Whats New
We have a pre-hearing conference scheduled for April 24, 2008 for the PUC case. It is important that any person who is part of that suit via filing a complaint with PUC come to one of the first two meetings listed below. Of course ALL concerned citizens are welcome to attend. We will update you on our progress so far and the process of the upcoming hearing. Meetings: April 16, 2008 New Cumberland Fire Hall 6p.m.- 9p.m. OR April 19, 2008 GIANT Camp Hill 2p.m.- 4p.m. This meeting is scheduled after the pre-hearing conference so we can let you know the date of the BIG HEARING where the issue of chloramine safety will be litigated on May 9, 2008 at Frederickson Library 6p.m.- 8p.m. Anyone who has e-mail is welcome to stay in touch with me through e-mail. Two-thirds of our groups have no e-mail address and postage is expensive. These meetings will help us reach you with vital information as we approach this very important hearing date. 3/13/08 - New Vermont Testimony Attached is the complete transcript of Dr. Richard Bull's talk given in Vermont to the Disinfection conference held on Nov. 1, 2007. It goes along with his power point presentation. Here is an excerpt: "I will note that when we did that skin hyperplasia study that people called attention to, we didn’t find chloramine acting as a primary irritant and causing skin hyperplasia at all in the mice. But one thing that we did find, which is not in the papers, we had a specially designed exposure method. We were originally going to have the mice swimming in the water. And for 10 minutes. And we had to put a collar around them so their head was held way out of the water out of the beaker, because they died of respiratory irritation, acute respiratory irritation if they were either exposed to chlorine dioxide or chloramine. Chlorine had no problem. But I don’t remember the concentrations, I think it was in the order of 100 mg/l, we had 100% mortality. It’s not something, there are issues with this, and that’s actually with chlorine dioxide it was documented the animals were drinking water that they had pathologic changes in the nasal turbinates So there are respiratory irritants and there’s some possibility that off-gassing in the shower and so and so forth might create a problem if the chloramine speciation is not controlled. And chlorine dioxide could also be a bit of a problem but in neither case has anybody looked at trying to establish a threshold." 1/24/08 - Offical Update status Brief update to let you know what it going on in the chloramine front here and in VT. - First and most importantly - we still do not have chloramine in our water thanks to all of you and our statement of outrage. - The Patriot is working on an investigative piece that should be coming out soon. - Still have not heard from PUC as to whether they have jurisdiction on our complaints there. - on the DEP complaint, I will be meeting with DEP attorney for a 'settlement' conference required by the Environm. Hearing Board judge next week. I am checking into whether I can bring other interested citizens if anyone wants to come. - A student at Widener is doing research for us on the legal aspects - I am looking into filing with the Environmental Quality Board to ask them to consider a Rule prohibiting the use of Chloramine until further research can be done on the health effects - Jennifer reserached the filter companies and found that 1) they really don't know much about chloramine and even less about the by products, 2) no one has said that they can keep the by-products out of your water with any system currently available (remember it is the byproducts that are cancer-causing not the chloramine itself) BE CAREFUL IF YOU ARE LOOKING FOR A FILTER to address chloramine. These filter costs thousands and you may be buying something that doesn't do what you want it to do. Below is the update from Vermont - they still have not heard from CDC but have other interesting news. I'll update you and our efforts pick up again. Susan 1. Meeting at Vermont's Department of Health with CDC and EPA on Sept. 26. There were meetings all day involving representatives of the CDC and EPA, and the CDC stayed around for a couple days and interviewed people who complained about symptoms, and they did a phone survey (conducted by VDH but results sent to CDC) with people they didn't get to meet in person. VCE and PCAC (Ellen's group) attended only one of the meetings held on the 26th. We put on a presentation (30 minutes), after which we discussed the issues with the folks in the room. There were about 8 legislators present including Sens. Racine and Lyons. Here's a link to the audio http://www.vce.org/CDC:EPA:VDH:Sept.27.WMA. PCAC's presentation is at the beginning. The most relevant thing to come out of it was this statement from WCAX's broadcast on Sept. 26: "In terms of the kinds of health effects that people are complaining about, there really haven't been any studies to really address that issue in a statistically significant way," said Lorraine Backer from the Centers for Disease Control. The other important thing that came out of the meeting was said by Mr. Grubbs of the EPA (contact info below). I asked what disinfection by-products of chloramine are regulated and he said they do not regulate any disinfection byproducts of chloramine (except the HAAs and THMS that are the regulated DBPs of chlorine). That's on the audio, in the latter portion of the meeting as I recall. Supposedly the CDC will be releasing the results of its investigation any day now. I recall hearing it would be at the end of the year. I do not have a phone number for Lorraine Backer but I did get the card of the top guy from the EPA who came, and you could call him and get Lorraine's contact info to get an update on when we can expect them to release their findings: Thomas R. Grubbs, P.E., Environmental Engineer, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water, EPA, Washington DC, (202 564-5262. 2. DEC held a conference on disinfection and disinfection byproducts for water system operators on Nov. 1. A lot of interesting things came out of the conference. One of the main ones I would point to is the lack of data on chloramine. That is evidenced best by Dr. Richard Bull's presentation. Ellen and I had lunch with him and talked the situation in Vermont over with him. He said we need a toxicological study, not an epidemiological study, and it's very expensive and won't ever happen. I recorded the conference and provide those audio links below (though someone tells me that Crombie and somebody else got mixed up, so two of the links are mislabeled). Also I put in below the link to the web site where you can find the power point presentations posted by DEC. Near the end of his talk, Dr. Bull said something that is really important I transcribed it, am attaching the last page of his power point. He is saying that the whole basis for this EPA rule that is causing water systems to switch to chloramine is not backed up by science. Very interesting. Here's what he said: "I think the THMs and HAAs are not particularly good indicators of risk from DBPs and I always object to it when it comes out or being talked about in that context. I don't mind talking about THM or HAA in the reg when appropriate but to connect it to the bladder cancer risk for example or even the reproductive developmental toxin effect is probably not very logical. It's certainly not scientific." -- Dr. Richard Bull at "Disinfection and Disinfection ByProducts Symposium" held in Vermont on Nov. 1, 2007. Sponsored by the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources. 1/24/08 - A New year and news a plenty! Hello everyone, and happy New Year! With the new year comes many big updates! Theres still no Chloramine in the water, and its all thanks to everyone banding together in protest! Everything is moving along for the complaints and hearings, check out the Urgent News on the home page for all the info also, i'll keep it up there for another means to get updates. There is also another article up on the case studies page, it is in bold, entitled "ERS: European Investigators Identify Potential Cause of Asthma in Swimmers". Thank you all for your support and keep up the good fight! 11/30/07 - Filters and Chloramine If you are looking into filters for your faucets or home, be careful. NSF is a company that certifies filters so that you are sure they do what they say they do. Read carefully and ask questions about chloramine. The NSF filters I have seen only say they 'reduce' the chloramine, not eliminate it. AND, they do NOT certify that they do anything with the by products. It is the by products that are carcinogenic. 11/12/07 - Special Thanks and New Info Thanks to Wendy Albright for collecting another 75 names of people interested in supporting the effort to stop chloramine before it starts in Cumberland County. Way to go Wendy! Some information that we have found recently that we thought you would want to know. * The Center for Disease Control in Washington DC is currently investigating the reported illnesses in Vermont attributed to chloraminated water. They expect a report by the end of the year. * The owners of American Water are in the process of selling 100% of their interest in the company. The company will be publically traded on the NYSE. Meryl Lynch is the main broker. They stated that they did not expect the costs resulting from antiquated delivery systems and the stringent EPA standards. (Talk about your impulse shopping!) They expect to be fully divested by 2010 - still two years before the stage 2 EPA requirements come into effect. The owner is RWE Group. 11/4/07 - Where We Are This is where we are and what I am doing next. Please read and let me know where you want to go. The PUC - The PUC is currently considering our filings on the issue of whether they have jurisdiction to hear this issue at all. If they decide in our favor we get a hearing on the chloramines. If they decide against us, we are out of PUC. If we get a hearing, they would have the authority to force a continued delay of the chloramine until the issues are resolved at hearing. PAWC has until Monday to respond to the exceptions and then the Commission has 30 days to rule on the issue of jurisdiction. The DEP - Myself and 15 other people have filed complaints with DEP via their webpage. I have also filed a formal written complaint with DEP with just my name on it. Rod Nesmith of DEP answered the 15 complaints with a letter stating that they know what they are doing and the are not going to act on our complaints. The next step with DEP, who has the authority to actually withdraw the permit to operate the chloramine system, is to file an appeal of their decision to the Environmental Hearing Board. This is another legal process that would require signatures and you would receive legal mail. Again, I am offering to handle that aspect of all of this. If we succeed in getting a hearing, we can talk about all issues of chloramine including the lack of reasonable notice regarding the permits. I do have an expert ready to testify if we can get a hearing anywhere. The numbers of people participating in the complaint process is helping with our credibility and with holding off PAWC's intent to restart. It is also getting us the press coverage that a single complainant won't. If you agree to participate in the appeal you will only have to sign verifications as you did for the PUC complaints and I should be able to get them to you in a more timely manner now. As always I will forward all documents to be filed in your names. It is my hope that you will continue to participate in the effort to 'educate' the water company and stop the chloramine before it starts. Please let me know as soon as possible whether you wish to be on the appeal to the Environmental Hearing Board. Thank you for everything you have done thus far. Susan 11/3/07 - Special Thanks Thank you to everyone for collecting another 15 names of people who want to join in on the complaints against chloramine. Anyone who wants to gather more names on a petition-style paper, please do. They need to see that, not only are we not going away, but we are adding to our numbers. The top of the petition can read anything along the lines of "We, the undersigned, wish to add our names and support to the complaints against PAWC's intent to use chloramine in our drinking water system." we need their name, signature, address, phone and if they are willing, an e-mail. Please assure them that I do not send spam to any of these members nor do I give out their addresses other than what shows up in the group e-mail on chloramine issues. 10/16/07 - Radio Show On Saturday October 13th, Medical Matters, a talk radio show on AM 580 with Camp Hill's Dr. Brett DeLone, featured the issue of chloramine in the drinking water. PAWC was invited but was unable to bring an expert. We had a good 25 minutes or so of discussion and 2 callers. At that point, Dr. DeLone indicated that he had heard from the water company and that they would like to participate but at a later date. So the issue was set to be continued for a future show and he went on to another topic. I anticipate that the next date will be in two weeks. If you can, be near a radio from 12-2 two Saturdays from now and listen and call in. The call in number is 540-0580. Our callers were Dr. Josephine Rakow, Camp Hill's health officer and Donna from Shiremanstown. Both supported our efforts and gave additional information. Dr. DeLone made a few supportive comments as well. Please tune in if you can. I will be sending an e-mail prior to the next broadcast. 10/16/07 - Meeting news On October 5th the Consumer Advocate facilitated panel discussion on chloramines took place in Camp Hill. Over 150 people turned out for the event! WAY TO SHOW UP EVERYONE!!!!!! I think everyone was shocked at how many people would come out on a Friday night. We made a definite impression. PAWC started the ball rolling by telling us point blank they had every intention of moving forward with chloramine and that the delay was just to give us time to adjust to the idea. Other panelists included DEP, EPA, and Dept. of Health. At the end of the day, the audience was not pursuaded and our numbers grew. A copy of the video is available to anyone who gets me a blank tape. Also on October 5th at 5:00 pm the ALJ announced her recommendation that our complaints with the PUC be dismissed. Nice timing! BUT...we are not down yet. We will be filing exceptions to the recommendation to the Commission. We have 20 days from the 5th. DO NOT DISPAIR..this is only round 1. LETTERs to DEP-Rod Nesmith (regional office on Elmerton), EPA - Rick Rogers (Philadelphia regional office), PAWC , Consumer Advocate - Darlene Wong, or to the editor of the Patriot News will help punctuate our concern. Addresses available in phone book, on web pages or I will follow up with them soon. We need more research if anyone has time or knowledge. We need as much information on Ultra-filtration, UV light and whole house filter systems as possible. If you have the time to research the web or if you know anyone in the industry that can help us with this, please let me know. I have extended our collective hand to PAWC in an offer to sit down with them and conduct a feasibility study for UV light and/or ultra-filtration methods of water treatment. HUGE THANKS to Corey Albright for our wonderful website..which by the way, can now be seen on Representative Glen Grell's home page. Thank you to Rep. Grell. Excellent job, Corey! 10/9/07 - Reformat!The Website has been reformated to view correctly in Firefox, with other minor grammatical and cosmetic changes. Click which browser you are using on the new front page, and you will be directed accordingly. 10/5/07 - The site has launched! The Chloramine Info Center has launched. Expect frequent updates and possibly layout changes. Feel free to send us your questions, comments and concerns via the Contact section on the left hand side of the page.