Virginia is For Sludgers

Archived Spews from November, 2005

Spew #	Post
[004]	Nov. 30, 2005 VBC unveils its repartee to the Gutter Grunt's blog -- a new anti-(anti-sludge) web site. Yesterday I had a number of people rattle my cage to wake me up to a new web site for Synagro's Virginia Biosolids Council. I believe the Gutter Grunt is already having an effect, folks. Just over a week after the blog's first spew, Synagro has retaliated with a beautiful, professionally designed web site-- hoping, not doubt, to improve on Rumsfield's "shock and awe" strategy that took us into Iraq with such resounding success. Charles Hooks and Robert Crockett, Synagro's PR guys, even put out a news release announcing the new site. According to the news release, Chris Peot, "biosolids manager" of Washington DC's poop-plant is a founding father of the VBC. Here's what Chris has to say about the new site: "This new website will be a valuable tool for those who want and need factual information about biosolids and its benefits to family farms and forests in Virginia." That's us!!! The news release, apparently in response to my inquiry (Spew # 001) as to who is on Synagro's Va. Biosolids Council, states that it is composed of "municipal wastewater treatment facilities, companies that land apply biosolids and Virginia farmers who use biosolids on their farms and forests." Apparently, the farmers are the only actual people on the VBC. Wonder how I get appointed . . . All of us here at www.VirginiaBiosolids.org (i.e., me) would like to welcome all the folks at the VBC (i.e., Synagro) and their www.VirginiaBiosolids.com to the dialog.
[003]	Nov. 28, 2005 Thanks to all of you who sent along encouragement and suggestions in response to the grand-opening of the Blog. I have yet to hear from Synagro or Mr. Crockett, although I do have a call in for Crockett. Will let you know what he says about the "Va. Biosolids Council" (Ha!) if I ever get past his answer machine. A few weeks ago I sent the L'burg News & Advance a letter that hasn't been published, which is not particularly surprising since, as some of you already know, my sludge diatribes can be pretty, well . . .diarrheal. By and large, the N&A has been very generous in publishing my anti-sludge ditties as well as the many well written letters from other sludge-warriors. And the N&A editors and reporters have been very active in raising the public's awareness of the problem, which is one reason why Synagro hired Crockett's PR firm. (See Spews # 001 and 002) So I take absolutely no offense at having a letter or two tossed in the circular file. But, if you don't mind, I'll go ahead and publish the offensive letter here. After all, now I'm the editor. The letter is about what I feel to be are three very important recent documents . Let me briefly give you the links. First, Shannon Brennan followed the sludge money and wrote an analysis (Link) of how the money is flowing out of Va. as the sludge is flowing in. Shannon is a writer for the L'Burg N&A and her editors have had her on this sludge thing for some time now, much to our benefit. I mean this August 14 piece is Pulitzer stuff, in my opinion. If you haven't read it, please do. Then the JLARC report came out on Oct. 11. Here is a link where you can download a .pdf of the thing. It's 114 pages long, but every page has some piece of information worth having. I'll be blogging this thing to death in the next few months. Finally, a week or so after JLARC, was Caroline Snyder's article in The International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health. I don't know how much you know about Longest, Walker, Rubin the other EPA nematodes who started, and for 15 years have maliciously promoted, this moronic idea of spreading poop on butter-peas, but Carolyn's article is a magnificent introduction to this whole dark side of the EPA. I mean this is the stuff a great book and movie could be made of. Maybe it's just me, but when I put these three articles together, what I see is not incompetent 'crats maxed out on their Peter Principle. I see (ok, smell) money moving under the table. I mean there's only one of two explanations of how the EPA and the VDH could have gotten us into this mess: 1. stupidity, or 2. cupidity. That was basically the theme of my letter to the N&A, which is a pretty good clue as to why they passed on it. Here's what the ole' gutter grunt had to say: October 28, 2005 Dear Sir/Madam The October 11^th Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission ("JLARC") report on land application of sludge in Virginia received a lot of attention by your paper – a front page article, an editorial, and at least one contribution to your letters to the editor section. The high priority your editors have given the sludge issue is more than justified. The short-term and long-term effects of sludge farming represent a major problem that is being faced and fought by rural communities across Virginia and across the nation. For instance, Maine is still reeling from multiple highway spills of sludge this year, and home owners in California have filed law suits after learning that their new homes were built on sludged land that contains endotoxins. It is also noteworthy that The International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health published a peer-reviewed paper last week authored by Caroline Snyder, PhD. Dr. Snyder’s report is entitled "The Dirty Work of Promoting ‘Recycling’ of America’s Sewage Sludge," and carefully lays out the history of the bureaucratic bullying, bungling, and deception perpetrated by high-ranking administrators of the US Environmental Protection Agency in their enthusiasm to promote the idea of spreading domestic and industrial sewage sludge on farmland. Dr. Snyder’s important and shocking article, which is not overly technical, can be accessed on the web at http://www.ijoeh.com/pfds/IJOEH_1104_Snyder.pdf . Farmers who are using sludge or are considering using sludge should read this eye-opener before buying into the sludge industry’s assertions that sludge is safe because the EPA says so. A troubling picture emerges when these recent publications are juxtaposed with Shannon Brennan’s excellent News & Advance article of August 14, 2005 disclosing the mega-buck economics of sludge farming in Virginia. When one realizes that tens of millions of dollars a year are at stake for the sludge haulers, the JLARC’s criticisms of the Virginia Department of Health for failing to enforce the sludge laws and regulations raises an unavoidable suspicion that there is more going on here than bureaucratic negligence or incompetence. Why, for instance, does the VDH continue to crank out sludge application permits while virtually ignoring the vital job of enforcing the state and federal sludge laws and regulations? JLARC found that there were only 19 routine inspections of 1100 sludged fields in Virginia in 2004. This is not, by anyone’s measure, a good faith effort at policing the laws and regulations that the VDH claims keep citizens safe. According to JLARC, the feds do no better – the EPA has only one person to address "sludge concerns" in all of Region 3, which includes Virginia, Washington, D.C, and four other states. Because neither the VDH nor the EPA carries out any meaningful enforcement, we don’t have any idea what sorts of trouble is lurking in the 230,000 tons of sludge that are spread in Virginia every year. The VDH’s tactic is to rely on the sludge producers and haulers to self-report violations of laws and regulations that limit toxins such as mercury and cadmium. This blind-eye enforcement policy is comparable to having the Virginia State Patrol pull all of its officers off the highways and then rely on drivers to call in periodically and report speeding and red light violations on their own. Self-reporting just ain’t gonna’ happen – and the VDH knows that. VDH’s who-cares? attitude makes Virginia one of the most attractive sludge dumping grounds in the country – second only to Pennsylvania in the tonnage of imported sludge. But it gets worse. Virginia’s industry-friendly sludge laws and regulations actually impede research and the dissemination of data regarding the hazards of sludge. Consider Virginia statute § 32.1-164.5, which requires VDH to maintain a searchable electronic database of all sludge-related complaints "received during the current and preceding calendar year." Ignoring for the moment the JLARC finding that VDH was not complying with this law, what legitimate purpose could be served by collecting data on the adverse health effects of sludge and then throwing the data away after only 1 year? No wonder the VDH claims that it has no convincing proof that sludge is not safe – the legislature has authorized destruction of the data! In fact, when I recently searched the VDH web site for the current complaints database, I could not even find data for 2004 and 2005. Then there is Virginia sludge regulation #270 that requires the State Health Commissioner to establish a "Biosolids Use Regulation Advisory Committee" (BURAC) to provide input by all of the stakeholders in this sludge game, including citizens and local governments where the sludge ends up. Except for four ex officio members, who are state bureaucrats, the 25 members of BURAC are chosen by the Commissioner or his designee. As the JLARC review points out, the vast majority of the Commissioner’s appointees have financial interests in promoting sludge farming. There are 7 representatives of the sludge producers, 3 of the sludge haulers, and additional representatives for the farmers and wastewater treatment associations. But there are only two representatives of the citizens. (The JLARC report seems to imply that two representatives of county governments help to balance the pro-sludge interests, but this misses the point that urban counties also have a financial interest in promoting sludge dumping in rural areas.) Given the wildly pro-sludge membership of BURAC, one can only conclude that the Commissioner’s choices of participants on the BURAC reflect the extent to which the VDH has crawled into bed with the sludge industry. BURAC is the proverbial fox watching the proverbial hen house. The JLARC report demonstrates that, for whatever reasons, the VDH has failed to assume its proper adversarial role vis-a-vis the sludge industry and has failed to enforce even the minimal sludge laws and regulations we have. Shannon Brennan’s article demonstrates that there are immense sums of money moving around in the world of sludge. Caroline Snyder’s paper demonstrates the extremes government bureaucrats are willing to go to protect the interests of the sludge barons. As one gets closer to this situation and starts putting some of these facts together, one cannot avoid bumping into troubling indications that not all of the foul smell is coming from the sludge itself. Denis O’Brien
[002]	Nov. 25, 2005 Good to hear from you, again, Mr. Synagro! The Lynchburg News & Advance ran a letter today from, guess who, Synagro shill, Robert Crockett. (Link.) The letter was signed by Crockett for "Virginia Biosolids Council." There was no mention of mega-sludger Synagro or Crockett's connection to Synagro, which connection is documented in the last entry in this blog. Spew# 001 Crockett's main allegation is that the anti-sludge people, and he names Caroline Snyder specifically (congratulations, Caroline) "repeat unsubstantiated and discredited claims..." Strangely, Crockett makes no allegations as to whether the "claims" to which he is referring are anti-sludge or pro-sludge, nor does he allege that any of the claims are false. But he goes on to give his own pro-sludge claims by the bushel-full, not one of which does he substantiate in any way, shape or form. Not only do we have a credibility gap here, we have a complete credibility disconnect. But Crockett's letter is absolutely priceless as a misleading piece of Synagro propaganda. It's not the first we've heard from Mr. Synagro here in the L'burg area. On September 26, 2005 (Link), Crockett -- writing again in behalf of the "Virginia Biosolids Council" (Ha!) -- wrote to set straight the record on sludge. In his 9/26 letter Crockett disagreed with a previous letter (Link) from Andy McElmurray, a dairy farmer from Georgia who had a pretty serious melt-down of his dairy herd that was grazed on pastures pasted with sludge from Augusta, Ga. Crockett's 9/26 letter advised the public that the sludge had nothing to do with the death of the McElmurray cows, citing studies by the U.S. EPA, Georgia Environmental Protection Division, and the University of Georgia. Now, who we gonna' believe here? On one hand we have Crockett and/or his PR firm, who are in Synagro's pocket, and on the other hand we have McElmurray, who is mad as a Siamese cat soaked in Augusta sludge. I, personally, would be more inclined to be persuaded a farmer who has personal experience with both sludge and dead cows than by a PR agent for the sludgers who's background is, apparently, limited to a BA in English, and a career in journalism and lobbying. (Link.) But the safe approach is skepticism of both positions -- at least not until we can dig into the facts. This incident in Ga. is high-profile in the sludgosphere. It is in litigation in at least two courts, and it's all pretty complex. I intend to devote at least one spew in this blog to reviewing the facts and findings. If you have info, please forward it to me. But the main point I want to raise here is that McElmurray's advice to farmers was completely ignored by Crockett -- McElmurray simply suggested that farmers contemplating using sludge get an indemnification agreement from the sludge hauler before signing any contracts. This makes enormous sense, regardless of how much one believes Synagro's line that sludge is safe. Should the sludge kill the farmer's herd or some kid who rides his dirt-bike across the sludged paddock, such an indemnification agreement would shift financial responsibility back to the sludge hauler so the farmer will not lose his shirt. This is where the financial responsibility should be. It's really weird that Crockett ignored this part of McElmurray's letter. Presumably, Synagro and Crockett would be 100% behind this indemnification idea, given their 100% certainty that sludge is safe. So let's have it Mr. Synagro, what's the Virginia Biosolids Council's position of indemnification agreements?
[001]	Nov. 20, 2005 Who, precisely, is the Virginia Biosolids Council? Short answer: Synagro, Mid-Atlantic, Inc. Long answer: Synagro, and Charlie Hooks, and Robert Crockett, and/or their PR firms. There has been a bit of buzz in the sludgeosphere lately regarding a new pro-sludge web site: www.virginiabiosolids.com that is, ostensibly, the site of the Virginia Biosolids Council. But who the heck is the Virginia Biosolids Council??? The site gives a POB in Richmond. No physical address. No phone. And no names -- like the board of directors or the main honcho. Weird, thought I. So I tracked down the registrant of the domain name. You can do this yourself a number of ways. I find the easiest is to got to www.GoDaddy.com and type in the name as if you wanted to register it yourself. Go Daddy will do a quick search and tell you if it's available. If it isn't you can follow a couple of links to WhoIs, which is a site that gives out info about who owns a domain. VirginiaBiosolids.com is owned by a PR firm in Lynchburg called Hooks Associates. The principal of Hooks Assoc. is Charlie Hooks. Hmmmm. . . This is getting even more suspicious. Let me tell you why. I met a Charlie Hooks on July 12, 2005 -- that was the night we had a pretty good sludge blow-out here in Amherst. (If you've never been to one of the pro-sludge donkey-shows put on by VDH, you ought to treat yourself. They are mandated by law before a sludge permit can be issued in a county, but the law only mandates that there be a public "meeting." It doesn't mandate that the VDH come into the community and sell the whole sludge-is-good-as-gold bucket of slop, but that's what they try to do.) Anyway, at the July 12th meeting I met Charlie Hooks. He's actually a friend of a friend of mine. Mr. Hooks was at the sludge meeting with the local representative from Synagro and Mr. Hooks told us that Synagro had hired his PR firm to help do some PR damage-control in the central Virginia area. No ain't that a coincidence??? Synagro's PR guy is the same guy who owns the web domain for the Virginia Biosolids Council. What a small world, and it gets smaller . . . The PO Box for the "Virginia Biosolids Council" is the same PO Box of one Robert Crockett, the managing partner of Crockett + Hooks, as you can see from their web site. Mr. Crockett used to be a company lobbyist for WestVaCo. He was recently appointed to the Waste Management Board by Gov. Warner. And the Hooks part of Crockett+Hooks?? You guessed it, he's the same Charlie Hooks who owns VirginiaBiosolids.com, the web site of the spooky Virginia Biosolids Council. Well, what is it, exactly, that Crockett + Hooks do? I know you aren't going to believe this, but they are media, lobbying, and PR damage control guys for companies that may not be perceived by the public as, well ... environmentally friendly. Here it is in their own words: What We Do Any action that could impact a community’s natural or cultural resources—land, water, air, scenic views, historic sites, or quality of life—is almost certain to provoke public and media interest. A lack of information or misinformation spread by others can result in costly delays or even rejection of a proposed project or program. We believe that fire prevention provides greater value than fire fighting. We . . .successfully manage issues communication. . . So the obvious scenario here is that Synagro hires Hooks, or Crockett, or Hooks Assoc., or Crockett+Hooks, or the whole bunch of them to set up a phony "Virginia Biosolids Council" as a front for disseminating "facts" on sludge. Bingo! You got a propaganda machine just like that. Hooks sets up the web site and Crockett answers the mail. Now go thither and flood the Net with mis-information about how good sludge is for everyone's health and happiness. These guys actually get paid for this. I wonder if they figure that the wealth they pass on to their grandkids will offset the screwed-up environment their grandkids inherit. But how good is the information on Charlie Hook's site -- sorry, on the Virginia Biosolids Council's site? One of their links is to one of the 2005 J. Applied Microbiology papers by the Gerba/Pepper group in Arizona, and I'll be posting an analysis on that paper here soon. Also, I had a note from Carolyn Snyder yesterday regarding the VirginiaBiosolids.com site. She is working on a careful analysis of the "facts" presented there, and I will publish her efforts, too. I will also endeavor to find out who -- as in what warm human bodies -- constitute the Virginia Biosolids Council's board of directors. Ha, ha, ha, ha, . . .board of directors, get it?? What board of directors????. In the mean time, I registered VirginiaBiosolids.org myself. I cannot begin to understand why a bona fide "council" would register itself as a ".com" (as in www.synagro.com) and not an ".org." But if they want to leave VirginiaBiosolids.org hanging on the line for some gutter grunt anti-sludge blogger like me to come along and snatch it off -- hey, great.