Asbestos- and Mining-Related Letters to the Newspaper Editors|
Preface: Traditionally, Libby and Lincoln County, Montana residents tend to be politically conservative. This philosophy can be a handicap when it concerns health problems that could have been prevented by better environmental oversight and by reasonable government participation/regulation. "Environmentalism" is a sensitive and inflammatory issue in Libby, and this negative attitude goes back to the early 1960's when asbestosis and mesothelioma cases were beginning to be associated with the Zonolite vermiculite mine. Even as late as the 1990's, some Libby families who sued W. R. Grace for asbestos-related health problems were ostracized by their neighbors. When the Hollywood film "A Civil Action," a true story about families who sued W. R. Grace & Co., played at the local movie theatre, attendance was sparse. When the highly controversial Kootenai River Libby Dam project and its associated re-reg. dam project were being considered during the 1960s-1970s, it was common to see pickup trucks around town with supportive "Pave the Kootenai" bumperstickers. "The environmental politics of the nation don't always go over well in small towns," Libby Mayor Tony Berget told the Seattle Post Intelligencer newspaper on November 18, 1999. That, Mr. Berget, is an understatement. When money is at stake, many Libby folks lose all sense of objectivity on critical issues such as this. Take into consideration that the magnitude of the asbestos health problem was finally accepted by the community only after the mine (and the good-paying mining jobs) were gone. It took an out-of-town organization (the Seattle Post Intelligencer) to publicize the full magnitude of the health problem. In contrast, Libby's local press (The Western News, the Montanian, and KLCB radio) were essentially caught flat-footed. Local union leaders at the Zonolite mine were aware of the environmental health catastrophe by 1979, yet the union did little to publicize the magnitude of the crisis to the greater Libby community. Everyone in power was on the same page: "tone down the issue". And the people of Libby followed the game plan. It would take two more decades, after the mine's jobs were gone, until the seriousness of the situation was widely and openly revealed. Prior to 1990, when the mine was finally closed, the people of Libby essentially prostituted their health for the privilege of making their boat payments and their snowmobile payments. W. R. Grace & Co. had essentially "bought" the silence of the town of Libby. Further, the anti-environmentalist views that the average Libby resident held in the 1960s-1970s also indirectly contributed to the present environmental crisis in Libby. Considering all of the above, it is clear that the people of Libby must share some of the blame. However, not all local residents are environmentalist-bashers, and I am striving to give examples of opposing viewpoints. A new mining project is about to be started in the Libby area (the Montanore Mine). Considering the W. R. Grace & Co. debacle, are Libby residents now more sensitive to the environmental issues and health issues associated with Big Mining? Have the townspeople learned any lessons from their misfortune? That remains to be seen. So, without further ado, let's get to the letters. |
"Forget substance. It's all about image - Libby's Chamber of Commerce attacks national media".....Phillip Bigelow
"Let the Extremists Speak"..............Phillip Bigelow
"What is happening to Libby?".............Wayne Hirst
"Eulogy to Les Skramstad"...............Phillip Bigelow
"EPA being the EPA"......................Roger Morris, editor, The Western News
"Were People Exposed By Not Listening To W.R. Grace?"............Marchette Momb
"George W. Bush Re-Election Allows Grace To Walk Away"........Travis Johnson
"Fairness Act is anything but fair to Libby victims of Asbestos Related Disease"......Gayla Benefield
"CAG still seeking declaration of public health emergency".....Libby Community Advisory Group
"EPA is about to shirk it's duty, again - - Partial cleanup leaves Libby with devalued homes and businesses, and endangers future residents".......David F. Latham, editor, Montanian newspaper
"We need ALL the facts, and NOW"..................Clinton Maynard
"Environmentalists misrepresent issues"................Marie Cripe
"Republicans have ruined Montana"..............former Governor Thomas L. Judge
"If more was needed, Grace, EPA equally guilty"...............Alan Stringer
"Time to replace officials who allowed Grace fiasco".............Don Smith
"Libby Inc."................Roger Morris, Western News editor
"Dillon woman concerned with lack of local warning".........Holly Miller
"Superfund discussion not new at CAG meetings"......Gayla Benefield
"Grace using legal system to escape responsibilities"................State Rep. Eileen Carney
"CAG urges governor to put Libby at top of priority list"...... Community Advisory Group
"We support Grace"...........John K. Beebe and Teddye Beebe
"Libby Needs Help Now"..............Clinton Maynard
"Lack of Community Support Remains a Problem".......Edgar Warner
LETTERS:
(with my comments/responses to the letter-writers, written in green)
>From the Western News newspaper, October 4, 2000, published in Libby, Montana.
"Lack of Community Support Remains a Problem"
"To the Editor:
I am writing concerning the "Conference on Asbestos and Public Health" of September 21-23, 2000. I would like very much to thank all of the people who were so instrumentally involved in setting up the conference.
The conference was very informative, educational, and at times very emotional. The speakers were terrific. The people who attended the conference were the people with asbestos-related problems, family and the participants involved with the presentations.
Lack of support from the community was one major problem. I thought there would have been more business and towns-people attendance to receive information on such an important issue concerning Libby.
Edgar Warner"
[Comment: Unfortunately, some Libby businesses would rather pretend that the crisis doesn't exist. And as you have observed, they show it.- - website editor]
>From the Montanian newspaper, October 11, 2000, published in Libby, Montana.
"Libby Needs Help Now"
"Open letter to:
Senator Max Baucus
511 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator Baucus:
First, I want to thank you for your efforts on behalf of the Libby community. The funding that you helped to obtain ($8 million) for economic development and infrastructure needs will help greatly to reduce the impact of this environmental disaster, we hope.
The hospital, also, recieved monies to help gear them up for the perceived disease influx. It seems this funding is a good start toward an effort to help remediate our dire situation.
It seems though, that an important aspect has been overlooked. We who have been working on these issues did not foresee the problem that has arisen recently in that people have gone through the medical screening and have been informed of abnormalities in the screening tests [results] and have been told to seek further evaluation toward diagnosis. Many people with health insurance have high deductibles and can barely pay for coverage as is, and many people have no coverage at all.
The result is that people are told of suspected disease and are left with nowhere to turn, except to dig into empty pockets. We of Libby assumed that the Agency of Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) would have had a program that, once initiated, would provide a follow-through approach for dealing with our health issues.
We assumed wrong. ATSDR is ending this phase of the medical screening soon and many people who didn't participatein the medical screening will feel the need to be screened also, as they learn of the current screening results. The screening needs to be ongoing and follow-up care needs to be provided.
The proceedures for diagnosis involves CAT scans and high-quality pulmonary function testing, and diagnosis is expensive. It is uncertain when a long-term medical plan will come together for Libby. In the interim, Libby needs emergency medical funding. Quality health care for the Americans of Libby, Mont., will be very expensive and how many millions of dollars that are needed depends on how long it takes to get a long-term program in place.
Max, please remember that the people of Libby are a proud people and that appropriations for Libby need to be expressed as compensation, not as a handout program.
Libby's past has created an unfortunate present and we request your continued support for our future.
Thanks again for your efforts and your heartfelt concern.
Clinton Maynard
Community Advisory Group member
Libby"
[Comment: Senator Max Baucus seems to be the most "tuned-in" to the environmental health problems that Libby faces.
Compare Senator Baucus' altruistic efforts with the less virtuous efforts of Montana's other senator, Senator Conrad Burns (R-Mont). Read about Senator Burns' early attempts to manipulate the system at the expense of victims suffering from asbestos-related disease (external link). After Burns was recently exposed as being in the "back pocket" of the Asbestos Industry, he and his coauthors pulled their pro-asbestos industry bill (S. 758) . There is word that the bill may be revived in the future. Here is an excerpt from the book An Air That Kills, by Andrew Schneider and David McCumber, recounting one of Sen. Burns' few trips to Libby. - - website editor]
>From the Montanian newspaper, March 14, 2001, published in Libby, Montana.
"We support Grace"
"Editor:
On the Libby asbestos issue I have finally come across someone who espouses common sense: State Sen. Bill Crismore [R-Libby]. Common sense isn't common anymore.
I propose that the EPA declare a new hazardous waste site to clean up the toxic waste emanating from the agenda of [asbestos victim's rights activist] Gayla Benefield, Don Wilkins [an outspoken asbestosis sufferer], and the local EPA representative Paul Peronard. Come to think of it, that just might be "mission impossible."
John K. Beebe
Libby
P. S. Using children to make the point verges on child abuse. It is intolerable!
Teddye Beebe
Libby"
[Comment: Teddye Beebe is a leader in the Lincoln County Republican Club and the Republican Central Committee- - website editor]
>From the Western News newspaper, March 21, 2001, published in Libby, Montana.
The following letter is from the Community Advisory Group on asbestos to Governor Judy Martz (R-Montana).
"Dear Governor Martz:
Thank you for the form letter that we received today from your scheduler, Mollee Gemar. We can certainly appreciate the volume of requests received by your office and your intention to process these requests in a timely manner.
However, events of the past couple of weeks, which directly impact the asbestos issue in Libby, Montana make it necessary for us to advise you that this matter requires your immediate, personal attention.
Unfortunately, to date the DEQ's [Montana Department of Environmental Quality's] participation has been infrequent and superficial. This past week we were advised that due to budget restraints, the DEQ will reduce staff. This makes it quite obvious to us that you have no intention of dedicating the necessary manpower to the clean-up of the nation's #1 environmental clean-up site, which is located in your backyard.
Furthermore, recent press releases would lead one to believe that you are listening to only one side of this tragic issue - a legislator [Bill Crismore R-Libby] who does not attend our Community Advisory Group meetings, never attended a medical trust subcommittee meeting to review W. R. Grace's Libby Medical Plan in depth, nor reviewed the proposed plan that addresses the extremely costly medical needs of an individual afflicted with asbestos-related disease. The statement that Grace has made "several" changes to their unfunded, unregulated, uncertain program to enhance the care for persons that they intentionally wronged is not accurate.
We are not certain what kind of a wake-up call the State of Montana needs before it recognizes that this crisis is real just like an earthquake, forest fire or flood and that this atrocity demands your long-term commitment to its resolution.
On April 11, 2001 U. S. Senator Max Baucus [D-Montana] and a contingency from Washington, D. C., will again visit Libby. You may want to consider this an opportunity for you and other Montana officials to come to Libby and view the immense task that our local officials will have to deal with on a "daily" basis for the next 40-50 years.
It is our sincere hope that this request will find its way to the top of your priority list.
Community Advisory Group
Libby, Montana"
Related link on Gov. Martz and Libby's asbestos contamination problems.
Another related link on Gov. Martz and Libby's asbestos problems.
A third related link on Gov. Martz and the asbestos industry.
An editorial on Gov. Martz and the asbestos problem in Libby.
>From the Western News newspaper, April 6, 2001, published in Libby, Montana.
"Grace using legal system to escape responsibilities"
By State Representative Eileen Carney (D-Libby)
"Claiming it can't handle the deluge of asbestos personal injury lawsuits, W. R. Grace & Co. announced earlier in the week that it has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
W. R. Grace & Co. came to Montana, took our wealth and made a great deal of money in the process. Now they decide they can't pay for the damage they caused. It is a double tragedy: first our minerals - then our lives.
Montana's history is a tragic cycle. Companies come to plunder our wealth and then leave us to clean up the mess they have made. Montana has always been run by and for big business - and working families pay the price.
This is a tragedy for the families who have had their lives shattered by finding out that they are the victims of asbestosis. They trusted the company to live up to its obligations toward the people who earned their great wealth for them. What will these families do now?
Sadly, no one is surprised by this announcement. It was expected that Grace was going to use the legal system to escape its responsibility to the hundreds of families devastated by their actions. But what a tragedy for the people who trusted Grace to do the right thing and whose lives were shattered by the company's dealings with Libby.
Rep. Eileen Carney (D-Libby)"
Libby voters give Carney the boot. Results from the local 2004 election
Libby voters reject Eileen Carney (yes.....once again) in her 2008 election bid.
>From the Western News newspaper, May 9, 2001, published in Libby, Montana.
"Superfund discussion not new at CAG meetings"
"To the Editor:
The subject of Libby becoming a Superfund site has been the topic of conversation at our semi-monthly CAG meetings for some time. To the members of the community who are aghast at the thought of the designation, I ask, "Where have you been?"
The Citizen's Advisory Group was formed shortly after the EPA arrived in Libby. The intent of the group was to gather input from everyone within the community.
The members were selected by designating which groups needed representation: the Libby Realtors, the LCEDC, the Chamber of Commerce, the Libby Public Schools, the Ministerial Association, Lincoln County Council on Aging, Montana Covering Kids, Kootenai Valley Head Start, Lincoln County health officer, St. John's Hospital, the lumber and sawmill workers, the city of Libby, the county, the former Grace employees, the media, and of course, the victims of asbestos related disease.
We tried to be ultra cautious to be sure that every segment of the population of the community had equal representation. If you look carefully at the above list of organizations, you will see that there was only one voice and vote representing the victims at that first meeting, my voice and my vote.
There was always the opportunity for any segment of the population who wasn't represented to send a representative. This was welcomed.
Where have you all been? The first to criticize the possibility of a Superfund site designation probably has never provided input to the organization.
If you had taken the time to take two hours out of your "busy schedules" twice a month to listen, you would realize that we within the community have the final say so on the future of the community. Instead, you sit back, accept someone's word that the meetings are nothing but a bunch of screaming and yelling and nothing is accomplished.
I will admit that occasionally, someone from the audience may speak too loudly for your delicate ears, but I don't think it is the volume of their voice that upsets you, it is the message that they carry.
Probably, they too were just diagnosed [with asbestos-related lung disease] and feel that the wheels of justice are moving too slowly. Perhaps they fear, as I did, for their children or grandchildren having the same fate as themselves. If this is the release that they need to feel that they are doing something, no one objects. We all understand the frustration and anger.
What Libby and the state of Montana has needed but hasn't had since the story broke is a leader! Either city, county or state level. One person in authority to speak up and say, "Enough is enough, let's get to work, analyze the problem, find a solution and get on with our lives."
Just one person to step forward would have helped....Have we had this? No!
Instead, the citizens of Libby who care enough about Libby's future have devoted their time and efforts into accomplishing all that has been done. The tragedy is that the victims of W. R. disGrace are the ones who have devoted their precious remaining fruitful futures to accomplishing what could be considered an impossible task!
You that have "dodged the bullet" so to speak are the ones who will realize someday the fruits of our endeavors. Once Libby is finally cleaned up, property values will soar, industry will come, people will willingly move to the most environmentally clean town in the west.
People will want their children to grow up here, knowing for certain that an invisible threat is gone.
The solution is simple. We have a mess, let's clean it up as rapidly and efficiently as possible. Let's cooperate with the only agency who dared to tell us the truth - - Region 8 EPA.
To the people and agencies that my tax dollars funded, let the shame be upon you. To the people who have continually thrown stumbling blocks in the way of our efforts, may you live a long and fruitful life and never find out that you also inhaled.
If someone out there has another solution, please speak up. To those of you who are members of the CAG but haven't sent a representative [to the meetings] lately, perhaps its time that you take an active part in the future of Libby instead of complaining about it.
Gayla Benefield"
[Comment: Gayla Benefield is an asbestos victim's rights activist from Libby who has been instrumental in the activities of Libby's Community Advisory Group on Asbestos - - website editor]
>From the The Western News newspaper, June 13, 2001, published in Libby, Montana.
"Dillon woman concerned with lack of local warning"
"To the Editor:
I am writing in regard to a situation that occurred a few weeks ago and I am still trying to understand it.
A young couple came into the store where I work and in a few moments of visiting I learned that they were moving to Montana from Ohio. She was interviewing for a teaching position and had narrowed her choices down to two, one site being Libby. They both loved the area, found property values to be reasonable, people friendly, and just the place to start their family. All the things we pride ourselves on in this state.
In two days of visiting, home shopping, interviewing, etc., not one word was mentioned about the asbestos problems facing your community. Who is responsible for providing information to the folks coming into your community?
I'm wondering if you thought that everyone already knows about the asbestos problems or if you think it's fair to withhold that type of information? It would seem that with efforts to address your situation there that part of the process would be to be very open and honest in regards to the past disasters and the plans for your community's future recovery.
This seems irresponsible of your school system, your real estate people and your chamber of commerce. We Montanans can and should do better!
Holly Miller
Dillon, Montana"
[Comment:
Although Libby is no longer poisonous to new residents, a poisonous political atmosphere still exists in the community - [1]. There is an abundance of denial regarding the magnitude of the clean-up and the magnitude of the health problems. This head-in-the-sand approach is being promoted by Libby's Chamber of Commerce and by some local businesses. There is also frustration that Libby's misfortune is being publicized nationally, and as a result, the media is being unfairly blamed. Even a simple asbestos victim's memorial proposal was criticized by some Libby businesses as being "too high profile". And now, some in Libby's business community are voicing opposition to Superfund designation for the town, mainly out of fear of "how it looks to outsiders". Libby needs to stop worrying about its image and instead focus on cleaning up the asbestos contamination and on taking care of its sick residents. - - website editor
How do Libby's businesses view Superfund designation?
How do Libby's other residents view Superfund designation?
2009 update: Coverage by the national media continues to frustrate Libby's leadership.
Editorial
>From the The Western News newspaper, July 6, 2001, published in Libby, Montana.
"Libby Inc."
By Roger Morris, Western News editor
"At her present rate of public comment about Libby and its Superfund decision, Gov. Judy Martz (R-Montana) should be trading us to New Jersey in the next month along with the defunct Zortman-Landusky gold mine for a couple of chemical dump sites.
It appears the governor is one of several people trying to force the community to make its Superfund decision quicker than we're ready to do.
A couple of weeks ago Dave Williams of the Superfund wing of the Evironmental Protection Agency said he was just beginning to put together his information, which is forwarded to the governor concerning Superfund designation for a community. Gov. Martz seems bent on reminding us the ultimate decision is hers.
The EPA's proposal must be able to stand up in court, Williams said. So he puts it together using the information gleaned from the efforts of the EPA crew in Libby.
The Community Advisory Group (CAG) and the local business people, who began meeting with the EPA last month, have been told that a decision is not needed right away but community discussion needs to begin. The business community would like to continue that discussion and not jump to a decision without a thorough understanding of the implications. They would also like answers to questions and assurances that the cleanup wouldn't drag on from 2-4 years to 20 years as seen in some listed communities.
Before meeting with State Sen. Bill Crismore (R) and W. R. Grace & Co. officials, Gov. Martz appeared willing to await Libby's decision and request. Shortly after that meeting, she expressed concerns about the community being divided over the issue and now, in a newspaper report printed Wednesday, Martz is saying she needs scientific proof that there is a problem before she agrees to declare the community a Superfund site. And she's not willing to receive that evidence from anyone associated with EPA's cleanup efforts in Libby.
Interesting that she's willing to have a discussion with W. R. Grace's top officials but not with the people directly involved in cleaning up the mess left behind by Grace.
We have extensive information from the EPA, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. The state health department may even have a file or two of information. The Department of Environmental Quality's file probably ends with the hearing to give back the bond money on the mine reclamation. There hasn't been much of a state presence here since that first meeting in Memorial Gym in November 1999.
Even more interesting is Martz's refusal to respond to the Lincoln County Commissioners, who have been trying to set up a meeting with the governor. Since her election, Martz has declined invitations to come to Libby to participate in discussion of the asbestos and asbestos-related disease problems. The commissioners would like to discuss the issue with her, as would CAG, who for the second time is sending a list of community priorities to the governor.
Gov. Martz said she wants input from the community but you have to wonder which part of the community.
Earlier this year, the governor was sending letters of support carried by whatever health person attended a CAG meeting. Now we read her comments about us in the media.
Perhaps if we change the city's name to Libby Inc. we'd get better response or even a visit [from her].
-Roger Morris"
[Western News editor Roger Morris's reference to "Libby, Inc." is in response to Governor Martz, who describes herself as "a lap dog of industry" (Missoulian newspaper, Dec. 7, 2000) - - website editor].
>From the The Western News newspaper, July 18, 2001, published in Libby, Montana.
"Time to replace officials who allowed Grace fiasco"
"To the Editor:
Being a Republican for the last 20 years, except taking time off to work for Perot, I probably have a different view of responsibility for the whole Libby asbestos fiasco than the core of the people I meet at the CAG [meetings].
What W. R. Grace & Co did was clearly criminal and they should be made responsible for it. Having said that, the core of America lays with the freedom of being able to go out and make and grow a business for yourself and your co-workers and your families. The way business is set up today, company officers are mandated by their owners or shareholders to go out and make money at whatever cost.
I believe that a lot of companies in some form or another break laws from time to time to accomplish this. This is not a picture-book glimpse of American business that most want to accept, but it is reality just the same.
The flip side of this, and also at the core of America, is the people's right to employ people and groups through their tax dollars and their elected officials to police these companies and bring them to justice if harm is done to the people.
I believe that the greatest injustice is done when the elected officials or the groups in their employ neglect or ignore their duties to keep the people from harm. This could happen in the form of collaboration with the companies they are supposed to police. This can also happen if hazards to the public are found and not communicated to said public.
To combat these problems we have employed, through our elected officials, groups and individuals to watch over the whole thing. When they are inept and living in a void I guess it's time to have them shut down.
The Tinsley woman said it, talk to your elected officials! I think she's right. We need to talk to them and tell them to throw that bunch out!"
Don Smith
Libby
[Comment: You may remember the formation of the Grace Commission in 1982, which was a collaboration between the Reagan Administration and W. R. Grace & Co. CEO, J. Peter Grace. Mr. Grace was a close personal friend of President Reagan. The Grace Commission was created by Reagan and was tasked to find ways to reduce the size and influence of government agencies in the guise of "cost containment". The EPA was one agency that was financially gutted during the Reagan Administration. During the 1980s, new data was being brought forth by environmental groups and by independent science groups regarding the deadly nature of asbestos found in various products. Undoubtably, this was news that W. R. Grace & Co. did not want used against the Company. A weakened EPA would have benefited W. R. Grace & Co. When Reagan gutted the EPA and then blocked the forthcoming EPA announcement that Libby's vermiculite mine was a hazardous working environment, his CEO pal, Peter Grace, won.
Collaboration between polluters and our elected leaders sometimes reaches to high positions indeed. In the case of Libby residents, some died as a result of it. - - website editor]
>From the The Western News newspaper, August 22, 2001, published in Libby, Montana.
"If more was needed, Grace, EPA equally guilty"
Guest editorial by Alan Stringer
"People who attended Gov. Judy Martz's town meeting in Libby a couple of days ago were treated to a nifty bit of theater. One man [asbestosis victim Les Skramstad] stood up with a Mason jar full of vermiculite and said the stuff was lying all over the place. He could have filled a five-gallon bucket with all the vermiculite just lying on the ground had he wanted to. His point was that W. R. Grace & Co. did a lousy job cleaning up the export plant.
It is entirely possible that he collected that vermiculite from the export plant, but it wasn't there when Grace completed the clean up. That is simply not possible. We removed an 18-inch layer of topsoil from across the entire export plant site, and even more in some spots. The old soil was replaced with fresh dirt from an EPA-approved gravel pit.
The vermiculite could not have been found inside the buildings either. The EPA, with Grace representatives present, visually inspected each building in a process designed to look for problems.
It is far easier to believe a well-spun tale disparaging Grace than it is to believe the truth. This has been the case for several weeks, whenever the subject of the export plant and the work that Grace did there is discussed.
In the export plant cleanup, Grace followed an EPA-approved work plan and an EPA contractor supervised the work every step of the way. When the work was completed, an EPA contractor hired to test the air inside the five buildings there could not find any evidence of asbestos. And that was the goal of the work plan.
When the EPA on-scene coordinator Paul Peronard says he did not sign off on the work, he is correct. There is no piece of paper with his signature on it. But in February, after the work was completed, he told the Community Advisory Group, he was satisfied with the work. According to the meetings minutes, "No asbestos has been left behind. The building question has to do with building safety, i.e., will they fall down, not left over asbestos contamination. We would be happy to show anyone interested how this site has been cleaned of asbestos."
We believe that there are other forces at work. There was a point early this year when Grace bought an advertisement in The Western News offering to clean up other sites in Libby, exactly as it had at the export plant. Because we had received clean air samples, and because we had no reason to believe that our work was unsatisfactory, we were eager to use the export plant cleanup as an example of what Grace could accomplish under EPA supervision.
And this was our mistake: We did exactly what was asked of us, and then attempted to promote it as an example of what could be possible. Now we've been knocked down for it.
The data Grace has received from the EPA indicates that the tremolite asbestos found at the export plant came from underneath the foundations of the buildings there. During the work Grace removed soil around the edges of each building to a depth of 18 inches - usually 6 to 12 inches below the bottom of the foundations - and replaced it with fresh soil. In a few cases, vermiculite could be seen underneath the foundations. After discussing it with the EPA's oversight contractor, it was agreed that the material should be left in place. Digging under foundations can destabilize buildings, while leaving the vermiculite in place keeps it sealed under concrete and soil.
Nevertheless, the EPA has now decided that the buildings were not cleaned well enough and, to remedy the situation, Grace has agreed to tear down the buildings at the export plant and remove the foundations.
If more should have been done at the export plant, Grace and the EPA should share that responsibility equally. We complied with an EPA-approved plan, with EPA oversight, and we received scientific evidence and verbal assurances from the EPA that we had eliminated the risk of asbestos exposure. It may not be nifty, but it's the truth.
Alan Stringer"
Comment: Alan Stringer is the Libby representative for W. R. Grace & Co.
Update: Alan Stringer and W. R. Grace executives indicted on criminal charges
>From the Montanian newspaper, January 30, 2002, published in Libby, Montana.
"Republicans have ruined Montana"
The following is an excerpt of a guest editorial by former Governor Thomas L. Judge (D-Montana)
"Governor Judy Martz (R-Montana) is clearly out of touch with Montanians on many other issues, including shifting funding away from efforts to stop teenage smoking, opposing a roadless designation area and opposing the Missouri River monument status. And because the recent Republican administrations catered to huge corporate mining interests and didn't require enough in bonds from them, Montanians are now saddled with tremendous cleanup costs from bankrupt projects.
To top it off, Gov. Martz is trying to portray herself as a hero for finally asking for federal help to clean up the community of Libby, after hundreds have been made sick from the pollution left behind by W. R. Grace & Company. A hero doesn't wait a whole year to do something to help a community in dire need of competent, professional assistance in removing toxic wastes."
Thomas L. Judge
Democrat Thomas L. Judge was governor of Montana from 1973 to 1981. His address is P.O. Box 1557, Bigfork MT 59911, phone 406-837-0111
[Comment:
Not only did Gov. Martz wait a year to finally act on the Superfund decision, she went kicking and screaming. A pro-listing opinion had already been made months before by Montana Attorney General Mike McGrath. McGrath had earlier stated that W. R. Grace & Company's bankruptcy filing had almost eliminated any chance that the company could contribute to the cleanup in an effective and timely manner. Grassroots pressure was also put on the Governor by Libby residents. The town was overwhelmingly in favor of EPA's role in the cleanup and was against any cleanup role by W. R. Grace & Company. But only months before her final decision was made, Gov. Martz had strongly supported a W. R. Grace-funded cleanup, only, and she refused to discuss Libby's asbestos crisis during her 2000 gubernatorial campaign. The Governor had also claimed that the cost to the State should be considered as a deciding factor in the cleanup, even when human lives are at stake. Earlier in year 2001, the Governor had refused to meet with Libby's Community Advisory Group on the asbestos issue, and she did not want to meet with the Lincoln County Commissioners until relatively late. She had also told Libby residents (rather forcefully) that she would not use the fast track cleanup option for Libby, which would cut months off of the cleanup time. Then the Governor reversed herself (under intense grassroots pressure) and allowed the fast track cleanup to proceed.
In her recent State of the State speech, Governor Martz implied that she should take full credit for the EPA cleanup, and she even went as far as to bring in a Libby asbestosis victim as her celebrity in the balcony for her speech (source: Western News newspaper, Jan. 30, 2002). If the Governor's hypocrisy wasn't so obscene it would have been funny. For her portrayal of herself as a hero, Governor Martz earns the 2001 Hall of Shame Award. - - website editor]
>From the Montanian newspaper, Feb. 27, 2002, published in Libby, Montana.
"Environmentalists misrepresent issues"
"Editor:
Mary Mitchell, executive director of the Rock Creek Alliance, sure is an expert on just about everything when it comes to the Rock Creek Mine. Most of it comes out like a big repetitive wind, heavy on lies and half truths and corrosive blather and just doesn't carry much weight. Did you ever stop to think that we have perfect examples that prove, absolutely prove that it's all a bunch of obstructionist propaganda?
I know I remember because I've lived in Lincoln County, Montana for 65 years and have been involved in mining, timber and farming all that time. I've heard this before.
Why don't these kind of people ever get embarrassed repeating the same old rhetoric over and over and over? The same old crap was heard when the Troy Project [Asarco, Inc.] and Montanore were being developed.
The Troy project ran for several years supporting its community, schools, roads, etc. Bears and wildlife are still all over the place, the foliage is still on the trees and the grass grows. Lake Creek has still got fish in it and the world didn't end.
If you didn't know the clearing where the Montanore Project was, you wouldn't even guess it was a clearing for a mining venture. Still, bear, deer, elk and cats are roaming around the area. Trout fishing in Libby Creek is as it always was with grouse and birds flying. Libby Lakes didn't even dry up. Good grief, do these people all think we're as dumb as they apparently are?
Montanore was one beautiful, clean, stainless steel project. But for the price of metals and somebody's arrogance, it could have been a great shot in the arm for our struggling communities.
They [environmentalists] all drive cars and run them on pavement and live in wooden houses. They run with their cute little waffle-stompers on and then expect us to buy the same old garbage they've always pedaled. Come to find out that their `independent' biologists they're so quick to quote are themselves self-declared!
What a deal!
Then there are the old hard-line Democrats such as Montana's ex-governor Tom Judge, blaming Republicans for shutting down industry in Montana. Are you kidding? It was the radical environmentalists who can take credit and he knows it.
Why don't we hear from our esteemed representative from District 82 in Lincoln County [Eileen Carney] who is up for re-election this year? She used to be a member of Cabinet Resource Group, one of the groups suing to stop the mine. How are you betting? Is she still a member?
What more can I say except let's not let them get away with it this time. Come on folks, let's call them to task."
Marie Cripe, an old Cabinet Mountains prospector and a member of Project 56.
[Comment: Marie Cripe is a member of "Project 56" 1, 2, an ultra right-wing, anti-government organization that is based in Libby, Montana. - - website editor] [Update, 2/5/2003: Cripe is now chairwoman of the organization. - - website editor].
>From the Montanian newspaper, June 19, 2002, published in Libby, Montana.
"We need ALL the facts, and NOW"
[Read aloud by Clinton Maynard at the meeting of the Community Advisory Group (CAG) June 13, 2002.]
On June 6, 2002, I engaged in a communication with a fellow concerned citizen who has been a very good source for credible information. This citizen is not in government or the medical field and doesn't even live here. In our communication, I was informed of some shocking information. This information was that, in the past three years, there have been 23 cases of mesothelioma diagnosed in Libby. [Mesothelioma is a rare cancer of the lining of the lung and is caused by exposure to tremolite asbestos.]
In disbelief, I sought verification of the accuracy of this information, through EPA, who verified this to be the truth. This means that 23 people in our community in the past three years were told that they have six months to a year to live. Mesothelioma is almost always a terminal cancer. Generally speaking, this diagnosis is a death sentence.
What I also find shocking is that this vital and pertinent information has been withheld from the community.
This parallels our history that produced this tragedy in the first place - - the withholding of vital information from the people. I would like to make myself perfectly clear on this matter: the withholding of vital information in regard to this asbestos issue is in my view, the equivalent of lying.
I would like to know who was privy to this information, for how long did they know it, and why this information has been withheld. When the number [of cases] was 15, I want to know the date [that the authorities knew]. I want to know if this information was considered in the recent denial of declaring a public health emergeny for Libby. The declaration of a public health emergency would have opened doors for addressing the long-term health care issue, it would have opened doors for research funding and it would have ensured that ATSDR [Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry] stayed on board here to finish the work they started.
The fact that this information had to come to me through the grapevine begs the question: what else are we not being told".
It seems we have a "don't ask, don't tell," "need-to-know basis" in regard to the sharing of information. I find this unacceptable and insulting.
We will not be viewed as a bunch of dumb hicks in Northwest Montana who have no credentials. It was people with credentials who failed to prevent this disaster.
We are the people who are enduring the aftermath, trying to find solutions. We need information. We need the numbers, we need to know how many cancers and what types, how many immune disorders, how many people are being prescribed medicine for arthritis. It's time we heard the rest of the story. It's time to put this above board and keep it there.
Clinton Maynard
Libby
[Comment: Mesothelioma is a rare form of asbestos-induced cancer. Normally, it is so rare that it usually occurs in only 1 person out of one million people. Biomedical statisticians typically refer to situations like Libby (23 cases in a town of 3,000 residents) as statistical "Hot Spots"- - website editor]
>From the Montanian newspaper, March 12, 2003, published in Libby, Montana.
"EPA is about to shirk it's duty, again - - Partial cleanup leaves Libby with devalued homes and businesses, and endangers future residents"
Editorial by David F. Latham
Editor of The Montanian
If you own a home or business in Libby, Montana, and you have plans of selling it at any time in the future, the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency is on the verge of wrecking your plans.
And if you live in a house in Libby that has asbestos-contaminated vermiculite insulation in the walls, and you thought you might like to avoid being exposed to deadly tremolite asbestos, think again.
According to a news article by reporter Matthew Bunk in the Daily Inter Lake newspaper (Kalispell, Montana) on March 7, 2003, the EPA has arbitrarily decided to leave behind tons of asbestos-contaminated vermiculite insulation inside the walls of houses and other buildings in Libby.
The Inter Lake article said:
"The Environmental Protection Agency will not remove asbestos-contaminated insulation from the walls of homes and businesses in Libby, according to an EPA regional manager."
That regional manager is Jim Christiansen, an EPA employee who is supposedly overseeing the cleanup of Libby.
This decision comes despite the promise made in Libby on Sept. 7, 2001, by [then] EPA Administrator Christine Todd Whitman that "this will never happen again."
The [Daily Inter Lake] article said:
"When EPA first investigated asbestos problems in Libby, coordinators expected to remove the dangerous fibers from every nook in homes found to contain Zonolite insulation."
This part of the article is not correct. When EPA first investigated asbestos problems in Libby, in the early 1980s, it prepared a lengthy scientific report about it. Then, before the report was made public, Peter Grace - - the industrialist whose conglomerate owned the Libby mine, and who was charged by President Ronald Reagan with gutting the EPA - - recommended that the report be killed. EPA got their marching orders and they marched right out of Libby, not to return for almost 20 years. (How come there's never a whistle-blower around when you need one?).
When EPA came back to Libby in November, 1999, it was with promises and assurances that the situation would finally be corrected. They began testing and found asbestos-contaminated vermiculite in hundreds of properties.
The article said:
"Nearly one fourth of the 3,500 Libby structures screened by the federal government contain dangerous levels of asbestos fibers in walls, attics or lawns, according to the EPA."
This information has been disseminated worldwide many times by TV, radio, newspaper, magazines and movies.
Now the EPA is backing out on Libby again, and the excuse they give is money. The article said:
"The agency initially estimated each structure would cost $20,000 - $30,000 to clean, but those figures were way off. As it turns out, the average cost is $230,000."
Never mind that some of the contractors that EPA hired to do cleanups in Libby are monumentally bureaucratic and inept. Never mind that the EPA constantly changes contractors so that no one contractor, even a good one, can stay on the job long enough to become efficient at it.
Never mind that W. R. Grace & Company has $6 billion hidden in other corporations, $6 billion that would go a long way toward cleaning up Libby and establishing a long-term medical health-care coverage trust fund for the thousands of Libby residents who will ultimately develop asbestos-related diseases. These are all subjects for other stories.
The fact remains: The EPA turned its back on Libby in the 1980s and it's trying to do it again.
The article said:
" 'We [EPA] will continue to remove it from attics', [Christiansen] said. 'But if it's contained in a structurally sound wall, then as a general rule we're not going to take it out. It's really not practical.' "
Is Mr. Christiansen joking? He cannot possibly believe that asbestos-contaminated vermiculite inside a "structurally sound" wall today will remain there. Walls crack. Walls get broken when children punch holes in them. Walls get removed for remodeling jobs. Even "structurally sound" walls get destroyed when the dilapidated house is demolished 30 or 40 years from now.
The article said:
" 'Some people will not be pleased', Christiansen said."
Thank you, Mr. Christiansen, for this astute observation. The article also said:
"Although he has been taking heat from Libby residents who feel they were misled by early EPA reports, Christiansen said that once the cleanup began, many top regional officials began to see the futility of trying to remove every fiber from each home."
Let's not forget, EPA was an equal partner with W. R. Grace & Company in the original cover-up of Libby's asbestos catastrophe. If EPA had done it's job in the early 1980s, the problem would have been taken care of then and the present generation of Libby residents and mine workers would not be facing a future of possible asbestos-related disease and the possibility of an early, agonizing death.
The EPA decision to arbitrarily leave behind tons of asbestos-contaminated vermiculite inside Libby homes is outrageous and everyone in Libby should be furious. This decision will leave a permanent shadow of doubt on all Libby properties, given Libby's abysmal national reputation for asbestos contamination.
Libby has received world-wide news coverage about its problems with asbestos and vermiculite. The bell can't be unrung. The ONLY way Libby will ever recover financially from the asbestos catastrophe is for the EPA to remove every measurable fiber of asbestos from each and every building, home, garage, shop, shack and barn that has an address with the ZIP code 59923, and then announce that accomplishment to the world.
I urge everyone with a financial interest in Libby, and anyone interested in protecting their health and the health of their family members, to come to the CAG meeting on Thursday to let the EPA know what we think of this decision.
Remember: the world is run by the people who show up. Please, show up.
David F. Latham
Editor of The Montanian newspaper
>From the Montanian newspaper, May 14, 2003, published in Libby, Montana.
"CAG still seeking declaration of public health emergency"
Open Letter to Secretary Tommy Thompson from Libby's Community Advisory Group
May 8, 2003
The Honorable Tommy Thompson
Secretary of the United States Department of
Health and Human Services
200 Independence Avenue SW
Washington, D.C. 20201
Dear Mr. Thompson:
We understand the enormous task that you must be faced with as you engage in your responsibilities of managing the health issues of our great nation. It is with this in mind that we express our deepenst appreciation for taking time to understand the magnitude of disaster that has occurred in our small town of Libby, Montana.
As you are probably aware, we are currently the home of our nation's highest priority superfund site. This is due to the widespread contamination of a most toxic form of mineral fiber, amphibole asbestos. This mineral fiber is a contaminant in the vermiculite that was mined and processed locally for 70 years prior to 1990. The miners and the general population were unaware that they were being exposed to this highly disease-potent, microscopic, toxic substance. Our awareness as a community began three-and-a-half years ago and today we understand that we face a desperate future.
We soon came to realize that our current and former exposed population would require specialized health care and we began to approach our federal government to meet this need, which is expected to last for the next 80-plus years, provided that exposures cease. With the assistance of our on-scene federal partners, we have engaged in an exhaustive search to identify a program that would address this need, only to come up with measures that are temporary, incomplete and non-comprehensive. That is, until recently, as we have now discovered that within "superfund legislation" exists a solution to our most troublesom dilemma. It is clear that the framers of this legislation had the wisdom to provide a solution in the event that a population such as ours had been exposed to a toxic substance. CERCLA 9604 (i)(1) provided our nation with the establishment of an agency, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), to address problems such as off-setting the impacts of toxic exposure.
Secretary Thompson, we are asking you to declare a "public health emergency" as stated in this legislation, 9604 (i)(1)(D), which would provide healthcare and engage the "all important" government agencies listed, therefore providing a comprehensive, scientific approach to addressing this tragedy.
Exposure presents a grim reality; debilitating lung dysfunction disease (asbestosis), terminal cancer (mesothelioma), cancers of other target organs (that we might survive if detected early enough) and shortened life-span. These devastating impacts of exposure can be decreased through specialized medical therapies and through research that might provide better therapies than exist today. Our immune systems have been compromised, robbing us of our health and these diseases create astronomical medical costs that will leave our families in financial ruin. We are asking that you use your authority to assure the long overdue fairness for our exposed people, to the fullest extent as provided by the law of our land.
In addition we have come to recognize that this American disaster was not simply due to an oversight. The State of Montana did a full mineral analysis in 1956 and the federal government was aware of the problem, at least by 1979. Much of this toxic exposure was preventable, but due to greed, ineptness, policy failure and apparent corruption, this was allowed to happen to us. Therefore, we respectfully ask that you launch a thorough investigation to identify and address these problems so that other Americans, who are not as aware as we are today, do not have to endure the plight of Libby, Montana. For those who have died and those who will die as casualties of failure, greed and perceived corruption, accountability and justice must be upheld. If this callous disregard for human life is to be viewed as acceptable, we can be assured that more Americans in the years to come are to meet the same fate.
Please correct this injustice for our nation. Please declare a "public health emergency" for Libby.
Thank you,
Libby Community Advisory Group
Signature page, attachments and cc. included
[Update: Bush Administration's response to the open letter]
[Bush Administration blocks declaration of Public Health Emergency]
>From the The Western News newspaper, April 2, 2004, published in Libby, Montana.
"Fairness Act is anything but fair to Libby victims of Asbestos Related Disease (ARD)"
To the Editor:
In response to Mr. Garcia's letter to the editor concerning the Fairness Act for Asbestos Victims being "fair", I would like to add a few comments.
Mr. Garcia, I have the utmost respect for your position and your concern for the veterans who are trying to receive compensation for asbestos-related disease (ARD). I too have been fighting for victims' rights for some years now and am extremely well versed in the Fairness Bill in Washington, D.C, which you endorsed.
I have been to Washington, D.C., twice within the last four years to object to the "fairness" of this bill. The intent of the bill is to unclog the court system of the 400,000 or so cases as a result of asbestos exposure. By each company contributing a specified amount of dollars, the federal government feels that this problem would be solved. The problem with this bill arose when it became obvious that there was a specific criteria for those who would receive benefit from this plan.
On our first appearance in Washington, D.C., in March 2000, the law firm representing the majority of the victims from Libby and I stated that of 125 people in Libby with ARD, 78 percent would have not met the criteria. Of that 78 percent, 4 people had already died of ARD. That alone should have been a warning flag. We managed to squelch the bill at that point and also, we had asked that a special provision be made within the bill for victims who had been exposed to our "Libby Fiber" as a result of working, living or playing in and around the Libby vermiculite.
At that time, there were approximately 300 people in Libby diagnosed with ARD, but as a result of the ATSDR screening held in 2000-2001 and continued education, we now have at least 1,500 people diagnosed with the disease from this fiber.
We are in the process of determining that the effects of this form of asbestos do not follow the guidelines of disease from commercial grade asbestos. Our people become very ill and sometimes die before the standard criteria for ARD is obvious. Also, during this time, the only recourse that most people had to receive compensation for medical care was W. R. Grace & Co. In April 2001, W. R. Grace went into bankruptcy, thus destroying any chance for medical relief from the mounting bills associated with ARD.
Because we would not have been eligible for compensation as a result of the Fairness Bill and the bankruptcy of W. R. Grace, our people find it necessary to rely upon the medical plan provided by W. R. Grace, the company that was responsible for their illness. The passage of the Fairness Bill would do little to alleviate the suffering of people across the United States who are ill as a result of exposure to our form of asbestos, but the passage of the Fairness Bill would certainly unclog the court system. Of the 400,000 supposed cases filed, over half would not be eligible for compensation. Suddenly, there would be another "Government Miracle" at work and we would all be deemed "healed" but not healthy. Of those who would receive compensation, the largest amount of payment would be $750,000 for someone diagnosed with mesothelioma, the only form of cancer of the meso lining of the lungs and stomach. If that person had a smoking history within the last 12 years, that amount would be dropped to $75,000. A question that I have repeatedly asked is, "With the evidence of the toxicity of second-hand smoke, would this principle apply to someone who did not smoke, but lived with a smoker? I would be willing to bet when payday came for this horrific disease, this would be taken into consideration.
The amount of money being offered for this terminal disease would possibly not cover medical expenses. The pain and suffering that the victim and their family would be put through would not be compensated, the family could be left financially devastated, but the government would have been absolved of the problem.
In June 2003, I once again appeared in Washington, D.C., Again, our pleas seemed to fall on deaf ears.
There needs to be a better way to provide care for the victims of ARD, whether it is through compensation directly from the companies that knowingly exposed their workforce, or families and community members, or the government entity that caused the exposure by ignoring the obvious and "sold out", so to speak, to corporate dollars, or as a final recourse, through litigation. I appreciate your efforts to draw attention to this growing national problem, but a band aid solution in favor of the companies who considered us a "collateral damage" in order to make a profit is not the answer.
Gayla Benefield
Libby
[Earlier 2001 report: U.S. Senator Baucus (D-Montana) plans filibuster if the pro-asbestos industry's liability-limiting bill is revived. - website editor]
>From the The Western News newspaper, Dec. 1, 2004, published in Libby, Montana.
"George W. Bush Re-Election Allows Grace To Walk Away"
"To the Editor:
I realize that there are many issues to consider when electing a public official, especially one as important as president of the United States. However, it seems that one of the most important topics in Lincoln County was not even considered when electing George W. Bush as president. Namely, asbestos victims. How can a county where hundreds of people have died and will continue to die due to asbestos exposure and asbestos-related lung disorders overwhelming elect a president that caters to W.R. Grace?
As most of the residents in Lincoln County are aware, industrial manufacturers, primarily W.R. Grace, have been faced with a flood of lawsuits claiming injury from asbestos exposure. These companies have lobbied Congress over the past several years for legislation that would limit the number of cases and give companies some certainty about the extent of their liabilities. This intense lobbying resulted in the U.S. Asbestos Bill, which would have established a trust fund, paid for by industry (mostly Grace) and managed by the federal government, to distribute payments for people who have been injured by exposure to asbestos, while ending all lawsuits against companies. It's been argued, and I agree, that the legislation did not require industry to pay sufficient money into the fund to compensate all potential plaintiffs.
Grace's lobbyists and large Republican campaign donations helped elect Bush and defeat Senate minority leader, Tom Daschle. The Democratic senator from South Dakota was one of the main opponents of the asbestos bill. He was against protecting the asbestos industry from lawsuits. By looking at Grace's recent stock history, one can draw conclusions about the results that Grace is expecting from the administration's upcoming policies and revised Asbestos Bill. Grace stock jumped 14 percent the day after the election and closed on Friday, Nov. 5, at $13.36 a share, up 26 percent for the week.
It's no surprise that Lincoln County went Republican, along with the rest of Montana. What does surprise me is that, given a clear connection between George W. Bush's policies and W.R. Grace's desired future, a higher percentage of people in Lincoln County voted for Bush than in the rest of the state. [See also Lincoln County's voting results from the 2000 election - - website editor]. Specifically, in Lincoln County Bush received 68 percent of the vote while Kerry received 29 percent, and others received 2 percent. In Montana, as a whole, Bush received 59 percent, Kerry received 39 percent, and others received 2 percent. In conclusion, even though Libby has been called "one of the nation's worst environmental disasters," the people of Lincoln County have just overwhelmingly voted in an administration that supports W.R. Grace in it's clear indifference to public health and the environment. The newly re-elected Bush and Republican Congress will allow Grace to walk away from their responsibilities to the people of Lincoln County and across the nation.
Travis Johnson
Washington, D.C."
Read a response from a Libby area resident (next letter down).
>From the The Western News newspaper, Dec. 8, 2004, published in Libby, Montana.
"Were People Exposed By Not Listening To W.R. Grace?"
"To the Editor:
This is in response to Travis Johnson's letter in the Dec. 1, 2004 Western News.
Mr. Johnson,
I can only surmise by your letter that you are some type of lobbyist yourself and on the "Democrat/Liberal" side of the political spectrum. You seemed much disenfranchised and surprised that Montana, and Lincoln County voted heavily Republican. You also seemed a little upset that Sen. Daschle was unseated. Liberalism is on a downslide, deal with it! You seem to believe that all of Libby and Lincoln County's asbestos problems are brought on and supported by the Bush administration and the Republicans. [Comment: See also 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 - - website editor]. I believe that a lot of the issues around the asbestos litigation have been tainted by trial lawyers and alike. I can't tell you how many times a night I see commercials on TV for law offices asking people to call if they have been exposed to asbestos or have been diagnosed with mesothelioma. Trial lawyers and frivolous lawsuits have been the downfall. It's very sad. The people who are truly suffering have a difficult time getting help.
And I've seen some people in town who sit at a bar, smoking cigarettes, and complaining about how terrible their asbestosis is. All I see there is another candidate for a trial lawyer to sue the tobacco companies over. It's been widely advertised that smoking can further complicate the problems brought on by asbestosis, but I've seen many people in this town, who claim to be a victim, smoking on a regular basis. So should their settlements be discounted in comparison to those who have asbestosis and don't smoke? Where do you draw the line on this issue?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not a supporter of W.R. Grace. But I don't think the entire truth about this fiasco is out on either side. I believe there are people who are suffering from the effects. I also believe that there are some "get rich quick" people out there jumping on the bandwagon in hopes of a big settlement so they can live happily ever after without having to be burdened with a 9-5 job. It's a double edged sword, that's for sure. I'm just an outsider looking in on this. I'm still learning bits and pieces of the details. And no two people I've talked with can give me the same story. The most posing questions I have are:
1. Did W.R. Grace ever tell these employees to change clothing and wash up before going home to their families?
2. Did W.R. Grace ever tell employees not to take the vermiculite home for their kids to play with and "pop" on the wood stoves for fun?? [For some answers to your questions, see court testimony - - website editor]
>From what I've learned so far, this is how most of the people in this town got exposed to the asbestos. [Five percent of Libby's diagnosed victims had no connection with the mine at all (except that they lived in Libby). - - website editor]. From workers coming home with it on their work clothes, and bringing some home for the kids to play with on the stove. To me, therein lies the problem. If they were required to change clothing before going home, and they were told not to take vermiculite home, why did they not follow the company policies? (If those were the policies -- like I said, I'm still doing the research on this) And, if those were the policies, then where in this entire matter is personal responsibility?
[Comment: Personal responsibility only grows out of possessing a total understanding of the problem. But if citizens have no knowledge of the danger, then they cannot be expected to take appropriate actions to protect themselves and their families. Furthermore, if W.R. Grace & Company had revealed the true danger of the working environment at the mine, then no sane person would be willing to work there. Again, I direct the writer to the URL for the civil court testimony. - - website editor].
You can tell a child that the stove is hot and warn him not to touch it, but if he does, and burns his hand, should we be suing the manufacturer of the stove?
[Comment: It's true that almost all Libby residents don't have an environmentalist bone in their bodies (the city's and county's politicians get elected specifically because they are not environmental activists). Because of the community's trusting, docile attitude toward W. R. Grace during Libby's employment haydays of the 1960s through 1980s, the town must now share some of the blame for being a passive bystander to their own environmental health disaster. This does not mean, however, that prior to 1990, Libby's indifference toward the company's rumored lies should absolve W. R. Grace & Co. of any responsibility. The following analogy may make it clearer: If a con man bilks a fool out of his money, the fact that the victim is a fool does not mean that the con man should not be prosecuted. - - website editor.]
It's amazing to me just how many "issues" are facing such a small town as Libby, and how it sometimes seems like these issues have divided so many. It seems that this asbestos issue has clouded this town for so many years that it's hard to believe that it will ever be resolved enough for this town to move on and rebuild.
Now, my final questions to you Mr. Johnson:
1. You are now claiming to be from "Washington, D.C." Have you ever been a Montana resident, or better yet, are you native to northwest Montana?
2. If not, who do you lobby for?"
Marchette Momb
Libby
>From the The Western News newspaper, Posted: Friday, Aug 12, 2005, published in Libby, Montana.
EPA being the EPA
An editorial by The Western News editor Roger Morris
The EPA, once again relying on their infinite wisdom in Washington, D.C., have come up with a great policy: Don't let anyone working on the Libby superfund project talk to the media -- local, regional or national.
Uh-huh.
Apparently the word is the "higher-ups" in the agency are concerned that loose lips will endanger the pending criminal trial against W. R. Grace and seven of its employees. Let's see, if I remember right that trial begins in May 2006. Between now and then there will be nine Community Advisory Group meetings with EPA officials, at least nine Technical Advisory Group meetings with EPA officials and possibly five operations and maintenance meetings with EPA officials. And lest I forget, the EPA was trying to complete its record of decision for the Libby superfund site by year's end. I guess the media can't ask questions about that, either.
Right!
So if the local media has a question, I'm told we have to call someone in Washington, D.C., and they will call the local EPA person to find out the answer, and then call us back and tell us the answer.
Sure.
This is a public relations disaster that rivals the lunacy of the EPA's statements immediately after the 9-11 attacks in which the agency said the dust from the collapse of the World Trade Center towers in New York City was not a health threat and did not contain asbestos fibers. Okay, that may not have been lunacy, it was criminal.
If you want to keep the media from publishing something, or at least making a big deal about something, do it in plain sight. The harder you make it for the media, the more they begin to think something's wrong or someone's lying. They begin digging harder and looking for more to report. And more of them get involved.
Early in my career -- 30 years ago this fall -- I covered a murder case in western Nebraska. It was pretty well covered by national and regional media but the feeding frenzy began after a county court judge slapped a gag order on the media from reporting any of the pretrial hearings. It was upheld by a district court judge. That was eventually appealed all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court, who ruled against the lower court judges.
The media coverage after the silly move by the judge was unbelievable. Our newsroom resembled a TV studio for weeks and if you left your desk to go out and cover a meeting, there was no telling what reporter from what organization was working at your desk when you returned or tying up your telephone.
If anybody has a legitimate question to ask the EPA, give me a call or e-mail me at rmorris@hagadone.com. I'm at the point where I want to make someone's life in Washington, D.C., a living hell.
Roger Morris
Editor, The Western News newspaper
Libby, Montana
[Comment: We must not forget, too, that the Bush Administration has also squelched the release of other public health news that was related to tremolite asbestos. And that censorship had nothing to do with any pending trial. - website editor]
>From the Daily Inter Lake newspaper, Feb. 20, 2007. published in Kalispell, Montana.
Editor:
I was moved by U.S. Senator Max Baucus’ eulogy to Libby asbestos victims advocate Les Skramstad and by the eulogies in other northwest Montana newspapers. The word "hero" came to mind. "Hero" seems to be a misused word these days, but in the case of Skramstad, it is an appropriate descriptor.
It is sometimes said that small towns produce more conformists than activists. People lose their anonymity in small communities, and when everyone knows both you and your lifestyle, there is often a subconscious pressure to try to fit in. Conformists often sleep well at night. Many of Les' ill W. R. Grace & Co. coworkers made the decision to accept an out of court settlement and then remained publicly silent about their company-caused asbestos-related illness.
Although Les also sued the company, he wasn't silent. Les' public comments were sometimes angry, but they were always backed by conviction and honesty. When he began voicing his concerns about the environmental health crisis in Libby, he was subjected to attack by W. R. Grace & Company spokesmen, by some local business leaders and by the local branch of a major political party. They insinuated that Les was a rabble-rouser and a liar. Les continued speaking out. The personal attacks abated slightly in recent years, but only because the truth had been revealed. Les had been right all along and Libby’s environmental health problem was worse than anyone had predicted.
Eventually, buildings and institutions may be named after Mr. Skramstad. I never knew Les personally but from what I have read about his life, he would probably scoff at such superficial accolades. He might suggest that a better monument would be to raise up new voices as his successors. Unfortunately, in small towns, environmental health activists are as scarce as hen's teeth.
Phillip Bigelow
>From the Montanian newspaper, Oct. 15, 2008. published in Libby, Montana.
The Western News is now publishing propoganda articles by the man most responsible for the economic destruction of Libby!
I was totally shocked when I opened the Western News and saw that they printed an article by Matt Koehler of the Wild West Institute (formerly the Ecology Center) in Missoula. [Koehler's article appeared in the Oct. 10, 2008 issue of the Western News].
There is no use in refuting anything Matt Koehler said in his article, as it is just the drivel he has always said. Like some (he hit on the Missoula Area Economic Development Corporation this time) want to just log all the forests off. Really? Where are the mills to take all these logs to, Matt? As we know, lots of mills have closed due to Matt Koehler's efforts, so we can't "log, baby, log".
But to have a local paper to actually publish his propaganda here -- after so many local people's lives, to say nothing of our economy, were devastated by this man's actions (and he's still trying more) -- is beyond my comprehension.
What was the Western News thinking? Don't they know who this guy is, and what he has done to this town? And what he is still trying to do? Just ask the USFS about him.
I point out one example from his article: He said he works on a "collaborative basis with others" but refuses to come to Libby to work on a collaborative basis with the Kootenai National Forest Stakeholders Group, while the Public Lands Council does work with that group, and does come to meetings here in Libby.
I just never thought we'd see his articles published locally, but now we have. Shame on them. And just what do many who are still here, who were devastated by actions of this man, think about his propaganda now being spread here?
Why would a local paper publish his propaganda? It is an insult to all Lincoln County residents."
Wayne Hirst
Libby
[Comment: Read a rebuttle to Mr. Hirst's advertisement (next letter, below)]
>From the Montanian newspaper, Oct. 22, 2008. published in Libby, Montana.
Recently, Wayne Hirst paid for an advertisement in the Montanian (Oct. 15, page 2), in which he chastised another local newspaper (the Western News) for publishing an article written by out-of-town environmentalist, Matt Koehler [Koehler's article was published in the Oct. 10, 2008 issue of the Western News].
It is important that Libby residents have access to all viewpoints through their local media, not just access to one politically-correct viewpoint that is "acceptable" to only one local political philosophy. Unfortunately, Hirst's suggestion that the local media should suppress Koehler's viewpoint will not help the town's already tarnished reputation. The Pennsylvania Amish call it "shunning", a crude, archaic, and frankly, a backward way of silencing open discussion. Shunning individuals because of their beliefs is usually considered to be a symptom of a socially-closed community.
I was raised to believe that the best way to expose an extremist is to let that person speak. If they are kooks, then let them hang themselves with their own words. In his book The Art of War, the ancient military tactician Sun Tzu, wrote: "Know your enemy, and in one hundred battles, you shall find victory." In other words, if Libby residents actually believe that Mr. Koehler is, as Mr. Hirst implies, an enemy of Libby, then the community should be allowed to read what Koehler says, pick apart his arguments point by point, and then rebut them point by point. If you instead try to suppress Koehler's voice locally, then you are revealing that you fear his words. Your fear will not carry either you or your community toward any satisfactory resolution of an issue.
Sincerely,
Phillip Bigelow
[footnote (added after my letter was published): A few additional comments. In essence, Libby businessman Wayne Hirst is making one person, Missoula environmentalist Matt Koehler, the scapegoat for all of Libby's troubles. Hirst's tactic is similar to the old practice of building a straw man so that he can then knock it down. Indeed, the very act of looking for scapegoats is an example of witch-hunting, a social "skill" that does not need be added to Libby's already tattered résumé. In reality, Libby's economic troubles are due to myriad issues ranging from: weaknesses/loopholes in the NAFTA agreement; an abundant supply of cheaper Canadian logs (which essentially killed competitiveness in the U.S.); consolidation of formerly abundant local lumber mills into fewer regional lumber mills; volatile international metal prices (which make it hard for U.S.-based mining companies to do long-term planning); many new international sources for metals and timber; and the totally preventable asbestos poisoning of Libby (yes, I said it. The pollution could have been prevented if Libby had bothered to pay attention and had bothered to care about its local environment). All of these factors have negatively impacted Lincoln County and they have caused the county's unending "boom-bust" economic cycles for the last 30 years. The world economy is vastly different from what it was during the 1970s, and this change will likely be permanent. Neither Libby residents, nor their claimed archenemies the environmentalists, currently have much control over how international trade is conducted. For small isolated communities who's economies used to depend on resource extraction, this change is a reality that must eventually be acknowledged. There will always be some resource extraction occurring in the County, but it will never again return to a magnitude sufficient to create or to maintain a stable local economy. The 1970s are over. Libby needs to create a diversified economic base, yet I don't see any indication that the community's leaders "get it". Of course it is a challenge to lift yourself up, but you must first honestly acknowledge why you are laying on the ground and why you fell down in the first place. In contrast, it is easier to stay on the ground and create a scapegoat (e.g., blame a lone environmentalist who, conveniently for his critics, lives in another city). The problem with scapegoating is that it won't create any new businesses, nor will it create any new jobs.
Libby, wake up. - - Phil B.]
An on-line editorial
By Phillip Bigelow
August 5, 2009
"It is better to look good than to feel good." So claimed comedian Billy Crystal's alter ego, Fernando Lamas. The director of the Libby Area Chamber of Commerce and at least one county commissioner seem to agree with Fernando's philosophy. They have recently lashed out at the national media for reporting facts about Libby's asbestos pollution and the town's painfully slow recovery. Those facts were not always flattering to the community, but they were facts none-the-less.
Dusti Thompson, executive director of the Libby Area Chamber of Commerce, said of the national media's past and present coverage of Libby: "Every time that Libby is standing on its own two feet again, trying to get past this stigma, they [the evil national media] do something like this, and it just pushes us 10 steps back".
What is the "something like this", that Chamber director Thompson is accusing the national media of doing to Libby? If you believe Thompson, they are victimizing the community. The logic is that Libby's tarnished image is due solely to the misdeeds of W. R. Grace, the EPA, the state of Montana, and the national media. According to the logic, Libby, is completely innocent of contributing, even indirectly, to its own demise.
Denial is rampant in Libby. The town avoids looking into mirrors.
Lincoln County Commissioner Tony Berget criticized the national media on the way they videotaped Libby's scenery. Some video clips, Berget pointed out, were aired in black-and-white rather than in color. Color video footage would have better revealed the beautiful Libby scenery. Berget said, "When they were doing all these negative stories about Lincoln County and Libby, they said, `We've got to film in black and white because it's just too pretty here'".
Never mind that the story about the EPA's declaration of a Public Health Emergency was historic news. Never mind that the declaration will eventually benefit the town. No, this important story was usurped by a locally-created side story about the media's unflattering past video coverage of the town.
The Libby Area Chamber of Commerce director focused her attack on how the evil national media's reports had "panicked" people across the nation. Thompson stated that "When they [the public] see this on a national news channel, the first thing they feel is panic." Thompson added, ".... They [the evil national media] come in, they stir up everybody and then they leave".
I think the Chamber Director has watched the movie Footloose too many times.
Drawn into the fray by the sight of blood in the water, Libby's Western News newspaper took the opportunity to pile on by using the loaded word "outsiders" to describe concerned citizens who don't live in Libby. "Outsiders"? Is the Western News trying to portray Libby as some type of cult community? Apparently, the newspaper thought that the word "non-resident" wasn't pejorative enough to use in its article.
In an attempt to further distance itself from the national press, the Western News went on to state that the national press "filmed elderly residents with oxygen tanks in tow". Although the newspaper didn't directly say it, the implication was that the filming of such scenes was somehow a bad thing. To the contrary, we will probably never know all of the positive effects, both tangible and intangible, that these images have had on the foot-dragging Washington D. C. politicians. How many politicos in EPA's Washington DC headquarters were guilted into finally acting after seeing sick Libby residents on TV? When unsettling photos of Libby's asbestos victim's memorial were posted on the Internet, did it help create greater public interest in the issue of asbestos pollution? I also wonder how far along Libby's cleanup would be today if those disturbing images had never appeared in national news stories. Understanding the scale of Libby's human disaster is not merely an intellectual pursuit. One's senses must also be employed. Televised news provides the out-of-town viewer a different, more empathetic perspective on Libby's plight than do the dry abstract images provided by the printed word alone. The reality is that the national news coverage was never intended to be used as a Libby vacation travelogue.
It is ironic that locals are attacking the national media. It was the national media, alone, who first revealed to the world the massive scale of Libby's asbestos problem. The national media's reports can also be credited for starting Libby on its long road to recovery. In comparison, from the 1960s to the late 1990's, the local media, both its print media and its radio station, failed to report on the occupational mass deaths in Libby that were caused by decades of Grace's asbestos pollution, even though rumors of the health catastrophe had been circulating throughout the community since the 1960s. Why did Libby's media remain silent? The answer is obvious if one is even vaguely familiar with the community: W. R. Grace & Co. provided jobs to residents, and it was viewed as being too important to investigate. Having decided that silence was the better part of valor, the local press kept their hands off W. R. Grace for nearly three decades. Libby's community leaders also failed to ask questions about the deaths. People continued to die. It would take one of those "outsider" media organizations (the Seattle Post-Intelligencer newspaper) to finally take note of the rumors, come to Libby, investigate the leads, and expose the environmental health catastrophe to the rest of the world. Yes, Ms. Thompson, just as the national press came and stirred up everybody back in 1999, they recently made a return trip to the community and did the same thing. It's about time. If Libby residents had instead relied on their own local media to be the first to expose the crisis to the world, the town - - and the nation - - would still be waiting. W. R. Grace & Co. murdered hundreds of Libby residents, and Libby was Grace's enabler. The town's residents handed the company the gun.
Chamber Director Thompson made the following prediction, "When it's all said and done, Libby is going to be the cleanest place on earth to live."
Perhaps. But how long will the town remain clean? Does it come with a guarantee?
It's true that you can polish a community until it sparkles, but how do you change a community's deep animosity towards creating tougher environmental oversight of mining companies? It is no secret that Libby is strongly anti-environmentalist. Yet, one would think that Libby's disaster would have been viewed by the locals as a learning experience. There is no evidence that its political leaders, or the community in general, have learned any lessons. Instead, locals wax poetic about the town's need to "move on". To my ears, that means, "lets pretend that this tragedy never happened." If Libby forgets its own mistakes (particularly if it forgets that it blindly trusted a corporate polluter in its midst for nearly 30 years), then it may make similar mistakes in the future. Since the Seattle Post Intelligencer broke the story in 1999, what new changes has Libby made to lessen the chance that industrial pollution could again be spread throughout its community? Have any new city ordinances regarding mining pollution been enacted since 1999? Have any new county regulations dealing with mining pollution been adopted since 1999?
Libby's leaders also need to ask themselves what type of relationship the town should have with new mining companies who intend to move into the area. Should the relationship be one of blind acceptance (such as the family-like relationship that existed between the community and W. R. Grace & Co. for nearly 30 years), or should Libby instead retain a bit of healthy skepticism in its dealings with these companies? This question has yet to be answered by anyone in town (in fact, the question hadn't even been asked). Traditionally, Libby's mantra has been: "Trust the companies, accept the jobs they offer us, and don't ask any questions." If, however, anything goes wrong (for instance, if residents start dying from environmental poisoning), then the community is supposed to blame the evil national media for having the audacity to report unflattering news.
In addition to Chamber Director Thompson and Commissioner Berget, there are many other Libby residents who feel that the national press reports about the town are gross misrepresentations. However, others who have been paying attention for the last decade see this disaster in its proper perspective. Like it or not, Libby will probably be viewed, and should be viewed, as a second Love Canal. For those who are too young to remember (or for those who have short memories), Love Canal is an infamous neighborhood in Niagara Falls, New York, where a housing development was built over a chemical waste dump. Greed, denial, enabling and foot-dragging all contributed to the disaster at Love Canal. The community's high profile misfortune was used as a rallying point for the newly-born environmental movement of the 1970s.
In an August 5, 1988 New York Times editorial, Sam Verhovek quoted former New York state health commissioner Dr. David Axelrod who said, "Among its legacies, Love Canal will likely long endure as a national symbol of a failure to exercise a sense of concern for future generations."
The health commissioner's words could just as easily apply to Libby. And yet, there are glaring differences. The Love Canal tragedy had a silver lining, because it created many new environmentalists from within the Love Canal community. In contrast, Libby's disaster did not have the same effect on its residents. Libby residents hate environmentalists and environmentalism as much as ever. The culture of Love Canal's former residents changed fundamentally, while Libby's culture did not. If Libby becomes an unwilling poster child for the nation's environmental movement, if it is remembered as an example of how things should not be done, then so be it. The community will have no say in the matter, and perhaps that is the way it should be. One's legacy should be based on substance. A legacy should never be based on a manufactured image. If the town wants to see itself portrayed in a positive light in a vacation travelogue, then it should make its own video. Don't expect NBC news or CBS news to film it for you. It's not their job.
Phillip Bigelow
Website editor
More letters to the editor to come!
This web page is dedicated to all who fight for a clean healthful environment.