Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Keep Safety in Our Footsteps
We need to keep safety in our footsteps of rebuilding.
Last week's RDC meeting with the firechief revealed not only the lower number of firefighters in our local department and at both the major refineries, but also the lower number who actually reside in our parish. So to respond to a major accident at a heavily industrialized business we will have to call in backup from neighboring parishes.
What are we doing with pending expansions to keep safety a priority?
As the council and administration consider a Refinery Expansion at Cost of Our Neighborhood , they are presumably making room for an ambiguous expansion that will have an irreversible effect on us all.
Our community's only high school is 14 blocks from this refinery. Both middle schools are to the east. To travel east or to come up west, you have no choice but to drive thru the ever expanding tank farm or the terminal and processing area.
We know the historic past of this refinery.
What are we doing other than false promises and ambiguous word games, to assure a safer, more responsible future?
As our government leaders help us press for the entire refinery expansion plans, we ask them to please keep our safety in mind.
Last week's RDC meeting with the firechief revealed not only the lower number of firefighters in our local department and at both the major refineries, but also the lower number who actually reside in our parish. So to respond to a major accident at a heavily industrialized business we will have to call in backup from neighboring parishes.
What are we doing with pending expansions to keep safety a priority?
As the council and administration consider a Refinery Expansion at Cost of Our Neighborhood , they are presumably making room for an ambiguous expansion that will have an irreversible effect on us all.
Our community's only high school is 14 blocks from this refinery. Both middle schools are to the east. To travel east or to come up west, you have no choice but to drive thru the ever expanding tank farm or the terminal and processing area.
We know the historic past of this refinery.
What are we doing other than false promises and ambiguous word games, to assure a safer, more responsible future?
As our government leaders help us press for the entire refinery expansion plans, we ask them to please keep our safety in mind.
Saturday, July 12, 2008
irresponsible planning
As St Bernard Parish Planning Commissioners begin discussions of changing
our code of ordinances they are considering what would be a new concept for
St Bernard Parish : a required "buffer zone" around heavy industry.
There are discussions towards defining this "buffer zone" landusage as a
commercial district and not a true protective greenspace. This would be out
of the norm. Other heavily industrialized parishes require any where from
600 feet to 2,500 feet of a nonutilized landscaped greenbelt to protect
their residents from the known risks of explosions and fires.
Most residents are adamantly opposed to this concept of commercial usage of
the buyout properties and disagree that a petrochemical refinery's
facilities would serve as a buffer for their protection or benefit.
We have the opportunity to create and to preserve a true protective green
zone belt on the most hazardous side of the Meraux refinery. To allow
anything else in not only bad planning, it is irresponsible and makes the
parish further liable.
http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/stbernard/20080710/018470.html
our code of ordinances they are considering what would be a new concept for
St Bernard Parish : a required "buffer zone" around heavy industry.
There are discussions towards defining this "buffer zone" landusage as a
commercial district and not a true protective greenspace. This would be out
of the norm. Other heavily industrialized parishes require any where from
600 feet to 2,500 feet of a nonutilized landscaped greenbelt to protect
their residents from the known risks of explosions and fires.
Most residents are adamantly opposed to this concept of commercial usage of
the buyout properties and disagree that a petrochemical refinery's
facilities would serve as a buffer for their protection or benefit.
We have the opportunity to create and to preserve a true protective green
zone belt on the most hazardous side of the Meraux refinery. To allow
anything else in not only bad planning, it is irresponsible and makes the
parish further liable.
http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/stbernard/20080710/018470.html
Thursday, July 10, 2008
define Murphy Oil Buffer Zone
As St Bernard Parish Planning Commissioners begin discussions of changing our code of ordinances they are considering what would be a new concept for St Bernard Parish : a required "buffer zone" around heavy industry. There are discussions towards defining this "buffer zone" landusage as a commercial district and not a true protective greenspace.
This would not only break our settlement agreement, it would bring hazards closer to our homes instead of providing protection. A true protective green zone buffer is supported by the Parish Master Landuse Plan recommended by the CRC , adopted by the Council and used in previous landuse decisions. Most residents are adamantly opposed to this concept of commercial usage of the buyout properties and disagree that a petrochemical refinery's facilities would serve as a buffer for their protection or benefit.
Other heavily industrialized parishes in this river region require any where from 600 feet to 2,500 feet of a non utilized landscaped greenbelt to protect their residents from the known risks of explosions and fires.
We have the opportunity to create and to preserve a true protective green zone belt on the most hazardous side of the Meraux refinery. To allow anything else in not only bad planning, it is irresponsible and makes the parish further liable.
This would not only break our settlement agreement, it would bring hazards closer to our homes instead of providing protection. A true protective green zone buffer is supported by the Parish Master Landuse Plan recommended by the CRC , adopted by the Council and used in previous landuse decisions. Most residents are adamantly opposed to this concept of commercial usage of the buyout properties and disagree that a petrochemical refinery's facilities would serve as a buffer for their protection or benefit.
Other heavily industrialized parishes in this river region require any where from 600 feet to 2,500 feet of a non utilized landscaped greenbelt to protect their residents from the known risks of explosions and fires.
We have the opportunity to create and to preserve a true protective green zone belt on the most hazardous side of the Meraux refinery. To allow anything else in not only bad planning, it is irresponsible and makes the parish further liable.
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Refineries in Wetlands
excerpt fromTHE SCHOOL OF BIG STORMS
The High Cost of Compromising Our Natural Defenses and the Benefits of Protecting Them
Refineries in Wetlands (page6/7)
The Gulf Restoration Network (GRN)
The Sierra Club
"The lesson from this case is that industrial developments
need to have good hurricane response
plans that involve getting the plant properly
secured and shut down. Furthermore, building
refineries in wetlands close to a residential area in a
hurricane zone is not good planning. We must
consider future consequences when siting new
businesses. As communities rebuild, we need to
make good social and economic decisions to
ensure both prosperity and safety."
With the replacement of tankage at the Murphy Oil Meraux refinery Judge Perez tankfarm, so too should be the implementation of foundation and berm design improvements. Just think how different District C may have been if the tanks' foundations had not settled over time, the berm (or burm) had not failed or if the tank had not lifted. Shouldnt we now have better designed berms and tank foundations with anchoring?
Big Oil -- Little Neighborhood
BIG OIL
The High Cost of Compromising Our Natural Defenses and the Benefits of Protecting Them
Refineries in Wetlands (page6/7)
The Gulf Restoration Network (GRN)
The Sierra Club
"The lesson from this case is that industrial developments
need to have good hurricane response
plans that involve getting the plant properly
secured and shut down. Furthermore, building
refineries in wetlands close to a residential area in a
hurricane zone is not good planning. We must
consider future consequences when siting new
businesses. As communities rebuild, we need to
make good social and economic decisions to
ensure both prosperity and safety."
With the replacement of tankage at the Murphy Oil Meraux refinery Judge Perez tankfarm, so too should be the implementation of foundation and berm design improvements. Just think how different District C may have been if the tanks' foundations had not settled over time, the berm (or burm) had not failed or if the tank had not lifted. Shouldnt we now have better designed berms and tank foundations with anchoring?
Big Oil -- Little Neighborhood
BIG OIL
Saturday, June 28, 2008
Public Participation
Active citizen participation in our community has never been more engaged and is truly an accomplishment to consider this Fourth of July Holiday.
From RDC 's community clean ups and RDC Beautification Projects to the EPA C A R E forums , residents now more than ever want to affect the ever-changing decisions in our community.
We have inspired each other and the results are amazing. Newly formed associations are making a difference throughout all districts, such as Eastern St Bernard Citizens . Residents from all walks of life are making a commitment to the future of our parish as seen in the emerging advocacy groups in District A and District B.
Recent strides include action on a proposed Truck Stop and the EPA's disaster asbestos experiment . Both developments were curtailed because engaged citizens volunteered their time and effort to place the health, safety and welfare of our family oriented neighborhoods above all other offered gains.
As Neighbors and Neighborhoods states: residents will come together to collectively support each other, to encourage, promote and facilitate community involvement and to work with local government and industry to achieve maximum growth with the re-development of safe, organized and productive neighborhoods as the primary goals.
From RDC 's community clean ups and RDC Beautification Projects to the EPA C A R E forums , residents now more than ever want to affect the ever-changing decisions in our community.
We have inspired each other and the results are amazing. Newly formed associations are making a difference throughout all districts, such as Eastern St Bernard Citizens . Residents from all walks of life are making a commitment to the future of our parish as seen in the emerging advocacy groups in District A and District B.
Recent strides include action on a proposed Truck Stop and the EPA's disaster asbestos experiment . Both developments were curtailed because engaged citizens volunteered their time and effort to place the health, safety and welfare of our family oriented neighborhoods above all other offered gains.
As Neighbors and Neighborhoods states: residents will come together to collectively support each other, to encourage, promote and facilitate community involvement and to work with local government and industry to achieve maximum growth with the re-development of safe, organized and productive neighborhoods as the primary goals.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Overall Air Quality Concerns - Asbestos
Because we care for the future of our community and for the safety and health of our children, all our residents, and the many workers in our area, we resolved to take action on the Clean Air Act violations in our community.
EPA's recent efforts to conserve landfill space explored disaster debris volume reduction with an experimental asbestos grind and burn at our Paris Road landfill. Asbestos containing debris scheduled to be incinerated with an Air Curtain Destructor pilot test was canceled because of citizens concerns for public health. The EPA curtailed their plans and chose only to test burn and grind non RACM containing C & D debris along with vegetative matter, as explained in the EPA 's pilot tests comments .
At prior council meetings, St Bernard Parish officials traded a temporary burn permit to the EPA for a renewal of a no action assurance from the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality. The no action assurance was a renewal of permission to demo without asbestos abatement. The RACM houses however are to be 'burrito wrapped' and hauled to the River Birch Landfill on the Westbank of Jefferson Parish.
Residents first became aware of the incinerator project by attending EFC meetings; the Executive Finance Meetings where St Bernard Parish Councilmembers customarily discuss business matters and ordinances before voting to bring such items before the full council. However, the agendas for both the EFC and the Council Meetings never contained verbiage of asbestos. While residents may sign up to speak for two (2) minutes at a council meeting, the ability to comment was difficult given the lack of information prior to the council's February 7, 2008 vote. Through public records requests, CCAM received the information about two weeks later.
Several active CCAM members whose work and lifestyle brings them in and around the landfill area spoke up to the EPA about their concerns for public health through these prior council meetings and the subsequent EPA community outreach meetings in June. The EPA June meetings were held in response to residents claims that there had been no adequate public notice given even by local standards.
St Bernard residents who attended two community outreach meetings with EPA officials in June reported the agency's response to our questions.
Q: HOW are they going to know that the one home for C&D burn experiment is NON Asbestos containing?
answer. "the answer they gave us...They chose 1 house out of 12,000. It has been tested by EPA and the results were compared to other tests made by another company, and the parish demolition company. They said the asbestos was minimal and not harmful. It is in the joints of the house."
Q: This resident asked about the large variety of everyday items in a typical house that would never reduce its size even in the temperatures of the ACD. Examples given were the electrical outlets, ceramic fixtures and hardware and other such auxiliary goods. Questions were also raised about the lead paint, plastic and mercury contents of a typical house.
CCAM wants to recognize the improvements to our quality of life and protection of our public health achieved by a number of residents and workers who made a commitment to our community by taking action on Clean Air Violations.
CCAM is also very appreciative of the expertise and stealth field work by Tulane Environmental Law Clinic, especially Lacy Smith, student attorney at TELC and Jim Hecker, a lawyer with Public Justice in Washington, D.C.
Recent articles about this asbestos experiment can be read at
EPA to burn houses with asbestos During test run, air will be monitored Saturday, February 09, 2008 By Paul Rioux
http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/frontpage/index.ssf?/base/news-2/1202538125169240.xml&coll=1
EPA DELAYS CONTENTIOUS ASBESTOS DEMOLITION PLAN OVER RISK ERRORS
by: Anthony Lacey INSIDEEPA-29-26-13 http://www.insideepa.com/
Daily Environment Report - EPA Cancels Project to Grind, IncinerateNo. 117 Wednesday, June 18, 2008Page A-5 ISSN 1521-9402 http://www.bna.com/products/ens/bder.htm
Read more about EPA's Disaster Debris Reduction Project - St Bernard Parish Louisiana
http://www.epa.gov/region6/6xa/debris_reduction.htm
Air Burners LLC http://airburners.com/?gclid=CNmI2ZmQl5QCFQuXGgodUH3_tw
EPA's recent efforts to conserve landfill space explored disaster debris volume reduction with an experimental asbestos grind and burn at our Paris Road landfill. Asbestos containing debris scheduled to be incinerated with an Air Curtain Destructor pilot test was canceled because of citizens concerns for public health. The EPA curtailed their plans and chose only to test burn and grind non RACM containing C & D debris along with vegetative matter, as explained in the EPA 's pilot tests comments .
At prior council meetings, St Bernard Parish officials traded a temporary burn permit to the EPA for a renewal of a no action assurance from the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality. The no action assurance was a renewal of permission to demo without asbestos abatement. The RACM houses however are to be 'burrito wrapped' and hauled to the River Birch Landfill on the Westbank of Jefferson Parish.
Residents first became aware of the incinerator project by attending EFC meetings; the Executive Finance Meetings where St Bernard Parish Councilmembers customarily discuss business matters and ordinances before voting to bring such items before the full council. However, the agendas for both the EFC and the Council Meetings never contained verbiage of asbestos. While residents may sign up to speak for two (2) minutes at a council meeting, the ability to comment was difficult given the lack of information prior to the council's February 7, 2008 vote. Through public records requests, CCAM received the information about two weeks later.
Several active CCAM members whose work and lifestyle brings them in and around the landfill area spoke up to the EPA about their concerns for public health through these prior council meetings and the subsequent EPA community outreach meetings in June. The EPA June meetings were held in response to residents claims that there had been no adequate public notice given even by local standards.
St Bernard residents who attended two community outreach meetings with EPA officials in June reported the agency's response to our questions.
Q: HOW are they going to know that the one home for C&D burn experiment is NON Asbestos containing?
answer. "the answer they gave us...They chose 1 house out of 12,000. It has been tested by EPA and the results were compared to other tests made by another company, and the parish demolition company. They said the asbestos was minimal and not harmful. It is in the joints of the house."
Q: This resident asked about the large variety of everyday items in a typical house that would never reduce its size even in the temperatures of the ACD. Examples given were the electrical outlets, ceramic fixtures and hardware and other such auxiliary goods. Questions were also raised about the lead paint, plastic and mercury contents of a typical house.
CCAM wants to recognize the improvements to our quality of life and protection of our public health achieved by a number of residents and workers who made a commitment to our community by taking action on Clean Air Violations.
CCAM is also very appreciative of the expertise and stealth field work by Tulane Environmental Law Clinic, especially Lacy Smith, student attorney at TELC and Jim Hecker, a lawyer with Public Justice in Washington, D.C.
Recent articles about this asbestos experiment can be read at
EPA to burn houses with asbestos During test run, air will be monitored Saturday, February 09, 2008 By Paul Rioux
http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/frontpage/index.ssf?/base/news-2/1202538125169240.xml&coll=1
EPA DELAYS CONTENTIOUS ASBESTOS DEMOLITION PLAN OVER RISK ERRORS
by: Anthony Lacey INSIDEEPA-29-26-13 http://www.insideepa.com/
Daily Environment Report - EPA Cancels Project to Grind, IncinerateNo. 117 Wednesday, June 18, 2008Page A-5 ISSN 1521-9402 http://www.bna.com/products/ens/bder.htm
Read more about EPA's Disaster Debris Reduction Project - St Bernard Parish Louisiana
http://www.epa.gov/region6/6xa/debris_reduction.htm
Air Burners LLC http://airburners.com/?gclid=CNmI2ZmQl5QCFQuXGgodUH3_tw
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
