northern Nevada. At that time, Dr. Forsythe was one of only two oncologists in the area, the significance being that he had firsthand knowledge of every cancer case in the area. This lead to his discovery of what he considered to be a cancer cluster in the Fallon area. His concern was amplified by the Veteran’s Hospital in Reno.
In 1979, an investigative study was initiated by the University of California, Berkeley, Public Health Service. Their statistical analyses revealed significant increases in brain and testicular cancer in the Fallon area. The report was delivered to the chairman of the Northern Nevada Cancer Council, Dr. John Shields, and the matter was not pursued.
Dr. Forsythe described his ongoing involvement in the diagnosis and treatment of Fallon cancer patients. He had long speculated on the commonality of the drinking water as the source of the problem, with arsenic levels at 20 times the national average. Today, Dr. Forsythe stated that his focus was diverted to contamination of water supplies by petroleum products originating in industries or perhaps the naval base.
Dr. Forsythe next shared anecdotal stories from various sources which he believed could have significance. The first point he highlighted was the high water table in Fallon (i.e., less than 50 feet) in combination with poor water quality. Secondly, Dr. Forsythe commented on the reported practice at the Fallon NAS of routinely spraying weeds with jet fuel. His third point centered on reports from utility inspectors excavating soil on the naval base and their observations of a petroleum stench at the 4 to 6 foot soil level. In 1995, there was an unofficial report of a large spill of petroleum products on the base. Although not revealed in the news media, the EPA did respond with remedial efforts.
Other risk factors included the atomic blast in 1963 (i.e., Shoal Project) and electromagnetic field radiation. Dr. Forsythe stated that, of all of the risk factors on a long list, childhood Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia (ALL) had been known to be induced, in part, by petroleum byproducts such as benzene and other gasoline substances. Lymphocyte assays of family members, through an analysis called ELISA, had proven to be revealing. More than 400 chemicals would be detected with ELISA methodology. Hair and urine analyses for heavy metals were also recommended by Dr. Forsythe.
Dr. Forsythe encouraged the expansion of testing by the Nevada Health Division to include the victims and families. He stated with reasonable certainty that petroleum byproducts had leached through the earth and had contaminated the high aquifers of the Churchill area. In his judgment, this would prove to be significant in the cluster investigation.
Chairman de Braga requested clarification on the 1979 cluster, specifically regarding the reaction of the medical community. Dr. Forsythe described the event as being “clinically suspicious” and was not noticed until Berkeley released their report. Chairman de Braga shared her own experience with inquiring about the cancer levels in Fallon. In reply, Dr. Forsythe expressed his disappointment in the apparent inaccuracy of the Nevada Tumor Board records. This was compounded by the fact that, in a small town like Fallon, many cancer patients left the area for treatment and were not tracked by the registry. Reporting lag time was also cited as a significant factor in the inaccuracy.
Chairman de Braga inquired about the costs and the process to test families and neighbors. Dr. Forsythe judged that it would be reasonable if a sampling of families was used and not the entire population. Hair testing would be non-invasive, and costs were estimated at $50 to $80. Urine testing for heavy metals was reported to be approximately $200. The ELISA testing for multiple chemical exposure was described as $300 to $400 per sample, but was the most diagnostic method. The latter test was based on the detection of antibodies produced by the body in reaction to various foreign substances.
In response to Chairman de Braga’s question about herbicides and pesticides, Dr. Forsythe acknowledged that these substances would need to be considered, given the extensive agricultural activity in the valley. Chairman de Braga requested recommendations for how to proceed with the cluster investigation.
Dr. Forsythe summarized his recommendations as: the testing of the victims for chemicals in the hair and urine, testing a control group of friends or neighbors, and thoroughly analyzing the drinking water for all possible pollutants. Dr. Forsythe clarified that he was not familiar with the list of previously tested substances in drinking water.
Dr. Forsythe reviewed the types of cancers he had handled during the last 10 years in the Churchill County area; 40 cases of breast cancer, 30 cases of colon cancer, 35 cases of lung cancer, 15 cases of Hodgkin’s/Lymphoma/leukemia, 25 cases of prostate cancer, 20 cases of skin cancer, 8 cases of brain cancer, 5 cases of ovarian cancer, and 8 cases of head/neck cancers. It was notable that these were just the cases handled by Dr. Forsythe and did not include the cancer statistics from 10 other oncologists in Reno.
Assemblywoman Koivisto asked for elaboration on the microwaves from radar systems at the Fallon Naval Air Station (NAS). Dr. Forsythe stated that electromagnetic fields (EMF) must be considered, however EMF research to date was inconclusive.
Chairman de Braga introduced Dr. Gary Ridenour, a Fallon physician. He commenced testimony with the topic of jet fuel, in particular JP8. It was introduced to Fallon in 1991, and shortly after that, Dr. Ridenour noticed an immediate change in the liver function tests (e.g., liver damage) in patients. Dr. Ridenour shared his extensive research on incidents of jet fuel leakage on the base. He further stated that he had not observed intentional malice on the part of the Navy regarding the subject of jet fuel. What they know was described by Dr. Ridenour as what they were told by the Department of Defense.
Often dismissed by the military as similar to kerosene, the high toxicity of jet fuel, even in minute quantities, had been demonstrated in multiple studies and was known to provoke serious health effects including skin penetration, decreased immune system response, increase in lung permeability, and headaches, to name a few. During the 1990’s, medical articles abounded on the subject of the toxicity of JP8.
In terms of fuel dumping and evaporation, the jet fuel would still exist in some form when it made contact with the earth. Dr. Ridenour cited a recent example of a cloud sighting near the base, described as a large brown vapor emitted from the start-up of jets. He added that one of the biggest problems with JP8 was the low cost of 80 cents per gallon, approximately half of the cost of its predecessor fuel JP5.
JP8 had so far not been allowed on aircraft carriers, a point which Dr. Ridenour considered significant. It was utilized extensively during the Gulf War, which suggested the need to connect the fuel with the highly publicized health problems among the military personnel. Even brief contact with JP8 fumes resulted in the immediate detectable presence of fuel in the breath of the person. Dr. Ridenour cited several recent research articles about the negative health effects of exposure to jet fuel.
In regard to the 6-inch fuel line that delivered jet fuel to the Fallon NAS, Dr. Ridenour described it as more than 30 years old, made of steel, and highly susceptible to corrosion and seismic activity in the desert. The integrity of the pipeline would be highly questionable. A map of Fallon displayed the path of the pipeline, described as running within 10 feet of schools in Fallon and crossing the parking lot of the new Baptist Church. The pipeline was further described as coming in contact with the Carson River and every ditch and irrigation channel across the town. In retrospect, it should have been routed around the city of Fallon, and not through it. Vents, located along the route, were visibly damaged in certain areas.
Dr. Ridenour expressed his alarm that, despite the plethora of reports and warnings about the hazards of the jet fuel, nothing was done about it. Morgan Kinder, the operators of the fuel pipeline, had some checks on the integrity of the system. Dr. Ridenour described a photo of one of the pipeline test locations. It was covered with spider webs, indicating that it had not been disturbed by personnel assigned to monitor the pipeline. Morgan Kinder supposedly used pressurization tests to detect leaks, with the problem being the unknown amount of pressure used during the test. In Dr. Ridenour’s judgment, given the 300-mile length of the pipeline, it would have to be a sizeable leak before it would be detected as a pressure drop. At a leakage rate of one drop per second, the soil contamination in one year would be 300 gallons.
Dr. Ridenour summarized by saying it generally would take 8-10 years after introduction of a toxic material before the onset of disease. In terms of what had changed in Fallon during the last 10 years, Dr. Ridenour summarized that insecticide spraying had actually declined due to fewer fields. He added there had been no increase in radar nor had there been a change in water quality. Whereas literature searches on the topics of arsenic and leukemia yielded no matches, the topics of bone marrow and JP8 fuel revealed multiple references.
Despite the military’s comparison of JP8 fuel to kerosene, Dr. Ridenour cautioned the committees that it would be akin to comparing plastic explosives to play dough. He encouraged the committees to consider requesting that JP5 be pumped through the pipeline from Benecia for an interim period in order to complete testing of JP8. A determination of the complete integrity of the line was also recommended by Dr. Ridenour. Finally, the aerosol effects of the fuel should be studied in greater depth. Air currents in the desert, below 18,000 feet of altitude, were described as highly unpredictable, and jet fuel particles would be very capable of making contact with people and soil.
Dr. Ridenour reemphasized that the change in jet fuels had to be considered as one of the most significant new events during the last 10 years in Churchill County. He once again stated that the Navy itself would not necessarily be at fault if they had also been “sold a bill of goods” on the merits of JP8. Morgan Kinder should be made to reroute the pipeline around the town.
Assemblyman Carpenter inquired about the type of fuel used on commercial jets. Dr. Ridenour stated that it was Jet A, a fuel that was closer to JP4 in composition. He cautioned that, because of its economical cost, some airlines were considering switching to JP8.
In response to Assemblyman Claborn’s comment about the fuel pipeline in Las Vegas, Dr. Ridenour cited the distinction between the two as being one of age, namely that the northern Nevada line was much older. The Fallon line also pumped a greater volume, estimated at more than 400,000 gallons per month.
Assemblyman Neighbors shared his confusion regarding the Helm’s Pit in Reno, once the site of serious ground contamination and now a family recreational area for boating and fishing. Dr. Ridenour agreed that it was both suspicious and confusing, and it seemed highly unlikely that the fuel oil would be cleaned up in such a short amount of time.
Chairman de Braga introduced Diane Hansen, a Fallon resident. Ms. Hansen sought reassurance from the committees that a systematic and thorough cluster investigation would continue. She spoke candidly and shared her concerns that the next stage of the Nevada Health Division’s investigation would not happen. Ms. Hansen expressed her expectations that a team of experts would be assembled and that this investigative team would receive specific direction and adequate manpower and funding to do the job right. She further emphasized the need for the team to ask the right questions and to be forthright in their communication with the residents of Churchill County.
Making reference to a 1996 newspaper article, Ms. Hansen shared her specific concerns about an industrial plant 12 miles north of Fallon. The New American Tec Corporation arrived in Nevada after having been cited for severe environmental contamination in Kentucky. Their chemical process, a nickel and chrome plating operation, was known to utilize known carcinogens. Ms. Hansen was especially concerned that there had been no follow-up publicity on this hazardous industry.
In an effort to get answers to her questions, Ms. Hansen conducted her own research and called various agencies, including NDEP, EPA in San Francisco, the Lahontan Valley News, the Reno Gazette, and the Churchill County Planning Commission. She was surprised to hear that she had been the only person to request follow-up information on New American Tec. What she learned was that Fallon was the only location in the nation that utilized a vaporization process to plate copper using nickel carbonyl, a known carcinogen. There was evidence that New American Tec had not been totally forthcoming about their history in Kentucky in applying for a permit in Nevada.
Her inquiries to Nevada Department of Environmental Protection revealed that New American Tec was permitted to emit 2 pounds of nickel components per hour into the air. Neither the state nor the county required air monitoring on a regularly scheduled basis. Any air emission results were self-issued by the corporation. The possible significance of the New American Tec production startup of November 1996 should not be ignored.
In closing, Ms. Hansen asked for assurance that the investigation would include these small pieces of the puzzle, for example New American Tec.
Chairman de Braga acknowledged that Ms. Hansen represented widespread community concern and that the serious nature of the cluster dictated a very serious and thorough approach. It was explained that the role of the legislators would be to make recommendations. The expert panel, comprised of a variety of medical and scientific experts, would also make recommendations. Ms. Hansen was reassured that the Nevada Health Division was committed to doing as much as possible. Congressional, state, and community interest would propel the investigation in the right direction.
Ms. Hansen requested clarification on the issue of NDEP writing a requirement for monitoring into their permitting process. The New American Tec permit was up for renewal at the current time, and NDEP was said to be in negotiation with the attorney for the company to require monitoring activities. Ms. Hansen emphasized the sincere interest on the part of the Fallon residents to do what ever they could to help.
Assemblywoman de Braga echoed the words of Ms. Hansen and agreed that Fallon was, indeed, a wonderful community for families. She gratefully acknowledged the testimony of Ms. Hansen.
The next expert witness called was Peter Washburn, Attorney for Senator Reid’s office in Washington, D.C. Mr. Washburn distributed a copy of his written statements (Exhibit G). He commenced his testimony by highlighting Senator Reid’s senior membership with the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. Mr. Washburn assured the committees of Senator Reid’s deep concern over the Fallon cluster. He commended Chairman de Braga on her foresight in scheduling the special legislative hearings and acknowledged the dedication of the two committees and Dr. Mary Guinan for their participation.
Because of Senator Reid’s dual membership in both the Appropriations and Environmental Committees, he was described as being in a unique position to leverage federal resources to aid the investigative work. Senator Reid’s first priority was described as in the areas of communication, participation, and coordination. Because of the multitude of experts and citizens involved in the process, these hearings were said to set the stage for the essential communication and coordination of information sharing.
Mr. Washburn described Senator Reid’s second priority as pointing to the issue of what could and should be done now to reduce environmental risk to the citizens of Fallon. Because investigative work would likely take years, remedial steps should be implemented regardless of conclusions about causal agents. He cited the example of arsenic and stated that federal grants were forthcoming. The Small Community Safe Drinking Water Safety Act was slotted for introduction by Senator Reid. This bill would make federal grants, not loans, available to small public water systems for purposes of improving the quality of the water.
Mr. Washburn explained that Senator Reid was planning to schedule hearings in Nevada for purposes of addressing the leukemia cluster and public health concerns. Dates and agenda would be announced. Chairman de Braga expressed her thanks to Senator Reid for his early and on-going involvement in the matter.
Chairman de Braga introduced Jerry Buk, Regional Director for the University of Nevada Cooperative Extension Service in northern Nevada. Mr. Buk addressed the Nevada GOLD (Guarding Our Local Drinking Water) project in Fallon. This program was designed by a water specialist in Fallon, Mary Reed. The model employed was a “train the trainer” in which volunteers from the community were trained to share water safety information with the residents, especially those served by private wells.
Due to an unexpected illness of the project leader, the Nevada GOLD project atrophied and ceased to function by May 2000. Mr. Buk explained that the program would be reinstated immediately. The first order of business was described as a compilation of all Nevada GOLD information and dissemination of the data to all agencies and businesses that dealt with residents served by private wells.
Mr. Buk concluded by saying that the program was being reviewed and streamlined for implementation in March 2001. The new program would be tailored to include the leukemia cluster issue and would focus on educating citizens on the need to have water tested, as well as how and where to procure testing services.
In response to Chairman de Braga’s question regarding the expansion of testing, Mr. Buk shared his knowledge of some grant money connected to a Ph.D. dissertation. This was described as a possible source of funds for actual water testing for residents. Mr. Buk cautioned that the breadth of water testing (i.e., number of substances) was overwhelming. The Nevada GOLD program had looked specifically at nitrates in water, a relatively cheap and easy analysis. This was contrasted to the complexity and higher cost of testing newer substances.
The next experts to testify were Juanita Cox and Robert Sonderfan, representatives of People To Protect America and Citizens In Action. Self-described lobbyists, researchers, and investigative journalists, Ms. Cox and Mr. Sonderfan displayed a stack of articles and research information (no handouts).
Ms. Cox expressed concern over the lack of discussion of the water contaminant MTBE. Added to gasoline in the late 1970’s, it had now been known to cause three types of cancer in laboratory animals, including leukemia.
The amount of contamination of drinking water and recreational water was described as extensive, and therefore, should be added to the Fallon testing agenda, according to Ms. Cox.
Internet literature searches revealed the 2001 military construction program for Fallon NAS, specifically the plan to replace military fuel tanks. Underground fuel tanks were described by the military as being 45 years old and having known leakage problems. The immersion of the tanks in the area’s saltwater aquifer caused corrosive effects on the metal. Because contamination by various substances could be through ingestion, inhalation, or skin contact, Ms. Cox urged the expansion of testing. Fluoride was cited as an example.
Ms. Cox concluded her testimony with her observations of the 3-day hearings, described as “CYA” and damage control. Because of economic reasons or the threat of legal ramifications, some answers would never be disclosed. Massive denials and subsequent legal actions were predicted by Ms. Cox to be unavoidable.
Mr. Sonderfan commenced his testimony with a review of Project Shoal and Project Faultless. He described the hurdles and red tape he faced in researching these topics. Project Faultless was a 13-megaton detonation of a classified military warhead near Fallon. In his judgment, the military had not been forthcoming in revealing harmful practices, such as burying trash for more than 40 years. Nellis Air Force Base was described as having 30 tons of depleted uranium, with a half-life of more than four billion years.
Ms. Cox elaborated on the subject of depleted uranium and stated that the Pentagon knew in 1995 about the environmental threats posed by nuclear weapon waste. The question needed to be asked of the Fallon NAS about their use of plutonium, one of the most toxic substances known to man.
Ms. Cox concluded her testimony with an overview of other agents for investigation and testing, which included electromagnetic radiation (i.e., EMF), Agent White (i.e., Tordon), DDT, nuclear fallout, fuel dumping from jets, manganese, ethylene dibromide, and bovine leukemia viruses. Research indicated that veterinarians and dairy farmers had elevated leukemia rates. Production of milk was reportedly greater in cows infected with bovine leukemia.
Due to the lateness of the hour, Chairman de Braga interjected with a request of Ms. Cox to leave one copy of her testimony for distribution to the committees. Ms. Cox concurred and added that having her testimony cut off would be expected especially since the topic was milk.
Mr. Sonderfan interjected with a plea for the Fallon NAS to come forward with a report of chemicals used and stored on the base. His research revealed leaking storage tanks. Arsenic, according to Mr. Sonderfan, was just a smokescreen.
Leukemia was described as resulting from a one-two punch, the first being the lowering of the immune system and the second punch some exposure to a trigger agent. Bovine leukemia virus in raw milk had the capability of being transmitted to humans.
Ms. Cox interjected with comments about the synergistic effects of chemicals and environmental toxins. She further cautioned that, even if causes were suggested by a citizen, it would invite legal entanglement for years. She urged the cessation of cover-ups and human experimentation. She urged the committees to empower the community because it was most likely that the answers would come from the people. The public needed a civilian investigative board and a hotline for public input that would facilitate the reporting of environmental hazards.
Chairman de Braga explained that there was a hotline in place for citizen input. In response to Ms. Cox’s concern about reporting an incidence of environmental dumping, Chairman de Braga assured the witness that the health department in each community was there to respond to these concerns.
Assemblyman Mortensen inquired if anybody in the room knew with certainty that the Fallon NAS practiced with depleted uranium shells. Chairman de Braga elaborated that this had been suggested in several letters from other concerned constituents. It would be included in the list of recommendations.
Chairman de Braga adjourned the meeting at 5:46 p.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
June Rigsby
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Assemblywoman Marcia de Braga, Chairman
DATE: