|
|
Post by d204mom on Jan 24, 2008 8:06:00 GMT -6
Agreed. There weren't any issues when the put the Prairie Path right through the property. How much remediated land was purchased from Midwest Gen for the Prairie Path? |
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Jan 24, 2008 8:06:35 GMT -6
arch,
I hope you have printed most of the data out....I would not want you to be exposed to exsessive EMF's from your computer monitor.
|
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Jan 24, 2008 8:08:15 GMT -6
Agreed. There weren't any issues when the put the Prairie Path right through the property. How much remediated land was purchased from Midwest Gen for the Prairie Path? You should be able to contact the DuPage County Highway Dept. They are the ones who are responsible for the Prairie Paths. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jan 24, 2008 8:14:50 GMT -6
arch, I hope you have printed most of the data out....I would not want you to be exposed to exsessive EMF's from your computer monitor. Aren't LCD's great? Call me crazy, but I even cook my chili in a fresh clean pot and don't use the oil drip pan from the garage. |
|
|
|
Post by hmmm on Jan 24, 2008 8:21:37 GMT -6
Agreed. There weren't any issues when the put the Prairie Path right through the property. How much remediated land was purchased from Midwest Gen for the Prairie Path? I don't believe that is a decent comparison. The exposure to any toxins would be much more limited on the Prairie Path in relation to time spent than exposure during a 6, 8, or 10 hour school day. |
|
|
|
Post by hmmm on Jan 24, 2008 8:23:49 GMT -6
BTW - Thanks Arch for putting the time in to research this EXTREMELY relevant issue. It isn't about schools or boundaries, it's about safety. Thanks!
|
|
|
|
Post by 204parent on Jan 24, 2008 8:24:38 GMT -6
The only thing that matters is we're getting a "NEW WVHS".
The district doesn't seem to care about anything else at this point.
|
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Jan 24, 2008 8:39:56 GMT -6
The only thing that matters is we're getting a "NEW WVHS". The district doesn't seem to care about anything else at this point. If that's all you got out of the SB meeting, I feel bad for you |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jan 24, 2008 8:40:42 GMT -6
Cool, OpenOffice makes light work out of the older DBF files.
1971 was a very busy year for the diesel depletion and use to produce electricity, right along w/ the natural gas.
Stocks start off around 17500 barrels, some use (couple few hundred quantity and electricity produced) then another huge disparity dropping from 16190 barrels in stock to 9048 the next month then back up to 16881 the next. Typical consumption on the DFO seems to hover around 300-600 barrels a month though for the other months. Again, why the 7,142 barrel difference (consumption should have worked out to around 600-800 barrels using other trend data of electricity produced per barrel consumed) based on what is in this report.
It'll be a fun day.
|
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Jan 24, 2008 8:44:32 GMT -6
arch, I hope you have printed most of the data out....I would not want you to be exposed to exsessive EMF's from your computer monitor. Aren't LCD's great? Call me crazy, but I even cook my chili in a fresh clean pot and don't use the oil drip pan from the garage. But that's where all the flavor is!!!!!  Not to make light of what you are doing; Thank you for researching it. I hope it will ease your mind and many others too (myself included). I personally think it's gonna be fine, given my personal experience with the site from the past. IIRC there were actually more issues from just the farm field itself. In that case most of us are already hosed. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jan 24, 2008 9:09:46 GMT -6
Aren't LCD's great? Call me crazy, but I even cook my chili in a fresh clean pot and don't use the oil drip pan from the garage. But that's where all the flavor is!!!!! Not to make light of what you are doing; Thank you for researching it. I hope it will ease your mind and many others too (myself included). I personally think it's gonna be fine, given my personal experience with the site from the past. IIRC there were actually more issues from just the farm field itself. In that case most of us are already hosed. It's not easing my mind yet. So far the conclusion is: DR. D was lied to and our Administration took their word for it. OR He completely made up a falsehood. Either way, it's not good. One thing Alka said is sticking in my mind: "They have given us their word and we should honor that." Oh, if the world really worked that way there would be no problems. Unfortunately, it does not and that is a very dangerous mindset to just 'accept' someone's 'word' on something this important. |
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Jan 24, 2008 9:31:29 GMT -6
Well then I think you need to report your data to several sources, starting 1st with the SD/SB.
See if they have any other supporting Docs, that you either cannot get to and/or not available on the net.
Then the IL-EPA next to see if they have anything else.
Then the media {{{{{SHUDDER}}}}}. Although I would doubt their thoroughness.
and along the way keep us in the loop too, and we can also keep pressure on the SB/Admin.
Might you also consider what if anything the phase 2 testing turns up. If it's clean, can we question what they looked for. Or better yet ask now what tests are included in Phase 2.
IIRC Mr. title1parent is an EPA type person. Maybe he can shed some light on what is tested, and do we need to ask for extra tests.
|
|
|
|
Post by sushi on Jan 24, 2008 9:42:27 GMT -6
MM said the state EPA is also testing the site; they are not relying on Midwest Gen. testing.
There is no doubt that BG's wording will be modified by the atty's to be legally binding. I don't think any one of us wants kids with 3 arms.
|
|
|
|
Post by d204mom on Jan 24, 2008 9:45:04 GMT -6
MM said the state EPA is also testing the site; they are not relying on Midwest Gen. testing. There is no doubt that BG's wording will be modified by the atty's to be legally binding. I don't think any one of us wants kids with 3 arms. Just a clarification - I believe that we are paying for the tests, not Midwest Gen. And I don't think the EPA will test; they will review the results from the consultant's tests and determine if they are adequate. |
|
|
|
Post by title1parent on Jan 24, 2008 9:52:35 GMT -6
Per my husband's description:
A Phase 1 is a paper search looking at historical documents regarding the property in question. You look at property deeds, old phone directories, environmental data bases regarding chemical releases, aeral photographs, etc. If there is anything that sticks out like a sore thumb, like the property had above ground storage tanks or was a gas station with underground storage tanks, then the recommendation would be to move onto a phase 2.
Phase 2 is a detailed investigation of the site where bore sampling of soil at various depths, possible ground water sampling to determine if there was a contamination plume. If something is found, you are looking at possible remediation.
Since there was an above ground storage tank on the site, they have continued with a Phase 2 ESA.
ETA: My husband said that an above ground storage tank is called a REC. REC stands for a Recognized Environmental Condition. Not necessarily a concern, hence the phase 2 ESA.
|
|
