1 24 45 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/836a13c38e936443effbf5034abd889f.mp4 e2af5c96a3d378d8ac6f7a99f8896749 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/20900ff7830055b61eb8f83574a068d6.pdf d872b7f0104e225c1a62d6bfc9606994 PDF Text Text Living with PFAS Interviewer: Danielle DeVasto Interviewee: Andrea Amico Date of Interview: 2023-02-10 Danielle DeVasto: I'm Dani DeVasto. And today, February 10, 2023. I have the pleasure of chatting with Andrea Amico. Hi Andrea. Andrea Amico: Hi, Danielle DeVasto: Andrea, can you tell me about where you're from and where you currently live? Andrea Amico: Sure. Um, I grew up in central Massachusetts, uh, Leominster, Mass, but I currently live in Portsmouth, New Hampshire. Danielle DeVasto: How long have you lived there? Andrea Amico: I moved to Portsmouth New Hampshire in 2007 when my husband took a job up this way, it brought us from Massachusetts to New Hampshire. And we have been here since. Danielle DeVasto: Can you tell me a story please? About your experience with PFA S or with PFAS in your community? Andrea Amico: Sure. So I like to say in May of 2014, my life changed forever. I read a newspaper article that had said they found high levels of PFAS in the drinking water wells at the Pease Tradeport, uh, which is imports with New Hampshire, where I live. And it is home to a former Air Force base that had been shut down in 1991. So many years before I had moved to the area and really knew a lot about the prior Air Force base and the fact that it was a super fun site. I didn't know that, but why it was important to me and devastating to me, frankly, when I learned that there was contamination, there was because my husband was working for a company at the Pease Tradeport. And my two children were attending a daycare center located at the Tradeport, and all three of them were drinking the water every day. And so when I read that article that they had found high levels of PFAS, and they had to shut down a large drinking water well, because the contamination was significant. Um, my heart sank, you know, because I was like, whoa, I don't know what these chemicals are, but my family's drinking that water. My kids are drinking that water. Like, what is this? What does this mean? So that's how I became introduced to PFAS back in 2014. Danielle DeVasto: And then what happened after that point for you? So you found out, you read the article and then, and then what? Andrea Amico: Yeah. So I started attending community meetings that were being hosted by our city and our state, and I just started trying to learn as much as I could about these chemicals. And, you know, back then in 2014, there wasn't a lot of information. Honestly, I, you know, searched the internet and I could find stuff about the C8 health project and C8 health study in Parkersburg, West Virginia. I found some EPA documents that were like 800 pages long and really hard to make sense of, but PFAS was not, uh, known and given the, you know, attention in the media and, uh, frankly like the scientific studies and resources that it is today. Um, and so I attended some community meetings and tried to do my, do my best to educate myself. And, um, the first thing I really started advocating for was blood testing for my community, because I knew that these chemicals built up in the body, and they stayed there for a long time. And I knew that you could have a blood test to determine how much was in your body. Um, even Page 1 �though we don't really know what that means, but you know, or at the time we didn't really know what it meant, but, so that was like one of the first things I did was advocate for blood testing. And then I formed a community action group with two other moms whose children also went to the daycare center, and we formed a group called Testing for Pease. And our first big, big push was that blood testing program. Hence, the testing part of Testing for Pease. Danielle DeVasto: And how did that go? Andrea Amico: Um, so we were successful. It took a lot of pressure, um, but we were able to get our State health department to offer a PFAS blood testing program to our, to the community at the Pease Tradeport, um, between 2015 and 2018 of almost 2000 people participated in that program. And it did reveal elevated levels of PFAS in the blood when compared to the, you know, general population. We know everybody has some detectable levels of PFAS in their blood, but the levels at the Pease Tradeport were elevated when compared to, you know, the general population. And with that information, we were able to advocate for filtration of the drinking water and the Air Force paid for that. Uh, we were also able to advocate for health studies for the community, and we were successful in getting two PFAS health studies for our community. One was with the ATSDR, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. They're a kind of like a sister branch of the CDC. They're a federal health agency that works with communities who have dealt with environmental contamination. Um, so we did have a large health study done, uh, that actually wrapped up about a year ago, and we're still awaiting our community results. And we have another health study that's ongoing today, um, called the PFAS reach study and that's funded by the NIEHS, and that is, um, looking at children of mothers who drink water at Pease, um, and looking at their, the child's PFAS levels and their immune function, 'cause we know PFAS can impact vaccines and vaccine effectiveness and the immune function of children. So, um, so we've been really successful here, you know, that blood testing program that we initially advocated for, I think opened up a lot of opportunities for advocating for remediation filtration and additional health studies. Danielle DeVasto: Wow. That's great that you guys have been so successful. What do you attribute that to? 'Cause I don't think that's the story everywhere. Andrea Amico: Yeah, I completely agree. I think there's a couple things. I think we were one of the first communities to really grapple with this. I know there were some others, but um, we were one of the first back in 2014, like I said, you know, Parkersburg, West Virginia was kind of on the radar with the CA health study there. But, um, and I know that, uh, the Wurtsmith Air Force Base had found their contamination as well. But I think us being one of the first, uh, communities to have a really significant contamination, uh, especially to a trad port of, you know, about 10,000 people were coming to this tradeport to work every day. Um, so I think timing being one of the first and really pushing when there wasn't a hundred other communities asking for the same thing, we were kind of the first ones. Um, I also think, like I said, we were a tradeport. Um, our forma military base was closed under what's called the bra program. It was the first BRAC site with DOD base realignment closure. Um, that program was really that program focuses on taking former bases and redeveloping them. And so I know Pease was considered a Page 2 �very big success story to the Air Force. The fact that they took this old base, redeveloped it into this large industrial park with 250 businesses, 10,000 employees like there's, you know, community colleges, restaurants, a golf course, um, all kinds of businesses, medical office buildings, restaurants, like this was a highly successful place for New Hampshire as well as a large economic hub for New Hampshire. You know, so they really, we, no one could just really walk away from this community. You know, I mean this was a, a significant resource and asset to New Hampshire. So I think that was part of it as well. Um, and I also think we were very successful in establishing relationships very early on with our congressional delegation and our elected officials and a lot of the efforts that happened at Pease, where as a result of, you know, our Senator from New Hampshire Jeanne Shaheen, who's been a PFAS leader in the U.S. Senate, uh, making sure we have funding for the health study, the at ATSDR Health Study, really pushing for the air force to clean up and filter the water. And, um, we also had an EPA order from region one that ordered the E uh, Air Force to clean up the contamination. And again, I think part of that was timing of being one of the first, but also just, I feel like it was a lot of things that came together, you know, timing quick, organizing on the community part, asking for things, being one of the first and having strong relationships with congressional leaders who were able to really, um, put legislation in place to give us action. So I attribute all of our successes to a combination of those things. Danielle DeVasto: Prior to all of this beginning, were you, um, did you have a background in community organization advocacy work? Andrea Amico: No, I get asked that a lot. No, I didn't. [LAUGHTER[ Um, so by training, I'm an occupational therapist. I work in the world of rehabilitation, neuro adult rehab. Um, and so yeah, no, I didn't have any knowledge. Like I was never an envi-. I wouldn't, you know, didn't think a whole lot, lot about the environment, you know, like this just never politically active. Um, it just wasn't, it just wasn't something I ever did or was never part of my life, even my family, you know, it just wasn't something I was raised to do. So it honestly took this happening to my family and my community to kind of spark a fire inside of me and say like, all right, like we gotta do something here, you know? And I think that's what was so shocking to me in the beginning when like they found our contamination, they shut down the well, and, you know, at first we were asking for blood testing, and it was like, we weren't getting, making a lot of progress on that. And it just, it kind of like, it shocked me that like a large amount of people could have been exposed, you know, were exposed to high levels of contaminants and drinking water. And at the time they were calling them emerging contaminants and our State health department was like, we don't really know the health effects. Like we're just not really sure. And it seemed like everyone was okay with just not being sure as a reason to not do anything. And that just, I couldn't accept that, you know, and like, I can't accept the unknown as a good enough answer not to do anything. Like if you don't know, you have to find out, you have to do health studies, you have to do blood testing. Like you can't just leave us all to carry on with our lives and not know if we're gonna get sick from this over time or, you know, so, um, yeah, sorry. That was a long winded answer, but, uh, no, I didn't have any prior experience and in a way I Page 3 �feel like that was a benefit. 'Cause I just came at this like trying to use common sense and be like, okay, you have to do more like, it's like not acceptable to just accept the unknown. Danielle DeVasto: So you're continuing right now with your advocacy work, correct? Andrea Amico: Yes. Danielle DeVasto: Like it's not, it's not done. Andrea Amico: Oh, it's definitely not done. I, I tell people it's, it's like a lifetime. I have set my mind up that this will be a lifetime of work for me in some way or another, you know? Um, I do a lot of work at the national level now, so I'm part of the national PFAS contamination coalition. I helped found that in 2017, and we're a large group of community, community leaders like me from all over the country, um, who are also dealing with this issue, whether it's at former military bases like mine, whether it's at industrial sites, like Saint Galvan um, that's contaminated, Miramac New Hampshire, Husick Falls, uh, Husick Falls, New York, uh, lots of firefighters who also are concerned about PFAS. Um, so yeah, we're a real, you know, broad group of people and working at the national level to try to get better EPA regulations, you know, hold polluters accountable so they are forced to clean up this mess. They're forced to fund health studies and, and make people whole again, you know, um, it's, it's incredibly wrong what has happened with PFAS in this country? You know, the fact that manufacturers hid the health effects for so many years, they were just allowed to manufacture so many PFAS, put them out into our environment. They're in our bodies, um, with no regulations with no consequences. And even now what we know, we're still, we still aren't at a point where they're regulated at a federal level. I mean, we're getting there, but, um, it's, it's, it's absolutely horrific to me how this is all played out in our country. And I hope it's an example of like how we need to do so much better as a country and as a society and how we treat chemicals and what we're willing to expose people to. And, um, because these chemicals are never going away. And so anyways, I see my work as something that will go on forever. I really do. As, as long as I'm living, there will be something to work on with PFAS. Um, and, and I'm committed to that. You know, I, I gave a, a TEDx talk in my community a few years ago, and I ended, I ended the line, like, I'll see people, and they're like, oh, you're still doing that water stuff. And I'm like, yeah. And I, I ended my talk saying like, you know, I, I'm never gonna stop because I'm just as per persistent as PFAS, you know, like, I'm, [LAUGHTER] I'm just as persistent as PFAS. So like, yeah, it's, my work will evolve over time, but like I have committed my mind to a lifetime of work on PFAS to some degree Danielle DeVasto: In the move that you've made from kind of focusing on just the local to the national, um, like what, what has that shift been like for you, or what have you noticed in making those shifts? Andrea Amico: Um, well the I've noticed that I'm not alone., [LAUGHTER] um, we're not alone, you know, as frustrating as it feels to be. Sometimes you can feel siloed in your own community and how everything happens. Um, I've realized that there's a lot of other people out there just like us who have experienced the same things, um, who want the same things. And all of our stories are different. You know, our polluters are different. Our sources of PFAS are different in some cases, but like, we all want the same things. Like we don't wanna be exposed to chemicals that we didn't volunteer or sign up for, you Page 4 �know? Um, and so I've, I feel a sense of collaboration and I feel a sense of validation with a larger group of people that it's not just us, it's not just New Hampshire, it's not just Portsmouth. Um, and I also feel a bigger sense of responsibility. The more people that join our coalition and the more stories I hear, I feel more of a sense of responsibility of why I need to keep going, because if I stop and look at like everything we've gotten in my community, I'm really proud of that. And I'm really happy. And I feel like I could just be like, Hey, we have our, you know, the Air Force is cleaning it up. They're filtering our water. We're getting our health studies. We've had our blood testing like good, you know, like I could just, but I, I feel a bigger sense of like, like you said, that's not the norm in most communities. Like people are fighting tooth and nail for blood testing and health studies and filtration and, um, and the numbers of communities discovering this contamination continue to grow. So I just, I feel a bigger sense of responsibility to something bigger than just my community and trying to use the knowledge and the experience I have to move the needle even further. Like we have to stop exposing people to PFAS. We do. Um, and, and we have to study the people who have been exposed, and we have to make the people who have been exposed and are harmed, we have to make them whole again, you know? And so, um, so there's yeah, a lot more to do. And it's bigger than just here. Danielle DeVasto: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm what concerns do you have about PFAS contamination moving forward? Andrea Amico: Well, I, I am concerned that a, a few things I'm concerned that we can't even detect all of them, you know? So the current testing, we have lacks the ability to really know what's, you know, uh, when something is said to be PFAS free, or we're gonna, you know, stop using PFAS, like my antenna immediately goes up, like, what does that mean? Is that mean just 20 of 'em, you know, PFAS is a class of, I've heard 12,000, 15,000, the number keeps growing. So it concerns me that we can't even detect all of them or truly know what we're being exposed to. Um, it concerns me that we don't have any federal regulations at this point. We have health advisories. Um, I know the EPA is working on that, but, you know, we've known for a long time that PFAS are bad. And the fact that we don't have regulations yet to stop exposure is unacceptable. You know. Um, another challenge that I think people are facing, and one that I've spent a lot of effort on is the fact that health, the healthcare community doesn't know what PFAS are. And, um, I mean, even in my own community, people got blood testing done, and they bring the results to their doctor, and their doctor was like, I don't, I don't know what this is. I don't know how to read these blood tests. I don't, I don't know what to do with this information. And so, you know, that's another thing as more communities become exposed. I mean, one of the first things that pops into your mind when you learn you're exposed for at least for me, it was, is my family gonna be okay? Like, are they gonna get sick? Like, what do I need to do to monitor their health? Like, what should I do now? I can't undo the exposure. I can't take the PFAS out of their body any faster. So now what, and then you, you know, go to your doctor, which seems like a very appropriate step. And, and they're, they're just, you know, they're uneducated about it. And, um, and it's not, it's not their fault, the physician's fault, it's that they don't get environmental health training. They're not given guidance on PFAS. They don't even know Page 5 �how to order PFAS blood tests, you know? So, um, I think there's a lot more that needs to be done too, on the healthcare side of things. So like, you know, I think when, when you think about lead exposure in kids, like doctors know that that's not good, and there's a level in the blood that you wanna be below. And if a kid has lead, there's steps, you can take, you know, to help them. I hope someday with PFAS, we can be there too with the healthcare community. They're gonna know how to test for it in the blood. They're gonna know what levels are concerning. And if you have an elevated level, they're gonna know what tests to run and steps to take, to monitor your health and try to keep you healthy, you know? And we have, we've seen some progress on that for sure. But that's another area I think, need that needs a lot of work. Danielle DeVasto: Before we wrap up today, is there anything else that you would like to add that we haven't touched on today or anything that you'd like to go back to and say more about? Andrea Amico: Um, I just think, I think a few thoughts, or just, I'll kind of elaborate on a few things I've said, um, it's infuriating to me how far this PFAS issue has become, um, how far it's gotten out of hand, I should say in the sense that the chemical companies that made these chemicals decades ago knew, knew the harms of them. Um, they hid that information, and they continued to make these chemicals profit off of them. And, and frankly, they continued to do that today. And I just, I, I really struggle with that. You know, I really struggle that a company, uh, can do something like that to our entire society and yet face no real consequences. Um, it's crazy to me that the people that have been harmed by these chemicals the most are the ones that have to like stand up and fight tooth and nail, uh, while these chemicals were, these companies were just allowed to profit off of them. And I, I think, I think our government and our society should make a very strong example of these companies. And I think they need to be criminally held responsible, uh, for what they've done. And, um, and I hope that we'll, I'll hope I'll see that in my lifetime because they absolutely need to be held responsible. Um, I will also say that, you know, as a mom, like this has been like one of the most emotional things for me as a mother, you know? Um, I think as a mom, you, you try to do everything right. You know, when I was pregnant with my kids, I like took my prenatal vitamins. I went to all my appointments, um, when, when I was looking for daycares for them, like, I, you know, toward the daycares, I asked so many questions. Like, are you first aid certified? What's your curriculum? What's your teacher to child ratio? Never once. Did I question the quality of the water? Never once. Um, that's like something that just eats me up inside as a mom that like, unbeknownst to me, I sent my children to a daycare center that had highly contaminated water. Um, and the daycare didn't know either, you know, so even if I had asked the question, they wouldn't have known, but I can't tell you like what that's done to me emotionally, that I made a choice that put my kids in harm's way and that, you know, that's honestly, the reason why I fight so hard is for them, like, I can't undo, what's been done in the past, but like, if I can do everything I can to make this better in the future, I will. And if I can do anything, I can to prevent this from happening to another mom or family, like I will. Um, but it's really robbed me of a lot of my happiness. And it's really like taken a lot away from me as a person. Um, and that's like something I don't think people truly understand like emotionally and psychologically, what contamination does to a family or an individual or, uh, to a community. You know, it's just, it's just, Page 6 �it's just absolutely devastating. It feels like the ultimate betrayal, honestly. Um, and so, you know, I guess I just, you know, talking about the human side of things and, you know, it's easy to be like with, I advocated for this, and we got this and like, you know, I'm so proud of those things. Those things bring me a lot of pride and joy that I've been lucky to work with community members, and we've accomplished so much, but I, I just want people to know that it's not easy, and it's, it's life changing, and it's not for the better, so I guess that's what all, but I guess, and one other thing just like, what keeps me going though, and I'll just end with this is that we have seen progress, you know, a lot. Um, not only in awareness, like I told you, no one knew what PFAS were or even heard of 'em before. Like the amount of legislation that's passed the amount of resources. I mean, there was $10 billion put billion with a B put in the infrastructure bill to address PFAS. Like that's huge, you know, um, a lot of money, a lot of attention, a lot of awareness, a lot of science going on. Um, that's what gives me hope. And I just, um, wanna just keep moving forward. Like I said, just if we can prevent this from ever happening again, make a strong example of what's already happened and help the people who have been harmed like that. That's what we need to do. Danielle DeVasto: So I suspect that you can never, you mentioned before being, you know, you want to work to help communities and people feel whole again. Um, and I suspect that after the kind of, you know, you say betrayal that you felt and, um, the other, you know, just all the ramifications of finding out something like this happened to your community, that you can never maybe a hundred percent be as you were mm-hmm, but I'm just, I was curious for you or for your community, um, or people that you work with, what do you think could be done to make you feel as whole as possible? Like what, what would that look like for you? Andrea Amico: I think it's a few different things. So it's having like an established medical monitoring program that allows people to have access to healthcare, so they can monitor their health and catch any health effects early. Like right now we don't have that. It's very fragmented. Um, so having a system in place that will help people monitor their health, that they don't have to pay for that, you know, and if people do suffer health effects as a result of that, they of their contamination, they should be compensated. I think if people have lost property values, because they live in a, in an area that's contaminated and people don't wanna buy their house now, or live there, they should be compensated for that. Um, I think holding the polluters accountable, you know, like criminally, um, is so important, you know, like, no, one's no one's ever apologized. Like, no one's ever said, like, we're sorry, this happened to you. You know, like I think owning the mistakes of the past are so important. Like as much as I like to look forward to the future and like, how do we change this and make this better? Like that past is so important and acknowledging the mistakes, apologizing to the communities and like taking full accountability is also another part of it. Um, absolutely cleaning up the contamination. Like it shouldn't be left in our water in our soil and, and that's even trickier. Like it's everywhere now, it's in our food, it's in our plants, it's in our fish, it's in the air, it's in rainwater. Like, you know, so I think being whole, again means a lot of different things, but it comes down to like accountability, cleaning it up, um, and not putting the burden of paying for all of Page 7 �this stuff on the communities, you know? Um, and, and whether that's paying for filtration of their water or paying to go to see the doctor, 'cause they might have health issues or losing, you know, some folks like in New Hampshire, um, you know, their property values went down like that's their retirement, you know what I mean? Their home, the value of their home. Um, it's just, it touches on so many issues. And so I think there's a lot that needs to be done to make us whole, but those are just some that pop off pop to the top of my mind. Danielle DeVasto: Mm-hmm those would all be excellent places to start. Mm-hmm mm-hmm even if, maybe it's not, you know, ultimately you can't undo what, what has been done as you've said mm-hmm so, Andrea Amico: Yeah, and I, I just hope too, like the technology advances on how to get rid of PFAS, you know, 'cause even at this point we can't destroy it. We can't like even incineration there's concerns with it there. So it's like in some ways too, I'm so grateful in my community, they're filtering it from the water, and you know, they concentrate it and right now they send it to a landfill aligned landfill, and I'm grateful that it's leaving my community, but in the back of my mind, I'm like, we're just like taking this pollution and moving it somewhere else. Like we're making it somebody else's problem someday. And that seems wrong too. You know, it's like we don't even have, and then I wonder like then why do we approve new PFAS on the market? We can't even handle the PFAS. We have, we don't even have a good understanding of the health impacts of all the PFAS that are on the market. Like why would we add more into the environment? You know? Um, so again, I'm just hopeful with the resources and the awareness and the scientific interest in PFAS that we will see more advances on remediation, technology and destruction. Um, so we're not just like picking up the pollution and moving it around instead of actually getting rid of it. But again, all the reason we probably should have never made this stuff in the first place 'cause we can't get rid of it, you know? Um, so yeah. Danielle DeVasto: Well thank you Andrea for taking the time to share your story today. Thank you. Andrea Amico: Yeah. Thanks for talking with me. Page 8 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Living with PFAS Interviews Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Devasto, Danielle Description An account of the resource Beginning in 2021, the Living with PFAS interviews were recorded to gather the personal stories of individuals impacted by PFAS contamination. PFAS, or per- and polyflourinated substances, are a large group of human-made chemicals used widely since the 1940s to make coatings and products resistant to heat, oil, stains, grease, and water. They can be found in countless household items, including food packaging, non-stick cookware, stain-resistant furniture, and water-resistant clothing. These chemicals are often called “forever chemicals” because they do not break down easily, can move through soils and contaminate drinking water sources, and build up in animals, plants, and people. PFAS have been linked to increased incidences of various cancers, increased cholesterol, decreased fertility, birth defects, kidney and liver disease, and immune system suppression, and thyroid dysfunction. It is estimated that PFAS are in the drinking water of more than 200 million Americans (Andrews & Naidenko, 2020). In Michigan alone, over 280 sites have PFAS contamination exceeding maximum contamination levels for groundwater (MPART, 2024). Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-11 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf audio/mp3 Type The nature or genre of the resource Motion Picture Text Sound Language A language of the resource eng Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context PFAS0036 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Amico, Andrea Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2023-02-10 Title A name given to the resource Andrea Amico, 2023 (Interview video and transcript) Description An account of the resource Andrea Amico lives in Portsmouth, New Hampshire where she moved in 2007. In this interview, Andrea discusses her activism and advocacy about PFAS contamination after learning about the superfund site at the Pease Tradeport, where her husband worked and children attended daycare. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource DeVasto, Danielle (interviewer) Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Moving Image Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/de2b660352e5037db0dafaf86a58d40d.mp4 b2f17065cbef332f8f70648daabd8299 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/79b9c08b8c380db250d0d17a76a2645c.pdf 21a285522a55c52bed4dd5a0066d73c6 PDF Text Text Living With PFAS Interviewee: AJ Birkbeck Interviewer: Dani DeVasto Date: May 19, 2021 DD: I’m Dani DeVasto and today, May 19th 2021, I have the pleasure of chatting with AJ Birkbeck. Thank you so much for being with us today AJ. Can you tell me about where you’re from and where you currently live? AJ: Well I grew up in Grand Rapids, Michigan and went to school in Ann Arbor and after that moved to Chicago where I worked for many years as an environmental attorney. DD: And are you still based in Chicago right now? AJ: I do maintain an office in the Chicago-land area, and I’m still licensed in Illinois but I’ve been focusing pretty much exclusively on Michigan of late, so that’s my focus and especially when it comes to PFAS. DD: Alright, can you tell me how long you’ve been here? AJ: Well, I spent all but 17 years of my life, so over 50 years I’ve been in Michigan. DD: Okay. So AJ, could you tell me a story about your experience with PFAS or with PFAS in your community? AJ: The main story is just unfortunately the lack of information that’s available to everyone. You know, critically, lawmakers don’t have accurate information, and many times they’re being informed by the chemical industry exclusively, not necessarily by science. As science is coming online, not only in Michigan but across the country and around the world, it’s becoming evident that this problem is a lot bigger than people thought, because these chemicals are everywhere. So, the story is: how can we get information out to people and how can we inform people of risks related to PFAS, and that’s what we did when we discovered the wolverine contamination in Rockford, MI, which is one of the most contaminated locations in the US. Even worldwide, people have heard of it. DD: Do you want to say anything more about your efforts to help get out information to people? Especially kind of surrounding the Wolverine West Michigan area? �AJ: Right. Well as a group of citizens, to say resources are limited is kind of an understatement. It’s something that people in the neighborhood do in their spare time and there was a lot of footwork done, a lot of discovery. It’s when we clearly determined there had been releases of PFAS in and around Rockford that needed to be addressed. The next big step was informing the regulatory community because still to this day, these chemicals are not effectively regulated at the federal level, which is just incredible. But in Michigan, fortunately they moved very quickly in legal moves with regulation that happened to be exactly timed with pleadings that came down and legal actions between the state and federal government and wolverine. So it all was a simultaneous recognition that something needed to be done. The regulations were passed and wolverine agreed to step up to the plate and really move forward with a lot of what’s been happening out at that site right now. DD: Can you tell me a little bit more about your role in this process? AJ: Well, I’ve spent my entire career out at locations working in communities on large contaminations. The biggest client for many years was actually an instrumentality of the federal district court in San Francisco with the Northern district of California. We worked directly for the court working on cleanups that were driven by community concerns. I had experience in doing things like that, and I received a call one day from a small community group, that’s the CCRR, and they needed legal advice as to what they could do with respect to the tannerring. I heard about some of the things that were going on, and I tried to reach out to city government at the time, but they really weren’t interested in finding out what was going on, or in any investigation. For the first time in my life, I met active resistance from a unit of government. I worked in my day-job for decades with municipal leaders in a very constructive way, and here, the door was slamming in my face. So I agreed to work with the CCRR in bringing action in Belmont and Rockford, and that effort so far has resulted in, my guess, and wolverine hasn’t disclosed any costs, but at least $125,000,000 in response costs. So, it has resulted in what I think is a significant improvement, not only to the environment, but in human health, which is most important. It’s unfortunate that the exposures were there as long as they were there, but I think, you know, as a result of literally, concerned neighbors saying something isn’t right here and digging deeper, and deeper, and deeper, we have prevented all those folks from Belmont from drinking what was the most contaminated drinking water I would argue in the nation. I think there was a couple of commercial wells that were tested at slightly higher levels. But I mean this is one of the most PFAS impacted sites that there is. The fact that people were sitting there drinking this water everyday, you can't taste it, smell it, or see it, it was just insidious. The fact that we cut that off by who knows how many years, 2 years, 5 years, 10 years, any day is too long to continue drinking what those residents were forced to drink. As we got more and more into it, I got more and more passionate about communities really needing help. What was going on in Rockford was the impotence for the founding of the PFAS alliance, which is- the motto is “From Communities, For Communities”. Taking everything we’ve learned in an area with very �little guidance as to what you should do as an impacted citizen, if it’s just finding out that you’ve been drinking PFAS for 25 years, you know, that's a scary prospect. There’s a lot more resources now than there were, but at the state level they’re really stretched. We need a lot more focused [?], which means a lot more resources, which means a legislature that’s willing to vote those resources into place in order to deal with this problem which is just getting bigger. I mean literally, go online to MPART and every week its 2 or 3 new sites. We had a big jump with, I think over 50 sites when the regulations finally came in. It’s so many communities being impacted and each one is related but in a unique way. So, how do you address that? It’s a huge problem which comes all the way back around to: I see this as a communication issue. A need to get information to the people who need it most, especially people living in impacted communities. DD: Do you want to say anything more about the PFAS alliance and either how that came to be or any of the work the PFAS alliance is doing right now? AJ: Some communities like to keep what’s going on behind a wrap, so if there’s a community that wants to remain confidential, we honor that request. We’ve reached out to a number of communities. Unfortunately, we are strictly an all-volunteer organization. We’ve received just a couple of very small grants, and on top of that it’s all volunteer work. So we have a dedicated group of directors and other folks that are members and work with us to really reach out, indepth, to communities. One of the communities we’ve recently worked with was down by Gerald Ford International Airport. There were, I believe, 247 households there with impacted wells, and we are working to ensure that they get hookups to the city of Grand Rapids water, which is very clean in respect to PFAS. So it’s the kind of thing that, as a community, they can’t do those things themselves, they don’t have the expertise and scientific help like we’ve gotten from GVSU with Dr. Richard Redinski, and with my experience with working with environmental laws with big cleanups in communities. Whenever we see success, like we’ve seen in several of the communities, it only makes us want to work harder and try to get the word out to more and more communities. Right now, we are just limited by assets. We do not have, you know, the grants behind us to really make things work as we’d like to. Because if we could expand and get out into 10s of communities, instead of just a handful of communities, which is all we can do at one time now. There’s 160 communities waiting for help across Michigan right now. DD: Wow. Before, I know you’ve mentioned that you’ve been involved for a long time with large community cleanups. But before you got involved with this, were you doing work with PFAS? Or is this a new contaminant that you encountered with CCRR? AJ: You know, it’s interesting. I used to go every year to these events that were hosted by the state of Michigan, DEQ at the time. You would sit around the lunch table with people that you mostly don’t know, and I happened to sit down next to a gentleman named Bob Delaney. Bob �Delaney is truly the biggest hero we have with the PFAS movement. He identified this stuff at one of his sites where he was project manager. He was researching into it and the more he found, the more terrible it became. He tried to elevate that within the state to an issue that should be addressed immediately. He even came up with a plan on how to address it, and unfortunately, it was placed in the circular file by those who made decisions, and there was no action taken. It turns out that literally 10 years later, actually it became more like seven years later, it became the template of how Michigan has handled this. So, you have a man that seven years beforehand was screaming, “something needs to be done about this”, I happened to sit next to at lunch. He started to explain this [?] and asked “have you heard of it?”, and you know, I hadn’t. I stay on top of these things, but the industry had done a very good job of making this appear to be a miracle group of chemicals, and it was like this isn't great? Science at work. “Oh so we have some evidence that it does some really bad things but we’ll just keep that quiet because this is extremely profitable and we don't really have proof.” That's basically what they ended up standing behind for nearly 50 years: We don't have proof that it's bad. The fact that there’s so many of these, 5,00 on a recent international science call. I meet every month with this group of PFAS scientists from around the world, but there has now been 9,000 categorized of them, and we know the health effects of approximately 2, maybe 3. The information we have, even there, is limited. So, this group of chemicals is out there and I think it’s something that ultimately, I became active in the environmental side of things as a geologist and in the light of when it happened with the love canal. That opened a lot of people’s eyes and I think when PFAS hits the mainstream media, there’s going to be a lot of eyes that are opened, as far as, “wow, I had no idea something this toxic was this close to my life every day”. They’re talking about going into camping stores where they have rack after rack of waterproof parkas and there could be a serious inhalation risk associated with that. Who would have had any idea? Dental floss, you know, wrappers for your burger, it just keeps coming up. The information that’s coming in daily is just mind boggling, and I actually suggested at a think-tank meeting that we create a worldwide information repository, scientifically vetted, because a lot of what’s going on right now is happening in the European Union. They tend to look more at human based health studies. So it was suggested that we start this, myself and Dr. Rediski are co-chairs on it, 2 and 3. We are working with China, Australia, the folks in Washington, and the European Union to get as much relevant health information in front of people in an easy to use interface and try to make that happen. But again, it’s all volunteer time by 20 people, no funding, no nothing, so it’s very frustrating unless you're plugged into that whole system of applying for grants and doing all that kind of stuff. We just have so many communities that need help, that we haven’t done that. DD: It seems like sometimes the timeline for some of those things like applying for grants and working through certain processes is not in sync with people’s needs too, adding to the challenge. �AJ: Yes, although I will say there’s been a number of groups, I can’t even list all them here, but one group in particular, Freshwater Future up in the Traverse City area, and they’re international as well, they’ve helped us with several grants. They’re helping us with our website right now. They are the group that came up with the $80 alternative to the $300 water testing alternative offered by the state. $300 is a lot for a lot of people, and the fact there’s an $80 alternative out there is great. Unfortunately, they had to shut their labs down due to COVID, but I’m trying to find out when they’re going to be back online. Ultimately, in my opinion, the way to address this is an initiative that I started with former chair of MPART, Steve Slyburn. We came up with computer systems to track, using PFAS, everywhere [?], then goes a step further to model groundwater flow to tell you if it’s moving towards you. So you can go and enter your address and it would say “you’re a quarter mile away from a landfill, where we know there’s PFAS, but you don’t have to worry about it because the water is flowing in the other direction.” Or, “you should be worried about it because it’s coming in your direction.” Those are the people who can’t know on their own, due to low funds, to test their wells. They could at least spring for the $70 and say “okay I’ve been drinking poison water, what do I do? Okay I get a filter, now what do I do?”. The state just doesn’t have the resources to deal with individual hits like that. There’s going to have to be a structure put into place, but the best hope right now is to come up with a system that allows any member of the public in Michigan to enter their address and find out if they’re at more risk or less risk. It can’t be able to say, you are definitely impacted. But I think people, if given the opportunity to check into risks, often will. We’re hoping that would be the case with this system. DD: That sounds like a great idea. I hope it comes to fruition. AJ: It’s been promised by the state by the first quarter of 2022. We’ve been told that certain aspects of it, the most difficult is the ground level water modelling as far as direction of groundwater, nobody’s ever tried that at a statewide basis based on well logs. They have to verify the data, because often well-logged locations often list the wrong location. That’s the element that’s taking the longest, but there’s 32 other layers of information, including manufacturers who utilize PFAS, in most cases in strict accordance with the law and there’s no spills. But, shouldn’t the person who lives right next door to that plant be able to say, “Okay, I’m going to spend $70 and test my water, and if it comes up clean then I can say I have a good corporate neighbor.” If it doesn’t, then we’ve got another site added to the ever growing list with MPART. Each one is a community with their own stories. DD: To go back to that original problem, the one where you said, “how do you get information, especially information about risk out to people?”, this would really help to address that lack. AJ: Right. Unfortunately, it’s come up against some real roadblocks. With respect to EPA, they have not really been allowed to look at PFAS until recently. The plan that they came out with in �the last year of the Trump administration was: “We agree to look at it, we’ll get back to you in a year.” They’re saying they could be as long as a year away from regulating this at the federal level. Which, by that time, Michigan’s regulations will be years old. Good for the folks in Michigan for recognizing how important water is and getting regulations in place to protect them. DD: So this kind of leads into my other main question, what concerns do you have about PFAS contamination moving forward? AJ: It’s just that- I think unfortunately there’s parallels with what happened with Covid, which is initially ignoring the potential gravity of the problem. Then when it hits, really going through a period of denial, “oh it’s not that bad yet.” You know, I found that even immediately in a case in Rockford, you could go up to almost half of the people you run into, and they won’t even really know what PFAS is, because Rockford has been on clean water since at least 2000. It’s one of those problems that unfortunately unless it’s happening to me, it sounds pretty complex. These 5,000 or 9,000 chemicals that the federal government doesn’t even regulate. There’s a very high degree of apathy, but when people begin to realize they are being exposed, it’s in 99.9% of people in the world. You have it in your blood right now, I have it in my blood right now. The question is, how much? The question that very few people have been able to look into is, how much is too much? What we know about the current PFAS contamination is that they’re really bad. Instead of being measured in parts per thousand, parts per million, or even parts per billion, the regulations for PFAS are as low as six parts per trillion. It’s difficult to comprehend how minute that is. An analogy I’ve heard is: when there’s one drop of water in an Olympic-sized swimming pool that renders the whole pool undrinkable. That’s some pretty toxic stuff. In the 50s and 60s, people were disposing of it in tanker trucks, thousands of gallons a day. Sometimes a local dump would take it. [?] turn on the spigot on a truck and just drive along the side of the road. This stuff can pop up anywhere, and it has been. In surface water, it’s pretty easy to identify because you have foam, and it’s a different kind of foam. It’s not that brownish-yellow natural foam, it’s bright white. Frankly, [computer stalls] [inaudible]because they’re PFAS in the Grand River, it doesn’t take much to generate foam. DD: So before we wrap up today, is there anything else that you’d like to add that we haven’t touched on? Or is there anything that you would like to go back to? AJ: Sorry, my internet is absolutely horrible. I used to have these fancy offices downtown and now I’m in the middle of the country in a rundown old town and we have to rely on cell towers that are miles away, [?] the phone companies lobbied….[inaudible]. DD: Uh oh, Aj I think you might have cut out...you’re back! �AJ: Can you hear me now? DD: I can. AJ: [Inaudible]...so now even though these phone lines [?] they won’t connect it. So actually, 100 years ago in 1921 there was better phone service here then there is today. DD: Wow. AJ: Anyhow, did I mention the one drop in an olympic sized swimming pool? Because I don’t remember when the question interjected into my line of thought. So I’m just trying to think where I left off. DD: Yes, you did talk about the one drop in the swimming pool. We had been talking about the concerns you have with PFAS contamination moving forward, and some of that conversation was helping people understand the magnitude of the problem. I don’t know if that helps jog your memory at all. Wait, are you still there? AJ: I mean without hearing what I really said before, I really risk repeating things, and that’s kind of embarrassing. It’s a result of the medications and everything they have me on right now. I don’t know if I could just listen to it and then we could ask that third question in a follow up in a day or two. That way, I could just say, “oh i left out these two or three points” and we could wrap it up that way. Does that sound like something we could do? DD: Yeah, absolutely. I can send you the recording. AJ: Unfortunately, with the recording also I’m usually a little more honest than I should be with the things that I mentioned to you earlier. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Living with PFAS Interviews Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Devasto, Danielle Description An account of the resource Beginning in 2021, the Living with PFAS interviews were recorded to gather the personal stories of individuals impacted by PFAS contamination. PFAS, or per- and polyflourinated substances, are a large group of human-made chemicals used widely since the 1940s to make coatings and products resistant to heat, oil, stains, grease, and water. They can be found in countless household items, including food packaging, non-stick cookware, stain-resistant furniture, and water-resistant clothing. These chemicals are often called “forever chemicals” because they do not break down easily, can move through soils and contaminate drinking water sources, and build up in animals, plants, and people. PFAS have been linked to increased incidences of various cancers, increased cholesterol, decreased fertility, birth defects, kidney and liver disease, and immune system suppression, and thyroid dysfunction. It is estimated that PFAS are in the drinking water of more than 200 million Americans (Andrews & Naidenko, 2020). In Michigan alone, over 280 sites have PFAS contamination exceeding maximum contamination levels for groundwater (MPART, 2024). Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-11 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf audio/mp3 Type The nature or genre of the resource Motion Picture Text Sound Language A language of the resource eng Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context PFAS0006 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Birkbeck, A.J. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021-05-19 Title A name given to the resource A.J. Birkbeck, 2021 (Interview video and transcript) Description An account of the resource A.J. Birbeck is an environmental attorney based in Chicago, but originally from Grand Rapids, Michigan. In his interview, he discusses the lack of information available to the public about PFAS and his work in communities with large contaminations, such as the the one in Michigan. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource DeVasto, Danielle (interviewer) Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Moving Image Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/b449f207249a2cc4a252cf4e502606e4.mp4 67d9d2780a425915e2cc692ef831e39e https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/271c73137bb38c4652709ce63d8f560d.pdf 2605d36c50dfae6657180f0536296252 PDF Text Text Living with PFAS Interviewee: Sue Borgeson Interviewer: Dani DeVasto Date: June 22nd, 2021 DD: I’m Dani DeVasto, and today, June 22nd, 2021, I have the pleasure of talking to Sue Borgersen. Hi Sue. SB: Hi Dani! DD: Sue can you tell me a little bit about where you’re from and where you currently live? SB: Well, it's a little difficult to tell you where I'm from because I was born and raised in the military, so I've lived all over the world all over the United States in the military and landed in Rockford Michigan. Thirty years ago, I met my husband, and he was from west Michigan, and you know the story of falling in love so here I am. So yep, I live in Rockford, and I absolutely love living here. DD: And you said you've been in Rockford for about 30 years? SB: Um well actually 20. We lived in Grand Rapids for about 10 years. DD: Great. Sue, can you tell me a story about your experience with PFAS or with PFAS in your community? SB: Actually, in my community my story with PFAS goes way back to the early 80s. Growing up in the military. My dad was in the Air Force, we lived in Oscoda, Michigan in a Wordsmith Air Force base. And we arrived in Oscoda from Austin Texas, and this was I believe our second time living in a military installation. Um so we arrived in Oscoda, happy, healthy um no concerns and within a short period of time um it seemed as if our whole family suddenly was getting really sick. And weird things would happen um weird ailments, it especially affected my mother, and we had no idea. She was experiencing extreme fatigue, excruciating migraines and it was suggested that it was her teeth, her back molars needing to be aligned. So, they went in and started grinding on her teeth and they said oh um maybe that's not it we think you have a TMJ problem. So she ended up down at Wright Patterson Air Force. They did temporal.. um had her mouth wired shut for probably a good three months. That did not help… um just it was really very awful. My mom… ended up going to a doctor down in the Saginaw area who started doing testing on her and ran blood analysis and hair analysis and came back and said you have high trace minerals in your hair but your blood, mercury is off just skyrocketing, sane with lead, arsenic and a few other things. And my mom's got black hair and the doctor said to her "If you're dying your hair chances are your probably getting poisoned by your hair dye. So I came home from school and she had shaved her head. So this woman had been put through hell and back and thought that the only way that she was going to feel better was to shave her head. And then in that time um my dad retired from the military, we stayed behind so I could graduate from uh High school with my class. And he headed to west Michigan here and we stayed behind but we �moved to um house in downtown Oscoda. Everyone had well water, um and the problems just kept getting worse and I had a sister um who was terribly ill, hospitalized, they told her she had toxic shock syndrome, mono um. But nothing was confirmed they could not say that this was definitive this was exactly what was happening, the same thing was happening with me. Um we moved to West Michigan and I left went to college and didn't come back till about thirty years ago when I met my husband, lived in Grand Rapids for a while and in that time just continued to be just a deathly sick person. Energetic and was athletic, and I liked to do things but was finding I wasn't able to function, so I started going through the same thing that my mom had gone through seeing doctors all over the Midwest all the way down to Cleveland clinic to check out, maybe what was wrong with me. Did I have MS, did I have chronic fatigue? Did I have fibromyalgia um I had carry malformation, grossest on my body in my body, right now I'm going to be hanging surgery here in the next couple months to have them removed but I've had cysts grow that nobody can explain while it just you know a freak thing. But things really seemed to come to a blow when my husband and I decided we were going to start a family. And in that, it was not happening we started seeing different specialists, but nobody could explain why we weren't able to conceive a child, we didn't want to go the fertility route, then we wondered about adoption, and it was like if we're not supposed to have them, we're not supposed to have them. And we're ok with it. We kind of moved on from that and um but I still was sick, and you know then they started telling me my cholesterol was high, my HGLS was all out of whack, just out of this world and extremely anemic on top of all of it. Um there was actually a point in time I was so sick that they were suggesting to me that I was anorexic, and I was doing it on purpose to be hospitalized. Um you know, I assure you, I am I’m not anorexic, not doing this intentionally that's the situation with the medical field, they can't figure it out or help you with it, they start telling you it’s in your head and they start coming up with alternate solutions or situations to say ok we think this is what it is. So, you go down that route for a while and discover indeed that is not it. And not only cause I was going on this route, did it make things worse. I still don't know what the heck is going on. So, about that time I started hearing stories, well I should say we moved to Rockford in that time, and we live in downtown Rockford not too far from Rogue River and that is how getting water, smelled funny. I didn't like drinking in Oscoda, on the air force base. To this day I have a hard time drinking water. Our water smelled bad, tasted bad, so I called the water department, they came to test it, the gentleman who came out said um you know usually when we go to people’s house because they say its smells. Usually, they have a lot of animals, animal waste, garbage, he said your house is immaculate. He said so we don't know what it is, but you know we'll get it fixed for you well that plant got decommissioned. They hooked us up to you know the whole area to this aquifer that's just outside town here. And you know things kind of seem to level off for a little bit and when you don't know what the heck is going on and you see these things and you like to try to put them together and it's just it's just frustrating. And so, we used to walk our dogs down by the river and walk along and in the fall when the river goes down you could see the tree roots exposed on the riverbank, and we would see these like these long-twisted things that were like shoved into the roots and they were all along the bank. And we get to a remote area, and we let our dogs off the leash, and they would run, and they would bring these things back to us and we had no idea what they were. And we kayak and canoed, there’s foam in the river we had no idea what it was and just to go back to Wordsmith again for a second Wordsmith is on a lake than at lake which is just outside the gate area, and they had their own private beach facility where all the military families could go and swim and they had docks and all kinds of cool stuff. And we was sit there and play �in this foam that would just come up on the beach and we would cover each other in this foam. It was just, we were thinking it was just this natural occurrence that came from lake nobody even had a clue. So I started hearing things coming out of Wordsmith about the water quality up there and the things that they found with regards to PFAS and it's to PFAA and then started hearing about the Wolverine factory, the PFAS, you know on packer and those drives that are just a West of Rockford. And started putting two and two together and discovered a group out of Wordsmith that was a community of people that had all the same symptoms, all the same ailments and they were coming together to talk about their issues yes, I can't have kids yes I've got high cholesterol yes I have thyroid problem multiple sclerosis just the whole gambit. And they were going to hire Erin Brokowich to represent them in a suit again the United States Air Force. So, I joined the group and having worked in engineering industry, friends that were environmental engineers, started asking them questions about things. I asked this group these questions and I got kicked out of the group because they thought, I was a mole. And I was like what? How come I can't be in your group? And they said nope, you're obviously a mole, and I said what makes you think I'm a mole? Well, you're asking questions nobody else would ask. Cause I work in this industry, you can go to my LinkedIn profile, it will tell you my work history. So, it didn't matter I still got kicked out anyways. Um but what they did for me was I said OK I don't need a group of people to figure what is wrong with me. I think this is what has happened to me and to my family. I'm gonna just investigate it myself and put 2 and 2 together and I went to my doctor, and I sat down with studies with studies and reports and articles, and you know she's got my high health of history, and I had all that. I had full on hysterectomy bout 5 years. And the doctor that did the hysterectomy said that there was no way on God's green earth that I was gonna get pregnant because my uterus and ovaries were nothing but one big lump of cysts, that had been growing for a bazillion years. And said that was never going to happen, um you have the strangers looking uterus we've ever seen you for. We stopped counting the number of cysts that were on your reproduction organs, anyway, so I sat down with her went through everything. And you know I think I would like for you to see a toxicologist. So, she scheduled an appointment to talk to a specialist at Devos children’s hospital because if there if somebody poisoned, it's usually a child. So, they have them at, the toxicologists are associated with the children's hospital. So, I go to meet, this doctor, explain my situation I’m concerned about my health going on in the future, are there tests for my blood, what's can we do here? And he told me he said, how long has it been since you lived in Oscoda? And I said oh about 35 years, and he said, well what happens when you take the pan off the fire, he said it cools down. He said there's no way you would still have any chemicals in your body from 35 years ago. So now um Pfas is considered the forever chemical, and um I don't know there's what 17 chemicals, 31 compounds in PFAS that settled within your tissue, in the organs in your body. Just the frustration with that, um to try to help yourself to figure things out um and to be told id you take the pain off the fire, it stops getting hot. The other thing that as military raised child, individual there's no way of tracking any of this health issues. Because once you turn 18, 21, 18 if you don't go to college, 21 if you do, you no longer afford military health care. So, they can't track you, so there are a ton of us out there that lived on these bases exposed to the chemicals. Going to my first class reunion ten years after I graduated because when you're in a military family, when your dad retired, everyone goes with ya. So, if you retire, wherever you and your family usually goes with ya. So, nobody is really essentially located there anymore. Going back to 10-year class reunion, nobody had kids. But some people were feeling kind of sick and getting diagnosed with things. Twenty-year class reunion, people are in wheelchairs, people �have died. My best friend across where my best friend who lived across the street from me, was a firefighter on base. Worked on those runways every day in that, passed away a number years ago of some bizarre liver cancer that they could not even identify how it may have even started she died of that same liver cancer her mother died of the same liver cancer so going back to my 20th class reunion and I said to my husband how am I gonna handle this when people start asking you about you know my kids cause this is where we're going to show pictures in what. said you know it's not a big deal to me to not have kids, but I don't want to stand there and have to explain to a 150 people why don't we have kids? And To my surprise a large majority of the people did not have children and if they did very difficult to conceive and/or that they had adopted so at adopt it so you know it's just if you start looking at the population then you're looking at all the different elements that people have that lived in that particular area there was something not right To my surprise a large majority of the people did not have children and if they did very difficult to conceive and/or that they had adopted so at adopt it. It's just if you start looking at the population then you're looking at all the different ailments that people have that lived in that particular area there was something not right. And the medical profession is not able to help us, maybe it's something cause it's a chemical, it sits in your body. Maybe its another cure or those sorts of things, but the direction I wanted to come from, On this was doctors need to be with the research community, new search community needs to be working with the technical scientists on not only getting rid of this chemical but also at the same time what is going to pop up out of this I mean are people going to be having you know Parkinson’s and ALS I mean I went to Chicago on Friday and it was a really kind of a taxing day the heat and the whole just a whole day while my Nero you're a lot of what is it neural muscular system just went on the blink and so I get fried and I'm not able to function so we ended up having come home because I was absolutely exhausted. And it’s taken me um since Saturday, and I was like oh please I hope I'm not too tired to do this on Tuesday because I have to say something about it. Um but you know I have um my sisters and brothers same sort of thing. Um and it's just, it's tragic to also live in a community where how the heck did, I end up here. After living wordsmith and Oscoda and living right smack dab in the middle of Rockford. And what is going to, what's going to pop up next with all of this? Um so that's kind of where that's kind of my story. Kind of rambled, that's kind of it in a big nutshell. My mom never did recover from of it. And when you have, you know healthcare professionals I'm drilling into your head that the pain that you feel on the tired that you feel is all in your head while it eventually ends up in your head and you know it's just at the time I want people invent these things they're really cool everybody's excited all this is you know the next greatest thing and then you know 10 15 20 years later we find out that you know what it's no dumb what it's doing too not only our world but you know what are the vitamins but people in health and You know I don't know what the solution to that is but you know but I feel like I needed to say something and health and spending some time investigating those kids of issues. DD: Yeah, thank you. SB: Sorry, that was a half an hour answer. �DD: It was great, it was a great story to tell and I'm so glad you told it. What concerns do you have with PFAS contamination moving forward? You might have hinted this a little bit, but can you speak to that question a little more? SB: Well, I do know that you know there's a full court press on trying to develop in our water in wastewater treatment plants filters to filter out PFAs to track it to see where it's going. My concerns with it it's not just in the water it's water it's in the soil so even though you may not be drinking water it's still in my backyard and still in the dirt. Um what is that going to mean for us, here's something I learned too, I was really surprised by. PFAs is on hamburger wrappers, you know when they're collecting water samples, to test for PFAs, you cannot have eaten a hamburger without washing your hands. They have this whole long list of things. It's still being used in products that are detrimental to the health and welfare of people of the world. I'm just you know, I'm glad in the industry that I'm in because it allows me to be a little more informed. And aware of what's transpiring with the world of PFAs and but I also know there's a whole of health issues that nobody is willing to say yes this is directly an impact from PFAs. Allot of liver cancers. You know H TAL's LDL is the Al's LD o's triglycerides cholesterol is cholesterol even when you take medication it does not lower those so just you know what does that mean for liver and pancreas and not just me but you know everybody that lives around here. DD: Well before we wrap up today, Sue, would you like to add anything we haven't touched on or anything you want to go back to and say more about? SB: Um, I think I pretty much said what I wanted to say about, but it's been 35 years almost 40 years, of being exposed to PFAs. Um I'm a pretty healthy girl, you know um I've endured a lot look great on the outside, I think. But on the inside, um not so much on certain days, I feel fortunate that I'm able to care through it where a lot of people have not been able to manage it. Because they don't know what’s going on with them, and they just continue they just continue to tread water and I'm excited about the ideas of people being able to come together and connect with one another over these issues maybe not me but generations behind me that have been exposed to this are they'll come up with something that can help people live better lives that have been exposed to PFAS. I think water is the war of the world in It's a precious resource that we have a tendency to take a pic take advantage of, but you don't know what you don't know so what's the next thing. DD: Yeah, very true, SB: So that's kind of my story in a nutshell, um I don't have anything seriously terminal to this particular point, but um sometimes you can live a long life and just be miserable every day. You know because of the things people have to deal with. And um as a result of this chemical, so I pray for those people, every day at least 3 or 4 times. So that's my story and I'm sticking to it. DD: Well, thank you so much Sue for taking the time to share your story today. �SB: Absolutely, thank you for your interest and spending the time with me today. . � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Living with PFAS Interviews Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Devasto, Danielle Description An account of the resource Beginning in 2021, the Living with PFAS interviews were recorded to gather the personal stories of individuals impacted by PFAS contamination. PFAS, or per- and polyflourinated substances, are a large group of human-made chemicals used widely since the 1940s to make coatings and products resistant to heat, oil, stains, grease, and water. They can be found in countless household items, including food packaging, non-stick cookware, stain-resistant furniture, and water-resistant clothing. These chemicals are often called “forever chemicals” because they do not break down easily, can move through soils and contaminate drinking water sources, and build up in animals, plants, and people. PFAS have been linked to increased incidences of various cancers, increased cholesterol, decreased fertility, birth defects, kidney and liver disease, and immune system suppression, and thyroid dysfunction. It is estimated that PFAS are in the drinking water of more than 200 million Americans (Andrews & Naidenko, 2020). In Michigan alone, over 280 sites have PFAS contamination exceeding maximum contamination levels for groundwater (MPART, 2024). Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-11 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf audio/mp3 Type The nature or genre of the resource Motion Picture Text Sound Language A language of the resource eng Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context PFAS0018 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Borgeson, Sue Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021-06-22 Title A name given to the resource Sue Borgeson, 2021 (Interview video and transcript) Description An account of the resource Sue Borgeson grew up in a military family and has lived all over the world and the United States, and currently resides in Rockford, Michigan. In her interview, Sue discusses the impact PFAS has had on the health of her family after being exposed on military bases and at her home in Michigan. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource DeVasto, Danielle (interviewer) Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Moving Image Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/95bc5e2ce1cce409723437486c8651b8.mp4 2847111c65c59bbd76389e60cb7726e1 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/8b54521dd324c29223715f49d24ba13a.pdf 3b23af45a1a76cc6a87e6f99a7f3e35e PDF Text Text Living With PFAS Interviewee: Senator Winnie Brinks Interviewer: Dani DeVasto Date: May 24, 2021 DD: I’m Dani DeVasto and today, May 24th, I have the pleasure of chatting with Senator Winnie Brinks. Winnie, thank you so much for talking with me today. WB: You’re welcome, I’m happy to join you. DD:Can you tell me about where you’re from and where you currently live? WB: Yes, I currently live in the city of Grand Rapids, Michigan. I have lived here since I came to the city to attend college. Before that, I was born and raised in Washington State. DD:Oh wow, what a beautiful place. WB: Yeah. DD: Can you tell me please a story about your experience with PFAS [Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances] or with PFAS in your community? WB: So, I first became aware of PFAS in our community here in Grand Rapids, or in the Grand Rapids area when news stories started hitting in the summer of 2017, and they were talking about contamination in the Northern part of the county that was due to use of the chemical to waterproof shoes that had been in use for a couple of decades, several decades even, and the community was completely unaware of the dangers of the chemical, and even that it was in their water. So, I took great interest in that, in part because it was close to home, but also because I started getting phone calls from people in that community and they were telling me their stories and some of them were just tragic. And I just started to really dig in because there's really nothing more important as a foundation of health than having water that you can trust and that is not contaminated. DD: And so you started to dig in and what did you - what kind of transpired from there? WB: So, we realized how pervasive PFAS in water is, not just in Michigan. I think we know a lot about the prevalence of this chemical or this family of chemicals in Michigan because we bothered to take a look, now. But I’m certain it is quite widespread throughout the nation, certainly wherever we have industrial sites, a lot of plating, or anything that requires waterproofing. And a number of other uses so we just kind of started getting more and more information, understanding some of the health impacts, understanding government response to it - from a township level all the way up to the state and federal levels. And just realized that there was a lot of work to be done to address it, to ensure our constituents that this was �something that we’re paying attention to and that it’s important and that we would help remedy it and, very importantly, prevent it from happening again in other communities if at all possible. DD: Can you say a little more about the kinds of options that are available to you as a political leader from remedying or taking action? WB: Yeah, I think the first and most obvious thing that we have tried to do, and it has now been accomplished, is to institute permissible levels of any contaminant in drinking water, right, we all know that there’s a tiny bit of lead, and there’s a tiny bit of different things that are harmful to us, but they are in our water in very small amounts. And the reason they are in very small amounts often is because we detected them in higher amounts and decided to regulate them and treat water for them to remove things like lead from our drinking water. And we just didn't have a rule for PFAS, for any of the chemicals in that family of compounds, to guide water systems and what they needed to do, but also to ensure that there was only small amounts or none of those PFAS compounds in drinking water, so I proposed a bill to do that. Really, a better tool to do that would be through the department to go through a rule-making process with public comment and scientific study and to establish those standards, and since I started proposing it in 2017, in law, the department has, with the change of political control in the governor's office, the new governor decided to continue that process and to expedite the rule-making process to ensure that those chemicals were adequately addressed in the protection of water systems and the requirements placed on them to remove certain quantities of certain compounds. I think there’s seven of them that are currently regulated, so I think that’s the most important and significant thing that we’ve done to date. Also establishing a body within a state government to actually take a look at the PFAS problem throughout this state from various sources and I think another thing that is certainly incredibly important is when they identified PFAS in lakes or rivers, they would go upstream and basically try to figure out where that was coming from and to address it, to reduce the flow of that - of those chemicals into our water systems and when we test for water in wells to be able to know if it’s present. If it is present, then try to figure out where it’s coming from and, occasionally, the departments are incredibly effective at limiting the discharge of those chemicals from various sources. So being able to identify the sources before it's identified as a contaminant is sometimes an incredible way to stop further contamination. DD: Just to clarify, is the department, for you, EGLE when you say WB: Um, so it’s a little bit of both EGLE and DHHS. DD: All right, thank you. WB: So a lot of healthwork and health studies have gone on through the DHHS, and I think in part had representation. The Michigan PFAS action response team - they had representation from different departments as well working with them, but the regulatory aspect happened through EGLE. �DD: Okay, thank you, I just on - on maybe a side note - were you aware of PFAS before people started to come to you and tell you their stories at all, or was this something WB: I was not, I was not. And you know part of the reason people came to me was because they were talking to other elected officials that represented them in the northern part of the county and they were unresponsive. They just kinda kept saying: “yeah, we’ll take care of it,” and didn’t really do much about it, and so there were lots of folks who either lived there, in the northern part of the county currently, or previously for many years and now lived in my legislative district, so they now started coming to me because they felt were being listened to. And that's a constant refrain from lots of folks whenever there's the initial information that is coming out of a chemical in their water and so, to me, it's just really important to make sure that when new information becomes available about something this important, that we make sure that we are taking a moment to listen to those, those constituents are impacted - they are often the most well-informed about what's going on and what they’ve attempted to do to remedy the matter, but until significant attention from people in the halls of power, it just doesn’t get addressed. DD:Yeah. It’s a collaboration, isn’t it? WB: Yeah. DD: So as someone who wasn’t familiar with it, it sounds like one way you were learning about it was by listening to people. Are there other things that you do as a political leader to learn about PFAS that you did learn, because I know people bring all sorts of concerns to you - as government folk, you have to know lots of things about lots of things, so I'm just kinda curious. Beyond listening was there anything else that you did to begin to understand this so that you could move it forward in the legislature? WB: Yes, yes absolutely. I started doing a lot of research, so, you know, initially, just kinda scouring the internet and making sure that I understood exactly what PFAS is, how it originated, how widespread the use is and for what kinds of industries, so I did a lot of just kinda digging around as an individual, just kinda getting out there and seeing what I could see. We saw a lot of great coverage from reporters throughout the state on PFAS issues, so that was really helpful too - it kept it in front of not just me, but of constituency other policy makers so that was really incredibly helpful. But I also reached out to GVSU, to the Annis water institute, and spoke with I’m gonna say it wrong - Rich Rediske, and he was incredibly helpful and very instrumental in helping me understand what tools were available in terms of constituency and how to address this issue in our community in ways that have been effective in the past with other contamination and communities in west Michigan, so it was really helpful and I would say lastly seeking information from the department and importantly folks in Oscoda. So, Oscoda is the site of a military base and they had significant contamination there of PFAS and they had been fighting with the military on cleanup of a number of other chem for many years, and having little success, and it was then discovered in addition to all those other chemicals, there was PFAS present as well in very large quantities, and its having a huge impact still on their community, �but there have been people who have been fighting this fight for many years, trying to understand what's in their water and how to address it and how to respond, so that really helped me put together the pieces of what needed to happen - not just at a local level and the state level, but also at the federal level. DD: Is there anything on your plate right now in terms of PFAS work? WB: So yes, we’re constantly being vigilant about ensuring that water systems are responding and that they have the resources to do so, and the state can be really instrumental in ensuring that states - that water systems remain as policies, that water systems have the resources to add the filters they need to remove from the water. We also have to ensure that EAGLE is adequately resourced so that they can do that upstream work to locate areas of contamination, so that’s always something we’re keeping an eye out for. I think on the horizon as we learn more and more about additional compounds in this family of chemicals, that we will need to add chemicals or add certain additional compounds to the list of regulated PFAS compounds in our drinking water. Part of the flaws in our systems, in some ways, is that we’re very reactive, so we wait ‘til we have all kinds of information about chemicals that we think are probably harmful and we have a good amount of evidence that points to the direction that they are likely to be harmful, but we wait ‘til we have lots and lots of proof until we actually take action on them as governments. And I think that’s to the detriment of the health of our constituents, in many cases, so I think that as we see these chemicals replaced by industry with quote on quote “less harmful alternatives”, we’re really just seeing a shorter chain molecule of the same substance being used. It’s highly effective in achieving the purposes that they would like to achieve; it can be incredibly useful in making our lives better in some shape, but we are then exposed to continued health impacts and environmental impacts because we are unwilling to respond proactively to the wealth of information we see in the direction that it’s pointing. So I think that we’ll have to keep an eye on adding those additional compounds to the regulatory framework, and as soon as we have information to do so, we should take action on that and, frankly, I think it would be really important to help support industries to find alternatives that are not harmful that don't contaminate our water or impact our health long-term. And that may require some research scholars, it may require some assistance to ensure that we're moving in a direction that won't harm us. DD: So, you kind of, I think, anticipated my next question a little bit, but do you have any - what concerns do you have about PFAS contamination moving forward? WB: Yeah, I'm really concerned that as we see more and more people who understand what they've been exposed to in various communities, now that we know how to test for it, we understand some of the harmful impacts. We’ll start to link health issues with that exposure in a more true way. I think in the past we’ve seen lots of people with inexplicable health issues from certain communities and we haven't really been able to pin it down, so I think as we go forward, we’ll get the benefit of that information, but it's also unfortunate, of course, because we’ll do so by learning more about the harms it has caused. �DD: Absolutely. Before we wrap up today, is there anything that you would like to add that we haven't touched on, or anything that you would like to go back to to say more about? WB: I think one big thing that is hard to wrap our heads around and really grab onto is the necessity for this to be regulated at the federal level and even at a worldwide level. It’s a compound that now we are finding literally everywhere in water. It’s incredibly difficult to destroy or get rid of. You can filter it out of drinking water, but then you have to do something with it, you know there is research on incinerating it, which we’re not sure is completely safe yet. You can basically isolate it and put it in a special landfill, but this is an enduring chemical in a way that we haven't seen in most other chemicals that we have identified as problems, and I think it has real potential to do incredibly widespread harm unless we interrupt this cycle of using it. And you know we already have a massive challenge just containing what we know exists out there, and so it can be daunting. But I think it’s one of those things that really deserves worldwide attention and international cooperation and I'm not sure we're really seeing that yet, but I think in the future those conversations are going to be really important. DD: Have you had any conversation or outreach yet with federal or global levels? I mean, I know Michigan is kind of leading the way on this, so I imagine that if you haven’t, you will. WB: Yes, yes, certainly a significant amount of conversation with our congressional members and our two US senators - they’ve been really great at identifying this as an issue and understanding that Michigan is poised to be a leader in responding to this, so making sure that we are talking about what policy changes can happen at the federal level - that would be helpful not just to Michigan, but to all of our states, is something that we've had significant conversation about. And I think that, you know, there's a lot of work to be done on this, so those conversations will continue for many years I think, but they've been really productive partners in terms of trying to pull all the levers that they have at their disposal at the federal level, and then various states responding at the state level in supporting them and being a model for them. But internationally, no, not much, you know, I'm aware of some things that are happening elsewhere but no, certainly no cooperation or significant conversation. Not sure head of state would take a call from a little state senator [laughter], but there’s certainly opportunities there and I hope that we take advantage of any opportunity we have conversation about - this and to deal with this in a much more productive way. DD: Yeah, I mean, it’s like you said, it’s likely in so many more places than just Michigan, we just haven't looked yet, but it seems- not - exciting might not be the right word, but hopeful for Michigan that we as a state could be a leader in this forefront - like a positive that we are making those steps, so I find that encouraging. Maybe that's the right word. WB: I think there’s one other thing I would like to bring up. In Michigan, the state laws- there's not really a setup incredibly well to sort of hold polluters accountable and to get them to participate in making things right when something is discovered. And part of that has to do with time frames, and statutes of limitation - when someone can bring a lawsuit it is harmful to individuals or harm to communities, so I have also proposed bills that would address that. So far �they've gotten no legislative attention to move toward being passed, but I think that's also going to be a piece of this moving forward. We’re going to need to help the industries that have used this to understand that they do play a role in remedying the damage that was caused, and the harm that is being caused to people's health, and they're going to have to participate in that. There's certainly a huge role for government, but there's going to be a role for private industry to pay and I think to be responsible, they're going to have to step up to the plate as well. And currently, we don't have the tools to obligate them to do so, and to take responsibility for their actions, and so I would like to see some changes there too. DD: That seems important there are lots of stakeholders in this situation. [ both speaking ] Yeah. DD :Well, thank you so much, Senator Brinks, for taking the time to share your story and your work today. I appreciate it so much. WB: Yes, you're very welcome. I look forward to viewing some of the other interviews, and thank you for bringing the voices of not just me, but all the folks that you're talking to to the public record and hopefully together we can make some progress. DD: My pleasure. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Living with PFAS Interviews Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Devasto, Danielle Description An account of the resource Beginning in 2021, the Living with PFAS interviews were recorded to gather the personal stories of individuals impacted by PFAS contamination. PFAS, or per- and polyflourinated substances, are a large group of human-made chemicals used widely since the 1940s to make coatings and products resistant to heat, oil, stains, grease, and water. They can be found in countless household items, including food packaging, non-stick cookware, stain-resistant furniture, and water-resistant clothing. These chemicals are often called “forever chemicals” because they do not break down easily, can move through soils and contaminate drinking water sources, and build up in animals, plants, and people. PFAS have been linked to increased incidences of various cancers, increased cholesterol, decreased fertility, birth defects, kidney and liver disease, and immune system suppression, and thyroid dysfunction. It is estimated that PFAS are in the drinking water of more than 200 million Americans (Andrews & Naidenko, 2020). In Michigan alone, over 280 sites have PFAS contamination exceeding maximum contamination levels for groundwater (MPART, 2024). Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-11 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf audio/mp3 Type The nature or genre of the resource Motion Picture Text Sound Language A language of the resource eng Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context PFAS0007 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Brinks, Winnie Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021-05-24 Title A name given to the resource Winnie Brinks, 2021 (Interview video and transcript) Description An account of the resource Michigan State Senator Winnie Brinks currently resides in Grand Rapids, Michigan but was born and raised in Washington. In this interview, Brinks discusses her role in advocating on behalf of her consituents for clean water and a healthy environment in the state government. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource DeVasto, Danielle (interviewer) Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Moving Image Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/13ab5577309d13ad17c48111090353cd.mp4 cf1dd5d14ff9e9cd436de10dcebd6f78 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/be1b7c808428284913b9f2468cd47557.pdf 4c7a5d523389bed639f2fa506a912ef9 PDF Text Text Living with PFAS Interviewer: Dani DeVasto Interviewee: Larry Campell Date: June 18, 2021 DD: I’m Dani DeVasto and today, June 18th, 2021. I have the pleasure of chatting with Larry Campbell. Hi, Larry. LC: Hi. DD: Larry can you tell me about where you’re from and where you currently live? LC: Well I currently- I was born and raised in Belding, Michigan, and I attended Grand Valley State for a short period of time. While I was attending Grand Valley State University, I met my wife, and she is from Sparta, Michigan. We eventually married and moved to Belding, Michigan. Unfortunately, through this horrible journey that this PFAS put us through, it eventually led to our divorce and I’m currently living in the Metro Detroit area. DD: And how long have you been in the Metro Detroit area? LC: It’s been over two years now. DD: Okay. Larry, can you tell me a story about your experience with PFAS or with PFAS in your community? LC: Yeah, you know. This kind of started around 1997-1998. After I met my wife, we lived in the same apartment complex that, when I was going to Grand Valley State University I was also in the Michigan National Guard at the time. I had come off active duty in 1996, off active duty in the Army, and enrolled in Grand Valley State University, where I also played baseball. After my first year at Grand Valley, I had moved to an apartment complex where I ultimately met my future wife. She had two children, and I love kids. And we kind of, you know– We grew closer, and I eventually met her family. One of the strange things about when I first met the family, especially her father, [he was] very stand-offish, not very talkative. Later on, once we had announced that we were going to have a baby together, things had begun to take a strange turn. Her father, my future father-in-law, and I could never have a conversation like you and I are doing now. He was always adversarial, always coming at me sideways, and I could never understand it. I was like, “Look, I love your daughter.” It was a very strange situation. She had two children from previous relationships and none of the fathers were in the picture. I was willing to take them on as well as I wanted to be there for my son, and so on and so forth. None of that seemed to matter to him. It was– It was a bizarre relationship in fact, at one point I became so frustrated that I said, “So, what you’re saying that you’d rather have me ride off into the sunset?” and he was like, “Yep, yep.” It was not normal. It was not normal. At first I thought that they were staunch catholic, and maybe because I wasn’t catholic that I thought that maybe there was some jealousy. I was another father-figure coming into the picture, and which he felt– I 1 �don’t know why he would’ve as he’s the patriarch of the family. There wasn’t anything I had done that would give him the idea that I wasn’t capable of raising a family and being a good protector. My son was born in 1999, and in the following year I was hired by the Michigan Department of Corrections. So, gainfully employed, it seemed barely worthy enough, it was very bizarre. They lived in Sparta, Michigan, which is in northern Kent County. Beautiful area up there, they live on Squaw Lake area, tributary, that feeds from Squaw Lake into the Rogue River. Which, people are following– We know that the river was contaminated quite a bit. You could go to Rockford, Michigan and see the PFAS foaming at the dam; it’s a water wonderland up there. They lived off the beaten path in a secluded [drive]. The father had blazed a two-trail track back into the woods and had built a house. It’s a beautiful area. We lived there for a while as they had a small cabin on the property as well. While his daughter was going to school at the time they said, “Hey stay there while she’s going to school.” I was driving from Sparta to Ionia, where I worked at the time. I just kept pluggin’ along and taking care of the family, building a relationship with their family, but it just never seemed– Something always seemed off. Right after my son was born in 1999, suddenly my wife had to have an emergency hysterectomy. DD: Hmmm. LC: It came out of the blue, we didn’t even get a second or third opinion. It was like, “Nope this needs to be done ASAP.” And it just came out of nowhere. I was kind of–I was pretty disappointed ‘cause I was like, “Well I guess I only get one child.” And you know, so– This was odd. She was probably early thirties, early to mid-thirties, and suddenly she has to have an emergency hysterectomy. If you know any women that have had hysterectomies then you know that it throws the hormones into an imbalance and that was the beginning of all, of all her medical problems. So, it-it was to a point where– Because my son was born in 1999 and we weren’t married yet, it was such an odd situation that I was questioning if I wanted to marry this woman. When you don’t really have the support of the parents, or it’s kind of an odd situation and it didn’t make sense. You could not reason with these individuals. You could not reason with– Interestingly, I started building a house around 2004, started building a house, in the Belding area where I grew up. I had purchased some property while I was in the Army and had sat on it for a while. Once I was well established at my new job, I decided to build a home. Well, 2005 we moved into the home. It seemed that when I got her away from that area, or her family–or you know looking back, it was probably that area, knowing what I know now–things started to get better. I didn’t know what it was at the time. I didn’t know if it was the influence of her parents, that was the only thing that I could come to the conclusion of. It was, you know, the influence of her parents, her dad was such an overbearing type of person. There were times that he would say “If the house isn’t clean by the time I get home, there’s gonna be hell to pay.” And different things like that. So, my wife was a very, meticulous, OCD, and kept a very clean house, and stuff. Basically, kind of had OCD from it. But she was a very good cook, and a great mom, and things like that. But when it came to her parents, there was just– there was, there was no reasoning. It was very disheartening. I always felt like an outsider any time I went over there, 2 �never really had a relationship with her father. It was more or less, you didn’t talk to him. It was– It was– It was strange to say the least. Now we are living in Belding, and we got married in May of 2005. I never even, even at the wedding–I got a hug from her mom–but didn’t even get a handshake or a welcome to the family from her dad. And just, I– You know– Another, just kinda strange, type, you know– I was just like, “Well it what it is.” And I was just accepting the fact that he was a hard worker and maybe that is just the way he is. So, I just kept pluggin’ on and did what I did, and stuff– Probably, not long after, 2006-2007, the wife started having a lot of kidney stones that were one right after another. Had no idea what was going on. I’ve still yet to look up– I haven’t looked up whether kidney stones can be any type of symptom or reaction from PFAS contamination. Now, because her health is being affected, she was losing jobs. And it was putting financial strain on us as well. And then, 2007 or actually 2008, her father comes down with colon cancer. And I guess he had known something was going on for a while and had this ‘didn't’ go to the doctor’ type thing. Unfortunately, it was pretty progressed, and they went into the chemo, and so on and so forth, to do what they could. But interestingly, the property they owned around Squaw Lake, the father’s name was Charles ‘Chuck’ Cockren, but he was drilling the wells lotting off the property. So, here he is digging the water wells, lotting off this property around Squaw Lake, and he was drinking this raw water right out of the ground, basically testing the vein. “That’s a good vein, not a good vein.” When we lived in the cabin that was between the dam and their property, right on the tributary coming right off Squaw Lake, the water tasted horrible. I mean horrible is– The only time I would drink the water is if we ran it through a Britta then would mix it with Kool-Aid or something. It was very horrible tasting, smelled. The weird thing is that their water, at their home, which came off the tributary and Squaw Lake, probably 300-400 yards, their water tastes amazing. DD: Huhh. LC: Like, like the best water I’ve ever tasted. So, we had lived there for a while, but her father was drilling all these water wells, lotting off this property. Well, he suddenly comes down with cancer and we had no clue. And we’re just like, “Oh my gosh.” And the heartbreaking thing about it was he had come down with cancer, and he passed away two days before Christmas. DD: Hmmm. LC: It was heartbreaking because we had put off Christmas shopping for the kids. Kind of, you know, making– I wasn’t able to go shopping with her, my wife, because she was visiting her father as much as possible. By this time, hospice had come in, and I finally said, “Hey is there anywhere we can meet at the Meijer in Rockford, just, you know, we can grab Christmas presents quick for the kids and you can get back?” So, I met her there and after we got done, I don’t even remember if I was home yet, but she called me, and it was like he was waiting for her 3 �to return from shopping, and then he passed away. So, two days before Christmas, that was a pretty-pretty somber Christmas. Still at this point had no clue, it wasn’t even on the radar. So– Wife’s health continued to get worse and worse. She had been diagnosed with Autoimmune disorder. She developed Fibromyalgia. Which it seems Fibromyalgia affects women more than men. It’s just this chronic pain all the time, joints; it's horrible. And so, we were living in Ionia County at the time, obviously in Belding, and the wife goes to a pain management clinic to try-to try to find something to help her manage the pain that she’s going through and dealing with. They prescribe her Opioids. And this was in, probably, oh I would say, I’m just guessing, 2012ish, 2011ish, somewhere around in there, and that just kind of allowed her to function, I guess. It just continued to get worse, the pain got worse– So long story short, it got to the point where she was running out of her medication, my mom who’s got arthritis really bad, she would ask to borrow a few just to get through until her next medication. But the Opioids were never enough. I think she was taking six a day at one point, which is unbelievable. And her pain threshold– I think she was functioning at a six on the pain level while on the Opioids. Which a pain level of 10 you’re crawled up in a ball. It just continued to progress and get worse and worse. I was working in a prison now. I was working at the Michigan Department of Corrections. I had worked third shift for 15 years. I was raising my son, he’s kind of hopefully the next major league baseball player. He’s been scouted and been playing baseball since he was 17. But me working third shift I was able to raise him and coach him. But, working at a maximize security prison, it’s not a nice environment. You know, there’s PTSD and hyper vigilance, it’s just not a good environment. Between that and working third shift where you’re kind of always in a haze you feel like a zombie because you’re always fighting to get enough sleep. I eventually thought that the cause of her health issues was that I was bringing home the environment I was working in. I started trying to find a way to get out because I knew corrections officers have a high mortality rate. Most of them pass away within five years after retiring. I was coming up on 15 years and I sure as heck didn’t want to do another 15. Especially, if I felt that me working there was causing a lot of the stress and other issues for her health. I really thought it was me. I thought I was the big [issue] with bringing my work home. Even though I wouldn’t bring it home, your still affected by it, and that’s projected onto friends and family. I’ll admit I wasn’t a nice guy. I was grumpy all the time, short fused. Unfortunately, it’s the environment you’re subjected to everyday. Being prior military, I was like, hey I’m equipped to work in law enforcement, but really no one is equipped to work in that job. Eventually I was able to get out that job, and get my real estate license, and was actually doing both at the same time. By the grace of God, I was offered a position in real estate and was able to finally able to leave the Michigan department of infractions. Still continuing to deal with the health issues and the doctors had no answers. All they did was give her more opioids and basically appeasing her. At this point this was about the time where the opioid crisis was just beginning and building. I was becoming disheartened, because I’m the hunter and gatherer, and protector, and now I can’t even, I have no answers when the doctors have no answer. This was in 2017 or 2018, and my son has gone to college now, his first year at Arizona. Went down to Arizona and played collegiate baseball for a college in Arizona. I’m very proud of him and things like this that was kind of the downfall for the family. My son is down in Arizona, and we kept a lot of her, my wife’s health issues [hidden]. My son, he needs to focus on school, focus on baseball. He’s 2,000 miles away in Arizona and we had a pact or an agreement between her and I; that we want him to focus on school and everything and that we won’t burden 4 �him with your health issues, we’ll try to figure it out. What was heartbreaking was that I had asked my son, I said look your mom needs to hear your voice and see your voice, whether it’s a text message or voicemail, video chat, every day. You need to lift your mom up every day, and I’m just trying to do anything to try and stay positive to keep her positive in hopes to turn a corner with her health, and he didn’t do that. It was kind of frustrating. In fact, when he got home from college, I’m guessing his mom had mentioned to him or he was asking me why she looked so you know, she lost weight. He’s yelling at me “Why didn’t you tell me that mom was sick?!” I said “I asked you to lift your mom up every day. Whether it’s a message, somehow, someway, some form and you never even did that.” He’s an eighteen, nineteen-year-old kid. I finally convinced her and said this is not sustainable. I went into her room, we slept in two different rooms because I was a third shifter. I had the room blacked out, and she had her little cocoon and oasis that she liked to keep, and it worked out better for us in that sleeping arrangement. I walked into her bedroom one day and she’s crying uncontrollably. She’s like “I can’t take this pain.” I was at my wits end. I was out of answers, I was out of options. She’s already taking six opioids a day. Borrowing from my mom. I knew that this was just not sustainable. Now, her mom lived up by herself in Sparta. By the way, she had, by this time, she had developed heart issues. She has what’s called A-fib, Atrial Fibrillation. She was by herself, she was retired, and basically, I said “Listen, I want you to go stay with your mom for a while. Go see her doctor, get a second opinion.” I felt that she’d love going to her mom’s. It’s an oasis up there it’s a beautiful area up there, away from everybody, where she doesn’t have to worry about two messy boys. “Look I’m mowing lawn, and fixing cars.” So, she wouldn’t have to pick up after us or anything like that. She went to her mom’s. She went to her mom’s doctor, got a second opinion, and what I was trying to do was, I was trying to get her mom to try and take some responsibility for her daughter’s health. Because I couldn’t do everything, I had everything on my shoulders, with no answers. So, she went and stayed with her mom for a week or so. Went to her doctor, got in and she says “Hey.” She didn’t want our son to know that I had drawn a line in the sand with regard to this not being sustainable. And kind of stepping back for minute to when she was crying uncontrollably, she says I can’t take this pain anymore I just want to die. DD: Mmm hmm LC: I kind of went into rescue mood, and I says now look you’re not going to die, that would devastate the kids. I knew just that this wasn’t sustainable. While we lived in Ionia County at the time north of me Montcalm County, one of my good friends was the Deputy Director of the Montcalm ambulance. And a week or two prior to her saying this to me he said, “Larry we had a husband and wife overdose from opioids a day apart in the same house.” So, this was right in the middle of the crisis, and I just finally had to draw a line in the sand and say this isn’t sustainable. I had to force the issue of having her mom come into the picture and take some responsibility for her daughter’s health. So, she stayed at her mom’s, went to her mom’s doctor and she called me and said, “Hey will you pick me up.” She didn’t want are youngest son to know we were struggling as a couple with this whole health issue. So, I go to [the] Grand Rapids area. Pick her up from her mom’s doctor. Through all of this, this PFAS really, it effects men and women differently. For women it brings their emotions down to where they’re very subdue. This chemical subdues any outward inflection. I didn’t know this at the time, but this was just how her mom was. I pulled up next to them. We parked driver to driver. It was close to easter, and she says, “I say hey how’s it going?”-and she just like says- “Hey.” Not like, hey we found some stuff out, hey we’re moving in the right direction. It was nothing, no report, just a hey. That was 5 �kind of par for the course. My wife gets out and gets in the car. I say, “Hey how are you doing?” and she just like “Not good.” I’m like “What did they do?” She says, “They pulled me off of opioids, cold turkey, and gave me pain patches.” They weren’t even touching her. I say, “What’s your pain level at?” She said “12.” So, we leave and were driving home. She did say the doctor filed a complaint with the Pain Management Clinic in Ionia County. As they were over prescribing her opioids. LC: So, we’re on the way home driving back from Grand Rapids. We come to M-44 where we head into Belding, and West River Drive area. We’re driving along and talking more, and I am just becoming more and more disheartened because there are still no answers. No clue [of] what’s going on, why this has become so bad. In hindsight, I wish I would have known how bad, how much pain she was actually in. Especially since she functioned at a six or an eight-pain level on opioids, and here she was off cold turkey. To go from six to twelve like she said, doubling her pain. I have no doubt. I wasn’t thinking. I had never dealt with any pain that severe, chronically, all the time. Because I was out of answers, I was still, I didn’t know what to do I said, “I think it would be best if you stayed with your mom.” Because once again I still thought I was a lot of the cause for pain, and the environment I was working in. She loved going to her mom’s, because like I said, it was an oasis up there. I said “Hey, I think it would be a good idea if you stayed with your mom for a while” and all hell broke loose. Like, all hell broke loose. She thought I was abandoning her. She thought I wanted a divorce, which was farthest form the truth. I was just trying to save her life. I was out of answers. Certainly, going back to the Pain Management Clinic wasn’t the answer. So, her pain and what I said. I didn’t know what to do. I shouldn’t have probably said that I should’ve at least probably waited until we got home to sit down and have a good face to face, what’s are next step type thing. While instead, she completely, I mean lucid is the only word that I can think of. She just went off. Long story short we’re driving down the road fifty-five miles per hour, and she opens the door. She says, “I just want to kill myself.” So, I hit the brakes, like oh my god what are you doing. She jumps out of the car. She’s walking down the middle of the road, so I’m like oh my gosh. So, I dial 911. I’m like, “Get out of the road please.” She’s like, “I just want to die. I hope a car hits me and kills me.” I’m freaking out, I don’t even understand what’s going on. So, I’m driving down in middle of the road to try to stop anybody coming from behind us or to alert anyone coming toward us that she’s in the road. I roll my window down, yell get off the road. So, she finally gets off the road and I’m calling 911. You guys need to send somebody right now because there’s going to be a fatality. I’m on the phone with 911 and they’re sending people this way. Now she’s off to the side of the road and I’m driving along with her so she can’t run onto the road again. I say get in the car, just please get in the car, and she comes up and she gets in the driver side passenger. She gets in and I don’t even know what I’m witnessing. Her emotions are so up, gone through the roof, and now she’s just beating on the back of the seat. I’m waiting for her to come around and hit me. I’m just like please don’t hit me type thing. So, we’re driving along, and I’ve never seen her like this. What it was, was just her pain was out of control. We get back in through Belding and were getting back home. We get to the road and slow down and she jumps out of the car again and what I was worried about was I was like when we turned down our road, I was like crap I don’t want to let her in the house ya know there’s knives and you know other things there that she can hurt herself with, so now I was like trying to go slow she jumps out of the car again, she runs into the weeds- I can’t see her cause the - the switch grass is is way above her height, so now there’s like the main road 6 �and then our road so i'm turning down our road and that’s when she jumps out, so now I’m like im worried that shes going to run back up to the highway, so I'm like staying up by the highway, you know making sure she doesn’t try running out running out up- up on the highway so I’m calling 911 again and I’m like where are you guys? You know, and I said by the way you know please send a female officer because I’m not going to have a male officer you know try to restrain her and say that she’s fighting or- or she assaulted a male officer. I said you guys do not understand what’s going on and, so I immediately requested a female officer and they said that there was a female state police officer that was- farther away then then then than I wanted to hear but, so I’m trying to figure out where she is, I don’t know where she is, so I was like maybe she went back to the house which is just like three tenths of a mile down our road off the main road we live on a dirt road. So I start going down the road toward my house and here she comes out of our driveway kinda like cuts across the yard and she’s in my son's car now. So full size chevy impala and now we're coming right at each other and I’m like oh my gosh so I'm liketrying to like get in the middle of the road but I don’t wanna cause a head on collision either and she gets by me. And now she’s you know driving down the road so I’m like you know asking for an ambulance, I’m asking for you know female trooper and and stuff. Well so I get on 911 again and and they’re you know flying down the- she’s flying down the road so we get to the corner of our Johnson road and M-44 and the ambulance passes us, I’m like hey tell the ambulance to turn around we're right here. So she’s going back into town and, I think the police are finally starting to converge and she pulls into a dollar general store and [brief pause] parks. and she’s got the windows rolled up, she won’t roll the window down the ambulance parks across the street, they can't help in any way until the scene is cleared. so they make sure they're not going to get- be put in harm's way. At some point I picked up my neighbor, I picked him up at my house, but I don’t remember how or when at some point. But anyway, he’s an attorney and I’m- he’s like what’s going on? She came back from the doctor and they taken her off opioids cold turkey and, you know I think just her pain is through the roof right now and she’s just so lucid that she is completely out of it. So the female officer shows up and I just told them I said look don’t be going hands on I said I don’t want her to get accused of you know resisting or fighting a officer or something and she had taken her wedding ring off and she threw it down and somehow it bounced right under the center of her car- of the car that she was in. At some point she had called her mom and her mom came all the way from Sparta and picked her up and they just let her go and didn’t really even question her and I was just- I just wanted to get her help, and you know I told the officers I said listen she’s- you guys are well aware of the opioid crisis right now and I said, you know she just got back and they completely have taken her off opioids cold turkey and and so on and so forth. So, that day literally was- so that was 2018 that day was pretty much the last time we were together kind of officially, and while it hurt to know that you know- and everything went sideways from there. You know I was you know I had abandoned her I- you know so on and so forth. But, I felt like I saved her life for that point. At least she had a full time caregiver there and her mom there every day. To you know, to try and get some answers. Well so now I kinda go into this, I’m still trying to figure out what’s going on and I’m praying, I'm like lord you have got to show me what is killing this family, it doesn’t make sense. Well interestingly, my neighbor who lived right behind me in Belding was a Vietnam veteran. He would come at me sideways just like my father-in-law. I had the epiphany, wait a minute [brief 7 �pause] the Vietnam veteran that lives right behind me was suffering from agent orange, that’s a neurotoxin, PFAS is also a neurotoxin that’s when I made the connection. That was the epiphany that I had, and so that’s when I really started diving into- and that’s when the wolverine worldwide started the PFAS contamination there was really starting to blow up and take off, so then I stared entrenching myself into figuring out what was going on and I knew that had to be it, I knew that had to be it. There was no other explanation. You got all this- you know her father died of cancer, her mom had heart issues, her daughter has all kinds of autoimmune issues, her brother developed lupus, and her brother acts the same way as his dad- as her dad. And so then I went out to the dam that’s right next to their house. The same PFAS foam that is occurring in downtown Rockford was occurring right here at the dam, I called Mark Worell the geologist from Eagle,got them down there, they witnessed it. I contacted Gram Peesley who is a professor from the university of Notre Dame. he used to live in Kent County and he said me these awesome little filter caps that they developed, you just screw them on the end of a the end of a 2 liter bottle and poke a hole in it and let the water drain out. He sent me these filters. I went to the dam, I took the filters he said in one of my samples the fluorine which is the indicator of PFAS was like two thousand parts per trillion, it was off the charts, so I was like finally I’m putting together. But I called- I called Varnum the law firm that is representing everybody in this PFAS lawsuit against Wolverine Worldwide and that said well that’s not a known area. So then I started diving into it more they just completely ignored me and so then the map that I sent you of Algoma township be- that the map of Algoma township Scwall lake buts up right against it and if your going to drop or, your toxic sludge you take it away from as far away from the plant as you can, but still stay in the same township. They could have literally been backing their trucks up to Scwall lake and dumping that PFAS stuff right into it. You know this has been going on 50’s 60’s 70’s and back in the day Scwall lake was such a excluded lake there was maybe a two track to it people walk down to go fishing DD: Mhm LC: So, you know I haven’t been able to prove that, but the health affects the PFAS foam at the dam that runs over from the tributary comes out of Scwall lake. They all witnessed that, I went and testified at the forum for eagle and you know I told- and by the way i've tried to tell my wife at the time were now divorced, but I tried saving our marriage I tried saving- i’m like listen you know stop drinking the water get your blood tested, and it was like it was a joke. Oh, yea that was it is, well how do you explain your dad’s cancer. Oh, just bad luck, you know you can’t reason with them. Look, you have all these health issues and by the way by the grace of God 2019, she’s living with her mom, and she messages her on her way home from work saying I’m on my way home from work do we need anything type thing and I think you know her mom responded to her. She walks in and her mom is unresponsive on the floor, she had had a stroke. And this is yet another you know but by the grace of God, they found her on time my son had come home from college and helped and the paramedics arrived and got her there in time and and she was at my son's baseball game two days later and you know by the grace of God you know her life was saved too. So I, through all this it's just I've been trying to save lives of my own family and try and figure out what’s going on and I finally started connecting the dots and putting two and two together, but I still feel like I have nowhere to go. 8 �DD: Mhm LC: People that I do reach out to they’re like well we haven’t found any proof there you know then I bring Eagle out they see the proof then COVID hits, and nobody has resources to do a further investigation. You know meanwhile I have completely lost the relationship with my son you know and i'll say in all of this. This chemical is the most evil thing that anybody could be subjected to through all of this and all of the research that I have done dealing with my family, what I have learned is to recognize those people who have been affected by PFAS. I can literally go through life and when I meet somebody the bells and whistles go off in my head as indicators of, I think that person has been affected by PFAS. I met two individuals right here in the metro Detroit area and one of them was a firefighter, this guy is probably the worst case of PFAS exposure that I have ever seen I actually had a- I actually had an encounter with him that I recorded and I’m trying to get that to Gram Peesley I’ve reached out to Gram and said, Gram this is another insistence of you know PFAS exposure you know I’ve been wanting to try and get this Infront of individuals but this person is off the charts. They have admitted to having ingested this PFAS foam during training and it’s, I can’t explain it, it’s literally like talking to the devil. I don’t know how else to explain it. This PFAS is such an evil cruel chemical and what it does to the body, what it does to the mind, I coined a phrase and have no other way to explain it but its PFAS dementia. And, my family has it, you can’t reason with them. And it breaks my heart and and ya know and through all of this my faith has grown and there was times when I just wanted to give up and I was like I can’t fight this battle anymore especially alone and so on and so forth. Yeah, know I mentioned earlier, my son has been scouted by major league baseball since he was 17. Now it's 2021 and he is going to be entering major league baseball draft next month. And so, 18+ years of all the coaching and giving him my knowledge as I have played baseball my whole life, he won’t even talk to me. And is getting one side of the story from a mother who has PFAS dementia. And it’s breaking my heart, it's ripping my heart out. I asked his mom and all i said is, please tell our son and reach out to me this fathers’ days and I am sure I won’t hear from him. And, I don’t know, to be honest I don’t know why God has put me on this journey. While he has revealed to me what has caused this, he hasn’t revealed the answer how to get the help, how toand it’s so frustrating it's heartbreaking. And you know I- don’t know. You know unfortunately the corporate lobbying for these corporations that say that this isn’t a bad chemical and it’s not as bad as it you know Rob Ballot has proven that it is and just like in my testimony you know I said look Dark Waters there’s going to be a sequel to that movie and it’s going to be called dark you know darker water right here in Kent county and so my hope is- I hope that through my story you know which is a battle will be someone else’s survival guide because I would not wish this journey upon my worst enemy DD: Can you- can you tell me about any concerns that you have in particular about PFAS contamination moving forward? LC: So one of the big problems in Michigan is, we have allowed industry to build on waterways and discharge their waste water in rivers, lakes, and streams out of sight out of mind. While there is a concerted effort- and by the way 3M who created this or sells this chemical by the way has now gone into the water filtration business. So now they're making money from filtering the very 9 �water they helped contaminate. I mean it is what it is but we’ve got to get tough on this chemical. There is no if ands or buts about it and Michigan has made that step in the right direction, but we need the blood testing we need- you know look this these are human lives these are you know these are lives that are being destroyed and that has to be the focus. How can we help these individuals. Look I would love to be, you know a part of a bigger effort to help identify you know those that have been affected by PFAS. I have been exposed to it so much that I can literally recognize those that have, and if you don’t believe me, hey go get a blood test and prove me wrong. so that’s the big thing. DD: Mhm LC: We’ve got to get the blood test and from what I’ve heard my son’s mom who I still love her dearly I love her with all my heart and I’m glad that I was able to save her life, but our marriage was laid to waste because of this horrible toxin and and her health issues, but she’s finally going to get her blood tested I guess next month and you know i'm scared to see what type of exposure you know she has- you know been affected. And but I’ve tried to contact her brother. I just recently reached out to his wife and him and they won’t even talk to me. It's like wait a minute I have information that you know could help your health and find out what maybe- likely killed you father or caused your fathers cancer. And like I said I’m dealing with this PFAS dementia and its heart breaking it absolutely breaks my heart and [clears throat] I just I can’t express how evil of a chemical this is. Just you know if you see the movie dark waters and the farmer you know that farmer acts just like my father-in-law DD: Mhm LC: Not a happy individual RA RA RA all the time you know that was literally I literally could plug my family member into that movie into different characters in that movie. But we’ve got to get the blood testing we have got to stop letting companies like downplay this chemical, this is no joke. If you watched the documentary on YouTube, the devil we knew it is, it’s the devil. It’s the most evilest toxin and now it’s in our rain water and it's not good, it’s not good. DD: Well, thank you so much Larry for taking the time to share your story today LC: I appreciate it, it feels good to finally tell my story so you know I thank you for providing a platform and you know please if there’s resources that come across that you come across, please send them my way. But I’m in metro Detroit area now and I’m kind of out of the loop with regard to you know Kent county area so please let me know what going on and and if there’s you know someone that can listen to me and listen to my story and and can potentially help, You know please send them my way because you know I’m afraid my sons affected by this too and you know I know all the family member have. Look I’ve lived there for awhile you know I’m certain that I have been affected too. I want to get my blood tested to you know see what type of exposure that I have been in to but I you know thank God. One thing I want to point out too is stress seems to be a big trigger in this PFAS exposure in men more so than women. It seems that stress is a real trigger point in men. In women it really just tends to really subdue them. It’s pretty heartbreaking so we’ve got to do the blood testing. Just like in the movie where they were literally paying individuals to get their blood tested. I would be thrilled if we could do something 10 �like that, because this has got to be taken care of. Look we are in a water wonderland and like I said in my like I said in my testimony in front of Eagle you know if these sights could be illuminated Michigan would be lit up light a christmas tree. DD: Mhm LC: That's no joke, they have confirmed well over 100 PFAS contaminations sites in Michigan so I’m certain it’s just the tip of the iceberg, but we have got to get the blood tests. Throughout the state of Michigan there needs to be a regular blood test. If you feel like you have been exposed to PFAS you should be able to come in and get your blood tested, no if ands or buts. If you know if everyone wants to say how much of a pandemic covid is, PFAS is a pandemic right in our state, and and it’s growing it’s getting worse DD: Thank you Larry. LC: Thank you, I appreciate your time and appreciated your efforts and please keep in touch with me 11 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Living with PFAS Interviews Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Devasto, Danielle Description An account of the resource Beginning in 2021, the Living with PFAS interviews were recorded to gather the personal stories of individuals impacted by PFAS contamination. PFAS, or per- and polyflourinated substances, are a large group of human-made chemicals used widely since the 1940s to make coatings and products resistant to heat, oil, stains, grease, and water. They can be found in countless household items, including food packaging, non-stick cookware, stain-resistant furniture, and water-resistant clothing. These chemicals are often called “forever chemicals” because they do not break down easily, can move through soils and contaminate drinking water sources, and build up in animals, plants, and people. PFAS have been linked to increased incidences of various cancers, increased cholesterol, decreased fertility, birth defects, kidney and liver disease, and immune system suppression, and thyroid dysfunction. It is estimated that PFAS are in the drinking water of more than 200 million Americans (Andrews & Naidenko, 2020). In Michigan alone, over 280 sites have PFAS contamination exceeding maximum contamination levels for groundwater (MPART, 2024). Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-11 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf audio/mp3 Type The nature or genre of the resource Motion Picture Text Sound Language A language of the resource eng Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context PFAS0016 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Campbell, Larry Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021-06-18 Title A name given to the resource Larry Campbell, 2021 (Interview video and transcript) Description An account of the resource Larry Campbell lived most of his life in Belding, Michigan. In this interview, Campbell discusses the impact of PFAS on the health of his wife and family. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource DeVasto, Danielle (interviewer) Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Moving Image Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/6fb64d87b8d476cfa944fa70ab9b59b9.mp4 63e6db84b89e7ecd037c554b4b98ba5e https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/ac530960811b9ba2a67ae1b77ab770c3.pdf 46047858a4641a92b9e986e19f81f7b4 PDF Text Text Living with PFAS Interviewer: Danielle DeVasto Interviewee: Courtney Carignan Date of Interview: 2022-11-18 Danielle DeVasto: I'm Dani DeVasto, and today, November 18, 2022. I have the pleasure of chatting with Dr. Courtney Carignan. Hi Courtney. Courtney Carignan: Hi Danielle DeVasto: Courtney, can you tell me about where you're from and where you currently live? Courtney Carignan: I'm originally from New Hampshire, and I currently live in mid-Michigan and work at Michigan State. Danielle DeVasto: Uh, how long have you been at Michigan State? Courtney Carignan: Since 2017. Danielle DeVasto: Courtney, can you tell me a story about your experience with PFAS or with PFAS in your community? Courtney Carignan: I sure can. Um, so I started actually first got involved in PFAS, um, when I was doing a postdoc in Boston, and I was living in Southern New Hampshire, um, and actually in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, which is right on the coast. Um, and I saw in the paper, our, our community, uh, news Seacoast online, there was a woman who wanted PFAS blood testing for her kids, because PFASs had been detected in the drinking water of Pease Tradeport, which is at the former Pease Air Force Base, and, um, I guess the State had told her that they would do the testing and then a year later they still hadn't done it and were saying now that they couldn't, she was getting very upset. Um, and so I actually had training in PFAS, um, I have a degree in, a Ph.D. in environmental health from the Boston University School of Public Health. And, um, I was trained in under a training grant called Environmental Epidemiology in Community Settings, and I worked on flame retardant, human exposure flame retardants, and, um, I was actually at that time doing a post doc on fertility and flame retardants at Harvard. And, um, so anyway, so I had a lot of training, and you know, how to provide support, technical support for PFAS impacted communities. And my advisor at BU had worked on the C health study. So people in my research group had been working on PFAS for, you know, the past five years or more. Um, and so I just sort of happened to know a lot about PFAS, um, and, you know, saw her in the paper. And so, um, I asked the reporter to tell me, you know, to connect us, and I connected with her and started providing her with technical support and started trying with her, the State with technical support. Um, 'cause I, you know, seem to know more about PFAS than anybody in the area. Um, and you know, Andrea went on to found testing for Pease. She was able to get PFAS blood testing for over 2000 people who worked, um, or was at, were at daycare at Pease Tradeport. Um, from that we learned that PFHXS is, which is, which is a PFAS that has a very long half life. It stays in the body for, uh, quite a long time. Um, that this was something that was part of the, astroblast mixture. So people with astroblast, source of drinking water contamination, um, have this kind of unique signature of PFAS in their bodies that, you know, at the time really wasn't understood at all. So, um, I can remember people misunderstanding the blood test results Page 1 �from Pease as, oh, well their levels aren't that high, but they were looking at PFOA, which is not a major part of AFFF. Um, and if you looked over at the PFHXS, it was quite high, you know, um, a lot of people in, in the community had levels that were elevated above, above what you see in the, the general population. So, um, I worked with Andrea for a few years, and then we helped organize the, uh, national PFAS conference. The first one that was at Northeastern University, um, we put in a proposal to NIHS, um, to do more work on understanding effects, uh, of PFAS in the immune systems of children exposed to 00:03:59 ___________ Pease and also had to community in Massachusetts. Um, and then I got recruited to MSU and I came here. Um, and since I, you know, since I came here, a few communities have learned about actually many communities have learned about PFAS contamination. Um, so I should have mentioned another thing that I did when I was at, um, Harvard is I was part of a, a group that wrote a paper, uh, using the UCMR3 data. So this is data from EPA, uh, that EPA had on PFAS across the country and drinking water. We were able to get that out and published. Uh, we found that over 6 million people had likely been served by PFAS impacted drinking water. Um, and we were able to sort of see that people were more likely to have drinking water contamination if they lived, if the drinking water system was closer to, um, a place that used Atripla for training airports, wastewater treatment plants. Um, and so that paper really, um, set off, um, monitoring in places or helped set off monitoring places. Michigan was one place that started doing statewide monitoring of public drinking water systems. Um, and that happened shortly after I came to MSU and, um, you know, that's how a lot of communities found out about their contamination, but of course, you know, um, in Rockford they had found out a different way. And I think you have a lot of videos of people explaining that situation. Um, and then Portsmith obviously found out was one of the first sites in the United States to discover PFAS contamination. Um, so I've been working, you know, with those communities, provided them with technical sports. Since I came to Michigan, um, I've been working with communities in the southeastern part of the State, um, that had quite high levels detected in their water through the statewide monitoring. I have a small exposure study, uh, where we're looking at exposure, via drinking water, diet and indoor environment. Um, so we know that drinking water is the main way that, so if you have elevated PFAS in your drinking water, um, we know that it's a, a large contributor to exposure and that's why, you know, a lot of the interventions are focused around drinking water. Um, and so, you know, that's the main focus, but, but we also know in the general population that the main exposure is through diet. Um, and so the question that comes up in a lot of communities is, you know, if they have my drinking water, um, treated, and we intervene and, and reduce or eliminate hopefully PFAS and the drinking water, um, do I have an ongoing elevated sources of exposure? So for example, through local and homegrown foods, so some communities have been told not to, you know, eat chicken eggs, not to eat the produce in the gardens. Um, if they irrigated using PFAS contained water and so forth. So communities have found elevating level 00:06:59 ___________ in fish or fish advisories for many PFAS impact communities. Um, and right, so this is a important question. So that's one, one of the questions that we've really working on for the past few years, um, and then the other, we got our, that NIHS project funded. And, um, I think what we've recognized, you know, through Page 2 �work on contaminants over the years, I've been working on contamination issues for 20 years now. And I look young, but I'm not actually that young. Um, so, you know, I've been working in this area for a long time. And what we've, what we've found is that, um, you know, no one research group can effectively help all communities, you know, not anyone scientists can do all the work that needs to be done. And so, um, a big part of our project is, you know, trying to build out resources for PFAS impacted communities. We started doing this before, you know, good resources really existed on federal or State agency websites. Um, and we think has been, you know, hopefully have been used as a model for a lot of those websites and help them, you know, um, give them ideas for how to improve and vice versa. Um, but we have a website called the PFAS exchange. So ww.pfas-exchange.org, and we put up a lot of different tools to help PFAS impact communities and also to help ourselves because we get a lot of emails from people. Um, and it's really helpful to be able to refer them somewhere where all the, you know, things that we think are useful for them are also located. So we have a tool that helps people understand their water. Our blood test results, so puts them into context. Um, so one of the water tool will compare your water results to state and federal agency advi, you know, advisories or MCLs. Um, and that's really complicated 'cause they're always changing, and there's a lot of, you know, to, to sort of dig up all that information on your own as a, you know, even as somebody who works in PFAS is a lot of work. And so, um, it's a really helpful tool, I think for people and also for professionals to be able to use, um, and then also compares you to sort of a representative levels across the country. Um, and I think what you notice when you look at that tool is that, you know, a lot of places are elevated above, you know, what the guideline, which seems to just continue to decrease as we learn more about the toxicities of chemicals. Um, and then the blood tool does something similar except there's no, I don't, I don't think we've come to a great guidance level yet for whats safe in blood. Um, we see effects of PFAS in the general population in general population levels. Um, so, you know, we think that we're, well, we know that we're all exposed, and we think from the data that we have so far, um, in the literature, et cetera, that, you know, these are affecting people at general population levels. Um, and of course that risk goes up as you're more highly exposed and as you have more risk factors, um, and that communication is always difficult with people with, you know, known occupational or drinking water exposures that, um, you know, just because you see this list of health effects, it doesn't mean you're gonna get it. 'cause you've been exposed, we've all been exposed. Some people have been exposed at higher levels than other people. And some people have been exposed at much higher levels than other people. Everyone has been exposed unwittingly. Um, and you know, there's a lot of risk factors that go into why would, why would you get a disease? Um, and so, you know, reducing your exposure moving forward and um, you know, talking to your doctor and trying to reduce your other risk factors and monitoring. So, um, I was part of, um, uh, community liaison for the national academies of engineering and sciences. And 00:11:01 ___________ just did a study on PFAS, um, blood testing and medical monitoring. Um, so as part of that group, and they came up with some nice guidance for clinicians, for talking about to their doctors or for clinicians talking to their patients, they have a nice guidance. Actually they came up with, um, some numbers so that people with levels in their blood Page 3 �could, um, you know, sort of understand better doctors in particular could look at blood levels and then, you know, make some, uh, informed decisions about screening. So there are medical screening guidance that exist out there. We have one on the PFAS exchange on the resources page. Uh, it's a companion guidance, so there's one for clinicians, and there's one for, uh, community members, and they're, you know, really kind of meant to be used together. Um, and then we have a new resources page for clinicians, and we've just put our new, um, continuing medical education video up there that we made with, you know, um, PFAS experts and physicians and, um, people who've been impacted by PFAS. Um, so that's up on our website now along with other tools for clinicians. So we're still building that out. Um, and sorry. I feel like I'm like, um, going around a little bit um, this has been helpful information so far. Danielle DeVasto: Absolutely. Yeah. I mean, that's kind of the way some of the PFAS stories works. I feel like it kind of wins and winds its way around and kind of gets into everything in its own weird way. Um, it sounds though like your, the PFAS exchange is still something that's kind of actively evolving or kind of growing. It sounds like? Courtney Carignan: Mm-hmm. Danielle DeVasto: Are there any, um, obvious next steps that you guys have in mind or other ways that you'd like to see it kind of keep evolving? Courtney Carignan: Well, another recent evolution has been, um, a new map. So we have a mapping tool on there under the community, connecting communities tab that, um, shares PFAS site data across the country. And then also, um, my collaborators came up with this idea of, um, suspect sources. So they actually map all, you know, kind of entities that may use PFAS in their, you know, processes, um, or at PFAS. And so they've mapped all of those, and I mean the map just like lights up completely, and it helps you see like all the places. 'Cause I think one of the things that is hard to communicate about PFAS is that, you know, there's a whole lot of them. I think the, the number keeps growing. I think the last I remember is like 20,000 PFASs um, when I started, I, I mean, I feel like just a few years ago we were saying like 9,000 or 4,000 or 2,000. Um, so the number really gone up a lot and um, you know, I, I tend to talk about them as legacy PFASs. So we know a lot about PFOA and PFOS health effects of these PFAS. We've been for a long time that were faced out a decade ago in the U.S., all of a, of them. Um, some countries have continued to produce some overseas, uh, in that time, but you know, in the U.S., we've been using other PFAS for many years now. And so we tend to talk about those as current use PFAS. So, you know, there's been a focus on monitoring for legacy PFASs and a lot of the data that's out there is legacy PFASs, it's a small panel. Um, and so a lot of our work focuses on looking at expanded panels that include current use PFASs and talking about current use PFASs um, because, you know, it's, it's basically doing a bunch of different jobs at the same time. You're looking back at all of the contamination that's occurred over the past, you know, basically my lifetime, our lifetimes, right. Um, and trying to clean it up, you know, for these bad, very persistent PFASs. And then there's all these new PFASs that, you know, as we learn more about them, we're learning, you know, that they can act in similar ways, a lot of them are less persistent. Some of them are precursors to the legacy PFASs of Page 4 �PFOA, um, and the, the chemistries are very complicated. I work with a lot of analytical chemists and, you know, part of the challenge of looking at PFAS in food is that, you know, different types of food are different types of complicated matrices and the, um, chemistry just didn't exist, you know, to be able to, to reliably, um, quantify large panels of PFAS and food. And then also, um, there are these interferences in food that will give you false positives. Um, and so it's just, it's very complicated, and you know, I'm not analytical chemist, but my work relies on good analytical chemistry. So, um, that's, that's a big challenge for PFAS. We're just like we just been playing catch up. Um, I just feel like since I started working on it, we're just playing catch up and, um, really communicating about, you know, moving to floral polymers, um, doesn't solve the life lifecycle issue of PFAS, which is that you're creating, you know, you're using PFASs to create Flor polymers, and then they're eventually gonna, um, break down back into PFAS over time. You know, we think that hope right, that floral polymers are reducing exposure to the consumer and during the lifetime of the, um, during the, you know, use portion of the product, but we know that, you know, we're not completely solving the problem of PFAS that it's, um, really a life cycle issue. And, uh, yeah, I'm not, did that answer your question? Did I just go off on like another — Danielle DeVasto: No, I mean, it, it raised a lot of really interesting points and, um, you know, uh, wow. And like, it actually makes me think of like probably five more questions that I could ask. Um, but one of the things that struck me about what you're saying too, is that I'm thinking I'm listening and hearing all of these different people that you're collaborating with to kind of, to do your work, you know, analytical chemists, um, all the collaborators that you have as far as like creating the PFAS exchange, the communities that you're interfacing with. And it just, um, it seems like you're, you're involved in a lot of different kinds of conversations about PFAS, you know, whether it's talking about kind of like the, like the chemical makeup and like the really technical nitty gritty, or talking with people who just wanna understand like their test results or what to do next. And I guess, you know, having kind of worked in this realm now for 20 some years, um, what, like, can you, can you say more about that or like what you've learned by doing some of this, this interfacing between all these different groups in order to do your work? Courtney Carignan: Um, I don't know. I, I mean, it's complicated. It's not, you know, we were talking about this before a little bit before we started filming that, you know, it's a really complicated landscape and that what I've learned. And I think I learned, you know, within the first decade of working on these kinds of issues was that no, you know, so I, I got my Ph.D. 'cause I was working in a community where they had drinking water contamination of trichloroethylene. It was a rural community in Pennsylvania and, um, people there really weren't being told much, you know, I kind of witnessed on 'cause I was, I was working in the community for two years doing the response action. I was a consultant. Um, we were, you know, consulting for the responsible party. And so I got this unique, you know, I don't think it's a unique look in, in terms of consulting. That's what consultants do, but it's unique in the sense of academic academics, don't tend to have this perspective. Um, so I really saw what happens in a community when this kind of contamination is discovered and, you know, understood what I thought they needed. I thought they needed studies. So I went back to it, got my Ph.D. Um, I thought they needed people who knew Page 5 �about contamination could help them, which is true. Um, and you know, I think in the process getting my Ph.D. and then, you know, providing technical support at Pease, I realized that or learned, um, through that work that again, you know, scientists and researchers do not have all the answers and do not work on their own, which, um, I'm sure people told me along the way through my training, um, you know, you hear that referred to the importance of community engaged work and the importance of working with your agencies. Um, but I didn't really understand that until, you know, I started doing it and making lots of, you know, probably lots of mistakes along the way. Um, 'cause it's very humbling to, you know, want to do all of this work and then realize like you cannot achieve [LAUGHTER] the things that you think need to be done without, you know, um, these relationships Danielle DeVasto: That's, that's so true., it's so true. And because, you know, as you said, this isn't just the legacy PFAS, it's kind of an evolving, it's an evolving story. Um, it's not just, you know, this one and done kind of thing, which maybe leads me into my next question. Um, thinking about PFAS contamination moving forward, what kinds of concerns do you have? Courtney Carignan: Um, so I'm, you know, I'm concerned about our ability to monitor for and make progress on the current use PFAS issue, right? The tap is still on, it feels very urgent, um, to make progress on that issue quickly. Um, and while simultaneously, you know, addressing all of the legacy pollution, you know, kind of how do we do that all at the same time? Um, the, you know, I, I do a lot of biomonitoring and health studies. Um, that's my main, the main thing that I, if there's a main thing I focus on, that's it, um, it's the, you know, maybe one of the things I'm best at, and you know, the way that we monitor for exposure to legacy PFASs is easy in the sense that you do a blood draw. Um, we just developed, um, or validated a new finger prick test, which is kinda exciting, um, because getting a blood draw is there's a lot of barriers for people. So we've been working on those kinds of issues as part of the reason we have the clinician resources page, we've got lots of resources there to help people get PFAS, blood testing, 'cause that's one of the main things that people tell us that they want when they find out that they've exposed. Um, but you know, legacy PFASs you can detect them in the blood for a very long time after exposure. So if you were exposed five years ago, and you were exposed to PFLS or EFFF um, and you do a PFAS blood test, um, and opposing your drinking water, you know, you could actually back back calculate what your exposure was five years ago. Like we understand, you know, the behavior in the body well enough that we can do that. Um, whereas with current use PFASs, they're gonna be eliminating from the body more quickly. They're still persistent, but not as persistent. And so when, if you're doing bio monitoring the blood, um, and you are ignoring the fact that all these different PFASs have different, you know, longevity in the blood, um, you are not gonna understand exposure correctly. Um, and so I think that's as an exposure scientist, I think, I think, you know, sort of the, the thing I'm thinking about the most right now is, you know, I think a lot about like how, how not to do harm and how to make sure my work is not harming anyone and making mistakes like that could be very big mistakes. So, um, being careful about, you know, how do we make sure that we are understanding people's exposures and representing them correctly, not only exposure assessment, but also importantly, in these environmental epidemiology Page 6 �studies, because exposure misclassification is one of the biggest problems in expo, uh, environmental epidemiology. Um, if you don't have exposure assessed well, um, you have a bias towards the mill, which means you're more likely to conclude there's no effect when one, in fact is there Danielle DeVasto: Can you just for people who maybe are listening and don't know, can you say a little bit more about what biomonitoring is? Courtney Carignan: So bio biomonitoring is, um, testing for or monitoring for, um, usually, you know, in my context, contaminants in the body are in biological matrices. So in people, um, you know where we're testing blood or urine or hair or fingernails, or, you know, you know, different biological fluids or matrices. Um, and you know, before, when I was a consultant, we'd even do it. And in, in lots of people still do this, right. Uh, you can do bio monitoring of, of IOTA also, um, but in my context I'm usually talking human health studies. Danielle DeVasto: Before we wrap, is there anything that you would like to add or, um, that we haven't touched on today or anything you wanna go back to and say more about? Courtney Carignan: Um, I mean, I, I plugged the PFAS exchange website. I think that's a really helpful place for people to get information. Um, and you know, we do, you know, it is a work in progress. Hopefully we can get funded to continue working on that, 'cause I think our project period is expiring, but, um, you know, we, we always wanna make it better, and it's helpful to, you know, know from people not only like what ways to improve it, but also, you know, sometimes we partner with people who can volunteer their time or, [LAUGHTER] you know, can help us find funding to, to be able to continue improve it. 'cause it is, like you said, I'm doing a lot of different things, and you know, spread pretty thin. So it's, um, there's like the pie in the sky, what we wanna do. And then there's like the nuts and bolts of getting it done and so people wanna, um, get connected. Uh that's great. And then I guess I would also say, you know, I, I, I would encourage people who, you know, are exposed, and you know, wanna take action. Um, there's a lot of different groups. So if you go to the PFAS exchange connection, connecting communities page, uh, it'll help you find different groups that are working on PFAS and taking action in their communities. And then we have a national PFAS contamination coalition, um, or shouldn't say we, there is one, um, I serve, um, serve as a, you know, provide technical assistance for the coalition. Um, and I provide technical assistance for a lot of community groups, you know, a lot of my funding, um, you know, my salary, right. It's all comes from the public. So, you know, I see that work as, you know, as long as I have the bandwidth to do it, you know, I'm gonna do that kinda work. Danielle DeVasto: I imagine also find, find meaningful because it sounds like that's sort of, you know, working with communities sounds like where your story started way back in Pennsylvania. Courtney Carignan: Yeah. I mean, you know, I'm from a mill family. So my, um, grandfather actually was a lumberjack in Maine and my grandmother worked at a shoe factory in Maine, Um, and you know, I'm, you know, I'm from New Hampshire, but you know, we have a lot of, you know, my husband's family help build the mills in New Hampshire. Um, so we kind of have this, um, history to our families that, um, you know, we also are French Canadians, so we also have indigenous, you know, backgrounds. So, um, I Page 7 �think I see those communities and, and I understand, you know, what challenges they face. Um, so yeah, I do find a lot of meaning in that work. Danielle DeVasto: Well, I have poked around the PFAS exchange website, and it looks awesome. I'm very grateful to you guys for creating that. Seems like such a great resource in so many ways, and I'm excited to see where it keeps going. Have you gotten much feedback about the website since it's launch? Courtney Carignan: Yeah. I mean, mostly we get mostly we get, uh, feedback from the coalition 'cause we meet with them and ask them, um, but, and then I have feedback from myself. Right. All things we wanna do. [LAUGHTER' Um, so yeah, it's definitely a work in progress. Well, I'm, I'm so glad that it's there, and I'm always happy to have it because you know, there are lots of questions and there's so much information and confusing information. So having somewhere to be able to send people is a really, seems like a really great thing. So. Courtney Carignan: I guess another thing to mention is, um, that I am working with firefighters as well cause firefighters have occupational exposures to PFAS. Um, and so I'm connected with a group that has a website called PFAS for EPPE. Um, and I'm connected with the IFFF and, um, I'm doing a very small exposure study on firefighters. I know that there's a bigger study going on in the State led by NDHHS, but, um, I decided mention that as well, that, you know, occupational exposed groups, I think, um, you know, there's been a lot of focus on drinking water. Um, and that's what I'm focusing on a lot on the last, you know, five to 10 years. But, um, occupational exposure is something that is also very important, and there's so many ways that people can occupation expose to PCOS and have no idea. So firefighters for a long time were told that Atripla was like soap and water and, um, it's just, that's how they treated it. So they, you know, exposed themselves, they, you know, spread it all over the environment. Um, PFASs are used in, have been used in ski wax. Um, I'm trying to think of all 'cause I usually like rattle off a list of occupations that you use PFAS and might not know. Danielle DeVasto: Yeah. What are, what are a couple of the most surprising ones? Courtney Carignan: Well, I mean, carpeting has been, you know, something that we were working on at BU during my Ph.D. So our group was the first to show PFAS, you know, and in the indoor environment from carpeting, um, and that, you know, it's in the air and dust and, and people also spray Scotchguard on their furniture. It was very common in the past. I was at my local hot tub store last summer and didn't get a hot tub, but I did notice that, uh, no, I wish I, they had a can of that kind of spray, and it actually said on it, you know, perifluoro-, blah, blah, blah. And I was so shocked that they still sell this kind of spray. And I told the cashier like, do you know what's in this? Um, so yeah, I mean that, those kinds of sprays are still in the market and, you know, people, you know, for the past, you know, a few decades used to spray it in their homes, um, parchment paper. Um, so the paper that you used to line, you know, holiday seasons coming up and doing a lot of baking, um, I'm curious to know what PFASs are being replaced in parchment paper. They think they're moving away from PFASs in food packaging, um, and food contact papers. Um, and so I guess those are the two sort of indoor environments, I think about the most. Um, I think UFM published a study on PFASs on floor wax, um, or they had a poster on it. So they found that it Page 8 �was being used in the, those big machines that wax the floors. Um, so that, I think that's another surprising place they're used in extrusion of plastics. So vinyl flooring there's trace levels at least of PFASs in, uh, artificial turf. So the plastic blades of graphs, grass in artificial turf, um, I mean, it's just like the list just goes on and on and on places that PFASs are used that are surprising. I mean, originally the first sort of surprising place that that was discovered was popcorn bags, microwave, popcorn bags, and again, I'm not sure what replacements being used currently, if it's still a PFAS or something else. Um, people ask all the time about, you know, pans, um, stuff on pans or nonstick pans. Consumer reports just put out a nice report on that. So I'm referring people to that report for more information. Um, but yeah, there's a lot of sources, you know, kind of lurking sources of PFAS, um, that you expect or know about. And often don't have control over, like right in your workplace, if you have a stain resistant carpeting, like, you know, um, what are you gonna do about that or in your home even, um, can you afford to replace it? Um, so I did that answer your question. on another tangent, but like in terms of occupational exposure zone, people who actually did make stain resistant carpeting, people who work, you know, in paper, the paper industry, you know, they actually mix the paper, you know, pull up in the PFAS together. Uh, people who worked in tanneries and used PFASs on leather goods, um, people who worked in the plating industry and are standing over vats of PFAS containing you know, so, you know, I think about those people and, um, wonder what's being, what's being done for them. Danielle DeVasto: Well, thank you so much, Courtney, for taking the time to share your story and your work today. Um, it's been a pleasure talking with you, Courtney Carignan: You too. Page 9 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Living with PFAS Interviews Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Devasto, Danielle Description An account of the resource Beginning in 2021, the Living with PFAS interviews were recorded to gather the personal stories of individuals impacted by PFAS contamination. PFAS, or per- and polyflourinated substances, are a large group of human-made chemicals used widely since the 1940s to make coatings and products resistant to heat, oil, stains, grease, and water. They can be found in countless household items, including food packaging, non-stick cookware, stain-resistant furniture, and water-resistant clothing. These chemicals are often called “forever chemicals” because they do not break down easily, can move through soils and contaminate drinking water sources, and build up in animals, plants, and people. PFAS have been linked to increased incidences of various cancers, increased cholesterol, decreased fertility, birth defects, kidney and liver disease, and immune system suppression, and thyroid dysfunction. It is estimated that PFAS are in the drinking water of more than 200 million Americans (Andrews & Naidenko, 2020). In Michigan alone, over 280 sites have PFAS contamination exceeding maximum contamination levels for groundwater (MPART, 2024). Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-11 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf audio/mp3 Type The nature or genre of the resource Motion Picture Text Sound Language A language of the resource eng Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context PFAS0033 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Carignan, Courtney Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2022-11-18 Title A name given to the resource Courtney Carignan, 2022 (Interview video and transcript) Description An account of the resource Dr. Courtney Carignan lives in central Michigan and works at Michigan State University, though she was raised in New Hamphsire. She holds a PhD in environmental health from the Boston University School of Public Health. In this interview, she discusses her involvement with PFAS advocacy and research in her communities, as well as a new mapping tool that will collect and share PFAS site data across the United States. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource DeVasto, Danielle (interviewer) Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Moving Image Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/0af0527e421f10b2e7ea753910d7c8d7.mp4 0562173539c4fa0dd5b6710833511c89 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/05ede121339cff1f60241d7b11b60fc4.pdf 90de3536df8f5176615f327ba24dee6d PDF Text Text Living with PFAS Interviewee: Lance Climie Interviewer: Dani DeVasto Date: May 14, 2021 DD: I’m Dani DeVasto, and today, May 14th, I have the pleasure of chatting with Lance Climie. Lance, can you tell me about where you’re from and where you currently live? LC: I currently live in Plainfield Township, in Plainfield Township water system. Northeast set of Deenly, in that area. I have lived probably within 5 miles of that location the majority of my life. My family has been in 4 Mile and Beltline area since the 1870’s. So, long time in the area. DD: And how long have you been in Plainfield Township, specific? LC: Since I was born? DD: Okay, so yeah. LC: I have lived– I have worked away from Plainfield Township, but I’ve always said you got us working– but our primary residence was here, so. DD: Okay, alright. Lance, can you tell me a story about your experience with PFAS or with PFAS in your community? LC: Well, it’s kind of interesting ‘cause our family, we were fruit farmers, and I remember my grandfather talking about Wolverine’s offer to come spread “sludge,” free fertilizer, on your fields. Come to find out, this is how they are disposing a lot of the PFAS residue, was by offering to spread it free as fertilizer on farmer’s fields. They offered it in a sincere manner. A lot of people took them up on that, and my grandfather thought they were quite out of their minds, not knowing what they’re putting into the ground. So, little flashbacks like that, it’s- Or the fact that my father was- is a retired Plainfield Township employee. He was the original Parks Department person there. He’s been deceased, here, about 8 years but– being at the dinner table with him, and he starts just kinda huffing and, you know, upset with people at work because they’re going to let people build houses up on House Street dump. They were going to change the zoning, and a lot of people would go build up there on the ravines and the dump around the dump. Why would you let people do that? So, those are- I guess I got a couple of different recollections of that year. It’s been around a long time, and there’s always been whispers of it, and you’ve seen signs of it. Then you see things like a dump at the old Bell dump on the Beltline, and there were precursors of PFAS that should have been warning signs, but sometimes it costs governments and businesses too much 1 �money to really look at what’s really happening with what might happen, versus what they just got paid for. DD: And with your family’s history with being fruit farmers, were you- did you- did your family take up the offer for the sludge or anything like that? LC: No. As a matter of fact, I remember my grandfather talking to some of the other farmers, and said, “don’t you let them put that stuff on your ground.” Just not– but he did. He was against- I remember he was railing against DDT [Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane] when it first came out, think it was just [?]. He was an advocate of using very little in the way of chemicals, natural fertilizers– Organic farmer before his time, just because it was the common sense way to do it. It was a good environment. He was- So we were definitely connected to the land, andAnd again, long ago, the county tried to take some of the farm to expand the dump that existed on the East Beltline a long time, too. That was a family fight, as well, too, that went through courts before we kept them away from taking the farm. So it was a– Some different stories, I guess. I kind of come at it from a different perspective. More of a family history perspective than- you know, a lot of people moved into Plainfield township and they moved into area, and had they known, they probably would not have done that. But, like I said, something was building for a long time. You know, I want to say that it’s unfortunate, and hopefully we’re able to rectify the situation, but this is a bad deal what’s happening right now, and it’s not going to get better unfortunately. DD: Is your connection with PFAS, then, mostly kinda through your family history and just being in the area for a long time? LC: I’ve also fished the Rogue River in 6 different decades now. So I’m a very– I’m an avid trout fisher and I’ve been involved with trying to limit it for a long time. We put- We are sorta affiliated with an organization that’s put close to 3 million dollars in working the watershed, just in the Rogue River, here, in the last 7 years. So we’ve been very aggressive in working to maintain that river and to improve it, not only for the common sense environmental aspects of it. It’s an economic engine, as well. So having a clean, chemical free trout stream [mumbling] within 10 miles of the major metropolitan area is a rare jewel in itself. DD: What concerns do you have about PFAS contamination moving forward? LC: That it’s going to continue to spread, and we have no idea where it’s going to go. We do not have detailed mapping [of] the geomorphology in layers below us. We don’t know where it’s going to end up. All we know is it’s going to keep spreading. We got plumes, now that we have an idea of where they’re coming from, but we don’t really have a specific idea- you know, a specific detail or facts to back any of that up, and the will to drill all those wells in all those locations at all those depths is– it’s an economic obstacle. So I don’t really find a way to address it. We are just trying to remediate the best we can at multiple spots. And the rest is just going 2 �to continue to evolve, and in a way, we don’t know what’s going to happen, nor do we really have the power to stop it at this point. Unfortunately. DD: (chuckles) Yeah. It doesn’t feel really good. LC: Well, but things like this have been occurring at different levels for a long time. That’s- You know, like I said, our family has been fighting ground water pollution since the early 60’s without much success. ButDD: How does that- I was going to say, how does that impact your perspective? [laughs] LC: Well, first off, I think it taught me that an individual does have some power in the world to try to effect change, and it’s our obligation to take that responsibility. I mean, it’s our world. Got generations coming after me and I don’t want it to be a worse place, I want it to be a better place. So, it’s really pretty simple. Make the place better for my kids and their kids and their kids. DD: Yeah. LC: Basic premises. DD: You make it sound simple. [laughs] LC: Well, sometimes it is. The problem is the real world is not simple. It’s not black and white. It’s all shades of gray and it’s a jumbled mess. DD: Well, seems like if you can hold on to that simple truth it might help a little bit. LC: Well, it- Yeah- When I get to hold onto my grandkids it makes it pretty clear. SoDD: Yeah, absolutely. I bet it does. Before we wrap up, is there anything else that you would want to add to that we haven’t touched on today, or anything you would want to go back to expand on. LC: Well, yeah, I’m not going to go into any hindsight at this point, but I think that it’s important for us as a community action group to try to make sure that Wolverine stays on their toes regarding their mediation that was promised at the tannery site, and to properly make sure that the House Street location is secured as best we can at this point, and that doesn’t include planting 10,000 trees on top. DD: You’re not a fan of the current proposal. [laughs] 3 �LC: No, actually. I read science. I understand science and I can read it and understand that- No, the hocus pocus doesn’t work, so– ‘Cause trees, they will actually accelerate movement of materials not slow it down. DD: And aren’t there currently quite a few trees on the site? LC: Yes, it is. Look at it right now. So, [laughter] I listen. You know, we weigh in. We want to do the right thing, so. DD: Yeah. LC: It’s best as it was recorded in the settlement. DD: Yeah. LC: So hold them to it. DD: I hope we can. LC: I do too, I do too. But like I said, it’s been– Over the decades, it’s been pretty inspiring to see the work that’s been done within the Rogue River watershed and in Plainfield Township, regarding the improvement of the river itself. I mean, it’s gone slow, but year by year it getsthe river improves and it’s getting better, and there’s more people getting involved in that work. So there’s definitely hope down the road, too. DD: What are some of the improvements that you’ve seen happening? LC: Well, I can tell you one specifically, actually- there’s two things specifically that our [?] limited chapter worked on– was first taking out the Rogue Creek dam, specifically behind the school there in the east side of town. And second where Reds on the River near used to sit, there was little Blakeslee Creek, and it used to run in when it came the river in 2011 and 2012. With all of the developments that were up above it and all the higher elevations, it would be solid mud coming down. And it took us a few years ,but there were 3 small cofferdams that we got taken out and we actually regraded it and actually reseeded it and got a lot of irrigationexcuse me, the erosion takes care of. So it’s no longer a huge mud source in the river. Again, the- what came from the tannery not going into the rivers is a blessing, and what used to come from the papermill in Childsdale not being in the rivers is a blessing as well, so it’s- those are a couple of the major things but it’s get- you know, and it’s individual property owner, you know? Somebody lives on the river and makes sure they got a setback of 20 feet from the river and not mowing all the way to the river. Simple things like that, not using the types- use a chemical that’s natural- use something that’s going to be beneficial to the river, not derogatory. Some– a lot of what people put on their lawns, it all ends up in the watershed. So it’s important for us as individuals to look at what we are doing to our lawns. I mean, you know what? And a 4 �few weeds are okay. You know, it’s not going to– and as a matter of fact a few dandelions are good for the bees really here. DD: Yeah. LC: So, there’s again, from a farming aspect, you can’t- to me, my yard is sterile. It’s a monoculture. It’s negative, it’s contrary to what nature wants to do and it’s artificially manufactured through the use of chemicals in most cases. So, I mean golf courses. Golf courses are highly manicured fields of weeds done in specific manners with specific chemicals. So. DD: Yeah. LC: But I think there’s still hope, let’s just- I would like to say the chemicals are not going to continue to spread but I think we are going to continue to discover that it continues to go wider and wider and hopefully the- we can impact the [?], at least, by knowing about it, we can hopefully prevent some people from tapping into that as they have not done, and past people weren’t so lucky to know what was there. But now at least we know it’s there and can make sure they’re not going to be pulling the drinking water from the groundwater there so that’s an improvement as well. DD: Yeah absolutely. Well, thank you so much Lance for taking the time to shareLC: Thanks. DD: your story todayLC: Good luck with the project. I think I’m- I know I’m [?] the archives in the school because I used to write for the [?] back in the day. DD: OhLC: I’m on record in there someplace. So. DD: Oh that’s great [laughs] LC: But thanks a lot. 5 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Living with PFAS Interviews Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Devasto, Danielle Description An account of the resource Beginning in 2021, the Living with PFAS interviews were recorded to gather the personal stories of individuals impacted by PFAS contamination. PFAS, or per- and polyflourinated substances, are a large group of human-made chemicals used widely since the 1940s to make coatings and products resistant to heat, oil, stains, grease, and water. They can be found in countless household items, including food packaging, non-stick cookware, stain-resistant furniture, and water-resistant clothing. These chemicals are often called “forever chemicals” because they do not break down easily, can move through soils and contaminate drinking water sources, and build up in animals, plants, and people. PFAS have been linked to increased incidences of various cancers, increased cholesterol, decreased fertility, birth defects, kidney and liver disease, and immune system suppression, and thyroid dysfunction. It is estimated that PFAS are in the drinking water of more than 200 million Americans (Andrews & Naidenko, 2020). In Michigan alone, over 280 sites have PFAS contamination exceeding maximum contamination levels for groundwater (MPART, 2024). Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-11 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf audio/mp3 Type The nature or genre of the resource Motion Picture Text Sound Language A language of the resource eng Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context PFAS0005 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Climie, Lance Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021-05-14 Title A name given to the resource Lance Climie, 2021 (Interview video and transcript) Description An account of the resource Lance Climie has lived in Plainfield Township, near Deenly, Michigan for nearly all his life. In his interview, he discusses his family history as fruit farmers and how Wolverien offered to spread free fertilizer, or "sludge" on the fields. Only recenlty have people realized that this sludge contained PFAS residue. Climie shares other stories about his grandfather and other farmers' knowledge of other chemical contaminants in the environment, as well as his own perspective from fishing on the Rogue River. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource DeVasto, Danielle (interviewer) Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Moving Image Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/516290f44ebb80dfc21b6a29c5948cc1.mp4 baf485936f0c641671916bc95b304ebc https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/90ad3f6ba6322588ccf7e474ef16ac32.pdf 92e5b6335948f8e007e8192f2702e78d PDF Text Text Living with PFAS Interviewee: Robert Delaney Interviewer: Dani DeVasto Date: August 1, 2025 Dani DeVasto (DD): All right, so I'm Dani DeVasto, and today, August 1st, 2025, I have the pleasure of chatting with Robert Delaney. Bob, can you, just to get us started, tell me a little bit about where you're from and where you currently live. Robert Delaney (RD) (00:00:39): Okay. I'm essentially from Michigan. My family moved quite a few times, but we were always within the state of Michigan. Most of my relatives were in the upper part of the lower Peninsula. Right now, we're living outside of outside of Lansing in a small village, small town called Potterville. DD (00:00:59): Alright. Thank you. How long have you been in the Lansing area? RD (00:01:06): Since 1979, I think. On and off we, we were a few years in France and a few years in, or one year in Colorado. Otherwise Michigan. DD (00:01:18): Okay. Bob, can you tell me a story about your experience with PFAS or PFAS in your community? RD (00:01:26): Sure. the PFAS my discovery of PFAS and what was happening in the state of Michigan and worldwide dramatically changed my career direction and my personal life really in many ways. And what happened was I was a project manager of the state's oversight of the US Air Force cleanup at the former Wurtsmith Air Force base that's up in Oscoda, Michigan. And it was a SAC base. In other words, it had the bombers that carried the nuclear weapons that were, well, the strategic bombers to protect us from nuclear war. They were a deterrent. Anyway, that that base closed in, I think it was 93, well, 95 might have been official year. And it was therefore part of the cleanup program for these major sites, it happened to be a Superfund site, EPA biggest site's most difficult ones that states weren't able to deal with on their own. And so I worked through a program where the Air Force paid for my services to help them follow our state laws as they cleaned up the project. And so during that time I oversaw the different technical consultants and all the, the grant work and all that. And, and handled the negotiations with the Air Force on this cleanup, well we were at the point where we had conquered, the Air Force had cleaned up, or we had a remedy in place for all what we consider the traditional contaminants, the chlorinated from the metals and oils and gasoline, that kind of stuff. We had, we've gone through virtually every site got have remedy in place. And I was starting to think about I need another, something else to work on. And I was praying in church one day and I said, God, I'd like to do something where I, I've never really used my intellect. This has been too easy. And and so I just, before I retired, I'd like to do something that really challenged me. Well, little did I know that within a month I would be down and at a conference and I would learn about PFAS chemicals, the firefighting foams the Air Force had well, the DOD had a, a session where they came in and told us about chemicals that were on the horizon of as potential problems. And it just so happened that while I was at that conference, my consultant calls me from Wurtsmith Air Force Base, and he says to me, we have this soil at at fire training area where we had been arguing with the Air �Force for years about the cleanup there. And they finally agreed to do what we told 'em they needed to do. And he calls and he says, Hey, they dug down in here 'cause they were installing the remedy. And he says There's a black soil horizon two foot down here. And that nobody told us, nobody knew anything about it. So that would change the potential for the effectiveness of the re remedy as is. And I said, okay, well grab three samples of this soil and send them to a lab and see if you can and analyze 'em for absolutely everything. 'cause We didn't know what they poured out there. And I said, and while you're at it, see if you can find a lab that can analyze for PFOA and PFOS. And so he said, so he found one in California and we sent it out to them. And it comes back with loaded with PFOS and PFOA, especially PFOS. 'cause It's a, it was a firefighting foam. And and I was surprised because they're essentially soaps, that's what they're used a lot as a soap. So I'm thinking they're, they should be all swept away outta that soil. And I won't get into the technical reason why they weren't, but they weren't all, there was a lot of 'em in that, those soil. So, so I said, well sample the groundwater. And then and then from this training I had gotten, I realized that there were all kinds of potential sources across the base. And so we started sampling across the base, all the surface waters soils. And every, absolutely every single sample came back with PFAS in it. Every one. I had never seen anything like it. And this is like four or five square miles of, of area that we're sampling and we're finding it everywhere. And we finally found one well, that didn't have any PFAS in it. DD (00:06:36): And did you decide to sample or test for it because of the conference? Or had you already started hearing about it before that conference? RD (00:06:43): I, I went back through my records and I had one message in 2008, two years earlier from a toxicologist that said you guys might think about PFOS or PFOA, you know this is something on the horizon. That was one of our lead toxicologists, but it wasn't on any of the stuff we worked on or knew and had no idea what it was. And at that point in time, there wasn't much literature even on it. And so I was shocked to find that we had, and I think we even mentioned it to the Air Force at the time, but I, it was just such a random thing. I totally slipped my mind. So it was because of that conference and just the uniqueness of the, the situation that we sampled for it. DD (00:07:26): And was it hard to find a lab at that time to test for it? Or was that not, RD (00:07:30): Well, I don't know. 'cause My tech, my my consultant does all the hard work. I just do the, you do this, you do that, and then he goes, do the hard, the hard work. DD (00:07:40): I see. Okay. RD (00:07:41): But yeah, it was, it was actually difficult because like, we went out the next year and sampled fish, and the only place that would analyze fish flesh was in Canada. So we had the whole cross border thing, and we had to figure out how to send a sample up there and stuff like that. So yeah. People weren't doing it. It was unusual. 'cause You know, there was no regulatory reason to sample for it. DD (00:08:06): Sure. So you started sampling and looking for it and finding it everywhere, except where you said one well, �RD (00:08:14): One, well, eventually we would find some other wells, you know? Yeah. That's just forest upgradient of the, of the Wurtsmith. So there, forest doesn't produce any PFAS. So it was yeah, it all came from, so it started at the base boundary, basically. DD (00:08:32): And what then? RD (00:08:34): Well this, the thing that really changed the direction was that my I went, I didn't know. I knew that these chemicals by this point were indestructible, essentially indestructible. And they also were ubiquitous. And so I went to our, went to the toxicologist in our department, the one that usually worked with me and asked him, can you come up with some criteria? Because that's how we operate. Something needs to have a criteria or some reason for you to try and regulate it. So he did a back of the envelope calculation, and he came up with a hundred parts per trillion as the cleanup, potential cleanup standard for PFOA and 60 parts per trillion for PFOS. Now, those words, those numbers, those words don't mean anything to anybody. But to me, in my line of work, if a contaminant was around a part per billion, which is a, an order of magni-, I don't wanna get into that too technical. But anyway, that's a lot, maybe a hundred times or a thousand times what we were eventually looking at for PFOS and PFOA as far as the criteria. So like, it's a thousand times maybe, or a hundred times higher. If I saw a chemical that was that bad, I thought, this is a really bad chemical. It's really dangerous. Then you back down into the parts per trillion. Well, there's only a few things that we worry about, you know, dioxins and mercury that we look at at that level. So here's a chemical that is on the level of a dioxin or mercury in people's systems. So that was pretty shocking. And then the kind of the weirdest other coincidence, there's a lot of weird coincidences. My son, we'd been told that they thought he was on the spectrum having Asperger's, and because of some of his and now he's, if he is, he's super high functioning. So, and I'm waiting until he becomes a billionaire, but he hasn't yet <laugh> Anyway. He so we my wife, you know, she's concerned and she knows that I want technical information. I do not want what some talking head says or whatever. I wanna understand something at a more base level. And so I started researching autism and what, how the brain worked and, and a lot of the things that go on, and it came to the realization that it was rising. And it's been rising since. Well, we know since 2000. So it's the last 25 years, it's gone up every year, the rate, and as I read about where autism was showing up, that, you know, I started realizing, okay, it's showing up in various areas in various subpopulations of the country at the same time, because my consultant had come to me and said, or my toxicologist had said, this contaminant is like super, super dangerous. And I said, okay, I've gotta go back to the military. We all think that we're almost done cleaning up Wurtsmith. Tens of millions of dollars have been spent, you know, 20 years or more have been spent on cleaning this place up. And I'm gonna have to go back and tell them that this is, we're just starting all over from scratch. So I didn't want to go to them. And <laugh>, I, I always joke, I always saw toxicologists as witch doctors. You know, when you want a criteria, they take some bones in the back room, throw 'em out on the floor, come up with a number and come out and tell you what that number is. And I'm a geologist, so I just follow whatever the toxicologist says. I had faith that they knew what they were doing. I'm just joking about the <laugh>, about them being witch doctors. But anyway, I decided, I want to know for sure if I, this is a dangerous chemical. Is this dangerous enough to go try and fight the Air Force? 'cause You, you know, you fight the Air Force, it's not a fair fight. So you had take it on with some, some intelligence. So I started doing a research on the toxicology of of PFOS and PFOA and the epidemiology. Where, where did it show up? What populations had higher concentrations? So as I'm reading these two sets of things, they're mirroring up. Like, autism was higher �in Minnesota. Well, who had the first widespread known PFOS contamination? It was Minnesota. And it's more common among rich people. Well, who gets new cars and new stuff, and it comes off electronics and stuff. Well, your carpets where they're covered in PFOS, your cookware, your fancy clothing, your floss, it's, and so the things that wealthy people did expose them more to PFOS than what the regular people did, you know? You go to Goodwill, that stuff's been washed outta that clothing by that time. You get it. And we don't change your carpeting probably as much. So anyway, then like, autism was higher among the military. Well, I already knew the military was drinking this stuff all over the place. Autism is higher in, along expressways within 300 feet of an expressway, or I think, no, 300 yards. I don't remember exactly. But if you look at where, where contamination non-point source contamination is, it's a lot of times along major freeways and stuff like that, because it's in diesel. There’s five systems in a, in a, in a diesel truck that de-gas. And, a lot of those fluids have PFOS in 'em. PFAS. So anyway, I'm getting, down rabbit holes. But, so anyway, I started thinking, well, maybe this is why autism's going up, because the use of this stuff has been going up dramatically through all this time. So I, I, there's, there's research being done on that now, but you know how it, is cause and effect, very hard to prove. So anyway, I just, for me, when I thought, oh my gosh. And I had, I was bouncing this off another one of our geniuses at the state, and I'm not kidding, he's a genius. And we were thinking, well, yeah, it's seemingly like this is the case. So anyway, I felt like literally I felt like I was standing at the edge of the abyss looking in that we were poisoning ourselves. And the more you read about diseases on the rise, the more you realize we're poisoning ourselves. And so to make a very long story short, <laugh>, I haven't made it short. But anyway that changed the, my motivation level to where I became super motivated that I had to do something about it. And it was not just deal with Air Force, but this was a, a reality that was way bigger than just the Air Force. And the Air Force and DOD actually proved to be a catalyst for people becoming aware of PFAS and, and the dangers. So it was really strategic. I was strategically placed because I was negotiating with the upper management of DOD on their environmental issues. And they were in a position to actually make a difference with our understanding of it and, and doing something about it. DD (00:16:59): Can you say more about how you, through DOD, were able to be a catalyst? RD (00:17:07): Sure. DD (00:17:07): From what you could see? RD (00:17:08): Okay. Well so, so many backstories. So anyway, I advised my management of, of this, at the end of 2010. I did a big slideshow, brought the toxicologists in and, and leaders of our division. And we went through all this. And then when this, and, and those were old time environmental leaders that were in that meeting, and they knew exactly what to do. 'cause They had already done the dioxins and the mercury and the variety of lead. And, and so they'd already gone through all this. And they recognized instantly the challenge that was there before us and what needed to be done. And so they set up immediate work group to work on on the toxicity and what we should be doing about these things. And we had some ideas. They were gonna test all the waters each year. The state tests a certain number of, of streams. So we were gonna do all this. And, and so there was, we, we started up gung-ho and then the Snyder administration came in and they stopped what the division and the department was doing. And and, and what they told what, I came back through the, through the grapevine. 'cause We asked our, our chairman chairperson of the group, why aren't we doing anything? Why aren't all these things we were supposed to do, we're not doing? And they said, well, the Snyder �administration had told our management is that if our management, DEQ's management, had made one more problem for business that we would be put outta business. And so obviously PFAS is a huge, huge problem for business. And not necessarily always because of their own fault. I mean, they didn't know, most of 'em didn't know. A few knew. So, so that kind of killed what was going on with the state, you know? Not until Rockford broke. Did, did anything happen with regard to PFOS, PFAS. But I was on these national committees working with the Department of Defense with EPA and with all the other states. And there I had carte blanche. My, I think my intermediate management said, yeah, you can go to any conference you want. You can speak to anything. They didn't say this to me personally, but every time I asked for, can I go do this, can I do that? They said, yeah. And so I went out and I would just tell the story of Wurtsmith, you know, and what was happening there. I didn't get into the toxicology or what I thought, you know, how bad it was or anything that, but and I, I talked to, well, in 2012, it was in Salt Lake City. RD (00:20:03): I told, told the defense department, they asked me to talk about contracting. And I said, well, you got a problem with your contracting. Because they were going to a method where you pay somebody to clean up a whole site and whatever was on that site, they were gonna clean it up. And they had to give you a price up front. The contractors had to say, alright, this is how much we're gonna do to clean this up. I said, you, you, yeah, you, there's a couple of problems with that. But anyway, they're gonna clean this up, but they don't know about PFAS or PFOS. And when the regulators come and say, Hey, you've got a problem, then there's no way they're going to have accounted for that in their costs. There's no way. 'cause It's about impossible to get rid of. It's terribly costly. So I said, so this is the demon in the closet, PFOS, PFAS, it's going to screw up your relationships, your, your contracting. RD (00:20:59): And it was from that point forward that I, I just started building, you know, building coalitions or you know, network of people that we were all concerned about it. And we, I, I you know, did issue papers for ASTSWMO, Association of State Waste and Manage Waste Management Operators. So it's a state organization that works with all the different states. That's where I was on the committees. Well, one of the places I was on the National committees was them. And so I would just go and I would just tell the story and you know, and find labs that I could work with and just people all over. And I got relationships with the media so I could feed the, you know, like InsideEPA from Washington would call me all the time to ask me what was going on with PFAS, PFOA. And so I was able to influence the nation and then within EGLE, or now called EGLE. But it was the Department of Environmental Quality at the time within that group, you know, all those peons, we all really cared about the people and the environment. And so, you know, word got out amongst us. And so when the Rockford thing broke, there were people that were already, were already knowledgeable about what was going on. DD (00:22:23): So you had initially been worried that bringing that information to the DOD about, Hey, we just finished cleaning up, but I just found this new thing that you need to think about. You were concerned. But it sounds like they, they kind of went with it, or No? How did they receive that information? RD (00:22:48): Well, it's the federal government. So <laugh>, what up here starts out as a shout, do this. And what actually gets at the bottom is two different things. Like they, the people at the bottom have no idea what's going on. You know, what the management really wants. And the people at the bottom can be shouting, and it gets muffled by the time it gets to the top. So, so there was this weird, I, because I was in acting at both levels, I could see the dynamic. So the person that was in charge of, at Wurtsmith, �he was anti-environmental. Anything environmental was bad in his worldview. And so they would do, they were doing nothing. And I knew they would do nothing. But what happened was we we went out and sampled the fish, like I mentioned, well, we sampled them in the AuSable River. And when we sampled in the AuSable River, the day that the data came back from the labs, this Canadian, this Canadian lab, the health department made an or, an order do not eat the fish in the AuSable River. Okay. So that had political resonance. Yeah. Is that right? All the way up to Washington. Suddenly Washington had a big PR crisis on their hands. And so they brought in outside people to deal with the situation and stuff. And so there was actually immediate action to control the contamination off that fire training area. And they built really the first DOD treatment system for PFOS or PFAS, anywhere that they had. and so, it was, so it just then, you know, just more and more information coming out, more of the waters are impacted people's drinking water's impacted, the on base water system was impacted. Uh, they, it became a political thing for both our state, you know, the governor's office and for DOD. And so that's why there was movement down at the bottom. There would never have been movement based, you know, from the, the local, local group. And so that's what I meant when it came to negotiating with those people. They, they, they are a law unto themselves at times when it comes to, what the president say. Well, I didn't hear it. You know? And, and so there's a kind of a weird dynamic, politically with the DOD. DD (00:25:43): Sure. And then you said too, that at that time, under Governor Snyder's administration, the state was also not pursuing... RD (00:25:55): Well, let's see...Well Snyder didn't come along until, well, he came along around. Yeah, that's true. He we were working on it. And, and Snyder administration, you know, they weren't stopping us from like we couldn't create criteria, or we couldn't, you know, start enforcing against anybody else. But they didn't care what we did to DOD essentially. So we were out pushing DOD, and and they were under Superfund. So Superfund doesn't necessarily need our criteria. Fortunately we didn't get surface water criteria long before we got a drinking water criteria. So we were, we were pushing that at 'em. 'cause They had a surface water, Because the treatment plants, they could regulate them under a different set of laws than what we were operating. Anyway, it was all lots of maneuvering. It was like I had a, when I wanted an intellectual challenge, that was it. I mean, they had to understand law toxicology, epidemiology to be able to talk to all these people. So, DD (00:27:04): Yeah. Can you tell me about the Delaney paper? I heard you wrote a paper. RD (00:27:12): Yeah. Myself and Richard DeGrandchamp professor out at Colorado University of Colorado. And that has another crazy backstory. But I, my, so I knew that PFOS what PFAS was a problem. 'cause My toxicologist had given me those criteria, and I'd started doing my own research. Okay. But my, my toxicologist was swamped. They were re-writing criteria and doing all kinds of things, and he just said, I, I can't support you. And the weirdest thing happened, another weird coincidence, but one day, one of the unit chiefs from the Superfund section comes over to me with a thing that had come across the fax machine. Somebody had done one of those, grab a fax numbers from all governmental offices and fax out an advertisement. And what it was, was a this toxicologist Richard DeGrandchamp was advertising, and they did, he did epidemiological and toxicological not studies, but research and what he did a lot was going, going to court as expert witnesses. So anyway, this, he was doing it on PCBs, and I think dioxins those two things. And she, so she brings it over to me, this unit chief, and says, well, you know, you might, you might be interested in this. And and so I say, oh, yeah, it sounds like it might be something interesting. Maybe this person can do some work �on PFAS. So I told my contractor, contact this contractor and subcontract him so we can, we can get to his expertise. And so we got him, and I remember meeting him at the airport, and he was just a, he was a classic professor type, corduroy coat, hat. And it was just all, it was just classic Indiana Jones. I kind of, all I thought of at the time. So he shows up and brilliant, brilliant man. And I have funny stories about him, if you ever want to hear any <laugh>. But he's a, he's a brilliant man and conscientious. And so I told him we, I got this problem. I got this PFAS stuff in the groundwater and the soils up at Wurtsmith. And I don't know if it's really dangerous or not. I didn't tell him that. I suspected it was super dangerous, that I had been doing the research. And and very much convinced that this was a, a very, very dangerous chemical. So I just say, will you go out, do the research, come back and advise me on what we should be doing about this? So he comes back to me and he tells me that this is really, really bad stuff. And he said, the studies in, West Virginia, Ohio area are, the gold standard for studies. You can't do a better study than this. And they say that this stuff is really dangerous, and, you know, it's almost better stuff than what the cigarette industry or the cigarettes were, you know, is that it was really good, good data and good information. So I say, okay, well, well, anyway, so that gave me direction on how to go with pursuing the, the military. But we had a new director come in. And the new director, it was funny, he, this is under Snyder, so this new director comes in, and he really wasn't, and he wasn't, didn't know much about environment. He was quite honest. He didn't know about, the environment. Uh, this is Dan Wyant. And he said he wanted to meet all of his 3000 employees, I think that was, so he had these meetings where you got to stand up and you had five minutes or something like that to tell him what you thought he should be working on or any, you could tell him anything. And he said, you could even tell him he didn't know what he was doing. So when it came my turn, I think I was the only state employee to do this, but I stood up and said, you don't know what you're doing. And then I launched into PFAS and PFOA See, in 2009 the European Union had already begun to regulate this stuff. And my director had never even heard of it. So this is 2011. My director hasn't heard of this, these chemicals, and yet they're that critical. Maybe it was 2012, I can't remember exactly what the date was. So I say to him, I'm gonna write you a report. And so I got myself and Richard DeGrandchamp wrote the, I think it was 95 pages. There's 96 page report on PFAS and PFOA, talking about the dangers, its distribution, its history. And one chapter, which turned out to be particularly inspired was what, what can the department do to address this? So it was, it was pretty, it was actually pretty funny. 'cause I always thought, well, I heard that. Don't bring a problem to your boss unless you got a solution. So this was a throw in, throw, throw in a chapter. I was just off the top of my head stuff, well, this is what we could do. We do this, we could do this, you know, or we should do. I never said we could. I said, we should do this. You know? And later that would be the kind of outline of what the state did. So it was kind of funny 'cause it was just off the top of my head to try and not, not do a faux pas and bring a problem without a solution. DD (00:33:21): I was impressed by that chapter or that part of the paper when I was reading through it. I was like, oh, they actually offered, like, some steps forward and some like very reasonable things. Like next steps. So I was very impressed when I read that part of it. RD (00:33:38): Yeah. That was the, that was the easiest part to read, write. 'cause I didn't have to really think hard. It just <laugh>. It just flowed. So it was funny. DD (00:33:45): And how, so once you had that paper written, how was it received? RD (00:33:50): Well I mean, it was received well, I, I had I had a good friend that was advising the, the director. And he was on, he was one of the, he and myself and the director had all met together. He, he �myself and another fellow that I have a lot of respect for was there as well. I can't remember his name. But anyway, they they received it well. The director was fairly interested in the autism thing. I hadn't mentioned autism, but he had ridden with my student assistant somewhere. And my student assistant was talking to him about autism and the link. I really didn't wanna talk about that 'cause I was a geologist. And this autism thing is just my, my my thing. I put it out on the web because I wanted to provoke conversation. So so anyway I didn't find out until later, but they distributed about 20 copies to other leaders in the, in the department. So, but that was in 2012. And it got lost after that. DD (00:34:58): Mm. Why do you think? RD (00:35:02): Well, it was, it was huge. And I mean, to me, it was like, to me, it radically changed my whole view of what we'd been doing. I thought that America had been making advances on contaminants that we had stopped putting out, you know, TSCA, RCRA ,all designed to stop us from doing this. And then I realized at that time that those, those were mirages, those were not doing, protecting us, that we were creating new problems. 'cause I thought, oh, we've stopped making new problems, and so suddenly here's a problem that is so huge that it's mind boggling trying to address it. And mostly, like a lot of reasons the DOD went and did some pretty positive things is they didn't realize how big it was and how expensive it was going to be. When it started dawning on them, how incredibly expensive and difficult this was. That's when you finally got push back at the top levels. Before that they were, they're most of the people, what, contrary to everybody's opinion nowadays, are really decent human beings. I mean, they're Americans. They're not like, they're not crazy people. They're Americans. They are honestly decent human beings. And yes, there are some bad ones up there, but wherever there's power or money, there will be bad people. You can't help that. But there were a lot of great people out there, and they wanted, like, one of the things I said in that 2012 meeting was I said, look, you guys have the young people in your ranks, the people that are gonna be having babies. It is critical for you to go out and find out and, and I didn't do it quite this dramatically, but it is critical for you to go out and find out if your people are drinking this water. So they literally went all around the globe and sampled every water supply that they had at their bases. And that becomes key at what happens in Rockford. And, and so if we get to Rockford, I'll tell you how, that became a key thing that made Rockford happen. DD (00:37:17): Can you just clarify one point, you said you put it out on the web, was that the autism information. Like did you have your own like, website or what? RD (00:37:27): The other person that I was working with is I'll just say Mark for right now 'cause I know if he wants his name out there. But Mark had a, a website for his business. And so we quick put it onto his business website, and for awhile it was the number one you put in PFAS and autism, it would be the number one paper that popped up. But, now, I don't know if you'd ever find it again, but still out there I think. DD (00:37:56): Wow. Thanks for that clarification. Okay. So how, so you're, you know, you're, sounds like you're working nationally. You're kind of, you've got kind of that perhaps unofficial carte blanche to do these conferences. Meanwhile, the state at some points is not really embracing this... RD (00:38:18): I gotta say like the health department was, and the surface water people, they were still going out and sampling fish. And they're still sampling the surface waters. So there was work being done at all the Defense department sites. So we're gathering information and there's this little pool of �information that's growing. But yeah, the department itself is, it's you know, we'd rather sweep this one under the rug. DD (00:38:43): So then how did you get connected in, or how did this get connected in with Rockford? RD (00:38:52): Oh, well, that is a, that I, I, like I mentioned in 2012, I had spoken, there was both, it was an Air force and Army conference, environmental conference with a small, um or they called it a summit. And I gave my little spiel and I told them, you guys, you know, you got these young people, you gotta go out and sample your water to make sure they're not drinking this stuff. So they literally, they didn't, they didn't check with me, but they went ahead and did that. And so they're sampling all around the globe. And that's where you, you find that suddenly the military has all these sites. And they were always mad and rightfully so. 'cause Everybody was saying, oh, the military's so horrible. They've contaminated everything. Well, the only difference was they sampled for it, nobody else did. So that, you know, they were really doing a great thing. Opening up the reality that this is super widespread problem. But, you know, they got whacked for, for doing it. But one of the last rounds they did were all these low risk sites. And it so happened that in Rockford there was a a facility that they had purchased, and its only function was to provide a place for the band to practice. Okay. And they never operated anything there. It was and they hadn't bought it that long ago. Well, when they sampled that water, it came back highly contaminated with PFOS, PFAS. And so they started investigating, you know, how is this possible? We know we didn't do this. You know, they reported it to the EGLE, the DEQ, whatever they were called then. And, and it, so that pointed back to, well, they were, they did weird things. The department, the, the people, first of all, the people that were responsible for doing the sampling, they, we don't know why, but they sampled down gradient instead of upgrade, or No, they sample, what did they do? They sampled either cross gradient or something to the groundwater flow. And then they didn't detect anything. And so they were trying to write it off as something, I don't know what, you know, nobody knows the full story of what was going going on with them. But anyway, they got called out eventually. 'cause They sampled, the, I don't know how it got tied back to the, the tannery, but it just, the investigation, I guess eventually got it back to the tannery. And, so it was because of that, because they found this high levels of contamination from a DOD site. And they know they hadn't done it that eventually was found out it was the tannery. And, and the other side note is that there's a friend, Janice, that had called me from, in 2000, I think it was 2011, that's when the emails are from, she called me and was talking to me about, contamination at the tannery. And I told her at the time, the thing that I said, she was worried about heavy metals because in tanning they used heavy metals. But, I said, wait, at the time, I said, well, you should have, you should be checking into PFAS. Because I had lived in Rockford, I knew about the tannery, and I knew they used Scotchgard on, on those shoes. And so, and the water tasted horrible. So <laugh>. Anyway, I told Janice, you guys need to be looking into the PFAS and see if they used Scotchgard and stuff. And so as Janice went through all the, all the files, from the tannery, she found evidence that they were using Scotchgard. And so, they were working from that end of things, from the public, trying to bring EPA in and, and various other things. You probably know Janice's story better than I do now. But, so those, those were the two things that were brought it together, DOD's discovery and, and that that group, fighting to have the place, that cleaned up properly. DD (00:43:32): And you knew that Scotchgard at that point had PFAS in it. RD (00:43:36): Yeah. In fact, in all my slideshows, when I talk about what, what's it in, Scotchgard is mentioned. �DD (00:43:42): Wow. That seems like two really lucky breaks in terms of putting that together. Right? Like these low risk band practice site, and, you know, Janice happens to contact you. Those are really tenuous threads RD (00:44:03): There are and as I've mentioned to you I have had a couple of supernatural experiences in my life. And this in total felt like one string of miracles. I mean, and I know I'm a scientist. Okay. I'm, I'm a I'm a skeptical personality type, and I don't expect anybody to believe it. But to me, the things that happened literally at, when I was sitting with upper management in our work groups at EGLE, and we were discussing, you know, we're gonna go out and sample all the water and all the systems in Michigan, I'm sitting here pinching myself. Like, this is unbelievable. This is like, I can't believe this is like a miracle. I never, I never thought in the world I could get, I would get them to do anything. You know, because the of the business angle, and if it hadn't been for Flint, Flint was also critical to what happened in PFAS because the, the, the governor could no longer look like he was ignoring environmental problems. He just didn't, he didn't, couldn't risk that. And so there was no political way of stopping what was going on. And so yeah, it was just crazy stuff just went on that, you know, when I was looking at that abyss, I was looking at it from the standpoint of there's a horrendous problem out here, and there is no way in the world it's ever gonna get addressed because we're going so far away. Even back then towards in the environment, it was, it was already an obvious thing that we were tired of caring about environmental things that was causing us problems with jobs or whatever. So I was thinking, there is no way we're gonna take on this. Like we took on the dioxins and, and the, and the lead and the mercury. And so to see what happened was, has been just amazing. DD (00:46:07): It sounds like your whole world became, at least work world became RD (00:46:10): Yeah. DD (00:46:11): PFAS RD (00:46:12): Yeah, I was just thinking this morning, my mom was the second one of the second leading experts on PFAS in Michigan. 'cause She would sit and listen to me when I ranted on and on about it. <Laugh> <laugh>. So yeah, it was, it, it became very very dominating in my life. DD (00:46:29): What what if any concerns do you have about PFAS now moving forward? RD (00:46:35): Well that, that anti-environmental spirit that has now gripped our nation, a lot of our nation is PFAS isn't the only environmental problem. We have so many diseases that are arising, not just autism and a lot of the autoimmune diseases, thyroid disease childhood cancers and diabetes. There are so many things hitting us all at once. And so it's not because we're all eating at McDonald's or some fast food place, that's not what's doing it because this is happening in other places around the globe that they don't have the same cultural behaviors that we do, and the same foods. And yet you'll find autism raising in you know, China and, and other places that don't, don't do what we do. And so there has to be an explanation for what's causing these real rates. Not just population trend changes. Like, you know, a lot of us are getting dementia while we're all getting older. The population get older. You expect dementia to increase, but you don't expect childhood cancers leukemia or something like that to increase. They're the same age, you know? So there are environmental things that are impacting us. And I've already, I've already seen rumblings of the Trump administration lowering the standards on, on �PFAS. And I don't, I haven't been able to verify this 'cause they just saw it yesterday. But there's even a move to to allow PFAS contaminated sludges from municipalities to be spread in farmland when they were trying, the Biden administration just apparently passed something that said, you can't put PFAS contaminated sludges on land, on farmland. And, you know, there's a, there's a business reason why, you know, tax and business reason to put that stuff on the land. RD (00:48:55): And that, again, I don't want to use this as a, a pun or whatever, but that's, that trumps protecting people's health right now at, at almost every turn. If it's perceived as bad for business, bad for American economy, real or not real. It is, is under attack. And so I see you know, I <laugh> it's almost suicidal. If people understood they were killing their children and their grandchildren, then I don't think this would be happening. Because like I say, I don't know if we can afford to clean up PFAS and stop it from getting into us, but I do know we cannot afford to poison our children. If you're doing your economic analysis, then what is the price of our children? What's their worth? So to me, it's mind boggling where we're at. So Yeah. I'm concerned. DD (00:50:04): Yeah. Sobering. RD (00:50:06): Yeah. Yep. DD (00:50:09): To say the least. Is there anything that you would want to add that we haven't touched on today or that you would want to go back to and say more about? Anything that's kind of bubbled up since we've been talking? RD (00:50:32): You know, the only thing I thought about is like what you're doing and what one of the things that was remarkable to me about the American system was the power of the media. You know, for all the garbage that the media puts out, they're also totally instrumental in counteracting the lies and the nonsense. If you want to know the truth, it's out there. And a lot of why I didn't get touch into what the media did with regard to helping the story here in Michigan and how they were so instrumental in, in in getting the, getting public awareness out there and making it impossible for the politicians to ignore. They were just so critical. And so it was, it was, it was great to see, you know, we had, we do have some important political and social things that have helped us. And that's what I'm more, almost more afraid of losing in this country now, is that with all the pressures that are going on towards I don't even blame people for being so thoroughly confused about what's true, but, but it is a scary thing. DD (00:51:53): Do you want to say anything more about media and PFAS and if you have any part of that story or...? RD (00:52:02): Well I'll tell you, there was a couple of people and that were critical. Garret Ellison and oh, drawing a blank on his name. This is a sign of old age. Steve Gruber Steve Gruber, he got me onto his show. When I broke the story, I think that's probably something I'd like to tell about is the, how, how Michigan actually became a leader nationally on PFAS and PFOA. And this is another one of those really crazy stories, but in the, in the Flint situation where they had the drinking water problem with the lead, and it was, it was caused by a bad decision to change water sources. There was a state employee that came to management and said, look at if we switch this water source from from Detroit to, or no, from whatever they were using in Flint to the Detroit water system, what's gonna happen is lead is gonna leach into the water. He told him, flat out, it's gonna be in everybody's water. That person was actually indicted by the Attorney General of Michigan, Bill Schuette. 'cause He, he needs to, he needs to hang or �not hang that this needs to be hung on him, that this, you did this. But he went after this this employee that was trying to warn people. And it, it was because his theory, from what I understand, was go after the little people and they will give you the big, big, big fish, which was John or not was Governor Snyder. 'cause He wanted Governor Snyder's job, basically. I guess. So he goes after all these small fry at the state and wrecks careers, hurts their lives, their families, all this because he wants to be governor, not because he wants the truth. So I was driving down the road one day when Rockford had broke. It was out in the news they'd find, they find the contamination all over the place. And I thought to myself, out of the blue, well, who knew about this first? Me. They're gonna go after me. And so I so I called my friend who's an attorney, and I say, Hey, can I meet with you? And we get together and I explain the situation. I explain why I'm concerned that I will be the next victim of this, this political war. And he takes my report home. 'cause I said, look it, I gave this report in 2012 to, to management. And he reads the thing and he comes back and, you know, after he's read it, the guy could read awfully fast, apparently. Anyway. And, you know, he's just really, he's blown away by it. And he, and so, so this is the amazing thing, Steve. This was on Wednesday. It turns out that Steve Gruber on his radio program here in Lansing, a talk radio in the morning. And he was talking on Thursday about what was happening in Rockford. And he's familiar with the Flint situation. And he says, somebody at DEQ had to know that this was out there. That this was a problem. And that's where I found out about the 20 copies that had been spread around. That somebody had read my report that was driving in to work at the state and they heard Gruber say this. And they call in and say, yeah, I saw this report report from this DeGrandchamp guy or whatever. And on Friday morning, Gruber is reading my report on the radio. This is a, I mean, that's how crazy this is. So Wednesday, Thursday, Friday. DD (00:56:17): Are you hearing this on the radio? RD (00:56:19): No, I didn't know anything about this. This is, this is this is just, this is what's so funny. So I, and I don't know how, I don't know how my attorney found out. My attorney found, my attorney turned out to be friends with Gruber. Okay. So another weird connection. But, so my attorney has this contact in the attorney general's office. And so he contacts this Attorney general and says, Hey, I got this guy that knows all about this PFAS stuff, and he's willing to come in and talk to you and give you everything he's got for immunity. So, well, Sunday or Monday, Sunday I think it is, I, we get back an offer from the Attorney General's office. And what they offered me was the deal they offer to mobsters, if you, we will, we will not con not prosecute you if you tell us every bad thing you did and everything, all your information, and if you hold anything back, we can come after you for that. Okay. So there's assumption that I did something wrong or bad in this and that. And so I said, I'm not signing that. So my attorney gets together with some some judges and some other attorneys. We all meet together on Monday evening and the decision is made that I need to get my story out before the attorney general comes after me 'cause then there's a, like gag order on you and whatever. And so that's where it comes out to me that Gruber has been talking about me and <laugh>. And so they set up an interview for Wednesday morning. So this is within a week. Wednesday morning I go on, I take time off from work, get it cleared so I can't get me for moonlighting or whatever. I don't know. Anyway, so I go on radio and we talk for two hours about the report and, and stuff. And you know, other co coworkers or people in the governor's office driving in listening to Gruber, hear my, what I'm saying on, on the radio about Yeah, they knew about it in 2012. And you know, this is the report. And, and so many of the questions you asked that kind of stuff too, was being asked. RD (00:58:37): And so it was really a tremendous relief to me because I felt like I've got all the, I'm so concerned about this stuff and I can't get the communication out. And so from there as one person said, �well, your attorneys made you prosecution proof that nobody can come after you. And but anyways, really, I knew I didn't really want to do it because, you know, it would be perceived as betrayal to the department. And, and so my career got, got whacked. But the nice thing about civil services, they can't fire you for telling the truth. Or they might be able to, but they're not supposed to <laugh>. So I, I knew they could make my my life miserable, but firing me would've been a, was a huge problem. Yeah. So they did make it kind of uncomfortable, but other than that, it wasn't bad. DD (00:59:29): That sounds like a really stressful week-ish. RD (00:59:33): I was under well on the stress belt too. Because you know, I no longer, well, I know I no long, I always felt like I was part of a team. And and that of course had been breaking down because of our division was headed in all the wrong direction. But then it got really bad. So they had one other person supposed to be spying on me, and all this other junk was going on. So it was stressful. But every morning I'd get up and I have my quiet time and I, I survived it all. My doctor gave me some pills to keep my blood pressure down. DD (01:00:15): And then from that point on was, I know you're saying the department was changing and like your role changed and things like that. So then was PFAS less a part of your life and your work? RD (01:00:32): You know what, well, what happened was the Air Force went after me trying to get me fired. And my division chief, she at one point was trying to get me fired. And and what they were doing was micromanaging me and they were making it so I couldn't give my, I give instructions to my my consultants. My consultants wouldn't do anything. And then they put another person that was supposed to be helping me, but rather was the one that was truly being made the project manager. 'cause They couldn't really take me off the site. They couldn't make it look like they were punishing me or anything. So they left me in position, but then took, stripped my abilities to do anything. And wasted my time basically. But I kept working on the outside on, on the issues, so DD (01:01:28): Yeah. Are you still working outside? I know you're retired now, but, RD (01:01:34): Well, I did a lot of volunteer work, but because of family issues I had been pulling away and just too much stress. So I have pulling away from doing much of anything anymore right now. So, but I was doing a lot of consulting on the side for, for free. You know, I was just helping out with the communities and still those kind of things, but I'm pretty tired. DD (01:02:05): You wanted to use your intellect... RD (01:02:08): Yeah. <Laugh> I did. Yeah. DD (01:02:10): Oh my goodness. Okay. I'll ask it again. Is there anything else that you wanna add or go back to before we wrap up? RD (01:02:19): There's a lot of wonderful people out there in the world. A lot of great people. I wish Americans could realize that even the people on the other side are not such bad people. But that's, that's relates to everything, not just PFAS. DD (01:02:35): Well, thank you so much, Bob, for taking the time to share your story with me today. �RD (01:02:40): Oh, it was a pleasure. I haven't thought about it much lately, but it was fun. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Living with PFAS Interviews Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Devasto, Danielle Description An account of the resource Beginning in 2021, the Living with PFAS interviews were recorded to gather the personal stories of individuals impacted by PFAS contamination. PFAS, or per- and polyflourinated substances, are a large group of human-made chemicals used widely since the 1940s to make coatings and products resistant to heat, oil, stains, grease, and water. They can be found in countless household items, including food packaging, non-stick cookware, stain-resistant furniture, and water-resistant clothing. These chemicals are often called “forever chemicals” because they do not break down easily, can move through soils and contaminate drinking water sources, and build up in animals, plants, and people. PFAS have been linked to increased incidences of various cancers, increased cholesterol, decreased fertility, birth defects, kidney and liver disease, and immune system suppression, and thyroid dysfunction. It is estimated that PFAS are in the drinking water of more than 200 million Americans (Andrews & Naidenko, 2020). In Michigan alone, over 280 sites have PFAS contamination exceeding maximum contamination levels for groundwater (MPART, 2024). Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-11 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf audio/mp3 Type The nature or genre of the resource Motion Picture Text Sound Language A language of the resource eng Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context PFAS0040 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Delaney, Robert Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2025-08-01 Title A name given to the resource Robert Delaney, 2025 (Interview video and transcript) Description An account of the resource Robert Delaney, a former Michigan Department of Environmental Quality project manager, became one of the first in the state to identify and investigate widespread PFAS contamination. His work at Wurtsmith Air Force Base in Oscoda and later statewide helped bring public, governmental, and national attention to PFAS risks, despite facing political pushback. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource DeVasto, Danielle (interviewer) Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Moving Image Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/29e74ae2cbcbbd32c0975fb437c08e2e.mp4 0bf5e3bef3799a6a1622dc00e27a71cf https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/8ded1b5182f5895b2e11bd487afe22af.pdf 87dbf7a9b54bb397a7a7588c9d61781a PDF Text Text Living with PFAS Interviewee: Emily Donovan Interviewer: Dani DeVasto Date: June 18, 2021 DD: I’m Dani De Vasto and today June 18, 2021 I have the pleasure of chatting with Emily Donovan, hi Emily. ED: Hi. DD: Emily can you tell me about where you’re from and where you currently live. ED: Yeah, so I am originally from South Carolina. I'm currently living in North Carolina and I’ve been a resident of North Carolina for, little over half my life now. I live in Brunswick county, so I live in a town, Leland, we’re right outside of Wilmington. And we’ve been here for going on almost twelve–over twelve years now. DD: Ok, Emily can you please tell me a story about your experience with PFAS or with PFAS in your community? ED: Yeah, so three years after moving to this area my husband started losing his eyesight and we didn’t know what was happening. We were terrified, we thought he was going to go blind. He had an MRI and this was around our ten year anniversary because he did the MRI and then we went on vacation, and I just remember that experience as having this kind of dark cloud looming over us. We get back and we find out that he had a brain tumor and it needed to be removed immediately or he would lose his vision permanently. So we did all the things, found a really amazing neurosurgeon, got the tumor removed and miraculously his vision was fully restored. We met with the surgeon six months after the surgery and the surgeon just looked at us–and this was literally the world's best skull based neurosurgeon, he was from Japan and had a teaching facility at Duke university, and he looks at us, and he’s like I’m good but I’m not that good. [Chuckles] That is–that is God and I had always kept that memory. I mean it was a very traumatic experience for our family but at the same time, just remembered that miracle because you hear about them but you don’t ever feel like you–would you recognize one if it happened to you. So that happened and then we fast forward to 2017 which was probably five years maybe six years later and I wake up and–actually it was in June, and so wake up to a news story that there’s a chemical plant upstream of Wilmington and they’ve been dumping large quantities of PFAS into the Cape Fear River, which it turns out is our drinking water supply. I didn’t know any of this so I start doing all of this research and like everyone else in our community, we're scrambling and we’re pulling together and we’re sharing information, and we’re reaching out to scientists. And I can’t help but wonder if what caused my husband's brain tumor was tied to these industrial chemicals that have no business being in tap but were in our tap water. And not just in questionable amounts these are insanely large amounts. I think a scientist did a study of a sample that he had taken in 2014 at the–the kind of the height of the contamination and one hundred and thirty thousand parts per trillion was recorded. It’s still questionable in my mind, it's 1 �unclear, was that just the PFAS’s that he could detect with where science is at right now, because the one thing that we are learning too, is that these labs can’t fully detect all of the PFAS, because they don’t have analytical standards for them. So there’s still this question mark of how much we were exposed to. It also was–it also started coming more into focus you know not just of what happened to my husband but, you know, my daughter’s childhood best friend. Her mother had breast cancer, at a very young age. She was in the military and then lived in this area. Her parents both developed rare blood cancers or diseases within months of each of other, and we were all living in the same neighborhood. And then I at the time was a youth director at a very small church and in our program I would you know end every evening that we met with prayer requests, and I just started realizing that we were praying for some very serious problems in these teenagers' lives. A father who had terminal brain cancer, bone and brain cancer. A mother who had colon cancer. A sister or a brother who had intestinal disorder and was so severe that he was hospitalized. So there was just all of these things, there was a kid in my youth group who didn’t even know his mother because she died of breast cancer before he was–right when he was born and so you know I just started looking around and this seems like too much disease, too much illness. I didn’t even have to go outside my inner circle to hear stories. And that just kind of resonated with me and furthered solidified that something needed to be done. Someone needs to speak up, so I helped–I was part of a group that formed in our region called Clean Cape Fear and we are a grass roots all volunteer coalition and we have just focused on trying to hold elected leaders, government bodies, and pretty much everyone including ourselves accountable. With a focus on making sure the polluter pays, and in this case the chemical company was DuPont which then spun off to Chemours. DD: And how is that work going? ED: It's been a really interesting journey, and I think–I feel like things are going good but you know I have very high standards of what I think a resolution should be. I think, you know, in a perfect world this chemical company, regardless of its name, should be making communities whole again. For the devastation and harm they caused, and we still don’t have safe drinking water. My tap water, our utilities, still record some of the highest levels of PFAS in the finished water that comes out of my tap, in the nation. But my work, what I’ve done is, I’ve testified before Congress twice. I testified in August of 2018 and then again in July of 2019. I organized to bring community members with me in July 2019 and meet with representatives, and that was a really positive experience. The community members that came convinced our local congressional representatives to cosponser the PFAS Action Act and make it a bipartisan bill. I know they weren’t the only ones that made it a bipartisan bill there were others, but that was positive to see that happen. We also, when we formed Clean Cap Fear, we–the first thing we did was host the first ever public forum on GenX. Because GenX is what was in the news it was supposed to be the PFOA [Perfluorooctanoic Acid] replacement. So everyone’s like what’s GenX and then we come to find out that really it’s not just GenX but it's all PFAS. So I think one positive thing that my group has done is we’ve shifted the focus away from a chemical by chemical approach and we’ve changed the narrative to let's talk about this class of chemistry. We really worked hard and intentional to do that. We noticed early on, one of the things when we sat around this dinning room table and were figuring out what we needed to do as a community. We realized that information was important and getting accurate information, that the chemical industry for–not just the chemical industry, but industry in general has a play book. We see it 2 �with tobacco and we see it with oil and gas and the same thing is happening with these chemicals, is that they play this game of hiding the information and making–casting doubt and making it really difficult for communities to advocate for themselves so we felt it was important to really bridge that gap of reliable information and so we focused on having public forums because there was so much silence and confusion and a lot of misinformation getting spread online, and we’re like let’s get scientists in front. Let's get scientists and medical experts, let's get the experts in front of the community and have some good conversations, and that's exactly what we did and in fact this is the–last week was the four year anniversary of our first public forum on GenX. So I don’t know, I mean obviously I don’t know if other forums were happening around the world in GenX, but I would like to think we were the first ever globally [laughter] on GenX. But it was a powerful standing room only event. DD: Wow. ED: And from that we had a second event and our second event was focused on equity and making sure this–that the information was communicated to all communities. Communities of color, low income communities, communities with English as a second language, and so we brought in a lot of nonprofits on our second forum and we made sure that everyone was networking and working together. That public officials, that the water utilities were working with the homeless community to just make sure that everyone understood. Hey, you know what, maybe we need to be careful about our tap water and we need to figure out how to get everybody access to what we feel is safe and comfortable drinking water. And then our third forum was really focusing in on the science and so we brought in a lot of scientific experts from the universities in North Carolina that had unlocked, uncovered or had been working on PFAS. And so they just really got into the weeds on that forum and by that time the media had caught on, and the media was starting to host their own public forums and so we were–there was just like a public forum on PFAS every week. And so by that point we felt like we had really initiated a concept and so we didn’t feel that we needed to host any more public forums so we just stepped back and let those continue. And so we started focusing on just network building, and alliance building, and coalition building and also just holding public leaders accountable and making sure that they did what they said they were going to do and not just talk a certain way and then act a different way. And so we’ve always just tried to maintain that perspective. Some other things that I’m really–you know I’m really proud of some of the work that we’ve done, is that we brought Mark Rufflo to town and we hosted two “Dark Waters” screening events, and so I worked really hard to make that happen. And we had–I did a ton of lobbying in D.C. and [chuckles] this isn’t even my job, I have a day job. My day job was working for–you know, building up a youth ministry, and I say was in the past tense because right before the pandemic in the beginning of January 2020, I actually retired from youth ministry and then I started working in communications for another local church so I’m still in the faith community. I just kind of shifted my gears away from doing teenage ministry more into helping communicate, with– digitally, with the church. So–but anyways in all of that I do this on the side [chuckles] this is kind of like my ministry and I think that’s what was happening is that I couldn’t really keep doing all of this, so I had to figure out what to do. So it kind of goes back to, that miracle that I felt my family had experienced when my husband’s eyesight was fully restored. It should have never been–he has twenty-twenty vision and we can’t explain it. And so I do feel that I have been called into this space to bring–to be the conscience and the humanity for society and remind 3 �public leaders that there’s a reason why you are elected. To remind scientists that the work is for the people, you know–that yes the betterment of humanity, and all aspects of humanity and that this work, you know even into the chemical industry to you know have a soul and make things right [chuckles]. So this is kind of the space that I keep trying to remind myself that I feel called to be in. I’ve also just done a–I know I didn’t go into to great of detail about the screening events but some really positive change that came from both of those events is that we got our attorney general to file a lawsuit against DuPont and Chemours seeking natural resources damages for the state. We’re kind of following up to see where that's at right now, because again there’s that accountability piece. And then we also saw the most PFAS legislation filed in the state legislature this cycle then we have seen ever, then we saw in 2018 when the legislature was supposed to be at the peak of our contamination story. So I really think that was a direct result of those screening events. So, North Carolina legislature woke up a bit about it. Unfortunately, North Carolina legislature did not progress the bills that were filed, so there was some really fantastic representatives in the house who filed some really good, thoughtful bills, and the party in control of the General Assembly right now, the Republican Party, did not move them out of the rules committee and so refused to advance them, and that has been really dissatisfying to watch. But again until we could convince the community that this is a voting topic, and not just our community, because our community is very aware that this is a voting topic, but it's the rest of North Carolina. We’re stuck, and we’re also know that behind the scenes the North Carolina Manufacturing Alliance which is the main hub that Chemours operates through is doing some heavy funding to make sure that their interests are maintained. So it's been a very eye opening experience to see how money flows through politics, to see how industry can capture public bodies, and can capture elected officials. But then also how industry can just capture the scientific narrative too, and so that has been an interesting experience. DD: Can you say any more about the kinds of legislation that were trying to be forwarded? ED: Yeah there was a Polluter Pays Bill, a local representative, Deb Butler, she had sponsored a Polluter Pays and basically it would have required any responsible party that put PFAS into a public source of drinking water was responsible for making sure that the utilities could filter it out. And so not putting the burden on the ratepayers, and it was pretty much a very specific bill that would have helped not just the Wilmington area because there are three utilities that have been impacted not–three utilities and three hundred thousand residents are impacted by this, but there’s also communities upstream along the Haw River that feeds into the Cape Fear River and Pittsboro, and their water district has high levels of PFAS that almost–I mean they’re just as high as our levels here, and that’s coming from the textile industry in Burlington, North Carolina, and so the concern is making sure that industry is being held accountable for what they’re dumping into these public bodies of water, because we can’t filter them out easily it requires very advanced technology to filter it out of the drinking water, and that’s very expensive. And as it stands right now Pittsboro residents, Brunswick county residents, CFPUA residents, Cape Fear Public Utility Authority, which is–it which services New Hanover county and Wilmington residents and then portions of Brunswick county residents are all having to pay for upgrades themselves because Chemours is refusing to do it voluntarily. That’s the big one, it did not go forward, and it did not have bipartisan support even with some–there’s republican representatives in our district who live in this contaminated area and they didn’t cosponsor–one of them didn’t cosponsor it. It was really odd like [laughter] this is why–what are your–who do 4 �you want to pay for this, it’s a real problem, and they’re just–yeah, there’s just no explanation for why he wouldn’t champion it or wouldn’t co-sponsor it. Because we had the Brunswick County representatives, our both republicans and they both co-sponsored it, they were like we’re on board [chuckles] so it just is such a bizarre situation. There were some other bills that would band–band PFAS and firefighting foam and that bill, I worked really hard with the state level coalitions to introduce that bill back in 2019 and it did not progress on in 2019. And I don’t know why because in Congress, Congress has already banned PFAS and firefighting foam, the military will no longer be using it. So it’s banned immediately from I believe training, and it will be banned completely from use by 2024, I’m not like–I can’t remember, I think that’s the date but I’m not sure. So the writings on the wall it’s inevitable, the military’s already doing it. Everybody sees how expensive it is to keep using this product, it’s a huge liability for the military, our military bases, it's a huge liability for municipalities to keep using it, so it seems like a no brainer North Carolina should actually pass this bill and go ahead and just fall in line with where the world is headed and they refuse to. The bill got resubmitted this past year and it was resubmitted by the Republicans but only as a lets catalog an inventory on firefighting foam. So it was not a firefighting band bill, it was a let’s have the state fire marshals create an inventory tracking system so they know exactly where it is but let's not touch–let’s let it still being used, and so that was just a little bizarre to me. There was movement in the house to get the bill to add banning it from training. So the house did eventually agree and pass their version that said fire fighting foam or AFFF would be banned from training and that was a modest win. But again it should be banned completely, especially when we see the military’s doing it. The Senate is debating it, and it’s my understanding that it's not going anywhere right now, but I haven’t checked in recently to see what the Senate side is doing. So this bill hasn’t been–it hasn’t fully passed, it hasn’t been signed by a governor yet. Other things, the only piece of legislation if we’re going back to 2018, so we found out in 2017 in June about our contamination. 2018 was when bills were submitted, and the only bill that got approved was this Water Safety Act Bill, and basically it gave the state agencies five million doallas to address PFAS. Compare that to Michigan, Michigan spent fifty million and North Carolina has like–DuPont and Chemours here, and they could–they only wanted to spend five million, and by the way North Carolina has a billion dollar rainy day fund. Like–is it a billion–I will have to double check, they have a massive rainy day fund and, they have the money, like there’s money they can use, it’s not that we’re a poor state at all, we're not. They just didn’t you know didn’t want to spend the money. That money was used, I believe–here’s where I have to like, I don’t want to misspeak, because I can’t remember everything that that bill incorporated, but it was modest, and it gave them–it gave money to establish a group the PFAS network which is North Carolina, education–like universities that are all supposed to start studying PFAS but the problem with doing that is that it didn’t give the state agencies like DEQ [Department of Environmental Quality] and DHHS [Department of Health and Human Services] authority to regulate. So even if the big thing that came from it is that they gave these independent scientists money to go and sample all the water supplies in North Carolina to find out where PFAS was, and so that’s good, we kind of want to be able to see it. But they wrote it in a way where they didn’t want utilities, they didn’t want any research to be done on the finished tap water only on the raw water. So it's just raw water sources that are being tested. And that’s fine that that’s being tested but DEQ can’t regulate off of any of that testing. So our DEQ said we still need a chain of command, we still have to do testing of our own in order to regulate. So that’s great that you’re letting us know but we’re still going to have to spend money and do our own work. So, it was kinda just like this silly–I mean I don’t want to 5 �call it silly because it’s great work what the scientists are doing, and the scientists just did some phenomenal work because they looked at more than just five or six, they were looking at, let’s open it up and do a wide view, you know a wide view and find out what we're seeing. So that was important for us to kind of see where it is, that was public surface water, I think they were then going to start looking at ground water across the state which is a little more tricky. And so I think they are working on that right now, but again in all of that in these four years the state of North Carolina still has not officially regulated PFAS. We do not have any drinking water standards for PFAS, we don’t have any surface water or groundwater standards for PFAS, we don’t have–any discharge limits or regulations set for PFAS. So nothing has been done in four years. On, officially and legally and that is frustrating because this is really just feeling like they’re running out the clock. It shouldn’t be that difficult to say, hey lets do something. There’s been a lot of back and forth on well, the federal government should do it, or the state government should do it. And there’s been a lot of waffling, and the most interesting thing is that the head of our EPA now was the head of North Carolina’s DEQ so secretary Regan, Michael Regan is now administrator of the EPA. Michael Regan–and super excited to see what he is going to do, and no one knows more about PFAS probably than he does, with his experiences here in North Carolina. The concern being will he act on PFAS because North Carolina was such a tricky place to be and we still don’t have regulations in North Carolina, will get regulations out of his EPA at the federal level. So there’s a lot of questions there and one other thing that I’ve done is I’ve partnered with center for environmental health, and we filed a petition to the EPA last year too [unclear here] to do human health and toxicity studies on fifty four PFAS that we documented we were exposed to either through our food, water, our air supply, or was in our blood. And the previous administration denied the petition and so we resubmitted the petition to the Biden administration, and we’re waiting to hear back and we also filed suit. So we are poised to go to court with the EPA regardless of you know which administration, just to show that this is something we feel should have been done. These chemical companies should be forced, or should be showing the toxicity data on anything that they make before they release it into the air, or the water, the soil, the food supply, you know this is just–it makes sense. You know you should have to get permission before you dump, not afterwards, but we understand that, the past is the past so let's fix it now. And it's my understanding that Chemours is actively fighting this. And so again it seems like Chemours says one thing publicly and then does one thing privately. Which is that they fight, they fight all these lawsuits there–my water district and Wilmington water district has been in an active lawsuit with Chemours for the last two or three years to get them to pay for utility upgrades, and they’re actively fighting it. And we are–and my coalision is working to get Chemours to pay for human health studies for the ones–the PFAS that we can document we were exposed to and they’re actively fighting against it [chuckles] so it's been a really not surprising journey because we knew they would play this game. But I know–what I think is interesting is will the agencies step up and do right by the public, you know who–what entities are they here to serve. Are they here to serve corporations or are they here to serve the American public, the taxpayers that pay for them because we are realizing that corporations don’t always pay their taxes, or you know find funny way to not pay taxes, but I’m paying taxes [chuckles], so I’d love to see this work for me, so. DD: So, you’ve hinted at this a little bit, but maybe you could say a little bit more. What concerns do you have about PFAS contamination moving forward? 6 �ED: Oh-gosh, this is where I get sad. Sorry [sniffle]. DD: I’m sorry. ED: Will I wake up one day and find out that something is wrong with my kids. And it was related to doing what I thought I was supposed to be doing as a parent, giving them water. You know our pediatrician–every time we would visit the pediatrician, they were like giving us–you know encourage to drink water, encourage to drink water, and you know we did that, oh my gosh my children love water. And for the last four years they have been afraid to drink water at their school. So you know there’s– I’m worried–yeah like I just don’t know–there’s mother doubt you know. Why didn’t we have a filter on our sink just as a precaution. There’s rage of why should we have a filter on our sink just as a precaution. And then there's an aching heart for those who simply can’t have filters because they can’t afford them. But like I see and read and talk to so many people that have to choose. They’re like I can’t keep buying bottled water, or I can’t keep filtering this out and keep paying for my utility bill. You know and so then there's this over rationalization of maybe it’s not that bad, maybe this isn’t an issue. But it gets kind of alarming when you read the studies and you see what the effects are, and the information is still emerging. So that’s the biggest one is, will we wake up in five or ten years and have major medical issues because we’ve had so many in the past, and that trauma comes back to the forefront of I don’t want to deal with another trauma, another medical problem, because it was really hard. I mean we got through it, people have been through worse, you know like I get that. This is avoidable, this is preventable, there is a solution to this problem, and it's just people having the courage to stand up and do the right thing so that’s what I worry about. Oh, there was one other thing, that, that I did that I am proud of that has been successful, is that we finally got two–we petitioned two school boards. I participated in an environmental working group tap water study and I pulled water from my children’s public school and it ended up being the top. The top of the study, and it ended up being an underreported moment because we get our water from the river so the levels fluctuate. So, when EWG [Environmental Working Group] called me and said you're at the top of this list and by a lot, I was like [we're by a lot?]. I was like okay so we had the highest levels in our tap water in my children’s schools and that’s not even a full representation of what I know is in the tap water. Because they used a commercial lab and our utility is also looking for Chemours compounds that weren’t included in that so. So we are always reporting higher than what some people will test for, and so I took that information to Wilmington–[or New Hanover?]county’s school board and I took it to Brunswick county school board and I got them to install reverse osmosis filling stations in all of their schools. So forty nine public schools at the start of last school year had reverse osmosis filling stations in every school so that children and teachers and staff could access healthy drinking water and its–I’m proud of it but I’m frustrated because Chemours should be doing that. You know and here a mom in Brunswick country you know whose [son and school teachers is begging people?]to do it. So, I’m happy it's done but sometimes it's bittersweet, but the person that’s doing it, you know it shouldn’t be just me, it shouldn’t be just my group, and by the way it wasn’t just me. I have a really fantastic team of supporters–a leadership team that I work with–so yeah again I have to state that it is not just me this whole Clean Cap Fear is a collaborative effort, and there is a lot of people who make the work I couldn’t do it alone. 7 �DD: For sure. Before we wrap up today, is there anything else you’d like to add that we haven’t touched on or anything that you want to go back to and say more about? ED: No, I could talk for hours about this [laughter]. It’s been a long journey, it's been a good journey. I do want to mention too that the national PFAS contamination coalition, this is–that has been really great group to be connected to. It’s other community groups just like mine across the country dealing with similar contamination stories. Whether it's industrial or military and I’m just grateful to lean on them because I think this whole experience is–it can get isolating if you think you’re doing it alone. You know and advocates are stronger when they can collaborate, and it's been really great to have that network of support. And so I think that is the biggest takeaway from this, is that coalition building has really worked, locally, we have a really strong coalition. There's a strong coalition at the state level and then this national coalition to be a part of so it's been a really, really important for emotional health and mental health when you're going through a contamination crisis and you’re trying to advocate for better solutions. DD: Absolutely, thank you so much Emily for taking the time to share your story today. ED: I appreciate it, thank you for having me. 8 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Living with PFAS Interviews Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Devasto, Danielle Description An account of the resource Beginning in 2021, the Living with PFAS interviews were recorded to gather the personal stories of individuals impacted by PFAS contamination. PFAS, or per- and polyflourinated substances, are a large group of human-made chemicals used widely since the 1940s to make coatings and products resistant to heat, oil, stains, grease, and water. They can be found in countless household items, including food packaging, non-stick cookware, stain-resistant furniture, and water-resistant clothing. These chemicals are often called “forever chemicals” because they do not break down easily, can move through soils and contaminate drinking water sources, and build up in animals, plants, and people. PFAS have been linked to increased incidences of various cancers, increased cholesterol, decreased fertility, birth defects, kidney and liver disease, and immune system suppression, and thyroid dysfunction. It is estimated that PFAS are in the drinking water of more than 200 million Americans (Andrews & Naidenko, 2020). In Michigan alone, over 280 sites have PFAS contamination exceeding maximum contamination levels for groundwater (MPART, 2024). Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-11 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf audio/mp3 Type The nature or genre of the resource Motion Picture Text Sound Language A language of the resource eng Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context PFAS0015 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Donovan, Emily Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021-06-18 Title A name given to the resource Emily Donovan, 2021 (Interview video and transcript) Description An account of the resource Emily Donovan is originally from South Carolina, but has lived in North Carolina, near Wilmington, for almost 12 years. In this interview, Emily discusses how her husband's sudden loss of sight led doctors to identify a tumor. A few years later, the Wilmington area was identified as a PFAS contaminiation site. Since then Emily has been involved in community action for PFAS awareness. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource DeVasto, Danielle (interviewer) Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Moving Image Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/25c314b9654a34509ff2c59a7c874a46.mp4 3a79e52cea8d4d954d85b9f2b7d67179 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/6406ae1b9118fd892e2c0cb2d2a8d8df.pdf a8682d79f16cd6d4b12aaaa5df014196 PDF Text Text Living with PFAS Interviewer: Danielle DeVasto Interviewee: Alan Eberlein Date of Interview: 2022-11-29 Danielle DeVasto: I'm Dani DeVasto, and today, November 29, 2022, I have the pleasure of chatting [BANG SOUND] with Al Eberlein. Hi, Al. Al Eberlein: Hello. Danielle DeVasto: Thank you for having me over to your house today. Um, Al, can you tell me where you're from, [CLICK SOUND] and, um, let's start with that. Where are you from? Al Eberlein: Right here in Rockford, born and raised. Danielle DeVasto: All right. So you've been here a long time. Al Eberlein: Yep. I grew up as a child on Myers Lake and went to Rockford Public Schools and then resided within a couple miles of town, or in town, my entire life. Danielle DeVasto: That's truly something. As someone who's moved around a lot, I wish that I could— Al Eberlein: Which is more the norm now than not. Danielle DeVasto: Unfortunately, yeah. Um, Al, would you tell me a story about your experience with PFAS or with PFAS in your community, please? Al Eberlein: Well, it's a funny thing because it's an unfolding story, right? And I lived through it, not knowing I was living through it for many years. Like I said, uh, went to Rockford schools, went to the junior high school and the high school here. Um, lived around, uh, Rockford, uh, for a number of years. Um, uh, my first home was a- a mobile homesite, uh, at Algoma Estates, [CLEARING THROAT] which I lived with several years after I was married in 1980, with my wife, Lori, and, um, as we were discussing earlier, uh, lo and behold in future years, I found out—and we always knew that it was something not quite right about the water there, uh, but we were close to the 12-mile dump because Algoma's off of 13 mile, and the 12-mile dump was, you know, backed up to that. And, um, [LIP SMACK] so I'm sure that we were probably drinking water that wasn't too great then. And, uh, we had our, uh, first child, um, there, uh, when we lived in Algoma Estates, Matthew, uh, in 1982. And, um, it was a- it was, um, [LIP SMACK] a strange birth. Matthew was, uh, born with what they described as immature lung- lung syndrome that you nor- normally don't experience unless a child is, like, two months early. His lungs were that bad or worse, but Matthew was full term. He was almost eight-pound baby, and they said they never had seen that before. Um, so, consequently, he almost died. Um, he was in neonatal unit in Grand Rapids, for two weeks and, um, he did pink up right away. For hours and hours after he was born, he was purple and, uh, he pulled out of it miraculously, um, [LIP SMACK] but consequently, uh, it left him with a lot of problems. He had episodes of schizophrenia, uh, odd, uh, feelings in his body, like his spirit was half out of his body. Um, uh, we tried some therapy with, uh, Wellbutrin and, um, [NOISE] Ritalin to try to help him, uh, control his thoughts, but they didn't work for him. Um, so anyhow, uh, they barely got him—kept him mainstream through, uh, grade school, and once he was junior high, and after, he ended up in special ed and unfortunately kids like Matthew, they fall through the cracks. They're not bad enough to be, you know, Page 1 �sent off to Kenosha, or something, but they're—they try to mainstream 'em, and they have a couple hours in special ed and put 'em in a regular class, and they're, you know, how children can be cruel and- and it was a terrible experience. Um, he was a very melancholy child and, uh—because by the time he got to high school, uh, he started self-medicating with alcohol, dropped outta school, and we didn't even keep alcohol in our house, but he sought out his own medication. And, um, consequently, he died at 24 years old, uh, from alcoholism. Well, like I say, he was born in, uh, '82. In 1986, we tried again for a child, uh, Christopher. And so we moved back into town in—before he was born— Danielle DeVasto: Into Rockford? Al Eberlein: — into Rockford, on Lewis Street, on the Wolverine plat, north of town, in an older home, and so that my wife could afford to stay home with the baby. And so consequently, Christopher was born a little early, not a lot, a little, and he was rather small birth weight, he's—but not terrible. He was about six pounds, and they thought he was normal at the- uh, at the moment he was born, but it quickly became apparent that he was not thriving, and they couldn't figure it out. Finally, after about a month or so, a geneticist in Grand Rapids, said, "Um, [CLICK SOUND] I can't tell you what's wrong with your son, but I'm heavily suspicioning that there's something wrong with him, genetically. Um, I think you should go to Chicago, uh, Children's Hospital." So we took Christopher down there five different times, and they did studies, and actually they did workups on Christopher. Uh, he's actually in a journal someplace. They took, uh, pictures of him, and he was very unusual and the best determination that they could come up with is they said, "Well, he sort of like neonatal renoleukodystrophy," and I go, what in the world is that? And they said, "Well, that's [CLICK SOUND] where the protozoa in the cell structure is low, and the ones that are there are deformed." So what does that mean? Well, the body does not have a good capability of dealing with heavy metals, like, uh, copper and so forth. And so as the months went by, all this kinda built up in his brain and damaged his brain. He lost his eyesight and, uh, he didn't thrive. He didn't get nutrition out of food well, and, um, they said he would only live two months, but, um, we loved him and took care of him, ended up having to feed him with a stomach tube, and we kept him alive for two years and two months, and gave him the best life that we could give him. But I remember them saying this towards the end of- of the time that we went to Chicago, at the Children's Hospital, and they said, "You know, there's several different kinds," that they had, uh, described at the time of- of that disease, but they said, "Christopher's really not like any of them, he's like his own thing." There again, both with Matthew and with Christopher, nothing remotely like this in my wife's family history, our family history. This was just crazy stuff out of the blue. So [SIGH] my daughter, Sarah, was born in 1992, and, uh, she was, uh, it seemed to be a normal pregnancy, and then all of a sudden my wife started having trouble and, uh, Sarah came, uh, two months and two weeks early. And, um, anyhow, trying to keep a long story shorter, [CHUCKLE] um, we, uh, you know, we, of course we were worried about these other things and, um, but I had a month old. They said, "Well, you know," they- they were worried about the Christopher disease, the neonatal renoleukodystrophy, but it- it didn't seem to, uh, manifest itself. And we don't know why she was born early. We don't know why she was red when she came out, but, um, she seems to be doing better Page 2 �now. So Sarah grew into a nice, healthy, young lady and, um, she got married at 21, and shortly thereafter, um, she got pregnant for my granddaughter. Well, my granddaughter's, uh, pregnancy seemed to be normal, and, um, along about six or seven months pregnant, my daughter said, "Dad," she goes, "Something's wrong. I'm just profoundly tired." And of course they checked out her iron and all the-, you know, the normal things, and, "We can't find anything wrong and your blood pressure's okay, you know, we just, you know, probably some people just get more tired than others, you know, during." She goes, "But dad," she says, "They're not listening to me. This is profound. I can hardly keep my eyes open." Lo and behold, the day that her water broke, and she went in for labor, she started hemorrhaging, and I mean, profuse blood loss. And she actually almost died twice, and they were pumping fluids into her, plasma, trying to keep her alive. And, uh, she basically died twice, and it was, uh, a rare form of, uh, HELLP syndrome. There again, no sign of it, neither side of the family. And, um, [CLICK SOUND] she actually saw her gr—, uh, deceased grandfather in the room, smiling at her, waiting for her to come to heaven with her- with him, but they pulled her through. And by-by golly, they saved my granddaughter, and they said for that to happen right at birth, it's almost very unlikely that both of 'em were to live.They said usually if you can save one or the other, [CHIME SOUND] you've done—you've had a good day, and they saved them both. My daughter was very weak. It took her over a year to get back on her feet. Uh, psychologically it did something to her because she still gets tired. I think it's mental. I think it's mentally tired. Um, it- it- it really goes deep into you. So anyhow, my granddaughter, we thought she was perfect, you know, beautiful little girl, and, um, went in for a two-month checkup, and they says, "You need to see a specialist. Something is wrong with her." And you know, here, my first son, second son, my daughter, and now my granddaughter, oh, what's wrong? "Well, we think she's not seeing good, and you need to see a specialist." Well, unfortunately my son-in-law was in the Navy, and he said, "Well, we're about ready to move." And my daughter, he was gonna deploy outta San Diego, and my daughter was coming back here with my granddaughter, uh, while he deployed for six months. [SNEEZE] Well, God bless Helen DeVos Hospital because they got down to brass tacks and figured it out quite quickly. What they missed is that she had cataracts in her eyes, but they weren't normal, I say_ normal cataracts that are more visible on the outside of the eye. These were deep with inside the eye. And they said it was rather unusual. And, uh, so they operated on her, got the cataracts out, and here she's just a lit—by this time, I think Natalie was five months old, and, it's so hard to have, when children to have to have operations right off the bat, it's—and she, you know, suffered through that. And then they, [CLEAR THROAT] she had these really thick glasses that we tried to put on her, and, um, also we had to force contacts into her eyes so that she could have enough imagery, you know, but still be fuzzy, but that she could—her mind could develop. And, um, that got actually very arduous 'cause by six, seven months old, she could fight back, and I actually had to leave the house because she would scream and fight not to have those contacts forced in her eyes. Well, they can't put lenses in a little baby's eyes right away, 'cause the eyes are too small. And they said, "We would like to wait at least till six, five, six years old." [NOTIFICATION SOUND] Excuse me, we will delay that message. Page 3 �Danielle DeVasto: Would you like me to pause? Al Eberlein: That's uh, that was my daughter. [LAUGHTER] She must have knew I was talking about her. Danielle DeVasto: She must have felt it. [LAUGHTER] Al Eberlein: So consequently uh, they—we had to wait till she was over two years old to put lenses in. So my beautiful little granddaughter, so she ended up having six surgeries all together. And they put the lenses in finally, and oh, what a joyous day that was, and the next day. All of a sudden, my granddaughter discovered going outside and said, "Oh, grandpa, look at the clouds," and she could see relatively clearly for the first time. And- and uh, we were so happy and overjoyed for her after all the torment she went through, and we could see her starting to regress. We could see her starting to act like she did before, when she didn't see good and straining her eyes. And so we called up and said, "Well, you better bring her back in." And so we took her back in and, um, they said, "Oh, we got bad news. Her eyes are rejecting the implants." And I said, I thought you said this, eyes, that this material- material you use, that the body doesn't reject, and they says, "For some reason, hers is." So they had to take the- the, uh, implanted lenses back out. And that was one of the worst days of my life, right up there with my two sons dying. And sh—I wheeled her out to the car, and she balled all the way out going, "Grandpa, I can't see, I can't see." And I go, oh honey, I says, we're gonna fix it, hoping that we could. Well, we—the doctors had a form online just to see if any other eye doctor in the nation, and even other countries, had any suggestions because Helen DeVos had run out of ideas, and that's a bad place to be. So we had everybody praying. [LIP SMACK] One man, I'd like to meet him someday, I'd like to know who he was, one man responded, and he said, "I had a- an adult patient once that had that exact thing happen." And this was one particular, really strong steroid, he says that worked for her. He said, "I've never used it on a child," but he says, "You don't have anything to lose." So we did it, and by golly, it worked. And so she's been progressing. She has to come every six months and be checked out, but from that second set of lenses, um, her- her eyesight has held and uh, you know, every time she gets checked though, you know, we've had so much trouble and turmoil that you always kinda tighten up a little bit, you know, and they come back and say, "Oh, her eyesight's even a little bit better," and I go, oh, thank God, you know. But, yeah, so my experience, you know, is—in our life is two sons with strange diseases that died, my daughter that almost died, and her daughter that almost died and almost lost her eyesight. So to find out—so like I said, it's like an unfolding story, right? We—I lived through all this when we know that in the '70s and '80s, and so forth, that the PFAS was being dispersed all over. And one thing that doesn't get talked a lot about, this river out here, the whole bed of that river that I—you dig down in that mud, and I'll guarantee it's got layers of PFAS in it. Our water, city water here in Rockford that, well, there's about 4,500 of us now that live here, they were getting all the city water out of the Rockford Rogue River. Who's talking about that? The water that I drank in high school and junior high school, and that I drank living all the decades that I lived here in town. Yeah, it was a horrible thing they did, burying it out in the countryside, and I have relatives that got poisoned by that. But in hindsight, and working at Wolverine Page 4 �Worldwide for 31 years and seeing how they used that strike to try to close the tannery down, I believe was nefarious that they wanted to cover up their sin. Danielle DeVasto: Can you—do you want to say anything more about the strike? Al Eberlein: About the strike? Danielle DeVasto: Yeah. Al Eberlein: Yeah. Danielle DeVasto: Or your experience at Wolverine? Al Eberlein: Well, my grandfather worked—my great-grandfather worked at Wolverine for 54 years. Nobody ever worked there longer than him. He was hired by Otto Krause back in 1903, when it was family own. And you know how it was back in these—that—those days of small towns and, you know, Wolverine was a big business, see, I mean even then for a small town, and, um, my grandfather went to work there at 16 years old. You know, times were hard back then. There wasn't safety nets, you know, and, um, people were glad to have a good job. He could walk to work. He lived on Main Street. His grandson, my cousin, still lives in the same house that my great-grandfather lived in. And, um, when times were hard, um, uh, in- during the depression, uh, several times Otto Krause came and said, 'Boys, I- I don't have money for payroll," but he says, uh, he said, "If you stick with me," he says, "I'll gladly pay ya in company stock." And my grandfather held onto that stock his whole life, and it divided. And, uh, my grandmother inherited a portion of it, and she gave it to all of us, her grandkids, that came from my greatgrandfather. You know, it was, like, a heritage. And you felt good about—we felt good about Wolverine back in those days, you know, in the old days. And, um, geez, half my relatives worked at the company. You know, it was a stepping stone company that a lot of people—my mother worked there in the office for a year or two, you know, to help buy a new car. You know, it was nice to have a big company that, you know, could facilitate and help out the local community, and everybody always felt good about it. And, uh, when I first started working there, uh, in the early '70s, um, there was still a—Wolverine was corporate by then. It went corporate, I believe in the '50s. And—but there was still, you know, oldtimers that- that worked there. There was—I remember one old guy that remembered my great-grandfather, you know, 'cause my grandfather worked till 1957, from '03. I started working there in- in '72, and I worked there 31 years, but I- I remember, oh, I remember your grandpa, Platton, you know, and- and just that continuity, you know, of community and the work and the pride that our little town, you know, is known worldwide for Hush Puppy shoes. And I personally—I was the dye maker. I- I made, uh, [SNIFFLE] I made dyes that made shoes for, uh, Shaquille O'Neal. [LAUGHTER] You know, hi- his personal loafers, you know, and I thought, you know, I made, uh, I made running shoes when- when we owned Brook's, uh, Running Shoe. I made running shoes for Greg Myers, you know, and- and you had pride in that, in- in our little town, you know, that all this wonderful stuff coming out of our little town and from my perspective, the way that, and this is my opinion, you know, this is the way I perceive it, but that because of PFAS and corporate greed, that they didn't have any problem covering it up, even though it was still currently poisoning people. When 3M told Wolverine in the '90s, that this stuff causes cancer and childhood, uh, diseases and maladies, Page 5 �okay, now I just gave you my testimony about all the childhood maladies that me and my sisters and my brother, who never had any children, he did end up adopting, uh, boy, that's a lot of damage. And for them, that's at the point in the late '90s, where I have a bone to pick with Wolverine Worldwide because they had to be forced to make penance for what they did to the people out in the countryside. How about people like me that lived in this town most of my life in or around the town and all of my—two of my sons are in heaven. You know, I got a—my daughter almost died and had extreme trouble. My granddaughter almost was blind. I mean, I could say if I wanted to be bitter person, I could say you owe me at least a million dollars. I know I'll never get—that would just be a token. That would be a token, you know? But, no, I'll tell you the strike was—so what happened. You see all this was happening at the same time. 3M tells Wolverine Worldwide, oh yeah, you know that stuff's bad. So what do you do? Did you come clean? No, you tried to cover it up. That's what you tried to do. And I believe with all my heart and that's why, you know, there's times in life I- I didn't like my career, I loved my career. I loved the people I worked with, you know, and you made my life a living hell by your corruptness, you know. And like they always say, even, like, with Watergate, the coverup is even worse. If you said, "Oh, we didn't know back in the '70s, and '80s, that this Scotchgard and all this stuff was so bad, oh, geez, you know, and that we went out to farmer John and paid him 40 bucks or whatever to dump it in his back acres," you know, "Oh, what can we do to, what can we do to make it right?" No, you didn't care about making it right. You cared about covering up your sin. They recorded their 12th record profit that year that they drove us out on strike. And why do I say drive us out on strike? Because they came to us with a proposal. They wanted to take a dollar an hour away from us across the board, a dollar an hour. Well, listen folks, I was their dye maker. I'd been their dye maker for 31 years, saving all their shows for 'em and everything, and I never made- I never made $18 an hour. So it wasn't that we were so greatly paid, and I'll tell you what, those guys down there, you know, I don't know what the average wage was, but I know a lot of those guys, their base pay was, you know, $13, $14 an hour, and if they worked real hard in that stinky place that, you know, they could make 125% sometimes on piece rate, but they worked hard in horrible conditions, horrible conditions. And they want to take a dollar an hour away from us while they were posting their 12th record quarter in a row. [BANG SOUND] Do you see how egregious that is? Well, geez, who would do something like that? Who- who would risk throwing away people? I- I, like I said, 31 years, that was on the- the small side of things. Man- many of those guys had 38, 40, 42 years. One guy had 45 years in there as a loyal employee, and they were throwing us away like yesterday's news. Who would do something like that? Oh, yeah, I can see a motive. Somebody that has a greater sin, they're trying to cover up, that's who would do something like that. That's exactly who would [BANG SOUND] do something like that. And you know, back then [SNIFFLE] we didn't- we didn't understand the PFAS thing in- in 2003. We didn't really understand what was going on yet, but we knew just by our innate common sense that something was terribly wrong. Something was terribly, terribly wrong. And so we stayed out on strike and I think we kinda surprised them. And we thought, well maybe when they see we've been out for five or six weeks, and of course, you know, Wolverine's a large company and that's gonna start hurting, Page 6 �hurt- hurt the profit, right? They still didn't care. I remember hearing they- they hired, uh, replacement workers. They said, yeah, we don't need you guys. And they- they kept going all through the summer and into the early fall. Well, we heard news that, um, they received back, I believe, now don't take this verbatim, but I think it was around 170,000 to 180,000 pair of boots, boots or shoes, because of inferior leather, because the replacement workers were not paying 00:27:42 ___________. Did they end the strike there? Did they try to come back to us and say, okay, okay, forget that taking a dollar an hour away, we'll give everybody, uh, 50 cents and next year you get a quarter, and we'll keep everybody happy? No. No, they were bald face as ever. No, not dealing with you. Went all the way past Christmas. And they came the day after Christmas and said, "Well, we'll take a third or so of you back." It'd give you, it was a paltry amount, I forget, 25, 35 cents, but the rest of you are gone, [NOISE] 'cause they still [BANG SOUND] wanted—had it in mind, they wanted to close that place down. I can't believe anything else. It's the only thing at that point. Now this is like six, seven months out on strike, and uh, they still wanted to get rid of us. And I knew I was gone 'cause at that point I'd done—I did an interview with a Christian, uh, radio station, and I did an interview with TV8 and I says, uh, how much is a man's life worth, 'cause most of these people, including myself, gave the best years of their life to that place, and they were throwing us away like yesterday's newspaper. I said, stark fact, while they were making record profit, there again, who would do such a thing? Hmm, somebody covering up a very large sin, I would propose. So anyhow, yeah, we had people die. So there, again, I believe they were covering up their sin. They wanted to sh—they wanted to get us—rid of us quite quickly, I believe. Uh, they wasn't counting on us, um, putting up such a fight. Of course, that got—that garnered, uh, attention from the powers that be, and because it was so egregious, the- the ones such as myself that they let go, and they finally did call us back, uh, long about the end of January, end of February, um, they- the people they let go, they had to, uh, either give a year of, uh, college or pay half of our wages at a new job for a year to help get us hired 'cause, you know, most of us were older guys. You know, I mean it- it's a sad fact, you know, there's nowhere in writing, especially nowadays, if things change so fast now in technology. You're over 50, and you can hardly get an interview, you know, especially then, things were pretty slow. So anyhow, a lot of us, uh, you know, got jobs elsewhere, and they took some of the guys back, and they worked them for, I don't know, I- I think around 2005, or thereabouts, they finally closed it down for good. And I did not get anything 'cause I was long gone by then, but I heard, and I felt a little bit good about this because we had gotten enough. We got enough sunlight shined on their darkness that they had, you know, people were watching them at this point, and I believe that the average person got $17,000 severance pay to, you know, to go somewhere else, and they had to help 'em out. Um, I was already at another, uh- uh, job shop, so I did not get any of those benefits, but, uh, [LIP SMACK] anyhow, so that all happened and then just about that time it starts being un- unveiled of the PFAS problem. And it became more and more apparent what had happened and that they were covering up this horrible sin of burying this stuff around. Oh, come to find out they had buried stuff right by the plant. Uh, I had—and afterwards, you know, in hindsight, now you start looking back and putting the little pieces of the jig pu- jigsaw puzzle together. I had a very dear friend Page 7 �of mine that used to live right next to the tannery, and he says, "Oh yeah, there was a low area there, and they were throwing all their hides right in there to fill up the low area, and then once it got full, they, you know, threw some dirt over it and covered it up." Well, that's one of the, you know, egregious areas that have been, you know, dug up and taken out of there. But that river is loaded with PFAS, from that plant sitting there. They said that- that 15 acres that sits down there now, where, you know, they quickly, you know, tore the tannery down, they were trying to, they almost had a deal going.They were going to try to build a, um, [LIP SMACK] a, uh, hotel there, if you can imagine. Oh, a lovely hotel on the river, you know? Quick, cover up our PFAS, but that dirt, there's areas in there that is one of the top toxic sites in the whole country for PFAS, and it's still sitting there. Now they've done some remediation along the river, but it's very possible with the way these people operated over the years that there could be other spots in that river, and I'll guarantee you, out there, how much PFAS over all those years do you think is lying in the muck of that river? I wouldn't eat one fish out of that river. I want—I had people park behind my house here in- in Pickett Park, and catching salmon and trout out there all the time, and I almost feel like I should tell 'em, I won't eat that stuff. That river's loaded with PFAS. And if you go down the river a little bit farther, the Rockford Paper Mill used to pump stuff. I can remember going behind the Rockford Paper Mill in- in, uh, the '70s, when I was in junior high school, and there's a pipe about that big, that was pumping red effluent right out into the river, you know. [NOISE] So we kinda got it at both ends that way, but I wouldn't eat- I wouldn't eat anything out of that river, you know. So, but let's come back to Rockford. So our water, until all this was coming out, our strike and, uh, the news of, uh, oh, there's a problem with PFAS in the early 2000s, well, what about all the people, the thousands of people that lived in the city all this year, and you fed us PFAS water. How about that? How about people like me that lost two sons andand all my families had childhood maladies, how's about that? [BANG SOUND] Where's the remediation for that? It would be real easy to be real bitter, but, you know, [SNIFFLE] time does heal to a point, and you have to go on living, right, and- and you can't live happily as a bitter person, but there is right and wrong. And I don't think Wolverine Worldwide has, by any means, has gotten to the end of their penance for what they did. And especially that they chose to do a cover-up and to throw people away that made their company for 'em because they wanted to cover up a sin. Well, that's a nice way to treat people that you've been poisoning for 40 years. See, but you have to go on. And so I just, you know, I thank God for people like you, for people like, no seriously, people like, uh, Lynn McIntyre, that actually care about people, like Wolverine used to. Oh, yeah, I got some real good memories of Wolverine. I remember when I first started working there and Tom Gleason would come down, and he wanted anybody that wanted to shake his hand. He'd look you right in the eyes, and,"Thank you for your service, you know, we truly need you around here," and maybe even have a cookie or a little holiday drink with you. It used to—it was like the last vestige of- of a good age. And somewhere in, when we started sending all of our work over to China, and we became a human resource, it became less and less. And it always happens by shades, right, less personable, a little less personable, and now all you are is a resource to throw you away like yesterday's news. And that's the way—it's a bitter pill. I definitely gave Wolverine the best, you know, Page 8 �my—I say, best years, I— that's not totally true 'cause you- you do think, you hope that you gained some wisdom, and, you know, and- and I did home care for 10 years and that was a wonderful time in my life. And I'm glad I did that 'cause it actually was a salvation for me because it really put some, uh, a deeper meaning back into my life and, uh, really did a lot of healing for how my career at Wolverine ended, with them trying to cover up their sin, you know, but uh, yeah, PFAS has done a lot of damage physically, probably mentally, to a lot of people and so on and so forth, but when companies like Wolverine go into cover-up mode, the mental and spiritual damage that they've done to people, you know, some people don't have the wherewithal to come back, and I think about those people often. I think I- I know probably a lot of 'em probably aren't even alive anymore. I- I know that, uh, yeah, there's several people I- I personally knew. There was a maintenance man down there that died from cancer at 42 years old. My friend's dad was having back problems, and he worked down there in the tannery, and [BANG SOUND] so he retired early at 54, only to find out, yeah, his back problems was he was loaded with cancer. And I think that had been repeated with maladies and cancer, people that worked down there over and over again, you know, and uh, so I just hope at some point, you know, we keep moving into the future, right, and then you get into, if I went up to Wolverine now there's probably not even anybody up there that I— even remembers me, or it's a whole new set of people. And you would- you would hope at some point they say, okay, you know, we know that our company, you know, probably did some wrong things, did things the wrong way, and we just- we just want to do whatever it takes to give us that good reputation again, and- and so forth. But, uh, yeah, I— for—looking back in hindsight over my life, after I knew all the facts, yeah, PFAS did a lot of damage. Danielle DeVasto: So then looking forward, what concerns, if any, do you have about PFAS contamination, moving forward? Al Eberlein: Well, for one thing, like I said, I believe it's- it's damaged my lineage. How- how long is it- is it going to keep doing that, you know. Oh, you know, are we still learning? I- I hope the science is- is still gonna find out more and more of, or how can we head things off at the pass, maybe. Like what happened to my daughter with th- this rare form of, uh, preeclampsia. How can we get, you know, more proactive about things like that? And on Wolverine side, I'm not convinced that they've totally come clean yet. I'm not convinced that that whole river is- is remediated yet. Um, and should people like me that lived here all my life, you know, is- is there any compensation for us, you know, is there, or- or any, uh, health benefits or anything? You poisoned this whole town, Wolverine. You poisoned the whole town. Nobody even talks about it. It's kind of convenient how big business and even, you know, unfortunately gov—you know, government, city governments, this little town that was all beholding to Wolverine, how they can kowtow down to money, but just a thought, you poisoned the whole town, the people that made all your money for you. [BANG SOUND] Danielle DeVasto: [SIGH] Big thought. Um, [CLEARING THROAT] before we wrap up, is there anything that we haven't talked about that you'd like to touch on or anything that you want to go back to and say more about? Page 9 �Al Eberlein: Well, there's other things I could say, you know, but I better not, you know. I don't want to get into other people's business, you know. But I'll tell you, like we were talking before you turned the cameras on, just want anybody that might s—watch this or- or maybe even somebody from Wolverine that would look in, do you really realize how deeply and generationally that this kind of thing affects people? And I would think going forward, any good thing comes out of this is that you would double, triple, quadruple down. Never, ever, ever let anything like this ever happen again [THUMPING] because if we don't learn that lesson, then what are we doing here? [NOISE] Danielle DeVasto: Thank you so much, Al, for taking the time to tell your story. Al Eberlein: You're welcome. And once again, thank you for caring, 'cause we've gone through a lot of years where it didn't seem like too many people were caring, and I'm glad to meet people such as yourself and Lynn McIntyre, to know that there are people being vigilant out there, and, um, [LIP SMACK] and, you know, I mean it's- it's all over, and it's not just one thing. Um, like I said, I grew up on Myers Lake. They just found out here recently. I mean, I swam in that lake my whole childhood. Oh, guess what, there's mercury in Myers Lake. Where did that come from? Some business at some point dumped something in there, you know, so how many times can we exponentially extrapolate that out to the countryside? You know, it's like there's landmines all over the place. And uh, so I- I don't think this is anything that's gonna be solved for a long time 'cause we had a lot of industrial years where, I mean, EPA didn't even come about to what, late '60s, into the early '70s, so, you know, it's, uh, we're just kind of getting on, excuse me, on top of a lot of these, uh, more egregious things, you know. But, yeah, do I believe PFAS damaged my life? Yeah, more ways than one. Career wise and personally with my family that even has come into the future with my daughter and granddaughter. And after she had all that trouble with preeclampsia and with the D&Cs that she had to have afterwards that, um, they scarred her for life, and she can't conceive now. So I've got one grandchild, and [KNOCK SOUND] hopefully they'll adopt someday 'cause we got a lot more love to give. Danielle DeVasto: Yeah, absolutely. Well, thank you again, Al. I really appreciate it. Al Eberlein: You're welcome. Danielle DeVasto: It was an honor to listen to your story. Al Eberlein: Well, thanks for saying so. Page 10 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Living with PFAS Interviews Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Devasto, Danielle Description An account of the resource Beginning in 2021, the Living with PFAS interviews were recorded to gather the personal stories of individuals impacted by PFAS contamination. PFAS, or per- and polyflourinated substances, are a large group of human-made chemicals used widely since the 1940s to make coatings and products resistant to heat, oil, stains, grease, and water. They can be found in countless household items, including food packaging, non-stick cookware, stain-resistant furniture, and water-resistant clothing. These chemicals are often called “forever chemicals” because they do not break down easily, can move through soils and contaminate drinking water sources, and build up in animals, plants, and people. PFAS have been linked to increased incidences of various cancers, increased cholesterol, decreased fertility, birth defects, kidney and liver disease, and immune system suppression, and thyroid dysfunction. It is estimated that PFAS are in the drinking water of more than 200 million Americans (Andrews & Naidenko, 2020). In Michigan alone, over 280 sites have PFAS contamination exceeding maximum contamination levels for groundwater (MPART, 2024). Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-11 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf audio/mp3 Type The nature or genre of the resource Motion Picture Text Sound Language A language of the resource eng Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context PFAS0034 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Eberlein, Alan Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2022-11-29 Title A name given to the resource Alan Eberlein, 2022 (Interview video and transcript) Description An account of the resource Al Eberlein lives in Rockford, Michigan, where he was born and raised. In this interview, Al discusses his family's history and medical troubles which can be attributed to PFAS exposure. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource DeVasto, Danielle (interviewer) Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Moving Image Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/56633af223e46292a26f2b48512f45cb.mp4 43143efa6ab44119f1b0a11f64e384a7 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/1c88a5fe46be90623647803f675c3b72.pdf 7a5e5b4e95c0f3f44479eb0505c4f964 PDF Text Text Living With PFAS Interviewee: Kevin Elliot Interviewer: Dani DeVasto Date: October 17, 2021 DD: I’m Dani DeVasto, and - [Recording paused] chatting with doctor Kevin Elliot. Hi Kevin. KE: Hey. DD: Kevin, can you tell me about where you're from and where you currently live. KE: Sure, well originally I grew up near the Chicago area - in the suburbs. Currently I live in Okemos, Michigan, which is just to the east of east lansing where im a faculty member at michigan state university. DD: And how long have you been there? KE: I came in January of 2014, so I guess it's been about 7 and a half years. DD: Kevin, can you tell me a story about your experience with pfas or with pfas in your community? KE: Yeah, so um... I don't have a good story about PFAS in my community, but um, I have, over the past year been involved with the center for PFAS research at MSU, and then I’ve been on a, um, National Academy of Sciences Committee thats is trying to give guidance to clinicians as they work with people who are concerned about PFAS exposure. And I guess maybe just a story that might be of interest related to that is that we’ve been having these public sessions where people who have been dealing with PFAS exposure can share their experiences, and several of the sort of stories that I've heard through that have been some that are really striking to me. And um, I guess maybe i'll just say one general sort of reaction first then you can let me know if you want me to get more concrete. The general reaction that has just been striking to me as I hear from different people who have been saying, saying they have children who ended up with testicular cancer or you know, other sorts of effects, or um other people, you know, spouses who have been dealing with health effects is just how frustrated they've been, feeling like their um, the physicians they've been working with, haven't been very supportive or in some cases even kind of minimize the likelihood that PFAS contributed to the health problems. And of course, you know it is - you can't be sure what caused it. But it was just so surprising to me hearing about the disappointment they've had working with doctors that either don't know anything about �PFAS, which I can kind of understand. But then also, just plain kind of being dismissive and not wanting to be very helpful in exploring PFAS as a potential contributor to these problems. So that was really striking to me. DD: Can you maybe take a step back and talk a little bit about how you got to that point of having those conversations; some of your background in any context, I think that might be helpful. KE: Yeah, I mean It would be helpful to talk about sort of how I ended up, like, how this committee ended up forming, or like sort of my background in terms of my scholarship and stuff like that DD: Yes, yes. KE: Okay, I'll talk about it all. So i'm a philosopher of science and I uh, - I don't know how much nitty gritty to go into - I have a background in chemistry and then I got interested in philosophy, and so I ended up doing my PhD in the history of philosophy and science and alot of scholarship involved studying controversies about science, and especially environmental kind of areas of science, and um, especially environmental pollution. And so, I would sometimes look at the role of conflicts of interest in that science. How they all have different groups with different financial stakes or other personal stakes in scientific controversies or how harmful chemicals may be. So I'm interested in, sort of, what are the judgements that go into evaluating the science in trying to say, yeah we think this chemical is pretty harmful or no its not that big of a deal. So yeah, as a philosopher I dont do the hardcore science but I sort of reflect and look at the dates and try to understand why are there these disagreements, how do we handle the disagreements, how do we sort of address them responsibly and so on. So anyway, as part of that work, I have ended up getting a little bit connected with agencies like The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences which is part of the national institute of health. Which funds alot of our medical research in the US, and the national academy of sciences. I don't know if it's helpful for me to say what that is for folks, uh DD: Sure. KE: Folks watching this may not know so much, The National Academy of Sciences put together, actually back during the civil war, as um sort of an expert organization provided by [?] to the federal government. And so, It will create committees to address certain issues when government agencies want certain advice on things. Most of the time it would be science on these committees, um, and uh so I was a little surprised when I got a approached to see if I could serve on this particular committee, that um, was actually partly - trying to think of the right word - commission, I guess, by a branch of the center of disease control, the ATSDR, which is the �Agency for Toxic Substances and Diseases [?] This is this group that helps deal with communities who are facing chemical exposures, pollution, spills [?]. And so they've provided advice to doctors in the past about how to deal with PFAS, but they've had pushback from communities feeling like the advice they've provided hasn't really been what they hoped for, communities feel like the current guidance isn't very supportive for them to be able to get tested for their exposure to PFAS, and it maybe doesn't - Yeah maybe just isn't as aggressive when accepting that their might be health effects from PFAS exposures as i think a lot of people in these communities would want. Anyways, so this community was put together and its mostly scientists, I was a little surprised as a philosopher that they asked me to be involved. But, I now understand why, because one of the things the committee asked to do is to provide principals for clinicians who are making decisions and providing advice under scientific uncertainty. I think they use the language of substantial scientific uncertainty. Scientists often don't really like having to provide advice in those kinds of situations. And it's just a tricky, tricky issue. So anyway, I think they realized maybe it'll be good to have someone like me on this committee, and I think it turned out to be a good move. So that's the background behind this, and I’m just blabbing away but as we got started, often it would just be us experts deliberating, and we ended up realizing this is so tightly connected with people's own experiences, maybe to be responsible, we really need to have some open town halls where we can hear from various people and communities who have had these experiences, and so that's where my story came from, that we’ve been hearing these [?] experiences, and that's probably what I’m most useful for sharing during this discussion. Because I don't have personal experiences but I’ve been struck by what I’ve heard from people. DD: Absolutely, were people something you were aware of before you started this project? How did you kind of come to be aware? KE: I was hearing about it a bit, just from you know interacting with other people in the university setting, um so I don't know exactly when I first heard of it, but I kept hearing little bits and pieces about it, and kind of got the sense, you know, i feel like the environmental health community will go through these waves where there will be this new big thing we realize, “Ah” This is a problem and there hasn't been enough work on it, then you know maybe it dies down, or it maintains attention and something else will come up that we realize, so I just kept hearing bits and pieces about it and thinking wow maybe this is a significant area I should try and learn more about. And then when some of the faculty at MSU started kind of pursuing like, some research funding to try and make a center for research on PFAS, I thought well this is a great opportunity to find out more, and so I got involved in that center. Thats been the past couple of years I’ve been learning a lot, I really didn't know much previously. DD: And do you foresee PFAS continuing to be part of your research focus moving forward or do you think this is - Like once you develop these guidelines? �KE: I think that, so you know participation in the national academy will be over, were supposed to have a report submitted in May of 2022, but, I would like to continue sort of exploring this issue, kind of as a philosopher I tend to sort of explore areas like case studies where i’ll sort of look over the research being done on them, you know, ask questions about it. So I would like this to be uh one of these case studies that I look at in the future. I have the benefit. Scientists have to develop all this infrastructure in their labs and really focus on something. I have the luxury. I can look at multiple case studies, but I’d like this to be one of them for a while to come I think. DD: So, as a philosopher then, are there particular questions or aspects of this particular PFAS case study that interest you, or challenge you, or you know... keep your attention? KE: Yeah um, well I think - I don't know that PFAS is totally unique compared to you know, other things, but I think there are some issues in this case and in other cases that strike me as really interesting. And one is, it once again highlights the question of how to engage in appropriate regulation and policy and responses to these issues where we're just not gonna have all the scientific knowledge that we'd like. Because, you know like I constantly hear, you know about thousands, you know often the numbers like five thousand different PFAS compounds that could be used, that are out there, depending on how you find exactly what counts in this category, and so there's just no way we can test all these things in detail, it's like a micro[?] of our general problems with, you know, chemical recreation, so we have to find strategic ways to sort of make decisions without knowing all of the nitty-gritty details. You know, some people suggest we should group them together as either a huge class, or as some class and say look, if a chemical falls under this general group, then shouldn't use it, or try to minimize the use, or try to look for alternatives for the greatest extent possible. And so, those are the things that interest me, sort of looking at the science and the decision making and trying to figure out what do we do given that this is just too messy, there's just too much going on to really study in great detail. DD: So I know your report and your study are still ongoing, but do you have any ideas about what we should do? KE: Yeah well... so... so this is where I probably can't say a ton about the details of the report at this point. But, um, I think a general theme in my work is to argue that it's a real mistake to think that you have to have the science figured out, before you can make decisions. I tend to be a fan of the folks who, you know some folks have been writing articles, saying things like given how persistent these are in the environment and given that, you know a lot of them seem to be fairly bioaccumulative, meaning that um, a build up in organisms and as it goes up the food chain you know, humans can end up you know [?] in our bodies. I think we have to be willing to go ahead and take some sort of action, even if we don't have decisive proof that there's a problem. And that's actually a little bit different from what I’m saying from the details from what we're talking �about in our report, our advice for clinicians. I guess I’m giving this general sort of perspective that we cant be perfectly precautionary with respect to everything, but I think it doesn't make any sense to say well we can't take any actions until we get the science. I think that's a mistake. DD: Well I will be looking forward to reading your report, in the near future hopefully. KE: Yeah, yeah. I’m hoping that it will be useful and it has been really interesting so I’ll just mention one other thing. As part of putting it together we looked at sorts of frameworks for making decisions under uncertainty, and it has been kind of striking to me that again, I feel like these frameworks in general are much more geared towards making the decision when you’ve got a good deal of evidence that we don’t have as quality frameworks for making decisions under uncertainty, and I think the scientific community just doesn't feel super comfortable with that. That's just the one comment I would make that's been interesting for me as I've been reading and [?]. DD: And can I maybe ask about another- other frameworks in terms of guidance from medical professionals. What's kind of the status on guidance for that or for medical professionals specifically dealing with PFAS right now? KE: Yeah, I’m not much of an expert on the medical stuff, but it's been very interesting for me learning a little bit more, there's a well put together framework from the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) And I get the impression they provide all kinds of guidelines for things like, you know when you should start getting prostate cancer screening or colonoscopies or breast cancer screening or all that kinds of stuff. And so they’ve got this whole framework in place for trying to evaluate evidence and decide when it's enough to definitely recommend that people do something or recommend that people do it, um, if they want to, you know leaving more judgement for them, and like how much evidence they wanna see in order to make these kinds of recommendations. So it's really pretty aggressive, but again, my sense of the framework, they don't really like to provide recommendations when there's substantial scientific uncertainty. So that’s one of the frameworks that was interesting to learn a little bit more about. DD: Sure. So what concerns, if any, do you have about PFAS contamination or PFAS related issues moving forward from this time? KE: Yeah, one of the things that strikes me, and this is coming from hearing people talk in these town halls from the committee, was just how sad it is, that you’ll have communities where on the one hand, people will want to find more about the contamination in their communities. But then, they’re afraid, at least some people in the communities are afraid, that if there were more, well then it would end up being economically harmful, like people don't want to come to those communities as tourists or people don't want to buy houses in those communities - or um - It was �so striking hearing about, like, farmers or ranchers like once they found out that they're, lets say, herd of animals was contaminated. Then they are in just a total mess in terms of not being able to sell the animals or sell milk from the animals or things like that. And so, It really worries me realizing that there's this tension between wanting to learn more about, you know, the potential threats one faces, then they are communities will disadvantage finding this stuff out. That can create tension between communities, and just, - serious economic problems, and so anyways that was really striking to me. DD: Yeah, I can imagine that playing out in a number of different ways into communities. Well, before we wrap up, Kevin, is there anything that you'd like to go back to, that we - or anything you'd like to add that we haven't touched on? I know you jumped around your story. KE: Right, right. DD: But I wanted to hear if you had a chance to go and say anything additional. KE: Yeah, another thing I guess - I guess that has just struck me, as I’ve been learning more about PFAS and maybe this is more sort of, you know the cognitive and academic thing you're looking for, but um, It's just been interesting - One of the things that I have been intrigued about is debates about biosolids, which are you know kind of produced from waste water treatment plants and have lots of, fertilizer potentially. So farmers will, you know, put them on their fields, and in principle it seems like a great way to kind of have a circular economy where you know, we're producing sewage waste, but we can take some of the good aspects of it and put it back on the land. But, then there are concerns now about pollutants in biosolids and so on, and worries that if we put it on farmers' fields it can cause problems, you know, potentially taken up by crops and then be a problem for people or be a problem for people near those fields and so on. It's just been striking as I learn more about this, I don't know enough about the scientific details on how much you should be worried about this and so on, um, but just realizing what a problem it is to sort of deal with these when they are so persistent in the environment, that its like they just keep cycling around. So you know, well go into the wastewater treatment plant, and then they go to the biosolids and the biosolids either have to go to some landfill somewhere or have to get spread on someones fields, then it goes to the landfills and eventually seems to come out in the [?] then that has to go somewhere, maybe back to a wastewater treatment plant, if it spreads on the fields then it may go into water. And the ways in which - We can’t get rid of this stuff, you know, unless I guess you burn it at 1000 degrees celsius or something, again the scientists can provide more nitty-gritty but that has been pretty striking to me, and again has kinda furthered my thinking, where you know, it just doesn't make sense to use persistent compounds like this, if we can avoid it. Because it’s just such a mess if they might become a problem. And so I think that's something that has been really striking and interesting to me as i've learned a little bit more about PFAS. �DD: Yeah, a whole other set of problems. KE: Right, exactly. And I - I don't know if there's anything else, um, that struck me. [Brief Pause] I guess just the other thing, and again this isn’t particularly profound, but it's been so interesting to me also hearing about some of the communities, or like, uh, seeing your military bases, or like firefighters where they are especially using these foams, they call them “A Triple F” [?] Forming foams I think, they reason in which they were told this is just like soap and they had no worries about these, and you know sometimes they would just use it for fun. Kids would play in this stuff, figuring you know they could just spray this everywhere and not worry at all about being exposed to it. And um, It just makes me wonder kinda the lesson I kind of gleamed from this is, what things are we exposed to now, where we’re just assuming there's nothing to worry about, and then we might find out 10 years from now, oh there was a problem, and again, we wanna ask these questions about surely there should be a better way of strategizing in terms of putting products onto the market. I know we don't want to halt innovation, but it's just so striking to me the way we just produce thousands of chemicals and just throw them out there and then end up finding out kinda later at some point that there's a worry. I'm just pontificating about all kinds of stuff. DD: Well I mean from a historical perspective too it's interesting right, I'm sure you've seen this is not the first time humanity has done something like this. Like, we seem to keep doing these things where we throw products out there and discover after the fact that we need to [?] back. So I imagine there might be some interest for you there from a historical perspective as well. KE: Of course, of course, absolutely. Great point. DD: Yeah, well thank you so much, Kevin. For taking the time to share your story today. KE: Yeah! It's a pleasure and I'm really glad youre doing this project. DD: Thank you. KE: Thanks. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Living with PFAS Interviews Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Devasto, Danielle Description An account of the resource Beginning in 2021, the Living with PFAS interviews were recorded to gather the personal stories of individuals impacted by PFAS contamination. PFAS, or per- and polyflourinated substances, are a large group of human-made chemicals used widely since the 1940s to make coatings and products resistant to heat, oil, stains, grease, and water. They can be found in countless household items, including food packaging, non-stick cookware, stain-resistant furniture, and water-resistant clothing. These chemicals are often called “forever chemicals” because they do not break down easily, can move through soils and contaminate drinking water sources, and build up in animals, plants, and people. PFAS have been linked to increased incidences of various cancers, increased cholesterol, decreased fertility, birth defects, kidney and liver disease, and immune system suppression, and thyroid dysfunction. It is estimated that PFAS are in the drinking water of more than 200 million Americans (Andrews & Naidenko, 2020). In Michigan alone, over 280 sites have PFAS contamination exceeding maximum contamination levels for groundwater (MPART, 2024). Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-11 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf audio/mp3 Type The nature or genre of the resource Motion Picture Text Sound Language A language of the resource eng Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context PFAS0029 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Elliott, Kevin Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021-09-27 Title A name given to the resource Kevin Elliott, 2021 (Interview video and transcript) Description An account of the resource Dr. Kevin Elliott lives in Lansing, Michigan, and is involved in the Center for PFAS Research at Michigan State University. He also serves on a National Academy of Sciences Committee that gives guidance to clinicians working with people concerned about PFAS exposure. Elliott holds a PhD in the history of philosophy and science, and studies controversies about science and environmental pollution. In this interview, Elliott discusses his involvement with PFAS research and education. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource DeVasto, Danielle (interviewer) Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Moving Image Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/333878650df1713a98e60a16fc187dd7.mp4 5efafdf197a5b009cf009e22f4641453 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/6e6649c770d20570bf2c1db8567cc9dd.pdf 94164b265ecfe1d51f5225df0120f49e PDF Text Text Living with PFAS Interviewee: Garret Ellison Interviewer: Dani DeVasto Date: June 29, 2021 DD: I’m Dani DeVasto and today, June 29th, 2021, I have the pleasure of chatting with Garret Ellison. Hi, Garret! GE: Hi, Dani. DD: Garret, can you tell me where you are from and where you currently live? GE: Well, I’m, [chuckles], I guess I’m from Traverse City. I grew up and went to school in Traverse City. Graduated high school up there in 2001 and then, I went to the community college there at [MC?] and started a journalism career — or studying journalism brought me to Central Michigan where I got a bachelor’s degree and I now work for MLive as the Statewide Environmental Reporter. I’ve done that since 2015-2014 and I currently live in Kalamazoo. I’ve bounced around — Traverse City, Mount Pleasant, Grand Rapids. I did a lot — a lot of the stuff we’re going to talk about today happened when I live in the Grand Rapids-Kent County area. DD: And how long have you been in Kalamazoo? GE: Since 2019. I moved down here to be closer to my daughter who moved away with my ex in 2018. So, [chuckles] I’ll get into some of that because it ties into the story a little bit. DD: Alright, let’s just get rolling then. Can you please tell me a story about your experience with PFAS [per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances] or PFAS in your community? GE: Sure, I guess what I can tell you is a little bit about the — the best story that I have to tell is the way the news broke around the Wolverine Worldwide contamination in the RockfordBelmont area and I think the place to begin is with an email that I got I — I pulled it up. So, it was July 19, yep, 2017, and I was in Alabaster Township over on the sunrise side of the state — near Tawas. Just south of Tawas. At what would be — would’ve been my father and mother in-laws’ bedroom where I was working— you know had I gotten married to my ex, my daughter’s mother. So, we were up visiting during the week, and I was working, you know, remotely and they were, you know, my daughter was little over 1 years old at the time. She’s still pretty little. And so, we were up near — Haley is her — my ex’s name and my daughter’s name is Olive. And so, we were up with Haley’s parents, and I got an email from a woman named Lynn McIntosh. And her email is lmarie003, right, and I didn’t understand it at the time but the 003 is sort of a cute James Bond reference [laughs] — like she’s [Agent 003?]. 1 �DD: [laughs] GE: And she said she had read a lot of articles that I had written, and she follows the PFAS issue pretty closely and she wanted to tell me a possible lead on a story about related to PFOS [perand polyfluoroalkyl substances] sources in Northern Kent County other than Plainfield Township. And so, at this point, I had written fairly extensively about Wurtsmith Air Force Base in Oscoda which like is the first place in Michigan that PFAS had ever been discovered. And through that reporting, I had learned that the chemicals were in the township municipal water supply in Plainfield at sort of moderate levels. I think were — nothing that really exceeded the EPA’s 70 parts per trillion health advisory level, but nevertheless, sort of concerning. So, I had written in 2016 an article about that, right so, Plainfield, Ann Arbor, detection of these chemicals in public drinking water— and it was some of the first reporting in Michigan about PFAS and drinking water. So it was real early — you know there was a reaction to it, but it wasn’t like, you know, had you written that story now, people would — “oh, no” — they’d really go nuts. People didn’t quite understand it then. So, I got this email from a lady named Lynn talking about possible sources in Kent County — Northern Kent County and it really piqued my interest because nobody knew why it was getting into Plainfield Township’s water. There was a suspicion that it was a [super fun side?] on the East Beltline but hadn’t been determined yet. And there was suspicion that it could from a gravel pit on the other side of the — the Grand River which subsequently would discover was a Wolverine dump site. But none of this had been discovered yet. And so, Lynn McIntosh asked to meet. And so — I didn’t get back to her right away. [laughs] I got back to her few days later on the 21st. And I said — I apologized for — the delay — sometimes it takes me a few days, you know, — just to — I get emails from lots of different people, and you’ve got to decide, do I respond to this person? Because everybody promises they’ve got a story, and they’ve got a big scoop. And it’s like, some of them are just cranks. And you just don’t — you just don’t want to — want to give them a reply because then you get pulled in. DD: [um-hum] GE: But Lynn had enough detail. And she mentioned something — she mentioned something in her email — or emails — about a tannery. And that — triggered something in my mind because — I had moved to Sparta in October 2016 from Grand Rapids with my, you know, ex and our — our infant daughter. Sparta, I don’t know if you’re familiar with Sparta, but it’s not — there’s not a lot to do there. [chuckles] DD: [chuckles] 2 �GE: But it’s close to Rockford, you know, it’s, you know, a 5-10 minute drive. So, in the evenings, we would go to Rockford and we would walk the White Pine trail with Olive in the stroller. And, you know, it’s kind of nice downtown, and there’s the dam. And just, you know, if you’re going to go for a stroll with a kid, it’s a — it’s a more desirable place to do that. And so, we’ve been walking the white pine trails a few times, and we’re walking past this big, empty property north of downtown Rockford and I keep looking at it like, why is there a fence here? What is this? I just didn’t know what the property used to be. But it looked like a pollution site, right? I’ve been doing environmental stuff for a while, and I was kind of like, [hmmm] something’s going on here. This is prime real-estate downtown. It would be built on if there wasn’t some sort of contamination error issue going on here. So, I remember flagging down a police officer, one of the bike cops that just sort of [roams around?], and I was like “Hey is there something wrong with that property?”. And I got a “Oh, no —no I don’t know anything about it, you know”. And I’m like, “you don’t know anything about that property, you know, mister police officer who live in Rockford and works in Rockford and this is downtown Rockford?” [mimics garbled response from police officer] DD: [chuckles] GE: So, I had kind of been like [huh]. Through this email with Lynn, I learned that this was the Wolverine Worldwide tannery. And — it — it just sort of clicked that — that could be interesting. And so, I agreed to meet Lynn a few days later and we walked — we walked from the Rockford Dam up to — a spot on the river right next to where the foot depot is, right. So, there is the existing building on the tannery site — the only thing that is left. And it used to be the manufacturing facility itself, but now it’s just a shoe store. DD: [um-hum] And so, Lynn’s kind of like, you’ve got to see this. There’s still a ton of leather and stuff leftover from the tannery itself right here in the riverbank. And I’m like, really? And so, we push all this brush aside on the riverbank, it was pretty overgrown at the time, I mean you walked the trail and could see the river but it’s not like it is now after the EPA clean up, where, you know, it’s been — all that underbrush and vegetation has been removed. So, we push aside this — all this vegetation and just look down and it’s just leather litter. It’s — it’s — like old scraps of the leather, the trimmings, right, from the manufacturing process. And — and — pieces of shoe, rubber soles — rubber shoe soles. And it was obvious right? Anybody could’ve figured it out. I mean — there was even a— a— a sole, a full rubber sole of a shoe that said hush puppies on it. [laughs] So — I mean it’s like, huh. DD: Yeah. GE: So, I took a bunch of pictures of this, and immediately I’m like, well, if a company is going to leave this here, right here on the riverbank for anyone to find, it’s got their name on it — what else have they left, you know? So, everything was sort of [hmm] — this is —Lynn McIntosh is 3 �definitely not just a crank or someone who was just emailing me, right? There’s something here for sure. So, I started to really get into, alright, what’s going on? And so, she shows me the leather scraps — which those photos really caught people’s attention, right? Just that — the idea that this stuff is still littering the river and it has the company’s name on it and it’s been there for years. And it’s been there for so long that like, it had become a part of the riverbank. Like trees had grown up around it. Big trees. And you know, to hear Lynn tell it, it was just the tip of the iceberg. You know, I mean like, the whole riverbank was made of leather, more or less, you know, in fact there’s and island on the river that they call the “Island of the Lost Soles”. DD: [chuckles] GE: You know, because it was supposedly built on leather trimmings, and leather hides and stuff that hadn’t been, you know, used as infill. DD: Wow. GE: So, [sighs] so she — you know I go over to Lynn’s house, and she drops theses huge binders of like, you know, paperwork, old reports [foil materials?], emails, her own sort of, you know, sketches and drawings like her decade of —near decade work on the tannery and the contamination issue there. And you know, it was like, it was overwhelming — like oh man. [laughs] And so, I started to go through it and talk to her and sort of understand what the concern was which ended up being they put a ton of scotch guard on that leather and — they had — you know her group, CCRR, [Concerned Citizens for Responsible Redevelopment], was initially the “R”, but they changed it to be “remediation” later on — you know had learned about all the scotch guard use and was arguing with Wolverine to try to get them to do more with the remediation at the tannery site. And they were having all kinds of problems because there was a guy at Michigan Department of Environmental Quality who was real friendly to Wolverine, and you know, he just didn’t take them seriously at all and didn’t like Lynn clearly at all. She seemed to have rubbed him the wrong way. [sighs] And so, we start to scope out a story about, you know, this issue with the PFAS in the river. It had been found with some surface water testing a few years prior that’s they knew for sure it was there — and like look at all this, I mean the leather scraps, and the river, and the tannery, and the fish was the first story that we worked on. And that was — I think we finally got that ready to go in late August. Let me Google the date. [typing sounds] August 23, 2017, right. So, it was ready to go about a week or so before that, but the Corner Bar in Rockford caught fire on like, the day that we were going to publish this story. And so, we held on to it. To not, I mean —sort of for us — just community sensitivity reasons. I mean it was like, okay, we’re not gonna — [laughs] the community of Rockford is mourning the loss of an institution right now., we’re not going to just the same day put this story out there about how there’s this big pollution problem in the river right downtown. I mean, it’s there, it can wait a week. 4 �So, we waited a week and then published it on the 23rd of August — and [sighs][chuckles] I feel like I already glossed over so much just by — at this point — so while I was reporting out that story in August, I got a phone call from Lynn, who, you know, [sighs] had just found sort of just through the grapevine that the DEQ [Michigan Department of Environmental Quality], they’re now called EAGLE [Environment And Great Lakes Energy] — it’s a cute acronym —they were handing out bottled water on a street in Belmont — where the chemicals were being found in people’s private drinking wells. DD: [huh] GE: And she was all excited — like not in a good way but like “oh my god, they found — they found this stuff at like, eighteen-hundred parts per trillion”, probably more, but I’d have to go find the notebook, but she was like, “really high levels at someone’s well on House Street”. And I remember writing it down like, “House Street, where the hell is House Street?”, right, like I didn’t even know where that was, and I thought, what a silly name for a street — like “building avenue”. [chuckles] DD: [laughs] GE: So, before the first story about the river published, we learned about what was happening on House Street— but, I mean, at that point it’s like, “oh, man, you know, what do I do?” You know, I’ve reported on this story, it’s focused on the river, and this issue with the tannery, and it became — so I started looking at House Street too and it became clear that this is a Wolverine Worldwide problem as well — and so, you know, the focus — the decision was — well let’s get the first story out and then follow up pretty quickly — as soon as you can. And so, you know, by the time the story was published on the 23rd, I had already started pivoting to House Street and I was trying to — I was — I had gotten a good briefing on the issue from the guy at the DEQ. His name was David O’Donnell. And he kind of ends up being a villain in this story. [long sigh] I don’t know if villain is the best way to put it, but he does not come across well. I mean like, you know, if you go back and look at some of the decisions that he made, you know, he not a [sighs] — the people who live on House Street, right, are not a fan of David O’Donnell — neither is Lynn McIntosh or anyone who, you know, works for the CCRR because he had been sort of a gatekeeper at DEQ — in charge of sort of the site, the Wolverine tannery site. Come to find out, he had been really — he had been a bit of an impediment to this stuff being discovered and being dealt with — something of a poster child for regulator captures in some ways. But what had happened, you know, CCRR and Lynn McIntosh — her group had been gathering all this evidence about Wolverine’s scotch guard use and had been taking it to David O’Donnell and the DEQ and trying to go, “Hey, look. Look at where they — this stuffs in the river right here in Rockford, you know, Wolverine’s patent [chuckles] clearly demonstrates that they use these chemicals, there’s all kinds of references to is even if” — but of course their lawyers are denying that they did and you know — you know even denying that they knew anything about scotch guard or PFAS and just the way that lawyers deny stuff like that. 5 �[sighs] So, once I found out about House Street, I had been back and forth with David O’Donnell about the river story, you know, just sort of reporting that stuff out and I had followed the [foyer?] request for, you know, Wolverine’s investigation — river investigation workplan, and so once I found out about House Street, I called David O’Donnell and said “What are you doing on House Street?”. This was like one of those “oh shit, caught us moments” because I had been talking to him about Wolverine and the river and PFAS and all this stuff for weeks, but he never mentioned that up in this neighborhood Belmont, nearby, we are investigating whether this stuff is in drinking water and ground water around an old landfill that they used to use. And they had been doing that — they started doing that in the spring. DD: [hmm] GE: So, months before Lynn McIntosh had ever emailed me, they had started doing work out there. The reason that they had started doing work up there is because of the Kent County Health Department, right, and — and there’s a big backstory there involving Lynn’s groups and trying to get information to the DEQ and trying to get enough evidence to force them to start investing this issue. There’s a woman at the health department named Sarah Simmons, who really played a big role in sorting of forcing David O’Donnell to move up a timeline for investigating this — this stuff there. He would’ve sat on that until 2018 or later, you know. And so — [chuckles] so my phone call with David O’Donnell was very much like, “Oh, you found out about that. Well, okay, why don’t you come on over to our office and I’ll sit you down and tell you everything that’s going on there”. And so, he — I went over to the State Office Building in Downtown GR [Grand Rapids], where the DEQ had it’s — Remediation Division Office, and it’s just a walk from MLive’s office to the State’s Office downtown. He put a map in front of me, you know, with like a color-coded — like oh here’s the property with really bad — red [laughs] — where we think there’s really high levels [sighs] and it was like “oh, man”. So, he laid it all out for me, so I had enough for a story, right? I have an official source from the government confirming that there’s an investigation going on — here’s what the investigation is about and here’s the properties, you know, that are at concern. But [sighs] you know, [sighs] that’s — that’s like the bare minimum for a story like this and I wanted to get some people who live in the — who live in the area, who live in the affected neighborhood. And so, I was really — working hard to try and get like anyone on House Street. [chuckles] The first story that I wrote doesn’t have anyone who lives on House Street. It had someone who grew up on House Street — a woman named Brandy Glaskey who is actually a loose family connection of mine — who is like [sighs] my grandma’s sister’s son’s wife. I think that’s third cousin or something like that or something removed? I never really figured it out, but I remember seeing her at family gatherings growing up anyway so somehow I put together because we were like friends on Facebook that she grew – oh no I saw her name -I had gone down the street, writing down all the -y’know knocking on doors but you know you are working during the day, nobody is home, nobody is answering. Those people that do answer like don’t want anything to do with a reporter, there was a pregnant woman answered, you know a pregnant woman answered. I don’t remember the exact address but, there were these bottles of water like 6 �four little twenty-ounce bottles of water sitting there with like a note on top. And like you know pregnant woman answers with a little kid behind her, and I’m like thinking “oh man” you know, contamination in the drinking water, its never good for -I mean pregnant women and kids are vulnerable populations. So, you know everything just- you know shaping up that this was bad news but. And so, I’m writing down addresses and and searching the people behind those addresses and trying to find phone numbers and stuff to call them and figuring out who lives here and sort of this sort of this basic investigative backgrounding work. And then I googled 18-50 – It think [sighs] I didn’t google – no 1850 house street, and I put that together with Joel Stelt. And I googled his name and an obituary popped up immediately, and it was recent. Like a year old, 2016. And it mentioned cancer? And it was like “oh no” you know? I mean it was just like one of those -all the pieces are -all the red flags are just you know stacking up. [sighs]. So, I eventually was able to get enough information out of DEQ, I was able to get a FIAO request with a lot of old files, historical sort of records showing that yes Wolverine dumped here on this property, and this was the dates, and there was a lot of old water resources commissions records and stuff. And so, I had a lot information and I had a lot of experience with the chemicals and what they can do and how far they can go and what the safety thresholds and stuff were, and who the experts talked to about this stuff because I had spent a lot of time at -reporting wordsmith. And so [sighs] the story about the river didn’t get a lot of attention, because that’s just the way it goes with environmental stories you know if the impact is primarily to the ecosystem, its, and ecological concern fore most. [DD agrees] people are upset about that sort of thing, get upset about it, but the more of the mainstream reaction tends to just shrug at it. But when you write a headline that says “toxic chemicals pollute drinking water” near old tannery dump, that gets attention and so that story went up, [pauses] [typing is heard] August 30th, 2017, so, about a week later, a week after the river story. And that was really the, you know, the sort of the damn broke on Wolverine and on PFAS and Rockford and that’s when it became like WOOD TV and all the TV stations suddenly jumped on it, you know Ken Kolker who is a former press reported you know is camped out on house street trying to get [sighs] TV reporters are intrusive, print reports we try not to be predatory but we are more the guy that comes up with you with the notebook and is like “hey how is it going try not to be a jerk here with the camera” whereas the TV reports are right in your face with the microphone you know they camp out on your lawn. But that approach can be effective because Ken Kolker was the first one to get Sandy went stealth actually to talk [laughs] I have bene calling and leaving voice messages and stuff before, but I was just too early you know? [DD laughs] the first one and nobody wanted to deal with the reporter but eventually when you deal with one its sort of like pandoras box is open and they start to deal with all of them. [sighs] so [pause] you know that story goes up and pretty quickly its- its big- its huge new right all the TV, all the Aps picking it, TV stations are doing stuff and immediately they schedule, a big public town hall meeting on it and you know it’s like, it’s a different thing you know? Chemicals in the river, that’s generally a concern for people who like a limited population right? People who eat the fish, [DD agrees] um, the chemicals in drinking water, that you know, that freaks people out rightly so. That’s a major problem. And it being that it wasn’t just the chemicals in drinking water, it was like these sort of new unregulated chemicals that people had never really heard of and understood. They understood the products associated but the underlying chemistry was a big mystery and its hugely complicated and you know this one woman’s property has got record levels of this. Like the regulators are like “we have never heard of anything this bad” right? 18.. what was it? [sighs and thinks] in the story it said that 27,000 parts per trillion in the well. Has the highest combined PFO as PFOA concentration the 7 �state health department toxicologist had ever seen in drinking water well. And that was just the PFOS and PFOA number, not the total PFOS number, which ended up being much much higher and subsequent testing showed you know just astronomically high levels. I think Sandy, that was Sandy [unclear]. [DD agrees] and I think later on I mean its tested at 88.000 parts per trillion its like pure scotch garden at that point. You know her husband was drinking that, and she was drinking that, and you know and then he its like [sighs] its one of those situations where you know as a reporter you always want a big story and then one lands in your lap and suddenly “ok now you gotta do this well! And you need to be respectful and and and not be predatory about it”. And you know so it was a delicate, delicate thing I think – I think I handled it pretty because the first two -well the first three stories because there was a third one here. Hold up I have gone back to you know years- you know the last few years to kind a like, read -reread through them, I mean like there is a lot of really good information here that holds up still. [DD agrees] And so part -one of the things that Lin Mackintosh had given me, one of the pieces of information -I think like the most crucial piece of information she ever got, the best document she ever got, was notarized in her view from my a truck driver -a dump -you know a guy that actually did the dumping on house street. She had found him one of her fellow group members had done a notarized interview with him, and that had they had given that to DEQ and that ended up being [pause] a really key piece of evidence that really forced the state to start invest- forced the state force Wolverine to start investigating around the house street dump. And so I had that too, you know I knew that not just -the chemicals weren’t only here on house street, they were, he dumped this stuff at a couple other places and so there was a third story um in that I was working on as well, um, [clicking] I can’t remember the headline there. [pause] [sighs] [typing] ok so, on September 7th I published the third story. Which is “Tannery waste dumped at landfill tied to municipal water pollution.” So here I was kind of able to bring this stuff full circle in some ways with the dump truck driver Earl Teft, he had said that we had dumped this stuff at house street, we dumped this stuff at old dump on -off of 12 mile and Algoma. Kind of up the river from Rockford, north of Rockford a little ways right on the river like a old dump on the river like, what a terrible place to put a dump. And the state disposal land fill on the beltline south of at like right there at four mile and [unclear] sort of like kitty corner of Robinette’s there a supper fun site. Used to be an old dump. Thankfully its downgradient from the apple orchard. So, I looked at that. You know cuz then you are like “oh my god” people are eating contaminated apples -but they weren’t. And so that was able to tie the Wolverine dumping to the Plainfield township municipal water issue. And that ended up being a really important thing because it sparked a lot of online activisms that resulted in people showing up in droves at Plainfield township board meetings demanding filtration and demanding something be done and that pressure for Plainfield township responded to that pressure by seeking state grant money to install activated carbon filtrations on their municipal water. And so that really kind of sparked the first [sighs] filtration efforts? And on municipal water in Michigan it was sort of a pilot project which is you know pretty, it created a water supply that could then be used as the solution you know that’s what’s happening right now right so Plainfield townships water is filtered for these chemicals and now they’ve extend -with the consent decree with Wolverine they’ve you know the company you know and three [unclear] are paying for Plainfield township watermain extensions to neighborhoods with polluted wells and stuff. So, it was like the first three stories in the span of about two and a half, three weeks you know. Established Wolverine the polluter, problem with the river, huge drinking water problem and ground water and Belmont and it’s tied to the municipal water issue in Plainfield township AND there are probably more dump sites, right? So, 8 �it was all of these things came out in the span of a few weeks and they didn’t go through the corporate PR downplay, spin washing machine, right? This was -there were no press conferences there were no press releases. There was no filtration of the news through you know the the through the government [sighs] or the corporate sort of polluter lens before it reaches the public, it was just pure information straight from primary sources and it was really strong reporting. And it at point -the community there was no denying it. Wolverine could not put the genie back in the bottle. And it, you know sort of spun into this enormous search for dump sites around the Rockford, northern Kent County area. And that turned up the woven jewel, Welling Ridge sorts of area that’s almost in terms of concentrations strength. It’s almost worse than house street a lot of people don’t know that. And it you know put a lot of pressure on the state government, especially after Flint. This is still Rick Snyder’s administration and so his response is, well gosh you know, I can’t be seen having another drinking water crisis, so you know he creates M Part, which and and and in M parts first big mission is to test all public drinking water supplies around the state. And what that does is it -that directly results in the discovery in contamination in parchment, and you know it you know it would not of happen if Wolverine had not broken in that way. If you know there hadn’t been enough -all this pressure being put on Lance and to act, [sighs] [sighs] that’s kinda where it becomes a personal story to me in some ways because, the work [sighs] on Wolverine and this story strained a relationship that was broken with my exgirlfriend. To the point of no return. We separated in December 2017. And That was very hard and and she met somebody within a few months, and he happened to live in parchment, [laughs]. And so, in mid-2018 she moves to parchment with my daughter. Mid, maybe it’s, its summer 2018 and off the top my head I don’t remember the exact date but thankfully by that time they had discovered the drinking water contamination, right. So, my daughter was in a you know, not exposed to that stuff [DD agrees] you know at that point I am really thankful for that, right? Because without all of this stuff happening, you know she’d have gotten down here and [pauses] you know I mean its high levels in the municipal water, they react really strongly to what happened in parchment, and they turn that- I mean they got the test and turned the tap off at the plant that day. And so that’s a weird you know, its sort of this roundabout way they I like kinda like I didn’t -I’m not Rick Schnyder, I didn’t make the state do this statewide water testing. But I do believe the that the way the news broke around Wovlerine and Rockford and sort of the community response to it and the fact that this stuff came out, [hand chopping] boom boom boom, like really solid reporting on this came out without a bunch of government or PR spin on it, forced a lot of action [DD agrees] I think that’s one of the more consequential actions that forced and and it did end up protecting the things that I love the most [laugh] so that’s, that’s a good feeling in that -that sense. DD: Can IGE: [stretches and laughs] I feel like I have been talking for a while [laughs] DD: You have, but that’s okay. 9 �GE: Did I -you know there is more to all -like there is more detail I could definitely like go back in and fill out detail on this stuff, [pause]. But [sighs] it oh [laughs and clears throat]. There is one interesting element to -to kind of go back to this point where [clears throat] I am just discovering this stuff, starting to report it as seek information about the Wolverines use of the chemicals and what’s going on with the river and what not. Back in August 2017, [sighs] one of the very first things I did, I almost the first thing I did after Lin Mackintosh identified Wolverine worldwide Tannery. As I sent a FOIA request from the DEQ for you know its investigation -I think it was -excuse me- [tisk] I forget the wording -exact wondering about a FOIA, it was information about what Wolverine was doing to investigate FPAS in Rockford. And that FOIA request [laughs] you know through subsequent FOIA requests in in you know reporting and stuff I [sighs] that FOIA request really hit a fire, under the state and Wolverine and I David O’Donald, I caught him before he gave me – FOIA materials to me, he gave them to Wolverine’s attorney a day prior. [DD agrees] Which is a no- no, you do not do that, I mean that was the kind of thing that never like I never fit it in any of the initial stories because it was seemed to be this sort of behind scenes inside baseball stuff that wasn’t directly relevant to the matter at hand which was drinking water contamination and health threat. It was you know corporate regulatory issue; you know involving the media. I was able to kind of, some oblique references to it in later stories, but that was how I knew that David O’Donald isn’t a voice right actor in this point right. You know the guy that is in charge of- you know overseeing the regulatory response is giving -media FOIA requests to the polluter before he gives them to the media. That’s an issue and that’s a big transparency shown, -it may just of sort of hammer home when Mackintosh has is saying to me at this time which is in some respect, going back to now this stuff sounds a bit extreme. And then you deal with something like that, and you are like “wow okay so there really is some bullshit going on here” [computer notification] So that’s an interesting piece of this you know DD: Yeah GE: There is more things like that, but I am thinking of writing a book [laughs] with this whole issue. DD: Wow GE: These initial interviews and [sighs] outlining and chapter and it’s a lot of work it’s a lot of work to write all report and write all day and you know. DD: And then write some more. GE: Yea [laughs] so I haven’t moved very far on that but there is just so much there that I don’t know how there really just is no other way to present it besides just documentary film or 10 �something like that it needs to be some sort of big, [sighs] you know substantial, depth, of [DD agrees] presentation for this matter because I am newspaper reporter and I can do long form stories and I can do regular updates and stuff but they’re all there is a limit to the newspaper format [DD agrees] and so I try to work the best I can within those limitations but there is still like like if she got -its been a few years at this point and you know there is, there is a lot of details around this story that you either have to know or know how to google search you know a whole bunch of old stories to find and stuff you know so I’d like to just, I’m really interested in a presentation that puts it all in one place. DD: Yea, that sounds fascinating I would read slash watch it. GE: Yea? Well, I hope but thank you. There is a kid working on a documentary eh he is a film maker in Ypsilanti. He kind of started working on it a few years ago and I have been trying to help him but he is kind of doing it on a shoe string but its not moving very quickly but you know I -it its an interesting story -I I I find the Wolverine story is -has a lot of drama [DD agrees] it effects a lot of people, chem- but its you know and in that respect its -its [sighs] you know its not like the military, where you know at an air force base -sorry about the pulsing black that’s there it’s the back lighting, like at an air force base, you’ve got the military they use this A FFF triple fighting foam, that creates the contamination there. It’s a different thing then when a company, you know, like Wolverine, which is this huge, global footwear company, headquartered in the same small town Kent County area, that it was birthed from, you know, it’s this sort of company town aspect to it, you know, pollutes the environment and the people in it’s hometown, right, in it’s backyard. It’s a different stor- I mean the contamination is the same, the result is the same. I mean if you’re drinking it because the military used AFFF foam and that’s how the groundwater polluted versus Wolverine Worldwide dumps scotts yard waste into an unmined landfill and that’s how the groundwater polluted. I mean if-if-if- you’re the affected person it doesn’t really matter. I mean you’re- I mean guess maybe it does in terms- if you want to get and sue them or something. You know you can’t sue the military basically. But in terms of storytelling and narratives and you know sort of things like that, the Wolverine Rockford story is much more compelling and I think it grabs people’s attention in a different way than a lot of the military contaminations, because I think when it comes to military there’s- people aren’t conflicted you know it’s like well this is the military weyou know- we support our troops. You know it’s hard for people to grasp the notion that- thatinstitution would be a bad actor. DD: “Mhmm” GE: “Versus you know a copr- major corporation. It’s almost like people just sort of expect you know, that sort of thing, right? You know, when profits, you know are on the line and- you know that’s the way business is done, you know kind of thing. 11 �DD: “Mhmm” GE: “There’s differences there in terms of, you know the residents I guess of the story. DD: “mhmm, absolutely. Yeah. So for you, after this kind of really intense period of reporting, what happened for you after that? Like as- as- in your work with PFAS? Did it have an impact for you moving forward or was this kind ofGE: “Yeah. [chuckles] I- so- it never stopped for me. It still hasn’t stopped for me. It’s- It’s been PFAS almost continuously since then. In fact, mLive recognized, thankfully, with a little bit of cajoling, sort of the mLive busts recognized this was- we were- we were way ahead of something that you know most other media outlets around the country hadn’t figured out yet. And so theynot only did they keep me on the story, the PFAS story, Wolverine, Rockford, all of that, but statewide and nationally, they added somebody so I started working with another reporter named Paula Gardner in early 2018. And, you know, because the M part situation quickly snowballed into statewide testing and now, we’re looking into wastewater, which, you know, is a huge pathway for the chemicals into the environment. Suddenly there’s a ton of interest and audience for this stuff in Michigan, and so and we had been doing great work on it, so, you know, there was about a two and a half, three year period where I wrote about nothing besides PFAS. Which is remarkable for a newspaper. You know it- it- just doesn’t really happen anymore. Especially in a time of consolidation in the media where everybody, you know, even specialists, are forced to do more generalist type stuff. It, you know, it’s still looking back, shocks me that I had A) I was writing about more or less one story, one subject for several years and I was doing it with someone else who was doing the same thing, it wasn’t like oh she’s going to help you part time, it was you two are a team and this is your subject and we- really proud of the work we did over 2018 and 2019. We really followed the drinking water testing and the results closely and it had a pretty big- it had some residence with Gretchen Witmer, who started talking about drinking water on the campaign trail a lot. It was like ‘fix the damn roads and clean up the drinking water’ like those were the two things. And so, when she gets elected, suddenly the process of developing drinking water standards is initiated. The groundwork had been laid under Rick Snyder, but nobody was expecting him to follow through with a regulatory process that, you know, imposes cost burdens on a regulated community, that’s just not what Republicans do. When she gets elected, you know, Whitmer’s a Democrat and she initiates the process for setting PFAS drinking water standards, you know, and now we have those. I threw some- just talking to people in this community, I remember talking to a donor, a Democratic donor, who is heavily involved in PFAS issues in Michigan. He- he tells me this story of you know, one of my- you know he’s at like a town hall presentation, like a- like a- campaign appearance with Whitmer and, you know, he gets an alert, and it’s one of my stories, it’s about like the first big results of drinking water testing around the state, you know showed, you know, if you total up the 12 �population of the systems with PFAS in them it’s about 1.5 million people are being served by filter systems right, so you know, that’s the headline. And so, he takes that headline over to Whitmer after their appearance, and she reacts pretty strongly to it. This is per my source but, you know, all of her actions today around PFAS, you know back that up that she took it pretty seriously. So that was nice. Anytime as a reporter you can point to policy action, you know, especially in the public health realm where people are being protected against a danger and a threat, you know that feels really good. That’s what journalism is supposed to do, right? I mean it’s sort of the larger importance of you know, journalism and what the news media can do and you know this is [chuckles] and this is all happening in the Trump era, you know where at nationally journalists are being, you know, vilified as enemy of the people, you know, interestingly I never experienced that. You know, most of the Trump years I spent writing about this issue DD: “mhmm” GE: “And just the amount of appreciation I’ve received from people who are affected by it or interested in it. I mean… overwhelming. You know, you get emails as a journalist, you get hate emails. If you’re writing about politics much more than about environmental issues, but I get some. Just the ratio is very much [chuckles] way way way way more people writing like ‘thank you’ emails versus you know what are you some kind of liberal doom sayer kind of stuff. So that’s been really encouraging. Right? It’s the kind of thing that, you know, makes the editors, you know, happy, your bosses happy, they can kind of sell the newspaper on that, a little bit on that. Look at what we’ve done, and here we got this guy, buy a subscription. And so that helps… job security. [chuckles] DD: [chuckles] GE: So yeah, I guess it’s a long way of answering your question, but yeah, I expect to be writing about PFAS for the rest of my career, you know, it’s like, every- you know, you talk to scientists, and you talk to experts and they’re like it’s the new PCB’s, it’s the new bestest, it’s the new this and that, you know and those things are still around, and those things still make the news now and then. I mean, I’m here in Kalamazoo, not far from the Kalamazoo River where, you know, there’s still dredging, sediment dredging going on from all the PCBs in the river from the paper making, you know, industry. They call that legacy, you know pollution. I jus-You know, PFAS is clearly on that sort of trajectory of being, you know, like it’s an issue that-, you know like PCBs, there’s clearly an effort to get it out of products where it’s not necessary, clean it up from the environment, more strictly regulate its uses, you know and that sort of thing. And because there is so much going on with it, there’s a lot to keep track of. And because that’s where my expertise has kind of been developed I kind of have to follow that. Which in some regards, creates a conundrum for me because I would write more about things like Climate Change, or 13 �Environmental Justice, which are really hugely important topics, but I have to kind of play a little bit of triage with my time because I go well, you know those things are being covered pretty well by other reports in Michigan and nationally. This is something that I have a lot of experience and knowledge in, and you know, I can do the most good by following that path, you know, instead of, you know, go where the herd is going. DD: “mhmm” GE: “But that’s hard to explain to some people, you know in Ann Arbor who are very upset about, you know rightfully so, climate change. And so, you know, over the years I’ve had to kind of say, you know look I can’t do everything, and this is the one I’m kind of following and I’ll get to climate change when I can. There are other really good reporters, it’s not like that topic isn’t in the news. DD: “Yeah. Well, I know, we’ve talked for the hour I’ve told you we would talk, and I want to be respectful of your time, and I’m sure you’re busy. GE: “Well, if you have more questions, I’m happy to answer them because right now you’re keeping me from a staff meeting which I am all about that.” DD: “Well I have one more question.” GE: “Okay.” DD: “Given your expertise, and all this experience. What are your concerns about PFAS contamination moving forward, either, you know, from human perspectives, personal perspectives, from work perspectives, what are your concerns about PFAS contamination looking into the future?” GE: “I guess my concern is that people become kind of a nerd to it, before there is very strong national regulations to keep them safe from- from this stuff. You know, and I think that is a big concern among the activists, community and some lawmakers who are trying to push for national drinking water standards. I don’t know if I have a great perspective on that because I’m in Michigan, which, you know over the last few years really learned- you know there’s a collective knowledge about it in Michigan to a much higher degree compared to states like Ohio even, well I guess not Ohio because they had the parkersburg, but other Great Lake states, and other states around the country where the testing hasn’t been done to show that, you know, it’s ‘Yes’ it’s ambiguous to the environment, it’s probably in some drinking water. You know, I guess last year during 2020, when the pandemic hit and everything, you know Covid was the only thing people were paying attention to, it was certainly the only thing that news editors cared about, you know 14 �followed by racial strife, you know in the summer, it was sort of- frustrating to have watched interest amongst the readership as well as, you know, your bosses just [plane noise] nose dive on that and I think we’ve gotten to a place now in 2020 you know where people are vaccinated and life seems to be kind of resuming in a normal fashion, where PFAS issues are kind of coming back and people are paying attention to that again. I can see it in the numbers on a particular headline, because we get- we can see how many people are reading stuff. There is the other concern that we keep replacing the chemicals that are in use now with newer versions of the same stuff. That’s what they’ve been doing right? Like PFOS has been phased out and so they bring in PFBS which is the same thing it just has a different number of Carbon atoms. It’s supposedly safer right? Well, is it? Probably not, right? We’ve talked to health experts and they’re like well it’s not any less toxic. It may not persist in the environment quite as long, but you know, you still shouldn’t be drinking that. And so there’s, you know, this sort of issue with manufacturing of these chemicals, which are obviously lucrative, and so it’s like as the problem evolves in this sort of industry, you know, looks to kind of keep that gravy train going, how does it evolve in a way- will it evolve in a way that we can kind of keep track of it and make sure that it’s not getting into the environment again or are we going to be repeating this years down the road. I remember even in the midst of Wolverine and all of this stuff breaking, people going ‘what’s the next PFAS going to be?’ and I’m like the next PFAS? Let’s deal with this PFAS right here instead of worrying about what the next thing is, but now I look back on that and think well that’s probably a smart thing to be worried about, right? Maybe we should be having that conversation now while this is happening versus ignoring it, you know, until we discover a new problem down the road. Those would be- I’ll probably think of a better answer once [laughs] we hang up, and I’ll be like oh there’s this thing. I wonder what it all means for people in general like what is the larger outcome of this science experiment that we’ve been playing on the human population with, you know, mutagenic chemicals that affect people’s DNA? What does that look like 50, 100 years down the road? What’s the world going to look like when my daughter is older, and she’s grown up? Those are things I think about too. DD: “Yeah. Before we wrap up, is there anything else that you would like to add that we haven’t touched on today? Or anything you’d like to go back to? I know there’s hoodles of things you could say but- “ GE: “Oh so much. You know, I- there’s a guy named Bob Delaney, who you may have heard of. Who really deserves just all the credit in Michigan for- and in some ways nationally, for being sort of the one who was out there kind of shouting that this was a problem, years before anyone was in a position to be able to understand that, or to acknowledge that. And he- you know, when I first called him about [?] in 2016, I didn’t know who Bob Delaney was. He’s a geologist, he’s a state scientist, well he’s retired now, at the time he was the state’s lead site manager for [?] and I expected that phone call to be ignored or to get an email back saying you know what you need to contact the PR people in order to set up an interview, in the way a lot of State and Federal 15 �employees do when a reporter calls, they’re like uhhh talk to the PR guy, but he didn’t do that. He recognized that what I was doing was important and he talked to me. And talked to me very frankly about the issue, and that was so different than most interactions you have as a reporter when talking to a government official. Without that, none of this would have happened I think in terms of the reporting and the stories and what not. Because I would- you know, the way he explained it to me and the knowledge I gained from him was absolutely crucial, to knowing that you’re on solid ground as a journalist on a topic you’re unfamiliar with, you know, you need sources you can trust, who are credible. If you have those, that's gold. He was that. I mean I can’t say enough about how important that was in order to, you know- because you know, writing about this sort of thing, you’re going to get people who try to knock it down right? And there’s going to be big, powerful institutions, you know, Wolverine Worldwide, 3M, attorneys for major law firms- they’re going to pick it apart, they’re going to, you know, try and find problems with it and I’m not a PhD, you know, I feel like I’m a smart enough guy, but I need to be able to trust the scientists who I’m talking to who are saying this is a huge problem, it’s worldwide, we’re not really dealing with it, here’s the potential health implications- I have to be able to trust they know what they’re talking about, and Bob Delaney did. He just deserves all the credit in the world for being, not only smart enough to figure out that this was an issue and start looking for it and taking actions to try and spur protections for people, as well as being open enough about it to speak to the media, and speak to journalists, and trust that they’re- you know, trust that process, you know, trust that that is still a valid way of getting good information out to the public-” 16 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Living with PFAS Interviews Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Devasto, Danielle Description An account of the resource Beginning in 2021, the Living with PFAS interviews were recorded to gather the personal stories of individuals impacted by PFAS contamination. PFAS, or per- and polyflourinated substances, are a large group of human-made chemicals used widely since the 1940s to make coatings and products resistant to heat, oil, stains, grease, and water. They can be found in countless household items, including food packaging, non-stick cookware, stain-resistant furniture, and water-resistant clothing. These chemicals are often called “forever chemicals” because they do not break down easily, can move through soils and contaminate drinking water sources, and build up in animals, plants, and people. PFAS have been linked to increased incidences of various cancers, increased cholesterol, decreased fertility, birth defects, kidney and liver disease, and immune system suppression, and thyroid dysfunction. It is estimated that PFAS are in the drinking water of more than 200 million Americans (Andrews & Naidenko, 2020). In Michigan alone, over 280 sites have PFAS contamination exceeding maximum contamination levels for groundwater (MPART, 2024). Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-11 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf audio/mp3 Type The nature or genre of the resource Motion Picture Text Sound Language A language of the resource eng Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context PFAS0019 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Ellison, Garret Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021-06-29 Title A name given to the resource Garret Ellison, 2021 (Interview video and transcript) Description An account of the resource Garret Ellison is an investigative environmental reporter at Mlive and Grand Rapids Press in Michigan. In this interview, Ellison discusses PFAS contamination in the Wolverine Worldwide site in Rockford, MI and his role in breaking MI-based PFAS stories. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource DeVasto, Danielle (interviewer) Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Moving Image Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/3778970e7b323fdddfbc7f2e7d3833bf.mp4 2c2678b17b05df2ab6ff655206cef89c https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/a053a58f4ee5da672fa92f8d82df1e90.pdf e80711672394d88ff4762f5d9a1fd89a PDF Text Text Living With PFAS Interviewee: Laura Facciolo Interviewer: Dani DeVasto Date: July 21, 2021 DD: I’m Dani DeVasto and today, July 21st, 2021 I have the pleasure of chatting with Laura Facciolo. Hi Laura. LF: Hello. Good morning. DD: Can you tell me about where you’re from and where you currently live? LF: I’m living in Italy- in the northeast of Italy, where there is a region named Veneto. So Veneto is- we have Venice that is the main city for us. DD: And how long have you lived there? LF: Since I was born, so nearly 43 years. [chuckles] DD: Thank you. Laura, can you tell me a story about your experience with PFAS or with PFAS in your community? LF: Yes, so I started having some information regarding PFAS [per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances] in 2017 in the early spring, because there were people saying that some teenagers near to our province- I’m living in the province of Padua- and in the province of Vicenza there were tests done on teenagers. And these tests were blood tests in order to find out some unknown compounds that were having very difficult names, and these compounds were PFAS. We were very worried because the information that we were receiving was not official information, so where- this information was not coming from official ways but was coming from other people that were knowing- I don’t know- friends or others living in that area. And they were saying that these compounds were present in the aquaduct, and the same aqueduct was also serving us. So even if we were not immediately involved in this blood test we were obviously worried because we were in the identical situation in terms of aqueduct. And what we immediately started to think was about our kids because these preliminary tests were as I said, done on the teenagers. So we were obviously worried about our kids and what was done at school, because many of us are having kids that are going to school where they also had lunch and were in the last years. It was told to us and told to the children that the best possible water we drink is the- let’s say- major water, so the water that was coming from the aqueduct and this was also advertised a lot in order not to use plastic bottles and so on. So we immediately stopped using aqueduct water. Also to cook pasta that you know, as an Italian is present a lot in- yes, in our food and our- what we are cooking. But we were worried because the kids when they were at school- they were also having lunch 1 �there and everything was cooked with aqueduct water. So again we started writing to our managers in order to have some information because no doctor was available and no information, nothing—also our physicians were not informed at all. And when we also after 1 or 2 months- when we also started receiving the invitations in order to go and get these blood tests done, our physicians were not aware of anything. And so the first- I would say that- the first 3 to 4 months were passed in order- doing a lot of meetings with each other in order to gain information between citizens living in the free provinces that are impacted by this pollution. And we finally understood that there was- there isa company that is based in the Vicenza- near Vicenza. And this company named the Miteni- in this moment now is closed- was producing these compounds since- 40 years at least and was discharging everything in a small river that is in contact with the groundwater. And unfortunately what happened is that we had a so-called free lather of contamination, because we- of water contamination- because the groundwater was contaminated- fully contaminated- and the superficial water- that is rivers and more rivers- were contaminated and the aqueduct water was contaminated also because the aqueducts are taking water from the groundwater that it’s in. And just to give you an idea, the groundwater that is contaminated is containing the same water of the Garda Lake, that is the biggest lake that we have in Italy. DD: Wow. LF: And it is the second aquifer in terms of dimensions in Europe. Unfortunately this is completely contaminated by these compounds. So what happened is that we discovered after months that we were not aware of anything as citizens, but actually information about this contamination was available in 2013, because there was a study that was done in Europe I think. And it was down after the institutions had heard about the Ohio disaster, the New Bond disasterso they decided to test all the rivers in Europe, and this study lasted 2 years. And it’s called the PERFORCE [Perfluorinated Organic Compounds in the European Environment] study. And they found out the levels of PFAS in the rivers of all Europe. What happened is that they found out that Po river- that is the biggest river in Italy and is in the north- was having a level of contaminants that was 10 times bigger than the 2nd most contaminated European river, that is the Thames. DD: Wow. LF: And so they did another study in order to find out what was the- from where these compounds were arriving. So this study was done in Italy and only in Italy, obviously, in order to try to understand what was contaminating the Po River. And they finally understood that- there was the 99% of compounds coming from this company. Unfortunately this was not shared with the citizens, with the relation that was continuing to drink the aqueduct river, to use also to growthe groundwater in order to- for example- for their, yes, for vegetables or fruits that we’re having in the gardens. And so they decided that- we discovered later that they had decided to put some filters in the aquaduct in order to- lowering down the levels of the compounds, at more or less at 500 nanograms per liter, but this was- this level of 500 nanograms per liter was not really decided on the basis of safety or-. It was more or less what they were about to do with the filters. 2 �So after more or less the end of 2013, we were able to have a lower level, but again it was too high for us. And then- we were angry when we discovered that they did not inform us at all and that they simply started to do tests on people without informing the physicians that were also enabled to rate these cleaning sites. Obviously when these things happen, luckily you are not alone, so not all people are having- I don’t know- the strength most of the time to do something, but we were lucky because we found out after months other parents that were worried. So as I said, we started to meet and to speak and to start going to managers, to the president of the region, and going to Rome and going to Brussels in order to find out solutions. So, almost at the end of 2017, we had a confirmation and then we whistled so that a second- there were other filters- so a second kind of filters was applied to the aqueducts in order to reduce the level to a so called technical zero that is more or less 5 nanograms per liter because this is the threshold under which the- yes, the company providing the aqueduct water are arriving with their detecting techniques. That is again not zero for us, so even if now they are saying that things are not solved. Actually this situation is not solved at all. First of all because Meteni is closed. Metini is a company that was obviously in contact with the group that was in contact with the scammers. And so they were perfectly aware of what they were managing, because there was a lot of correspondence between all these companies and they- were perfectly knowing what they were causing. And they had also paid a company that- in order to start- let’s say- having an idea on the cost for remediation of all the plans. And at the end they discovered that the costs in order to remediate the soiled water was bigger than the company level. So the company was sold for 1 euro to another company, the so called ICG [Intermediate Capital Group] company that is based in Luxembourg for 1 euro. And they continued to do what they were doing and in the last years, you know, I told you that the PERFORCE study was done and then the other study in order to find out all the contaminants in the Po River was done. And the results were available not to the public, but to institutions in 2013. So in 2014 the institution provided the approval to this company to work on disposal waters coming from the Netherland Chem Wash in order to- let’s say- they were working on those discharge waters that were used to produce a new PFOS compound that’s named GenX. So they were working on them, on these waters in order to concentrate GenX and be able use, again, these compounds. And this approval was given in 2014, so it’s incredible because we- they were knowing, they were applying filters at that time we were not aware of anything, but they were doing this very costly- these very expensive things done in the aqueducts and they were a few months later getting approval to work on GenX. And again we discovered this later, because we only started in 2017 and the most- you say- what happened- the majority of people were saying to us we were only generating honor with no reason because the water was not safe. And during the official meetings with institutions they were telling us that the water was safe, that the pregnant women and the children may have drunk it without problems. But we have 2 studies done in this area- so the so-called red area, in terms of this triple level of contamination, that demonstrate that a lot of women here are having a lot of troubles during pregnancies. There are a lot of babies that are lost during pregnancies and babies that- so we have both problems in terms of during the pregnancies and then we are also having problems with the newborns that are having a low birth weight. 3 �So, for example, there are a lot of small gestational age newborns having mouth formations and so on. So., two studies are confirming this. Unfortunately, these studies are not linking- were done in- were comparing the situation here with the situation in another Venetal area that is not impacted by PFAS. But they did not do the PFAS tests on moms and newborns unfortunately. Also because they- unfortunately there is no- there is still and- there was and there is still a big problem because they are not willing to show the truth as it is and show the causal relationship with this. I would simply say if PFAS were not the responsible- are not responsible for what is happening to pregnant women and newborns, what is the cause of this? And this is also only 1 of the effects because we have other studies that were done in order to find out if there is a difference in terms of mortality in our area. And a study that was conducted here shows there are more than 1000 people that were- died - and let’s say it was considered as an axis of mortality, respect to other areas of Veneto region. So why this 1 in 1000 people died? And what is the reason that caused this axis of mortality if not PFAS? So, we are now discovering that not only water unfortunately is contaminated, we found out that the most contaminated people were the ones who were growing food in their gardens- vegetables and the fruits- or were also having- yes, animals. These people are having the highest levels of contamination in their lives. So there were studies conducted on the food- we were- there were 2 different studies done in 2015 and 2017. In order to have the results of the study done in 2017 we started asking to region immediately to share with us the results. What happened is that they were not providing us the results. So we were forced to have the help of a lawyer and to ask -to have a trip law- I don’t have the English translation for this. We needed to go to a higher level, and we won this case. And they provided us this results in May this year. And these are not very good results. And so we are now studying them with experts and enrolling experts in order to find out the risk that is associated with the results that we are seeing and that we find and we have received. On the other end we are also obviously involved in the trial against the company, because in the meantime there was a trial that was initiated against the managers that were managing the company that caused this disaster. We are involved as civil parties so we are only providing our help to the institute in order to find out the truth and in order to have these people so they get people paid for what was done. And obviously the main problem is the soil and the groundwater is still fully contaminated and so everything is now, lets say, flushing and going into the adriatic sea, so, near venice because they’re either is let's say receiving the water is nowis then going into the Adriatic sea for example they found out very high levels of PFAS in the fish. So if unfortunately we still know that there are today no satisfying technologies in order to destroy these compounds because they are very strong, the bond that is within carbon and fluoride is very strong and in order to be destroyed it needs temperatures that are higher than one thousand degrees centigrade. At least the old soil should be kept somewhere and waiting to have new technologies in the future in order to destroy them it seems for example that there are some bacteria that can do this kind of or some vegetables that can destroy this bond, but these are still experimental technologies. But, again keeping all this soil there is continuing to -it means that it is continuing to since this soil is in contact with the groundwater is continuing to contaminate the water, the water is then contaminating the rivers, the water of the rivers is then used in the in order to give water to the vegetables ETC. Something needs to be done and has not been done yet on this level and moreover we found out that for example all the filters that are used in order 4 �to to lower down the levels of PFAS in the aqueducts are filters that are made by GAC so they are then reutilized, lets say, reused. So the process, the technology that is used in order to be able to use again the compounds that are in the filters is to, lets say, eat them, the direct result of these is that the compounds that are lets say, absorbed into these filters. When they are coming to higher temperatures, they are simply passing into the air they are not so the bond between carbon and fluoride is not broken, because it needs very high temperature and immediate high temperature. Because if you are heating it very slowly, these filters, what happens is that the compounds simply is detached from the filter and then it goes into the air, so,we have another level of contamination is coming from the air because they are trying to do this to the filters that are used for the aqueducts, and so, everyday we are discovering new things what we are doing now is to so- , i'm not using aqueduct water anymore unless for doing shower and, i'm not- let's say, i'm not cultivating anything in my garden i'm not even giving this kind of water to my dog. DD: Mhm LF: I had a german shepherd in the past, at the age of nine, she died full of cancers and we were not aware why she was having these very terrible cancers everywhere, because she was relatively young and when I brought her to the - Yesterday where did I oh- to the doctor we say. DD: To the Vet? LF: Yes, to the vet he told me that there were a lot of dogs in the same situation and I immediately I remember perfectly what he told me, It is the water. And I was not aware at the moment, I discovered some months later what was happening so my dog now is drinking [chuckles] bottled water and to cook also I am cooking- cooking the pasta with bottled water. We are working a lot, too much I would say and doing a lot of meetings because now we are a very big group, we have a web page, we have a facebook page, we are dividing the things between each other on the basis of what- the time one can- yes give and also the attitude and also the job that we are doing, and, so for example I am working in the field of clinical trials and so at this moment we are working a lot to have new studies done and clinical studies done in our area in order to find out for example the relationships within PFAS and Covid-19 because there are studie that were done early this year in our region that show we have a higher mortality rate and we need to discover if this higher mortality was due to the fact that have a lower way to respond to this virus or because it’s we are having more people that are sick. On the other end we need to understand if the current vaccination program is working with us because the rest are just saying that PFAS contaminated people are not having the expected vaccine response and so then to keep the level in people that are supposed to process sometimes very low and so we are working also in order to find out to do this new study in order to, yes, see what is the best for us. We are trying to work with the institutions, but it's very difficult because 5 �as said, unfortunately they are linked to the very beginning of what happened because they are having big responsibilities for the fact of not informing us in time for years. So they are civil parties also in the trial against mitini but you know, we are not having the same willingness to have the truth really discovered and it's clear from some decisions for example, there is this screening that is done on the population, it was initially only done on people born from 2002 until 1951 so all other ages were not included. We went to do a fight in order to have at least some classes of children entered but only few of them actually did it so less than I would say 130, 120 children under than 2002 were able to do it so. For example, I have three children and only my elder daughter were able to do this when she was ten, now she is nearly twelve and the other two, were not tested, yet, even if this was a program obviously because we had covid pandemic in the meantime that blocked everything and so this is what we are doing the main struggle , I don't know if you will be having some time to visit our website, it is www.MammaNOPFAS.org and you will find a lot of information there about our story and what we are doing and the main struggle is for me, in this moment, is to find the time. The time needed to do everything we have a lot of journalists which are calling us, cryptographers, researchers, people that are willing to speak with us, to discuss the kind of solution, to do new studies, to propose things, and we need to speak with them and to speak with each other to decide what to do, and to inform other people, to keep the webpage open, to also to speak with other people in the world or all the way. In Europe in order to share information, for example we are in contact with the Netherlands people and the Swedish people that are impacted by PFAS contamination, so it's very useful when we are sharing information like this. And it may be a struggle this time but I am doing this- I started to do this mainly, for my kids in order to protect them and what is happening now is that I am using a lot of time instead of being with my kids I am being with the PFAS problem and so, yes it's not easy. DD: Yeah, I imagine not. You kind of started to answer this question already but what concerns do you have about PFAS contamination moving forward from this point in time? LF: Well, I know from the studies that are published, so the scientific studies which are the main problems associated with the PFAS contamination and I also had problems during pregnancies, my first two kids were low birth weight, and no one was understanding why I was having this kind of problems during pregnancies. I was not a smoker, I was healthy, so it was strange, they were not having explanations, they were asking me why- if I- to find out this sort of familiarity for other- for this kind of situation and then the third pregnancy they suggested I take some drugs and they were helping and then I understood why, because I took aspirin, and I found out later that aspirin is able to mitigate the effects of PFAS settled in the, let's say at times at the level of the circulatory system. I have already had one of the effects and my kids also. Im not having, my son is having the problem of growth I don't know if this is still related to the fact that he was born very small so- or if there is a direct or an indirect effect of PFAS, I'm trying to involve other 6 �researchers in order to understand if other kids are having the same issue. And, obviously I am worried a lot for the future because these kinds of compounds are still there in their blood they are not having a lot of them in the blood compared to other people living in our area but it's enough to create damage. So, I'm trying to do my best in order to get them the best possible- the best possible, let’s say food, water and it's a struggle because when I go to the supermarket I always read everything [chuckles] in order to be sure that this was not cultivated here, and for example eggs, the most contaminated things and so I'm looking in order to find out eggs that are not coming from this area and vegetables and fruit and so on everything and the water as I said is bottled water, it bottles up in glasses. I hope that we will not have any issue- that it will be enough not to have other issues other than the ones that we have already in the past, but we have a lot of people here that are having problems and those are the class there near the area of the company of where there are a lot of women with breast cancer- a lot, and there is a big hospital that only treats breast cancer there and no one is having the question why. Why here so many women with this kind of cancer? Also here I have a friend, a lot of friends that are here and I am lucky because I am not from - so, I was not born here, I was born fifteen kilometers far from here but this area- that area is by another aqueduct so its safe at least, in terms of water. I was living here since 2007 and I discovered the problem ten years later, but people that were living here, and were born here and for example people that were using the groundwater also to drink it were having levels of this contamination had already had problems. So I'm worried obviously but I’m doing what I can in order to prevent anything else. DD: Which sounds like a lot, sounds like you’re doing a lot. LF: I hope. DD: Before we wrap up today, is there anything else you’d like to add that we haven’t touched on, or anything you’d like to go back to, or say more about? LF: Yes, what is strange to me is that when we started to understand the issue and I told you that I'm working on creating it, i'm used to searching for scientific documents or papers and so on I find out there were a lot of studies already done on this compound after the compound disaster in the middle aravali. What happened is that all these studies were not considered for us. So, what I mean is that it's said that we are a different kind of humans, because we have to demonstrate that this is also happening here. It's not enough to have that kind of disaster, here even if we are having higher levels in our blood of this compound we still need in order for the trial against mitini to demonstrate that this is causing something to us. Instead the problem is that having this compound in our blood after all the studies that have already been done demonstrating the risk that is associated in terms of a lot of diseases that are caused, is itself a legion. We should not demonstrate anything else we have already, a lot of studies that were already done here that were done all over the world. 7 �Why we cannot learn from past mistakes? Why we have to still demonstrate that they cause something to us, the fact itself of having them in the blood is the damage, is the big damage for us, because it is a big question mark on our future. We don't know what will happen but something will happen. This is the problem, and this something that will happen was done without anyone asking the consent so, it's like being in a big clinical trial without having signed a consent because someone decided for us that this water was safe without informing us, so they should have told us, okay, we discovered- at least when they discovered- we discovered this and that, so, the information that we have so far is coming from studies that were conducted in ohio because they were available and we are saying, we are not having a lot of information to tell you that it is safe or not but at least we are informing you then you can decide what to do. 8 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Living with PFAS Interviews Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Devasto, Danielle Description An account of the resource Beginning in 2021, the Living with PFAS interviews were recorded to gather the personal stories of individuals impacted by PFAS contamination. PFAS, or per- and polyflourinated substances, are a large group of human-made chemicals used widely since the 1940s to make coatings and products resistant to heat, oil, stains, grease, and water. They can be found in countless household items, including food packaging, non-stick cookware, stain-resistant furniture, and water-resistant clothing. These chemicals are often called “forever chemicals” because they do not break down easily, can move through soils and contaminate drinking water sources, and build up in animals, plants, and people. PFAS have been linked to increased incidences of various cancers, increased cholesterol, decreased fertility, birth defects, kidney and liver disease, and immune system suppression, and thyroid dysfunction. It is estimated that PFAS are in the drinking water of more than 200 million Americans (Andrews & Naidenko, 2020). In Michigan alone, over 280 sites have PFAS contamination exceeding maximum contamination levels for groundwater (MPART, 2024). Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-11 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf audio/mp3 Type The nature or genre of the resource Motion Picture Text Sound Language A language of the resource eng Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context PFAS0022 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Facciolo, Laura Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021-07-21 Title A name given to the resource Laura Facciolo, 2021 (Interview video and transcript) Description An account of the resource Laura Facciolo has lived all her life in the Veneto region of Italy. In this interview, Laura discusses the contamination of Garda Lake, the second-largest aquifer in Europe, as well as other fresh water sources in Italy. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource DeVasto, Danielle (interviewer) Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Moving Image Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/b533094def8d73b9ff3272f207becacc.mp4 b1eeaf39f7018b3ef431df7706c7a984 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/9406c11ecdc441af6d4d29523b9de8d7.pdf d10832a8b7f468ee10032eff6354baca PDF Text Text Living with PFAS Interviewee: Kevin Ferrara Interviewer: Dani Davsto Date: September 29, 2021 DD: I’m Dani Devasto and today, September 29, 2021 I have the pleasure of chatting with Kevin Ferrara. Hi Kevin KF: Hey Dani how are you? DD: I’m doing well, How are you? KF: I’m doing well. DD: Alright, Kevin can you tell me where you’re from and where you currently live? KF: Sure, I grew up here in central Pennsylvania, and after doing 20 years in the military I came full circle. Came back here. Right now I live in Wolrich, Pennsylvania, which is, for those that are unfamiliar it’s between State college, home of Penn State, and Williamsport, home of little league baseball. So if you look at a Pennsylvania map I’m almost smack dab in the center. DD: Awesome, and how long have you been in Wolrich? KF: Moved back here a couple years now. I retired from the Air Force in 2017. I grew up in Avis, Pennsylvania which is about 3 or 4 miles down the road from Wolrich. But born and raised here in Pennsylvania, grew up here all my life with the exception of the military. DD: Okay, Thank you. Can you tell me a story about your experience with PFAS or with PFAs in your communities? KF: I absolutely can. I started a volunteer firefighter service here in Pennsylvania in 1988. Foam really wasn’t an issue, the firefighting foam that contains PFAS [Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances] that we found. It really wasn’t being used here in central Pennsylvania. I only became a aware of it and started seeing it in 1991 when I entered the United States Air Force. We went through the DOD [Department of Defense] fire academy at the time. Which was at Son Nhut Air Force Base in Ranto, Illinois. We were exposed to it, slathered in it, ya know, covered in it. It got in our eyes, our ears, our mouth, you know, on our bare skin. And then after I left Cant-or, Son Nhut Air Force Base. My first assignment was Cannon Air Force base in Clovis, New Mexico. And That's getting a lot of attention now because of the dairy farmers, that are �nearby. Their dairy cows are contaminated, the Aquaphor systems are contaminated. And the reason for that because we release each trip firefighting foam that contained PFAS pretty much every day. So I got out for 6 years in 1995, I returned here to Pennsylvania, only to return back to the Air Force in 2001. Different bases I was assigned to. It was the same thing. We used the firefighting foam that has PFAS in it pretty much every day. I eventually got to Langley Air Force Base and their combat command headquarters started seeing some emails about PFAS and everything. But throughout my 20 year career I was exposed to A-trip firefighting foam that we now know contained toxic PFAS. And you know, unfortunately we are learning now that the turnout gear, the firefighter turnout gear, that we wore for all of that time contained PFAS as well, the protective coating. So, firefighters, we got a double dose. There was really no way we could get away from the stuff. And you know, that was my experiences, you know. Either, you know, being physically exposed to it, you know with the products the firefighters use, in the drinking water. You know so, firefighters, we have a larger exposure than what the normal everyday citizen gets. DD: Can you say a little bit more about the, you said that you were using foam almost daily or daily. What kinds of things were you doing or why were you using foam? KF: Sure. So, at Cannon Air Force Base, what we, this is where I got the routine of, they call it an operational check, and all of the airport rescue firefighting vehicles or crash trucks. As a lot of us call them. We would take the trucks on the flight lines, somewhere on the flight line and discharge, and actually turn on the foam system. And discharge foam to make sure the trucks were operational. We did this every day, ya know, 365 days a year. We had 2 shifts. My shift would do it every other day, the other shift would do it every other day. It wouldn’t be, it wouldn’t be a lot, but it added up over time, and this happened at every military installation that had a flying mission. So if you had a crash truck, the crews took the trucks on a flight line or the training areas, somewhere on the installation and discharge foam to just simply make sure it was operational. Aside from that, if we obviously had an emergency, and aircraft incident where we needed to spray foam we would do that. And you know some of the incidents it was copious amounts. We had foam trailers, there was a few incidents, 1,000 gallon foam trailers, where we would have to, employ that and start using that foam, some incidents, depending on the size of the incidents. It would not be uncommon to discharge, hundreds of gallons of foam, concentrate, that was pure foam, into the environment. Training exercises. We would do live fire training, and use copious amounts of foam, to suppress that as well. Because for liquid fuel fire the only way you can put it out is to sit there for hours let it burn out or discharge foam. That would snuff it out and extinguish the fire. And that happened at every installation that had those capabilities. So, you know, Air Force alone there was over 200 plus military installations, just here in the United States. That would do that almost every day. You know. Operations checks you know, monthly live fire training. �DD: You mentioned earlier, drinking water, can you say more about that? KF: Sure, so at Cannon Air Force Base, in- I only learned all this in the past couple years, you know. While I was active duty in the military nobody ever told us about, you know, the hazards you know, with firefighting foam, PFAS, and contamination. And I’ve since learned with drinking water contamination at Cannon Air Force base, like I said, we would discharge the foam every day and that seeped into the aquifer system. At Cannon Air Force base, the city of Clovis, that was a mile down the road from the base, and residents in between. Their drinking water came from wells that pulled water out of these aquifer systems. So the entire time I was at Cannon Air Force base, you know, the four years I was there, I was polluting the aquifer system, and then as unknown to us we were drinking that polluted aquifer. So we were drinking contaminated water. So it came full circle. I don't know if it was karma for us or what [chuckle] you know, I feel guilty. You know. Had i known then there is no way I would have discharged the foam you know. There are so many people, and it’s not just in New Mexico. I mean it’s across the country, Michigan is getting a lot of attention because of the contamination up there. Here in Pennsylvania we just recently learned one-third of the state has PFAS pollution in drinking water. And it's shocking to know that and the more and more research that goes on the more and more water systems we find are polluted with PFAS. DD: How did you, start to learn, that, about PFAS and that is was a problem? KF: Well, like I said, I was at air combat command from 2010 til 2017 when I retired and about 2014 I started seeing a few emails that popped up that had the acronym PFAS in it. So it PFAS, P-F-A-S, and then we say the acronym PFOA, P-F-O-A and PFOS, P-F-O-S. But there was really no other emails or clarification that specified or defined what those acronyms meant. So I sort of just of- I'll be honest, I brushed them off. I like okay, you know, they are talking about it, but there is no other guidance behind it. And after it retired, the environmental working group sort of got in touch with me, through a fellow firefighter, and during some conversations that when they started sending me information the military timelines, of H triple F and PFAS and the more I read through it, I could physically feel my body just start tingling in frustration and anger, in shock and awe because since 1973 I found the military knew about H triple F and that it contained PFAS and it was hazardous. Up until, you know, from that point up until probably a few years ago nobody really said anything. And it was, pretty much left up to me and other firefighters to dig for this information and that's really the only way we found out what PFAS was. Through a network of environmental groups. Fellow firefighters that really started digging into this, and you know it was it was just unbelievable that the foam manufacturers, the military, there was people that knew about this. We as firefighters, we as veterans, we as military personnel were never told about this. And definitely the public was never told about this. Which is, it’s alarming to know, only 50 years this stuff has been going on and only now are we really �scratching the surface of the amount of damage PFAS had caused within our environment, within our communities. DD: So you post retirement, sounds like, you pretty much started kind of uncovering and learning about the situation, and then what for you? KF: Well, I sort of got trust into the whole PFAS and firefighter safety thing. I have no regrets of doing it, you know, like you said you know, I’m retired, I do my own fire service consulting, I do a podcast with firefighter health and safety, and I’ve gotten so much feedback with these firefighters. Not just here in the United States but really across the globe that are impacted by firefighting foam that contains PFAS, turnout gear that contains PFAS, and I’m getting bombarded. And I appreciate it because it is a learning for both me and those that are sending me questions. I’m getting bombarded with questions though. One, what is PFAS, because, you know, it’s simply not out there, and I keep foot stomping education, education, education on what PFAS is. I’m dealing with legislation, I’ve talked to congress you know, participated in some of the hearings down there in DC, on PFAS, for mediation and protection of firefighters. You know. I’m doing surveys, you know, I guess at the end of the day, I'm doing what I’m doing. I’m trying to educate firefighters, protecting them, because really nobody in, I’ll say leadership, you know, the government entities, it simply doesn’t seem that they are doing enough, if anything at all to really educated and protect firefighters. So, you know, like I said before I got nothing to lose as a retiree. I got a lot of time on my hands, so you know. I’m happy to go ahead and-and do all the-the behind the scenes effort to help firefighters. Cause the last thing I want them to do is worry about, what is PFAS, what their health and safety when they are on the job. They got to focus on the job and not worry about, you know, these other things. You know. If I can let them focus on their job and then on their off days get them spun up on what PFAS is, then that’s what I’m happy to do. DD: I mean there's already so much risk in firefighting though. {chuckle} KF: Yeah, that's what I tell everybody. You know, firefighting is inherently dangerous, we know that. You know, but the products that were supplied to us, you know, the firefighting foam and the turnout gear. The last thing we expected is the products we used to perform our jobs were actually harming us. You know, we know going into a burning building, you know going into a hazardous material situation it’s going to be risky like you said. But you know for god sakes provide us with some products, some equipment that isn't going to harm us before we get to the incident scene. DD: Yeah, It sounds like PFAS is really impacting your life in multiple ways. Both, you know, personally and through your work as you worked with the foam and the gear. But also now it’s �shaping your life and the activities that you are doing. The service and leadership you are providing. KF: It has. I’ll be honest, when I retired, I did 20 years in the military, 20 years in the air force and I was ready to hang up firefighting. You know I was like, I did it and I was like let me move onto something else. And then, I got involved with a local volunteer department down here and then of course that the PFAS issue came up and it brought me, it sort of sucked me back in. And like I said I have no regrets of doing it, I’m actually excited, you know, to be able to help. But it is, it’s a life changing issue. I got some health concerns with my exposure, not as bad as a lot of the firefighters I’ve talked to. PFAS whether it’s physically impact, mentally impact, its causing people to think and rethink the way they operate and the way they live. DD: What concerns do you have about PFAS contamination moving forward? KF: You know, I’ve always said until you cut off the source of contamination you can’t fix the problem. You know. The problem being that PFAS contamination is ongoing. You know. Remediation efforts are years down the road. There's still a lot of research and testing going on. Until you cut off that source of contamination you really can’t start doing anything else. And now with firefighters, the DOD they are now looking at replacing the fluorinated foams with the non-fluorinated foams they have to do that by 1 October 2023. Which is fiscal year 24, but that's, I've always said, that time frame, that gap in there, you still have firefighters and nonpersonnel still being exposed to fluorinated foam. It’s still in use. A lot of the volunteer departments, the municipal departments are not getting a lot of the conversation with this. A lot of focus on military with DOD and federal level, but the same foam, the same turnout gear is being used within our municipal, fire departments or local communities. And that is where is a lot of the exposure is occurring. So I think going forward education is number 1. Getting people informed with that, meeting with their local leaders, local fire departments and really pushing the issue and saying look, we have to cut off the source, and then go from there. DD: What kinds of advice do you give to people who are active still in firefighting, when they learn about PFAS, but then they ask then what now? KF: The first piece of advice that I tell them is personal protection. Don’t rely on others, you know, and that goes for everybody, is that, your personal safety starts with you. In terms of your situational awareness, if you are around the foam, make sure you have proper, you know, personal proper protective equipment on, gloves, you know, certain clothing, definitely eye, you know, eye protection. Don’t for the volunteer firefighters that take their turnout gear home, I can’t stress this enough, don’t take it, and put it in your vehicle. A lot of firefighters will just put it in their truck, on top of the gear, on top of the PFAS, obviously, you know is the soot and other products or combustion that absorbs into the turnout gear. So, you know, I tell them all of that as �you transfer, gets onto your clothes, your skin then they take it home and now you have crossed contaminated your home. You know, that with fire fighters that live in the fire station. The same thing. Don’t wash your personal clothing with, you know, your duty clothing, your work uniforms and everything. You know, it’s really a matter of, you know, just taking personal precautions, wash your hands, use gloves when you using turnout gear, don’t use turnout gear if you don’t have to, obviously we can’t get away from that as firefighters. But if you don’t have to put it on, don’t put it on. It’s that simple. Showers, after every call, take a shower and wash all of those contaminates off because we’ve learned that turnout gear especially is creates what is called PFAS dust. And you may not see that, and you know it covers the inside of the truck, it gets absorbed into the air condition systems, and it just, like I said you know just, situation awareness is the big thig. Be aware of your surroundings. Be aware of what you are using and then personal hygiene, decontamination procedures and then go from there. If you are worried about the drinking water, look at different filtration systems that are out there. Now there's only a few that’ll filter out PFAS and there are a little expensive, you know. But, again talk to your- I would say talk to your local water suppliers in the community, and say hey are you testing for PFAS? Are you filtering for PFAS? If there not, you know, it's a judgement call. You may want to look at bottled water. I know the military handed out bottled water to some communities because of the PFAS contamination. It's tough, we could go on and on and on and talk about what should be done and you know, what needs to be done, what's not done, but at the end of the day, you know like I said, it comes down to, you know, everybody is responsible for their own safety and to do their homework. That's a big thing, you know, research on this. DD: Are there particular things on your agenda, your next steps, or things that you're looking towards? KF: Yeah. There are a few pieces of legislation, right now, that I'm trying to get pushed. There's the Mike Elestic Firefighting Protection Act. Um. And that pretty much talks about military firefighters, and with PFAS contamination. Cause I worked with Mike, I had a little bit of a crossover with Mike who's a former Air Force firefighter and then he went as a DOD civilian firefighter. So that’s sort of near and dear to my heart. There’s a Neil Hogan piece of legislation out there as well, for federal firefighters. We're just trying to get, whether it’s local, state, or federal officials to really get involved in this to make this a priority. It should be a bipartisan matter, but it seems like it’s not. There’s you know. You know there’s as with any piece of legislation there’s back and forth on it but at the end of the day for me, you know, I’m really passionate about this, put all your differences aside and look at the big picture and say hey, this is a health and safety issue. Not just for firefighters, for everybody, Americans, people overseas, cause it's a global issue. It's, you know, not just an isolated issue. Then really you know, personally just educating firefighters. You know, I'm an instructor here in the state of Pennsylvania, so, you know, I’m working with the state fire academy to push this out more, and more, and educate firefighters. Obviously with my podcast you know. I do that. Any opportunity �I get to talk about this, you know, I get excited about this because it, that tells me that this topic is getting the attention that it needs to. So that's where I am today. The more I can talk about it the better. DD: From an education standpoint, do you find that this is something that, is being included in instruction and education, that these kinds of topics? Or is this something that is maybe, is still coming or could be included more? KF: Depending on where you're at. Here in Pennsylvania, you know, I had the pleasure of working with the state fire academy on their administrator on a PFAS awareness program. It’s a short program, its baby steps, it's the first step towards getting to the bigger picture. I don’t believe the department of defense is really doing much. They sent out a few fact sheets, a few brochures. I’m not really sure what they're doing at the DOD fire academy. I think they do mention it a little bit but it's not getting the attention it really needs to. Like I said within the volunteer fire service community, you know, its hard getting, you know first and foremost, its hard getting training with volunteer firefighters, simply because of funding. But they get the word out, it's a challenge. And I say that because for the longest time firefighters have been using foam and there's a big misconception that foam is safe. You know, it's simply soap and water. There’s nothing wrong with it and it's time to get that mentality out of the fire service and educate them and prove to them that, no, firefighting foam that contains PFAS isn’t soap and water. It's actually harmful, it's actually toxic. But I found that once you change the mentality, once you open their eyes and ears to it, they're more receptive then, you know, they sort of lean in and their like hmm maybe, you know, there is something to be concerned about here. But that’s the biggest challenge, is getting the word out and educating folks. I wish every state fire academy across the United States would incorporate, similar programs that they have here in Pennsylvania. Overseas they’re starting to do that, it's gaining a lot of attention. I know in Australia they have a really great program. They got rid of, you know, a lot of the PFAS foams. So there is some success stories out there. I just wish it would reverberate across the oceans and you know, where everybody would be on the same page but unfortunately were not there yet. DD: Well it sounds like you’re working to make that happen. KF: I’m trying {laughs} I’m doing the best I can. {chuckle} DD: Well, Kevin, before I wrap up, is there anything else that you would like to add or anything you would like to go back to and say more about? KF: The big thing is, you know, like I said with the water contamination, I would just encourage your audience members to reach out to their local community leadership and start asking the questions. Be like, hey, you know, PFAS is on the radar, we heard a lot about it in the media, �What are we doing locally? Don’t be afraid to ask questions. And you know, especially for the firefighters out there don't be afraid to ask questions. Because at the end of the day, like I said before you know, health and safety is the big thing and if you don't ask the questions you're never going to know the answer. And you’re never going to know if those that are responsible are doing what they should be doing to protect those they serve. You know, with news media, any type of media, please pick up on this and talk about it cause the, you know almost with any topic, the more and more you talk about it, the more and more people listen to, and you know, as they start uniting. That coalition, that network becomes stronger and stronger. As a team, that's where we all come together and get rid of PFAS. Or at least, you know, regulate it and minimize exposure. Because I don’t think we will ever get rid of PFAS but you know at the very least we need to minimize unnecessary exposure to it. The other thing is PFAs blood testing. That’s something that I’m really pushing for right now is PFAS blood testing cause we really don’t know what's in our body unless you test for it. Something that I found with firefighters is that they have high levels of PFAS in their blood. Unfortunately there is no magic pill to get rid of it. But that’ll tell us, do we need to, you know, it's almost a threshold. The EPA said 70 parts per trillion of PFAS in drinking water but if we see elevated levels of PFAS in firefighters blood, then we can say, okay let's get you away from PFAS so we don’t add to that. You know unfortunately it has a huge half-life so it’s going to take a while. And that's something a lot of firefighters have contacted me about is their medical concerns. If I have a high level of PFAS am I going to get cancer? Am I going to get some other medical illness? And that's a big concern, and it goes back to what I said before, is that. I don't want to see firefighters focusing on that and getting hurt on the job because their mind is elsewhere. You know, worrying about am I going to get sick, is my family going to get sick. There's a lot of work to do, you know, with PFAS, I appreciate you getting involved in this. And many others cause like I said I mean, the more people involved the more attention is going to get, and I think the faster action is going to be taken to protect citizens, fire fighters, everybody that either is or could potentially be exposed to PFAS. DD: Yeah absolutely. Thank you so much Kevin for taking the time to share your story and experiences today. KF: Great, like I said before I appreciate the invite. Thank you, Thank you. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Living with PFAS Interviews Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Devasto, Danielle Description An account of the resource Beginning in 2021, the Living with PFAS interviews were recorded to gather the personal stories of individuals impacted by PFAS contamination. PFAS, or per- and polyflourinated substances, are a large group of human-made chemicals used widely since the 1940s to make coatings and products resistant to heat, oil, stains, grease, and water. They can be found in countless household items, including food packaging, non-stick cookware, stain-resistant furniture, and water-resistant clothing. These chemicals are often called “forever chemicals” because they do not break down easily, can move through soils and contaminate drinking water sources, and build up in animals, plants, and people. PFAS have been linked to increased incidences of various cancers, increased cholesterol, decreased fertility, birth defects, kidney and liver disease, and immune system suppression, and thyroid dysfunction. It is estimated that PFAS are in the drinking water of more than 200 million Americans (Andrews & Naidenko, 2020). In Michigan alone, over 280 sites have PFAS contamination exceeding maximum contamination levels for groundwater (MPART, 2024). Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-11 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf audio/mp3 Type The nature or genre of the resource Motion Picture Text Sound Language A language of the resource eng Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context PFAS0031 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Ferarra, Kevin Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021-09-29 Title A name given to the resource Kevin Ferrara, 2021 (Interview video and transcript) Description An account of the resource Kevin Ferrera grew up in central Pennsylvania and returned there after spending 20 years in the military. Kevin discusses his work exposure to PFAS through firefighting foam used on air force bases. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource DeVasto, Danielle (interviewer) Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Moving Image Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/55e3ff0945bfbdc56da4eadf5f332208.mp4 2d1607b97f864a89c5f4619ebed1c446 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/b3db2e4edf4d48145bb5f2aff1bb2400.pdf 156fe76357851e079c8cd5c0a9672a91 PDF Text Text Living With PFAS Interviewee: Stacey Gardner Interviewer: Dani DeVasto Date: April 6th, 2021 [Construction noise] DD: Oh, and please excuse any noises if you can hear that. [chuckle] We have some plumbing work going on today. SG: Oh no! [laughs] DD: Which they just started sawing into the pipes. Both: [laugh] DD: Welcome to COVID life. Alright well, I'm Dani Devesto and today April 6th, 2021, I have the pleasure of speaking with Stacey Gardner. And Stacey, thank you so much for being here and participating in this project, I really appreciate it once again. I was hoping before we start talking about your experiences with PFAS, [Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances] you could tell me where you live or where you're from? SG: Sure. So, I am from West Michigan, I grew up here. Upon graduating high school, I ended up getting married and my husband joined the military so we traveled around the country beforeーI eventually joined the military as well. Once I completed my service, I came back to West Michigan and have concerted my career here. And then,ーI currently live officially in Comstock Park, but it's really Plainfield Township just outside of Rockford. DD: How long have you been in Plainfield Township? SG: Since April 2015. DD: So, it must not be too bad of a place, you've been there for a while. Both: [Laugh] 1 �SG: Yeah it's actually really great, we love where we live. It’sー feels like it's out in the country, but Meijer is only a mile away. So we have access [DD laughs] to anything we might need whenever we want it. DD: [Laughs] Yeah Meijers has everything. [SG laughs] So you're pretty much set there. Alright so I am wondering, could you please tell me a story about your experience with PFAS or with PFAS in your community? SG: Sure. So, when we moved to our current home, we purchased it from a couple who have lived there for 57 years. And they were in their 80’s and they were getting ready to move to a retirement community. So, it was this great little homestead that they had built, I mean it- it’s beautiful, it has very mature plants, it was everything we wanted and it was just the right size for us. So, when we got the notification in the mail that PFAS had been found in our well water, honestly we weren’t really that upset by it because we figured that the people that lived in it before us were still very active in their 80’s, and if they have been drinking this water for the last 40 years then apparently it couldn’t have been too bad, because it didn’t affect them, it didn’t affect their children. So, all of them were all very active and healthy and didn’t have any history of unusual medical issues. So, we got this and we thought well, that’s probably not a big deal people might be overreacting. It wasn’t until it came out in the news that things were actually really not good for so many families. There were a lot of other health issues and kinda just some of the stories you would hear, you know, wasn’t our experience. So that's when we started to get a little bit more worried about, well maybe this isn’t a good thing and maybe we do have something to be concerned about with the levels in our water and, you know, how it might be affecting us in the long term. When the state came to our house to test our water we got our results for the first time, we were actually really excited to get that information and to find out that our levels were under 20, I think, which, compared to some of the friends we had, their levels were over 500, 600. And, you know, they had children with congenital anomalies who have been drinking this water, you know, forever and they really suffered from it. So, we saw first hand what can happen when you have this kind of exposure of long term to these chemicals. But our exposure was actually pretty limited time wise and with the limited amount in our water. So, we were solicited by a couple of attorneys to join some class action lawsuits, and we didn’t feel, for ourselves, that was anything we wanted to do. Because we 2 �didn’t feel we were harmed anymore than somebody who maybe didn’t identify PFAS in their drinking water because it's really iniquitous. I mean, most people have this exposure just in their daily lives and so looking at it from where we were at, just with our water, we felt like it wasn’t the right thing to do. But we absolutely know that there are those who have been more involved in this and more impacted and didn’t feel that a class action lawsuit was out of the question, it just wasn’t the right choice for us. So, that has really been how we’ve looked at this, is trying to make sure that our lives were impacted as little as possible by everything that’s going on. Knowing that, other people really have a lot to deal with, so we feel very lucky to be where we are at. And we actually are quiteー thankful to Wolverine for, you know, installing the whole home water filtration system and paying for all of that. I know that it's something they obviously should be doing, but were actually glad that, in this way, they were corrective in resolving the issue. So, I'm not looking forward to hooking up to township water at all, I don’t want to do that. [laughs] I would be fine keeping my well water with the water filtration system but it doesn’t look like we're gonna have that choice, so. DD: Why do you prefer well water? Just curious, as someone who is on city water. [laughs] SG: [chuckles] Yeah so, I know people who have Plainfield Township water and there were a lot of issues with it. There's a lot of unusual smells and discoloration, a lot of pressure issues. Andー the source of the township water is also highly questionable. And so, to me it doesn’t make sense to just go from one contaminated source to another while introducing all these other variables to the water system. Where I feelー and this probably isn’t true, but that we have a little bit more control if we have our own well and we know that this source of the water is local, is right there in our yard and we know who our neighbors are and what might be happening to the water source, as opposed to some of the other chemical dumps [laughs] that are close to the township water sources, so. DD: Sure, absolutely, that sounds totally logical and reasonable. And it sounds like from what you are saying you have reallyー you feel like you have been really lucky in a lot of the conversations and issues that are happening. SG: Yeah, yeah we do. We ended up joining the MiPEHS [Michigan PFAS Exposure and Health Study] study through the state of Michigan. Because we’re really interested in getting those individual lab results to see what our levels of 3 �PFAS are in our system and some of the other markers they’re testing for. So, we figured, while we’re notー you know the most active community members on this topic, at least we can help out some way by joining the study and having them use our information as somebody who had pretty minimal exposure as a comparison to those who had a lot more exposure. DD: Can you remind me, when did the state first start? When did they reach out to you to do the testing that you referenced earlier, the testing that you were really excited about? Do you remember? SG: I believe that it wasー late in 2017 [Unclear] DD: Ish? SG: Yeah I think that was about the time. I had a friend who had previously worked for Varnum Law and they were one of the firms that were soliciting for the class action lawsuit. And so, I remember reaching out to her at my former employer and saying who is this attorney? [DD laughs] Do you know him? Is he legit or is he just looking for a buck? So, [laughs] so that’s what I think it was about that time. DD: So, with the health study that’s going onー what's coming down the pipe for that? Anything for you all? Or anyー forget when that study is supposed to be concluded. Do you know? SG: It’s several years, it’s longitudinal. I want to say it’s 3 to 5 years. No, I think it's 6 years because we get our blood tested 3 times. Once every 2 years. So they are doing another study right now, related to the CoronaVirus Vaccine and how that might impact your response if you have these higher levels of PFAS in your system. But unfortunately, we couldn’t participate in that because we’ve already been vaccinated. And so, I am hopeful in the next 6 years though, they will have additional sub-studies related to the MiPEHS research that we can also participate in. So, I hope they can continue to keep contacting us with those opportunities. DD: Yeah. One more question from me. Do you have any concernsー or I say, what concerns if any do you have about PFAS contamination moving forward? SG: [Long pause] I thinkー itー where we liveー we have 1 acre of land and it backs up to a trust, a family trust that has over 800 acres of undeveloped woods and lakes right behind our house and that backs up to another 500 acres of 4 �privately owned woods that are also undeveloped with lakes and the water stream. And so, that is right where the house street dump site was. So, it’s really on the other sides of one of the lakes that’s back in those woods. And theー we have an arborist who helps us take care of all of our plants and trees, and he has been really involved environmentally with looking at the forensics of the plants and the trees in the area. He can walk through the woods and identify when a tree maybe has had unusual mutations due to chemical exposure, and it's made me really think about, as I’m walking through the woods through the trails back there; what's happened to all the wildlife? We have rattlesnakes back there, there's eagles, there’s amazing owls, and all kinds of different crazy things that you wouldn’t think are so close to such an urban area, but they’re all out there. Andー it’s nice to know that we as humans are going to be okay because we can filter the water, we can do all these extra things, we can watch the products that we buy and see if they have limited PFAS or no PFAS in them at all. But, you know, there's the animals that are there and they don’t have that choice. They’re out there in the water, you know, drinking it, swimming in it. Theyーand what is that doing ecologically to our neighborhood and how does that affect it and, you know, I justー it really bothers me to think about that because they didn’t ask for it and they’ve had generations of their own little animal families having this exposure and having it built up in their system, and does that impact make them really different compared to some of the other sites where, you know, the Michigan rattlesnakes are more populated and is itー how mutated are the ones we have here? I just think that would be a really interesting thing to consider because they need more help from humans right now in order to survive, so. That’s what I think is my main concern. [laughs] As opposed to people. People can take care of themselves. DD: [Laughs] We try don’t we? Both: [Laugh] DD: Sometimes we’re better at it than some others. I think those are really interesting questions and it sounds like you live in a really beautiful area. SG: It is absolutely beautiful, we are so lucky to be where we’re at. DD: Well, is there anything else that you’d like to add that we haven’t touched on today or anything that you want to go back to that youー feel like you didn’tー I 5 �don't knowー that you forgot something or anythingー before we end is there anything else you like to touch on or go back to? SG: [Long pause] I don’tー I don’t think so. I don’t think so. Although, there was one very interesting item in the MiPEHS study that they are looking at. My husband and I are vegetarian, and we haven’t eaten meat in almost 10 years. Soー I think that’s good for us, but within the study they are looking at people who hunt and fish locally that eat the animals around here that may have had that exposure. And so they're still looking at how that is affecting, kind of just, the life cycle of everything. And I think that’s gonna be a really interesting outcome, when they get to that point. And it’ll also be interesting, we do eat a lot of local fruits and vegetables from the farmers markets, to see, you know, could that have impacted us because we eat so many fruits and vegetables grown locally. You know, what’s in the plants that we’re eating? Is it there? And could that actually be increasing our exposure in ways that we haven’t considered before? So, I’m hopingー maybe in many years [laugh] that they’ll have that information available. We can understand better howー even though we are trying to make healthy choices it might have backfired on us and they’re not as healthy as we thought. DD: Yeah, that study is gonna have, hopefully, have a lot of information. A lot of really interesting information. Yeah. SG: Yeah I hope so DD: We’re all anxiously waiting for it. Both: [Laugh] DD: Alright well, thank you so much Stacey for taking the time to share your story and your experiences with me today. I’m gonna stop the recording now. SG: Okay. [Recording stopped] 6 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Living with PFAS Interviews Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Devasto, Danielle Description An account of the resource Beginning in 2021, the Living with PFAS interviews were recorded to gather the personal stories of individuals impacted by PFAS contamination. PFAS, or per- and polyflourinated substances, are a large group of human-made chemicals used widely since the 1940s to make coatings and products resistant to heat, oil, stains, grease, and water. They can be found in countless household items, including food packaging, non-stick cookware, stain-resistant furniture, and water-resistant clothing. These chemicals are often called “forever chemicals” because they do not break down easily, can move through soils and contaminate drinking water sources, and build up in animals, plants, and people. PFAS have been linked to increased incidences of various cancers, increased cholesterol, decreased fertility, birth defects, kidney and liver disease, and immune system suppression, and thyroid dysfunction. It is estimated that PFAS are in the drinking water of more than 200 million Americans (Andrews & Naidenko, 2020). In Michigan alone, over 280 sites have PFAS contamination exceeding maximum contamination levels for groundwater (MPART, 2024). Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-11 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf audio/mp3 Type The nature or genre of the resource Motion Picture Text Sound Language A language of the resource eng Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context PFAS0001 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Gardner, Stacey Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021-04-06 Title A name given to the resource Stacey Gardner, 2021 (Interview video and transcript) Description An account of the resource Stacy Gardner moved to the Plainfield Township area, north of Grand Rapids, Michigan in 2015 after completing her military service. In the interview, she discusses the fairly low PFAS levels found in the well water at her home. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource DeVasto, Danielle (interviewer) Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Moving Image Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/61b95429dbe0bf3288fa99d75e8fe2d2.mp4 60ff07bf5b99036ac083bfc33ae8e2e8 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/2c006ccc82049de6d5c5d005c4cf193f.pdf 6c44df5c20edc3f7f4aff26450e40901 PDF Text Text Living with PFAS Interviewee: Paul Golembiewski Interviewer: Dani DeVasto Date: November 6, 2025 Dani DeVasto (DD): I'm Dani DeVasto and today, November 6, 2025, I have the pleasure of chatting with Paul Golembiewski. Hi, Paul! Paul Golembiewski (PG): Very good. Thank you. DD : Thank you. Paul, can you tell me where you're from and where you currently live? PG: Grand Rapids, Michigan. Rockford, Michigan. It's not far. The same places basically. Went to school at the University of Michigan State. What am I saying? University of Michigan? Michigan State. Graduated with two degrees, horticulture and crop and soil sciences and have been working my own business for 43 years. And have lived here for 48. DD : And your business is? PG: Expressive Horticulture. Landscape design, installation, problem solving. I throw a lot of pesticides out there, so I'm aware of chemical use. And that would be of benefit probably to this discussion also. I'm lived here very intensely. Um, city lot. Planted 40 trees. Someone told me the last thing I planted was my feet. <laughs>. DD : And how long have you been in Rockford? PG: 47 DD : For 47 years? PG: Yeah. DD : 1 �Awesome. Paul, can you tell me a story or several stories about your experience with PFAS or with PFAS in your community? PG: Um, I'd like to start with a story that I was six years old and my parents loved to ride around on Sunday afternoons and, uh, in the old Oldsmobile with no AC and I'd get the middle of the backseat 'cause my sisters got the windows. And my dad was told of a gentleman in Rockford who had animals in cages on his front yard. My dad worked at Fisher Body and he knew he was a very good oh politician. Met a lot of, met a lot of people and knew them well. And so he'd always have conversations on where to go on a Sunday afternoon because he'd like to drive. So we ended up, my my recollection is we came down Oak Street and we went across the railroad. And the first house on the right was Mr. Cahill's house. The gentleman whose name is used on our road. PG: And sure enough, there were cages in the front yard. There was a, there was a bear, there was a black large cat. There were peacocks walking around. I think there might've been some monkeys. My sister Sue got out of the car and ran up the front door, and Mr. Cahill, you know, came to the door and invited her in the basement to look at other animals. And here's my parents not doing anything like, oh, yeah, go ahead. I mean, they, they didn't, they didn't give her permission, she just, just went. DD : Wow. PG: So she emerged about 15 minutes later, and while I was waiting, I looked to the, uh, northwest, which is where this development that I live now is, and it was totally barren. There wasn't a stick of a grass or weed, anything, nothing. And the smell...watering my eyes and burning my nose. And I asked my dad, what's that smell? And he says, oh, that's pig. That's why nobody moves to Rockford. DD : Hmm. PG: <laugh>. So later I found out that where I live was basically a field of the waste from the vats at Wolverine. And when the smell got to be too bad, they trenched it in. Now jump ahead 50 years. And this became a development. Nobody has record of where those trenches are. Nobody has any information on what was in those trenches, except it's obvious, it's lead, mercury, chromium, and likely PFAS later on. So this whole development had likelihood of a lot of contamination. Consequently, uh, because of HIPAA, you can't get enough information to know how people's health are, you know, their health is around here. But in my experience, there have been four premature deaths and several people with blood, bone and, um, oh, muscle activities, you know, that they can't do anymore. Um, two 10year-old kids who were next door to each other, but they were 10 years apart, and they played in the same sandbox. And when I got involved with Lynn McIntosh, I was responsible for taking soil samples. And I, I found that, uh, kind of a shaded area where the sandbox would've been between their two properties. It was right on the property line, and I took a sample and, uh, it was sent off to Prein and Newhof to be analyzed. Uh, it never came back. And Lynn and I found out later that all the samples were 2 �lost, or they were tossed intentionally. And that's because Wolverine instructed them to, they didn't want any of the soil tested from Rockford. DD : But you guys were paying for those tests? PG: Well, we never paid for 'em, because they never came back. <laugh>, DD : but they were like your own private tests? Samples? PG: Yeah. It was, it was very disheartening. We took other samples, and I think Lynn may have sent some of them out. Um, so let's keep this in some sort of chronological order. I'm jumping around a little bit. DD : Can I ask you a question? PG: Sure. DD : Um, Mr. Cahill, who is he? PG: Oh, he was the mayor, the chief of police, the, um, uh, the governor, the, um, he was every officer that could be possible for the city of Jericho. And, um, I went to his house about four or five years ago, and there was a new owner, and I asked if there were any, any sort of documents, any sort of newspapers of any sort left up in the attic, maybe used for insulation or anything. And they said they'll look, but I've never heard back from them. Um, but the, yeah, the city of Jericho was, uh, a sad place to be, unfortunately. Just, just a little side note. The, uh, just to the east of the bridge that goes over the Rogue River, that is the Jericho Road. There is a sandy level surface there. It's the only such surface that I know of on the Rogue River. I've canoed it a couple times. And the gentleman who bought the property there, Mill Pond, built the condos, did research to find out that that was an Indian trading post for 10,000 years. <laugh>. DD : Wow. PG: Yeah. And here's, uh, Jericho came in, put up a dam to flood their entire trading area. And the Indians just decided to leave. They, they didn't have much left to hunt anyway, because all the forests were gone, so the animals were not there anymore. So they basically agreed, you know, there was no 3 �skirmish at all. And, uh, so Jericho became a horrible place after a while. They were nice and friendly to the Indians at first. Now I got all this is, this is not directly from the Indians, but this information I got from Charles Hornbach, who was the owner and developer of that property. And he went back through archives, actual physical pieces of paper and the internet, and found this information. And, um, I'm very grateful for him doing that. And while I did the landscaping there, I found countless number of arrowheads and pieces of pottery, you know, so that, yeah. You can tell there was life there for a long time. Yeah. Anyway, so how about the next subject? DD : <laugh>. Alright. So, so you, yeah. You were six and seeing these animals in cages and seeing the, just the barrenness of the land up here. Um, and then you were talking about the, the trenches. But that there are no, there's no record, no. Of where the trenches have gone. And I assume no testing? PG: Uh, intentionally. And we'll get to that later. Living with PFAS, that's, that's the stuff that, um, this little interview will be very much valuable for with the information I have. But later on, I was told by the great, great grandson of the homesteader of that property, Mr. Giles, he said his grandfather was told it was fertilizer and to dump it on the, on the ground. And they could be in, in some way, having, you know, better crops, didn't do anything but kill everything. DD : Oops. PG: Yeah. Um, there's, there's a couple of side notes on that. I, I guess I could say this now that he told me that right along my property line was a two track that went to the railroad, that Wolverine at about, uh, 1915, got permission to dump their waste on the railroad's property because it was lead. A lot of, uh, arsenic is lead. So the railroad would spray the railroad bed twice a year with arsenic. So in this case, from, from what is my property line to 12 Mile became a dumping site right alongside the railroad. Because the, the terrain was possible to run a, what would be a, if you can imagine a truck from the 1915s, you know, the wheels are about, you know, six inches across and there may be 20 horsepower or flatbed. And they had barrels on them, and the barrels would slosh around while they would go, you know, down the two track and across and down to the railroad's property, and they'd dump them, just kick 'em off. PG: And imagine, you know, how ridiculous that would've been. But, so that was what Mr. Giles told me. So that's, that's firsthand information. I asked the DEQ if they could test the railroad, and they told me, oh, they already did. And there's nothing, there's, there's no lead. It's all set. Right. You got a hundred years of applying arsenic, and then you got Wolverine dumping on it. It doesn't make sense that it doesn't have contamination. I tell everybody to keep their dogs on the asphalt, and if it's a dry, dusty day, don't go out there because the dust is gonna be blowing and you're gonna get inhaling it. PG: Oh, yeah. I'm sorry. I skipped over the story between the two kids that were 10 years apart. Um, yeah. Uh, let's see. Kruisenga, Derek Kruisenga and his neighbor, neighbor of 10 years later, her name was 4 �Tammy, I don't have her last name. They both died of the same very rare nasal cancer. And it's because they played in that same sandbox, and there wasn't enough sand in it. And if you look at the terrain, it was right on top of a, of a ridge that the truck from 1915 would have then dumped and probably spilled over and ran down the hill, and probably on the wrong side. And so that area right there is probably very, very contaminated. And they were playing in the dust, and they both had a very horrendous death. They, they suffocated they had cancer in their sinuses that couldn't be cured. PG: Um, yeah. And I was really quite amazed that the, the doctor that was treating, um, Derek actually diagnosed that. He said, this is a chromium toxicity. And at that point, no one had even thought of that, so whatever happened to that information I don't know. It never was then found to be a serious issue, which again, at the end of this interview, I have a a point to make, but, well, let's see. Let me go on to, oh, yes. <laugh>, our founding fathers, can I mention their names? They're long gone. Rockford's founding fathers. Mr. Blakesley, Mr. Farmer and Mr. Krause. Mr. Krause was the architect of Wolverine Worldwide. In 1905, Ford began to want chrome bumpers. Mr. Kraus had been to Europe and saw where their plating process was great for cleaning up hides from pig hides for, for leather, because the acid would eat the remaining flush away without any having physical work to clean it. And in that same vat, there were lead, mercury, and chromium, which made the leather heavy and ductile. So their boots that they made at the time. They would advertise 'em as a hundred year boot <laugh>. I wouldn't wanna, I would imagine that. But, um, so that's how Mr. Kraus made his money. Now, these three gentlemen all agreed to allow the dumping of that solution wherever Wolverine wanted to get rid of it, because that was Mr. Krause's venture, and they all knew it had lead. Lead has been a poison for 6,000 years. So they just said, oh, okay, fine. No, the next generation will take care of it or the next. And they never kept, never kept any records. Uh, they did own Bell Disposal in the sixties, and basically it just disposed of their liquid waste up to House Street DD : Who owned Bell Disposal? PG: Yeah, the, uh, gentleman that told me that he lived on 10 Mile and was able to see the vats and the solution sloshing out as they go down the road. And some of the hides would come out and he'd run out in the street and pick 'em up and play with 'em. And today he's blind. DD : And Krause owned Bell disposal or Wolverine did? PG: Wolverine did, yeah. Krause was the, he made his money in, in lumber, and, uh, then went into the, uh, tanning industry. And disposed of all the waste wherever he could. But he picked up the waste because of the booming plating industry, because of the Ford company. All throughout Rockford, which would be Keeler Brass, McInerney Spring & Wire, and probably three dozen other little, you know, outlets that were plating. And when they, they could only use that material for about six to eight hours, then it'd get contaminated. So they would change it out, and Wolverine would come and pick it up for free, and they'd put their hides in it. And then they dispose of it wherever was easy for them to dispose of, which in my degrees, I could tell where the foliage was incorrect. Where the, the growth of trees had been 5 �suffering and lead grows trees to death. It, it accelerates their growth. So you would find, um, elm, box elder, uh, choke cherry, all soft wooded trees along the, along the trail and in other places I found about 104 that were showing very, um, disfigured growth and a lot of dead growth. I gave a partial list of that to the EPA during a, um, interview, and they pretty much discarded it. DD : Hmm. That must have been disappointing. PG: Yeah, I think I mentioned this when we talked earlier, um, that only, that was about six years ago, that the EPA was looking for liaisons that would be able to talk to the community through information that they would give us. It was not that at all. It was just a ruse. It was to find out how many people knew how much, and to make sure that that information wasn't so widespread that people would panic. So it was an attempt to just feel around to understand who knows what and why. And I'm sure they got to me, they didn't want anything to do with me. They didn't want me to go out and start telling people what I know. Because <laugh>, that would not be DD : You knew too much. PG: They would, they would, I don't wanna panic people. Yeah. In fact, I want to do the other. But, um, we'll get to that at the end of this. Let me go on with my stories here. I'll, I'll go a little quicker. Um, I have a gentleman friend that I've known for several years. He and his wife live just over on Childsdale. And Carol had a condition that was never, uh, diagnosed and she had lower GI um, cancers and chronic pain and such that it was just horrific. Um, the back of their house is a ravine that had some water in it, which is the MO for Wolverine. They look for places just off the roadway that are already wet, and then they, they can dump their liquid and it's not as obvious. And, um, the gentleman that lived in that house before worked for Wolverine and had nine foster kids. <laugh>. DD : Oh my. PG: So it really didn't work. So what the fact was, he was being paid by Wolverine to dump, and at Carol and Conrad's backyard. And I had that as one of my sites with the EPA, and I never got notice back. But Carol had very serious health issues. And, uh, they divorced. And she's, she's okay. She's had a lot of surgeries, and she's been through chemo several times. So, and that's one story. Uh, let's see another story. DD : And those were neighbors of yours on Childsdale? PG: Yeah. Right up here, about a quarter mile away. My, uh, former cousin-in-law, Tom Breihof lived, he, he passed away from, again, lower GI cancer concerns. And he lived on the site that was later, much later, 6 �announced that from House Street to the Grand River, there was an underwater or underground, um, movement of that water from House Street, which was where there was a large amount of contamination for almost 20 years. Boy, you see what they do with that now. They really cleaned it up, maybe, but he lived and he had a well, and he drank his own water there, you know, so that was likely how he was affected. I've had two other accounts in that neighborhood. Um, one, the gentleman died when he was in his mid fifties of cancer. The other, while I was working there, they had health issues, and their backyard was literally seeping water, and they were lower than House Street on the other side of 131 Highway. By about maybe a half a mile, but they were right on top of that aquifer that was draining into the Grand River. And, uh, my job was to drain their backyard. Didn't know it at the time that it was, you know, likely PFAS. The water was, um, very, uh, it had an iridescent sheen to it, so it had oil in it. Um, but it was, it was a lot. I mean, we, we, we put in three tile lines and they ran water out just constantly into a wetland area behind their house, which then I also gave to the EPA. I get nothing. It's, it's, it's right around houses that are worth half a million dollars. And that's another issue that drives this. Property values. PG: So let's see. Next story. Oh, yeah. Right near the Rogue off of 12 Mile, Rogue River, there's a, uh, a development, it's a dead end road. There are 10 houses on that street. I did work for two of them. And while I was there, the account that I was working on said that there were nine people in those households, nine outta 10, that were suffering from cancer and are not expected to live. They all had wells, and they all were on a wetland or near a wetland that was used by Wolverine. Another site I gave to the EPA, nothing happened. Um, right now there's a, there's a new dog park just down the street from there. <laugh> and I, I look at that and I, I, the dogs have access to the river and, you know, people are there, you know, they, they've got a drinking fountain. I don't know. It must be a, well, I don't think so. I don't know. They must have had city water come into there because this, this development also had city water. But just recently. It had been almost 15 years that they were still using their wells. And all those houses sold out. I mean, they, they sold most everything, all those people that were there when I was there. They all sold their homes. DD : And left. PG: Yeah. So you know, talk about you don't really wanna publicize this stuff. But you have to. But, but there's, there's concentrations in places that are overwhelming. And then there's just a general understanding that, that these contaminations exist everywhere. I, I can drive down the road and I can look at just off the, off the side of the road, if there's a wetland area, you can right away see that it's contaminated. There's one DD : What, what kinds of things do you see that clue you in? PG: Trees that are growing like this <laugh>. I mean, they just don't, they have a very poor form, or they've rotted away, and then they're still trying to grow some more growth on them. And, you know, they're, they're terrible in that they, they can't, you know, they're growing too fast. They're, they're trying to, uh, 7 �grow more cells. It's cancer. And there's a, there's a holding pond at Rockford Public Schools, right between baseball fields. And that was a site that I told the EPA was, you know, to go test for. Two weeks ago. Now, this was nine years ago, eight years ago, I told 'em to. Last two weeks, they put up signs, metal signs every 30 feet. Caution, stand back. Do not enter, do not approach. Very serious language, very serious metal signs. Probably cost as much as a fence would've been <laugh>. But I'm sure that, you know, teenagers will be teenagers look, you know, looking through this and go pick up frogs that are, you know, dead and dying in there. DD : So someone's doing something PG: Yeah. That, what is is that? It's just a bandaid, you know? PG: Uh, let's see. Um, oh, I was on a, a site on Plainfield. And, um, this was for a, oh, a little retail, a strip mall. And I was in charge of the outdoor landscaping and such, and I was there to make sure that the excavation was gonna take place correctly. And, uh, we had an excavator putting in the, uh, I think it was a gas line. And he excavated down and he found metal barrels down about four feet in the ground. And so we dug around a little bit, and there were about half a dozen of them. They called the township, um, inspector over. And the inspector looked at them and waved his hands like this and walked away. They reburied the barrels and they rerouted the line. DD : Oh. PG: That, that whole area, that Plainfield and East Beltline was once a swamp. It was barely trackable in the 1900s. And then they put in a little sand, um, berm. So, you know, you could run a little truck over it or something. But, but that was all filled in. And that is also the location of Plainfield Township's water supply. It's the, the lake, DD : The current, the current location? PG: Yes. It's, it's the lake right to the east. It's, it's even got a public swimming area. No boats allowed, but I can't remember the name of the lake right now. <laugh>. But, but, uh, that's DD : Is that Versluis? PG: Versluis. Thank you. Thank you. So that's their water source for Plainfield Township. I was told by a prominent person regarding the, uh, they worked at the Plainfield, uh, offices and, 'cause we, I, I 8 �brought up the fact that that was all filled in and I can't imagine that that lake has clean water at all. And, uh, she said that the incidences of cancer and serious, serious health issues in Plainfield is 30% higher than the national average. They don't want that publicly known. Also, in the 1940s, there was a landfill just to the south of that by a quarter mile up by where Robinette's is. Just the other side of the road. You'll see these mounds that are there, and you'll see the pipes that come up every so often. So the, the property near Robinette's to the northeast driving down East Beltline, you'll see that there's this barren hillside with pipes sticking up and it's all fenced off. That was a landfill in the thirties that Wolverine used to dump serious amounts of PFAS and that drains into Versluis Lake. Now, they went through extensive amount of effort to ensure that the, that landfill doesn't have the opportunity to have enough water sourced actually, you know, penetrate the ground and go into the lake. So what they did was they, they put in wells, put in probably 30 wells all around so they could suck the water out continuously. And then on a Sunday afternoon, a Sunday morning, for some reason I was going down East Beltline and there's no churches there that I go, I don't go to church <laugh>. Sorry. So there's a lot of churches there. PG: But on a Sunday morning, I was going by there and there were, uh, at least a hundred guys that were rolling out white PVC over that entire, like, 10-12 acres site. And they were gluing the seams together. And then they, later on in the week, they then brought in top soil and put top soil over the PVC liner. So that way there's no water that can get through. Imagine the expense. Yeah. It's just an, an incredible expense. Why in, why does Wolverine get away with this? You know, it's so many ways in places that they've contaminated, it would be impossible to clean them all up. But this one is possible. It's a very condensed area. It's just like House Street. DD : That landfill. I think I've heard about it before. It's, um, Wolverine, this was not, Wolverine was not the only company dumping there. PG: Correct. It was not DD : So that, that also probably gets them out of PG: Yeah. Liability had to be stretched out over several people. And what, and then Wolverine could say, excuse me, <laugh>. DD : Mm-hmm <affirmative>. Okay. PG: Yeah. Okay. Let's see. What do I got here? Oh, I worked at the, uh, the CEO of Owen-Ames and Kimball, um, who built most of the schools in Rockford. I worked at his house for 25 years. Um, the house is worth probably 10 to 12 mill. It was right on the Rogue River. And, um, he told me the story of when he 9 �bought the place that it was just a little shack and it was all in need of all kinds of things. Of course, being involved in <laugh> Owen-Ames and Kimble, things got really fixed up and really very nicely. And, uh, the wellhead that was part of the original house was right next to the front door. And on the north side of the house, about 50 feet away was a wetlands that was right off of Algoma. And there was a nice little roadway back to four other homes further out into the woods and on the Rogue. And, uh, that was a site that Wolverine used. Um, the owner of the house knew it. When I told him what information I knew, he and his wife looked at me like deer, you know, staring at the headlights because they didn't want, they didn't want any way of suggesting that they already knew that 'cause their property values. And, uh, so the, the wellhead was moved to 150 feet away from the house, right at the very farthest point of their property. And the furthest they could get away from that wetland. Um, they still had five, six gallon containers of water delivered to their house every week. They still had a refrigerator in the garage stocked with bottled water. And all their grandkids and their kids all drank from that. Nobody drank from the water. But he was very smart. He probably had that tested soon after they moved in because he may have even suspected that the growth of those trees was not right. Everything was just twisted and gnarled and, uh, and it's right on the Rogue River, which, let's see, that is, yeah, that's, uh, upstream from where I discussed about the nine households that had cancer. But there are several other places along the Rogue River that are very easily accessible. And again, the MO of Wolverine is to have found a way that they could just park alongside a road or pull into a very, uh, well established roadway that's solid enough for a very heavy truck to dump all the liquids into the wetlands and down a slope. PG: It's a, it's really obvious to see those places and, you know, right away the trees, most people will probably think, well, that's just wetland and that's what trees look like when they're sitting in water. That's not the case. I can show you plenty of cases where there are wetlands that don't have that. Well, anyway, uh, <laugh>, uh, let's see. Oh yeah. Recently, I had an account. Well, let me, let me back up on, on Lake Bella Vista. Are you familiar with Lake Bella Vista? DD : Yes. PG: Okay. I don't think there's a home on the lake, no matter how small or how insignificant it is, that isn't worth over a mill. Right now, I've seen houses that are worthless places on the lake selling for 2.3. DD : because they're on the lake? PG: Yeah, they're on the lake. Um, I did the condos on the lake back in the early nineties. And, uh, there were two wells that were drilled on the condo property that were designed to keep the lake full of water because the lake was manmade. And it was supposed to be sealed with clay. Of course, you know, there are going, it's a huge place, you know, so there's always gonna be some, some ways in what the water gets out plus evaporation. But there may be one little spring in there someplace. But I wouldn't touch that either. But, um, so while we're working there, um, the water would flow a lot. I mean, there was a stream that was probably four feet wide and, and 10 inches deep of water flowing in all the time. 10 �Um, and I'll jump ahead to last year, I was working at a house, um, not far from there. And, um, one of my projects was to ensure that there was gonna be enough water for irrigation. And I looked at their water meter and it had a five eighth inch water meter. So I went to their association and I got permission to put in a one inch water meter because they didn't have much water running out in the yard. It was very poor water pressure and not a lot of volume. An irrigation system would've been a lot more expensive. 'cause you gotta put in more valves and more, more heads to be able to cover it. Uh, so I, I put in a one inch meter and, um, I, as I'm doing this, I'm cutting the pipes. I've had water turned off at the road, and I'm cutting the pipes and I'm measuring, I'm putting it in, and I cut the pipe and I look inside the pipe, and here it is nearly blocked with a black jello like stuff. It is. Um, I, I stuck my finger in it thinking, well what's this? <Laugh>. DD : Oh, Paul PG: Well, I take other measures. I wash my hands right away. But, um, it was, it was not a salt, it would've dissolved. It was not an organic compound. 'cause that would've, you know, rinsed away. Um, it, it was not a water soluble con, it's not a water soluble product at all. Okay. Think about PFAS. Okay. Teflon does not, you know, in any way, uh, connect with any other surface. So water is one of them. So here it is just at the meter, it slows down and this, this goo collects there. That, that's what was shutting off the water supply to the whole house, which they had a little tiny water filter. And the gentleman says, yeah, that's good enough. But that's another story. But anyway, so I I, I put the water meter in and I saved the pieces of pipe that I cut out. And I called the water authority. And the water authority that week had just changed hands. In other words, they hired somebody else to take care of the water around Lake Bella Vista because it's a closed system. PG: And the gentleman that came out, two of them had no history at all of what Lake Bella Vista was. They barely knew that it was a manmade lake. Now, when I did the condos, I was told that the wells were also going to feed the houses for a short time on the, uh, north or southeast corner of the lake, because they didn't have enough homes to afford a massive system with a wa with a water tower and, and had and water, um, wells. Which by the way, they did about 10, 12 years later. And they put it at the exact opposite place on the other side of the lake, furthest away from the condos, furthest away from what was the most likely dumping site because it was the lowest part of the lake. It was, it was a swampy area. It was called Grass Lake. I remember seeing it before it was ever excavated. And that was where they could have easily had access to it. Well, um, these two gentlemen had no idea. Well, I was, I told them that those two wells are still feeding this side of the lake. They should have been shut off 20, 25 years ago. And that's why the neighbors all around this cove were getting sick. Two people had died. And the people that live there are not very healthy. Um, low, low energy. They're going to the doctor often. Um, and they're using water from their faucets. So, uh, I told these guys, I said, you know, this has gotta stop. You gotta do something, you know, you gotta expand, you know, the water system around this side of the lake. Okay. Jump ahead a year later. And the wells are turned off. PG: Lake Bella Vista's water level now is down almost 18 inches. People can't get their boats in because in some cases it's too shallow. They can't run their jet skis because you gotta have 18 inches above the 11 �sand. Otherwise they're, you know, they burn out the, the pump. So there's all sorts of people wanting to know what's going on. Nobody's telling them. I know. Because they shut those wells off because the people on that side of the lake are finally getting water from another source. And it could be from Plainfield Township, who's been putting in a lot of water lines, although I haven't seen any construction there. It may be that they continued off to the, to the other side of the lake and used a bigger pump or dug another well, where their water tower is. But the, the creek doesn't run water into the lake anymore. So I know those wells are shut off. DD : That's a significant water difference for two wells. PG: What do you mean, sorry? DD : Like 18 inches down. And it, you think it was the two wells that got shut off? PG: Yeah. PG: That's a lot of supply. PG: Yeah. These are two eight inch wells. And there's a separate pumphouse for them. And there's, they probably run on 4-40 and they run day and night. And, uh, that's why the, uh, the service fees for like Bella Vista is something like $1,800 a year, which is probably not bad anymore. If they keep it there. But the, um, the, the new Water Authority looked into when I told them to look into it, and, you know, it took them a year before they, they recognized what the problem was. I just told an account, this goes back to my summary about that the lake has excessive amount of PFAS. DD : Has anyone tested Lake Bella Vista's water? PG: I again told EPA. They didn't. They probably did. They don't wanna let it out. Because these are million dollar homes. You know, people are gonna get really upset. A lot of lawsuits, they're gonna take, you know, EPA to court, a lot of lost time, a lot of money. So, but there, there's probably a lot of other contaminations in there too. DD : Did the, the black goo in the pipe ever get tested? PG: 12 �Uh, I gave it to the water authority, and I don't know, <laugh>, DD : Did the homeowners have anything to say? Or did they not see it? PG: Oh, they saw it. I, I showed the gentleman when I, you know, first cut it, he was home. I stuck my pinky in there and I said, look, <laugh>, DD : now we know why you didn't have water. PG: I only did it one time. I didn't do it twice. But, um, they were, they were bo both, uh, Air Force, uh, retirees. And they still make a lot of money doing related. And, uh, they told me that, well, if the Air Force didn't kill 'em, whatever's in the water is not gonna kill 'em. I, you know, I can't argue with that <laugh>. So you, but yeah. You know, they went through survival training and, you know, they had to, they had to eat crow and all sorts of fun stuff, you know, so but, um, yeah. So, so that's that whole ring of effort there. PG: And I, well, I did talk to an account and kind of the subject came up about the lake being low. And I told her about the wells being down and why. And she says, you mean the lake is contaminated? And I said, I wouldn't doubt it. I don't know if it's been tested, but I highly would <laugh> imagine that it has, because there's so many people and there's so much liability. And she got a little upset with me that I would suggest that Lake Bella Vista is toxic. I didn't quite say that. She asked me, is it contaminated? And I said, likely. That was just, you know, gotta be so careful. PG: Okay. Next effort. Uh, let's see. Oh yeah, I told you a certain, I won't name it, very prominent, um, engineering firm on East Beltline. I can say that much. Um, took my soil samples and threw them away. And at the same time I had insight that was, it was one of their employees that, that told me later that they were told by Wolverine. They didn't want, they weren't supposed to test anything from Rockford. So that's firsthand. PG: Uh, let's see. Hey, we're onto the second page. Almost done. Um, Lynn, when Lynn McIntosh first met up with me, she was riding her bike. She saw me out and she wanted to stop and, you know, say something about the landscape. And then she identified herself and, uh, she wanted me to try to have, you know, some understanding of where the contamination was. And that's when I told her about, you know, trees being disformed. So I, I said, well, just, I'll show you something. I said, so we walked out, we walked to the trail, and if you look to the east, you'll find nothing but disfigured trees. Soft wooded trees. A lot of 'em have fallen over recently. And the brush is gonna be there forever. 'cause they can't get a, a heavy truck on there with a chipper <laugh>, one thing only put one inch of asphalt out there. They shouldn't have done that. So, <laugh>. But you look to the, you look to the east, and the trees are 13 �gorgeous. They're absolutely beautiful because the creek stopped the buckboard and the little truck from going that way. And the, the, the creek wandered all the way up to the north. So this was the dividing line between here and 12 mile DD : Your house. PG: Yeah, so the property on my, on my property line is very contaminated. I don't do much of there. On the other side, it's not. DD : And the, the, um, the trail runs behind your house, right? PG: Yes. Correct. Runs parallel to the back property line. Yeah. So I, I showed Lynn that, and she, she got pretty excited about the fact that that was so obvious. DD : The cont the, the damaged trees are to the west or the east PG: To the, to the east. DD : To the east, yeah. And then west of it is...? PG: Yeah. From here to 12 mile is the worst. And, uh, it's a big difference. Um, and again, told the EPA nothing <laugh> one of the other sites. Should I stop saying that? <laugh> uh, let's see. See, I told you about the baseball pond and has the signs up. Uh, okay. I can, I can summarize this. Um, I, I own a, uh, tfel fry pan. Teflon. And I would never give that up. You'd have to prime my dead hand off of it before I'd give it up. <laugh>. I make breakfast every morning. And if I'm gonna clean the fry pan for, for more than 30 seconds, that's years off of my life cleaning a fry pan. So, okay. PFAS standing in the kitchen cleaning a fry pan, <laugh>. So, you know, the point is, um, there's toxins everywhere. And Wolverine got to the point where, where they knew that there was going to be more PFAS, there was going to be more lead, there was going to be more toxins. And there, there still is. I mean, there are a lot of things that we take for granted, like dish soap. How do we know that dish soap doesn't build up and then have effects on our environment and us, you know, nobody wants to know that. And if it does, if there's a, no one's gonna afford the testing for that because somebody's gonna be in very deep trouble <laugh>. So, um, yeah, nobody wants to know it's the norm. And without really knowing what is the norm, there's no absolutes, there's no, there's no guidelines, there's no baseline, there's, there's nothing. We all live in an industrial area that always has and always will be contaminated until, you know, you get up to, uh, probably Manistee, you know, you gotta go further north <laugh>, it's just, Ludington maybe. There's probably not a lot of industrial, uh, environments there. 14 �PG: They, there, there's a river. So there probably was some, at some point, whenever there's a river, there's gotta be some, some industry that decided they're going to make something and dump their waste into it. But further north, you go the further off of 94, you get goes east west, and so then you're out of the corridor. So shipping becomes a problem. So as global warming occurs and everybody goes north, hey, it'll probably be a better lifestyle. <laugh> who knows but, uh, yeah, Rockford, Rockford is toxic by design. It's, it's always gonna be that way. Uh, Wolverine did probably the most damage. And, uh, the, uh, the EPA did this huge cleanup, right where Wolverine was, where, where the tanning plant was, but they neglected to do the river. Now there's a dam immediately there. So lead chromium, zinc, they're very heavy. They're heavy elements. PG: They settle in the lowest spots. So the opposite side of that dam is probably one of the most contaminated areas. Someday that dam isn't gonna be there, it's gonna break, and all that stuff is gonna float down river. It is now, because it's being agitated all the time. A lot of it, you know, still comes around, but there's, that needed to be cleaned up. I mentioned that. Nothing happened. You know, they, they did the land, they, they actually trenched and dug and did a fine job. Uh, they did a fine job on House Street too. An enormous project. Took them four years. And I, it was, it was very similar to the, the landfill on East Beltline. They, they took out all the vegetation. And Lynn, you know, said to us that, that all had to go to Byron Center's landfill because it was toxic. PG: Now the trees are toxic. I didn't know that. Now that means all this vegetation along here is also toxic. You know, if you're, you're sitting there with a chainsaw and you're cutting up a dead tree that was on the railroad's property, and you're getting this dust from this, and Yeah. You, you shouldn't be there. No one should even be on the trail. It, it should have been fenced off and forgot about it. Oh. There's portions, portions of the trail further on the, the Mesquite Trail that go to Muskegon. They, they did that 'cause of contamination from, um, farm, uh, concerns for, um, factory farm for cattle. That they can't clean it up. And it's, it's got a lot of heavy metals in it. And so they just blocked off the trail indefinitely. DD : I can't imagine that happening for the White Pine. It's such a big thing. PG: Yeah. They should have signs up. You know, stay on the trail. Don't let your dog wander away. Stay off of this. And if it's dusty, if it's hot, if it's dry, don't go there. <laugh>. That's not gonna happen. You gotta have signs that show that, you know, people falling over on, on the ground around <laugh>. But, uh, so, you know, toxins are everywhere. And here's my point, the last thing. People are complacent, and they have to be, they have to be, otherwise they would panic. They'd go crazy thinking about all the things they have to be concerned about. And if life expectancy doesn't get beyond, you know, 75 or whatever it is, 78 now, then I guess that's okay. Um, you can't expect anymore if you're going to expect a Teflon coated fry pan <laugh>. And, you know, I, I gained three years of my life with that. So what, what I, you know, <laugh>, you know, I don't wanna stand by the sink that long. You know, there, there's just things you have to have to give up. And so I'm, you know, I, I don't want to burst your bubble or anybody else's, but we all live with a lot of toxins and they're not gonna go away. And, uh, if in fact, in the time, in the future that there is a way to clean this stuff up easily, marvelous. But there's gonna be side effects to 15 �that too. Probably cost, if anything, but um. Even in the cooling towers and the smoke stacks for what, what our power plants, they spray them down with PFAS on an every other week basis to keep the, the byproducts from accumulating so they all fall to the bottom. PG: And of course it all goes up in the air. There was a study done back early 2000s that from, Port Sheldon Power Plant, which is 46 miles away from us, their stacks, if you take a, a 60 degree angle out of those stacks to the west, that the incident of breast cancer is quadrupled for the next 30 miles. So we're just to the east of that. But you can imagine, you know, they're burning coal. Um, they were supposed to shut down and Trump said, no, don't shut down. Now they're going, I don't know, a couple more years. That makes some real good sense. PG: But, you know, again, this information, it, it either gets forgotten or it's not to be public. It's, it's to be, not to frighten anybody, let's just imagine what healthcare costs would be. What, you know, you wanna, you want a rider in your healthcare plan that says if you, if you are, you know, deemed to be too toxic to burn your body, <laugh>, they have to ship you over to Byron Center's landfill where, where everything else is toxic already. You know, because it, it's just a matter of, uh, there's no absolutes, there's no understanding it, there's nothing more than just be aware of it and do what you can to safeguard yourself. I eat chicken bones, a lot of chicken boats, <laugh> not, not the shafts, but the ends of the bones. I get a source of calcium that replaces the calcium that I, that I use every day. That's a whole other story, which I, I know you don't want to hear <laugh>, my kids don't ever wanna hear it either. <laugh>, I got one of them, one outta the four that's finally eating. No two, got two that are now eating their chicken bones. Sometimes <laugh>. DD : Oh my goodness. PG: So that, that would be the premise of how I feel. Yeah. And it's not easy. Yeah. DD : I'm, I guess it's striking me listening to all these different stories that your line of work has really put you in a position to see things in a way that most people don't get to see. You know, you're seeing both the kind of work you do, but also that you, you know, are working at all these different places in the area, PG: Black goo in someone's plumbing. Yeah. That's. DD : Like, you're just, you, your perspective is, is really like, you have a lot of data points in a lot of ways. So I think that's just, um, that's just not a perspective that, you know, most people, it's like, it's, it's me, it's here, it's in my neighborhood, or it's my thing. And you have all these different kind of reference points, which is very interesting. 16 �PG: I'm a very, um, empathetic and very, uh, observant person. And I'll, you know, toot my own in that way. But, um, so I, maybe that's why I, I see all these things. I don't know. I don't know if other people do and then they just don't, you know, take a, a moment to think about it. But, um, DD : Do you have concerns about, um, like exposure through your work? I mean, if you're, if you're digging in soil or you know, you're doing all these projects, um, do you have concerns for yourself? PG: I have for the last 45 years, applied some very horrific pesticides. And I don't wanna sound like those people that, you know, went through the Air Force and decided that if they didn't die from that, you know, that they're not gonna die from PFAS. But, but, um, I, I take, you know, some, uh, responsibilities to know what I'm using and what its action is. I stay away from any nerve agents. There's very safe pesticides out there in the last 22 years now that, um, you can spray on yourself. They're, they're actually labeled that way. They're, they're bifens. Well, bifen is a product name, but they're, uh, pyrethrins, which are made from, uh, originally made from, uh, chrysthemum and eucalyptus extracts. Now they're made synthetically. And you can buy the, the original, which is made from those two products. PG: Or you can buy the synthetic, which is a lot less money. And it works the same, but it, it is so safe. Um, it actually can be sprayed on the surface of your skin and on your clothing if you go out camping to keep out mites to keep out, uh, ticks and fleas. Um, I don't <laugh>, I, I don't do a lot of camping, but I do a lot of spraying. And I get a lot of, you know, overspray. I think I sprayed about 69, 68 people last year, and each of these places was a hundred gallons minimally. And they don't have a single insect for a year. And, uh, they can't be happier. Um, no spiders, no anything. No ants. Ants is a big thing because if you let ants get away, you know, they can destroy your house and your trees, you know, landscape, they can undermine your concrete. I have had so many people think that their driveway is cracking up because it was poorly installed. No, it was ants, <laugh>. They, after 25 years, the ants have moved out the sand and they've created their space. I could stop talking anytime. You could tell me. Shut up. DD : <laugh>. No, but, um, so it sounds like maybe you're not concerned about PFAS exposure for yourself through work. PG: Uh, boy, or That's a good question. I, I, um, no, I guess, well, one other little story I have, when I first moved here in '78, um, when 1980 came along, I looked at, I had been looking at Rockford's water supply was the Rogue River. It was just downstream from Wolverine Worldwide. And I was, I was mentioning this to people around here, and I says, what are we, what are we drinking here? We we're getting the water, just, it's going through a, a swimming pool filter, you know, diatomaceous earth. And, you know, it's supposed to be cleaned up and it's, that's not getting, you know, the chemicals out. So I went to at the time. DD : 17 �So what was, what was, what were people's reactions as you were...? PG: Oh, they, they thought I was, no, it's fine. Of course they wouldn't, you know, they wouldn't put poison in the water. And why would anybody do that? So I went to Builder Square at the time, you're not old enough, <laugh>. It was the first big box, uh, national chain. It was owned by Kmart. And on the shelf, I looked at all their water purification systems, and they had, well, larger, no, this was the larger one, <laugh>. It had a reverse osmosis filter in it, and a sediment filter and a carbon filter. And they were big filters, and this thing was big. And it took up the entire space underneath my cabinet in the kitchen. And, uh, I brought it home, cost a thousand dollars in 1980. And my wife said, no. I said, yes. I said, we're not drinking that water. Now, to this day, my kids are all very healthy and sane. Knock on wood. I don't have any but <laugh>. But I, I have other neighbors who they, you know, they don't have a filtration system, and they have health issues. They have fatigue issues. They have, um, poor reflex to, you know, food items. They get allergies, they get, uh, um, what's it, um, <laugh>, I said it earlier. But, but they have other concerns that, that are easily cured. You have to create, create for yourself an environment of your body that can withstand that. And your skin is your most important organ and it's the largest one, and you better make sure it stays perfect. I don't have any cracking. I don't have any soreness. And as of, you know, last year I calculated the amount of, you saw the trailer out front with the firewood in it. Okay. I've been doing that for 37 years, and sometimes many earliest years, I'd handle that amount of wood six times before it was burned. Now I got it down to like three, but I did the calculating over 37 years, and I have moved 1 million ton of wood personally. DD : Wow. PG: Yeah. DD : Wow. And, and it's, can I ask, how old are you? PG: 71. DD : 71. And it's, and you credit chicken bones. PG: What was that? DD : You give the credit to the chicken bones. PG: 18 �Well and we also eat, uh, products that are mostly organic. Or if they're not organic, they are no pesticides, hormones or antibiotics. And I go outta the way to get it. Um, we, we haven't gone out to eat in <laugh>, I don't remember, it's probably five plus years. Maybe we've gone out once or twice in there. But I don't trust, uh, food in a restaurant because they're always trying to make a profit. They're gonna give you whatever they can that's gonna make them money. And that's not gonna be the healthiest stuff. But we do eat Qdoba once in awhile we like that, but we don't eat burgers out anywhere. We eat organic ground beef. I, I buy salmon from Alaska. Um, which I still have. I have enough right now. But yeah, I eat fish two or three days a week. And, uh, so that's my efforts to get away from the contaminants. Yeah. Um, there's probably another three dozen of 'em. You don't want to hear my DD : No. But it does make, so I, you know, you've got the filter are on your street. Are you, are you on city water here? PG: Yes. Yes. And I just bought a new filter because the other one I couldn't get parts for and it was starting to leak. And the other one I got now is really nice. The first one I had, this is, it was a water pic, and it was one of the earlier, um, reverse osmosis, and it took 11 gallons of water to make one gallon of filtered water. So my water bills were always kind of high. Yeah. Plus I, you know, irrigate and, but, um, I cut my pipes here and I'm looking in the pipes. There is phosphorus, which is what it's supposed to be. It's supposed to be a coating. It's supposed to be white. So I know that there's no buildup of that much. PFAS. The, there's a pamphlet that comes out every year, and it's always suggesting that the, now the PFAS doesn't exist. PG: Well, it does, but their wells are well away from, from Wolverine. There's three eight inch wells that are water, our water source. And that has been in service now for, oh, since 06, 07. But I did hear through the gentleman who I mentioned earlier, who's the engineer. I asked him, I think the last couple days, no days, not months. Um, how's the water doing? And he says the aquifer is half empty, so there's gonna be a time when we're probably gonna have to switch. And the only other source of water is Lake Michigan, which was an option for Rockford. But the previous manager decided he was gonna do the well thing and then do, um, Wolverine or have, uh, the water sewer system. Oh, yeah. There's another caveat to that. <laugh>. This, this is, this is fun. Um, we were told by the city manager that we were going to have, um, the water sewer North Kent water sewer authority paid for by Wolverine. OK. And the sewer line, Wolverine was gonna pay for it all the new sewer line and the, the sewer cleaning facility. And, um, I dunno if they were gonna throw in the new wells there or not, but it was going to cost Wolverine, uh, over 20 years, millions of dollars a year to be able to afford to do that. Well, um, at the time they announced that, uh, about two and a half years went by, and then our city manager said, oops, Wolverine's no longer gonna pay for this, so everybody in Rockford's gonna have to pay for it. So my water bill now has an additional charge of $45 every billing period, which is two months. Um, and that's gonna go on 40 years <laugh>. But at the time, they, that Wolverine had announced that they were going to pay for it. They had already bought the permits to build in Big Rapids and move their facility there for tanning hides. So they weren't going to be using the sewer, they weren't gonna be using the, the sewage treatment plant. That was just our city manager wanting them to announce that. So the people in Rockford will all get all happy and excited and that he was doing a fine job and Wolverine is being so nice, <laugh>, but it was all planned. It was all planned. Two and a half years later, he said, oops, sorry. Uh, everybody's gonna have to be charged now. 19 �PG: <laugh>, It's corruption everywhere. You, you just, it's like it toxic, toxic substances. And then there's toxic people, there's toxic events, and then yeah. Everybody wants to have some sort of power and control, and they, they want to see if they can get away with it. Um, that's unfortunate. But it's, yeah. To, to preserve yourself, you have to know the facts. You have to feel that you are capable of making decisions, which also is, I'm still in Rockford and I know why the water system is the way it is, that I know that there's contaminants everywhere. And, um, and they're not just PFAS. Um, DD : So you sort of maybe hinted at this, um, but what concerns do you have about PFAS contamination kind of moving forward from here, if any? PG: Right in my neighborhood? DD : Locally or broader. PG: I, I guess I see it as being still being used. Um, there is not enough regulation on where and how it goes after it's been used. And if it can be contained at all. I don't, you know, the, the whole effort to give us a limit on how much PFAS can be in our water or any other sources around us is just a cover up. There's not, it's not ever going to be controlled. There's not ever gonna be enough testing. Um, there's not gonna be enough ways to try to change that substance into something that is not toxic. You know, the research to do that, I'm sure there is some, probably the makers of Teflon have to come up with something, or they have to have a, you know, a laboratory someplace, you know, that looks like they're trying. People are greedy. They're gonna keep being greedy and eat your chicken bones <laugh>. That's all DD : <laugh>. PG: Oh, it's, it's, I don't know. I, I find that, uh, I've been very fortunate and my kids are all very healthy. And I, I do know that in the past, some of my relatives have probably passed because of alcoholism before anything else, or they, they were not recognized as being, um, gay. So, you know, they committed suicide. So those are concerns too. Mentally. And, uh, I don't know. It, it's a, it's a crazy mixed bag of everything around us and probably PFAS may not be the worst. DD : I should ask you, before we wrap up, if there is anything that you'd like to add that we haven't touched on, or anything that you want to go back to, to say more about? PG: 20 �I, I have to give Lynn McIntosh enormous amount of credit. Wow, she is just one great woman, <laugh>. Yeah. If it weren't for her, I don't know where this would've gone. You know, I mean, she used me for information, but she put it all together. She presented it, she went to all the council meetings. She went to fight, you know, for some sort of understanding. And, uh, yeah. That's great. Yeah, there's been a couple of other people, I, I don't know them personally. I was part of the CCRR group and, you know, it's still kind of casually am. Um, Lynn kind of keeps me in tow, but, um, I've been so busy, <laugh>. But, uh, yeah, I, I really do have to give her probably 99% of the credit. Yeah. PG: And, uh, for me, it's just been, just been in the wrong place, or the right place at the right time, wrong time, whatever, you know, people open up, I see things that are not normal. I recognize that there's, uh, extenuating circumstances that should be looked into and never are. And I had my chance to talk to the EPA. Over an hour and a half, three very nice people that sat across the conference table. And I told 'em what I knew and how many ways they could check and test. Um, they didn't get back with me. Of course, <laugh>, there was never, never any liaison. DD : When did you meet with the EPA for that? When did, when was that? PG: Uh, four years ago. DD : Oh, so somewhat recently. PG: Yeah. Yeah. And they were just doing a, a fishing to find out who knew and how much, and to know if they had to try try to find out a way to be, uh, calming people down. Yeah. I've tried in so many ways to not be hysterical, not be playing, you know, commenting, you know, commenting, commenting to people that, you know, this is not good. There have been people on my street though, that I have told 'em not to let their kids play in the sandboxes. Uh, just, just abandoned them. And kids that had, you know, parents that had kids that were, uh, young toddlers and yeah. There have been incidences of, of childhood cancer here that, that really are out, out of the line. I mean, way outta line. I have warned people, you know, to, you know, if they have a, a daycare in their house. Uh, the, um, the development right to the north of me is also where, well, that's where the, the field was that the, you know, Mr. Giles' great-great grandfather had been, well, great-grandfather had been dumping or allowing Wolverine to dump. So they have a, a holding area, <laugh>, little retention pond that, that's built up like a up. And <laugh>, there's an overflow that goes down, Jericho. PG: Oh, yeah. There is one other story I should tell you anyway, that, that water goes into a, a storm drain that by all regulations, all ordinances, state, federal should have gone into a retention pond. And it had to be a a hundred feet away from the, from the bank of a water source. Which was be the Rogue River. Well, they, they ran that line, uh, down the new home. Here is his driveway underneath the driveway, and they emptied it out 15 feet from the Rogue River without it being in a retention pond. <laugh>. Why? I mean, they did, they, they just bypassed all of the regulations. So, and he goes, oh, here's 21 �something. And geez, I forgot to tell you, I dunno why I didn't write this one down. When I first moved here in, uh, '78, um, it was in March, and I noticed there was these two guys that were dressed in very dirty coveralls, uh, and driving a pickup truck that was all rusted out with a winch on the back, cable winch, and a motor that ran the winch. And they would, between the sewer manhole covers of the old sewer line which runs, you know, back that way. Um, they would send down a fish line and then pull back a, a stainless steel bucket the size of the sewer line on the power winch. They would do this continuously. Every 200 feet is a manhole cover that goes from here to Comstock Park <laugh>. And they would drag the bucket, pick it up, and dump it on the ground right next to the manhole. PG: You can imagine how contaminated that is. Again, I told the EPA, but I did tell million dollar homes across the river here. There's a development called, uh, River Bluff, I think it is. And, um, there's, there's two houses with a manhole cover on their property line, because the sewer line goes underneath that. And I told them, please don't let anybody near that. Don't, don't even touch it. Don't mow it, don't do anything. Just let it grow wild. And they don't, they manicure it and it's lot, a lot of dead <laugh>, but every 200 feet is probably the most contaminated surface in Rockford that you could have that runs right through those million dollar homes and all the way, all the way to Comack Park. Um, the EPA, nothing. DD : So you said you noticed them doing this back when you first moved here? Yes. Is this a practice they're still doing? Or they don't do it anymore? PG: No, they don't do it anymore. Um, they still use the old sewer line like we talked, and it's probably rusted through in so many ways 'cause of the acid that it's just leaking it out and it doesn't have to be dragged anymore <laugh>. So it, it just seeps into the ground. And you can imagine how that's going to affect the aquifer in 30 to 50 years from now. Um, especially. Right you know, right near the Rogue River, we're talking about surface water and we're, we're talking these manhole covers are just on either side of the Rogue River. And that's where they've been dumped. And, you know, every time it rains, a lot of that still finds its way into the river. DD : Oh yeah, for sure. PG: Yeah. I did, I did have a gentleman who lived across the street from me and his dad bought a piece of property and had owned it on the end of Rio Rogue, which was a dead end road, and it's beautiful little site right on the river. And, um, I remember talking to him and I told him, I says, you know, this could be contaminated. That sewer line runs, you know, right alongside your property. I told him what I knew. He sold it in a couple months, got rid of it. He didn't want any part of it. DD : Hmm. I wonder now that the, since the tannery closed, um, how that affects, you know, they're, they're not discharging in the same way that they used to 22 �PG: In Big Rapids they are <laugh>. DD : They have the boot making factory up there, don't they? PG: Yeah. They have asphalt lined retaining pods, retention pods DD : In Big Rapids? PG: Yeah. They have to, they have to pump it out and where they run it to, I don't know. Um, that would be a good story for MLive to look into <laugh> DD : Because, Yeah, go ahead. PG: It probably, they probably dump it somewhere around Big Rapids. So maybe on people's property that is abandoned, maybe probably the same scenario that they did here. They're just doing it up there now. It'd be impractical to haul it and it doesn't evaporate when it gets down to a, a certain level, it just becomes sludge and it doesn't evaporate after that very much. I don't know. Unless they have a lot of retention ponds and as it 'cause it rains, it, it becomes a liquid again. I don't know. Leather. Leatherette. It's a good idea. <laugh> the fake stuff. Actually that is still leather. It's a very thin coat of leather on top of a polyester. leatherette. It looks like leather. DD : Well, Paul, thank you so much for taking the time to share your stories today. PG: Thank you for listening. I think I got 'em all out too. It's that last one I totally forgot about the bucket. That was a good thing. That was when I first moved here, I saw that and thought to myself, why? This is weird. What are they doing, <laugh> DD : Yeah. And just cleaning the pipe PG: Cleaning the pipe. And they're dumping it. Sewage. I mean, if it's just sewage, it's bad enough. But it was from Wolverine and all the heaviest metals you could possibly imagine. Yeah. They didn't go down the pipe. There's not enough fall, not enough, you know, circulating. So they had to scoop 'em up. <laugh>. 23 �DD : That's wild. Well, thank you. PG: No, thank you. Oh gosh. <laugh>. Yes. I'm free <laugh>. 24 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Living with PFAS Interviews Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Devasto, Danielle Description An account of the resource Beginning in 2021, the Living with PFAS interviews were recorded to gather the personal stories of individuals impacted by PFAS contamination. PFAS, or per- and polyflourinated substances, are a large group of human-made chemicals used widely since the 1940s to make coatings and products resistant to heat, oil, stains, grease, and water. They can be found in countless household items, including food packaging, non-stick cookware, stain-resistant furniture, and water-resistant clothing. These chemicals are often called “forever chemicals” because they do not break down easily, can move through soils and contaminate drinking water sources, and build up in animals, plants, and people. PFAS have been linked to increased incidences of various cancers, increased cholesterol, decreased fertility, birth defects, kidney and liver disease, and immune system suppression, and thyroid dysfunction. It is estimated that PFAS are in the drinking water of more than 200 million Americans (Andrews & Naidenko, 2020). In Michigan alone, over 280 sites have PFAS contamination exceeding maximum contamination levels for groundwater (MPART, 2024). Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-11 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf audio/mp3 Type The nature or genre of the resource Motion Picture Text Sound Language A language of the resource eng Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context PFAS0042 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Golembiewski, Paul Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2025-11-06 Title A name given to the resource Paul Golembiewski, 2025 (Interview video and transcript) Description An account of the resource Rockford resident and horticulturist Paul Golembiewski reflects on decades of living and working near the former Wolverine Worldwide tannery, sharing detailed observations of chemical dumping, environmental damage, and community health concerns tied to PFAS contamination. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource DeVasto, Danielle (interviewer) Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Moving Image Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/87f88291b83ac519bcd902c793fd93f6.pdf fccd3431f2272db0ae0479e5baf888ba PDF Text Text Defenseless but Fighting: A Personal Battle with PFAS and Infertility PFAS is a group of chemicals known scientifically as perfluoroalkyl substances. Even more concerning, according to the CDC, is there are more than 9,000 different types. These include PFAS, PFOS, PFOA, and others. PFAS chemicals are incredibly stable both chemically and thermally. These are forever chemicals, meaning they bio-accumulate, bio-magnify, and will not degrade. These substances are in everything from carpet, furniture, camping gear, makeup, non-stick cookware, firefighting foams, fabric, and firefighting gear. These chemicals are in every living organism and virtually every body of water. As a 14-year Fire Lieutenant, I have been heavily exposed to PFAS. Here is my story. In May 2020, my wife and I thought our dream of having a family was about to come to fruition. A short time later, we quickly realized that wasn’t the case. My wife woke me in the middle of the night, stating that she had intense abdominal pain, severe cramping, and heavy bleeding. She was 10 days late, but never showed a positive pregnancy test. She informed me she thought she was having a miscarriage. Unfortunately, all this was taking place during a global pandemic. We immediately called my wife’s OB to be told that they weren’t accepting patients. After many phone calls, her doctor finally agreed to see her. Initially, the focus was on my wife. After many invasive and humiliating tests, we were surprised to learn that no abnormalities were found. We never found out whether or not she had a miscarriage. The focus quickly turned to me. I immediately referred to EVMS, where multiple blood tests and semen analyses were ordered. Ultimately the results from those tests were heartbreaking. They found no sperm and noted abnormal hormone test results. What followed still seems like a blur. First, there was a brain MRI. The results from the brain MRI came back and showed a tiny benign tumor on my pituitary gland. The tumor was ultimately ruled out as an issue and deemed not a concern — next, more rounds of bloodwork. Then, genetic testing is followed by more physical exams. No abnormalities were noted during my genetic testing, and no deletions were reported from my chromosomes. I then underwent hormone therapy via Clomid to increase my testosterone. I’m still recovering from what Clomid did to my body. I seemingly gained 60lbs overnight and always felt like I wanted to crawl out of my skin. My urologist then suggested doing a testicular biopsy. The testicular biopsy was scheduled for December 3, 2020. That biopsy would serve two functions, to check for testicular cancer and look for any sperm residing in my testicles. Unfortunately, again the results were not what we hoped. While they found no cancer, they also found no sperm. They diagnosed me with Sertoli-Cell Only Syndrome, NonObstructive Azoospermia with an unknown cause. Following that procedure, my wife and I discussed getting a second opinion at VCU Health. Our initial consultation was with Dr. Smith-Harrison in January 2021. He felt that he might still find sperm by doing a procedure called Microsurgical Testicular Sperm Extraction (micro-TESE). Following that consultation, I was placed on chemo. The goal of chemo was to control hormones my body was overproducing, specifically Estradiol. Chemo was single handily one of the worst experiences of my life. To this day, I deal with random bouts of hives, forgetfulness (chemobrain), and chemo rash. March 30, 2021, I had the micro-TESE surgery, and once again, the results were negative. While heartbroken and frustrated, my wife and I vowed to press forward. Dr. Smith- Harrison referred us to VCU endocrinology. My first appointment with Dr. Madan �Defenseless but Fighting: A Personal Battle with PFAS and Infertility was on April 20, 2021. The initial meeting again involved more blood work. The blood work was for thyroid, hemoglobin, and additional hormone testing. No abnormalities were noted. In May 2021, I was placed on testosterone replacement therapy. One definite is I will have to be frequently screened for testicular cancer for the rest of my life. The testicular cancer screening will occur twice a year. By all accounts, Sertoli Cell Only Syndrome is the precursor to testicular cancer. Having NOA is in 5% of males in the world. Having NOA along with Sertoli Cell Only Syndrome resides in 1% of males globally. Have Sertoli Cell Only Syndrome and NOA with an unknown etiology only occurs in 0.5% of all males globally. At the end of May 2021, I received a small piece of information that was significant. My liver enzymes were shit. The results indicated borderline non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. As a curious person, I went back in my records to see if the result replicated or if it was just due to the chemo. Come to find out, the first poor liver enzyme test I received was in 2019! Unfortunately, I never heard a word about looking into it. In June of 2021, I participated in the 2021 National Firefighter Cancer Symposium when Dr. Angela Slitt began to present. A few minutes into her presentation, a slide detailed the relationship between liver enzymes and PFAS. At that moment, a light bulb clicked. I rushed to my computer and immediately sent a screenshot of the slide to VCU with my liver enzyme report attached. Both the doctors noted the significance of the findings and are actively researching. I received two more vital pieces of information in June. First, Dr. Graham Peaslee notified us my 2018 gear tested positive for PFAS. My station wear did not. However, it did contain brominated flame retardants (banned since 2004) and Benzene, a known carcinogen. The combination of Brominated FR and Benzene mirrors the effects of PFAS on the human body. Unfortunately, for my testicles, they were given a high dose of toxic chemicals for 33% of the year, every year, for 14 years. Let that sink in. Now one more test to go…PFAS. This test will not confirm whether or not PFAS is in my blood; we already know it’s there. This test will indicate how much. On June 26, 2021 at 0530 in the morning I received the results. Keep in mind there are 9252 PFAS. I was tested on 6. I popped positive on 4. The highest were PFOS and PFHxS. It is important to note; I have kept two pieces of information out. One question asked at EVMS, Urology of Virginia, VCU Urology, and VCU Endocrinology was whether or not I have been exposed to any toxic chemicals. The answer I provided was yes. This question alone started us down a rabbit hole my family never imagined. We began researching firefighter fertility, firefighter endocrine issues, and firefighter testicular cancer. That research led me to have conversations with Diane and Lt. Paul Cotter (who is mentioned in a NY Times article), Captain Sean Mitchell from Nantucket Fire (IAFF Resolution 28), IAFF President Ed Kelly, Dr. Graham Peaslee of Notre Dame, Lt. Neal Sinatro from West Hartford, Ct, Dr. Madan at Virginia Commonwealth University, and Dr. Smith- Harrison at Virginia Commonwealth University regarding firefighter fertility research. I have reached out to many others in hopes of finding answers and getting the word out. In a profession where we encounter many hazards, we should not worry about the consequences of donning our turnout gear and putting on our station uniforms laced with chemicals. The second piece of information is a report from Dupont scientists. Lewis (2005) stated, “Beginning in 1992, scientists began to publish papers addressing how PFOA causes testicular tumors and other harmful effects on the male reproductive tract. First, they found that PFOA increases blood levels of Estradiol in male rats” (P. 29). Scientists �Defenseless but Fighting: A Personal Battle with PFAS and Infertility also found males who have been exposed to PFOA and PFAS having difficulty regulating testosterone. Consequently, my body has yet to regulate both of these hormones, verified with blood testing, Clomid, and chemo (Lewis, 2005). As a society, we must sound the alarm. Our blind trust in chemical companies and the EPA has led to arguably one of the worst environmental catastrophes known to humankind. PFAS is in everything, everyone, and has polluted every one of our waterways. Only recently has this began to garner attention. In June 2021, articles have been released detailing PFAS is in newborns, every citizen of the US, sparkling water, fish, makeup, and our waterways. We must hold the companies that have polluted our country responsible. Or this story will become all too familiar. Folks, we need to be better. Go to the DOCTOR! Trust me; I was that guy who didn’t want to go. I thought it was all BS, and I was fine. I wasn’t okay. I don’t know who out there needs to read this. But trust me, there is no shame. Talk about it. Write about it. Just get it off your chest. You are not alone. One Last thing, Our dream of having a family is still very much alive. We are actively navigating this next chapter and look forward to what the future has in store. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Living with PFAS Interviews Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Devasto, Danielle Description An account of the resource Beginning in 2021, the Living with PFAS interviews were recorded to gather the personal stories of individuals impacted by PFAS contamination. PFAS, or per- and polyflourinated substances, are a large group of human-made chemicals used widely since the 1940s to make coatings and products resistant to heat, oil, stains, grease, and water. They can be found in countless household items, including food packaging, non-stick cookware, stain-resistant furniture, and water-resistant clothing. These chemicals are often called “forever chemicals” because they do not break down easily, can move through soils and contaminate drinking water sources, and build up in animals, plants, and people. PFAS have been linked to increased incidences of various cancers, increased cholesterol, decreased fertility, birth defects, kidney and liver disease, and immune system suppression, and thyroid dysfunction. It is estimated that PFAS are in the drinking water of more than 200 million Americans (Andrews & Naidenko, 2020). In Michigan alone, over 280 sites have PFAS contamination exceeding maximum contamination levels for groundwater (MPART, 2024). Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-11 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf audio/mp3 Type The nature or genre of the resource Motion Picture Text Sound Language A language of the resource eng Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context PFAS0014 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Goodman, Bryan Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021-06-17 Title A name given to the resource Defenseless but Fighting: A Personal Battle with PFAS and Infertility Description An account of the resource Personal essay by Bryan Goodman discussing the impact of PFAS on his family and fertility. Subject The topic of the resource Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/97c9be594f2e3fe201456b655bf840ab.mp4 be4680c825a52562b0f5bee7830a57a8 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/bc0a1b7f18ad31a49f1516310b4414c7.pdf 22a0dc906706e19a8464342dc77b3871 PDF Text Text Living with PFAS Interviewer: Dani DeVasto Interviewee: Laureen Hackett Date: June 16th, 2021 DD: I am Dani DeVasto and today, June 16th, 2021, I have the pleasure of chatting with Loreen Hackett. Hi Loreen. LH: Hi. DD: Loreen, can you tell me about where you’re from and where you currently live? LH: I am from and still live in Hoosick Falls, New York. DD: And, have you lived there your whole life? LH: Mostly, on and off I moved around a little bit but, I’ve been here, like, 45 years [chuckles] combined, so. DD: Alright, Loreen can you tell me a story please about your experience with PFAS or with PFAS in your community? LH: The PFAS awareness issue began here in basically it was presented to the village board in August of 2014 and then began the debacle of how the state did not [chuckles] help Hoosick falls for almost a year and a half, they didn’t even tell us to stop drinking the water until EPA stepped in end of November 2015 is when we finally got the do not drink order. Our levels here were extreme and blood testing that started in February with results coming in April, May, also revealed extraordinary levels, scary levels in our- in our blood in all our residents. And from then on, we started a Twitter page, PFOA Project New York, and we- it was in the beginning to, one bring awareness but two we were also clamoring for hearings on what went wrong with the department of health and all that. So, it was sort of to bring shame but also, you know, awareness- my grandchildren were in the top 3 [chuckles] tested for their levels and at the time they were age 4 and 6. I am in the top 50 and- once the do not drink order came about in, we’ll say December 2015, I started doing research because I have all these health problems that are just weird. They’re nothing that none of my family has and whatnot, so I’ve always been wondering what happened. Well, I got some answers once I started doing research on PFAS and health effects, and I have continued to do that for the last 5 years, and it gets more and more [chuckles] dire every day to the point now that I’m working with- a university, we’re collecting health studies as part of our site study that we were worded through CDC and so we- we had been sharing the monthly and we’re starting on their site, now we’re going to weekly because so many studies are now coming out fast and furious and none of its good news. So, I- as- at the beginning I thought my Twitter page was finite, I thought once we got our hearings and once we started getting some regulations I could lay off, but this issue has just, literally popped since. So I’ve continued it, my page has grown, and I almost feel obligated because so many communities are going through what we went through in the beginning. So, you know, I want my page to be 1 �reflective of awareness for a mom or dad that just found out that their water has too much PFOA in it and they can go to my page and it's easier reading stuff. I do post health studies I find if they feel like delving into those. But more, you know, general here’s a, you know, a video, here’s what this states doing here, you know so that you can understand- so that someone who- cause this is not easy stuff to [chuckles]- to understand by any means with so many acronyms, I mean that took 2 years to get them all down. Both: [laughter] LH: You know, and with more coming out now as we start digging into replacement chemicals, so I try to keep it as user friendly as possible, although I will post the health studies that I find. DD: Mhm LH: So, it’s been a job, it’s been a full-time job for me for the last 5 years and now I’m on, I don’t even know how many committees. I’m working with National Academy of Sciences as a community liaison, I was invited to speak at their East Coast panels they just had the last month or so, I am a co-chair of our community working group here because we have 3 federal super-fun sites, the 1st in the nation for PFOA, there’s 2 state sites and their looking at 5 more, so this tinyyeah, we got Chernobyl-d with PFAS. So, among that, I’m part of the national coalition for PFAS- oh gosh, I’m on our cap committee for our site study, [chuckles] so it just goes on andI’m always- and now, the last couple years I’ve been writing and helping draft legislation, whether it be in New York state or federally and we have some great partners inside our general brands office, which is the next bill I’m working on and New York state I work with a lot of the environmental orgs, been to D.C., I think 7 times, I’ve submitted testimony at 2 congressional hearings, [chuckles] I’ve been invited to Alaska to do seminar there, I’ve been to- I’ve beentravelled all over the place for conferences and it’s just- I dove in head first, head first because I just feel like I need- given this is our health, this is the health of my family, this is the long term health of my grandchildren, I’m one of those, I’m a nerd, I need the data, I need the info, I’ll read as much as I can of it even though it’s sickening and depressing and arduous at times I just keep doing it.[chuckles] So, but until the issue stops, until it’s banned or I don’t need it, you know, we don’t need to do it anymore. So, that’s one of the things I’m working really hard on and also, you know, I’m a- I’d like to think I’m the biggest advocate for children’s health, because if you look at Hoosick Falls, you know, a lot of us, good majority of us have been here our whole lives. We’re toast, there’s no helping us at this point. But if we can help our children to not end up like us and give ‘em half a chance, and it may already be too late given, you know, the levels that they were drinking. But man, that’s the goal, you know, if not for us, you know, older folks, then for the kids. They didn’t sign up to drink poison, you know, so whatever I can do to help just keep pushing that. DD: Mhm, so what happened in Hoosick Falls? Why is it the Chernobyl that you call it? LH: So, the history of Teflon, it really goes back to the history of Teflon. We had our first plant open here in 1956, so-. DD: Wow. 2 �LH: Yeah [laughs], it was called flea dodge and then, we- it just was a little industrial town. We had like 8, 10 factories running all at the same time at one point so, now all these factories have contaminated, are still contaminating, we still have 2 sites of Saint-Gobain that are still operating, and this is becoming a huge battle now too because, while New York state has declared them hazardous substances, and they did that back in 2016, which allowed them to get state super-fun site status then onto federal in July of ’17. But they’re still operating, and while PFOA and PFAS have been stewardshipped out, [unclear] the replacement chemicals, which we are finding, which aren’t regulated. So, we’re back to square one and we also know now through all the ongoing health research, that the replacement chemicals are just as bad, if not worse. So, this is going to be an ongoing- we just literally 2 weeks ago, 3 weeks ago had a PRAP from DEC, a Proposed Remediation Action Plan, for new water sources. So, we had a municipal gack filtration system on the municipal water and all the well owners got POET’s, which is Point-ofEntry Treatment systems on their wells. But we’d been looking and looking and looking for a new water source for 5 years. DD: Wow. LH: And so- yeah so, they’re- the proposal’s out now with comment due, I think at the end of the month and then we roll from there and however many years it’s gonna take to get those going and. But, in the meantime, we’re back to square one with the replacement chems and we had this argument with DEC while we’re still being contaminated [laughs]. Until they’re regulated, I can’t think of a better term than we’re shit outta luck. Which is, I suppose, you know where most industrial communities contaminated are too, until they’re- till more regulated we’re just gonna keep breathing them in. And the stacks from these plants is what contaminated us in the first place, all this stuff literally, the best explanation is, came outta the- it snowed on us for decades. Snow hit the soil, it came through the soil and hit all our water tables and aquifers and it’s still snowing. There is no regulation to make them put controls on the stacks to control the emissions, it’s not regulated. So, this is the next battle, or current battle, actually. DD: Wow. [laughs] LH: Yeah. DD: So, it sounds like you were able to get some movement, some help- some help from kind of local governments and things but not- not all the way. LH: So, our water’s filtered, ok so that- you know, alright so we’ll at least stop the exposure that way. But the exposure happened because of what’s coming out of the stacks hasn’t been remedied, other than the 2 being phased out by 2015, and EPA did an air stack test here last year which showed the replacement chems, the shorter chains, plus, I don’t remember if it was 15 or 20 long chain PFAS that all, you know, seems like every researcher will tell you are worse for the humans. There were C8’s through C18’s that they couldn’t even identifyDD: Wow. 3 �LH: -that we’re being exposed to this very minute 3 blocks from my house, and nothings been done about it. So, [laughs] you know you- you’d think with what we’ve learned even just the past 5 years, you know, you look at Rob Bilott’s story right, he’s been doing this for 20 plus, and I can’t imagine 15 more years of this and being no further along, that man must be a saint because [laughs] I have the patience of a fence post. Both: [laughter] LH: I’m thinking 5 years and I’m still [unclear] I’d be banging my head off the wall, I’d probably give up which is maybe what they’re hoping for, you know. DD: Mhm. LH: But I’d like to think that the last 5 years with community after community, you know with us and p’s and West Virginia and [cape fear] and, you know, now it’s all Michigan, it’s all headline news. So, I don’t think we’ll slide backwards, so that’s good news but we still need more regs and hopefully a non-essential use ban on all of them, the EU is doing it between 2023 and 2025. Maine just passed, a week ago, a non-essential use ban by 2030 in all products, so now there’s precedent so, bills are coming, I can tell you that, on non-essential use bans and we have the PFAS Action Act out now and Senator Jill Brand has done some wonderful bills with us. I did a Facebook Live event with her and Rob Bilott and Mark Ruffalo to announce the PFAS Accountability Act that she came her and introduced as well. So, they’ve been- Congressman Delgado has been great, he’s on the PFAS Task Force, he was just here 2 weeks ago, so they’ve been- we’ve been lucky to have some really attentive elected, you know, representatives. Congressman Tonko, he’s right on this and he’s right here in Albany next to us. Senator Schumer is well behind all the ‘get rid of PFAS’ stuff, so we’ve been lucky there, luckier than a lot of states. But, again, are we lucky that we’re still being contaminated? [laughs] You know, they’re coming down on DOD now, you know, it’s the head of the snake, and it’s a whole different animal. And that was from, you know, the firefighting foams and whatnot. So, once you stop using firefighting foams and clean up the contamination, then your exposures could- supposedly done, yeah? Well, ours isn’t. DD: Right. LH: So, it’s 2 different battles but the same dragon, right? DD: What concerns do you have about PFAS contamination moving forward? LH: That they’re not doing enough quickly to stop exposure. Number 1, you have to stop the exposures any way possible, knowing how even the lowest doses, the lowest grains of salt in this bioaccumulate in children and cause health problems. There is no doubt now that they cause health problems, so stopping exposure has to be first and foremost and whether that’s in the air, water, food, cosmetics, wherever it’s coming from, especially contaminated communities. Cause we’ve been told by our health departments we have to lower our exposures, right so I have this huge level, in parts per trillion it’s 266. 4 �DD: Wow. LH: Yeah, so I have to go out of my way to not eat microwave popcorn, use Teflon- right cause I have to do- it’s gonna take me 20, 30 years to get that down to the [chuckles] EPA accepted level of 70 at the time, right? Well, if I can’t find it in the products, how am I supposed to lower my exposures? And they keep accumulating. So, will I die with this stuff in me? Likely, yes. Likely, yes. I’m gonna have just an extraordinary amount and I’ve never stepped foot in a factory. So, until we know where it’s coming from and stopping exposure, it’s just gonna keep building up and making people sick. So, that’s gotta be number 1. So, that would entail, right, you know, regulating all of them coming into any drinking water sources, all of them coming through the air because, you know, inhalation and dermal exposure and all that. Things in kid’s products, any- all of it it’s just- and there hasn’t been one found to be non-toxic out of the 92 hundred that are out there that we know of. Not one has come out and say, ‘this is absolutely non-toxic’. NTP and IEHS, they haven’t found that list yet. So, it’s frustrating to see congressional people saying ‘you don’t need to- we can do these 1 by 1’ yes, it’ll take 1,020 years. [laughs] okay, you know. But yeah, you have to stop the exposures, however it has to be done. Whether it’s rewriting all of Tasca, cause it’s ass-backwards. We have to start taking a precautionary principle, especially with this class of chemicals. They’re horrid. DD: Did you have any- you said that was number 1 concern that you had. LH: Number 1, we have to stop the exposures, yeah. And then, you know, then we have to look at clean up and that’s only once [chuckles] we can get the exposures stopped. Can’t clean it up if you’re still getting exposed. For here, for some place like Hoosick falls, we’re never gonna clean up our soil and stuff it just- you can’t dig down 30, 40 feet around every single house and bring us all new dirt, you know, so that won’t happen. And even though we have superfund sites, it only is site specific. We’ll only clean up around that site, not the homes 3 doors down from it, you know. So, you know, in stopping- I mean this stuff lasts forever, right? Its hundreds and hundreds of years in the soil, lord knows you can’t get it out of an entire aquifer, at least technology’s not there yet. Even trying to destroy it or, you know, burning it. We just had an issue nearby at Norlite, Cohoes and we found that they were burning it without telling anybody, the PFAS, A triple F foam. [laughs] So, that was a whole nightmare. The county executives put out a moratorium for a year to stop them from burning it, and then we passed a bill in New York State to ban burning it temporarily unless EPA comes up with some new-fangled method that would make it safe. So, this is- I often refer to PFAS as the mutant octopus, because once you think you’ve cut off one arm, 8 more grow out and it’s constant it’s always an evolving issue, it’s not a simple, ‘we can do this, this, this and have it stop’. Well, we did this and then 2 other issues came out of that and then once we did those, we got 4 more, so it’s a ever-evolving mutant octopus whose arms, they can never quite get wrapped around. So, it’s just regulation after regulation and hopefully they’ll smarten up and do them in a class and ban them, just ban them. DDT and PCB times 100, it’s that much worse. DD: Before we wrap up today, is there anything you’d like to add that we haven’t touched on or that you would like to go back to and say more about? 5 �LH: I think, you know, people don’t generally call their congress people for things. People are reluctant advocates, unless it’s an issue like this that hits close to home. I think the more people that yell, the better off we’ll be. The more pressure we put on them- elections matter. So, things that you might’ve taken for granted before, it’s time we step out of ourselves and start really yelling. And the more normal people- ‘normal’ [laughs]- ordinary citizens that say we’ve had enough of this, we’re sick of being- having all these toxic chemicals in our stuff, then that will change. And I think that those of us that’ve been advocating for this issue for the past 5 years have proven, we can make change. And we’re moms, we’re, you know, grandmas, we’re sisters, you know. We’re not anybody special, but it’s just a topic that hit us, and we proved that we can change, we can make change if we’re loud enough. So, I’d like to think that, as more people wake up to the nightmare of this, it’s in 49 states, everybody’s gonna be facing- if they look they’re finding it, so that’s the sad part, that everybody needs to just start yelling to make things happen, and it can be done. I think that’s it. And, you know, again we have to help our next generation, we have to help our children, we have to help our grandchildren. This just isn’t- and the more we learn about PFAS, suddenly the more you’re learning about other toxic chemicals that are coming to light, like phthalates and, you know, all these other things that are also harming endocrine systems and immune systems. You just can’t help but notice it when you’re reading health studies, these other ones pop up on the side, you know, and you’re like, ‘oh man BPA’ and you’re like, ‘ah geez we’re just- we’re screwed’ [laughs] and unless we make some changes, you know, you start with one issue and I still even have a hard time- this is like 30 hours a week on just a Twitter page reading health studies, I haven’t even delved into these other things yet but I know, you know, anything they have seen [unclear] immune system is horrific. But [chuckles] how did this happen, you know, how does this keep happening? It’s cause our laws are backwards. So, maybe, you know, that’s something everybody else can keep focusing on as we talk about climate change and effects of bad regulation or no regulation, this really needs to be looked at too, or we won’t be here for the climate to change, cause we’re all gonna have cancer and die, [laughter] you know. And I’ve had cancer, so I kind of speak from experience on that one. I just don’t want it for my grandkids. DD: Yeah, absolutely. Well Loreen, thank you for taking the time to share your story today. LH: Thank you for having me and thank you for this project. All necessary awareness is vital and dire now, so it’s great. DD: Thank you. 6 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Living with PFAS Interviews Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Devasto, Danielle Description An account of the resource Beginning in 2021, the Living with PFAS interviews were recorded to gather the personal stories of individuals impacted by PFAS contamination. PFAS, or per- and polyflourinated substances, are a large group of human-made chemicals used widely since the 1940s to make coatings and products resistant to heat, oil, stains, grease, and water. They can be found in countless household items, including food packaging, non-stick cookware, stain-resistant furniture, and water-resistant clothing. These chemicals are often called “forever chemicals” because they do not break down easily, can move through soils and contaminate drinking water sources, and build up in animals, plants, and people. PFAS have been linked to increased incidences of various cancers, increased cholesterol, decreased fertility, birth defects, kidney and liver disease, and immune system suppression, and thyroid dysfunction. It is estimated that PFAS are in the drinking water of more than 200 million Americans (Andrews & Naidenko, 2020). In Michigan alone, over 280 sites have PFAS contamination exceeding maximum contamination levels for groundwater (MPART, 2024). Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-11 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf audio/mp3 Type The nature or genre of the resource Motion Picture Text Sound Language A language of the resource eng Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context PFAS0012 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Hackett, Loreen Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021-06-16 Title A name given to the resource Loreen Hackett, 2021 (Interview video and transcript) Description An account of the resource Loreen Hacket lives in Hoosick Falls, New York. Loreen learned of the PFAS contamination in the area in 2014 and soon linked her own health problems to it. The PFAS in Hoosick Falls has been linked to Teflon, which opened its first factory in the area in 1956. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource DeVasto, Danielle (interviewer) Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Moving Image Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/202e63b7f08efc99b8528ccee82dc72d.mp4 b23d1bbb8402bcebbd3eec8715f7e8cd https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/3c8079565f3e6e43fc0f62d5ac6fa5b8.pdf 40acf0d95534eb88182f866ccaffc3de PDF Text Text Living with PFAS Interviewee: Abigail Hendershott Interviewer: Dani DeVasto Date: August 13, 2021 DD: I’m Dani DeVasto and today, August 13th, 2021 I have the pleasure of chatting with Abby Hendershott. Hi Abby. AH: Hi Dani. Nice to be here. DD: Yes, thank you for being here and talking with me today. Abby, can you tell me about where you’re from and where you currently live? AH: I am currently living in Rockford, Michigan though I am from the Bay City area originally, but I do have a residence up north as well, so I seem to be on the west side of the state quite a bit. DD: How long have you been in Rockford? AH: Since 1996, so 20-since 25 years. DD: Abby, can you tell me a story about your experience with PFAS [per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances] or with PFAS in your community? AH: Yeah, so PFAS, for me, folded in a very personal way and we-you know working with-at the time that PFAS started unfolding with Wolverine it was 2017. I was the assistant district supervisor for the remediation redevelopment division in the Grand Rapids district office. The supervisor at the time-the district supervisor at the time, was handling the-starting the project. Had the-some of the initial meetings-was kind of handling the situation as the initial sampling and discussions with Wolverine started happening. We were-you know the communityconcerned citizens came to us at the end of January. I was not in that meeting but then in subsequent meetings as things started to unfold, the health department got a request for a well permit right next to what was known as the house street dump area, and we didn’t have really good record on the area, it wasn’t something that was on our radar, it wasn’t something we had worked on in our division in a couple of decades. So, it wasn’t something that we were intimately familiar with, but when the well request came in for the health department we thought, well we’d better take a look at it. Things quickly escalated. The first 8 houses were sampled, those were okay, but then when the Belmont Armory tested their well as part of a National PFAS testing for all the armory sites across the state or across the country, they got a PFAS hit that indicated we needed to go back and resample some more. So, what started as a few houses, I think the initial sampling was 35 houses, quickly escalated to-and this was July of 2017-we had staff out there trying to figure out, you know, which houses would be most at risk. We didn’t have any monitoring well data, we didn’t have any ground water data. And so, it was a very, very intense time and so once it really started getting kicked off, for myself, I was working as the Assistant District Supervisor helping to support staff as we were going through this, but then the 1 �District Supervisor actually got a promotion and by September of that year, and was in Lansing, and so I took over as the District Supervisor in the middle of this. So, by, you know, July we had sampled 35 houses by September we were recommending sampling 300 houses. By December we were up to 650 houses, and the [laugh] the real kicker was that in addition to the residential drinking water sampling that-that staff were doing, Wolverine was actually doing it the staff were actually out in the field with the Wolverine consultants trying to make sure we were talking with residents, giving them enough information, it was a tremendous strain on-one of the most intense periods of my entire career because we had so many people calling us and at one point we didn’t understand that-we didn’t know where else Wolverine would have dumped. We had a lot of concerns that there were other locations around the county that Wolverine would have dumped. [coughs] And so this started trickling out into the-into the community, and so we were getting hundreds of calls from the community about people finding barrels, finding what they thought were leather scraps, finding all kinds of things, and so we had to basically stand up by the-by the end of October we had to stand up our instinant command system and have our instant managers, there were 8 of them that came over and helped us through-through the next six months to really investigate all of these complaints, help us talk with residents, help us make sure we were, you know, getting back to the 650 residents that were being sampled, and at that point then by November we were-I had set up with-with the team and with Wolverine that we would do daily meetings. So, every day we had a team of, you know, remember we had two staff working on this in July, and by November we had basically 15 of us working on this daily. DD: WowAH: It was-it was so intense. Seriously one of the most intense things that we did, and so, at one point, we are sampling, you know, one of the Rockford Middle Schools, we’re sampling some of the Elementary Schools to make sure the schools are okay. You know, the Rockford High School was-was served by municipal water so that was good, but all the way around it had neighborhoods that were served by the drinking water wells. And so, these constant meetings and-and, you know it was very stressful for staff, but it was very stressful for the community. And so, the first meeting that happened in September with the town hall was-was before I kind of took over as the District Supervisor, but that first meeting was with our-our field staff were up there to try to kind of explain what was going on and-and as well as Wolverine as well as the Health Department. And it was, you know, like a four and a half hour meeting with, I don’t know, probably-there were probably 600 people in the room. It was huge. The next meeting we had in November we coordinated a little better and had the whole Freshman Center gymnasium set up, plus we were televising it, so we had, we figure, over a thousand people in person, plus all the media crews, plus the Sheriff, plus probably another 200 people live streaming from theirfrom their thing. So that was, you know again, that’s still on YouTube if you want to-[laugh] if you want to go take a look at it. So that was November of-of 2017, and so by, you know, by that point then we are fully in the midst. People are all on bottled water, people don’t understand what’s going on. Wolverine is starting to install full house filters but we just don’t know that we’ve gotten the full extent of that contamination going on, and through this whole thing I’ve got you know friends of mine who live in the area, people that I go to church with, people that I go to the gym with, people, you know, stopping me to talk about what’s going on. Are they at risk? Should they be drinking their water? Should they be, you know, all these questions, and the fear and anxiety was at a level that I had never really, really experienced before, so-so it was a pretty 2 �intense time. Things shifted by the time we got into 2018, we-the state had established a drinking water-a groundwater cleanup criteria for the protection of drinking water. So, we had then a-a regulatory limit for PFOA and PFOS, so, all through 2017, we were having Wolverine go out and assess these homes, but we had no regulatory authority to-to establish an actual cleanup limit. So, all we had at that point was a EPA health advisory limit, which they were working with, but it wasn’t, you know, it wasn’t a regulatory inforcible criteria that we could enforce this as a state. So, 2018, early on, we got that and we continued then to have Wolverine assess more and more houses. December-December-beginning of December we got results. So, one particular story, I’ll tell you about that I think is really-wow it was pretty unnerving, we had had conversations all through this fall we were doing township meetings, we were doing neighborhood meetings, we did a lot of after hour meetings trying to just get the information out to people, but one of them was a neighborhood up in-in the north of Tenmont, in an area we thought would not be impacted by the house street dump. And, you know, when looking at the data, all of the groundwater from the house street dump went Southeast. This particular area was to the Northeast so they should have been out of the range of any contamination. We said, we don’t really think there’s anything in your neighborhood. You know, we talked to them, we said it-it’s pretty unlikely, but they-everybody at that point was -there was a lot of people trying to get their own testing done because they didn’t know what they were finding, so we had people not only sending us complaints about barrels and leather scraps, but also sending us their private testing data, and one of those-one of those houses that was close to this particular neighborhood was-we had been talking to the township or to the Neighborhood Association President for a while and one of them came back as being a-like a thousand parts per trillion of drinking water. So, I got Wolverine to-to agree to do the whole neighborhood. They gave them bottled water, they agreed to do all the testing in the neighborhood. [cough] Three weeks later, we get the results and it’s a Saturday. I’m seeing the results come in. They-usually, because it was a laboratory that worked on the West Coast, the results would all come in on a Friday night, late, like 10 o’clock. So, Saturday morning I’m sitting there looking at these results going oh my god, there is house after house after house in this neighborhood, in this Wellington rich neighborhood, that was at eight thousand, 20 thousand, 10 thousand, I mean like, the whole neighborhood was so severely impacted it was just like oh my god. And again, these are-these are people I know, and one of the families that I was attending church with, you know, she’s pregnant, she’s got four little kids. You know, they’ve raised all-all the kids drinking this water, and it was just-it was heartbreaking. So, for me I think that was one of those pivotal moments where we just go, wow I can’t believe this, because it was not-it was not something that we would have ever been able to identify except through his very extraordinary set of circumstances that brought us to this point-you know in a normal investigation you stick with the area, you know the contamination, you define it. And, we had the house streets contamination somewhat defined, but this was an entirely new area, and it was something that, you know, Wolverine said that it didn’t have any records for. They said they never dumped there. We think that somebody dumped a whole-whole barrel of scotchgard, whether it was something that somebody took home and just dumped in their backyard or what happened, it was such a-a high strength source that there’s just no other way it could have been done. And, unfortunately, where this was dumped at, was at a topographic high, and it was part of a-a-because the Rogue River goes around the whole area, it was not only at a topographic high, but it was at like a groundwater divide, and so groundwater went in five directions. We ended up, from that one source area, having a very strong plume that went off to the Northwest, some fingers of plumes that went off to the Northeast, another plume 3 �that went to the Southeast, all following the Rogue River but from different locations. And-and we were guessing at this, completely guessing at this. Had a Geologist working on staff that did a fabulous job and trying to figure it all out but hours after hours, I mean, the-the staff, you know, we had literally the Incident Managers work with us from like November to March, but even after that it was full time for myself, the project manager, the Geologist, another person on staff, and then all the other resource staff that we needed to keep going for two or three years. And so, you know, in the end we were able to get some agreement with Wolverine to actually get an incentive degree written, get the almost 70 million dollars to get municipal water hook-up for a thousand homes, which we’re very proud of. Plus then they’re going to go back and they have to access all of these different locations where the groundwater is benting to surface water, because we know that there is, you know, the groundwater continues to be a source for PFAS, and it is going to continue to impact the Rogue River for the long term, so that’s something that is moreone of their ongoing obligations. So I’m gonna stop there and see what your next question is. [laugh] DD: [laugh] Well I’m just struck by how much PFAS is bringing the personal and the professional together for you. I’m wondering if this is typical for you in the work that you do, or if this is kind of a unique or maybe a more intense situation? AH: Very, very intense, very unique. I mean, we’re always striving to make sure residents know what we’re doing, and that we talk with residents about their concerns, but this was-you know, this was a project that was one of those lifetime events. You-we hopefully will never have another project quite like this. And when I, you know, now I’ve gone from a District Supervisor in Grand Rapids for the last couple years, and I’m now-have the privilege of being the-the Executive Director for the Michigan PFAS Action Response Team, so I’ve actually stepped up to the state level. And when I look at the concentrations that we’re finding around the rest of the state. When I look at the magnitude of what is at other sites, this is still the worst. This is by far the first-the worst of the contamination, the worst of the impacts to residents, the-the-just the amount of contam-the high strength of the contamination as well as the-the distribution of how far that it has gone. It’s probably got a full 23, 24 miles-square miles of contamination of groundwater, surface water. Soils, of course, not so much but definitely have an ongoing source. So, this is one that I think will, you know, I think somebody will-it’ll somehow end up in a story in some way, so it’ll be your story but the-but it’s really a very unique situation. We just don’t have that-we will have other sites that will, yes, we’ll have to do town meetings, and yes, we’ll meet people, and we’ll try to get them clean water. You may find one or two houses, you may find a couple of houses, but you’re not going to find this. So, we’ve got other sites where we’ve sampled, you know, a couple hundred homes, but we’ve not found concentrations like this. And as you know from talking with people who have been impacted, you know, we had one house that topped over a hundred thousand parts per trillion drinking water well. That’s probably the highest one in the country I would-I would guess. DD: Just sounds overwhelming. [laughs] AH: It was overwhelming. It was overwhelming. Our team did a great job, but I can’t, you know, as with everything we had a physical breaking point where it was just-it was-you just sat there and cried. Because, you know, I had people in my office talk to us one-on-one and it’s, you 4 �know, you’re sitting there after hours talking with these people, and they’re just crying their hearts out. So, it was not just a job at that point, it was really everything we could do to try to make it-and then you’re balancing it with the constant, constant media requests. The trying to balance the-the narrative that’s coming out of the media, and the narrative that’s coming out of Wolverine, and the narrative that we’re trying to promote, that, you know, we’re trying to do the best job we can. It was overwhelming, and there’s no doubt about it, so, that job was much harder than this job that I’ve got now. [laughs] Which seems weird, but it really was. DD: [laughs] Can-would you say more about the work that you did with communicating with the community. I mean I know you said that the whole situation was more intense, but it seems like, especially like the community engagement communication part was also kind of a really key part of your work and just, maybe unique to this situation. AH: For sure and I think this-this really, you know, started paving the way for how we do community engagement now for MPART overall. As things started to unfold, you know the firstthe first townhall was in September of 2017. It was-it was an eye opener for us. We figured people would be a little upset, we figured that yes, you’d get people to come but the visceral anger and a lot of it was pointed at Plainfield township. Which we didn’t expect, we didn’t understand that there was already this residual tension between the residents and township which is something that we had not even expected or understood. And-and then, you know, at that point they-they didn’t really understand the whole wolverine thing so much, so, you know, they didn’t take their anger out on them. But that was a real eye opener for us and so at that point we started getting [coughs] requests from some of the townships, Algoma township specifically, that they wanted to have some neighborhood meetings. And I said, you know I think that's a good idea. So, we started meeting with some small, you know, small subdivisions basically. We had probably, I want to say in between 2017, 2018, we probably did 20, 25 neighborhood meetings in addition to the September town hall, the November town hall. We had a, I want to say there was another one in there as well as all the media stuff. So we were trying to kind of attack it at all of the different levels, not only to try to get the word out to the media, who's kind of controlling the narrative, but try to reach to the Township, make sure that they were supported because they were just as overwhelmed as we were trying to answer resident calls and questions and then getting in there and-and really talking to people one on one, I think, is where we were able to turn that narrative around. Me, you know this-I think, personally, despite all of the contamination, despite all of the-the anxiety, there’s some-one of the things I think that became very evident was that there is a very much that seven stages of grief that goes with finding out that, you know, if it's a death in the family or some major trauma or some major shock, that's what these people were going through was you had the whole-they were very angry, then they were very sad, then they were very resigned and then-. And it probably took a full-it probably took a full 18 months for some of these people to work through those [clearing throat] those stages. And it was very obvious that it was easy to blame, you know, Eagle. It was easy to blame Wolverine at the time. [clearing throat] And obviously, you know, the contamination did come from them. So that was justified. 5 �But they didn't get the response that they wanted from Wolverine. They didn't get any kind of personal connection. [clearing throat] They didn't get a way to talk to them because they were so insulated with lawyers that they-they had no connection. So, we provided that ability for them to, you know, ask us the questions, try to give some sort of feedback to help them feel justified or- in what they were doing. You know, I think over the-the timeframe from like September to November, December, I think we ended up with, like, 600 calls that went to our environmental Assistance Center. When they couldn't get one of us, they would call our 800 number. And so, you know, it was crazy trying to deal with it. But I think the best way you deal with it is on that personal contact, that one on one contact where you're really sitting down and talking to people. And we did. We went into people's homes. We had-we went into if any of the neighborhood Association invited us, we went in and talk to them. We did a ton of night meetings and that really is what changed the attitude and changed this. And so, despite this being the worst of what I see in the state, I think it's the best example of a good response, a great response from not only Eagle, but all of our partners as we work through this. You know, we worked daily at these daily meetings with Eagle or DEQ at that point was not only all of our staff, but we had local health Department, Kent county health Department there every day. We had Plainfield Township there just about every day. We had the state health Department, Department of Health and Human Services was there with us every day. And so, you know we had 20 people. Plus, we had Wolverine there every day. Plus, we had their consultant there every day. We soon hired our own consultant to-to help take samples. And by December-December, January of 2018 is when EPA showed up and they started meeting with us every day. And so, these team meetings were big, but it was the only way to keep the wheels on the bus. And it was the only way to keep the coordination and the communication going. And so, I think because we forced that model and we forced everybody to come together every day, it really turned out to be hugely successful in the way it was implemented. Not to say there weren't bumps. There was always bumps. But considering how long some of the other litigations can go on, how little the-the, you know, actual residents can get out of these things, I think we did pretty well in trying to negotiate a response for, you know, municipal water hook up for 1000 homes, plus some sort of a capping for House Street, as well as a investigation for all of the groundwater getting into surface water and those kinds of natural resource damage stuff so- I think we'll leave-I’ll leave that one there then. DD: Okay. What concerns do you have about PFAS contamination moving forward at this point? AH: You know, that's a great question. I worry about what we don't know. I worry about what we're not looking for that five years, ten years down the road. We wish we would have known when we're doing our investigations now. I worry about the other types of PFAS light chemicals that are out there in our world that we aren't paying enough attention to. But yet they're pervasive-they’re, you know, PFAS is unique in that it has- [clearing throat] it's not only a persistent biocumulative toxin, it’s-we're finding it everywhere. We're finding it in our soils and 6 �our groundwater, in our air, in our-in our bodies. And without a full worldwide response to this and the fact that we are already, you know, consuming so much of this, we expect these-we expect the luxury of our first world country, which includes the use of a ton of PPAS chemicals. How do we turn that expectation around to-to be able to eliminate some of this stuff? And I think that's going to take a long time. And I fear that-[laughs] that the long-term ramifications of what we've allowed to happen in the last 60 years will take, you know, the next 180 years to rectify, because that's-that’s really the big piece. We started using this stuff in the 50s, and it's now 2021, and we're just starting to get our hands around it, and we still don't have federal standards, and we still don't have a national response to this. So those are the kinds of things that-that I worry about. And unfortunately, so far, PFAS has not become-it's a political thing, but it's still getting bipartisan support, which was one thing that, when we started off, when MPART was first established in the fall- in November of 2017, really indirect response to what was happening at Wolverine. Governor Snyder at the time saw what was happening at Wolverine, saw us go from 50 houses to 200 houses to 600 houses and said, okay, we can't have that happening again, set this up. And he kind of threw this MPART structure at us, which, you know, we didn't even, we didn’t realize was coming at the time, it’s all being done at the governor’s level. But it is really what has shaped us. And so, one of the things that we were pretty careful about doing when we were going out and doing neighborhood meetings, when we were going out and doing town halls, was we included all of the legislators because, you know, Senator McGregor at the time, Peter McGregor, was, again, very involved because this was his neighborhood. These were his people. These were his neighbors as well. As well as Kevin Green, who is Algoma supervisor again, very-very involved. And so, that kind of-that kind of legislative personal stories was taken back to the legislature and was really the reason that we were able to get some of the first pots of dedicated PFAS money for response. And so that next year, then in 2018, the legislature actually gave the state, you know, 25 million to handle some of the PFAS response. We were able to go out and do statewide drinking water sampling for all the municipal systems, which is huge. Nobody ese-I don't think anyone else in that some of the other States are just starting to do that. But we were the only one, and I think we still are the only one that has consistently gone through and done all of our municipal water supplies. We've done all of our daycares. We've done all of our schools, we’ve done-you know we're working on all the type twos and type three water supplies. And so that was huge step forward in what Michigan-so we've taken the situation that started with Wolverine, started with this one community. It's expanded now to making MPART really be at the forefront of what's going on for PFAS across the whole country. So now we're getting-we’re getting asked, how do you do this? How do you make this happen? And for me, MPART is one of those things that I think again is a once in a lifetime opportunity because we have an opportunity to be collaborative with and cut off all of the normal chain of command type of situations that you have with state government or you have with any 7 �government and really go to the experts in each of the departments. So, we have seven different departments that are all participating in MPART. Eagle, Department of Health and Human Services, DNR, our Department of Military Veterans Affair for all their bases. We have our fire Marshal, we have our Department of Transportation who handles all the airports, and I'm missing one. There's one more. [laughs] Anyway, we bring all of that team together, and we meet with them weekly. We're all in the same room together, at least weekly, talking about things because, you know, has become very evident. As with our airports, PFAS is much used in all of our firefighting foam, which the airports have to use for airplane crash and rescue. And so, they trained with it. So, we've got large parts of the state with pretty high concentrations from what we call AAFES. But that coordination has to happen with everybody because you got people out there taking surface water samples, taking groundwater samples. DOT actually regulates the airport themselves. You've got Eagle regulating all the media contamination. But you’ve got-in some cases, you've got DNR who may have migratory birds that end up on the airport. You know, they end up in their holding ponds. There's all these weird connections that go in there. But the thing that's so successful about it is that collaboration, that communication, that coordination happens in a structure that is set on top of-it’s like an umbrella that sits on top of the state government and allows us to do and leverage really great work at an exponential rate beyond what we would normally be able to do. If you have to work through a normal chain of command, you can't have those conversations. So, it's almost like what we did in Wolverine with actually getting into the neighborhood, talking to the people one on one, only flipped and reversed. So now we're getting into those agencies and talking one on one with, what do we need to do with Peacocks? What do we need to do? What's our next steps? Where do we need to go as a state, as a country, as a world? And so, I'm very proud of the fact that we're going to continue those personal conversations and keep those things going on. One of the things that we're doing this winter is having our second PFA- Great Lakes PFAS conference. So last year, we were able to have about 1600 participants, all online, but we had three different countries, 35 different States. We had presenter from Germany, we had presenters from Australia, and it was a way to have that conversation about what's going on with KBAs. What do we know? What don't we know? So, this year, same thing. We're going to do another virtual conference in December, and my hopes are that-that we can continue that conversation about where do we need to go with PFAS? I think some of the big unknowns are still, what does it mean to have PFAS concentrations in soil? If-if it's an okay concentration for soil, that it won't Leach to groundwater, is it an okay concentration that it can't be taken up into plants, or that it can't be taken up into the silage for the cows, and then it doesn't get into the milk. So, there's a whole lot more that we don't know. I mean, I think we've just hit the tip of the iceberg for what we do know about PFAS. And so, when I think about what's to come, we've still got a long, long ways. But I think we've at least at the state level, I'm very proud of the work that 8 �we've been able to do. And the [laughs] you know how you-the old expression is, you never get more than you can handle. God doesn't allow you to handle more than he-he thinks you can handle. So what-what was allowed, what we went through for that whole experience with Wolverine has really shaped not only our state responses, but also the way that hopefully we can go forward, because I think the best thing that we can do for PFAS, the best thing we can do for our state, and for our Great Lake States, especially is to make sure that we continue to have those conversations around collaboration of data, collaboration of responses. What do we know, you know, what's truly a fluorine free foam? We've got a lot more conversations that are going on behind the scenes. DD: Absolutely. Before we wrap up, is there anything else that you would like to add that we haven't touched on today or anything you'd like to go back to and say more about? AH: You know, I don't know that there's anything in particular that sticks out. I think that this will this particular experience with Wolverine will always be one of those special experiences in a lot of different ways. But I think-what, you know, for me, it's not just been a project. It's about the people. I’m very much a people person. And so, when I think about getting to know the people around the area who have been most impact, I think of Sandy Windstalt and I think of Jenny Kearney, and we've gotten to know the people on our Community Advisory group or the Wolverine [keg?] very well. A lot of those people then stepped up and are not just concerned about Wolverine but their also now actually participating on our statewide citizens advisory work group, that I’m now chairing as well. So, they’re the people that are great voices in the room to be able to provide perspective. 9 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Living with PFAS Interviews Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Devasto, Danielle Description An account of the resource Beginning in 2021, the Living with PFAS interviews were recorded to gather the personal stories of individuals impacted by PFAS contamination. PFAS, or per- and polyflourinated substances, are a large group of human-made chemicals used widely since the 1940s to make coatings and products resistant to heat, oil, stains, grease, and water. They can be found in countless household items, including food packaging, non-stick cookware, stain-resistant furniture, and water-resistant clothing. These chemicals are often called “forever chemicals” because they do not break down easily, can move through soils and contaminate drinking water sources, and build up in animals, plants, and people. PFAS have been linked to increased incidences of various cancers, increased cholesterol, decreased fertility, birth defects, kidney and liver disease, and immune system suppression, and thyroid dysfunction. It is estimated that PFAS are in the drinking water of more than 200 million Americans (Andrews & Naidenko, 2020). In Michigan alone, over 280 sites have PFAS contamination exceeding maximum contamination levels for groundwater (MPART, 2024). Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-11 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf audio/mp3 Type The nature or genre of the resource Motion Picture Text Sound Language A language of the resource eng Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context PFAS0025 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Hendershott, Abigail Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021-08-13 Title A name given to the resource Abigail Hendershott, 2021 (Interview video and transcript) Description An account of the resource Abby Hendershott is originally from Bay City, Michigan and now lives in Rockford, Michigan. In this interview, Abby discusses her work as a District Supervisor in relation to the PFAS water contamination at former Wolverine dumping sites. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource DeVasto, Danielle (interviewer) Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Moving Image Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/4261c43fc4cfdde943fc51c943939c6a.mp4 65a14a1e93a25d1c195b7c0c092a61e9 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/47edc50b31794ea1ab13157e2c5fb60e.pdf 70f9c411d28a0297f683dfe8ffec5901 PDF Text Text Living with PFAS Interviewee: Elaine Isley Interviewer: Prof DeVasto Date: April 9, 2021 DD: So, I’m Dani DeVasto, and today, April 9th, 2021, I have the pleasure of chatting with Elaine Isley. Uh, thank you for being here today, Elaine. EI: Sure. DD: Can you tell me about where you’re from, um, and/or where you currently live? EI: Uh, sure. Those are two different questions for me. Um. I– I’ve been in Grand Rapids for 20-plus years, but I still kind of, where I’m from. I grew up in the Washington DC area. So I’ve– I’ve, I’m not a Michigan native. Uh, I moved here to go to professional school, and I just stayed. Uh, particularly, once I moved to West Michigan. Um, I currently live in Grand Rapids Township with my family. DD: And you said you’ve been in Grand Rapids Township for the last 25 years or so? EI: I’ve been in Grand Rapids metro area for about 25 years. I’ve only been in the township for a year. DD: Okay. EI: We moved– we moved right before the pandemic started. DD: Oh my. [chuckle] EI: Yeah. [chuckle] DD: At least you were settled before the pandemic started. I can’t imagine– EI: We have a little more space in this house than we did in the last one, and we’ve been really thankful for that. DD: I bet– I bet. So, Elaine, can you tell me a story about your experience with PFAS, or with PFAS in your community? EI: Uh, sure. So, uh, the first– the personal story, which is not super exciting, uh, when we moved here uh, so Grand Rapids Township abuts Plainfield Township, and I am on the upper border. Um. I live on 4 Mile, and 4 Mile is the dividing line between Plainfield Township and Grand Rapids Township, so when we were looking at purchasing this house, the first thing we did was look for, um, PFAS drainage in the ground water and because of my work. Uh. We had 1 �a general idea of where it was, but um, that was a consideration for us when we were moving. And there is a super-fund site not far from here, so there actually were a lot of wells and there had been a lot of tests. So, we were able to find definitively that we are not in a PFAS groundwater plume. So, uh, that’s– that’s where the– the personal impact came from. It– it was certainly a consideration for me, um, in moving a little bit closer to the affected area. Um. But I am the Director of Water Programs at the West Michigan Environmental Action Council, and we have been working with the citizens group in Rockford for almost 10 years. Um. It was the– one of the first meetings that I went to when I joined WMEAC in 2012. We went to, uh, Rockford City Hall and we met with, uh, Wolverine Worldwide’s council and some representatives from the city. Now this was before PFAS had actually been identified on the site, um, and we were, uh, what was happening was the downtown tannery that, um, Wolverine had in Rockford had been torn down years before. But a small citizen’s group had raised some concerns about what had happened to those materials. How had they been removed from the site? Was permitting appropriate? Is there still a danger? And unfortunately, because Rockford is so entrenched as a company town, they– the citizens’ group kind of got a raw deal. Um. The city did not take them seriously. The local newspaper sort of painted them out as-as, just wild and crazy people. And-and so they– it became really contentious for these individuals personally. And so our organization got involved to make sure that they had a seat at the table. Um. On their own, they compiled a pretty large dossier, and they sent it to the US Environmental Protection Agency, ‘because they weren’t getting a lot of cooperation even from, um, then it was the Department of Environmental Quality, um, now it’s the Department of um, Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy. So, if I go between DEQ and EAGLE, that’s why. Um. But the EPA came back and said, “Look, there’s a lot here. You should be looking at this.” So then-then the DEQ got involved, and things started to move a little bit. But there was still a lot of tension between this local citizens’ group and Wolverine and the city, and so we’ve remained involved and we’ve sort of helped them kind of work through how to raise these issues. Um. [sigh]. They didn’t need a lot of guidance. This group is very dedicated. Uh. I don’t-I don’t wanna name names because that’s not really my place, but they were affected or they had neighbors who were affected. They were worried about the air quality. There was a lot of concern– they were worried about what was getting into Rum Creek which flows right into the Rogue River, um, which ultimately flows into the Grand River and out to Lake Michigan. So this is a very interconnected system. Uh. It was a regional water quality issue. And it was during that time frame that we had, uh, started working with Dr. Rick Rediske. He is an environmental chemist at uh, Grand Valley State University at the Annis Water Resources Institute. I– he was actually one of my graduate advisors. And so I knew he had a background working with tannery contamination. He had done some work in White Lake up in Muskegon County, and there had been a tannery on the lake that had contributed to some of that pollution. There were other issues on White Lake. White Lake, um, was, uh, an area of concern, a designated area of concern in the Great Lakes, but they have been delisted. So I knew that he had that background for the tannery waste, and so they- we were finding documentation and- and sampling, um, data that showed contamination of ammonia and, um, hexavalent chromium, and there were some bad things there. Um. At some point, and I don’t recall exactly when, Rick started talking to us about PFAS, and none of us really knew what that was. To this day, I’m not sure I can give you the long chemical name of it [laughter]. [intermittent beeping] 2 �EI: So, it’s PFAS. PFAS and PFOS, PFOA. DD: [laughs] EI: It’s -it’s this horrible family of chemicals, and they’re forever chemicals. They-they can affect people in a number of different ways. Unfortunately, there isn’t a lot of data on it. Or there wasn’t at the time. But, um, Rick was- Rick was positive that we would find it in- on this site. One of its primary applications was Scotchgard. DD: Mhm. EI: And we know that Wolverine Worldwide used Scotchgard. I mean, Hushpuppies shoes. I mean, we just knew that it would be there. And, um, I think it was 2017 when we were able to get documentation. And when I say “we,” that’s the global “we.” It was really the citizens’ group. So, [laughter], um, of which Rick was a part– he became very invested in this project. And um, that sort of broke the whole thing wide open. And all of a sudden people started coming out of the woodwork, like “what is this stuff?” Uh, and then the House Street dumpsite was identified, and the woven jewel. [stutters]. It became very clear that this was a much bigger issue. And while my organization– which we go by our acronym, so WEMEAC, which is a little easier to say, um, we remained involved with the citizens group and we had a policy of-uh, on our books that we would support the citizens group and we would make this more public. We hadn’t really done a big push on that. All of a sudden with these concerns about PFAS and then it blowing up and it's coming from other parts of the state, people are seeing this as a bigger issue, we started getting a lot of questions. Um. There were people who, well-educated people, who could not find any information about what this body of chemicals was, what– where this plume was, was it affecting them? How concerned did they need to be? And it just became really clear that we would have to be much more present about, uh, getting information out there. And so, we started putting some information on our websites and Frequently Asked Questions. When uh, Rick started really pushing this issue of having a citizens group involved, um, with the cleanup because of his work in White Lake– there had been a citizens group that was sort of the liaison between the cleanup site and the local citizens, and he wanted something then put into place there. The one in White Lake, because it was an area of concern, there was a pot of money that was able to fund that. Um. We weren’t a designated area of concern. We’re still not a designated contaminant site, but right now the EPA is helping fund um, the community advisory group, or the CAG, um, through superfund. It’s not a designated superfund site and will not have um, indefinite funding. I think we have a few more months from the EPA, but the EPA helps set up the group. Um. And so we have been able to be a much better link for that information between what’s happening at the you know, at EAGLE, at EPA, at Wolverine, and the local citizens group. So that’s– so that’s really my PFAS story, is trying to elevate the issue uh, in a way that gives people the information and resources. Um, because communication has been sort of the big push there, I- I’ve taken– I’ve joined the CAG, I’m an official member, and I sort of, by default, have become the chair of the communications team. And so uh, we’re transitioning a few things, but right now I’m making sure that things are posted on the website and on our social media and we’re working with some other volunteers in the group who are trying to get um, a little bit more of a voice in the local Rockford Squire newspaper. So um, so 3 �yeah, it’s– my-my story is a bit more from the professional side of it. Uh, but it’s important because it– the people who are affected or the people who are potentially affected need more information. They need to know about the health studies that are going on. They need to know about what is happening on the cleanup. Um. They need to know what PFAS is to the extent that we’re finding out and what that effect would be for them. DD: Mhm. Is your sense that the, um, communication or the information available for people now is better? Is improved? That what is was- when you first- when people first started asking and looking for this information? EI: To some extent, yes. There are a lot more sources of information, uh, because of Rick’s work. Uh, Grand Valley State University has a lot of information. Um. The Annis Water Resources Institute has been putting up more information about that. The state has been doing a better job. They’ve created MPART, which is the PFAS uh, response team. And so there’s more information out there for people to find, but it’s still hard for people to find it. Um. I mean, that’s one of the things that my organization does. Uh. We are an action council, an environmental action council, and what that really means is we teach people how they can take action. And our organization does that in a number of different ways. Sometimes it's individual action, sometimes it’s municipal action. I mean– but in this case it’s really trying to empower people to find that information on their own. Um. Since PFAS is so complicated, we’re trying to pull as much of it together so that um, there’s a better sense of it. But I’m still- I’m finding that it’s not that easy to get information. When you listen to the– in some of our monthly meetings, you know, people will, you know, “well, where’s that information?” How do- you know, “how does my attorney find that information?” Because there’s a lawsuit now, um, against Wolverine. We’re not super engaged with that but a lot of the people who are engaged with us are engaged with that. And so there does still seem to be difficulty in finding the information, and I don’t-I don’t know– this isn’t meant to be an accusation but I don’t know if it’s because, you know, the industry is trying to be so secretive about what’s in these chemicals. You know, that’s often an issue. It’s a- It’s called “proprietary.” Um. Or if it’s just because it hasn’t been studied as widely, until recently. [stutters]. Or if it’s just because it’s one of those technical issues, that people just don’t quite know how to find– DD: Mhm. EI: – the studies or the information out there. DD: Mhm. So, that kind of might lead into the next question a little bit. Um. My- my last question for you is what concerns do you have about PFAS contamination moving forward? And if you have a totally different answer, that’s fine, too. EI: [laughter] Um. [clears throat], My– [clears throat] Excuse me. I-I- my biggest concerns about PFAS moving forward are– that’s really interesting. When we spoke with uh, Representative Peter Meijer this week, we talked a little bit about this. And one of the things that he had raised, which I thought he articulated very well, was the concern about the prevalence of the contamination. We’re seeing higher rates of-of PFAS in Michigan because Michigan’s looking for it. 4 �DD: Mhm. EI: When and if other states start looking for PFAS contamination, they’re going to find it because it’s in so many different materials. Um. We’ve been utilizing it for so long, and really just unbeknownst how– what the big problems were. Um. Or at least, unbeknownst to many of us. And Representative Meijer’s comment was when that happens, his concern is that there’s going to be this shift of “oh, well we need to take care of ‘the PFAS problem,’’’ which, at that point is gonna be somewhat global, as opposed to a site like this Wolverine tannery site where there’s an actual hardcore contamination site and people are– have extreme levels in their systems. Um, I- I forget what the numbers were– and there’s still debate about what’s a safe level in a human body, but 70 parts per billion was- was one of them. And there are people who have like twenty thousand parts per billion. I mean, it’s just– there are people who are going to have much more severe impacts than others. And if, when we start realizing how big this problem is, will we be able to really truly help the people who need it most, um, and soonest? So that’s a concern. Um. That’s a big policy issue, though. That’s not something that an individual’s gonna be able to tackle. That’s not something that even my organization will be able to do. We can advocate for that, but, it’s- I mean, that’s going to take a lot of effort and a long term solution. Um. The other things that really concern me is just making sure that the people understand and how I–you know, I wasn’t around when people were really starting to understand the impacts of DET, uh, and what that did to animals and ultimately who that affected us, so I don’t- I don’t have a memory of what– how we responded to that. But now, 50 years later, we’re seeing another legacy problem like that, and how long is it going to take before we really can do something about it? Um. You know, life is politics. It- there’s always a give and take. And you hope, you hope that when somebody raises the alarm, that people listen. But they’re– there’s just so many different obstacles and challenges when it comes to- to these complex scientific, um, issues, even when they can be disastrous for individuals. DD: Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely. Before we wrap up, is there anything else that you would like to add that we haven’t touched on today? Or anything you’d like to go back to? EI: Um, I- I guess, from my perspective, this is one of– I mean, my background is in water quality. So I- I feel really comfortable talking about things that create problems in the water. But I don’t feel comfortable about talking this– to this with people because it is so complicated and complex. And I feel like I could go back and get my whole– a PhD in this, and still not feel like I have a grasp and- and do this. But I do understand why this is a hard topic for people to find information on. Um. It’s- it’s- it’s intimidating, and so I– It’s- even for me as a professional, it’s like “ooh.” Yeah, I wanna know enough to be able to talk to people about it. But I don’t want to do what Rick does. DD: Mhm. EI: Rick is the one who helps lead our technical committee in really delving into some of the technical aspects of the remediation plans and “will,” you know, “this method of cleanup really tackles these things?” And I really appreciate having experts who can help us work through those things. Um. So when I’m- when I’m saying that I’m concerned about how people learn about 5 �this topic, I mean, there’s a lot packed into that. It- I mean, doing this oral history project is going to be really interesting, because there will be a lot of people who have some personal stories about how that’s impacted them. Um. But I think it’s really something that’s impacting more of us than we realize, and we just all don’t necessarily have the story because it’s- it’s a frightening topic. It’s a complicated topic, and people sometimes don’t want to know, they don’t wanna spend that time, because unless they’re having something that they see as an immediate impact, they’re not as concerned. DD: Mhm. EI: So, so yeah. This is- This is not a small, small issue. DD: No. it’s really complex like you’re saying. And I think made even more complex by the fact that we’re– it’s still evolving and we’re still, you know, we’re still learning new things and uncovering this and figuring out how it works, which makes it, you know– even if we knew all the things it would be hard to talk about it. EI: Yeah. DD: But we don’t know all the things. [laughter] So. EI: And it’s not that it– the information is some place. DD: Mhm EI: I mean, DuPont’s been manufacturing these chemicals for decades. It’s not a brand new thing. It’s just the awareness is brand new. Relatively. DD: Yeah. Yeah. Well, thank you so much, Elaine, for taking the time to share your story and perspective today. EI: No problem. Thanks for having me. 6 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Living with PFAS Interviews Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Devasto, Danielle Description An account of the resource Beginning in 2021, the Living with PFAS interviews were recorded to gather the personal stories of individuals impacted by PFAS contamination. PFAS, or per- and polyflourinated substances, are a large group of human-made chemicals used widely since the 1940s to make coatings and products resistant to heat, oil, stains, grease, and water. They can be found in countless household items, including food packaging, non-stick cookware, stain-resistant furniture, and water-resistant clothing. These chemicals are often called “forever chemicals” because they do not break down easily, can move through soils and contaminate drinking water sources, and build up in animals, plants, and people. PFAS have been linked to increased incidences of various cancers, increased cholesterol, decreased fertility, birth defects, kidney and liver disease, and immune system suppression, and thyroid dysfunction. It is estimated that PFAS are in the drinking water of more than 200 million Americans (Andrews & Naidenko, 2020). In Michigan alone, over 280 sites have PFAS contamination exceeding maximum contamination levels for groundwater (MPART, 2024). Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-11 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf audio/mp3 Type The nature or genre of the resource Motion Picture Text Sound Language A language of the resource eng Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context PFAS0003 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Isely, Elaine Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021-04-08 Title A name given to the resource Elaine Isely, 2021 (Interview video and transcript) Description An account of the resource Elaine Isely is the Director of Water Programs at the West Michigan Environmental Action Council (WMEAC). She grew up in the Washington, D.C. area, but has been a resident of Grand Rapids for more than 20 years. In her interview she discusses community activism related to water contamination in the Rockford, Michigan area and the leadership of Dr. Rick Rediske, an environmental chemist at Grand Valley State University. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource DeVasto, Danielle (interviewer) Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Moving Image Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/5babbe2a3f22da4b1f105c7b7c2cfc2f.mp4 69db2c20acf6e76f06521bd567a8bc9b https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/f814d527f47259f9230520cb52a3a489.pdf 3daf04fb5734351148a390a3a72f83b8 PDF Text Text Living with PFAS Interviewee: Tom Konecsni Interviewer: Dani DeVasto Date: May 18, 2023 DD (00:02): All right. Uh, I'm Dani DeVasto and today, May 18th, 2023. I have the pleasure of chatting with Tom, an individual who has been impacted by PFAS. Can you tell me about where you're from and where you currently live? TK (00:26): Yes. I, I currently live in, in the west Wolven area of Rockford, and I've been here, um, going on 16 years. DD (00:37): Great. TK (00:38): Prior to that, um, different states, uh, 23 years in Southern California. Um, couple years in Dallas, Fort Worth in Austin, Philadelphia, four years, and then, uh, Cleveland, Ohio, eight years. DD (00:58): Oh, you've really been in a lot of different places. TK (01:02): <laugh>. Yes. It was driven from, you know, childhood moves to, uh, young adult adulthood in southern California. DD (01:14): Awesome. Thank you. Can you tell me a story about your experience with PFAS or with PFAS in your community? TK (01:24): Yeah, and I'll, I'll start with, um, how, how I even came upon, you know, PFAS and that was, uh, in the, oh, I think the summertime of, uh, or the spring summertime of, um, 2010. I was driving my kids to school one day and I noticed a cloud of dust and particulate coming from the, uh, the tannery. And I looked over and they have a, a security fence around the property. And, uh, I noticed, uh, Pitch and Rockford were demoing the buildings. Pitch, being the demo, and Rockford doing the, the, the, the construction work. So there was a general, and I believe a sub on that job site. And while I was looking, um, I, I noticed that the buildings that were being knocked down were very old, and the dust being emitted and the cloud that was being generated from all the demolition activities was being blown into the neighborhoods and, uh, the local school. TK (02:40): 1 �So I, um, um, was concerned about that because I, I, at the time with my background, I believed that the buildings contained, you know, asbestos and lead and other chemicals, and I didn't like the fact that it was going beyond the, the property line. So I went to a public hearing at, at the high school, uh, a couple weeks later just to try to understand what was going on. And, uh, uh, a lot of the parties were present from, uh, Wolverine executives to the law, you know, the, the law law firm that was, um, um, that was hired basically to help them out through any legal matters. And then, uh, which was Rose & Westra, and then I believe GZA was there, and then city council, Mayor Michael Young and, and some other staff. And the presentation was basically trying to, um, soothe or, um, calm, calm people's concerns and fears of what was happening at the site, um, stating, um, situations or their facts of the contaminants that are, are there, aren't harmful. TK (04:08): And, you know, you'd have to drink a, an Olympic sized pool, you know, every day for 10 years to be affected by it. And with my environmental safety health background, when it became, um, question and answer period, I raised my hand and I, you know, I said, well, you know, that's not totally accurate because, you know, 23 of my career years, uh, or my career was in Southern Cal, and they have the toughest environmental regs in the country. And I said, you know, especially with lead, if you're six years or younger or 65 and older, you want zero in your blood. So, you know, there is no such thing as drinking an Olympic size pool and not be affected by, you know, lead and, uh, with the Flint problem, and, you know, this and that going on. Uh, that was just one of my concerns. TK (05:00): So when I stated that, um, the, uh, concerned Citizens Group at the time that was formed approached me and wondered if I could help them out, you know, with, with, um, their research into what's going on with, with that activity at the tannery and, um, the companies I worked for and me being in, in the, uh, Rockford school system and the stories that I was told with, um, certain intimidations going on with, uh, individuals in the, um, concerned Citizens Group and, and, and other people, uh, I wanted to be anonymous. And, uh, I chose to be that way for quite some time, um, until now. And, uh, uh, after some research and FOI-ng information, we were getting, um, a lot of, oh, excuses that it's a hardship to find this paperwork. Uh, you know, we don't have safety data sheets 'cause the building's been knocked down and, you know, it's required by regulation. TK (06:13): You have to have 'em for 30 years and or, you know, um, or even if you, you transfer ownership, that new ownership should need to, has to have them. Same with has waste manifest. And because we were getting, um, just a lot of, uh, no's from them or basically, um, obstacles in our way to get this information, uh, you know, more and more research was being done until we did get information that we needed so that we could present our findings to E uh, DEQ at the time, which is now Eagle, um, and presented to a Cadillac, which is the enforcement branch of it. Um, a few years went by where they were interested, but nothing was being done. And then we ended up, uh, going to Chicago and, uh, getting the interest of EPA Region five involved in 2017/18, where, um, the hand was forced, you know, to clean up the tannery and the House Street, um, sites where samples were taken and obviously high levels were found at House Street, a, a as well as the Rogue River in, in Rum Creek. And since then, I've been part of the monthly, um, community awareness group, Wolverine CAG, and, um, continue to, you know, just make sure things are being done right, you know, for the community and, and, uh, you know, all affected parties that come to Rockford, whether it's for entertainment or business or they're just living here. 2 �DD (08:00): Mm-Hmm. <affirmative>, just for folks who might not be familiar, can you explain what a haz waste manifest is? TK (08:11): Yeah. Um, with anytime you have a, they call it a RCRA waste, which is a Resource Conservation Recovery Act, um, that was put together many, many decades ago, um, in the eighties, if you're on this list or if you have any of the characteristics of a hazardous waste, like if it's ignitable toxic, corrosive reactive, uh, there's definitions for that, then, um, it's, it's considered a RCRA waste and then it has to go to an approved treatment storage disposal facility where they either treat it, store it, or dispose of it. It could be just a landfill. And, um, you know, a lot of the toxic chemicals, reactive chemicals, ignitable, you know, those are, um, uh, you know, high risk, uh, that could cause immediately dangers to life and health situations if it's not, uh, monitored and, uh, handled properly. DD (09:16): Thank you. So you, you mentioned that when you, um, were first noticing the building being demolished, you were concerned about other hazardous, potentially hazardous substances like asbestos. Um, did, were you aware of PFAS at that time or when, like when did, when did PFAS kind of enter your, your world? TK (09:38): When, um, safety data sheets were, um, um, were looked at and reviewed, that's when the compound came up with Scotch Guard. So at the time, you know, and that was several years, um, after, um, getting Wolverine to try to do the right thing to clean up the site. So that was, uh, when I first got involved was the immediate aspects of, um, asbestos, you know, uh, particulate or, or dust, and then, um, you know, lead, lead as well. So that's what initiated, uh, my interest in, you know, trying to figure out, Hey, what, what, what's happening? There's contamination in the river, in the land, in the air, just from those two substances alone, hazardous substances. Mm-Hmm, DD (10:37): <affirmative> TK (10:39): Or materials or waste, but that they're called different, um, you know, different names based on the regulation that follows 'em. So you have OSHA that regulates asbestos, EPA, DOT, same with lead. DD (11:02): All right. It sounds like it was, um, a good thing that they, that they were able to get you in on the Concerned Citizens Group. <laugh> sounds like your your knowledge of, of environmental safety regulations and policies would be particularly useful. TK (11:22): Yes. Yes. And, uh, you know, it, it helped, you know, steer the path of, you know, where things are at currently to try to remediate, you know, the both sites, the tannery site as well as House Street. 3 �DD (11:38): And when you started seeing PFAS showing up on those, um, safety sheets, were you familiar with that concept or with that, with the class of chemicals? TK (11:49): I, I, I, I knew about it, but I had to do research on it. Um, I've heard it, but I didn't really know the toxicity of it, you know, until, until I did some research on it. I, I knew it was, you know, a water repellent that's, that they have for, you know, Teflon pans. It's a, it's a, it's a great, you know, chemical, so is asbestos, you know, a mineral. It's got a high tensile strength. It's was used in a lot of things, and it's still used in some brake pads today. So, um, you know, things could be chemicals, hazardous substance materials can be handled, but they need to be handled safely, you know, write PPE disposed of properly. You know, you could, you could do things, but you need to have procedures in place, you know, and, and follow them and enforce them. That's why they're there, you know? Mm-Hmm. DD (12:47): <affirmative>, yeah. What concerns do you have about PFAS contamination moving forward, if any? TK (12:56): Um, just that, uh, it's the forever chemical and, uh, you know, the concentrations that are, you know, currently in the Rogue, um, that, that goes to the Grand River, the Grand River goes to Lake Michigan and so on, so forth. Um, will it ever get to be a, a level that's safe, you know, for not only drinking, but you know, the general public, just recreational activities, boating, kayaking. So, um, I, you know, that's, that's a concern. You know what, since the science is somewhat new, and since health studies are new, considering studies on other chemicals that have been around for decades, um, it's evolving. And, you know, we don't know the exact, um, effects 10, 20, 30 years from now from, you know, PFAS in your blood, you know, at high levels. So, um, you know, will it lead to more cancers or, you know, other illnesses, you know, uh, for, for being in your body, you know, for a duration of time. DD (14:14): Yeah. So some of those really long, the unknown of the long term. TK (14:19): Yep. Yeah. The acute effects would be short term, you know, are are there acute effects, you know, possibly, you know, possibly if you consider getting cancer, you know, in a short period of time. Uh, but it's the long term that I, I think isn't, um, the science isn't out for that yet. But, you know, I'm not a toxicologist, so I can't, you know, verify that. DD (14:49): Fair enough. Uh, is there anything that you would want to add that we haven't touched on today, or anything that you want to go back to in what you've already said that you'd like to say more about? TK (15:05): Um, lemme think. No, other than, you know, it's been a long, long journey, you know, to see where things first started, to where everything has ended. I mean, there's, uh, you know, details on how information was, uh, received and gathered and, and put together and, and, uh, you know, that those 4 �aspects, um, I may come back to in a, in a future time. But, um, for the purpose of this, this recording, um, I'm just given a high, high level, high look down, um, summary of my, uh, um, my experience through, you know, living here and being part of the community and being part of the CAG, um, to actually having these sites mediated. So, uh, it's, it's, you know, it didn't happen overnight and it's continuously evolving. Again, it's not a destiny, but it's gonna be this, you know, this long journey to see how this, this ends up, if we ever do, you know, DD (16:32): Mm-Hmm. <affirmative>, TK (16:34): Maybe not in my lifetime, but, um, my, my gen, you know, not my kids generation and so on and so forth. DD (16:45): Yeah. PFAS is the, the situation both in Rockford area as well as kind of, I think globally. Yeah. Around PFAS. It's all still emerging and unfolding. And, and that's part of the, I think the challenge, TK (17:03): The tough part is, you know, it's, they're even finding it in rainwater. So when it rains, you know, there's <laugh>, you have PFAS and pretty much everybody has it in their, in their body throughout the world, and, you know, at different levels, depending on their exposure, their dose, the duration, that's what really determines, you know, what your health effects will be, DD (17:30): Right. Yeah. It's, uh, like you said, it's still an evolving, unfolding situation and TK (17:39): You be cautious, right? It's everywhere, right? DD (17:42): Mm-Hmm. <affirmative>. Yeah, TK (17:45): Exactly. And, uh, you know, I just, uh, just want people to do, do the right thing. I've always been, um, on the defense side of, of corporations, you know, from a OSHA, EPA, uh, standpoint, um, DOT standpoint, and, you know, having this opportunity in front of me to, Hey, let's just, you know, have corporate America do the right thing. Um, kids live here, go to school here. It's a good, good community. You know, I enjoy, you know, the, the environment and, you know, I'd like to stay here. So if I'm gonna do that, um, you know, do what we can to clean, clean up, uh, you know, the contaminated areas. DD (18:35): Yeah. It sounds like you are doing that -- what you can, TK (18:39): 5 �Right? DD (18:41): It does sound like TK (18:42): With the power invest invested in me, right? You grant me that, right Dani? DD (18:48): <Laugh> If I could, I would. <laugh>. Oh, well thank you so much for taking the time to share your story today, even at a high level. I understand that, like I said, the situation is evolving and, um, I really appreciate that you're willing to talk and share the parts of your story today that you did. TK (19:14): Yeah, no problem. Dani, remember when you put this into a book or a movie, I want to be the one of the actors. Don't ask for Tom Cruise. I wanna be able to be the main character and pick, you know, my, uh, my partner like Michelle Pfeiffer, Julie Roberts has had too many roles like that <laugh> with Erin Brockovich. So as long as that happens, Dani, you'll get all the details from me. All right, DD (19:40): <laugh> Sounds good, Tom. 6 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Living with PFAS Interviews Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Devasto, Danielle Description An account of the resource Beginning in 2021, the Living with PFAS interviews were recorded to gather the personal stories of individuals impacted by PFAS contamination. PFAS, or per- and polyflourinated substances, are a large group of human-made chemicals used widely since the 1940s to make coatings and products resistant to heat, oil, stains, grease, and water. They can be found in countless household items, including food packaging, non-stick cookware, stain-resistant furniture, and water-resistant clothing. These chemicals are often called “forever chemicals” because they do not break down easily, can move through soils and contaminate drinking water sources, and build up in animals, plants, and people. PFAS have been linked to increased incidences of various cancers, increased cholesterol, decreased fertility, birth defects, kidney and liver disease, and immune system suppression, and thyroid dysfunction. It is estimated that PFAS are in the drinking water of more than 200 million Americans (Andrews & Naidenko, 2020). In Michigan alone, over 280 sites have PFAS contamination exceeding maximum contamination levels for groundwater (MPART, 2024). Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-11 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf audio/mp3 Type The nature or genre of the resource Motion Picture Text Sound Language A language of the resource eng Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context PFAS0038 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Konecsni, Tom Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2023-05-18 Title A name given to the resource Tom Konecsni, 2023 (Interview video and transcript) Description An account of the resource Tom Konecsni is a resident of Rockford, Michigan. After observing a building demolition in 2010, Tom became concerned about the environmental impacts of industry and chemicals in the area. He joined the Concerned Citizens Group. In the interview, he shares his observations about PFAS from various corporations that impact the area around Rockford, Grand Rapids, and the Grand River. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource DeVasto, Danielle (interviewer) Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Moving Image Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/b5c54c29d9bd0dde27d330f89d732d07.mp4 9adc279610ce2a47a044b44769a8783e https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/0ae3455606e94ca69f92985f702e6989.pdf a5c8375ec745f4152b9b1b19aa6e8887 PDF Text Text Living with PFAS Interviewee: Colleen Linn Interviewer: Dani DeVasto Date: April 30, 2025 Dani DeVasto (DD): I'm Dani DeVasto, and today, April 30th, 2025, I have the pleasure of chatting with Colleen Linn. Hi, Colleen. CL: Hey, how's it going? DD: Great. I'm so glad to have you here and talk with you today. CL: Yeah, thanks for having me. DD: Colleen, can you tell me about where you're from and where you currently live? CL: Yeah, I grew up in the Upper Peninsula, Michigan, in the Houghton-Hancock area, so that's in the left thumb of the state, if you will. And I'm currently in the metro Detroit area, southeast Michigan, attending Wayne State University in Detroit. DD: And how long have you been in the metro Detroit area? CL: Since about 2016. That's when I started the master's in anthropology program that year. So I've been in graduate school the entire time I've been in the Detroit area. (0:52) All right. DD (00:58): Colleen, can you tell me a story about your experience with PFAS or with PFAS in your community? CL: (01:01) So I really got into looking at PFAS from the perspective of a researcher. It became a huge topic in Michigan at the same time that I was trying to figure out what to do in my dissertation research specifically. And I was originally interested in drinking water issues. And so when everything started coming out about PFAS, those two very much so overlapped. And it was a topic that the state kind of took in full, especially after the Flint water crisis, which is a place, which is an issue that I also had been doing research on. So it was really curious to me that there's this other drinking water crisis that kind of came out in the state. And at the same time, I was working with some folks at Wayne State, working on an interdisciplinary research project. And one of my colleagues in that capacity was interested in groundwater issues. So we were trying to figure out an interdisciplinary project to work on together that combined all of our expertises between engineering, pharmacology, and anthropology. And groundwater contamination kind of is able to capture a lot of those, all of those together at once. So when I started formulating my dissertation research plan, it seemed kind of like the natural progression. �But since starting it, I've been thinking about it in the context of like other chemical issues. Because once you start talking about PFAS with other researchers, they constantly refer to the other types of chemical issues that they've worked on before too, like PCBs and mercury and VOCs and microplastics, things like that. So as I started my dissertation research, I was kind of approaching PFAS as like a way to think about how we deal with chemical exposure in general, and also how it relates to these other kinds of chemical problems. So I don't know if that's a story specifically, but that's how I got into the dissertation research and what I wanted to do, to do my work on and kind of how I started thinking about it, but yeah. DD: One follow-up question, were you aware then of PFAS before you started your dissertation or much before you started your dissertation research? (3:16) CL: Barely. Yeah. Just barely before I started that. Um, yeah. DD: But just it coming up in the news was kind of how you started learning about it? CL: Yeah. Because I heard the stories from West Michigan specifically that there was, and it was so quickly after Flint, it was like, well, what is this happening all of a sudden? I think it was the idea that, or a strange idea to have so many drinking water crisis in a state, with so much freshwater resources, that really, that issue really does not compute with me, especially having grown up in the Keweenaw next to Lake Superior. So my perception of water is just like everlasting and never ending and always accessible and always there, always present. So the idea that people wouldn't have access to clean water, like it just does not compute. It does not work in my head. DD: And then you moved down to Detroit and you're hearing all these new stories. CL: Yeah. All these different stories. And Flint was such a specific case. And then of course, the Detroit water shutoffs too, which came, which kind of like escalated, was escalating in the early 2010s and had continued up until the pandemic as well. So all these different ways that we were managing water just became clear that, you know, it's not about the presence of water, but how water is managed, you know, from a political standpoint and a social standpoint that really contributes to how people are able to access it and use it and the safety and affordability of that and at that too. DD (04:49) : Yeah. Would you be willing to tell us more about your research? CL: Yeah. So I, what did I do? I traveled to three different sites in Michigan and my goal was to connect with private well users who were impacted by PFAS specifically and talk to them about their kind of household experiences with having, you know, basically a letter from the state saying that they're drinking, their well water is unsafe. You know, how do people �process that and how do people adapt to that? And then I also wanted to connect with those kind of working in the state governance capacity to kind of work on the issue. And that includes local government officials and state government officials. You know, how are they helping households and how are they also like in the community and environmental context to try and fix the issue if there are solutions possible for these different parts of groundwater contamination. And then also the community activism, because that includes folks who weren't directly impacted by a well water, but they were still concerned about this issue in their community broadly. So it works to connect with all those different stakeholders in three different sites across Michigan and conducted interviews, did some door to door canvassing to get kind of like a neighborhood perspective. I did these in Rockford and Grayling and then in Hawley, Michigan, which have very different experiences with PFAS. And that was another part of what I wanted to understand was how the state approaches different pollution scenarios. And so Rockford represented a corporate polluter, Grayling represented a military polluter, and then Hawley represented a kind of an quote unquote orphaned site who didn't have a direct owner. And they had less people directly impacted by the PFAS contamination, but still like this like historical dump site that just hadn't been cleaned up. And so that affected social land orders and land owners in the immediate vicinity, their experiences with their environment. So all this was done for a comparative context to see just like kind of like the energy and the work that it takes for a community to be able to like effectively respond to groundwater contamination, which not only affects drinking water, but like recreational, environmental resources and just the idea of water resources into the future. Because there's always this concern with groundwater that maybe it's not affecting you now, but it's going to affect you soon if, you know, things travel a certain way. It's such a difficult substance to predict and track because everything is underground. And so anthropologists love that kind of stuff. Like, how can we know what we what we can't necessarily physically see? How do we how do we map that? How do we model that? And how do how do kind of different social groups make sense of it when they when they can't know certain things? Because that's where that, you know, our cultural ideas come in is when we the gap between our ability to know and what we what we know. DD: So I know that the research is still sort of in progress and we should all go read your dissertation and anything that gets published from it once that's done. Do you have any, like, initial findings or conclusions that you're drawing from your research that you'd be willing to share with us or lessons learned or? �CL (8:14): Yeah, I think the uncertainty that comes with folks having to deal with this was really prominent throughout everything, but then also just the I think what what I was noticing specifically was just the the complications that it came up with, like health care, like conversations with health care professionals and just the need to focus on health care access in general. When we're talking about not just PFAS, but just all kinds of chemical exposures, it became very difficult to not understand PFAS in relation to other types of of chemical issues. But having that like health care access seemed like a way to kind of address it like the end point instead of focusing on the prevention and exposure, which is which is super important. But since there's like already all these exposures, how are we, you know, how are people able to access those resources? And then also just the necessity of having multiple actors across scales, like in alliance of values to make anything happen. You know, you can have support from the state and you can have support from local officials. But if you don't have that citizen component, things don't go as far as they could. And then also, if you have that citizen component and that state component, but not that local governance component, there's also going to be like a, you know, kind of a break in the road and how things are able to kind of get done. And that's really tricky to do. And that's really dependent on the capacity of municipalities, of water treatment departments and also just cost. You know, there's a lot of stuff, environmental pollution issues that get tied up in legal stuff. And that is dealt with in a very like case by case basis. And hopefully, you know, those cases set precedent for other communities. But it's really hard to have like one community’s success expand to to other areas as well, if that makes sense. So that alliance of values, I think, is a specific one that I'm working on fleshing out at the moment. DD: Wow. CL: Yeah. DD: It's a lot. CL: Yeah. It’s a…yeah. DD: Tell me about any concerns, if any, that you have about PFAS contamination moving forward, either for you personally or like as a researcher thinking about these questions about, you know, how states approach and communicate these kinds of issues? Do you have any concerns about PFAS contamination moving forward? CL (10:55): I do. Alongside kind of the other major global issues, I think my biggest concern is things like this not receiving the attention that it was, you know, a couple of years ago. Changes in administration affect how certain issues are dealt with, including PFAS. So because it's such a big problem, such an expensive problem, I worry about it being �normalized, the exposure being normalized and people not taking it seriously over time because they don't feel that they can escape, you know, not just being exposed to PFAS, but other other types of chemical issues as well. So like VOCs especially. So that's so I think awareness and communication like public health education and just general community awareness is is a big concern of mine. But I think Michigan has been setting a lot of precedent for that. So and then I think it's just the funding thing again, municipal water departments are, you know, without, you know, staff funding expertise in a lot of places to to to retrofit their infrastructures. So it's kind of like we have to go back to, you know, when we first initial initially built our our water infrastructure kind of like system and we're in this place where we need to to update everything that was done, you know, 80 years ago, 100 years ago. And that's a huge task. So but and I, you know, once people know about it, they they want to be able to find the tools to to fix it. But when there's an absence of those resources, you know, I just worry it gets it like slips through the cracks, if you will. I hope that made sense. DD: Yes, I mean, funding is funding is a huge component of addressing this and being able to address it. And when you don't have it or you have other issues, it is easy for something like this to become normalized and fall through the cracks, especially when it's, you know, showing up as being everywhere. CL (13:03): Yeah, yeah. And I think something that should always be said is, you know, how are we using chemicals and, you know, in our society in general? I think that was the hardest thing to really get answers about was just like the manufacturing use of it and kind of like it's used in the corporate corporate industries. So I think transparency there, like, I don't know. That was the one thing like I just don't know how to like I can talk about the governance side of things and like, you know, critique it to, you know, whatever ends. But that there's a lot of like corporate obfuscation, if you will, and just opaqueness and how it's used. And I don't know how to address that. But I have a feeling that's going to continue. And that's where a lot of these exposure possibilities kind of remain. DD: I just had another question that kind of goes back a little bit more to your research. Speaking of, you know, not always remembering the questions right away. You mentioned that, you know, a big part of the research was thinking about (14:05) the process or like trying to better understand people's reactions when they get these kinds (14:10) of water notices and just like that, that process, that reaction, like, like just looking at kind of that whole scenario. Am I understanding that correctly? CL: Yeah. �DD: So I just was curious if you would say more about that. Like, what did you I'm just curious, what did like what did you find? Like, how did how are people responding to that? And how, you know, I don't know anything around like what did you notice about that part of it? CL (14:35): Yeah, I think they were very individualized responses, which kind of tracks against kind of the individualized nature of well water management in the first place. From my my sample size, it wasn't enough to kind of understand like a very specific pattern. But, you know, a lot of people, people who were, you know, they were, you know, they were there were certain people who could be very pragmatic and they could just, you know, call the call the county and get the water filter that they needed to to get to reduce PFAS exposure. And they got it installed and they just never really thought about it again. For others, that process was a lot trickier. And so it became, you know, a question of of procuring enough like bottled water resources in the meantime until they could figure out how to implement that. And for others, they just it was just like another piece of paper on their counter that they never really looked at again or were concerned about, or it was just, you know, the thing on the list of to do on a person's to do list that you just couldn't really like get around, get around to because everyone is is working and overloaded and, you know, in many different capacities. So the range of reactions was kind of surprising because it was very clear that the toxicity issue, like the the the risk of being exposed, I felt like that that part of it wasn't always communicated the most clearly. I think there was a there was a gap in that specifically. And it became more challenging, especially when I met, you know, I met people who were not affected. You know, they had a slight detection in their well. They didn't do anything to their water. A lot of people had like the habit of drinking bottled water anyway, so they weren't necessarily concerned about the water coming out of their faucets. They weren't using that for their personal consumption anyways. But there are some people who are very severely affected to, I think, an unimaginable degree to the folks that, you know, weren't affected in the same capacity. And so it was just it was just so much a lot of up and down, if you will. And so it's like, how do you take the person's experience who, you know, lost a loved one who's dealing with a very serious health effect and then have somebody be so apathetic about it? That was that was difficult to kind of make sense of, but it really was a wide range of experiences. (17:01) And I think it kind of reflects that that individual nature of well water use where you're not always talking to someone else about it because your well is your well. And so somebody else's well is a different context. You know, stories about people who their well water was testing very high price for trillion and their neighbors were not detected. You know, that was there's just such a variance of pattern. That's why I think the original testing that was done in Rockford in 2017, those folks who were who had �contamination very early on had a point of connection because, you know, we didn't necessarily know what to do about it. I think as the kind of response became a little bit more standardized and regulated, those points of connections weren't as prominent because they had that intermediary of the state. And so they were just it became a very one directional transaction instead of understanding what it was like at a community level. And of course, there's, you know, variances of this. But, yeah. DD: Well, it's so interesting to be able to think about it like over time and as because PFAS is kind of still in some ways an unfolding, emerging situation, right? To think about how that response was handled and received in the beginning versus, you know, like, as you said, once the once the kind of state response became more codified, perhaps, or like the process for handling and responding to it. It's so interesting. CL: Yeah. Yeah. There's a huge difference there between 2017 because I talked to a few folks who were (18:44) part of that. But then the newer identification in Rockford area in 2023 was tied back to Wolverine headquarters. And so just much different. Those are the same two neighborhoods of multiple people in those neighborhoods and very different experiences and kind of levels of engagement with it. And more limited options because the lawsuit had already been filed and settled. And so Wolverine's responsibility was, you know, kind of already decided upon. And then another instance kind of came up and they couldn't quite directly prove. And just the ability to not quite directly prove something and not having the reasons for the lawsuit results in a different household experience of this. DD: That's fascinating. Wow. I was just thinking about how many how many variables there are. Right? As you said, the resources, finances, you know, time, people's own knowledge and just…Wow. CL: It’s one chemical. (19:52) And we think like, I think one chemical class, you know, should maybe experiences are more uniform. But no, it's it's it's it's very, varied DD: Yeah. Wow. Before we wrap up today, do you is there anything else that you'd like to add that we haven't touched on or anything that you want to go back to and say more about? CL: Um, there is a specific thing. It's, um. I think that this idea of chemical exposure and how people are affected by it. Actually, the experience with this helped me reflect more on what happened to my grandfather specifically. (20:35) He passed away by senior year of high school from mesothelioma, which is from asbestos exposure. And just on a personal level, it was interesting to kind of revisit and rethink about what happened to him, because I think at the time being like a senior in high school and not really understanding, just understanding that, you know, your grandparents get, you know, they age and they get �older. But I think the the randomness of the PFAS experience and hearing people, you know, what happened to their loved ones, I kind of re-reflected on on what happened to other people that I knew, basically, to understand, you know, why certain why or how different health health issues are managed later in life. So it became a very personal, self-reflective project because of that as well. DD: I can imagine. (21:28) I mean, as you said in the beginning, conversations about PFAS were naturally kind of lending themselves to also conversations about other kinds of chemical exposures and certainly water-based ones like lead. But I can definitely see how like something like asbestos would again kind of fit into that and allow for that kind of reflection and comparison. CL (21:53): Yeah, yeah. It's made me wonder how we how we how we approach all these issues. They're so segmented by type, but I'm just wondering how do we how do we approach them not necessarily by type, but just by by experience and by like health outcome, if you will, instead. DD: Yeah, I often hear people talking about how, you know, pulling lessons from other ways that we've we've handled lead or PCBs or things like that. Like, can we pull lessons from those in order to think about how we deal with exposures moving forward or the defenses of like, well, this is that's this and this is that and they don't compute. (22:42) CL: Yeah, yeah. DD: Well, thank you so much, Colleen, for taking the time to share your story and your research today. I really appreciate it. Yeah, thanks so much for having me. It was great talking with you. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Living with PFAS Interviews Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Devasto, Danielle Description An account of the resource Beginning in 2021, the Living with PFAS interviews were recorded to gather the personal stories of individuals impacted by PFAS contamination. PFAS, or per- and polyflourinated substances, are a large group of human-made chemicals used widely since the 1940s to make coatings and products resistant to heat, oil, stains, grease, and water. They can be found in countless household items, including food packaging, non-stick cookware, stain-resistant furniture, and water-resistant clothing. These chemicals are often called “forever chemicals” because they do not break down easily, can move through soils and contaminate drinking water sources, and build up in animals, plants, and people. PFAS have been linked to increased incidences of various cancers, increased cholesterol, decreased fertility, birth defects, kidney and liver disease, and immune system suppression, and thyroid dysfunction. It is estimated that PFAS are in the drinking water of more than 200 million Americans (Andrews & Naidenko, 2020). In Michigan alone, over 280 sites have PFAS contamination exceeding maximum contamination levels for groundwater (MPART, 2024). Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-11 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf audio/mp3 Type The nature or genre of the resource Motion Picture Text Sound Language A language of the resource eng Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context PFAS0039 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Linn, Colleen Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2025-04-30 Title A name given to the resource Colleen Linn, 2025 (Interview video and transcript) Description An account of the resource In this interview, Dani and Colleen discussed Colleen's research on PFAS in Michigan, focusing on how private well users and communities respond to water safety issues. Colleen's research also led her to reconsider her grandfather's experience with asbestos exposure, highlighting the broader implications of chemical exposure studies. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource DeVasto, Danielle (interviewer) Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Moving Image Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/408938bc0d8864d0b4ea06cad66e1789.mp4 64920388a8ef05f7e9b71c3605783f15 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/89773faf1331a5ce4851ac6e07683ff7.pdf 1d7268b4b89cc3ac172b5e593d4ff1f3 PDF Text Text Living With PFAS Interviewee: Gail Mancewicz Interviewer: Dani DeVasto Date: September 28, 2021 DD: I’m Dani Devasto, and today September 28th, 2021, I have the pleasure of chatting with Gail Mancewicz. Hi, Gail. GM: Hi, how are you? DD: I’m doing well. How are you? GM: I’m doing wonderful. DD: Gail, can you tell me about where you're from and where you currently live? GM: I’m from Rockford originally, the Rockford area and then I moved to Grand Rapids in 2017 I believe. I and that – and that kind of goes along with this PFAS story. Originally, I moved to Rockford- I lived in the Rockford area all my life. I lived in Cantford. And then I moved to Rockford in 03’ and then I moved from my house, I lived down on a little side street, to Mainstreet in 09’. And then that summer, I’m standing out on my lawn talking to my mother and the [Macintosh?] comes up and she starts talking about the demolition of the [tannery?]. And would you be interested in meeting with residents and talking about this? Sure, sure. So, I go and low and behold they’re - they literally- we wind up babysitting the site as far as proper demolition but were also trying to get them to test. They destroyed all those buildings without doing any testing whatsoever. Of a hundred-year-old [tannery?]. And I was like huh? You're really going to put us all at risk. And then the more we started to dig we realized; this is nuts. We found a 1994 – 90 – yeah 94, inspection of this site. I think it was by MIOSHA. And the housekeeping was deplorable. DD: [laughs] GM: And – And that’s putting it mildly, and when you're dealing with- I mean there's scraps all over the place. And some of them treated, and you can still find scraps. You could put up a telephone pole and find scraps. And – And so that even further encouraged us to keep going. And then we find these waste reports. And they would say, oh no there's no known contaminants on the site. And they’re saying we didn’t use any [unclear] or ammonia or anything. And they're saying we didn’t use any of those and were seeing it in the waste reports. So, no, they’re lying to you, to us. And the city is pushing back on us and I’m sure everyone has heard of the expression of company town. Wolverine was and yes, still is a company town. I’ve heard stories from- my mother heard stories actually, from an old time, he’s no longer with us, business owner who said he couldn’t even practice his religion of Catholicism because he 1 �wanted to be a businessperson. He wound up going out of town to do that and still keeping his business but that’s how much of a hold, that company back in the 50’s had. DD: [mhm] GM: So, but we’re still seeing this when there's pushback, we really don’t want to predict residents from chemicals. This is before we even knew about PFAS. I got into it, I called up Glen and I said I’m worried about this rearing its ugly head 20 years from now in our groundwater. And this was in 2010- 2011. I’d be sitting in there – these meetings with my neighbors and they’re talking about runoff, and I'm saying guys, what about the groundwater? And they’re like no no no no, this is all historical so it’s gonna be runoff. It turned out to be, it's both. We still have - there’s still chemicals in that, but the PFAS has been removed or most of it. It's still going underneath the river and stuff and invading the water supply. And – And so, it is both, there was runoff into the river but then there’s also this water supply issue. And my worry of 20 years came way way too soon. I wish I had been wrong. And so, we're being bullied, and there's articles in the paper. We put out a petition to the EPA, because we weren’t getting anywhere with the [DEQ?]. So, we - we make this petition to the EPA, and they liked it and they came on board. Well, there’s articles in the squire saying how we shouldn’t have done this, and they even printed our names which was supposed to be confidential. Michael made sure that our names got plastered and vilified in that article, which the squire does what he told them to do. And my hunch is he wrote the article. And later, situations with other sites- the editor made it mush, so I knew he was helping her write those articles. So, then I decided I wanted to be in city hall, so I ran for city council, and I won. DD: [chuckles] GM: By 30 sum votes. I beat out an incumbent by 30 sum votes. 300 or something, I forget. It was 3 something, but it was a really close margin. And I still- they would even interrupt me when I was speaking but I couldn’t interrupt them. It was all – it was 2 women and 3 men, and they ruled the roost. And at one point [it was – we were going to have-?] I go to this council meeting, and they say oh yeah, we’re having a meeting that’s, ya know exempt afterwards from public meetings act. And it was - the original part of it and this wasn’t even on the agenda, it was supposed to be on the agenda, and it was about labor, but it still should have been on the agenda. We should have gone out and come back, but they do it all after, and then after that was gone all staff was involved in those labor negotiations left. And then they started to attack me, for my stance on [unclear]. And it was - they were saying oh it's just a Hail Mary and its only ammonia. No, it was a year or so after that PFAS got on our radar. And I left that that meeting and I’m like [I’m not stopping?] this is too important, because lives are at stake. And sure enough, as this progressed and PFAS got to be known, that wound up being this baby jack [I think you’ve- I’ve talked with mother?] and I told people that [hate?] is like a grenade with a pin out. [You don’t know where it’s gonna come?] there's so much PFAS, you don’t know where its gonna manifest itself and how its gonna impact this life. And that’s scary. DD: [mhm] 2 �GM: And that’s why I was in this for decades so that years down the road people don’t say what were they thinking. And I’m still wondering what the town of Rockford was thinking. Because they made people who are impacted sacrificial lambs for their, Wolverine’s, profit margin. And for the town's public image. Of being this nice, cute town. Which, I’m sure you’ve seen some of the articles in the squire, if you haven’t, we will get them to you. Because it was unbelievable, the length they would go to, to stop us. And here people are having cancer because of what they put in the ground. And they didn’t want anybody to know about it, so you wanted people to die without being able to save their lives, without being able to have testing and catch it early. The earlier you catch cancer the better you are surviving. You really wanted to rob people of that? And that’s - that’s what got me into it. I mean, Rockford is supposed to be this predominantly Christian community, but yet there's nothing Christian about what was going on and still going on as far as I’m concerned, [there’s still pushback?]. And it drove me to law school. You know, after age 50 I went to law school, because I wanted- I knew I was being lied to, but I needed to know the laws. DD: [chuckles] GM: And so, I went to law school and that’s why I wound up moving into Grand Rapids. Because I’m visually impaired, I don’t drive. And [Trying to get back from?] law school. [I was going to Cooley law school?] in Grand Rapids. And I needed to move. So, I lost the election. Get this, it was another site that’s not connected to Wolverine that’s contaminated. And they wanted to put, and they are putting a [development?] on it. And I was against that and so they literally pushed me out of that office by getting the Widow of Michael Young on there and really propaganda, I didn’t have a voice and it’s only one paper and she was [unclear] line of Rockford, the city of Rockford. I didn’t have a voice. And it’s crazy and that’s what hurts. Not that they attacked me, it's that they were stopping people from being able to have agency over their own health and knowledge of what was being put in their bodies. DD: When was that? That the – that you lost the election? GM: 2016. DD: Ok. GM: Yeah, I served one term. I thoroughly enjoyed my time. I love representing the people and I like politics. And so - But it was just heartbreaking that they were willing to go to such lengths just for PR and money, and human life is way more valuable than that, way more valuable. DD: [mhm] So, what happened after that? You're-You’re not on the city council anymore, you're in law school. GM: I graduated. 3 �DD: Congrats. GM: In Grand Rapids, I’m still living in Grand Rapids. And I’m still involved in the CAG, and I’m still involved in CCRR. The CAG for those who hear this is the Wolverine Community Advisory Group, its connected with the EPA. And then CCRR is Concerned Citizens for Responsible Redevelopment which is the whole group that started this in the first place. And so, that’s where we’re at now. But there is another story I want to tell of how far they went. That really doesn’t have to do with me but has to do with a member of our group. Janice she was working for [Elboro?]. What does that stand for, it's part of the Grand Valley Metro Council. [And it’s the lower] Grand RapidsDD: Organization of water sheds? GM: Yes. Yup, yup, yes. She was working for them, and Michael got the director, Michael Young go the director to leave, either you work for us entirely and stop working with CCRR or you leave. And she said fine, I’ll leave. [unclear] she said to us later [inaudible] I could work for them full time, and they put out things that were helpful and she did a lot of investigating for us that was so helpful, and she had a knowledge of the DEQ. That, and she could connect us with people, and it was the best thing that ever happened. And God was walking with us. But that’s how, they were even-and it was illegal, but yeah, they impacted her employment just for his own gain, and Wolverine’s own gain. DD: And just for those listening, can you say who is this Michael Young? GM: Michael Young was a city manager of Rockford; he is now deceased. And he was the city manager for 20 years. DD: Ok. GM: Over 20 years. DD: [mhm] GM: And for his 20-year anniversary they had the retired judge [Cervas?] there. They had the news people there, and they were giving him this award about doing environmental work. I had every-and I was on the council at the time. I had everything to do, not to just vomit right there on the, at the table. DD: [chuckles] GM: Because his work paled in significance to what he could have done to help bring proper testing and accountability to Wolverine for the citizens of Rockford and the Rockford area. So that we could stay healthy, so that people could know if they were exposed to carcinogens, and he did nothing for that. His work paled in- Yes, having streams that are shaded and nice are 4 �great for trout fishermen, yeah and I applaud that, but it pales in significance to what he could have done. And I had everything I could do not to vomit right there sitting in front of everybody. DD: It sounds like you’ve been involved in a lot of different ways in your community for dealing with PFAS both through the council and the CAG and the CCRR group, it sounds like you’ve been busy, Gal. GM: I have. I’m not really- I mean now I'm going to be going in a different direction because I’m looking for positions with diversity, equity, and inclusion with my law degree because of my disability, that’s an important thing for me too. And so, there’s a lot going on and it’s pretty amazing and I’m very proud of what I did and what, I, we are continuing to do. In fact, for that group an absence of any one of those people; you know myself, Lynn, Grant Mittich and Lynn’s husband: Mike, Lynn MacIntosh and Mike MacIntosh, we could not have done what we did, it took all of us. There’s no one star, it’s everybody. And that’s what a community is all about, is everybody, not just the businesses but everybody including the residents and Rockford’s forgotten that. They forgot that we pay your taxes too and we need to be listened to and they have still forgotten that. DD: How did CCRR form? GM: That was-that was first the Central Rockford Neighborhood Association. And I was a part of that too, I was the secretary, I ran unopposed, it was really funny. A month into it, I’m running for an office and here I am secretary. And-but some people didn’t want to be a part of the Wolverine thing. So, we split the 2 groups in half. The paper still smushed us together they want to paint everybody in that neighborhood with a bad light. So, then we started CCRR and kept CRNA, Central Rockford Neighborhood Association separate. So that’s how it all started. And I respect some people didn’t want that much drama in their life and it [it is?] a lot of drama. And it’s unfortunate that we- unfortunate because human life is human life and if you’re a right to life [you should be about?] protecting people from carcinogens. [both speaking unclear] DD: How have you handled the drama in your life? GM: I do a lot of venting [laughs] and I for a while was eating my stress. And then-and then I got into law school and that helped because then I was doing something constructive and also that’s why I got on the council because the stress I needed to be doing something, I had to put it in action and that’s what you do when you see something that’s important to you, you put it into action. DD: So, moving forward what concerns do you have about PFAS contamination? 5 �GM: I’m worried about where [unclear] are going and we’re still finding stray barrels around and I’m worried that they're not testing about- with it- and there are other areas in fact I’ve got to even get my mother’s water tested and I’ve got to figure out how to do that. She lives out in [Canonsburg?] and whether it’s connected with PFAS, I mean with Wolverine PFAS I don’t know. Because there are other things that cause PFAS. So, I want to make sure that people are aware of where those [tubes?] are going and I want more action by Wolverine on clean up on House Street and what is actually happening, and they literally use the court system to insulate themselves from more action. And they really-and they also need to be accountable for what's going on in Plainfield and that bothers me too. They really broke the law already and unfortunately the AG’s office, the attorney general's office didn’t see that because they were, they said, okay you can put-you can continue to dump here in Plainfield, but it can’t enter the ground water. Well, it has and that was in a court order, and they're not being held accountable for it. So, where's our court dollars and tax dollars in the court going? To help Wolverine, and that’s, that’s disturbing, and it don't look right. And we-they did this in the federal court with only the EPA, Eagle, what is now called Eagle [inaudible] EQ which is now called Eagle, and Wolverine. citizens weren’t involved in that negotiation on what was going on there. What their cleanup is supposed to be, so all those people affected on Health Street had no voice and if they did it wasn’t listened to much because it’s not enough. And you just can’t just be comfortable as Wolverine [inaudible statement] with your water you’ve gotta be darn sure there’s nothing wrong. Not just comfortable like a shoe or mattress, but one-hundred percent sure. And it was not taken into account very much in my opinion. There’s work going on and we have a great relationship and credibility with the EPA and with Eagle so that is very helpful, and we have been able to say uh-uh it needs to be- there needs to be more action here and they’ve listened to us. There was a plan they wanted to do for Health Street and it was a non-starter, it was - it was like doing nothing and so they had to go back to the drawing board and that’s where we’re at now with it. So, it’s just keeping them to the fire, and that is what I told the EPA, none of this can go away because they’ll just drop the ball and that’ll be it and people will still be impacted, and this is a forever chemical and so it’s going to be forever that we keep an eye on it. DD: Before we wrap up is there anything else that you’d like to add that we haven’t touched on today? Or anything you’d like to go back to and say more about? GM: No, I think, my outline is on my phone so I’m not texting anybody I’m just[both laughing] GM: I had my outline on my phone and I want to make sure, I do have some articles here, but I couldn’t read them on my phone. Oh yeah, the city council- oh what year was that? It was before I was even on it, so it was like 2011 or something or 2012. Before I got on it. I sent a letter to John Biles, he was a part of Wolverine, and all five city council members were on at the time signed it, trashing us and saying how they support them and they will help them and it was just- it was not helpful at all. I mean, it definitely showed their colors of not wanting to protect the citizens. Because that’s where environmental action starts and prevention starts, the city 6 �and municipalities can protect the citizens that where it starts. And if you don’t do that, and if the state who also has this duty to protect the citizens as part of their police powers that the constitution gives the state, then where are we? We’re lost. And we need more people to step up, there are some good people at Eagle at the beginning of this, they would say oh wait, I would hear, oh yes, they really see what's happening here and they agree with us and then they’d be moved to another project. So as soon as someone saw what was going on they would be moved to another project. No, no more. And thank goodness now we have the same people but, in a way, it was, you know it was only really after the whole it exploded with PFAS that I really started to see the same people. And there was one particular person who was on there, David O’Donnell who literally was helping Wolverine. They-we have a picture of Michael Young, David O’Donnell and someone from Wolverine standing by the river and their [unclear] it and there was no permit for this, I think it was right where the wastewater treatment plant used to be. You know, kind of the highest contaminated spot, no permit, no regulations they’re just [unclear] away. They have been known to even, during a rainstorm, they would spray it with water by hose, it was a solution to pollution with dilution. And he’s still in the Eagle, they moved him to Lansing. I’m like come on, I mean as a person with a disability it’s hard to get a job, and here he’s doing all these horrible things and he, yet he gets a job? Uh uh, and I justthey've gotten better, and we’ve gotten a good relationship with them, and we’ve gotten credibility and that’s why that other site that’s not related to Wolverine did so well and was cleaned up much better than would have been had we not had that relationship with Eagle. And so, it’s gotten better but I think there’s more that can be done because your gonna have these [unclear] and not just here in Rockford but also [Portsmith?] and Portage and there’s other places I think in the state and they’re going to need to be on top of it and they're going to need to inform the residents not way after the fact, so they can be doing proactive health screenings and testing and know where they’re at. So, they can either you know [inaudible] water system or bottle their water way before, I mean that’s why we really gotta keep an eye on [inaudible]. Right now, the technology isn't there to scoop it out of the ground and out of the water supply. We don’t have the technology for that yet. They are working on that, but we just don’t have it. DD: [hmm] GM: That’s all-I think that’s it. DD: [chuckles] Well thank you so much, Gail, for taking the time to share your story today. GM: Oh, you're welcome. 7 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Living with PFAS Interviews Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Devasto, Danielle Description An account of the resource Beginning in 2021, the Living with PFAS interviews were recorded to gather the personal stories of individuals impacted by PFAS contamination. PFAS, or per- and polyflourinated substances, are a large group of human-made chemicals used widely since the 1940s to make coatings and products resistant to heat, oil, stains, grease, and water. They can be found in countless household items, including food packaging, non-stick cookware, stain-resistant furniture, and water-resistant clothing. These chemicals are often called “forever chemicals” because they do not break down easily, can move through soils and contaminate drinking water sources, and build up in animals, plants, and people. PFAS have been linked to increased incidences of various cancers, increased cholesterol, decreased fertility, birth defects, kidney and liver disease, and immune system suppression, and thyroid dysfunction. It is estimated that PFAS are in the drinking water of more than 200 million Americans (Andrews & Naidenko, 2020). In Michigan alone, over 280 sites have PFAS contamination exceeding maximum contamination levels for groundwater (MPART, 2024). Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-11 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf audio/mp3 Type The nature or genre of the resource Motion Picture Text Sound Language A language of the resource eng Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context PFAS0030 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Mancewicz, Gail Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021-09-28 Title A name given to the resource Gail Mancewicz, 2021 (Interview video and transcript) Description An account of the resource Gail Mancewicz lives in Rockford, Michigan. In this interview, Mancewicz discusses the demolition of the old Wolverine tannery and the environmental and public health impact on the community. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource DeVasto, Danielle (interviewer) Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Moving Image Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/c4f583dde9c54a86cd406912b007ac79.pdf a7cd58b0ca5570f02e0e15a6c38210e9 PDF Text Text Living with PFAS Interviewee: Sue and Scott Mark Interviewer: Danielle DeVasto Date: September 30, 2021 Danielle DeVasto: I'm Dani DeVasto, and today, September 30, 2021, I have the pleasure of chatting with Sue and Scott Mark. Hi, Sue. Hi, Scott. Sue Mark: Hi, Dani. Scott Mark: Hi. Danielle DeVasto: Um, Sue and Scott, can you tell me about where you're from and where you currently live? Sue Mark: Um, I will start. Um, I was born and raised in Kalamazoo, but my husband and I now live in South Haven. We've lived here for 15 years [CLEARS THROAT], so we've been away from Kalamazoo for quite a while. But I used to work, um, the last job I had in Kalamazoo was at a doctor's office, at 1127 South Park Street, which is, um, by the Crosstown Ponds, and there were, the ponds were behind the office building. This building was built in 1986, and I started there in 1991. Um, I don't know if any of this is related to PFAS, but I'm going to share my story just in case it is. Um, when I started there, we would make coffee with tap water, and, um, we didn't get bottled water until probably, I would say, five to eight years after I started there. It was not something we had on a—early on when I was there. [CLEARS THROAT] I worked in the office for 15 years. We had two physicians that were employed there, and 14 ancillary staff, which really is not a very large office in today's terms. Um, there were a number of people that had cancer in that office. Um, I can tell you that there were four people with breast cancer. There was one person with lymphoma. There was one that had multiple myeloma. But, what I'm focusing on right now is the diagnosis that I have. Um, I was diagnosed last year with pancreatic cancer. And what's significant about this is the fact that I am the fourth person from that office with pancreatic cancer, and I am the only one still living. The last person that was diagnosed with it died this past March. So, there are four of us with that diagnosis, and I realize pancreatic cancer is out there, and there's a number of people with it, but my feeling as a nurse is that there is far more breast cancer than there is pancreatic cancer, and to have four of us in one office with pancreatic cancer, there's something suspicious about this. Um, the ponds would frequently overflow when there was heavy rain. Um, it was a lowland, and it would come up into the parking lot, and we'd have to walk through it sometimes to get into the building. Um, and there's a lot that ran off those roads. When you think about oil and rubber, or asbestos, uh, rustproofing, all that. And that would all drain into these ponds. In the time that I worked there, there were two vehicles removed from those ponds. Not at the same time, but somebody dumped the car in there even. Um, there were lots of goop and bird feces. Um, just all kinds of debris in there. I-I never even wanted to go near those ponds. But, to have four of us with pancreatic cancer threw up a red flag for me, and I honestly believe that that's where my diagnosis came from. It has something to do with that office. Um, I've been a very healthy person. I have not had to take hardly any medication. I just took vitamins and supplements. I was active. I exercised. I ate a very healthy diet, and I had a normal weight. Um, I've taken very good care of myself, so I'm rather surprised. I don't have a family history of cancer, except my father had leukemia, and he survived that for 18 years. So, I don't have a lot of family history. I was also tested in the Page 1 �very beginning of my diagnosis, um, for genetic testing, and they did, they tested 55 genes. Everyone was normal, and there were three of them that were from my pancreas, and those were normal, as well. So, it was not a mutation in my genes. This is something that I contracted but I still, to this day, don't know exactly where. Um, my husband is older than me, and he lived in Kalamazoo, um, when I was there, And he has more knowledge of the paper mills and so forth in that area, and he can speak more to what his thoughts are on this-this, um, possible contamination. Danielle DeVasto: Okay. Scott Mark: Good morning. I'm Scott Mark, and I have lived in Kalamazoo since 1962. And for many years, I lived in the general area of the Crosstown Ponds, and passed by them frequently on my own way to work. Uh, in the, I know that in the 1970s, uh, there was some water contamination in the wells, in the wells, you know, and, uh, they were stripping, uh, those wells, uh, and the water was being pumped onto the roadway, and then drained into the Crosstown Ponds. Now, I know that Kalamazoo draws all their municipal water from, uh, fresh water aquifers, uh, and below the city. But there's a long history of paper mills, uh, in the Kalamazoo area, and the two that I will speak directly to were situated, uh, near Cork Street, which is approximately a mile from the, um, Crosstown Ponds. Um, the watershed would move towards those Crosstown Ponds, and, of course, the aquifers are all that general area. The paper mills had fire protection systems, and potentially could have used these, uh, uh, [CLEARS THROAT] for, uh, fire protection. Um, there's an area on Cork Street—which I have some pictures that I'll share—that, uh, has been contaminated for probably 40 years, and is still fenced off today, uh, with warning signs that it's a contaminated area, and it's a hazardous area. Uh, there is a, uh, seven-foot cyclone fence around it with barbed wire across the top, multiple signs around the property, and I would guess that there's probably somewhere in the area of 40 to 60 acres, uh, that go to the north toward the Crosstown Ponds. Now, I know that that the, uh, the, uh, city municipal water system draws from deep down in the, uh, aquifers, but the leaching of chemicals of many different kinds naturally goes down to the aquifers. And I know that there has been some acknowledgment of groundwater contamination in Kalamazoo. Uh, some of the research that I tried to do about the contamination around the Crosstown Ponds did not yield much because they indicate that any dredging of the Crosstown Ponds, uh, was for, uh, the purpose of reducing the flooding that would occur in the spring or when there were, uh, significant, uh, rainstorms. And, um, sometimes those streets beside the Crosstown Ponds would have to be closed because of high water. Um, the one thing that concerns me is that of all the dredging of the Crosstown Ponds they did, they never indicated that they did any testing to see if there were contaminants. But, anyone that lived in the Kalamazoo area acknowledged that those Crosstown Ponds were contaminated ponds that sat, in, uh, the valley just south of the main downtown area. Um, I will be happy to forward some things that I recently, um, some pictures that I recently took of that, uh, contaminated area. Uh, this is the first time that I noticed, yesterday was the first time that I noticed that any mitigation of hazardous material going on or any work being done in there, um, um, for many, many years. However, I am well aware that to the south of Cork Street, which is, you know, approximately a, approximately a mile away from Crosstown Page 2 �Ponds, there was a very significant amount of, uh, uh, reclamation that was done, uh, probably 10 years, 10 to 15 years ago, um, which would be, uh, would, which would be in that same, uh, watershed that moved toward the Crosstown Ponds and into those aquifers. Uh, I think that probably, uh, that's what I can contribute at this point in terms of what my thoughts are about any contamination to that general area. Sue Mark: Um, I will mention one other thing that [CLEARS THROAT] back in 2018, um, I had a relative that told me—that still lives in Kalamazoo—told me that these ponds were dredged, and that would be around Fourth Street and, um, South Park Street. So they were dredged, and they took out, um, a pile of sludge, and put it on a portion of Fourth Street that was approximately 100 feet long and 10 to 12 feet high, and it sat on this road for two years. To my knowledge, it was never tested, it was just left there. Um, I don't believe it was fenced off. I think it was just piled there. And my concern from that is that how many children, um, animals, pets, whatever might have gotten into that could just crawl on it and climb on it and play on it or whatever. And that sat there for two years, and this is what they dredged out of the bottom of these ponds. Um, there was no concern for anybody's safety or, um, what could happen to anyone that got near this. Just to leave it there for two years is totally wrong. Um, I did not see that. This is what my relative told me, but at this point all that has been removed. But to allow that pile to sit for two years is totally wrong. And that's-that's basically all I can think of at this point that I want to bring up. But, um, as an individual, I don't feel that I can go to the city or the state and get anywhere with them acknowledging that they've done anything wrong. I'm just one person. Um, and I'm focusing on my cancer diagnosis and getting myself better, so that's where I'm at today. Danielle DeVasto: Would either of you, would either of you be able to say anything about what the neighborhood around the Crosstown Ponds is like? Is this residential? Is it, um, how would you characterize the-the-the neighborhood around there? Sue Mark: It's a combination. There were businesses in there. There were, um, um, different offices, um, and there was a lot of low-income housing. That's the best way to put it. Um, I'm sure most of those people were transients. They probably rented. I don't think that there were very many that owned. Um, as far as contacting other businesses, um, my dentist office used to be across the pond from where I worked, and, um, they are not there. They moved their office to another area, and I had talked to my hygienist and just told her what's gone on. And I said, you were down there the same time I was, you better pay real close attention to your health because, you know, you don't know what's gonna come from this, and you were in that same area. But, um, there were a lot of low-income housing, and it's hard to say, you know, I, we never talked with any of those people so I, you know, they come and go. And it's, a lot of the businesses that were there back when I was, aren't there anymore. So, um, it was a combination of both. There were offices and-and homes in that area. Danielle DeVasto: Okay. Sue Mark: Do you have anything to say? Scott Mark: No, uh, that was what I was going to bring up is the neighborhood issue. Page 3 �Danielle DeVasto: Awesome. Do you, moving forward from this point, I know you don't live there anymore, but do you have any particular concerns about the contamination, um, PFAS or otherwise, whatever it might be? Are there any particular concerns that you have moving forward? Sue Mark: Um, I'm concerned for anybody that lives anywhere around that area at all, because I don't believe anything has been truly taken care of. Um, maybe they're working on this one spot on Cork Street, but if it sat there for 40 years, how many people have been affected by it? And the signs say hazardous material right on the sign. Some of the signs that are on that fence have been there so long that they're faded. You can't even read them. So, this has, this has been a problem for a long time, and, um, I see the city is just ignoring it, and I think that's a shame. Do you have anything to add? Scott Mark: I-I think it would be very hard to come up with, uh, finding people because of the time period, uh, say from the 1990s, uh, to present, that may have been in that area and may have had diagnoses. That would be an awesome, uh, undertaking. And, you know, the fact that the, uh, the people that rented, the businesses that were there—some of them were medical offices, some were, um, lawyers offices, there were, um, just many types of small offices there that came and went over the years—and you just didn't have the contact with those people to know what was happening medically with any of those people. So, for us it's a concern that we're bringing forward, and hoping that somewhere along the way, somebody might ask the question, and there might be some information somewhere that they can plug into a computer, and it'll spit out some information of some of the diagnosed people that lived in those areas over the years. Danielle DeVasto: Before we wrap up, is there anything else that you'd like to add that we haven't touched on today or anything you'd like to go back to and say more about? Sue Mark: I can't think of anything. Can you? Scott Mark: No, at the moment, I can't think of anything. Uh, Sue and I have discussed this over a period of time. Um, while she generally focused on the pond, um, my knowledge was focusing on the groundwater that, uh, and the well fields, that were in that immediate area, as well as the contaminated areas nearby that would contribute to any of the, uh, chemicals that may be in the groundwater, uh, that the general population of Kalamazoo might be, uh, drinking from. Danielle DeVasto: Yeah. Well, thank you so much, Sue and Scott, for taking the time to share your perspectives and your stories today. Sue Mark: Thank you. Page 4 �Scott Mark: And thank you for your interest, and I hope that you come up with some good solutions and good information that point you in a direction that will help everybody. Danielle DeVasto: I hope so, too. Page 5 �Page 6 �Page 7 � https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/2e0a38d78b4120bb9731016598d9a7f5.MP3 db8a52f6b1203126945f23ead0a6d646 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Living with PFAS Interviews Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Devasto, Danielle Description An account of the resource Beginning in 2021, the Living with PFAS interviews were recorded to gather the personal stories of individuals impacted by PFAS contamination. PFAS, or per- and polyflourinated substances, are a large group of human-made chemicals used widely since the 1940s to make coatings and products resistant to heat, oil, stains, grease, and water. They can be found in countless household items, including food packaging, non-stick cookware, stain-resistant furniture, and water-resistant clothing. These chemicals are often called “forever chemicals” because they do not break down easily, can move through soils and contaminate drinking water sources, and build up in animals, plants, and people. PFAS have been linked to increased incidences of various cancers, increased cholesterol, decreased fertility, birth defects, kidney and liver disease, and immune system suppression, and thyroid dysfunction. It is estimated that PFAS are in the drinking water of more than 200 million Americans (Andrews & Naidenko, 2020). In Michigan alone, over 280 sites have PFAS contamination exceeding maximum contamination levels for groundwater (MPART, 2024). Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context DC-11 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf audio/mp3 Type The nature or genre of the resource Motion Picture Text Sound Language A language of the resource eng Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context PFAS0017 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Mark, Sue Mark, Scott Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2021-09-30 Title A name given to the resource Sue and Scott Mark, 2021 (Interview audio and transcript with images) Description An account of the resource Sue and Mark Scott lived in Kalamazoo, Michigan for many years before moving to South Haven, Michigan. In their interview, they discuss their knowledge of the groundwater contamination in Kalamazoo and its effects on their health and community. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource DeVasto, Danielle (interviewer) Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Personal narrative PFAs (Perfluorinated chemicals) Groundwater--Pollution Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Living with PFAS (project) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives