If the summer 2003 Intel whistleblowers were right about the probable source of sickening chemical emissions, a significant part of the decade-long problem may be resolved in the months ahead.

When former Intel senior engineer Chris Grotbeck and former senior industrial hygienist George Evans went public with their concerns about pollutants causing illnesses to nearby residents, they pointed to inadequate air pollution controls at the factories’ Central Utility Building (CUB),

Now Intel officials say they are upgrading and adding acid gas scrubbers at the CUB, and installing back-up incinerators to burn off volatile organic chemicals when existing equipment is off-line for maintenance or malfunction.

Few details were provided in the brief letter sent by Intel to the Sandoval County Commission in early December outlining planned pollution control improvements. And neither Intel nor N.M. Air Quality Bureau officials would indicate when specific changes might be implemented.

Presumably, Intel’s air pollution permit will have to be revised to account for the operational changes. But N.M. Environment Department spokesman Jon Goldstein said December 29 he did not know whether a permit modification process would be required. “We have to see more details.”

Intel’s new spokeswoman, Augusta Meyers, said January 4 that only an “administrative permit revision” would be required, rather than a full re-opening of the permit. “All the work can be comprehended under the existing permit parameters, and will only require notification to the agency… when the equipment is brought on line.”

Intel’s letter to the County December 6 refers to a “detailed… environmental investment plan that will upgrade targeted emission control equipment and provide additional redundancy to existing systems. The projects further improve the reliability and reduce downtime of exhaust treatment equipment and include:

“• installation of three additional ammonia scrubbers and associated support systems. This provides redundancy for the existing three ammonia scrubbers so that emissions can be re-routed and treated during planned maintenance.

“• installation of a second regular acid gas scrubber on the Central Utilities Building (CUB). This provides redundancy for the existing CUB scrubber.

“• upgrades to existing scrubbers and thermal oxidizers. This reduces unscheduled down time.”

The letter from Intel Vice-president Tim Hendry, Fab 11-X plant manager, said the changes have already begun. “We began implementation of the overall plan in November 2004, and will complete the project before the spring of 2005 at a cost of approximately $6.7 million.”

The $6.7 million figure is apparently the investment that former Sandoval County Commission Chairman Daymon Ely said he had negotiated with Intel in exchange for the commission’s approval last summer of a $16 billion industrial revenue bond.

Ely said last summer that Intel had agreed to spend $6 million on environmental improvements, but said he did not know what those changes might be. He said it would be up to  Intel and the Air Quality Bureau to determine that.

Although no additional details had been released by Intel or the bureau as of January 3, the new, redundant thermal oxidizers (incinerators) and back-up ammonia and acid gas scrubbers should also address a shortcoming for which the bureau criticized Intel in June 2003.

NMED officials stopped short of slapping a notice of violation against Intel at that time for lack of data on emissions when the factories’ pollution control equipment was down. Bureau compliance officer Robert Samaniego said in an official enforcement action against Intel June 3, 2003 that there was no way to tell whether Intel complies with its yearly emissions limits when none of Intel’s stack testing covered periods when the equipment was down.

The citation included a chart showing 38 separate excess emissions reports from January 2002 to April 22, 2003 for which the company had submitted inadequate data to determine environmental or health impacts. Periods of pollution control down time ranged from 15 seconds to more than 39 hours.

(See Corrales Comment Vol. XXII, No.9, June 21, 2003 “Intel Deception on Toxic Fumes Documented.”)

The enforcement action noted that “According to the excess emissions reports, the acid gas scrubbers occasionally experience malfunctions. Intel has not provided sufficient information to evaluate whether uncontrolled Hazardous Air Pollutant emissions from the acid gas scrubber stacks during these alleged malfunctions are of a nature or quantity that might endanger public health or safety.”

Intel was given until June 30, 2003 to respond, and its reply on that date set out proposed corrective actions.

Installation of the back-up equipment which Hendry outlined in the December 6 letter may resolve much of those issues.

But absent from Hendry’s letter, and still apparently unresolved, are uncontrolled emissions from Intel’s cooling towers, also cited by the Intel whistleblowers as a source of air pollution.

Furthermore, no assurance can be offered that improvements to the CUB scrubbers will end health problems that nearby residents claim are caused by Intel.

And, of course, Intel has never admitted that its emissions around the CUB operations have caused any health problems. It is not reasonable to expect that corporate officials would ever make such an admission even if solid proof were presented.

As a public relations tactic, Hendry simply notes in his letter that pollution control down time “is a concern to some,” and therefore the microchip maker is taking steps to address those concerns… regardless whether the changes are really necessary.

More to the point, residents’ illnesses have continued to be reported even since Intel began improvements at the CUB. Nearly a year has passed since Intel made significant changes to waste treatment at the CUB, in line with recommendations advocated by Evans and Grotbeck.

The two former Intel employees say they were fired or forced out for insisting that changes be made at the CUB. Evans insisted that the CUB scrubber was inadequate to treat the waste stream there. Intel announced last year it had segregated out the ammonia so it could be treated more effectively before being exhausted to the air.

(See Corrales Comment, Vol. XXII, No.7, May 24, 2003 “Intel Insider Charges Cover-Up of Toxic Emissions into Corrales” and Vol. XXII, No. 10, July 5, 2003 “Second Intel Whistleblower Goes Public on Emissions Cover-Up.”)

Intel’s environmental relations manager, Fred Shannon, wrote in a November 11, 2003 memo that Intel had already begun installing a second scrubber at the CUB. “We’re not sure if the odor complaints are related to the CUB scrubber; nevertheless, the addition of the new scrubber will improve the treatment and removal of ammonia compounds, reducing potential odors. Installation began this past August [2003] and the ammonia scrubber is expected to be up and running by January or February 2004.”

Despite those changes at the CUB, villagers have continued to reported health problems related to Intel.

Joy Tschawuschian, who resides near the Intel property line at the top of Windover Lane, has continued to send pollution complaints to the Air Quality Bureau since the disputed Corrales Air Toxics Study was completed last summer.

Her December 20 report noted, “Let’s not blame this report on fireplaces as I didn’t see any smoke coming out of any chimneys other than Intel, and it sure didn’t smell like piñon.

“It all started on Saturday night [December 18, 2004] at 8:15 p.m. The wind was quite calm. The air was dense with a weird, sickening chemical odor. Around the same time, Patricia [Stribling] said she was going from her parking space to her house and smelled the same odor. One breath and she had burning eyes and throat. She woke at 8:30 a.m. with a headache which lasted all day.

“On Sunday, December 19 at 9:15 p.m. I stopped at Patricia’s and went from the parking space to the house and smelled the same odor, began coughing from tightness in throat and chest, and now continue to cough as I write this report… My throat and chest are very tight with spasms.”

She sent a similar report to the bureau’s Robert Samaniego December 8 describing a bitter-sweet chemical odor from Intel that lasted from 1:05 p.m. to 10:05 p.m.

Another report from Tschawuschian for October 27 noted an ammonia odor from Intel permeating her home.

Dozens more complaints have been submitted to NMED by other residents since the air toxics study concluded.

On September 2, Tschawuschian wrote to NMED air quality compliance officer Robert Samaniego and N.M. Department of Health toxicologist Len Flowers that “I am still trying to recover from August 27, 2004 attack. I now have acute rhinitis and cannot go outside without severe effects. Every morning I wake up with plugged nose and eyes glued shut. My chest feels like sand paper. This started in August and has just become worse with every emission.”

She told Samaniego that “After the August 22, 9:55 p.m. chemical assault, hard to breathe incident, I barely made it to Lovelace Westside Emergency with both nostrils tissue completely blocked. This was a pretty scary experience. The doctor decided after analyzing my health history that it was probably chemically induced. As a physician recently moving here from California, he was knowledgeable as to what chemicals can do.

“I reported the 9:55 p.m. episode to you previously, my condition kept getting worse to the point that I was breathing through my mouth and gasping for breath. That’s when I had to go to emergency.

“What is interesting and comforting is that I finally met up with a doctor with knowledge, understanding and compassion.”

In August, she reported to Samaniego, “This is my 25th emissions report thus far this month. How many does it take to get someone to check out the chronic problem Intel has with their equipment?”

Another Corrales resident farther from Intel’s boundary, wrote to Samaniego June 23. “Your name was passed on to me to write concerning Intel’s pollutants and the odors that are affecting people, myself included, who live in the Intel neighborhood.

“I have had many, many instances of foul odors, especially in the middle of the night as I like to have fresh air when I sleep. I have suffered sore throats, sinus aches, two-day sneezing episode, headaches, and nausea for the past four plus years I have lived on Coronado Road in Corrales.”

She concluded by observing,“It will probably take a major catastrophe for N.M. Environmental people to get out of bed with Intel.”

Another resident below Intel, Steve Martinez, also continued to send in “air event reports” to NMED using its standard format. His July 6 report reads: “Event Noticed: 7/6/04. Event End: continues as I type. Winds light from the west and northwest. Odor smelled: Very strong chemical smell and burnt plastic like smell —horrible!

“I have smelled this odor several times before. I am experiencing dizziness, headache. I have felt this way several times before.

“The house has been in lock down and we can’t cool the house off. Please do something about it!”

Another of the many reports from Martinez reads: “Event Noticed: 7/1/04, 5:50a.m. Event End: continues as I type this - really bad! Winds light from the west and northwest. Odor smelled: Very strong chemical smell —horrible! I have smelled this odor several times before. I am experiencing headache. I have felt this way several times before.

“The house has been in lock down all night and we can’t open the windows to cool things off this morning. Please do something about it.”

Rio Rancho resident Marcy Brandenburg told of her recent health problems when she testified at the Sandoval County Commission’s hearing on issuing a $16 billion industrial revenue bond for Intel.

Brandenburg told the commissioners she has been continually sickened by Intel fumes over several years. “I am a Rio Rancho resident, not Corrales, and I have been sick ever since I moved to Rio Rancho.

“Finally, after four years, I had my blood tested.

“What they found in my blood was ten times the average for the population. It can cause cancer, liver damage and neurological problems. This is a chemical that is on Intel’s permit, and there is no other place in Rio Rancho I could get this chemical in my blood.”

All of those “air incident reports” to the Air Quality Bureau came well after improvements at the CUB which Intel’s Shannon said were completed by February 2004.

Whistleblower George Evans, a nine-year employee with Intel, said in a May 9, 2003 Corrales Comment interview he was convinced that nearby residents’ exposure to industrial chemicals was coming at least in part from the Central Utilities Building on the east side of the complex, near homes where most complaints had arisen over the years.

“In the past, Intel has always told Corrales that Intel wasn’t the source of those odors,” Evans recounted. “But as of last October [2002], we started doing community sampling for organics [chemicals such as acetone, isopropyl alcohol and other solvents]. At the same time, we started walking along the Intel perimeter checking for odors.

“These would usually be teams of two or three people. One day when we were near the Central Utility Building, we noticed odors and we identified the source as the scrubber and cooling tower there. The odors were in the breeze that seemed to be going into Corrales.

“The three of us identified the odor as sort of a burning odor, or as a chloramine-like odor.”

During later community air sampling work, Evans said, “I identified two potential sources for the odor; the Central Utility Building scrubber and the cooling towers of the plant.”

In response to Evans’ allegations that summer, Intel’s regional environmental manager, Jim Casciano, admitted on May 16, 2003 that unexpectedly high levels of ammonia had been detected in the waste stream headed to the CUB due to changes in the manufacturing process in Fab 11-X.

“What concerned me,” Evans said in his Corrales Comment interview, “is that we [Intel] have been telling Corrales that we’re not responsible for these things [odors and irritants] and it’s not true.”

And, he said, his superiors at Intel seemed determined to make sure the public never found out.

Evans thought the acid gas scrubbers at the CUB and the cooling towers were only part of the problem. He saw other potential emissions problems around the CUB. “The cyanide destruct system may impact the scrubbers by releasing pressure that causes a ‘burp’ of un-scrubbed gases,” he warned.

Intel internal documents obtained by Corrales Comment in 2003 demonstrate that the company’s engineers knew at least as early as September 2002 that there were emissions problems around the CUB. Reluctance of supervisors to implement corrective measures, such as segregating the ammonia waste stream headed to the CUB scrubber, is what led whistleblowers Evans and Grotbeck to allege a corporate cover-up.

The internal documents, dated September 26, 2002, reveal Intel’s technicians had known for some time about the ammonia pollution from the CUB scrubber. The disapproved funding request to fix the problem explained, “The CUB scrubber has a ‘plume’ visible from off-site and/or adjoining communities. Past research shows that this plume is due to ammonia salts in the airstream. Segregation of the system will help reduce the visible plume while increasing the ammonia scrubbing efficiency. Increasing the stack velocity will help ensure scrubber carry-over does not enter the adjacent make-up air intakes.”

The last sentence refers to instances in which Intel has had to evacuate its facilities due to the plants’ air-intake system pulling in contaminated air.