Judge: State should grant Clean Harbor permit, with caveat • By MARISSA BARNETT The Daily News • http://www.galvnews.com/news/article_73e95ea6-1797-5681-a9af-37f352a94b2d.html#comments SAN LEON A company seeking to dump treated wastewater into a tributary flowing in Dickinson Bayou failed to include certain testing required by law in its permit application, a state administrative judge ruled. The application should be granted by the state’s environmental agency, but only if the state inserts a legally required request for testing and monitoring of the discharged waste, Administrative Judge Joanne Summerhays said. Clean Harbors San Leon Inc. in May 2015 applied for an amendment to its existing permit from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to discharge up to 105,000 gallons of treated wastewater and treated stormwater each day into a tributary on its property that flows to Dickinson Bayou. The proposal quickly drew the ire of neighboring property owners and residents, particularly in San Leon, who worried the company’s plan will further pollute the bayou. A coalition of residents, including local oyster company owners and representatives of the San Leon Municipal Utility District, protested and sought a hearing from the State Office of Administrative Hearings, which considers disputes over permits. In a proposal for decision published April 24, the administrative judge ruled the draft permit had not required Clean Harbors to conduct whole effluent toxicity testing, or WET as it’s called, on its discharged wastewater, which is a violation of state code. The judge recommended the amendment be accepted, but with the requirement. The environmental commission will ultimately make the call on the amendment to the permit, but it weighs the administrative judge’s proposal. The state had almost allowed a company to dump more wastewater into unnamed waterways with little oversight or regulation over how it affects the environment, said Lisa Halili, an owner of Prestige Oysters in San Leon. People who protested the plan celebrated the move as a step in the right direction because it requires hazardous waste companies doing business in Galveston County to have some accountability in protecting the waterways. “The recommendation to include WET testing is a very big win because it will require Clean Harbors to constantly monitor potential toxicity in receiving waters,” said Joe Manchaca, president of the San Leon Municipal Utility District. The testing measures the toxic effects of pollutants on species specific to the area where it’s dumped, Summerhays said. “WET testing is an integral tool in the assessment of water quality for the protection of aquatic life because it can measure both chronic and acute impacts on the survival, reproduction, or growth of test organisms,” Summerhays wrote. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality will review the proposal for decision and submit responses if there are any concerns or disagreements, agency spokeswoman Andrea Morrow said. Once the process is complete, it will be scheduled for a monthly agenda meeting, Morrow said. The commissioners will then decide on the application, Morrow said. Marissa Barnett: 409-683-5257; [email protected] The San Leon community is opposed to this permit because we do not want Dickinson Bay poisoned by Clean Harbors. In San Leon everyone loves this area to fish, catch shrimp and oysters and enjoy all aspects of water recreation in this bay. The pollution from this project will ruin our way of life, poisoning our seafood and must not be allowed. We can not allow Clean Harbors to dump 12,000 pounds of oily grease in our bay each year. We are a small unincorporated area easily taken advantage of by corporate bullies who look to prey on rural areas such as ours. It is time to take a stand for communities and families and stop poisoning our water. The state of Texas needs to be held accountable for the decisions made on behalf of its citizens. Tell the TCEQ do not rubber stamp this Clean Harbors San Leon permit. There are so many people now entering this cause that I believe that the folks fighting for Dickinson Bayou have a good fighting chance of winning. People, we need you now more than ever in this cause to protect Dickinson Bayou. Please email Ann Bright of Texas Parks and Wildlife at [email protected] and let her know that you do not want any more harmful chemicals dumped into our bayou. You do not have to live here to support this cause. If you eat shrimp, crabs, oysters or fish, or like fishing, boating or water recreation, you need to support this. It only takes a minute or two to email Texas Parks and Wildlife to help save this bayou. http://www.coastmonthly.com/2016/12/accidental-activist/ http://seabreezenews.com/issues/2016%20issues/1216%20-%20December%202016/Page_01c.pdf

Rule 534 will apply to all mental health-related communications between clients and their licensed counselors, alcohol and drug counselors, social workers, psychologists, psychiatrists and doctors, nurses, psychoanalysts, physician assistants, and midwives, the vast majority of which are totally unaware of the contents or import of Rule 534. Rule 534 will deter people from seeking mental health or addiction treatment, from confiding in their treatment providers, and creates terrible national precedent for all mental health providers and clients. Rule 534 creates a complex scheme containing 13 exceptions to mental health provider-client confidentiality. Its four pages of legalese will confound therapists’ ability to obtain their clients’ informed consent for treatment. The Rule 534 confidentiality exceptions will undermine mental health providers' ability to establish therapeutic trust and chill mental health providers' ethical obligations to advocate on behalf of their clients. Rule 534 was praised by lawyers and condemned by mental health providers. In written testimony to the NJ Supreme Court, Professional Mental Health Counselors and Clinical Social Workers uniformly condemned Rule 534: "would 'compromise client confidentiality' and deter people from going to social workers;" "if a therapist told a patient all of the legally required exceptions, the patient would terminate the counseling session;" "would discourage mental health treatment;" "creates a 'confusing array of additional exceptions that are not currently in place;'" "will be interpreted 'very loosely' so as to allow confidential information to be disclosed;" and, ""it will create more lawsuits." One of the most egregious provisions causes a client to lose confidentiality for all time if the client asks the provider to provide written or oral testimony in any proceeding, such as an unemployment, benefits, child protection, or disability proceeding. Clients will lose all confidentiality protection in a civil suit for damages that resulted from conduct that constitutes a crime. This will chill, for example, people with gambling, drug, or alcohol addictions, that have stolen from their employers, families, stores, or other third parties, from seeking mental health help to curb their dysfunctional behaviors. Clients may also lose confidentiality if they have ever told a third, non-spouse, party about their mental health condition or treatment. The beneficiaries of Rule 534 will be the lawyers who will be able to obtain adverse parties’ mental health information and use that mental health information in settlement negotiations or in courtroom trials. Please share this petition with friends, family, professional and consumer organizations, and anyone else that has an interest in promoting access to confidential mental health and drug and alcohol treatment. Advocate for health clients and professionals by contacting your NJ State Senator’s, NJ State Representative’s, and Governor Christie’s offices.

I never worked in DuPont’s factory. I never knew I was being exposed to harmful amounts of C-8. But DuPont knew, and DuPont did nothing to stop it. I was exposed to C-8 because the company dumped it into the Ohio River and landfills, where it leached into the water me and my family drink every day. After decades of lies and delays, it’s time for DuPont do the right thing and clean up our drinking water NOW.

C-8 is a byproduct of Teflon, which DuPont manufactured in Parkersburg, West Virginia since the 1950s. The company knew the chemical was harmful since the 1960s, but they never told anyone, including the thousands of West Virginia and Ohio residents that were drinking it in their water every day. Now I and thousands of others are dying from C-8, and DuPont is delaying compensating us and cleaning our water in order to save money for Wall Street investors. Why are our lives worth less than theirs?

DuPont used the harmful chemical C-8 in the production of Teflon, and the chemical is linked to cancer, ulcerative colitis, and other deadly diseases. The chemical can be found in the blood of 99.9% of Americans, and I can almost guarantee you it’s in yours right now. DuPont was found guilty of contaminating drinking water in 2005, but they’ve dragged their feet for over a decade and done everything possible to delay helping the people harmed by its chemical C-8. Tell DuPont: No more delays. Help the people you poisoned with C-8.

From C-8 contamination in the mid-Ohio Valley and beyond to the Bhopal disaster, DuPont and Dow Chemical have poisoned the world with dangerous chemicals. Both companies already face overwhelming liabilities in connection to their environmental disasters, and advocacy groups like Keep Your Promises DuPont are fighting for accountability against these corporate giants. If DuPont and Dow Chemical are allowed to merge, it will be even harder to hold them accountable for poisoning the world. Tell Attorney General Lynch to block the DuPont-Dow megamerger.

On April 4, 2016, MV@Play and Gale Associates presented to the MVRHS school committee a $12-million proposal to build a centralized athletic facility on a 3.6-acre parcel of land on the MVRHS campus. Funding would initially come from private donors, but MVRHS, and all six Island towns, would be expected to pay for future upkeep. The plans, designed to be implemented in three phases, the first beginning as early as September 1, 2016, include the installation of four artificial turf playing fields: one inside the track, plus three others. The intent is to eventually host all soccer, lacrosse, field hockey, and football practices and games (from the youngest players through high school and adult leagues) there for decades to come. From financial, maintenance, health, environmental, and playability perspectives alike, natural grass is a far better choice. Artificial turf fields are not as low-maintenance nor as cost-effective as their billion-dollar industry suggests. According to Gale Associates, installation costs for a new artificial turf field with GreenPlay infill costs $850,000, assumes a 14-year carpet life, and the only maintenance is grooming with a towed groomer 4-5 times per year. The limited warranty covers only 8 years, however, and can be voided for a multitude of common conditions/maintenance practices. The life cycle costs of natural grass fields, when compared to those of artificial turf, are essentially the same—assuming the artificial carpet lasts 6 extra years after warranty expiration, and the cost of replacement doesn’t rise. Not mentioned: the premature failure rate of artificial turf fields, the costs of replenishing the infill, whether we would switch to crumb rubber if the GreenPlay infill becomes moldy, the intensive maintenance costs and practices necessary to keep the carpet sanitary and safe—including sweeping up debris like trash and leaves, brushing to straighten fibers, deep raking to loosen infill, spraying disinfectant and anti-static chemicals, manual removal of gum (with a solvent, then hand-pried out of the fibers), cleaning of spilled drinks, vomit, spit, sweat, blood, and animal droppings (dog, goose, etc.), and repairing loose seams to avoid liability issues. Given the exorbitant costs and many complications associated with artificial turf fields, it would be highly irresponsible for MVRHS to assume financial responsibility for their upkeep. Forbes. “Buyers’ Remorse Surfacing over Artificial Turf Fields.” October 23, 2014. http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2014/10/22/buyers-remorse-surfacing-over-artificial-turf-fields/#7203e2c321ff City Limits. “NYC’s Fake Grass Gamble: A $300 Million Mistake?” August 24, 2010. Winner of the 2010 Sigma Delta Chi Award for Investigative Reporting. http://www.spjvideo.org/sdx/sdx10/mag-inv-reporting-r.pdf Red Hen Turf. “The Dirt on Turf: What You Need to Know About Synthetic Turf and Natural Grass for Athletic Fields.” http://redhenturf.com/pdfs/TheTruthAboutArtificialTurf.pdf Artificial turf fields are not safe. According to Mount Sinai Hospital Children’s Environmental Health Center, “All components of an artificial turf field (fiber blades, infill, backing, colorants, sealants, antimicrobials, and flame retardants) contain potential chemicals of concern and can leach from the product.” They urge extra caution when the site is in close proximity to a water source potentially contaminated by chemical leaching, as MVRHS is (directly above the Island’s sole source aquifer). Further, the antimicrobials and fungicides required to routinely sanitize the fields “not only increase the likelihood of chemical exposures, they may pose health risks for children chronically exposed to them.” Although the newly proposed infill is labeled “organic,” such terms are not regulated in the turf industry, nor are manufacturers required to list all chemicals. Risk of joint injuries, turf burns, “turf toe,” and heat-related complications are proven to be more likely on artificial turf, and it is a fertile breeding ground for harmful bacteria including those that cause antibiotic-resistant infections such as MRSA. Artificial turf also denies our children hours of time that would otherwise have been spent on grass and dirt, the immunological and psychological benefits of which are well documented. Mount Sinai Hospital Children’s Environmental Health Center. “Artificial Turf: A Health-Based Consumer Guide.” February 2016. http://media.wix.com/ugd/fd0a19_f5aa0824698341499b4228ebabf90cb5.pdf Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “MRSA and the Workplace.” August 27, 2015. http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/mrsa/ (Note: the artificial turf proposed for MVRHS would likely qualify for all five C’s of the MRSA risk factors.) Most athletes dislike playing on artificial turf. From professional athletes down to the youth level, the majority of players regard artificial turf as a second-tier playing surface. This strong preference is based on increased post-game recovery time, risk of injury, and heat stroke on artificial turf, as well as a fundamental preference for playing the sport on grass. These issues led a group of international soccer players to file a lawsuit against FIFA for forcing them to play the 2015 Women’s World Cup on artificial turf. Lawsuit against FIFA and the Canadian Soccer Association regarding the use of artificial turf at the Women’s 2015 World Cup. http://equalizersoccer.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/141001_2_Application-Sec-24-Schedule-A.pdf Change.org. “FIFA: The World Cup Should Be Played on Natural Grass.” https://www.coworker.org/petitions/fifa-the-world-cup-should-be-played-on-natural-grass (Note: more than 70 national team players from 17 countries signed this petition.) BMC Sports Science, Medicine, and Rehabilitation. “The Perceptions of Professional Soccer Players on the Risk of Injury from Competition and Training on Natural Grass and 3rd Generation Artificial Turf.” March 2014. http://bm...

The mixing of residential and and commercial living space will adversely affect the small town feel of our neighborhoods located between Germantown Rd/118 and Great Seneca Highway from the Germantown Marc Station to Clopper Road. This addition to our neighborhood will not only affect the feel of our community, but Dawson Farm Road and Liberty Mill Road, both roads that our children use to walk to Germantown Elementary School, will be overwhelmed with traffic coming in and out of an already congested area during school start/end times. Please sign and forward this petition to let our voices be heard in this matter.

Currently the State of NC says it wants to do this, but it will be 20 years before it happens. It is needed now, particularly in the under-developed northeastern part of NC from Edenton, NC to Norfolk, VA (i.e., Highway 17). It's essential to make us competitive for new businesses who are re-locating, improve access to the port of Norfolk, VA, and expand awareness of our capable work force. We are proven workers. We have never recovered from the banking disaster of 2008 and do not need to wait 20 years for major improvement to key highway in our region.

More than 11 million documents from the secretive Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca were leaked to international journalists, and more than 140 world leaders, public officials, and major celebrities have been implicated already. The documents, spanning almost 30 years, expose how the world’s elite use fake corporations called “shell companies” to launder money, evade sanctions, hide wealth, and dodge taxes. While U.S. government officials insist they are aware of the scandal, there is little indication they are taking action. But now, Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Sen. Sherrod Brown are demanding that the Treasury Department investigate U.S. links in the Panama Papers, and we need to stand with them. (From Americans for Tax Fairness email 5/9/16.)

Corporate interests rule everything in america, from television to congress. There are a few safe spaces left, and the national parks are one of them. If this deal goes through, and Jarvis is allowed to stay in his post, we move past the point of no return.

New Jersey is the nation’s most densely populated state, and we’re running out of open space. Back in 2014, voters took action to keep parks, farms, and historic areas from being developed. But that dedicated money for open space has been accruing in the Treasury and can’t be spent predictably until Governor Christie signs the Open Space Implementation Bill. Once this bill becomes law, New Jersey will have reliable, dedicated funding to preserve open spaces, parks, farms, and historic areas, and to clean up polluted areas. The bill also guarantees that the funds don’t get diverted to pet projects or used to plug holes in the state budget. Last year, Governor Christie pocket vetoed a similar bill. It’s time for Governor Christie to do the right thing. Nearly two-thirds of New Jersey voters supported open space funding, and the full legislature has voted for it twice. We can convince Governor Christie to change his position, but we’ve got to flood him with messages so that he sees the overwhelming majority of New Jerseyans and their elected representatives support this law!