Industrial Waste - Chapter 9

Almanac Table of Contents | Chapter Nine Table of Contents | TEC Home Page

NOTES * PREVIOUS PAGE Go to page 1*2*3*4*5*6*7*Notes

Texas Environmental Almanac, Chapter 9, Industrial Waste, Page 7

TOXICS AND BIRTH DEFECTS
Are hazardous and toxic waste responsible for an unusually high number of birth defects recorded in the late 1980s and early 1990s along the southern Texas-Mexico border? While the answers are far from conclusive, many community and environmental groups, as well as scientists, believe that certain types of birth defects are linked to exposure to pollution from industrial facilities. The controversy along the border dates back to April 1991, when three women at one hospital in Brownsville, Cameron County, Texas, gave birth to infants with anencephaly, a rare birth defect in which babies are born with either incomplete or missing brains and skulls. Following this unexpected event and public outcry it generated, the Texas Department of Health and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control conducted a joint study to identify cases of both anencephaly and other birth defects known collectively as Neural Tube Defects (NTDs) and search for causes. A total of 68 NTDs were discovered among pregnancies conceived in Cameron County from 1986 to 1991, about twice the rate in the United States during the same time period. Moreover, in 1990 and 1991, the rate was nearly 27 per 10,000 births, about six times the national average.(137) High rates were also found in other counties along the border. The CDC/Department of Health report concluded that the causes of these high NTD rates could not be determined.(138) However, recent evidence has pointed to toxics, notably organic solvents, as possible candidates that could be investigated further. Some studies have pointed to a link between the occurrence of NTDs and certain occupations, such as painters, in which the parents are exposed to solvents.(139) Moreover, environmentalists point to the rapid industrialization in Matamoros, Mexico as a potential source of high levels of toxic emissions to water and air.(140) Unfortunately, relatively little is known about the amounts and types of waste released by the primarily U.S-owned companies operating on the Mexican border. In the United States companies are required to report this information under Superfund Right-to-Know Legislation; in Mexico, there is no such requirement.

TOXICS AND BIRTH DEFECTS

Are hazardous and toxic waste responsible for an unusually high number of birth defects recorded in the late 1980s and early 1990s along the southern Texas-Mexico border? While the answers are far from conclusive, many community and environmental groups, as well as scientists, believe that certain types of birth defects are linked to exposure to pollution from industrial facilities. The controversy along the border dates back to April 1991, when three women at one hospital in Brownsville, Cameron County, Texas, gave birth to infants with anencephaly, a rare birth defect in which babies are born with either incomplete or missing brains and skulls.

Following this unexpected event and public outcry it generated, the Texas Department of Health and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control conducted a joint study to identify cases of both anencephaly and other birth defects known collectively as Neural Tube Defects (NTDs) and search for causes. A total of 68 NTDs were discovered among pregnancies conceived in Cameron County from 1986 to 1991, about twice the rate in the United States during the same time period.

Moreover, in 1990 and 1991, the rate was nearly 27 per 10,000 births, about six times the national average.(137) High rates were also found in other counties along the border.

The CDC/Department of Health report concluded that the causes of these high NTD rates could not be determined.(138) However, recent evidence has pointed to toxics, notably organic solvents, as possible candidates that could be investigated further. Some studies have pointed to a link between the occurrence of NTDs and certain occupations, such as painters, in which the parents are exposed to solvents.(139) Moreover, environmentalists point to the rapid industrialization in Matamoros, Mexico as a potential source of high levels of toxic emissions to water and air.(140)

Unfortunately, relatively little is known about the amounts and types of waste released by the primarily U.S-owned companies operating on the Mexican border. In the United States companies are required to report this information under Superfund Right-to-Know Legislation; in Mexico, there is no such requirement.

EFFLUENT DISCHARGES FROM MATAMOROS INDUSTRIAL PARKS
LOCATION	NEAREST COMPANY (PARENT CORPORATION, HEADQUARTERS)	TOXIC POLLUTANT DETECTED	QUANTITY DETECTED	STANDARDS	COMMENTS AND OBSERVATIONS
Finsa	Near to Rimir (General Motors,Detroit, MI)	Total Xylenes	2,800,000	440 U.S. Drinking Water Standard	Discharge passed into industrial park soil and into an agricultural drainage canal. Contaminants may reach Rio Grande, which is drinking water supply. Discharge smelled strongly of aromatic solvents and had coagulated black tarry particles suspended in it.
	"	Methylene Chloride	41,000	.19 U.S. Ambient Water Quality Criterion	Suspected Carcinogen
	"	Ethylbenzene	430,000	1400 Mexico Potable Water Stdd.
Aldusa Industrial Park	Canal flowing off site of Stepan de Mexico (Stepan Chemical, Northfield, IL)	Naphthalene	16,000	20 Mexico Standard for Protection of Aquatic Life
	"	Total Xylenes	23,200,000	440 U.S. Drinking Water Standard
	"	Acidity	1.62 pH	5-8 pH is Normal Permitted Range	Sample is highly acidic. Acids in soil here would leach metals into groundwater.
Del Golfo Industrial Park de Preservacion	Next to Productos (Preservation Products/Idacon Houston, TX)	Pentachlorophenol	505 effluent 14,300 soil	.5 is Mexico standard for Protection of Aquatic Life	Soil, samples at discharge pipe, contained levels of Penta on par with U.S. hazardous waste standard for Penta sludges.
	"	Total Xylenes	1020 effluent 47,000 soil	440 U.S.Drinking Water Standard
Note: All figures are in parts per billion unless otherwise noted.
Source: National Toxics Campaign Fund, Border Trouble: Rivers in Peril, a Report on Water Pollution Due to Industrial Development in Northern Mexico, May 1991.

THE PAPER TRAIL OF THE UNIFORM HAZARDOUS WASTE MANIFEST

A one-page manifest must accompany every waste shipment. The resulting paper trail documents the waste's progress through treatment, storage and disposal. A missing form alerts the generator to investigate, which may mean calling in the state agency or EPA.

Source: Environmental Protection Agency, Solving the Hazardous Waste Problem: EPA's RCRA Program (Washington, DC: EPA, September 1986, 11).

GETTING WASTE FROM POINT A TO POINT B

Millions of tons a year of hazardous waste pass along Texas highways, rivers, coastal waters and railways, potentially exposing Texas residents to accidental spills and releases. Transportation of these hazardous waste is highly regulated. Any transporter shipping hazardous or Class 1 industrial non-hazardous waste must carry what is known as a Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest. This manifest lists both the generator and waste disposal facility, and an EPA identification number.(150) Only facilities which have a permit from the TNRCC and an EPA identification number are authorized to manage hazardous waste.(151)

In Texas, regulation of oil and hazardous waste spills is divided among a myriad of state and federal agencies. The Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission is the state's lead agency to respond to inland oil spills, all hazardous substance spills and all other spills under the state's Hazardous Substances Spill Prevention and Control Act.(152) The Oil Spill Prevention and Response Act, passed by the State Legislature in 1991, designated the Texas General Land Office the state's lead agency for response to oil spills that threaten or enter coastal waters.(153) Finally, the Railroad Commission of Texas is charged with regulating spills or discharges from exploration, development, or production of oil, gas and geothermal resources.(154) The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department has a role in all three programs in assessing damages to natural resources.

By law, transporters and generators must report any spills or accidents in route. In fiscal year 1993, TNRCC received 4,896 reports of spills by transporters and generators of hazardous and oil waste. Of these spills, about 99 percent were cleaned up voluntarily by the responsible parties, and 1 percent (73) required state funds for clean-up.(155) About $3.4 million were spent to respond to and clean-up these accidents. Most accidents occur on highways.(156)

In addition to these transportation-related spills, millions of gallons of oil and gas and other chemical products are spilled from oil and gas production facilities, barges, pipelines and platforms. The Railroad Commission receives reports of more than 5,000 oil spills annually related to oil and gas production, exploration and development.(157) The General Land Office responded to 1,304 spills into coastal waters of the state in 1993. Cleaning up 45 of these sites cost $150,000. Funds generated from a fee assessed on all crude oil loaded or unloaded in Texas ports were used for those oil spill clean-ups in which a responsible party cannot be identified (see "Coastal Waters" section, Water Quality chapter).(158)

TEXAS WATER COMMISSION RESPONSES TO REPORTED SPILLS IN TEXAS
1989	2,300
1990	3,700
1991	4,500
1992	7,200
1993	4,896
Hazardous Substances	50%
Oil	48%
Other	2%
Source: Don Fawn, Texas Water Commission, Spills: Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst (Austin: TWC, 1992), 10.

Texas Environmental Almanac, Chapter 9, Industrial Waste, Page 7

Almanac Table of Contents | Chapter Nine Table of Contents | TEC Home Page

NEXT PAGE * PREVIOUS PAGE Go to page 1*2*3*4*5*6*7*Notes

Please send questions, comments, or problems with this page to ltarver@mail.utexas.edu.