THE REST OF THE STORY
PAGE ONE
Deadly Deceit
Between 1989 and 1999 Kansas City, Missouri assured the neighbors
and farmers of its sludge disposal site that it was a very safe place. In
1999, Kansas City went to court to shut down public access to farms near
its 1,200 acre sludge disposal site. City attorneys told the court that
federal and state law required the site be restricted to public access. The
court agreed that a gate could be placed a public street some 500 feet
from the city's fenced disposal site. See Clay County Missouri politics
for the rest of the story.

As the following statement by James Bynum shows, this was a very
dangerous place. The statement only addresses the sludge situation at
the site.
Wastewater Industry
Dangerous career
Sanitary Landfill:
Open Dump-Superfund Site? Up dated version
by: James W. Bynum

Abstract                      For Original copy click here

This paper examines the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) policy
of sanctioning the beneficial use of sewage sludge on farmland as a
cheap fertilizer and soil conditioner in light of recent revelations of human
and animal health problems associated with the use of sludge.  Some
environmental organizations and scientists are concerned with its
deleterious effects on public health.  The paper looks at the existence,
nature and causality of the illnesses and fatalities that can arise from the
use and disposal of sewage sludge under current EPA   
guidelines.
KERN COUNTY
GRAND JURY
FINDINGS  ON
SLUDGE
ORANGE COUNTY
GRAND JURY
FINDINGS ON
SLUDGE
NSA FACT SHEET
#138 - OSHA - CDC
Sewage sludge
(Biosolids) is a
potential killer
KERN COUNTY
SLUDGE DEBATE
3-31-2005
to watch it! Head to
http://www.kget.com/
mediacenter/default.
aspx?videoId=5724

ARTICLE ON
DEBATE
THE FULL TEXT OF THE PAPER
Congress mandated the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of
1976 (RCRA) and later the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of
1984 (HSWA) to prevent the development of new toxic waste sites such
as the toxic waste dump site in New York that was converted into a
housing development called Love Canal. The site had to be evacuated,
of course, and by 1979 the clean up cost had exceeded twenty-seven
million dollars.  Area residents had filed suits for health and property
damages in excess of two billion dollars. Unfortunately, the RCRA and
the HSWA have not prevented the exposure to toxic waste from a new
direction. This new danger is toxic contaminated sludge
Toxic Organic
sludge Dust is Not
Good for You

Deaths doubled in
15 years --1980/1995

                                      BETRAYED    
.:        
One of the selling points in the EPA/WEF's promotion to farmers is their
claim that the farmer and his family will not be harmed by the use of
sewage sludge and there will be no liability under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA)
(Superfund Act), if the Part 503 is followed and sludge use is considered
to be a "normal application of fertilizer.

Field of Bad Dreams   
Jim Bynum declares a sludge match against the city.  

Lacking the support of its own scientists, the EPA sought approval from
the general public. Public perception of sludge, which was
overwhelmingly negative, had to be overcome. So the agency
commissioned Powell Tate, a public relations firm, to develop "a national
communications plan for the promotion of land application of biosolids."
By renaming sludge "biosolids," officials hoped to raise new connotations.
GOOD GUYS AT
THE UNIVERSITY
OF COLORADO
RADIOACTIVE
SLUDGE EXPOSED
AND OTHER GOOD
WORK
Toxic Sludge -- Still Not Good For You!
Source: Reuters, July 4, 2002
Seven years ago our book, Toxic Sludge Is Good For You, broke the story of
how the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was disposing of toxic
sewage sludge by calling it "biosolids, a natural organic fertilizer," and allowing
it to be dumped on farmland across the US. Today 70% of the nation's toxic
sewage sludge is spread on cropland, a major environmental scandal and a
threat to public health. Reuters reports that a National Academy of Sciences
panel, led by Thomas Burke of Johns Hopkins University's department of
health policy, urged the EPA to assess the risks from sludge. "There is a
serious lack of health-related information about populations exposed to
treated sewage sludge," Burke said. Meanwhile EPA microbiologist David
Lewis, who has broken ranks with the agency's official pro-sludge position,
has published a study of people living near areas where sewage sludge is
used as fertilizer, showing that they are often "plagued with infections" and
symptoms including burning eyes, burning lungs, skin rashes and other
symptoms of chemical irritation. Notwithstanding the courage of whistleblowers
like Lewis, however, asking the EPA to investigate sewage sludge is like
asking Enron to investigate itself. As citizen activists like Jim Bynum have
proven, the EPA has been the driving force behind dumping toxic sludge on
farmland and then harassing and belittling victims of sludge poisoning.