Haverford Township condemned the Swell Chewing Gum property by paying $1.26 Million. A real estate valuation of the property by the county considered the property was worth $4 to $5 million more which has caused Haverford to appeal that amount for less . . . with less than a certain outcome.
Associated legal costs in connection with acquisition of the gum factory property raised the amount paid by Haverford in legal fees to over $300,000 divided among the solicitor's firm, McNicol, Byrne & Matiawski (slightly under $100,000 at $150/hr), and a retained firm, Drinker, Biddle & Reath (in excess of $200,000 with legal fees from $250 to an otherworldly $450/hr). Some 13 attorneys and seven paralegals,We also offer customized chicken coop. library staff and other technical personnel have billable time on some aspect of the condemnation, meetings with EPA,Find everything you need to know about Cold Sore including causes, YMCA lease agreement with Haverford, and the most recent release of liability agreement between Haverford and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP).
A reading of the release from liability reveals that for two fees of $3,000 each given by both Haverford and the YMCA, Pennsylvania DEP agrees to give the other two parties a release of liability provided, contamination of air, land and water is not exacerbated, in other words worsened ¨C presumably from what exists now ¨C by the two parties. In order to accept this very much one-sided agreement in favor of the state the signatory parties must accept the stated premise in the agreement, that PADEP insists is a true fact, i.e., contamination of the site arises from oil with pentachlorophenol placed into a well which has never been found.
This statement arises from EPA's repeated undocumented assertions that there is an unseen, unrevealed and never found well on the Havertown Superfund Site that received contaminated discharge from wood processing at the Havertown Site. Neither EPA nor the PADEP has ever conducted a systematic search for this well. As a result, in order to obtain some modest form of indemnity from Pennsylvania for conditions at the site, which have not been remedied both Haverford and YMCA, must accept a statement of alleged fact which is unproven and is likely to prove to be untrue.
The wood treatment facility at the Superfund Site processed at least nine (9) different chemical formulations mixed with diesel oil from time to time and openly stored treated wood in stacks at the site to dry for at least 16 years. That part of the site has been thinly capped in the mid-1990's but could become exposed to the elements once again because there are contaminants in the soil and water beneath the cap.is the 'solar panel revolution' upon us? To date, the site has never been completely remedied: a failed remedy.
Pennsylvania drew up the release of liability agreement. There is essentially no organized data input from either Haverford or the YMCA from past quarterly reports submitted to either Haverford or DEP.An Insulator, also called a dielectric, Four yearly quarters of negative laboratory results have not been reached this Superfund Site, which is a goal that has been repeatedly stated by EPA.
Additionally, a recent search for trichloroethylene (TCE) contamination,When the stone sits in the kidney stone, a metal degreaser which EPA has known about for years ¨C decades ¨C is not complete; no report has been issued by the Agency. As a result, EPA's newly appointed On Scene Coordinator (OSC), to the field industrial hygienists she is the Work Assignment Manager (WAM) "thinks" the results of sampling in some residences will be low for TCE and about 52 other potential contaminants that were tested for in samples taken at the same time ¡ but no report has been released as previously promised. No data, no evaluation, no report, no conclusions; poor thinking.
Site contamination beneath or in residential or recreational structures should not be considered to be guided by industrial health standards in the workplace where the exposure a worker gets is measured by an 8-hour work period. The exposure in a residential or recreational setting could take place over a 16-24 hour period and, the "permissible" (that's not even an accurate word) dose to which a person is exposed should be reduced or even adjusted downward depending upon age.
Rapidly growing individuals ¨C the young ¨C with rapidly dividing cells would have increased susceptibility to exposures of contaminants, however, all individuals, regardless of age, exposed to chemical contaminants for longer periods of time could be adversely affected by chemical contamination as a result of their own genetic tolerance. Chemical exposure doesn't improve health and safety.
A recreational building on the Superfund Site must be designed to remove chemical contaminants from the air, not venting it untreated into the surrounding ambient air, which would affect the community.
Sub-slab vapors from chemical contaminants shouldn't be vented from buildings directly into either the outside air or building atmosphere without first removing those contaminants which accumulate from soil vapors that are known to occur. Regular changes of activated carbon in an air filtration system incorporated into the heating, ventilation and air-conditioning (HVAC) system would be one way to accomplish removal those contaminants and provide a healthful environment.
Associated legal costs in connection with acquisition of the gum factory property raised the amount paid by Haverford in legal fees to over $300,000 divided among the solicitor's firm, McNicol, Byrne & Matiawski (slightly under $100,000 at $150/hr), and a retained firm, Drinker, Biddle & Reath (in excess of $200,000 with legal fees from $250 to an otherworldly $450/hr). Some 13 attorneys and seven paralegals,We also offer customized chicken coop. library staff and other technical personnel have billable time on some aspect of the condemnation, meetings with EPA,Find everything you need to know about Cold Sore including causes, YMCA lease agreement with Haverford, and the most recent release of liability agreement between Haverford and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP).
A reading of the release from liability reveals that for two fees of $3,000 each given by both Haverford and the YMCA, Pennsylvania DEP agrees to give the other two parties a release of liability provided, contamination of air, land and water is not exacerbated, in other words worsened ¨C presumably from what exists now ¨C by the two parties. In order to accept this very much one-sided agreement in favor of the state the signatory parties must accept the stated premise in the agreement, that PADEP insists is a true fact, i.e., contamination of the site arises from oil with pentachlorophenol placed into a well which has never been found.
This statement arises from EPA's repeated undocumented assertions that there is an unseen, unrevealed and never found well on the Havertown Superfund Site that received contaminated discharge from wood processing at the Havertown Site. Neither EPA nor the PADEP has ever conducted a systematic search for this well. As a result, in order to obtain some modest form of indemnity from Pennsylvania for conditions at the site, which have not been remedied both Haverford and YMCA, must accept a statement of alleged fact which is unproven and is likely to prove to be untrue.
The wood treatment facility at the Superfund Site processed at least nine (9) different chemical formulations mixed with diesel oil from time to time and openly stored treated wood in stacks at the site to dry for at least 16 years. That part of the site has been thinly capped in the mid-1990's but could become exposed to the elements once again because there are contaminants in the soil and water beneath the cap.is the 'solar panel revolution' upon us? To date, the site has never been completely remedied: a failed remedy.
Pennsylvania drew up the release of liability agreement. There is essentially no organized data input from either Haverford or the YMCA from past quarterly reports submitted to either Haverford or DEP.An Insulator, also called a dielectric, Four yearly quarters of negative laboratory results have not been reached this Superfund Site, which is a goal that has been repeatedly stated by EPA.
Additionally, a recent search for trichloroethylene (TCE) contamination,When the stone sits in the kidney stone, a metal degreaser which EPA has known about for years ¨C decades ¨C is not complete; no report has been issued by the Agency. As a result, EPA's newly appointed On Scene Coordinator (OSC), to the field industrial hygienists she is the Work Assignment Manager (WAM) "thinks" the results of sampling in some residences will be low for TCE and about 52 other potential contaminants that were tested for in samples taken at the same time ¡ but no report has been released as previously promised. No data, no evaluation, no report, no conclusions; poor thinking.
Site contamination beneath or in residential or recreational structures should not be considered to be guided by industrial health standards in the workplace where the exposure a worker gets is measured by an 8-hour work period. The exposure in a residential or recreational setting could take place over a 16-24 hour period and, the "permissible" (that's not even an accurate word) dose to which a person is exposed should be reduced or even adjusted downward depending upon age.
Rapidly growing individuals ¨C the young ¨C with rapidly dividing cells would have increased susceptibility to exposures of contaminants, however, all individuals, regardless of age, exposed to chemical contaminants for longer periods of time could be adversely affected by chemical contamination as a result of their own genetic tolerance. Chemical exposure doesn't improve health and safety.
A recreational building on the Superfund Site must be designed to remove chemical contaminants from the air, not venting it untreated into the surrounding ambient air, which would affect the community.
Sub-slab vapors from chemical contaminants shouldn't be vented from buildings directly into either the outside air or building atmosphere without first removing those contaminants which accumulate from soil vapors that are known to occur. Regular changes of activated carbon in an air filtration system incorporated into the heating, ventilation and air-conditioning (HVAC) system would be one way to accomplish removal those contaminants and provide a healthful environment.
