1 / 19

The Woburn Toxics Case A Civil Action

The Woburn Toxics Case A Civil Action. The Woburn toxics case In May 1982 a lawsuit was filed on behalf of eight Woburn families by Jan Schlichtmann.

faith
Télécharger la présentation

The Woburn Toxics Case A Civil Action

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Woburn Toxics Case A Civil Action

  2. The Woburn toxics case • In May 1982 a lawsuit was filed on behalf of eight Woburn families by Jan Schlichtmann. • The suit alleged that serious health effects (childhood leukemia, cardiac arrhythmias, disorders of the immune and neurological systems) were caused by exposure to contaminated water from public supply wells G & H. • The suit named W. R. Grace, Beatrice Foods, and subsequently UniFirst Corporation as the polluters.

  3. History of the wells • G was drilled in 1964 • H was drilled in 1966 • Residents complained the water smelled and tasted bad, but no significant contamination was found. • In May 1979 DEQE (now DEP) found several chlorinated compounds in the wells (TCE & PCE). • Both wells were closed May 22, 1979

  4. Three defendants were named in the lawsuit • W. R. Grace • Beatrice Food Company • UniFirst Corporation (UniFirst settled for $1.05 million before the trial began)

  5. Business Activities of the three defendants • W. R. Grace (Cryovac plant) manufactured equipment for the food-packaging industry. Solvents were used to clean and cool tools, degreasing, and paint thinner. Testimony during the trial revealed that TCE wastes had been dumped in a trench adjacent to a building on the Grace site. • Beatrice Foods Company purchased the Riley Tannery in 1978 and sold it back to Riley in 1983. It was alleged that activities at the tannery and dumping of chemicals on an adjacent undeveloped 15 acre tract had contaminated the groundwater. • UniFirst Corporation operated an industrial dry-cleaning business and used PCE in its business.

  6. Two EPA superfund sites are located in Woburn. One north of I-95 and the other the Civil Action site. Woburn’s athletic teams are called the tanners. Anderson Transportation Center EPA Super Fund site WoburnMall Civil Action site

  7. The watershed for the Aberjona River includes both EPA superfund sites.

  8. 128/I-95 Civil Action site I-93

  9. Air photographs of barrels on the Beatrice site. These were gone by the time of trial. Contaminants found in groundwater and soils.

  10. http://www.geology.sdsu.edu/classes/geol351/woburn.htm

  11. The trial started in 1986. US District Court Judge Walter Jay Skinner presided. He divided the trial into three phases. At each stage the jury had to rule in favor of the plaintiffs in order for the trial to proceed to the next phase. The first phase of the trial ran 78 days. • The plaintiffs would attempt to show that wells G and H had become contaminated as a result of actions by Grace and Beatrice, and that the contamination had occurred before the wells were closed in 1979 • The plaintiffs would attempt to show that exposure to contaminated well water resulted in the leukemia cases and the other illnesses alleged in the lawsuit • Setting of damages

  12. Forensic geology question – • Could contaminants from the various sites have reached wells G and H during the time they were operating? • . Determine the general geology of the site. • . Investigate the hydrologic relationships between the Aberjona River and wells G and H. • . Determine groundwater flow for the site. • . Decide if contaminants from the various sites could have reached wells G and H during the time they were operating.

  13. Judge Skinner’s Interrogatories

  14. The EPA - Analysis and Cleanup Property Owners Responsible for the Contamination W. R. Grace UniFirst Corporation New England Plastics Olympia Nominee Trust Wildwood Conservation Trust (Beatrice Foods)

  15. Types of Contamination: • Groundwater contaminated with VOCs (minor BTEX compounds) • Sediments in the Aberjona River contaminated with PAHs and heavy metals (Cr, Zn, Hg, As) • Soils contaminated with PAHs, PCBs, VOCs, and Pb.

  16. Remediation: • VOC contaminated soil cleaned by air injection and vacuum extraction. One set of wells injects the air into the ground to bubble contaminants to the surface and a second set of wells pulls contaminants to the surface with a vacuum. A cap covers the entire area to trap gases at the surface. • PCB, PAH, and pesticide contaminated soil excavated and incinerated. • Groundwater pumped and treated at separate treatment plants. UV light and H2O2 used to destroy contaminants.

  17. Legend: H = municipal well H G = municipal well G U = Unifirst Properties G = W.R. Grace B = Beatrice (Riley Tannery) red = outcrop of fractured schist pink (Qgm) = ground moraine (mixtures of sand-silt-clay) beige with blue plant symbols (Qsd) = wetland deposits (mixtures of peat-sand-silt) white (Qo) = glacial outwash (mixtures of sand and gravel with silt) yellow (Qf) = artificial fill

  18. This geologic cross-section is from the “Civil Action” site

More Related