California reps ask for new water study at former base
SANTA CRUZ, Calif. (AP) — Two California congressmembers are asking the federal government to study whether there’s evidence that potential toxic and contaminated drinking water at Fort Ord can be tied to specific cancers and other diseases.
“Our nation owes a debt of gratitude to our servicemembers and their families,” said Reps. Katie Porter and Jimmy Panetta in a letter to the director of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. “By conducting a new study at Fort Ord, we may guarantee that those harmed while serving our country get the medical care they need.”
The request follows an Associated Press report earlier this week about hundreds of people who lived and served near the Army base who are concerned that their health problems might be tied to chemicals there.
In 1990, four years before it began the process of closing as an active military training base, Fort Ord was added to the Environmental Protection Agency’s list of the most polluted places in the nation. Included in that pollution were dozens of chemicals, some now known to cause cancer, found in the base’s drinking water and soil.
The AP interviewed nearly two dozen of these veterans and reviewed thousands of pages of documents, and interviewed military, medical and environmental scientists.
Responding to AP’s report, a Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee spokesperson said its chair, Montana Democrat Jon Tester, believes the “VA should take this and any potential toxic exposure among our military men and women seriously, and keep working to provide a fresh look at the possibility of toxic exposures at Fort Ord which may be causing adverse health effects in veterans.”
The problem is not just at Fort Ord. This is happening all over the U.S. and abroad, almost everywhere the military has set foot, and the federal government is still learning about the extent of both the pollution and the health effects of its toxic legacy.
AP found the Army knew that chemicals had been improperly dumped at Fort Ord for decades. Even after the contamination was documented, the Army downplayed the risks.
And ailing veterans are being denied benefits based on a 25-year-old health assessment, which Porter and Panetta Friday said needs an update. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry concluded in 1996 that there were no likely past, present or future risks from exposures at Fort Ord.
But that conclusion was made based on limited data, and before medical science understood the relationship between some of these chemicals and cancer.
Congress has been weighing legislation this month that would recognize some potential health impacts from some military toxic exposures, particularly burn pits. And the Wounded Warrior Project released findings from a survey of about 18,000 registered members that found 98% of wounded veterans reported exposure to hazardous or toxic substances during military service.
Related News
- Cadiz to supply water to over 4,000 California homes through revamped Northern Pipeline
- Virginia American Water to invest over $10 million in water infrastructure upgrades with $15 million Cape Charles acquisition
- Michigan to expand clean water plan by $290 million to support statewide water infrastructure upgrades
From Archive
- DeLa Express seeks FERC approval for Permian-to-Louisiana gas pipeline project
- OSHA penalizes Houston contractor over safety violations resulting in worker's death
- Fiber infrastructure has no known expiration date, Fiber Broadband Association research concludes
- Nevada OSHA fines Elon Musk's Boring Company over safety violations in Vegas tunnel project
- Damage prevention and safety: Turning awareness into action
- Ditch Witch 1030
- Michigan lawmakers introduce bills to create septic codes throughout the state
- Indiana American Water to gain 8,000 water customers with Silver Creek Water acquisition
- Arkansas governor allocates $42 million for water infrastructure projects
- Federal judge finds Flint, Mich, in contempt over lead water pipe crisis
Comments