Friday, November 6, 2009

The Yadkin Riverkeeper gets it wrong... again

The Yadkin Riverkeeper said today that he has recently “discovered” internal Alcoa documents from 1997 that suggest Alcoa tried to hide information about possible contamination in Badin Lake.

The truth of the matter – Alcoa openly shared information about the presence of PAHs (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons) in Badin Lake with state agencies, local government officials and the media in May 1997. It gave a presentation to health officials and government leaders on May 16, 1997 and a story about Alcoa’s testing was reported on the front page of the Stanly News & Press on May 18, 1997.

The voluntary testing, conducted in April 1997, indicated PAHs in the sediment 20-30 feet below the surface of Badin Lake. Luanne Williams, a toxicologist with the N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, reviewed the test results and indicated that the PAH levels in the swimming cove at Badin Lake were “comparable to concentrations found in urban soil” and “should not pose a significant health risk.” The N.C. Division of Public Health indicated then it was safe to swim in Badin Lake and confirmed that in early 2009 when it said, “It is safe to boat, wade, swim and do other activities in the water. Skin contact with the water or sediment does not represent a health risk.”

During the past 12 years, Alcoa has continued to monitor the sediment in Badin Lake and a 2008 study showed these sediments remain isolated and are not spreading to other parts of the lake.

Alcoa was commended by Stanly County officials, including county manager John Whitehurst and health director Barry Bass, in the Stanly News & Press’s 1997 article for sharing the information with the public.

“I commend (Alcoa) for proactively handling this information and for the way they worked with the state to determine the significance of the information,” Bass said.

Now, Yadkin Riverkeeper Dean Naujoks is trying to say that Alcoa’s behavior “indicates a pattern of deceit regarding its environmental record…”

But the facts show just the oppositeagain.

No comments: