CLNCC "What's Next For New Castle County?" With Marcus Henry! ZOOM Meeting 7PM WEDNESDAY, October 16th

Civic League for New Castle County Meeting

NOTE: Special Wednesday Meeting Date

 

Time:  Wednesday 7:30 PM 16th October 

Topics: What's Next For New Castle County ?

Guests:  NCC Executive Candidate Marcus Henry 

Location: Zoom

New Castle County Property Reassessment VIRTUAL Meetings Run October 20-28

From WDEL - New Castle, Kent counties to host property reassessment meetings

New Castle County will be hosting a series of meetings, both online and virtually, that start next week. Here's the schedule:

• Wednesday, October 20 at 6 p.m. 67 Reads Way, Gilliam Multipurpose Room | Register Here

• Thursday, October 21 at 2 p.m. 67 Reads Way, Gilliam Multipurpose Room | Register Here

• Thursday, October 21 at 6 p.m. 67 Reads Way, Gilliam Multipurpose Room | Register Here

• Wednesday, October 27 at 6 p.m. 67 Reads Way, Gilliam Multipurpose Room | Register Here (accessibility session with ASL interpreter)

• Thursday, October 28 at 1p.m. 67 Reads Way, Gilliam Multipurpose Room  | Register Here

To access these meetings on Zoom, click here. The webinar ID is  828 8241 0392 while the passcode is 716384. You may also call 312.626.6799 and use the aforementioned webinar ID and passcode.

Social, Environmental Justice, And Hazards Mitigation Comp Plan Elements To Be Considered At November 4th Planning Board Hearing

 From David Carter, New Castle County Council -

Legislative Update
 

On September 8, I introduced Ordinance 20-101 which will amend Chapter 28.01.003 (Comprehensive Planning) to require a Social Justice Element, An Environmental Justice Element, and a Hazards Mitigation Element to be included in the 2022 Comprehensive Plan, and all Comprehensive Plans thereafter. 

These issues are important as we move forward as a county to ensure equity and inclusion in our policy development and zoning recommendations. 

There is no Hazard Mitigation in our comprehensive plan; which I found surprising, not only after Tropical Storm Isaias, but the response to the industrial leak of dangerous ethylene oxide gas into nearby communities from CRODA.  The Hazard Mitigation plan should include considerations to all infrastructure, community level communications, preparedness, and other non-structural measures, with particular attention being given to the safety of vulnerable communities related to natural and man-made hazards.  

This Ordinance is currently tabled as I have agreed to place it in front of the Planning Board for their November 4th Public Hearing.  I encourage anyone to participate and give their feedback on this legislation.

[Zoom instructions for access to the meeting are included on the 7 p.m. November 4, 2020 NCC Planning Board Public Hearing Agenda HERE]

NCC Comprehensive Plan Workshop - 6PM Wednesday, October 21st (RSVP)

 

Comprehensive Plan Meetings

The Comprehensive Plan shapes the future of New Castle County.  We would like this to be a community-driven process, as public feedback is key to ensuring an equitable and inclusive future for our community. 

The next meeting in the "Let's Talk" workshop series will take place on October 21 at 6:00 PM.  The meeting will be conducted virtually, and you can register here. 

This meeting will be Our Places and Spaces and will focus on:

• What makes our communities special and makes them places where we want to live, work, play, and enjoy
• The design of our communities, from vibrant landscapes and pedestrian friendly community design, to a compatible mix of residential, retail, and/or commercial uses
• Maintaining, preserving, and enhancing the character or charming features of our neighborhoods that are attractive, meaningful, or interesting.

REGISTER HERE

Future Virtual Workshops Include:

• November 9: Our Environment and Nature
• November 18: NCC@2050 Fall Forum. More details to be announced soon!

Visit NCC2050.newcastlede.gov to learn more about past and future workshops, the comprehensive planning process, and how you can get involved.

 

~*~

Special Meeting 17 Sept. Thurs. 7PM Topic: Flooding Woodland Run Park and Sewer Blowback Issues Woodland Park : Second Follow Up Zoom Meeting

Special Meeting 17 Sept. Thurs. 7PM Topic: Flooding Woodland Run Park and Sewer Blowback Issues Woodland Park : Second Follow Up Zoom Meeting

Topic: Special Meeting 17 Sept. Thurs. 7PM Topic: Flooding Woodland Run Park and Sewer Blowback Issues Woodland Park : Second Follow Up Zoom Meeting
 
Time: Sep 17, 2020 07:00 PM Eastern Time (US and Canada) 

Join Zoom Meeting
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/8986924710?pwd=YmJMbUhpZlpoMUtGMERqdENCQlk5UT09
Meeting ID: 898 692 4710
Passcode: 12345 

One tap mobile
+13017158592,,8986924710#,,,,,,0#,,12345# US (Germantown)
+13126266799,,8986924710#,,,,,,0#,,12345# US (Chicago)
Dial by your location
        +1 301 715 8592 US (Germantown)
        +1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
        +1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
        +1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
        +1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
        +1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
Meeting ID: 898 692 4710
Passcode: 12345
Find your local number: https://us02web.zoom.us/u/kjPcmlNKt

Flooding In Woodland Run Park / Little Mill Creek - Sewer Blowback Issues, ZOOM Meeting With NCC Set For 7PM August 27th

An invitation from Brookland Terrace and Woodland Park civic associations ~

Flooding Woodland Run Park and Sewer Blowback Issues: Follow Up Zoom Meeting 

7 p.m. Thursday, August 27th

ZOOM Meeting

Join Zoom Meeting
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/8986924710?pwd=YmJMbUhpZlpoMUtGMERqdENCQlk5UT09
Meeting ID: 898 692 4710Passcode: 12345

Agenda

Solutions and Timeline for Resolution of Issues

- Sewer BlowBack Woodland Park Clean Up and Back Flow into Homes 

- Sewer Outflow Issues Woodland Run Park 

- Raw Sewage C19 In Homes and Park  

- Right Of Way NCC Sewer Main Maps WP WH BT WRP  

- Woodland Run Park downed Trees , Brush , Banks  and Trees in Creek

Background (read more HERE) ~

Pamela Russac Pres Woodland Heights Civic Association and Chuck Stirk Pres Brookland Terrace Civic Club have been dealing with flooding caused by brush and trees down in NCC Woodland Run park that has gone multiple years with out clean up . 

We believe NCC sewer lines blowback in Woodland Park directly related to flooding in NCC Woodland Run park as the NCC Sewer lines run through the park and we have multiple reports of outflow from the manholes throughout the past weeks. 

........We feel for those in Woodland Park and would like to see the issues with sewer blowback resolved before situation is similar in our communities. 

LWVNCC: Navigating New Castle County's Comp Plan Update ZOOM Program, 1PM May 26th (RSVP)

League of Woman Voters of New Castle County present - 

Navigating New Castle County's Comp Plan Update

The League of Women Voters of New Castle County Land Use/Transportation Committee invites you to its online meeting on May 26, 2020 at 1 pm.  Mike Hoffman from Tarabiscos Grosso LLP to discuss the NCC Comprehensive Development Plan and the Unified Development Code. 

The Land Use Department of New Castle County is gearing up to present its draft Comprehensive Development Plan (Comp Plan) update. By law, the Comp Plan has to be updated every 10 years. 

PRE-REGISTRATION REQUIRED; use the zoom registration link at the bottom of this event. 

Questions this meeting will cover...

• What is the Comp Plan, and how does it relate to the Unified Development Code (UDC) for the County? 

• Word on the street is that our UDC encourages sprawl. Could this be true? If so, what changes can we make to the new Comp Plan to put a stop to that practice? 

• What other changes will we want to support as we review the new Comp Plan update? 

• What are the political realities involved in passing a new Comp Plan update?

We are happy to invite you to a Zoom meeting with the knowledgeable Michael Hoffman, of Tarabicos Grosso, LLP, (law firm of Larry Tarabicos that does a lot of land use work). Mike will join us on Tuesday, May 26th, 1-2:30 pm, via Zoom. His comments will be followed by a question and answer session. 

To register:https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZMtcuirqzoiH9wVQie5A8mFRH7ESsRY2ZZF

CCOBH: NCC Land Use Labyrinth – A Primer For Community Engagement And Participation - 7PM May 21st (RSVP)

You are invited to a Zoom meeting on “Navigating the New Castle County Land Use Labyrinth – A Primer for Community Engagement and Participation Meeting” hosted by CCOBH. 

When: Thursday, May 21, 2020 07:00 PM Eastern Time (US and Canada) 

Register in advance for this meeting:
https://us02web.zoom.us/…/tZAqdemgrj8vH9QUIKeRpkPViwPaY3S0H… 

After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the meeting. 

Guest Speaker: Dave Carter, New Castle County Council Member 

The meeting will be a comprehensive look at the land use process in New Castle County, a "how-to navigate" guide for community involvement and advocacy, and discussion of potential ways to create more opportunities for public input.

From RJ Miles, VP, CCOBH: 

In the land use process, our primary tool is participation in the process. 

At a time when both the State and the County are working to reduce the community participation role in the process in order to save time, we must take every opportunity to understand and defend the tools we have to help define and shape our community.

Updated: 2018 New Castle County Council Democratic Primary Forum Is Next Thursday, 6:30PM At The Mill Creek Fire Hall!

Update:

View the forum on facebook at the link HERE


Network Delaware:

1st NCC Council Democratic Primary Forum: Candidates Present Their Visions

The 2018 New Castle County Council Democratic Primary Forum will focus on the Democratic primary races.  

The forum will be an hour and a half with candidates sharing the podium for Q and A via written questions from co-sponsors and then from the general public.   

Half the candidates have accepted invitations.  

President of the Civic League for New Castle Council Nancy Willing said members were eager to hear from council's incumbents and challengers on quality of life issues for residents.  

She added "I will be interested in the candidates' thoughts on potential new revenue streams in lieu of further tax increases and what council should be doing to address land use-related traffic congestion in light of high-density residential development plans in the works for so many northern county golf courses." 

Who: New Castle County Civic League and Network Delaware 

What: New Castle County Council Primary Forum 

When: Thursday, August 23rd from 6:30pm to 8pm 

Where: Mill Creek Fire Company's Chambers Memorial Hall located at 3900 Kirkwood Highway, Wilmington, DE 19808. 

Why: To encourage discussion of the role New Castle County Council can play in improving the lives of its constituents

Updated: Watch Live Today! NCC Land Use Panel Discussion On "The LOS Issue" 4-6PM October 18th In New Castle - RSVP Required

Update: From  New Castle County Government:

Watch a livestream of Wednesday's panel discussion on traffic impact requirements for land development by tuning in right here on facebook at 4 p.m. 

From the New Castle County Department of Land Use ~ 

Discussion on Traffic Impact Requirements for Land Development

4 - 6 p.m. Wednesday, October 18th

Route 9 Library and Innovation Center

3022 New Castle Avenue, New Castle, DE 19720

Panel Discussion on Traffic Impact Requirements for Land Development in New Castle County 

You are invited to join a panel discussion on the topic of Level of Service (LOS) with representatives from New Castle County’s Department of Land Use and the transportation, economic, civic, and engineering communities. 

This meeting will include an overview of the LOS issue and feature a question-and-answer session regarding the LOS regulations in New Castle County and other local governments. 

The meeting will take place on Wednesday, October 18, 2017 from 4:00 to 6:00 p.m. at:
Route 9 Library and Innovation Center3022 New Castle AvenueNew Castle, Delaware 19720(302) 657-8020 

Please note: This event is open to the public but space is limited. If you plan on attending, please RSVP at: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/traffic-impact-requirements-for-land-development-in-ncc-tickets-38440609899?aff=utm_source%3Deb_email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_campaign%3Dnew_event_email&utm_term=eventurl_text  

Additional information may be found on the Department of Land Use website at: www.nccdelu.org

You may also view the Level of Service White Paper.  

We hope to see you there!

• Kid Friendly

MLCA Raises Environmental Issues Around Residential Development Of The Hercules Golf Course

The Environmental Issue that no one wants to talk about regarding Residential Development of the Hercules Golf Course

 As some may have noticed, in the News-Journal this week was an article about the development of the Delaware National Golf Course (formally Hercules Country Club).  In that article, the well publicized traffic issues represented the core focus of what was covered, followed by the existing residents from the Little Falls community who were concerned about preserving the character of their community by seeing the proposed townhouse phase, be stipulated as a over-55 restricted community. 

In the next to last paragraph in the article, it briefly highlighted; "Other issues raised at Thursday's meeting include environmental concerns from both herbicides used on the golf course as well as commercial chemical development on a neighboring property that drains through the golf course."  

The Milltown-Limestone Civic Alliance has for 13+ years taken an active interest in the development of the Hercules Country Club property for two primary reasons; The transportation and/or road expansion necessary to deal with the additional traffic that would be generated, AND, The need for proper Clean-up of well-documented environmental problems that exist in various areas of the golf courses and bordering properties. 

I spoke about these issues at the meeting Thursday night and surprised many residents, which prompted even greater concern with the information that they heard and were otherwise, completely unaware of.  

The below document is a brief review of that material we have collected and steps that the MLCA has taken, to get this significant environmental issue addressed.  Our surrounding community groups believe it is important to protect their residents and that of future residents.  PLEASE TAKE A FEW MINUTES AND READ THE DOCUMENT.

Bill Dunn - President 

Milltown-Limestone Civic Alliance (MLCA) 

302-598-6313 

Environmental Issues disregarded by DNREC and developers that will likely affect future homeowners and the surrounding community with the development of the Hercules C. C. property

By: Bill Dunn – President, MLCA

Preface

Sometime in 2011, after Greenville Overlook 1 was underway, Toll Brothers began work on moving through the development process to get approval of the remaining 18-holes of what was the Hercules Country Club.  Since DNREC had records of environmental spill(s) on the property, the State’s Hazardous Substance Clean-up Act (HSCA) analysis was mandated.  Toll Brothers hired Brightfield & Associates, Inc. to do the evaluation.  Consistent with the process, soil analysis test bores were taken at various locations and a Cleanup Plan was developed.  Subsequently, DNREC met with Brightfield several times and numerous changes were made in the planned cleanup.  In late 2011, DNREC Administrators were prepared to approve the cleanup plan, which is the point in time, the public gets to review the plan and make comments to DNREC and the developer.

Public Hearing

The Milltown-Limestone Civic Alliance, having been involved in issues regarding traffic and environmental cleanup with Greenville Overlook 1, we took an interest in the proposal.  Members of the MLCA’s Technical Working Group reviewed some of the material and decided to attend and comment on issues like dust control (which was not handled very well with Greenville Overlook 1) and the extent of the study done on the northern border adjacent to the Aqualon LLC property (a wholly owned subsidiary of Hercules Inc.), where agricultural product testing was done by Hercules for many years.  A member of the MLCA that lives in Brandywine Springs Manor and who’s home backed up to the first property developed, spoke about the dust issues they experienced and how better oversight was necessary.  Having worked in chemical research for more than 25 years, I spoke about dioxins and testing.

Despite DNREC being aware of dioxins being present in some areas of the property, they appeared to not to be very concerned in about the area I was emphasizing.    The term “Dioxin” is a generic term that is used to refer to a family of chemical compounds that are very toxic (one specific compound, by EPA standards, is only tolerated to 3 parts per TRILLION).   I commented on what and how research compounds may have been handled, applied and disposed of after basic lab testing in the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s.  Also noteworthy, is the rain water from this testing field on the Aqualon property, flows into two negative swales eventually converging and flowing down on to the property where they want to build new homes.  I felt that this issue should have prompted DNREC to call for additional test bores in this area of the property and a follow-up review before moving forward.  There were a few more brief comments and the meeting was closed.

DNREC’s Secretary’s Approval

Four or five weeks after the meeting, I contacted DNREC to see where the Remedial Action Plan stood.  I was told that the Hearing Officer, Robert Haines, determined that all issues brought forward at the Hearing were addressed by Brightfield and DNREC and that no further action was necessary, completely contrary to what our comments emphasized.  The Secretary, relaying on his staff and the Hearing Officer, went ahead and signed the Plan, allowing the Plan to move forward, barring any challenge of that decision.

Call for Environmental Appeal Board Hearing is filed

In a situation such as this, the public has an opportunity to challenge the Secretary’s decision by calling for an Environmental Appeals Board Hearing, which we did.  The Board is a State body, of technically competent people whom have the appropriate backgrounds, to determine if the Secretary made the proper decision.  With the Appeal being filed, DNREC notifies the AG’s office and an attorney is assigned to handle the case. 

Seeing the items brought forward by a specific community member, four neighbors in Westminster and a recognized community group that had a history of involvement in the overall property (i.e. Hercules C.C.) their initial consideration to challenge our “Standing” regarding the Plan was quickly dismissed.  The next issue was legal representation in the matter, which the community must obtain.  Without going into detail, we had a lawyer willing to support our effort.  And, Toll Brothers having a stake in the outcome, they interacted in the process.

Negotiated deal to avoid EAB Hearing

After roughly a year of negotiations with DNREC’s attorney and Toll Bros. attorney, we agreed to withdrawn our call for an EAB Hearing, IF three requirements were met:

1)      A community-approved, revised dust control plan was addended to the legally binding plan, and

2)      Two additional test bores would be collected (3 depths/bore) from very specific locations, which we designated, on the Aqualon property where water would run-off of and on to the property where they wanted to build homes.  Each one of the six samples would be divided in half.  Before the samples were taken, DNREC provided the MLCA with a list of Soil Analysis’s firms which we could choose to contract with for our analysis.  We sent our six samples off, under tightly controlled standards, to an approved firm for a detailed seventeen-analyte analysis for both Furans and Dioxins.  The other halves, were sent off by Brightfield or Toll or Ashland for their chosen analysis.

3)      Finally, both sides would disclose their results to the other and the Secretary AND, the Secretary would be obligated to review the results of both analysis’s and make a final decision based on those results.

MLCA’s Interpretation of their Sample Results sent to Colin O’Mara & others

The MLCA is providing, as agreed upon, the results of the analysis that we have had done on two of six samples we were provided at the end of May by DNREC and Ashland Inc.  The remainders of the samples tested, as well as the other samples not yet tested, are being held by our DNREC-approved Analytical firm (in a controlled environment) for possible additional analysis. 

Members of our MLCA-Hercules Technical Group have looked at the data attached and find some aspects quite concerning.  I believe Dr. (Prof.) Detra's comments back to me and others in the Technical group, touches on some issues that have been discussed so far:

=============

Assessment of the polychlorinated diphenyl dioxins and furans.

Submitted 15 June 2013

Summary

Six samples were collected. According to the chain of custody they all required PCDD and PCDF analysis by EPA SW846method 8290. However only samples 1 and 4 were analyzed in this way. All samples were subjected to percent solids determination.

Sample 1 had apparent measurable residues of all PCDD and PCDF analytes. Specific analytes were converted to TEQs or “Toxic Equivalents” to 2,3,7,8-TCDD per the method using TEFs or “Toxic Equivalency Factors.” They were all added together and a final Toxic equivalent to 2,3,7,8-TCDD was determined to be 18 ppt (parts per trillion).

Sample 2 had apparent measurable residues of all PCDD and PCDF analytes except for 2,3,7,8-TCDD and 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF. The data were treated in the same manner as required by the method and the toxic equivalency to 2,3,7,8-TCDDwas 19 ppt.

The method blank had some sort of contamination for most of the furans. Although there was background for total TCDD it was somehow overlooked and was not included in the reports of the samples. However, 2,3,7,8-TCDD itself did not have background interference.

The laboratory control spike performed well for all analytes. even with the background interference.

Assessment

I am concerned that in sample 1 there were ten analytes reports which were qualified with Q, meaning there was some sort of quality control failure in their measurement. In sample 2 there were eleven quality control failures. The background interference is bothersome but they seem to have had little impact on the final values. Both samples had such high values of OCDD that it exceeded the upper limit of the standard curve so it had to be estimated. Often laboratories would dilute and reanalyze. However, the TEQ for OCDD is only 0.001 so it would not have much impact on the final values.

It appears the data are valid. The report does not assign any significance to the final reported TEQs. This may vary from state to state and it does vary according to the planed use for the site or how it is currently being used. I did check to see what URS (Uniform Risk Standard) regulations are for PCDD and PCDF toxic equivalents with DNREC. I did find conditions for surface soil under the category: “Protection of the Environment.” There was no limit based on toxic equivalents. However, if we do hold faith in the principles of the TEQs, we should be able to use the URS limits for 2,3,7,8-TCDD as the same as TEQS.  The TEQs are supposed to express the total risk based on that form of TCDD. The DNREC URS limit is 3 ppt.

So based on the “Protection of the Environment” criterion, the residues in this soil greatly exceed the DNREC version of URS limits. Some might complain that many of the analytes used for this determination are estimated because they were below the lower standard curve limit or above the highest limit. But this is what we have to work with now. It appears some remediation for PCDDs and PCDFs is necessary.

Sincerely,

Randall L. Detra, Ph.D.

=======================

In my assessment, 4 of the 17 analytes (2-furan & 2-dioxin ) in Sample 1 and similarly, 4 of the 17 analytes (2-furan & 2-dioxin ) in Sample 2, were reported at or above the instrument's calibration standards and EPA 1989 TEF, with an additional 5 and 4 analytes respectively, showing values above tolerable levels, but below the lowest calibration standard (i.e. a "fitted" value based on extrapolating confirmed standards).  Not being an expert, yet having had numerous discussions with others of similar backgrounds and knowledge as Dr. Detra, I and others in the MLCA have a great deal of concern.

The locations where the samples were taken, were specifically chosen because of the possibility that those locations would highlight how these types of chemical could have possibly migrated to where residential development is proposed to occur.

Again, not being an expert, yet having a reasonable degree of understanding of approaches applied in research and chemistry in general, this information should support the supposition that DNREC needs to reevaluate the Remedial Action Plan for the Hercules Golf Course (DE-1492), as well as start/continue a Remedial Action Plan for the now confirmed issues that exist on the Aqualon property.

Regrettably and to my surprise, after a discussion with our legal representation, it can be interpreted, that regardless of what DNREC chooses to do with this information and all other information being equally shared by all parties involved, we have agreed to withdrawal our EAB appeal/hearing.  I would hate to think my confusion in the stipulation set forth before the sampling could have a long-term negative effect on the present and future residents in this area.  We at the MLCA continue to be firmly committed to supporting and protecting all the residents and property owners in the area. 

We request that this note and attached data, as well as all other information regarding the recent sampling analysis, be provided to all members of the EAB. 

We look forward to seeing the other sets of results which we expect will include data from all six samples to the same level of detail and precision that we applied with the community's limited funding and what the Secretary and DNREC staff is willing to do to rectify any shortcomings that may exist in their earlier decision.  

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Four Pages of MLCA’s Data

The Analysis done on the sister samples

I believe that Ashland/Toll/DNREC expected the MLCA to do a general, total concentration analysis of our samples.  The State has a “total concentration” permissible limit that is roughly 20 ppm.  Knowing that some specific Dioxins have limits of 3 parts/trillion, we thought it was important to do the detailed analysis, despite the additional expense.

Not wanting to provide any more detail than was necessary, Ashland/Toll/DNREC chose to do the total concentration analysis, which provided data results just under the 20 ppm limit. [DETAILS are IMPORTANT!]

The Secretary’s Decision

Despite the MLCA’s Dr. Detra acknowledgement of short coming in some of the data results, DNREC and/or the Secretary, chose to completely disregard the results and NOT call for additional analysis.

                                                                                                     

STATE OF DELAWARE

DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES

& ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL

DIVISION OF WASTE AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES

391 LUKENS DRIVE

NEW CASTLE, DELAWARE 19720-2774

      SITE  INVESTIGATION

August 14, 2013

Mr. William Dunn

Milltown-Limestone Civic Alliance

RE:       Aqualon Sampling Results – May 2013

              Hercules Road and Lancaster Pike Site, DE-1492

Dear Mr. Dunn,

Thank you for your comments and those of Dr. Detra concerning the results of the May 2013 sampling event at the Aqualon property.  The purpose of this letter is to review all of the data now available and inform you of the Department’s path forward on the Hercules Rd & Lancaster Pike Site.  There are three sets of dioxin analysis data available now for the Aqualon site: the May 2013 Ashland samples (3), the split samples from that sampling event (2), and the May 2012 Ashland samples (3).  

With regard to the 2013 split sample results, there is an error on the Test America results summary pages for the two samples, pages 11 and 13 (highlighted copies are attached), which affects Dr. Detra’s evaluation of the results.  The next-to-the-last column is headed “EPA 1989 Toxicity Equivalence Factor (TEF) ”.  The value given for octachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (OCDD) is 0.001.  This value was adopted by the US EPA in 1989.  In December 2010, the US EPA issued an update in a document titled:   “Recommended Toxicity Equivalence Factors (TEFs) for Human Health Risk Assessments of  2,3,7,8-Tetrachorodibenzo-pdioxin and Dioxin-Like Compounds” (www.epa.gov/raf/files/tefs-for-dioxin-epa-00-r-10-005-final.pdf ).   The TEF given for OCDD in Table 2 of this document (attached)  is 0.0003.  The toxic equivalent (TEQ) concentration given in the lab report for the split samples is thus inflated by a factor of three. 

It should be further noted that the predominant parameter contributing to the TEQ  concentration in the split samples is OCDD.  The OCDD results for the split samples are qualified and would not be considered valid by DNREC for decision making purposes.   Note that the results reported for the split samples are all qualified as “B” meaning that the analyte was detected in the method blanks or “J” meaning that the value is estimated.  (These qualifiers appear in a foot note on the second page of each result summary.)

The split sample results are consistent with the three samples analyzed by Ashland in 2013 when 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) was not detected in any of the samples.  There was no congener analysis reported for the Ashland 2013 samples.  This result is also consistent with the previous three soil samples taken at the site by Ashland in May 2012.  Those samples did receive congener analysis and results were similar to the 2013 split samples including the qualifiers for OCDD.

In summary, six soil samples from the Aqualon site have been analyzed for 2,3,7,8-TCDD.  Two of those samples were split and analyzed for 2,3,7,8-TCDD.  All eight results were the same:  2,3,7,8-TCDD was not detected.

Since there is no evidence indicating that dioxin contamination is present in soil at the Aqualon property, the Department will not alter the current Final Plan of Remedial Action (“Final Plan”) for the adjacent Hercules Road and Lancaster Pike Site.  The Department will require the Final Plan to be implemented at that Site in accordance with the Secretary’s Order of March 22, 2012.

Please call me with any questions or comments.

Sincerely,

Stephen F. Johnson, PE

Site Investigation and Restoration Section

In our interpretation, essentially, because the instrumentation standards samples that are used to calibrate the instrument, in the case of 5 of 17 analytes analyzed, did not go to a low enough in concentration to guarantee accuracy.  Because of that, they through-out ALL the 17 analytes detected.

MLCA’s Conclusion

We have very little doubt, that there is a significant danger not only on the Aqualon property, but where rainwater has ran off that property and onto the areas proposed for residential development.  Our position IS NOT based on conjecture and speculation, but scientific and engineering principles.

It is our belief that DNREC has been negligent in, if nothing else, not calling for additional sampling based on the  result of our independent laboratory’s findings and analysis by our chemical expert.

As previously stated in other forums, the MLCA is NOT opposed to the development of the property in general.   If environmental and transportation requirements and responsibilities are met and all other requirements under today’s UDC are responsibly addressed, we are more than willing to not oppose the proposes development of this land. However, until  our concerns are properly addressed by DNREC and Petinaro,  we remain opposed  to any development of the property.