VIRGINIA
12-12-2006 Review of DEFENDANT SYNAGRO CENTRAL, INC.'S DEMURRER to remove sludge
damage lawsuit out of county circuit court
12-19-2006 Review of DEFENDANT SYNAGRO'S NOTICE OF REMOVAL of lawsuit from state to
federal court
12-20-2006 Area sludge battle is on (Altavista and Campbell County news)
12-20-2006 Biosolids debate heats up (Altavista and Campbell County news)
Brand new blog for the anti-sludge "movement" in Virginia.
Two domain names point to the blog:
www.VirginiaBiosolids.org
www.Something-stinks.com
www.stopsludgeva.com
There is no connection between these sites and the information on this page.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The United States of America is spending billions of dollars to prevent agricultural bio-terrorism.
Why then does the government support a bio-terrorism policy under the guise of a regulation
which appears to be aimed at destroying farmers and contaminating the food supply? Why would
federal and state officials claim exposure to human disease organism in sludge/biosolids is safe
for farmers and home owners, but requires bio-safety level 2 security in the laboratory? How
could one person create this disaster?
Why has the Virginia legislative body mandated that its citizens must accept this bio-terrorism
policy against the people as law? Why also has the Virginia legislative body mandated that the
Health Department promote this bio-terrorism policy as a safe method of sludge/biosolids
disposal? Didn't the Health Department read 40 CFR 503.9(t) where EPA warned that exposure to
the chemicals and disease causing organisms in sludge/biosolids through the air, water or food
chain could/will cause death - disease - cancer - or worse?
In the October - December issue of International Journal Occupational and Environmental Health, Dr.
Caroline Snyder identifies the wizard of Oz at EPA in the study - The Dirty Work of Promoting
"Recycling" of America's Sewage Sludge".
As head of EPA’s Office of Water (OW): Henry Longest II, was able to initiate a policy to dispose of hazardous and
disease contaminate sewage sludge on food crop production land in spite of the laws to prevent such an action. He
was able to accomplish this feat in spite of the fact the laws state that exposure to the chemicals and disease
causing toxic pollutants in sludge/biosolids will cause death - disease - cancer or worse.
Once the policy was operating, he became head of the EPA Office of Research and Development where he was
able to control the scientific research and create a regulation around his policy using exclusions in the laws to not
only dispose the hazardous and disease contaminate sludge/biosolids on food crop production land, but also to use
home lawns and gardens as disposal sites. If he wasn't employed by the EPA, he would be classified as bio-terrorist.
Since Henry Longest II started putting this program together in the 1970s, one has to wonder if he is not a holdover
agent from the cold war, when Russia promised to destroy the United States from within. No one (on this side of the
ocean) could imagine that one person could accumulate the power necessary to circumvent the laws of the United
States and destroy public health by contaminating our land. Not only that, but who could have imagined that such a
person could use the state legislative bodies and health departments to accomplish his mission?
Henry Longest II is a genus. He has to be to have initiated a national policy to create an epidemic of pathogenic
food poisoning (70 million a year increase since 1990) as well as a Methicillin-Resistant Staphlococcus aureus
epidemic.
Tens of thousands of people have died from exposure to the toxic pollutants spread on farms and home
lawns and only a few scientist have looked at the connection between sludge/biosolids and the deaths.
Virginia is an example of Henry Longest II's genus in action as the legislative body and the health
department try to cover up his deadly secret by preventing any local control of sludge/biosolid disposal
as well as refusing to investigate health complaints.
Legislative Bodies are expected to followed federal laws concerning the health and welfare of their citizens and the
environment, rather than change state law based on exclusions in the federal laws.
Legislative Bodies are also expected to consult with the Health Department before mandating a rule to destroy rural
health and quality of life -- cause deaths - cancer - diseases - etc., and contaminate the food supply with chemicals
and disease causing agents.
Health Departments are expected to be fully aware of the damages that inorganic chemicals and organic chemicals,
as well as disease causing agents can do to exposed humans and animals through the air, water and food chain.
Health Departments are also expected to do their best to prevent exposure to these chemicals through the
environment when they are warned about the danger in 40 CFR 503.9(t). Since the state is aware of the danger
and promotes spreading of chemical and disease contaminated sludge/biosolids, it would appear to be a case of a
state run terrorism program.
According to an October 25, 2005 letter to the editor of the Lynchburg News & Advance, farmer GLENN
WITT of Bedford thinks sludge/biosolid opponents are attacking farmers. He said, "The agencies that we trust to
protect our health and our environment tell us that biosolids are safe and are good for the environment including
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Virginia Department of Health, the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality, Virginia Tech Extension Service and our own legislators in the Virginia General Assembly."
Farmers were the first to oppose sludge/biosolids use because their farms were destroyed and EPA has
published data showing 21 cancer causing agents, 25 family groups of disease causing organisms, stated it did
not do a cancer risk assessment for any pollutants in sludge/biosolids and does not have data on most of the
chemicals in sludge/biosolids. Not only that, but a lot of the sludge/biosolids promoted as a safe fertilizer could not
be disposed of in a part 503 surface disposal site were chromium is highly regulated.
Yet, in Virginia, the Health Department doesn't seem to have a clue about the documented harm which can be
caused by exposure to the chemicals and disease causing agents in sludge/biosolids through direct contact or
indirect contact up to a year -- the residuals of wastewater treatment - which some in EPA like to call soil
amendments or fertilizer. (EPA/625/R/92/013)
When the legal minds of the Legislative Body and scientific minds of the health experts decided lie to farmers,
pollute the environment, destroy rural health and quality of life and contaminate the food chain in violation of
federal law and known science -- they react to public outrage by suggesting more studies that have no value or
relevance.
An example is the recent "JLARC's study re the HJR 643, which directs the Commission to study land application of
biosolids. The joint resolution was limited to oversight and enforcement with some overreaching recommendations."
According to comments by C. W. Williams, Chair, Biosolids Information Group, the intent of the limited study was
accomplished. Legislators did investigate the lax, inept, favoritism and visible corrosive management of the land
application of sludge/biosolids in Virginia.
The report did not and was not intended to address the health effects and environment damage caused by
sludge/biosolids. The fact is that the state has caused so much health and environmental damage that it can not
afford to study or acknowledge the human health and environmental damage. There is simply too much liability
involved.
As Mr. Williams points out, the citizens do have some political recourse. What the citizens of Virginia must
understand is this is not just a rural issue. The contaminated sludge/biosolids issue has an impact of the food they
consume and the soil amendments they use for their lawn and garden as well as their health. The next pandemic
could be spread through sludge/biosolids.
Mary H. Carwile, Co Chair, CRAS, makes the point directly to the Principle Legislative Analyst for the study. She
points out that the study appears to have deliberately understated and underreported the unknown facts.
But then, a factual study would be of absolutely no value to the legislative body or the health department. In fact it
would just emphasize the complete disregard for the health and welfare of the citizens of Virginia by the legislative
body and the health department