Note to Readers: This is a summary of SUNY New Paltz PCB and dioxin incident. While focused on the local issue, it has many implications for dioxin policy in total. It will be of particular interest to students or former students of SUNY New Paltz. One original of this letter to New York State Assemblyman Kevin Cahill is posted as a static page, and another is here. My intention is to provide a resource for people searching for information about the New Paltz incident, as well as to keep Mr. Cahill’s name associated with the issue. More information is at a website called Dioxin Dorms.–efc
Eric Francis Coppolino
Investigative Journalist
PO Box 3606 | Kingston NY 12402
VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS
May 5, 1993
THE HON. KEVIN CAHILL
Member of the New York State Assembly
Committee on Higher Education
Legislative Office Building Room 625
Albany, New York 12247
DEAR MR. CAHILL:
When we met to discuss the SUNY New Paltz PCB, dioxin and dibenzofuran situation on Jan. 29, 1993, we agreed that I would express my questions to you in writing and that you would do your best to seek out satisfactory answers. Our initial communication, at which I presented you with a collection of published materials on the subject and provided an approximately one hour briefing on facts and questions uncovered through my reporting, was conducted at the suggestion of Edward C. Sullivan, chair of the NYS Assembly Committee on Higher Education. Mr. Sullivan said that as a member of the Higher Ed. Committee and as the representative of the legislative district which includes the college, you would be the appropriate initial person with whom to communicate on the issue.
During the sixteen months I have been covering this $25 million (and still counting) [Note: the final cost of the cleanup exceeded $50 million. -ef] cleanup project, my work has expanded beyond New Paltz and now encompasses reporting on the more than 50-year history of the dangers of polychlorinated biphenyl chemicals and PCB-containing equipment. This history includes an apparent pattern of concealment by PCB manufacturers, who have also allegedly made misleading and outright false statements to the federal government, the public, their workers and, most pertinent to this situation, their customers. The denial of reality by the manufacturers continues to the present day — in March, for example, a Westinghouse spokesperson assured me that “PCB transformers cannot explode,” period. The transformers formerly located in Bliss and Gage residence halls on the New Paltz campus, both of which were manufactured by Westinghouse, exploded Dec. 29, 1991. Given this history of concealment — of which New York State is no doubt a victim — there is no level of misinformation on the issue that would surprise me.
Indeed, my own ignorance about the issues at the time of the 1991 incidents has taken some effort to transcend. Since that time, my research has been facilitated by a considerable number of individuals, including scientists, medical doctors, authors, journalists, environmental attorneys, toxicologists, engineers, professors and other specialists in various disciplines related to the issue. They have provided instruction and a great deal of reading material, including scientific studies, books, articles, primary source documents and other literature, of which I have done my best to gain a genuine understanding. The questions that follow are based on a synthesis of information I have gathered through this research, as well as the examination of state documents and other investigation into the New Paltz PCB fires and explosions.