Search

 In 1991, the Public Health Service articulated a vision for primary prevention in Strategic Plan for the Elimination of Childhood Lead Poisoning, a departure from previous federal policy focused on finding and treating lead-poisoned children. This publication detailed a 15-year strategy for primary prevention and offered a cost-benefit analysis to demonstrate the monetized benefits of this approach. A strong national effort to follow this strategy developed but was eventually abandoned.

The organized campaign against universal screening began in California, where letters questioning the reported prevalence of elevated BLL began appearing in pediatric journals and newspapers. These letters acknowledged receiving editorial assistance from Kaiser Permanente Foundation Hospitals and argued that money spent on screening, treatment and abatement would be harmful to more worthy public health efforts. The AAP president took up this attack on universal screening as well, and efforts for universal screening were gradually eroded. 

Needleman identifies racism and the belief that lead poisoning “is a product of poor mothering, not of environmental pollution” as a driving factor shaping lead detection and prevention efforts (or the lack thereof) … “this weighting of personal choice or behavior over environment is a tool used to shift responsibility away from health authorities or polluters and onto the victim” (1875).

This supplementary legal document describes recommendations for storm- and waste-water management improvements for the Formosa petrochemical plant in Calhoun County, Texas. The text is a fairly standard drainage assessment. The author describes non-trivial discharge of pollutants out of the plant’s outfalls, which drain into local waters, and the inability of the plant’s systems to prevent flooding from even small storms. For some context on this, it is pretty standard to design a stormwater system to be able to drain the 100-year storm (that is, the storm with a 1% or less chance of occurring in any given year). Formosa’s Texas plant demonstrated the inability to convey even the 2-year storm.

Emphases are mine:

“Problem areas were identified based on the results from the outfall drainage studies provided by Formosa. Thus, all the results in the OPCC rely on those studies, uncertainities associated with those studies, and the assumptions made for those studies, some of which may or may not be appropriate as I pointed out in Supplement #2 [Page 4]” (3)

“The proposed improvements assume that the conveyance capacity of the problem areas is increased 100%, which would be able to handle twice as much flow that it currently does. The results from the Drainage Study are not conclusive as to what storm event Formosa’s system currently is capable of conveying. The report does mention that the system is not capable of conveying the 2-year storm, and “sometimes” not even the 1-year storm event.” (3)

“A 45% contingency is applied to the OPCC due to the uncertainties associated with underground utilities, likelihood of existence of low road crossings and need to replace those, groundwater impacts, other unknowns, and additional costs associated with engineering, etc. 45% is reasonable and in line with industry practices in my experience, especially given the large amount of unknown information available.” (4) 

“My opinion from my July 9, 2018 report that “there have been and are still pellets and/or plastic materials discharges above trace amounts through Outfall 001” is further supported by the deposition testimony of Lisa Vitale, as representative for Freese & Nichols, Inc, that she and her colleagues have seen floating white pellets or small plastic pieces in Lavaca Bay and in the area near outfall 001 as part of her work on the receiving water monitoring program for Formosa’s TPDES permit...Ms. Vitale also testified that she told John Hyak of Formosa about these sightings as well as has sent him water samples with the pellets about five or six times, including at least one time prior to 2010. This, along with the June 2010 EPA Report I cited in my July Report, demonstrates to me that Formosa was aware of problems related to discharges of plastics from its facility since at least in 2010.” (6)

While the organization was founded by Taiwan's citizens to uphold environmental justice movements centered on Taiwanese citizens, its involvement in Vietnam's Formosa case signals that the organization itself may be broadening their scope in future endeavors. In leveraging its resources to seek redress for victims outside of Taiwan, ERF may need to extend their networks to international agencies as well as engage with communities not directly reachable to its workers. As Vietnam's Formosa case also concerns dealings with an authoritarian government, restrictions on speech, police brutality, and censureship on the part of Vietnam's government may render it difficult for ERF and affiliated agencies to obtain all relevant information pertaining to the case.

• Website: https://erf.org.tw/about/

• Youtube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWiSqQq9d56aRjUabg3ZRfg

• Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/ERFTW

• Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/erftw/ 

Environmental Rights Foundation (ERF)  was founded due to the result of the court settlement regarding the lawsuit on the 3rd phase expansion of Central Taiwan Science Park (CTSP) between farmers and the government. As such, the organization’s focus remains centered on ensuring community members' environmental rights across different government development plans.

https://erf.org.tw/news/ 

ERF has published over 150 press releases documenting their engagement communities in seeking government actions to address environmental disasters. These press releases include up-to-date news on each relevant environmental justice case the agency is currently working on. One example of a recent press release includes information issued by the Formosa Plastics Vietnam Steel Alliance, which consists of six non-governmental organizations supervising the case. Statements issued within this press release comes from members of Amnesty International Taiwan, Reporters  without Borderes, Environmental Lawyer's Association, and the Environmental Rights Protection Foundation. 

In regards to the Formosa case, ERF has collaborated with the Justice for Formosa Victims (JFFV)- a Vietnamese-American based organization- to coordinate efforts in seeking redress to affected communities.

• Drawn from website,community engagement  activities undertaken by ERF in Taiwan includes:

• At Reservoir Planning Areas: ERF has organized the International Day of Action for Rivers events on March 14 for two consecutive years in 2018 and 2019. The events aim at drawing the society’s attention on reservoir issues through local concerts or speed-walking events.

• At Solar Power Planning Areas: ERF has organized with local indigenous people the Tribe Land and Sunshine Workshop so that the local communities know more about solar energy and the practicing of indigenous peoples’ right of consultation and consent and the right of benefit sharing.

• At So-to-Be-Eliminated Fishing Villages Whose Land is Acquired by the Tourism Industry and Hotels: ERF organizes courses on urban planning procedures and more.

• Near Factories of the High Technology Industry: ERF organizes courses on communities’ right to know, health risk reports, and more.

• The organization has also established the following:

• Citizen Monitoring the Sixth Naphtha Cracker Environmental Rights Promotion Action Platform (Citizen Monitoring the Sixth Naphtha Cracker Platform): The Sixth Naphtha Cracker of Formosa Plastics is the largest petrochemical industrial park in central Taiwan, impacting the local environment and the health of residents greatly. Research has shown that the incidence of cancer is significantly higher in residents living near the petrochemical industrial park. Taixi Village of Changhua even has the name “cancer village”. The platform was co-established by civic organizations and local residents, aiming at urging the government to enhance its capability of environmental governance and conduct adequate environmental monitoring to realize the public’s right to know.

• Legalization of Unregistered Factories on Agricultural Land: At present, there are over 134,500 unregistered factories on agricultural land in Taiwan, occupying an area of 13,859 hectares. ERF has been working with civic organizations since 2017, organizing legal policy lobbying, urging the government to amend laws and regulations, and publicizing data and information for better policy tracking and judgement. 

• Judicial Remedies for Transnational Corporation Pollution (Ocean Pollution of Formosa Ha-Tinh Steel Corporation): ERF organized a lawyer group to assist the 7,875 Vietnamese victims. We filed for a civil lawsuit for compensation against the shareholders and board of directors of Formosa Ha-Tinh Steel Corporation, hoping that transnational corporations bear responsibilities of pollution.

ERF members include lawyers and environmental experts.  The board of directors of the ERF are nominated by governmental authorities, local farmers, lawyers, and environmental experts. Of special note to this case is Hsin-Hsuan Sun, a researcher at ERF. She maintains  an active online presence to educate others on the progress of the Formosa case in Vietnam and raise awareness on international policy developments with direct relevance to environmental justice cases. For example, her recent tweets call for greater involvement of underprivileged and indigenous communities in renewables development.