Questions and Answers - WordPress.com...Cleburne County, which houses Fruithurst and Muscadine,...

Questions and Answers Fruithurst and Muscadine Cancer Concerns

January 30, 2018

Table of Contents Extent of Cancer ......................................................................................................................... 3

How much cancer is in the community? .................................................................................. 3What about other kinds of cancers in the area? ....................................................................... 3

Problend ..................................................................................................................................... 4How long was the Problend Rubber facility in operation and what was it doing during that time? ....................................................................................................................................... 4What chemicals were used at the Problend facility? ................................................................ 4Did the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) regulate Problend? ..... 5How much contaminated water was feasibly discharged from the ProBlend facility? ............... 8Could contaminated water from Problend have feasibly traveled to wells miles away?............ 8

Water and Soil Test Results ........................................................................................................ 9What contaminants were tested for in water? .......................................................................... 9What contaminants were tested for in soil? ........................................................................... 10How do I make sense of the health impacts of these contaminants? ..................................... 10

Arsenic...................................................................................................................................... 13How does arsenic impact health? .......................................................................................... 13

Bis(2-ethylhexylphthlate) ........................................................................................................... 15How does bis(2-ethylhexylphthlate) impact health? ............................................................... 15

Caprolactam ............................................................................................................................. 17Barium ...................................................................................................................................... 18

How does barium impact health? .......................................................................................... 18Cadmium .................................................................................................................................. 20

How does cadmium impact health? ....................................................................................... 20

Chloroform ................................................................................................................................ 21Chlorodibromomethane ............................................................................................................ 22Chromium ................................................................................................................................. 23

How does chromium impact health? ...................................................................................... 23Dichlorobromomethane ............................................................................................................. 25Lead ......................................................................................................................................... 26

How does lead impact health?............................................................................................... 26Naphthalene ............................................................................................................................. 28

How does naphthalene impact health? .................................................................................. 28Nickel ........................................................................................................................................ 29

How does nickel impact health? ............................................................................................ 29Selenium ................................................................................................................................... 31

How does selenium impact health? ....................................................................................... 31Silver ........................................................................................................................................ 32Zinc ........................................................................................................................................... 33

How does zinc impact health? ............................................................................................... 33Radium ..................................................................................................................................... 35Radon ....................................................................................................................................... 36

How does radon impact health? ............................................................................................ 36Mercury ..................................................................................................................................... 38References ............................................................................................................................... 39

Extent of Cancer

How much cancer is in the community?

Initially, Cleburne Cancer Concerns worked with Auburn University rural sociologist Dr. Ashwood to identify patients with only leukemia and lymphoma, which are closely related cancers. Interviews revealed that between 2013 and 2017, three children and one adolescent were diagnosed with leukemia, about 39 times the prevalence expected in the census block where they reside, compared to county-wide averages over a five year period.1 Cleburne County, which houses Fruithurst and Muscadine, typically averages only about one childhood leukemia diagnosis in a 5-year period. Further, between 2016 and 2017, four adults in the same census block have been diagnosed with leukemia, and two adults with lymphoma. Interviews revealed occupational exposure to rubber and well-water drinking as potential common routes for exposure. Especially for pregnant mothers and infants on formula, exposure to contaminated well water was of concern. Based on information collected in interviews, Cleburne Cancer Concerns, Auburn University researchers, and University of Alabama researchers collected well water and soil samples. The findings are presented in this document.

What about other kinds of cancers in the area?

Cleburne Cancer Concerns would like the next step to include a survey of all residents who live in the above census block to understand what other kinds of cancers may be related to environmental, occupation, or household exposures. Initial accounts suggest a potential prevalence of breast, colon, prostate, stomach, and other cancers.

Lymphoma

Osteosarcoma

Non-Hodgkin Lympohma

Leukcoytosis & Hyperlipidemia

Fruithurst Elementary School

Cleburne County

Haralson County

" Former Patient Homes

! Current Patient Homes

Cleburne County roads

Census Block Map

Map Made By: Kenzley Defler

Auburn University Undergraduate Student

0 1.5 30.75 Miles

AL/GA Stateline

Problend Rubber Facility

Problend

How long was the Problend Rubber facility in operation and what was it doing during that time?

The Problend location in Fruithurst Alabama opened in 1987 and in 2006 was taken over by Preferred Compounding. This acquisition included the Associated Rubber Company locations in Fruithurst and Tallapoosa, GA. Problend’s purpose was to, “supply proprietary and custom mixed rubber compounds, chemical blends and calendered sheet to molders, extruders, mixers and others in the non-tire rubber goods market. Primary industries served include automotive, construction, power generation and roll goods.”2 Because Problend was a sister company with Associated Rubber in Tallapoosa, an interviewee stated that all waste and chemical cleanups materials from the Fruithurst location were picked up and handled by Associated Rubber.

What chemicals were used at the Problend facility?

From statements given by former employees of Problend, ADEM documents, and interviews, several chemicals have been identified. Former employees state there were many chemicals used, some they could not identify. A former employee of Problend described that many of the products used on site were sulfur-based powders which were mixed with oil for dispersion. This mixture was then used for further stages of rubber production. Some of the chemicals that have been identified include:

o Zinc dimethyldithiocarbamate, commonly known as methyl zimate or ZDMC. 3 § A creamy white powder used as an accelerator in low temperature rubber

processes § Is an industrial fungicide § Looks like an odorless white powder § When heated to decomposition it emits toxic fumes of carbon monoxide,

carbon dioxide, sulfur oxides and nitrogen oxides

o N-Cyclohexy(thio)phthalmide or PVI. 4 § Used to protect the rubber material from scorching during processing,

especially during high temperature and high speed processes § Also used for better storage capacities

o Talc or magnesium silicate

o N-diethlethanolamine (ADEM Permit 1994)5 § Used to neutralize acids and make salts § Known to be highly caustic § Corrosive to metals and tissues § Used to manufacture petroleum products

o Sodium Hydroxide (ADEM Permit 1994)6 § Used to neutralize acids and make salts § Known to be highly caustic § Corrosive to metals and tissues § Used to manufacture petroleum products

Did the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) regulate Problend?

Problend was required to submit twice yearly stormwater reports to ADEM. That means that ADEM permitted the facility, and required water reports, but had no enforceable standard. In the event Problend discharged too much of something into the environment, ADEM had no regulatory authority to act. They did, though, have authority to act if Problend did not submit water reports. For the first seven years of Problend’s operation, they did not submit any reports, as ADEM did not require it. From the time of which they were required to submit reports, they failed to report water quality data eighteen times bi-annually. In other words, nine years of water quality reports are missing as required by law, according to what ADEM has available. From the 24 water reports we have access to, we know that Problend was outside of acceptable EPA benchmarks for stormwater monitoring for the following measurements: Biochemical Oxygen demand (twice); pH, which measures acidity or alkalinity of water (12 times); total suspended solids (4); zinc (22 times); lead (3 times); chromium (9 times); oil/grease (twice). In total, Problend’s stormwater runoff was over EPA benchmarks for water quality 54 times for 7 different criteria. Please not that these criteria encompass only regulatory ones, and do not include other chemicals that could have been used in production, and ones that we tested for. In 2012, ADEM implemented a new permitting standard for rubber and plastics facilities. That included monitoring for benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, xylene, napthalene, and Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether. From 2012 until Problend’s closing in 2015, it submitted no water quality reports to ADEM, as the law requires. Please see the next page for a comprehensive table that summarizes of all of the ADEM stormwater discharge reports relating to ProBlend. Note the “times above EPA Benchmark” columns: standout numbers include zinc levels in 2008, which were 42,222 times the benchmark, and lead levels in 2008, which were 804 times above the benchmark.

Problend Stormwater Discharge (runoff) Water Quality Reports (ADEM Reports)

Highlighted numbers are above the EPA threshold; Abbreviations: ND = no discharge occurred during the monitoring period; NR = not required; BRL = below reporting limit; BDL = below detection limit; NODI=B or NODI-B = no discharge/no data indicator

How much contaminated water was feasibly discharged from the ProBlend facility?

Problend had one household

septic tank with a 1,000 gallon capacity. A regulatory document from the Alabama Public Health Department estimated daily use at the facility to be 330 gallons of water (see image). This means that there was no formal treatment system for contaminated water. Water usage documents from the City of Fruithurst show that ProBlend used an average of 1,315 gallons of city water daily, more than the septic system could process. Interviews suggest that ProBlend employees switched from the city water supply to a well-water supply during the second shift, making the 1,315 gallons a conservative estimate. Problend feasibly could have used between 1,972 to 2,630 gallons of water a day, adjusting for one or two shifts of well-water use plus recorded municipal amounts. In any event, more water was used than the septic tank could hold on a daily basis.

Could contaminated water from Problend have feasibly traveled to wells miles away?

Auburn University Geoscientist Dr. Lee and his team calculated that the artesian well located 250 feet from Problend is at a higher elevation than wells where some cancer patients once drank from. The artesian well likely is a groundwater recharging site for the area. This is especially possible in the event that fractures exists, and there are hydrologically connected aquifer bedrocks between Problend and wells that patients drank from.

Water and Soil Test Results

This map shows the locations of wells, one stream (Point 11), and one municipal household water sample (Point 2) that were tested for heavy metals, volatile organic compounds, semi-volatile organic compounds, and/or radon.

What contaminants were tested for in water?

Auburn University, University of Alabama, and two labs – TestAmerica and RA data – tested for heavy metals, volatile organic compounds, and semi-volatile organic compounds. The only chemicals listed are those which showed up in levels at or above the reporting limit set by Test America in their procedure or those utilized by researchers at the University of Alabama (for radon), or RA data (for radon). A reporting limit means the detectable amount of a specific contaminant. More simply, it is when

Point 9

Point 8

Point 7

Point 6

Point 5

Point 4

Point 3

Point 2

Point 1Point 11

Point 10

Co Rd 49

US Hwy 78State Rte 4

Co Rd 14

Co Rd 40

Co Rd 82

Co Rd 50

Co Rd 76

Co Rd 232

Old Georgia Rd

Co Rd 250

Co Rd 296

Co Rd 243

Co Rd 426

Co Rd 295 Co Rd 72

Co Rd 205

Co Rd 4

Co Rd 69

4th St W

Coffey Rd

Co Rd 214

Co Rd 949

Co Rd 216

Co Rd 290

Co Rd 208

Pilgrim

s Rest R

4th St E

Co Rd 467

Co Rd 466

Co Rd 228

tested well

Well Water Test Results

0 1 20.5 Miles .

the laboratory equipment finds there is something in the water. Detecting something does not mean there is too much according to federal or international standards, but it does mean there is something in your well that could potentially cause health problems.

What contaminants were tested for in soil?

We examined the same contaminants in soil as we did water, excluding radon and radium, which were only tested for in water.

How do I make sense of the health impacts of these contaminants?

WATER: The charts below list every time a contaminant was found, and contextualize its level by using standards for water established by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or World Health Organization (WHO). The first organization is domestic and the second is international. The WHO recommendations are guidelines for chemicals that are of significance to human health. They are set at a level over which remedial action is encouraged.

!Point 2

Point 1

Point 5Point 4Points 3 & 6

Co Rd 49

US Hwy 78

State Rte 4

Co Rd 14

Co Rd 40

Co Rd 76

Co Rd 50

Co Rd 82Co

Co Rd 250

Co Rd 243

Co Rd 426

Co Rd 489

Co Rd 69

Co Rd 296

Co Hwy 69

Co Rd 72

Co Rd 290

Co Rd 2

Co Rd 4C

o Rd 435

4th St W

Coffey Rd

Co Rd 233

Co Rd 214

Co Rd 949

Co Rd 216

Co Rd 222

Co Rd 180

Co Rd 380

Co Rd 208

Co Rd 266

4th St E

Co Rd 467School St

267Co Rd 466

Co Rd 228

Co Rd 59

Co Rd 7

! tested soil site

Soil SampleTest Results

0 1 20.5 Miles .

In terms of the EPA, the chemical levels found in your water were compared to maximum contaminant levels (MCL) and maximum contaminant level goals (MCLG). The first level, MCL, reflects a negotiated level of pollution allowed based on discussion between researchers, industry, and the EPA. This is the most pollution that can legally be in the water. MCLG, conversely, is a level that the EPA sets to be reflective of health concerns. The MCLG for some contaminants is often lower than the MCL. Maximum contaminant levels are not always straightforward. Take radon, for example. The EPA does not federally enforce safe levels of radon that can be found in drinking water. They do propose communities to monitor and regulate radon levels at a state-level to provide water with no more than 4,000 pCi/L. The radon test results shown below are from water samples. Any row highlighted in red shows the chemical level in the water sample was higher than the MCL level set by the EPA. Any row highlighted in yellow is above the MCLG set by the EPA. Any row highlighted in green is above the WHO guideline. The following legend applies to water test results: B = compound was found in the blank and sample ^ is for Di(2-ethylhexyl)phtalate * = The relative percent difference between the laboratory control samples and the laboaratory control sample duplicates exceeds the control limits ** = denotes the action level set by EPA meaning if more than 10% of water samples exceed this level then additional steps should be taken *** = denotes the secondary MCL meaning this is a non-enforceable guideline for a contaminant that may cause cosmetic or aesthetic effects; some are enforced at a state level **** = denotes the ambient water criterion set by the National Service Center for Environmental Publications (NSCEP) of the EPA SOIL: Unfortunately there is not one overarching soil contaminant standard accepted by all, therefore, the sample results were compared to standards set by different organizations. The California Human Health Screening Levels (CHHSLs) from the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) are used as a guideline, but have no regulatory effect or authority to require remediation for affected sites. Numbers are advisory and simply a reference for citizens, government, and communities. For individual homes, the CHHLs residential scenario standards were used. For locations other than homes, for example the Problend test sites, the commercial industrial scenario standards were used. OEHHA notes that the arsenic numbers are for contamination from human activities only and natural arsenic concentrations may be above the screening value. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also developed standards, called soil screening levels (SSL), which are limits above which site-specific studies of risks are warranted. These take into account data from the regulatory and human health benchmarks used for SSL development, but again, have no regulatory power and are not enforced federally. While there

are many different categories of SSLs, the two used are the ingestion limits and the limits for one dilution-attenuation factor (DAF). A category of 1 DAF refers to chemicals released into the environment through groundwater pathways with one natural process present to reduce contaminant concentrations. According to EPA, DAF is defined as the ratio of contaminant concentration in soil leachate to the concentration in ground water at the receptor point. For example, if the acceptable ground water concentration is 1 mg/L and the DAF is 10, the target soil leachate concentration would be 10 mg/L. Any row highlighted in red shows the soil sample level was above the CHHLs set limit. Any row highlighted in yellow shows the sample was above the EPA SSL set limits for ingestion. Any row highlighted in green shows the sample was above the EPA SSL set limits for 1 DAF. The follow legend applies to soil test results: F1 = MS and/or MSD Recovery is outside acceptance limits F2 = MS/MSD RDP exceeds control limit B = compound was found in the blank and sample ca = screening number is based on carcinogenic potency factor nc = screening number is based on reference level for chronic toxic effects other than cancer max = screening number is based on maximum concentration allowed (100,000 mg/kg) and not toxicity b Calculated values correspond to a noncancer hazard quotient of 1 e Calculated values correlated with a cancer risk level of 1 in 1,000,000 i SSL for pH of 6.8 k A screening level of 400 mg/kg has been set for lead based on Revised Interim Soil Lead Guidance for CERCLA Sites and RCRA Corrective Action Facilities (US EPA, 1994) L SSL is based on RfD for mercuric chloride m SSL is based on dietary RfD Note: Lead acetate and nickel subsulfide, both forms of metal salt, are significantly more toxic that their corresponding metal in general. If these forms were used on site, the specific screening level should be used.

Arsenic

How does arsenic impact health?

All metals, not just arsenic, bioaccumulate in soft tissues over time, interfering with normal reactions. They can, “exert their toxic effects by forming complexes with organic compounds.” Arsenic is the first of a series of metals found in water and soil samples in the Fruithurst-Muscadine area.8 Arsenic can be found in many sources in which people come in contact with everyday including food, soil, and drinking water. In many studies, arsenic from drinking water was found to be a leading cause of cancer risk9, most typically linked with cancer of the bladder, kidney, lung, and liver10. In addition to cancer, arsenic has been reported to cause DNA disruptions including strand breaks, synthesis inhibition, repair inhibition, and retardation of replication11. It also is connected to chronic respiratory problems, circulatory disease, hypertension, diabetes, myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular disease, reproductive issues, immune system effects, endocrine effects, development issues, skin cancer, coronary heart disease, and neurological impacts.12 Evidence suggests that high levels of arsenic exposure can cause leukemia, particularly childhood leukemia.13

Water Test Results: Arsenic

Address Chemical Amount Detected

EPA WHO

MCL MCLG

Point 11: Northside Railroad

Arsenic 0.003 mg/L 0.01 mg/L

0 mg/L 0.01 mg/L

Point 7: 531 County Road 91 Muscadine, AL 36269

Arsenic 0.0043 mg/L 0.01 mg/L

0 mg/L 0.01 mg/L

Soil Test Results: Arsenic

Chemical Amount Detected

CHHLs (mg/kg)

SSLs mg/L

Ingestion (mg/kg)

1 DAF (mg/kg)

Point 1: 422 Co Rd 88, Fruithurst, AL 36262

Arsenic 3.2 mg/Kg 0.07 ca 0.4 e 1 i

Point 2: 456 County Road 80, Muscadine AL, 36269

Point 3: Dirt Pile Arsenic 9.5 mg/Kg 0.24 ca 0.4 e 1 i

Point 4: North Side Railroad

Point 5: East Field Arsenic 3.1 mg/Kg 0.24 ca 0.4 e 1 i

Point 6: Dirt Pile Arsenic 6.2 mg/Kg 0.24 ca 0.4 e 1 i

Bis(2-ethylhexylphthlate)

How does bis(2-ethylhexylphthlate) impact health?

Bis(2-ethyhexyl) phthalate, also called DEHP or phthalates, is an endocrine disrupting chemical (EDC), causes DNA methylation, has epigenetic effects on DNA, and is an immune disruptor. Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate is linked to multiple medical complications. It is used predominately in the production of plastic, but also other industries. DNA methylation and the epigenetic effects from environmental exposures to bis(2-ethyhexylphthalate) and during fetal development is linked multiple medical problems, and acts similarly to BPA. Potential health impacts include leukemia, pancreatic cancer, neuroblastoma, osteosarcoma, reproductive issues, infertility in men, ovarian disease, prostate cancer, testicular cancer, pancreatic cancer, pulmonary issues, respiratory issues, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, testicular disease, obesity, neurodevelopment (decreased IQ, poorer memory, ASD, ADHD, and other behavioral problems), cardiac muscle problems, pubertal abnormalities, diabetes and insulin resistance, fibroids, uterine cancer (because of endocrine disrupting chemicals), Wilm's Tumor (indirectly by DNA methylation), ewing sarcoma (indirectly by DNA methylation), rhabdomyosarcoma (indirectly by DNA methylation), high blood pressure, hyperglycemia and hypertriglyceridemia, low HDL concentrations and too much fat in the waist area, and oxidative stress.14

Water Test Results: Bis(2-ethylhexylphthlate)

EPA WHO

MCL MCLG

Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate

0.013 mg/L B* .006 mg/L

0 0.008 mg/L ^

Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate

0.024 mg/L B* .006 mg/L

0 0.008 mg/L ^

Soil Test Results: Bis(2-ethylhexylphthalate)

CHHLs (mg/kg)

SSLs mg/L

Ingestion (mg/kg)

1 DAF (mg/kg)

Point 3: Dirt Pile Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate

2.1 mg/kg None given. 46 e 180

Caprolactam

Water Test Results: Caprolactam

EPA WHO

MCL MCLG

Caprolactam* 0.053 mg/L

None given

Barium

How does barium impact health?

Large amounts of barium consumption can change heart rhythm or cause paralysis in human. Small amounts of consumption (drinking or eating) can cause vomiting and diarrhea, muscle weakness, or numbness around the face.15

Water Test Results: Barium

EPA WHO

MCL MCLG

Point 1: Fruithurst Well Barium 0.034 mg/L 2 mg/L 2 mg/L 0.7 mg/L

Point 11: Northside Railroad

Barium 0.029 mg/L 2 mg/L 2 mg/L 0.7 mg/L

Point 2: 1807 County Road 80 Muscadine AL, 36269

Point 4: 456 County Road 80, Muscadine, AL 36269

Point 5: 425 County Rd 88, Fruithurst, AL 36262

Soil Test Results: Barium

CHHLs (mg/kg)

SSLs mg/L

Ingestion (mg/kg)

1 DAF (mg/kg

Barium 110 mg/Kg 5200 nc 5,500 b 82 i

Barium 55 mg/Kg 5200 nc 5,500 b 82 i

Point 3: Dirt Pile Barium 240 mg/Kg 63,000 nc 5,500 b 82 i

Barium 35 mg/Kg 63,000 nc 5,500 b 82 i

Point 5: East Field

Barium 67 mg/Kg F2 63,000 nc 5,500 b 82 i

Point 6: Dirt Pile Barium 220 mg/Kg 63,000 nc 5,500 b 82 i

Cadmium

How does cadmium impact health?

Cadmium is used in industrial processes, including the manufacture of plastics and rubbers.16 Cadmium can cause kidney, lung, bone damage, DNA strand breaks and chromosomal damage. Cadmium chloride, oxide, sulfate, and sulfide can case increased rates of testicular, prostate and lung cancer.17 Further, cadmium and nickel function as endoctrine disruptors by mimicking the action of estrogen, which contributes to the development of breast cancer.18 The development of mammalian cells can be negatively impacted by exposure to nickel compounds, which increases breast cancer development.19 Cadmium is also associated with prostate cancer,20 pancreatic cancer,21 and cancers of the pulmonary system, liver, hemapoetic system, urinary, bladder and stomach cancers.22

Soil Test Results: Cadmium

CHHLs (mg/kg)

SSLs mg/L

Ingestion (mg/kg)

1 DAF (mg/k

Cadmium 1.3 mg/Kg 1.7 ca 78 b,m 0.4 i

Chloroform

Water Test Results: Chloroform

EPA WHO

MCL MCLG

Point 1: Fruithurst Well

Chloroform 0.0049 mg/L

None given

0.07 mg/L

0.3 mg/L

Chloroform 0.012 mg/L None given

0.07 mg/L

0.3 mg/L

Chlorodibromomethane

Water Test Results: Chlorodibromomethane

EPA WHO

MCL MCLG

Chlorodibromomethane

0.0045 mg/L

None given

0.06 mg/L

Chromium

How does chromium impact health?

Chromium most commonly impacts the respiratory track, causes asthma, cough, shortness of breath and wheezing. It also causes ulcers in the stomach, and anemia. Known impacts include sperm damage to the male reproductive system, as well as cancer, including stomach, intestinal and lung.23 Some studies show a relationship between chromium exposure and lip, oral cavity and pharynx cancer, female breast cancer, prostate cancer, and leukemia.24 Chromium also can damage DNA and cause mutations.25

Water Test Results: Chromium

Soil Test Results: Chromium

EPA WHO

MCL MCLG

Chromium 0.0094 mg/L

0.1 mg/L 0.1 mg/L 0.05 mg/L

CHHLs (mg/kg)

SSLs mg/L

Ingestion (mg/kg)

1 DAF (mg/kg)

Chromium

12 F1 F2 mg/Kg

III: 100,000 nc, max IV: 17 ca

Total: 390 b

III: 78,000 b

IV: 390 b

Total: 2 i III: --- IV: 2 i

Chromium

11 mg/Kg III: 100,000 nc, max IV: 17 ca

Total: 390 b

III: 78,000 b

IV: 390 b

Point 3: Dirt Pile

Chromium

Total: 390 b

III: 78,000 b

IV: 390 b

Chromium

7.6 mg/Kg III: 100,000 nc, max IV: 37 ca

Total: 390 b

III: 78,000 b

IV: 390 b

Point 5: East Field

Chromium

13 mg/Kg F1 III: 100,000 nc, max IV: 37 ca

Total: 390 b

III: 78,000 b

IV: 390 b

Total: 2 i III: IV: 2 i

Point 6: Dirt Pile

Chromium

Total: 390 b

III: 78,000 b

IV: 390 b

Total: 2 i III: IV: 2 i

Dichlorobromomethane

Water Test Results: Dichlorobromomethane

EPA WHO

MCL MCLG

Dichlorobromomethane

0.0040 mg/L

None given

.006 mg/L

0.1 mg/L

How does lead impact health?

Children exposed to lead have cognitive impairment and behavioral problems. Health effects later in life include ADHD, hypertension, renal effects, and reproductive problems. In pregnant women, maternal exposure to lead reduces fetal growth and results in lower birth weight, including decreased postnatal growth of head, height, and delayed puberty. Pregnant women can also experience neurological symptoms similar to children. Childhood lead exposure can have renal effects, cause anemia, and effect endocrine levels. Amongst all people, exposure can cause cardiovascular effects, reproductive effects (like fertility), lower bone mineral density – which slows childhood growth. Classified elemental lead and inorganic lead can be carcinogenic,26 and is connected to pancreatic cancer,27 cancers of the stomach, lunch, kidney, brain, and meninges.28

Water Test Results: Lead

EPA WHO

MCL MCLG

Lead 0.015 mg/L 0.015 mg/L**

0 0.01 mg/L

Lead 0.0017 mg/L

0.015 mg/L**

0 0.01 mg/L

Soil Test Results: Lead

*Note: test results did not differentiate type of lead.

CHHLs (mg/kg)

SSLs mg/L

Ingestion (mg/kg)

1 DAF (mg/k

Lead 130 B F2 mg/Kg

Lead & lead compounds: 80 nc Lead acetate: 2.3 ca

400 k None given

Lead 20 mg/Kg Lead & lead compounds: 80 nc Lead acetate: 2.3 ca

400 k None given

Point 3: Dirt Pile Lead 20 mg/Kg Lead & lead compounds: 320 nc Lead acetate: 10 ca

400 k None given

Lead 15 mg/Kg Lead & lead compounds: 320 nc Lead acetate: 10 ca

400 k None given

Point 5: East Field

Lead 19 mg/Kg F1 F2

Lead & lead compounds: 320 nc Lead acetate: 10 ca

400 k None given

Point 6: Dirt Pile Lead 19 mg/Kg Lead & lead compounds: 320 nc Lead acetate: 10 ca

400 k None given

Naphthalene

How does naphthalene impact health?

Naphtalene, as well as 1-Methylnaphthalen and 2-Methylnaphthalene, in large amounts can destroy red blood cells, called hemolytic anemia. Other symptoms include pale skin, lack of appetite, fatigue, restlessness, blood in urine, or yellow skin color. For children, naphthalene can cause lung injury and possibly lung disease later in life.29

Water Test Results: Naphthalene

EPA WHO

MCL MCLG

Naphthalene 0.00039 mg/L

0.143 mg/L**** None given.

Nickel

How does nickel impact health?

The most common reaction is a skin rash – like dermatitis or hand eczema – on contact. The most serious harmful health effects are chronic bronchitis, reduced lung function, or lung cancer. This most commonly happens for workers who have high levels of exposure, especially the most soluble compounds of nickel. Nickel refiner dust and nickel subsulfide are human carcinogens.30 Nickel is connected to lung and nasal cancer, along with testicular DNA damage,31 and endometriosis.32

Water Test Results: Nickel

EPA WHO

MCL MCLG

Nickel 0.0067 mg/L

0.1 mg/L****

0.1 mg/L***

0.07 mg/L

Soil Test Results: Nickel

CHHLs (mg/kg)

SSLs mg/L

Ingestion (mg/kg)

1 DAF (mg/kg)

Nickel 6.5 mg/Kg

Nickel & compounds: 1600 nc Nickel subsulfide: 0.38 ca

1,600 b 7 i

Nickel 3.6 mg/Kg

Nickel & compounds: 1600 nc Nickel subsulfide: 0.38 ca

1,600 b 7 i

Point 3: Dirt Pile Nickel 4.6 mg/Kg

Nickel & compounds: 16,000 nc Nickel subsulfide: 11,000

1,600 b 7 i

Nickel 9.4 mg/Kg

1,600 b 7 i

Point 5: East Field Nickel 4.3 mg/Kg

1,600 b 7 i

Point 6: Dirt Pile Nickel 4.5 mg/Kg

1,600 b 7 i

Selenium

How does selenium impact health?

Human skin contact with industrial selenium compounds can cause rashes, redness, heat, swelling, and pain. Burning to the eyes and tearing can result. One particular form of selenium, selenium sulfide, is probably a human carcinogen. Very high amounts of selenium can reduce sperm counts and change reproductive cycles.33

Soil Test Results: Selenium

CHHLs (mg/kg)

SSLs mg/L

Ingestion (mg/kg)

1 DAF (mg/kg)

Selenium 0.69 mg/Kg 380 nc 390 b 0.3 i

Point 6: Dirt Pile Selenium 0.70 mg/Kg 4800 nc 390 b 0.3 i

Silver

Water Test Results: Silver

EPA WHO

MCL MCLG

Silver 0.0017 mg/L

0.1 mg/L***

None given

How does zinc impact health?

Some zinc is good for health, but too much is not. Inhaling large amounts of zinc can cause a short-term disease called metal fume fever, which is reversible. Little is known about long-term impacts. Drinking or eating too much zinc can cause vomiting, nausea, and stomach cramps short-term; long-term, it causes anemia, damages the pancreas, and decreases level of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol.34

Water Test Results: Zinc

EPA WHO

MCL MCLG

Zinc 0.029 mg/L 5 mg/L***

None given

Point 6: 139 County Road 417 Fruithurst, AL 36262

None given

Soil Test Results: Zinc

CHHLs (mg/kg)

SSLs mg/L

Ingestion (mg/kg)

1 DAF (mg/k

Zinc 1500 mg/Kg 23000 nc 23,000 b 620 b,i

Zinc 33 mg/Kg 23000 nc 23,000 b 620 b,i

Point 3: Dirt Pile Zinc 3000 mg/Kg 23000 nc 23,000 b 620 b,i

Zinc 22 mg/Kg 23000 nc 23,000 b 620 b,i

Point 5: East Field Zinc 30 mg/Kg 23000 nc 23,000 b 620 b,i

Point 6: Dirt Pile Zinc 2600 mg/Kg 23000 nc 23,000 b 620 b,i

Radium

Water Test Results: Ra-226

EPA WHO

MCL MCLG

Ra-226 0.162 pCi/L or 0.006 Bq/L

5 pCi/L 0 1 Bq/L

Ra-226 0.297 pCi/L or 0.011 Bq/L

5 pCi/L 0 1 Bq/L

Ra-226 0.135 pCi/L or 0.005 Bq/L

5 pCi/L 0 1 Bq/L

Ra-226 0.027 pCi/L or 0.001 Bq/L

5 pCi/L 0 1 Bq/L

How does radon impact health?

The EPA recommends anyone exposed to 4pCi/L or more to fix their home and address the radon level.35 There are many studies correlating radon exposure with increased risk of lung cancer. Other studies have looked at radon specifically with childhood cancer and/or leukemia. Domestic radon exposure was linked specifically to Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL)36. Children who were born and grew up in areas with normal or high levels of exposure were more likely to develop ALL than children in areas of low exposure.37 Relative risk for various forms of cancer was increased slightly due to medium or high radon exposure while childhood leukemia risk was significantly increased in medium and high exposure counties.38 High radon sections have been shown to have an increased incidence of AML.39 Areas with higher average radon levels saw higher disease incidence and increased mortality rates from childhood leukemia.40

Water Test Results: Radon

EPA WHO

MCL MCLG

Point 1: Fruithurst Well Radon 11/27/2017

4077 pCi/L <4000 pCi/L 2702.7 pCi/L

Radon 11/27/2017

2165 pCi/L <4000 pCi/L 2702.7 pCi/L

Radon 7/10/2017

6586.0 pCi/L <4000 pCi/L 2702.7 pCi/L

Radon 11/27/2017

1.3 pCi/L <4000 pCi/L 2702.7 pCi/L

Radon 11/27/2017

842 pCi/L <4000 pCi/L 2702.7 pCi/L

Radon 7/10/2017

3206.5 pCi/L <4000 pCi/L 2702.7 pCi/L

Radon 11/27/2017

1004 pCi/L <4000 pCi/L 2702.7 pCi/L

Radon 11/27/2017

368 pCi/L <4000 pCi/L 2702.7 pCi/L

Radon 7/10/2017

8449.4 pCi/L <4000 pCi/L 2702.7 pCi/L

Radon 11/27/2017

5391 pCi/L <4000 pCi/L 2702.7 pCi/L

Radon 7/10/2017

348.1 pCi/L <4000 pCi/L 2702.7 pCi/L

Radon 11/27/2017

1449 pCi/L <4000 pCi/L 2702.7 pCi/L

Radon 11/27/2017

66 pCi/L <4000 pCi/L 2702.7 pCi/L

Mercury

Soil Test Results: Mercury

CHHLs (mg/kg)

SSLs mg/L

Ingestion (mg/kg)

1 DAF (mg/kg)

Mercury 0.050 mg/Kg 18 nc 23 b,L 0.1 i

Mercury 0.047 mg/Kg 18 nc 23 b,l 0.1 i

Point 3: Dirt Pile Mercury 0.020 mg/Kg 18 nc 23 b,l 0.1 i

Point 5: East Field Mercury 0.020 mg/Kg 18 nc 23 b,l 0.1 i

References

1 Alabama Department of Public Health. 2015. “Alabama Cancer Facts & Figures.” Accessed November 13, 2017. http://www.alabamapublichealth.gov/ascr/assets/FactsFigures2015.pdf

2 Preferred Compounding. 2006. “Preferred Compounding Acquires Associated Rubber Compounding.” Retrieved Jan 29, 2018 (http://preferredperforms.com/preferred-compounding-acquires-associated-rubber-compounding/). 3 National Center for Biotechnology Information. “PubChem Compound Database- CID=8722.” Retrieved Jan 19, 2018 (https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/ziram#section=Top); also see, The University of California at Berkley Lab. 2007. “The Carcinogenic Potency Project: Zinc Dimethyldithiocarbamate.” Retrived Jan 19, 2018 (https://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/cpdb/chempages/ZINC%20DIMETHYLDITHIOCARBAMATE.html). 4 Rongcheng Chemical General Factory Company. “Products: Agent CTP (PVI).” Retrieved Jan 19, 2018 (http://www.rchchem.com/pages/pvi.htm); R. E. Carroll Inc. Specialty Chemicals & Petroleum Products. “Products: PVI PDR-D.” Retrieved Jan 19, 2018 (http://www.recarroll.com/product-details.cfm/ProdID/516/category/307). 5 Science Lab Chemicals and Laboratory Equipment. 2013. “Material Safety Data Sheet: N-Cyclohexy(thio)phthalmide.” Retrieved Jan 19, 2018 (http://www.sciencelab.com/msds.php?msdsId=9923812). 6 National Center for Biotechnology Information. “PubChem Compound Database- CID=14798.” Retrieved Jan 19, 2018 (https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/sodium_hydroxide#section=Top). 7 Note, that zinc and lead level benchmarks are dependent upon the hardness of the water; which we are uncertain of. This is a middle-line standard: see https://www3.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/msgp2008_part8.pdf. For BOD, we drew from the summary provided at https://www3.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/msgp2008_part8.pdf. 8 Aquino, Natalie B., Mary B. Sevigny, Jackielyn Sabangan, and Maggie C. Louie. 2012. “Role of Cadmium and Nickel in Estrogen Receptor Signaling and Breast Cancer: Metalloestrogens or Not?” Journal of Environmental Science and Health. Part C, Environmental Carcinogenesis & Ecotoxicology Reviews 30(3): 189-224. Accessed January 28, 2018 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3476837/.

9 Smith, Allan H, Claudia Hopenhayn-Rich, Michael Bates, Helen M Goeden, Irva Hertz-Picciotto, Heather M Duggan, Rose Wood, Michael J Kosnett, and Martyn T Smith. 1992. “Cancer Risks from Arsenic in Drinking Water.” Environmental Health Perspectives 97: 259-267. 10 Bates, Michael, Allan H Smith, and Claudia Hopenhayn-Rich. 1992. “Arsenic Ingestion and Internal Cancers: A Review.” American Journal of Epidemiology 135(5): 462-475. 11 Basu, A, J Mahata, S Gupta, and AK Giri. 2001. “Genetic Toxicology of a Paradoxical Human Carcinogen, Arsenic: A Review.” Mutation Research 488:171-194. 12For more details about arsenic impacts, see these peer-reviewed articles: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3546776/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3781005/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4575137/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3621177/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4143819/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3621177/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4522704/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4314243/ 13 Infate Rivard, C. Olson E., Jacques L., Ayotte P. 2001. “Drinking water contaminants and childhood leukemia.” Epidemiology 12(1): 13-9. Accessed January 29, 2018 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11138808/. 14 For more details, see the following peer-reviewed articles:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4492068/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4702494/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3174260/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3521879/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3171169/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4565614/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3554682/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2527472/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4928498/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3678847/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5306137/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3554682/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4313599/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5129340/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4273518/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3443608/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3348351/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4632802/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3443608/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3572204/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3554682/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4170195/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4962211/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3572204/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4286269/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5429819/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3003946/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3554682/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4702494/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5201388/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4801991/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4636966/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3554682/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3443608/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5384040/ 15 Department of Health and Human Services. Agency for Toxic substances and Disease Registry. 2007. “Public Health Statement Barium.” CAS#7440-39-3. 16 Celia Byrne, Shailaja D. Divekar, Geoffrey B. Storchan, Daniela A. Parodi, and Mary Beth Martin. 2009. “Cadmium – a metallohormone?” Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology 238(3): 266-271. Accessed January 29, 2018 from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2709711/ 17 Department of Health and Human Services. Agency for Toxic substances and Disease Registry. “Case Studies in Environmental Medicine (CSEM) Cadmium Toxicity.” Accessed January 29, 2018 from https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/csem/cadmium/docs/cadmium.pdf. 18 Aquino, Natalie B., Mary B. Sevigny, Jackielyn Sabangan, and Maggie C. Louie. 2012. “Role of Cadmium and Nickel in Estrogen Receptor Signaling and Breast Cancer: Metalloestrogens or Not?” Journal of Environmental Science and Health. Part C, Environmental Carcinogenesis & Ecotoxicology Reviews 30(3): 189-224. 19 Natalie B. Aquino, Mary B. Sevigny, Jackielyn Sabangan, and Maggie C. Louie. “Role of Cadmium and Nickel in Estrogen Receptor Signaling and Breast Cancer: Metalloestrogens or Not?” Accessed January 29, 2018 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3476837/

20 B Julin, A Wolk, J-E Johansson, S-O Andersson, O Andrén, and A Åkesson. “Dietary Cadmium exposure and prostate cancer incidence: a population-based prospective cohort study.” Accessed January 29, 2018 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3425979/ 21 Brian G. Luckett, L. Joseph Su, Jennifer C. Rood, and Elizabeth T. H. Fontham. “Cadmium Exposure and Pancreatic Cancer in South Louisiana.” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3540786/ 22 Natalie B. Aquino, Mary B. Sevigny, Jackielyn Sabangan, and Maggie C. Louie. “Role of Cadmium and Nickel in Estrogen Receptor Signaling and Breast Cancer: Metalloestrogens or Not?” Accessed January 29, 2018 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3476837/ 23 Department of Health and Human Services. Agency for Toxic substances and Disease Registry. 2012. “Public Health Statement Chromium.” CAS#7440-47-3. Accessed January 29, 2018 from https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/ToxProfiles/tp7-c1-b.pdf. 24 Athena Linos, Athanassios Petralias, Costas A Christophi, Eleni Christoforidou, Paraskevi Kouroutou, Melina Stoltidis, Afroditi Veloudaki, Evangelia Tzala, Konstantinos C. Makris, and Margaret R. Karagas. 2011. “Oral ingestion of hexavalent chromium through drinking water and cancer mortality in an industrial area of Greece – An ecological study.” Environmental Health 10:50. Accessed January 29, 2018 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3123268/. 25 Zhitkovich, Anatoly. 2011. “Chromium in Drinking Water: Sources, Metabolism, and Cancer Risks.” Chemical Research in Toxicology 24(10): 1617-1629; and Sun, Hong, Jason Brocato, and Max Costa. 2015. “Oral Chromium Exposure and Toxicity.” Current Environmental Health Reproduction 2(3): 295-303. 26 Department of Health and Human Services. Agency for Toxic substances and Disease Registry. “Case Studies in Environmental Medicine (CSEM) Lead Toxicity.” Accessed January 29, 2018 https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/csem/lead/docs/CSEM-Lead_toxicity_508.pdf 27 André F. S. Amaral, Miquel Porta, Debra T. Silverman, Roger L. Milne, Manolis Kogevinas, Nathaniel Rothman, Kenneth P. Cantor, Brian P. Jackson, José A. Pumarega,2 Tomàs López, Alfredo Carrato, Luisa Guarner, Francisco X. Real, and Núria Malats. “Pancreatic cancer risk and levels of trave elementas.” Accessed January 29, 2018. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3310963/ 28 Linda M. Liao, Melissa C. Friesen, Yong-Bing Xiang, Hui Cai, Dong-Hee Koh, Bu-Tian Ji, Gong Yang, Hong-Lan Li, Sarah J. Locke, Nathaniel Rothman, Wei Zheng, Yu-Tang Gao, Xiao-Ou Shu, and Mark P. Purdue. “Occupational Lead Exposure and Associations with Selected Cancer: The Shanghai Men’s and Women’s Health Study Cohorts.” Accessed January 29, 2018 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4710592/

29 Department of Health and Human Services. Agency for Toxic substances and Disease Registry. 2005. “Public Health Statement Naphthalene, 1-Methylnaphthalene, and 2-Methyl-naphthalene..” CAS# 91-20-3, 90-12-0, 91-57-6. 30 Department of Health and Human Services. Agency for Toxic substances and Disease Registry. 2005. “Public Health Statement Nickel.” CAS#7440-02-0. Accessed January 29, 2018 from https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/ToxProfiles/tp15-c1-b.pdf. 31 Keyuna S. Cameron,1 Virginia Buchner,2 and Paul B. Tchounwou1,* “Exploring the Molecular Mechanisms of Nickel-Inducted Genotoxicity and Carcinogenicity: A Literature Review.” Accesed January 29, 2018 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3172618/ 32 Jin-Sung Yuk, Jong Seung Shin, Ji-Yeon Shin, Eunsuk Oh, Hyunmee Kim, and Won I. Park. “Nickel Allergy Is a Risk Factor for Endometriosis: An 11-Year Population-Based Nested Case-Control Study.” Accessed January 29, 2018 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4594920/ 33 Department of Health and Human Services. Agency for Toxic substances and Disease Registry. “Public Health Statement Selenium.” CAS#: 7782-49-2. Accessed January 29, 2018 from https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/ToxProfiles/tp92-c1-b.pdf. 34 Department of Health and Human Services. Agency for Toxic substances and Disease Registry. 2005. “Public Health Statement Zinc.” CAS#7440-66-6. Accessed January 29, 2018 from https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/ToxProfiles/tp60-c1-b.pdf.

35 United States Environmental Protection Agency- Indoor Environments Division. “A Citizen’s Guide to Radon: The Guide to Protecting Yourself and Your Family from Radon.” 2012.

36 Rassaschou-Nielsen, Ole, Clause E Anderson, Helle P Anderson, Peter Gravesen, Morten Lind, Joachim Schuz, and Kaare Ulbak. 2008. “Domestic Radon and Childhood Cancer in Denmark.” Epidemiology 19(4) 536-543.

37 Kohil, S, B Noorlind, and O Lofman. 2000. “Childhood Leukemia in Areas with Different Radon Levels: A Spatial and Temporal Analysis Using GIS.” Journal of Epidemiology and Health 54(11): 822-826.

38 Collman GW, Loomis DP, Sandler DP. 1991. “Childhood cancer mortality and radon concentration in drinking water in North Carolina.” Br J Cancer. 63:626–9. 39 Thorne R, Foreman NK, and Mott MG. 1996. “Radon Exposure and Incidence of Paediatric

Malignancies.” European Journal of Cancer. 32A132371–2372. 40 Rassaschou-Nielsen, Ole. 2008. “Indoor Radon and Childhood Leukemia.” Radiat Prot Dosimetry 132(2): 175-181.

Questions and Answers - WordPress.com...Cleburne County, which houses Fruithurst and Muscadine,...

Documents

Bridges of Cleburne County

MUSCADINE GRAPE INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT GUIDE

2012 Graduation - Cleburne News

Backyard Vines 08 - Muscadine and Vinifera Grapes

Cleburne News - High School Football

City of Cleburne

’ Nursery & Vineyard Muscadine Planting Instructions...Nursery & Vineyard Muscadine Planting Instructions Storing Your Vines: If you are unable to plant immediately, or the ground

production guide for muscadine

NEW RATES - Alabama Department of RevenueMar 02, 2017 · FRUITHURST . Posted 3/2/2017 Corrected 3/9/2017 . Effective January 1, 2017. The Town of Fruithurst has levied sales, use

Cleburne County - The Responder

to Association Members From the Presidentsettlements of Fruithurst and Thorsby. Both areas were promoted as fruit growing acreages. One of the ambitions of Fruithurst was to become

MICROENCAPSULATION OF MUSCADINE GRAPE EXTRACTS TO …

2012 Cleburne Football section

Fresh Muscadine Varieties and How to Train · PDF fileFresh Muscadine Varieties and How to Train Them ... well-constructed trellis ... is internal soil drainage

The Muscadine Experience

The Muscadine Experience - Post Familiepostfamilie.com/muscadines.pdf · tance in the laboratory analyses ofthe muscadine grapes. ... Although muscadines grow wild throughoutArkansas

COMMERCIAL MUSCADINE CULTURE - smallfruits.org · / COMMERCIAL MUSCADINE CULTURE ... denote this grape in the wild and in ... the wholesale market for muscadine table grapes in North

MUSCADINE GRAPE BOTANY AND PRODUCTION

Cleburne ISD - Cleburne High School - 2008 Texas School Survey of Drug and Alcohol Use

Cleburne News — 2010 Prep football