TURA Data shows that the average per municipality use and release of Toxics is greater in those municipalities where 75% or more of the population lives in an EJ Neighborhood. The disparity is most stark in the average Toxics use per municipality, in which municipalities with over 75% of the population living in an EJ Neighborhood average over 10 times the Toxics use when compared to the average in municipalities with less than 25% of the population living in an EJ Neighborhood. Figure 5 aims to illustrate the present and historic differences in Toxics use among the four municipality groups using data from 2007 to 2020.

Since 2007, Toxics use has been greater in those municipalities with over 75% of the population living in an EJ neighborhood.

Considering the cumulative health and environmental effects which Toxics use and release has on communities, a historical perspective is also crucial to this analysis. While chemical use and release has decreased throughout the country and the state, certain municipalities may have benefitted from these reductions more than others. Since 2007, Toxics use has been greater in those municipalities with over 75% of the population living in an EJ neighborhood.

As illustrated in Figure 7, the average per municipality release of Toxics, while higher in municipalities with greater than 75% of the population living in EJ Neighborhoods, is not as disproportionate to their population as Toxics use. Nonetheless, municipalities with greater than 75% of the population living in an EJ Neighborhood averaged five times more releases per municipality compared to groups with less than 25% of the population living within an EJ Neighborhood. The maps in Figure 8 show the three facilities with the highest releases of Toxics in 2020 in relation to EJ Neighborhoods.

The average annual release of Toxics per municipality has generally decreased in municipalities with at least 75% of the population living in an EJ Neighborhood (Figure 9). The three facilities with the most Toxics released from 2007 to 2020 are power plants or Municipal Waste Combustors (MWCs). They are located either directly in or in close proximity to EJ Neighborhoods.

Analyzing the amount of Toxics shipped is important to consider. The magnitude of Toxics transported can be a useful proxy for the risk of chemical accidents. In particular, those communities where chemicals are being moved at higher rates may face more risk of accidental, acute exposures. This concern is underlined by a nationwide focus on the possibility of hazardous spills, as in the train derailment case in East Palestine, Ohio. In 2020, municipalities with greater than 75% of the population living in an EJ Neighborhood averaged over five times more Toxics shipped per municipality than the next highest group (Figure 10). Figure 11 shows the facility’s location with the most Toxics shipped in 2020.

An asthmagen is a substance that can cause or trigger asthma in exposed people. This class of hazardous substances includes chemicals used in manufacturing textiles, footwear, plastics, rubber, and cleaners, among many other products. Sixteen of the over 350 chemicals identified by the Association of Occupational and Environmental Clinics as asthmagens are reported under TURA. The release of asthmagens has steadily declined since 2007, including in towns with 75% or more of the population in an EJ Neighborhood (Figure 12).

Asthma is a significant issue of concern for many communities. There are traditionally high levels of asthma found among certain vulnerable groups (e.g. children) in EJ Neighborhoods. According to data from a 2017 MA Department of Public Health report, of the top twenty municipalities with the highest percentage of the population living in an EJ Neighborhood, fifteen have childhood asthma rates that are more than twice the state average. Asthma is a particularly difficult problem in Springfield, which has asthma rates above the 95th percentile for the nation. In Springfield, hospital visits for childhood asthma were 220.5 per 10,000 residents in 2020, almost three times higher than the state average. Between 2007 and 2014, a TURA reporting facility in Springfield reported cumulative releases of 3,351 pounds of methyl methacrylate and 63,372 pounds of styrene monomer, both of which are asthmagens. The facility recently closed.

While statistics on asthma in environmental justice communities around Massachusetts are of particular concern, releases of asthmagens have steadily declined since 2007, including in those towns with 75% or more of the population in an EJ neighborhood (Figure 12). A deeper dive into this decline may be helpful in crafting Toxics Use Reduction strategies that focus on environmental justice.

Under TURA, certain substances can be designated as Higher Hazard Substances (HHS). The HHS list includes many halogenated solvents, toxic metals, and other substances associated with adverse health effects, including cancer. As illustrated in Figure 13, average HHS use and release per municipality have been consistently higher in municipalities with 75% or more of the population living in EJ Neighborhoods. In these municipalities, the average use of HHS has decreased by around 25% since 2007.

The facility shown in Figure 14 has released the highest cumulative amount of the carcinogen trichloroethylene since 2007. It has also reported releases of other HHS, such as hexavalent chromium and tetrachloroethylene (TCE).

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) represent a category of thousands of chemicals that are widely used in manufacturing and consumer products. This class of chemicals is often described as “forever chemicals” because they never fully break down in the environment. PFAS have been detected in drinking water, and are linked to numerous adverse health impacts, including cancer and interference with endocrine and metabolic systems.

PFAS have emerged as a chemical class of major concern for fenceline communities.

2022 was the first year in which reporting on the use of a new PFAS category17 was required under TURA. Six facilities reported using PFAS covered in the TURA category. The two facilities which reported releases of these PFAS are shown in relation to EJ Neighborhoods in Figure 15. These were reported as point air and fugitive air emissions. Air emission and exposure of PFAS from manufacturing sources is not as well studied as PFAS in drinking water.

The ability of Massachusetts to collect data on industrial PFAS use under TURA is unique as the EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory covers a far less extensive group of PFAS substances. Access to this information puts the Commonwealth in a strong position to address PFAS sources using Toxics Use Reduction. As data collection on PFAS use in manufacturing and in products continues, TURI will seek opportunities to provide targeted assistance to the relevant companies, prioritizing those near EJ Neighborhoods.

MassDEP recently adopted a drinking water standard limiting the sum of six specific PFAS to no more than 20 parts per trillion (ng/L). A U.S. Government Accountability Office report concluded, “In Massachusetts, communities with higher percentages of non-White or Hispanic/Latino residents and/ or families living in poverty were less likely than other communities to have PFAS in their drinking water.”

Nonetheless, testing of drinking water in Massachusetts is ongoing, and the results should continue to be monitored with explicit consideration of the potential impacts on vulnerable groups and environmental justice populations.

The data generated from TURA (TURA Data) provides a foundation for targeted intervention to ensure more equitable distribution of environmental benefits and burdens. Given the considerable potential to improve health outcomes, state and local governments, as well as businesses, may wish to redouble efforts to reduce the use of Toxics in EJ Neighborhoods. Federal agencies may wish to use the analysis and conclusions found in this report to prioritize grant funding for EJ Populations and Neighborhoods described herein. State legislators and researchers may wish to prioritize the development of safer alternatives for those substances which pose the greatest risk of negative health outcomes for EJ Populations and Neighborhoods, including the Toxics covered by this report.

Deeper analysis of the intersection of environmental justice and occupational health in Massachusetts based on TURA Data is ongoing. Further research would be beneficial to help support this analysis. For example, research is needed to better understand factors that may influence disproportionate exposure levels and susceptibilities and data on health endpoints, as well as environmental and biological monitoring for pollutants.

TURI and its partner agencies, OTA and MassDEP, are a resource for businesses and communities to better ensure everyone enjoys the benefits of a healthy environment.  TURI collaborates with both communities and businesses to better ensure equal protection from toxic exposures.  We encourage anyone who is interested in advancing environmental justice through Toxics Use Reduction to contact us to discuss potential opportunities to reduce the use of toxics.