BEFORE FLINT, PENSACOLA RADIONUCLIDE POISONING

INTRODUCTION

No one expects board members to be experts in chemistry, but we do expect them to have sound moral principles and to exercise good judgement.  We do expect our elected officials to protect the public interest and the common good, not their own bureaucracy or corporate polluters.  When adults and children are being poisoned by radionuclides, we expect our local ECUA to warn us and limit the harm done.  And, in the case of Pensacola’s radium poisoning, Elvin McCorvey, currently running for his sixth term on the ECUA Board, sided with the ECUA administration and failed to tell the truth to Pensacola’s and Gulf Breeze’s ratepayers, even though he and the ECUA Board had been told directly that ECUA’s wells had been contaminated by the toxic plume emanating from the Agrico Chemical Superfund site.  Larry Walker on the ECUA Board at the time is now running for re-election as well.

Even today, decades after the fact, McCorvey cannot tell the public the whole truth.  He cannot tell Escambia County residents that when he was faced with a moral issue of deciding whether he would protect young children and adults from radionuclides in their water, he decided not tell them of the harm; he chose to give them a false sense of security; he chose not to protect them; he chose not to give them an alternative source of water.  He decided to treat ECUA ratepayers--and vulnerable children--like they did not matter.  Elvin McCorvey and Larry Walker do not deserve your vote.

 

The story is rather complicated and involved.  Here, we shall emphasize what the ECUA Board knew and what the Board, including McCorvey, did and did not do.

A TALE OF DECEIT AND COVERUP

The Pensacola News Journal published three front-page stories on September 7, 8, and 9, 2003 (behind paywall).  The three articles, based upon a review of 50,000 pages of public documents, established that “for at least 54 months, between February 1996 and September 2000, more than 10,000 residents in Pensacola and Gulf Breeze were drinking water polluted with radium 226/228 at levels considered unsafe by the federal government.”

The EPA’s standard for radionuclides in drinking water is 5 picocuries per liter.  That standard has not changed since 1977, though in 1991 the EPA announced that it was starting the process to review this standard—though it remained legally in effect.  The Pensacola News Journal wrote that in 1996 the EPA decided not to revise the level of radionuclides upwards and had told public water companies that the radionuclide level would not change.  In 2000, the radionuclides rule was finalized without having changed the permissible Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCL).  Thus, at no time did the radionuclide standard change and no deviation from the standard was permitted.

The radium 226/228 was discovered in ECUA wells in February 1996, one year before McCorvey was coming on to the board in January 1997.

In the September 7^th, 2003, article, the PNJ reported: “In August 1997, the Northwest Florida Water Management District, a state agency, told the ECUA board that the Agrico plume had contaminated two of its wells, which provided water to thousands of residents in Pensacola and Gulf Breeze, and appeared to have polluted a third” [emphasis added].  In fact, the City of Pensacola knew in 1958 that one its wells had been contaminated by toxic waste from Agrico Chemical.  In 1972, the U.S. Geological Survey informed the City of Pensacola that Agrico Chemical “could be contaminating as many as ten public wells.”

According to the September 7^th, 2003, article: “In the last five years alone, ECUA has closed two wells—No. 9 and East—because of radium pollution, and the No. 8 well, in part, because of radium.  All these wells are near Agrico and in the path of the known plume.”

In June 1998, the ECUA published a notice in the News Journal that barely informed the public of what was wrong.  Instead, the ECUA notice stated that radium was a “‘naturally occurring radioactive metal’” and a “‘health concern at certain levels of exposure.’”  The notice also stated that “‘although the ECUA well identified in the above [No. 9] notice is technically out of compliance ... there should be little reason for concern.’”

In November 1998, the ECUA began testing its wells for radium 226/228.  At no time did the ECUA inform the public of the results of the radionuclide testing.

The radionuclide levels were shocking.  The water going to Gulf Breeze was 129 times higher than the federal level 5 picocuries per liter.  A second sample registered at 99 times the federal level.  Samples taken from tap water revealed radionuclides 2 times the federal level, according to the Pensacola News Journal.  The victims of radionuclide poisoning included:

•  very young children at “Cordova Park Elementary School; travelers passing through the Pensacola Regional Airport; visitors to the Welcome Center at the foot of the Pensacola Bay Bridge; employees at the offices of the Santa Rosa Island Authority at Pensacola Beach;” and, 10,613 ratepayers in Pensacola and Gulf Breeze drinking poisoned water from their household taps.

In December 1998, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) drafted a consent order that would have required the ECUA to begin a study within 90 days to determine ways to fix the high level of radionuclides and to provide ratepayers an alternative source of water.

Apparently as late as October 1999, the ECUA was still measuring high levels of radionuclides in the drinking water.  Ordered by the FL DEP to inform its customers of the dangers, the ECUA refused, according to the News Journal’s September 8^th article.

The ECUA resisted and refused to provide an alternative source of water for over 10,000 people being poisoned by ECUA.  The Florida Department of Health backed up the ECUA and eventually the FL DEP caved in August 1999 on providing alternative water.  The final consent order, issued in February 2000, had no mandatory timeline to fix the high levels of radionuclides.

In February 2000, the then executive director of the ECUA wrote a letter to the ECUA Board bragging that they were required to do nothing and an unlimited time to do it.  The News Journal quoted from the letter: “‘The requirement to provide an alternate source of water, which was in the original language, has been removed,’ he wrote. ‘Most importantly, this consent order does not require ECUA to commit to any corrective action at this time.’”

Later in February 2000, the ECUA sent a “Update on Radionculides” letter to 10,613 ratepayers that essentially lied to them, telling them that the EPA was considering raising the radionuclide level.  Even if true, the 1977 radionuclide was still legally in force.

In April 2000, according to the Pensacola News Journal article, the “EPA formally announced what it had been telling public utilities and state regulators since 1996—the existing radium standard would remain unchanged.  What’s more, ‘new data and models suggest that radionuclides are much riskier than thought,’ according to the EPA notice.  The new goal: a maximum contaminant level goal of zero for all radionuclides in drinking water.  The message was clear: No level of radium in drinking water was considered acceptable by EPA.”

In July 2001, the ECUA mailed the following information to its ratepayers, according to the News Journal:  “‘Although radium levels in two wells exceed’ the federal standard, ‘both the toxicologists with the Florida Department of Health and our consulting scientists agree that there is no significant increase in short-term or lifetime risk to public health associated with the use and consumption of ECUA water.’”

The News Journal quoted three outside different experts with no apparent financial links to local industry who essentially stated that the ECUA and its Board were misleading its customers, trying to give them a false sense of security, and hiding their near criminal actions.

A toxicologist from Western Michigan University called the ECUA statement “‘baloney.’”  A nuclear physicist and radium expert from the University of Pittsburgh’s School of Medicine stated the ECUA statement was “‘a complete misstatement.’”  An epidemiologist from the University of North Carolina’s School of Public Health stated, “‘To me, that kind of public response is a red flag…. That’s the response of people who want to convince the public, ‘We know everything,’ which we don’t, and that you as a resident are irresponsible to be concerned about your water.’”

On September 30, 2003, 21 days after the News Journal finished publishing its three-part series on the Agrico Chemical Superfund site and radionuclide levels in Pensacola and Gulf Breeze drinking water, at least 50 residents of Pensacola, backed by some City Council members met with ECUA board member McCorvey and head of the Escambia County Health Department John Lanza at the Macedonia Baptist Church.

McCorvey was quoted by the News Journal telling the residents, “‘There has not been any evidence to show that the Agrico (Chemical Co.) plume has contaminated the aquifer.’”

That statement is simply not true and is contradicted by water experts who told the ECUA that it had been contaminated by the toxic plume from Agico Chemical.

As noted above, the City of Pensacola had been told in 1958 that Agrico Chemical had forced the closure of the 12^th Street well and in 1972 the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) had told the City that at least ten wells were threatened by Agrico Chemical and those wells needed to be monitored.  In fact, the USGS had reported that contamination levels, including of fluoride, were higher in 1972 than they were in 1958.  The News Journal reported in its September 7^th article that “There’s no evidence in the public record that this [monitoring] was ever done.”

And, McCorvey’s statement is directly contradicted by an August 1997 statement—eight months after McCorvey joined the ECUA Board—delivered directly to the Board by the NW FL Water Management District that “the Agrico plume had contaminated two of its wells, which provided water to thousands of residents in Pensacola and Gulf Breeze, and appeared to have polluted a third,” according to the first of the three-part News Journal articles.  And, the ECUA was aware as early as November 1998 when it began joint testing with the Escambia County Health Department that it was delivering drinking water to Gulf Breeze and Pensacola that was contaminated with radionuclides far above the EPA’s maximum level.

The three Pensacola News Journal articles, based upon reviewing 50,000 pages of public documents, spurred the creation of a Special Grand Jury in November 2003 to investigate the ECUA administrators and board members.  The Special Grand Jury was also investigating Conoco and Agrico Chemical, the last two companies responsible for the Superfund site.  Assistant state attorney Russ Edgar advised the Special Grand Jury.

When the Special Grand Jury’s report was released to the public, the News Journal’s headline for the May 5, 2004, story was: “Grand jury blasts agencies over tainted water supply.”  The News Journal characterized the report as “blistering” and stated that the ECUA is “by far is the agency hardest hit in the grand jury report.”  The Special Grand Jury blamed the federal Environmental Protection Agency, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, and singled out the top two ECUA administrators for not informing the ECUA Board.

But, of the ECUA Board, the Special Grand Jury observed, “We find ECUA’s former Executive Director and former Science, Technical and Regulatory Administrator made policy decisions on health and safety issues without oversight from a majority of the members of the ECUA Board. A majority of the ECUA Board’s members subsequently tacitly approved these decisions, relinquishing their responsibilities to their customers and the public” (page 3 pdf).

The News Journal wrote that “Edgar confirmed the report is referring to Larry Walker, Bobby Tronu and Elvin McCorvey as the members who relinquished their responsibilities to the public.  Walker and Tronu no longer are on the board; McCorvey has been a member since 1996.”  Actually, Larry Walker returned to the ECUA Board and is running for re-election.

McCorvey told the News Journal, “‘It speaks directly to my actions because I supported recommendations that came to the board based on information we had,’ he [McCorvey] said.  ‘And based on the information we had, our decisions were good decisions…’”  Walker flat-out stated that the ECUA administrators and staff never withheld information from the ECUA Board and that “‘there were no big hidden secrets at ECUA.’”

The bottom line is that there is documentary evidence that the ECUA Board was informed of the radionuclide problems and explicitly or tacitly supported ECUA’s administrators who failed to inform the public of the scope and seriousness of the very high levels of radionuclides in the drinking water, especially drinking water provided to very young children at Cordova Park Elementary School; fought the Florida DEP to inform the public; fought the Florida DEP into not providing an alternative water source; and, then deliberately misinformed the public after the News Journal articles appeared.

McCorvey ran unopposed in 2004 and has never been held publicly accountable for his shameful and borderline illegal actions.

Moreover, Elvin McCorvey is still misleading the public about radionuclides in the ECUA water.

In late May 2016, McCorvey conducted a very friendly interview with the Pensacola Voice.  In response to a question about "chemicals in their water," McCorvey responded with a half-truth:  "'Some of things are naturally occurred.  Rocks give off radium and that’s natural.  It does not come from man (contamination) It’s natural.'"

Yes, radium in rocks is natural.  But, how the radium in the rocks got into ECUA's wells was not natural.  And the level of radium in the water was not only natural, it was downright dangerous to the growing bones of young children.

The September 7, 2003, Pensacola News Journal, explained that the ECUA staff knew this was not natural.  Bernie Dahl at the time was the ECUA's administrator for scientific, technical, and regulatory matters.  The newspaper reported that "handwritten, undated notes by Dahl, written sometime after April 2000, show he knew fluoride measured in ECUA wells was 'from Agrico,' and that high levels of aluminum and manganese were 'most likely from Agrico.'  He also wrote that 'extreme acid from Agrico' could have dislodged the naturally occurring radium 226/228 in underground rocks and released it into the aquifer that supplies Escambia and Santa Rosa counties with their drinking water."

McCorvey, apparently, cannot face the reality that he chose to do something monstrous--to not tell parents that their young children were being poisoned by radium in their school's drinking water, as well as more than 10,000 other ratepayers in Escambia and Santa Rosa counties.

ECUA CANDIDATE FORUM ALL DISTRICTS

On July 31, Ellison Bennett of the National Movement for Civil and Human Rights, headed by Pensacola civil rights icon Reverend H.K. Matthews, hosted a candidate forum for all eight Emerald Coast Utilities Authority candidates appearing on the August 30, 2016 ballot.  The only two candidates appearing were Cloristti Johnson-Mitchell who is running against the incumbent for District 3 and Dr. Larry Walker, who is running for re-election for District 5.  All the candidates received invitation letters from Ellison Bennett.

Other representatives attending included Mr. Jerry McIntyre, Movement for Change; Reverend Rodney Jones, second vice president of the local NAACP; and Ms. Melanie Nichols, president of the North Hill Preservation Association.  Also attending were Ms. Deb Moore, running for Escambia County Tax Collector, and, Ms. Anny Shepard, a dynamic, kinetic community activist running for City Council District 7 who promises to bring new ideas, energy, and passion to the council.

The following videos are posted in order.  In the first video, Ellison Bennett gives an overview of the forum.  Then Clorissti Johnson-Mitchell spoke.  Then Dr. Larry Walker spoke.  And then the floor was open for more general questions to both candidates.

Readers are encouraged to watch all the videos because the two candidates were asked questions that related to the county as a whole, not just issues specific to a particular district.  The questions were wide-ranging.

MCCORVEY VOTES IN DISTRICT 4 NOT DISTRICT 3

UPDATE (29 JUNE 2016):  According to the Supervisor of Elections office for Escambia County, on May 20, 2016, Elvin McCorvey changed his voter registration address from 1708 E Scott Street, which is in District 4 (see below), to 201 W Scott Street, which is in District 3.  So, he was elected to represent District 3, somehow registered to vote or found himself registered to vote in District 4, realized his error, and changed his voter registration one month before the closing qualifying deadline.  Is this not unusual?  Does this not call into question his eligibility to represent District 3?  How about all the votes he took on the ECUA Board while living in District 4?  Are those votes legal?  End Update.

UPDATE (29 JUNE 2016, 1451H):  Here is the official response from the Supervisor of Elections for Escambia County:

"According to our records:
Prior to May 29, 2013, Mr. McCorvey was registered to vote at 1770 E Baars Street, Pensacola.
On May 29, 2013, he updated his registration to 1708 E. Scott Street, Pensacola.
On May 20, 2016, he updated his registration to 201 West Scott Street, Pensacola."

In other words, he was registered to vote in District 3 before May 29, 2013.  Then, on May 29, 2013--after he had won re-election to ECUA Board District 3--he registered to vote in District 4, since 1708 E Scott Street is in District 4 (see below).  Then, while still registered to vote in District 4, he filed paperwork with the SOE appointing himself and his ex-wife as deputy treasurer and treasurer, respectively.  While still registered to vote in District 4, he filed candidacy papers with the SOE (see below) to run for re-election in District 3.  And none of this unusual in Escambia County politics. End Update.

ORIGINAL ARTICLE: 

According to Florida Statute, Title IX, Chapter 101, Section 101.045(1), "A person is not permitted to vote in any election precinct or district other than the one in which the person has his or her legal residence and in which the person is registered."

According to Chapter 104, Section 104.011(1) on "Election Code Violations, Penalties," "A person who willfully swears or affirms falsely to any oath or affirmation, or willfully procures another person to swear or affirm falsely to an oath or affirmation, in connection with or arising out of voting or elections commits a felony of the third degree."

Elvin McCorvey is attempting to be elected to his sixth term as District 3 representative for the Emerald Coast Utilities Authority Board.

According to candidate information through the EscambiaVotes.com website, his "contact information" is listed as "201 W Scott Street" in Pensacola.

When McCorvey appointed his ex-wife, Joyce McCorvey as his Campaign Treasurer, he listed his address as "201 W Scott Street."  When McCorvey appointed himself as Deputy Treasurer, he listed his address as "201 W Scott Street."  And, when McCorvey filed his first Campaign Treasurer's Report Summary, he listed his address as "201 W Scott Street."

The registered voters at "201 W Scott Street" in Pensacola are Willie F. McCorvey and Margie P. McCorvey.  It is not known what relationship they are to Elvin McCorvey.  They are also registered as taxpayers at that address.  There is no Elvin McCorvey associated with this address in terms of voter registration or property taxes.  This is simply his mail drop for his campaign.

So where exactly is Elvin McCorvey registered to vote?

McCorvey is actually registered to vote in Escambia County at 1708 E Scott Street in Pensacola.  He shares that address with a woman named Modeste M. McCorvey.

According to the voter registration data, that address, 1708 E Scott Street, is actually in County District 4 and School District 4.  In fact, if you query "1708 E Scott Street" on myescambiavotes.com to find your precinct, that is Precinct 41.  According to an official map, Precinct 41 is in District 4.  And, in the Democratic National Committee Vote Builder for Florida, McCorvey resides at 1708 E Scott Street with a Modeste McCorvey.  They both vote at the Bayview Senior Resource Center and they reside in Commission District 4 and School District 4.

In short, while McCorvey is running for ECUA District 3, he resides in and is registered to vote in District 4.  This would make him ineligible to vote in District 3 and to run for office in District 3.

CLORISSTI MITCHELL RUNNING FOR ECUA DISTRICT 3 SEAT

On February 12, 2016, Ms. Clorissti Mitchell formally declared that she is running for a Emerald Coast Utility Authority (ECUA) District 3 seat on the board.  With family and friends on the patio of the Tuscan Oven in Pensacola enjoying antipasti, pizzas, wine, and beer, Ms. Mitchell was introduced by longtime Pensacola activist Barry Goodson.

Goodson stated, "We need her voice for our community."  Goodson stated that while women make up 52 percent of the population of Escambia County, women are grossly underrepresented in government.  Goodson noted that we need to be as concerned about women's rights as water rights.

The Reverend H.K. Matthews, who just celebrated his 88th birthday last week, was unable to attend and lend his prestige and status as the county's leading civil rights leader to her campaign.

Ms. Mitchell told her supporters and the community at large that she pledged to be their voice in government on water issues.  Since November she has been walking door-to-door introducing herself and writing down residents' views on water issues affecting them and their neighborhood.  She plans to hold more "listening" events at community centers.  Ms. Mitchell stated that while a Flint situation is not possible in Escambia County because of the filter system in place, she wanted all residents to be assured that she will work to maintain the highest quality water standards.

Although Ms. Mitchell did not talk about specific issues and concerns, it is known that she is aware of the issue of the potential coal ash contamination of our underground aquifer.  Last Sunday, Ms. Laurie Murphy, executive director of the Emerald Coastkeeper organization, wrote a powerful essay in the Pensacola News Journal explaining that "Florida law does not regulate coal ash ponds."  Emerald Coastkeeper is actually conducting its own "groundwater monitoring."  There are two coal ash storage ponds in Escambia County--at the Southern Company's Crist Plant located near the Escambia River and one at Gulf Power.

Another local water issue that has drawn opposition from concerned residents is ECUA's proposed construction of two 35-foot to 45-foot tall storage tanks holding a total of six million gallons of raw sewage on Palafox Street near a historic district and the business district of downtown Pensacola.  Ms. Melanie Nichols, president of the North Hill Preservation Association pointed out that ECUA did not inform local residents of the planned sewage tanks in a timely manner.  Undoubtedly, Ms. Mitchell will be addressing this pressing issue that threatens the welfare and lives of local residents, as well as their home property and business values.  Another 750,000 gallon sewage tank and pumping station located on Pensacola Beach has also drawn the ire of local residents, according to a Pensacola News Journal article.

ThinkProgress, a progressive website, reported that on January 29, 2016, that "the Florida House approved a bill that would allow fracking to take place throughout the state as early as 2017, following an inquiry into the environmental and health impacts of the practice. The bill does not require fracking companies to disclose the chemicals or potential carcinogens used in the process, however, and includes a ban on local communities banning the practice entirely."

Whatever the Florida bill allows or does not allow, an environmental voice listening to residents of Escambia County, will be vital as northwest Florida confronts the reality that a fracking accident could contaminate our underground water supply.

Below are videos of the campaign event.

BARRY GOODSON:

 

CLORISSTI MITCHELL:

CONCLUSION:

Water is vital to humans.  Without water, we will not survive.  Contaminated water, as Flint has shown, can have deadly and catastrophic effects on young children and adults.  Escambia County has serious water issues that need to be addressed.  We need an advocate who is willing to listen to the community and willing to stand up and fight for the community.

I think Ms. Mitchell can be that voice.