TCE exposure concerns

[g0rd057]

I was wondering if anyone here could give me some advice on what to do about this issue which is bothering me.
I recently discovered that the building I work in is a former TCE hazardous waste site. (TCE was dumped into the ground there throughout 70's, 80's, and early 90's).
Several dozen people who have worked in this building during that time period have become seriously ill and\or died. They have filed lawsuits against their former employers. After reading all the horror stories about long term TCE exposure, I'm concerned about my own health if I continue to work there much longer. I have been working there only a month so far.
Supposedly the EPA had the building's former owners pay 2.5 mil. to clean up the site in the last decade or so, but they did not demolish the building so I'm assuming there is still a lot of ground contamination underneath the building's foundation.
Should I still be worried about residual TCE exposure today?
Are there any agencies which I can contact to verify that this particular worksite is not a health risk anymore?
I don't really trust my employer to tell me whether or not it's safe to work here.
I'm just seeking a little "piece of mind".

[JDenyer232]

TCE was and still is used as a degreasing agent, years ago thats what we cleaned parts with, with bare hands no less. It is suspected of causing cancer, but like everything the dose makes the poison. I really depends on how well the site was cleaned up, and how much remains today. I would bring my own water to work however.

[g0rd057]

Gotcha...
I don't even wash my hands in the building. I do it outside in the parking lot next to my car where I keep some soap and water.
The shop has many water coolers set up all over the building with tons of bottled water to drink.
I see this as evidence that someone knows that the water isn't safe in this building.
What worries me the most is how much contamination is seeping from the foundation into the air that we're breathing.

[Mike Horne]

Good news: Since the there was a cleanup, it is usually done through a polution complaint number... and the cleanup endpoints and status of the cleanup are public record.

I don't know how your state works, but you can get info from the "department of environmental quality" or suchlike. If it was a superfund site (meaning the old company was bankrupt, and the fed gov picked up the bill) then you will have to search federal records.

Okay, there is a lot of jargon you probably will get a headache reading.

Since the contamination is likely to be in the groundwater, then the tool that they use to both monitor and remediate the plume is a monitoring well. It looks like the manhole things you can see in the corners of tank fields at gas stations and has dire warnings like "Monitoring well, do not fill" sadly this sometimes doesn't work... but that's another story

If it is not in a concrete manhole, then they are usually encased in metal bollards and are about waist high.

If the cleanup is still ongoing, you'll see somebody come every once in a while and look like they are fishing with a three foot one inch diameter white plastic bailer... removing water and then doing some tests.

If these structures are filled with concrete... then the authorities have decided that further cleanup is likely A)too costly to get any tangible increase in cleanliness... and will await natural breakdown of the yuckiness or B)There is no *receptor* of the nastines that is endangered at the current level. It is not likely that it is C) SPARKLE-LEE KLEEN for ever after.

This stage of environmental cleanup is called closure. There should be reports of reaching this stage you can read.

Likely there will have been monitoring of the levels of TCE in the groundwater for years before reaching closure...

I see you mention bottled water. This may or may not be a red flag. Environmental complaints (PCS) can be brought to closure by removing the receptor... but in rural areas in my experience (UST's... argh!! jargon), there is typically installed a Gigantic Granular Activated Charcoal filter installed for drinking water, which must be inspected at some interval as specified by the DEQ/environmental authority.

What's that mean, sometimes the most effective cleanup costwise is to not use the water, and if it has to be used, treat it before use.

Okay on the next level is your employer... It may well be that the boss just likes bottled water. And the coffee maker that used little one cup cartridges. I had one of those once.

It could well be that they feel that the treated water is okay for washing hands, but Kharmically Yuckky for going throught the treatment, even if the state says it's okay to drink. Which is nice of them.

If your company is big, and has an industrial hygenist, then the air levels of TCE probably were monitored and proven to be within permissible levels. Permissible doesn't mean safe, it means the level that industry is allowed to expose you to without getting fined. Many, many chemicals have not been totally studied, and the exposure reccomendations are guesswork. But that's another story.

If your company is not big, then the monitoring done in the building to see if there was a problem during the earlier cleanup is probably the only thing done, and you should get those records from the public record house. Given the nature of the spill... they probably had to do some air monitoring to achieve closure. 2.5 million dollar job... There were environmental contractors there, and you can bet your bippy that they were happy to bill out all the air monitoring to ensure their workers were safe. It's lucrative, lemme tell ya!

So, if you can wade through the reports... and really dry reading... you may find what you want.

If you can't... and you have reason not to trust your employer, and feel asking will jepordize your job you are in an emotional no win situation. (Believe me, these are difficult waters)

It's Hazcom time... You have a legal right to know what you are being exposed to. Here's the link, read it, but don't take rash or unconsidered action.

http://osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp....RDS&p_id=10099

You have to decide if pissing off your employer is worth your risking your job, health, and a lot of frustration.

It's all in your immediate super's hands. To play straight and fair, you need to ask him what's going on. Follow the supervison chain and ask about the levels of TCE. Yes, if the OSHA guy comes later... you are figured out. In my experience you're gone...

But he may welcome the topic being broached, if the company can hire a hygenist, use personal dosimeters, run some tests... and prove it one way or another, for good or bad... and move on.

Basically, if it is a good company, with good management, then they will recognize that worker fears for health will effect productivity if they have high turnover. It is in their best interest to have the issue both open and settled.

One factor that complicates things is that it is hard for the Environmental and Hygenist types to put things in terms that Joe Average can understand... It is easy to forget how to put all the jargon in simple terms... and your supervisors or the business owners may have had a lot of people talk way over their heads.

I saw it happen a lot when I did this kinda thing. There may well be some genuine misunderstaning on your employers part to.

So, be careful... but give them the benefit of the doubt approach your boss first.

You may propose something like this if they are open to working on it... but at a loss how to proceed.

There are colleges that have Hygiene and Osha issues as a field of study... You may find that one of these is relatively near you... A compromise might be for a professor to supervise a study that the students can get their hands dirty on. Your company would provide the location... the college and the students would pay for the dosimeters, and air monitoring and testing.

Could be a feather in a bunch of people's hats... Professors don't turn down research projects that get them published, students have money and don't usually turn down resume fodder, and your company might not object terribly to the monitoring being free.

And the solution as simple as proving a air exchanger (saves on lost heat) vents the possiblity of TCE, or other chemicals currently in use, right out the roof

It's outside the box... and a pie in the sky, but nobody likes when the OSHA guy comes

And having a plan for a solution or compromise is always better than nothing when you bring up a concern

It may work out. But if it doesn't, you'll have a clear conscience that you asked the right questions in the right way.


Mike Horne