DOCSLIB.ORG

Safety Zone; Delaware River, Big L

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Safety Zone; Delaware River, Big L Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 94 / Monday, May 17, 2010 / Proposed Rules 27507 document above, CPSC has identified 58 products that present a substantial commerce, the severity of the risk, or suppliers of hand-held hair dryers to the product hazard. The proposed rule does otherwise) creates a substantial risk of U.S. consumer market which provide not establish a consumer product safety injury to the public. products listed to the UL standard. standard. The preemption provisions in (b) Hand-held hair dryer means an Three large firms supply approximately section 26(a) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. electrical appliance, intended to be held 92% of the U.S. market share. 2075(a), apply when a consumer with one hand during use, which According to the Small Business product safety standard is in effect. creates a flow of air over or through a Administration Size Standards, these Therefore, section 26(a) of the CPSA self-contained heating element for the three firms are not small businesses. would not apply to this rule. purpose of drying hair. According to the UL Online M. Request for Comments Certifications Directory and the Intertek § 1120.3 Substantial product hazard list. ETL Listed Mark Products Directory, The Commission invites interested The following products or class of these three firms plus an additional 55 persons to submit their comments to the products shall be deemed to be firms are UL listed to produce Commission on any aspect of the substantial product hazards under complying hair dryers. All but one of proposed rule. Comments should be section 15(a)(2) of the CPSA. these 55 firms appears to be a small submitted as provided in the (a) Hand-held hair dryers that do not business. Thus, the overwhelming instructions in the ADDRESSES section at provide integral immersion protection majority of hair dryers sold in the the beginning of this notice. in compliance with the requirements of United States are already UL listed. List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 1120 section 5 of Underwriters Laboratories Since the majority of businesses (both (UL) Standard for Safety for Household Administrative practice and large and small) are already in Electric Personal Grooming Appliances, procedure, Consumer protection, compliance with the voluntary UL 859–2007, 10th Edition, approved Household appliances, Imports, standard, the proposed rule is not March 21, 2007, or section 6 of UL Incorporation by reference. expected to pose a significant burden to Standard for Safety for Commercial small business. Therefore, the Therefore, the Commission proposes Electric Personal Grooming Appliances, Commission certifies that, in accordance to amend Title 16 of the Code of Federal UL 1727, 4th Edition, approved March with section 605 of the RFA, the rule, Regulations by adding part 1120 to read 25, 1999. The Director of the Federal if promulgated, will not have a as follows: Register approves these incorporations by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. significant economic impact on a PART 1120—SUBSTANTIAL PRODUCT substantial number of small entities. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. You may HAZARD LIST obtain a copy from UL, Inc., 333 I. Environmental Considerations Sec. Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, IL 60062. A rule determining that hand-held 1120.1 Authority You may inspect a copy at the Office of hair dryers without immersion 1120.2 Definitions the Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product protection in accordance with UL 859 or 1120.3 Substantial product hazard list Safety Commission, Room 502, 4330 UL 1727 present a substantial product Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2064(j). East West Highway, Bethesda, MD hazard is not expected to have an 20814, telephone 301–504–7923, or at adverse impact on the environment and § 1120.1 Authority. the National Archives and Records is considered to be a ‘‘categorical Under the authority of section 15(j) of Administration (NARA). For exclusion’’ for the purposes of the the Consumer Product Safety Act information on the availability of this National Environmental Policy Act (CPSA), the Commission determines material at NARA, call 202–741–6030, according to the CPSC regulations that that consumer products or classes of or go to: http://www.archives.gov/ cover its ‘‘environmental review’’ consumer products listed in § 1120.3 federal_register/code_of_federal_ procedures (16 CFR 1021.5(c)(1)). have characteristics whose existence or regulations/ibr_locations.html. absence presents a substantial product (b) [Reserved] J. Paperwork Reduction Act hazard under section 15(a)(2) of the Dated: May 11, 2010. This proposed rule would not impose CPSA. The Commission has determined Todd Stevenson, any information collection that the listed products have requirements. Accordingly, this rule is characteristics that are readily Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. not subject to the Paperwork Reduction observable and have been addressed by Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501–3520. a voluntary standard, that the voluntary [FR Doc. 2010–11624 Filed 5–14–10; 8:45 am] standard has been effective, and that BILLING CODE 6355–01–P K. Effective Date there is substantial compliance with the The proposed effective date of Part voluntary standard. The listed products 1120, which declares that any held-held are subject to the reporting requirements DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND hair dryer without immersion of section 15(b) of the CPSA and to the SECURITY protection, as specified in UL 859 or UL recall provisions of section 15(c) and (d) 1727, is a substantial product hazard, is of the CPSA, and shall be refused entry Coast Guard 30 days from issuance of any final into the United States under section regulation in the Federal Register. Thus, 17(a)(4) of the CPSA. 33 CFR Part 165 it would apply to hand-held hair dryers [Docket No. USCG–2010–0349] imported or introduced into commerce § 1120.2 Definitions. 30 days or more after publication of any The definitions in section 3 of the RIN 1625–AA08 final rule in the Federal Register. Consumer Product Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 2052) apply to this part 1120. Safety Zone; Delaware River, Big L. Preemption (a) Substantial product hazard means Timber Creek, Westville, NJ The proposed rule would place hand- a product defect which (because of the AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. held hair dryers without integral pattern of defect, the number of ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. immersion protection on a list of defective products distributed in VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:12 May 14, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17MYP1.SGM 17MYP1 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS 27508 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 94 / Monday, May 17, 2010 / Proposed Rules SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to suggestion or recommendation. You individual submitting the comment (or establish a temporary Safety Zone may submit your comments and signing the comment, if submitted on during the ‘‘Westville Parade of Lights,’’ material online (via http:// behalf of an association, business, labor an annual event held annually on the www.regulations.gov) or by fax, mail, or union, etc.). You may review a Privacy last Saturday in June with a rain date of hand delivery, but please use only one Act notice regarding our public dockets the first Saturday in July. This Safety of these means. If you submit a in the January 17, 2008, issue of the Zone is necessary to provide for the comment online via http:// Federal Register (73 FR 3316). safety of life on navigable waters during www.regulations.gov, it will be Public Meeting the event. This action is intended to considered received by the Coast Guard temporarily restrict vessel traffic in the when you successfully transmit the We do not now plan to hold a public regulated area within Big Timber Creek. comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or meeting. But you may submit a request DATES: Comments and related material mail your comment, it will be for one using one of the four methods must be received by the Coast Guard on considered as having been received by specified under ADDRESSES. Please or before June 16, 2010. the Coast Guard when it is received at explain why you believe a public the Docket Management Facility. We meeting would be beneficial. If we ADDRESSES: You may submit comments determine that one would aid this identified by docket number USCG– recommend that you include your name rulemaking, we will hold one at a time XXXX–XXXX using any one of the and a mailing address, an e-mail and place announced by a later notice following methods: address, or a telephone number in the (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: body of your document so that we can in the Federal Register. contact you if we have questions http://www.regulations.gov. Background and Purpose regarding your submission. (2) Fax: 202–493–2251. Annually on the last Saturday of June, (3) Mail: Docket Management Facility To submit your comment online, go to the Borough of Westville and Westville (M–30), U.S. Department of http://www.regulations.gov, click on the Power Boat will sponsor the ‘‘Parade of Transportation, West Building Ground ‘‘submit a comment’’ box, which will Lights.’’ There will be a boat parade Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey then become highlighted in blue. In the ‘‘ ’’ from the Route 130 Bridge to the Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590– Document Type drop down menu ‘‘ ’’ Delaware River entrance in Big Timber 0001. select Proposed Rule and insert (4) Hand delivery: Same as mail ‘‘USCG–XXXX–XXXX’’ in the ‘‘Keyword’’ Creek along with a fireworks display address above, between 9 a.m. and 5 box. Click ‘‘Search’’ then click on the launched from land with a fallout area ‘‘ ’’ p.m., Monday through Friday, except balloon shape in the Actions column.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • I-295/I-76/Route 42 Direct Connection Summary of Potential Wetland Mitigation Sites Search
    APPENDICES APPENDIX A Well Information APPENDIX AB KnownWell Contaminated Information Site List APPENDIX C Freshwater Fish Management Database APPENDIX D Agency Correspondence APPENDIX E Site Photographs Photo Plate 1: View looking downstream (west) from Bell Road Bridge. Photo Plate 2: View looking upstream (east) from Bell Road Bridge. Dresdner Robin Photo Plate 3: View looking east toward Wetland V data point behind noise barrier. Photo Plate 4: View looking east from AF-1 just beyond inlet. Note drop inlet. Dresdner Robin Photo Plate 5: View looking southwest toward Wetland AF from AE-2. Photo Plate 6: View looking south from Wetland Z Upland Data Point. Dresdner Robin Photo Plate 7: View looking upstream from sanitary sewer line toward Wetlands AA and AB Photo Plate 8: View looking downstream from sanitary sewer line toward Wetlands Z and AC. Dresdner Robin Photo Plate 9: Wetland K. Note skunk cabbage up slope along seep line. Photo Plate 10: Wetland K looking toward cemetery. Seep/spring along far side. Dresdner Robin Photo Plate 11: Open Water behind residential dwelling on Lowell Avenue. Photo Plate 12: View of wetland data point behind residential dwelling on Lowell Avenue. Note jewelweed is the dominant forbe. Dresdner Robin Photo Plate 13: View looking east along the I 295 north corridor at Wetland P. Photo Plate 14: Photograph of landfilled materials (glass, plastics, concrete, etc.) near TF-17. Dresdner Robin Photo Plate 15: Photograph of TF tidal wetland mud flat from TF-17. Photo Plate 16: Photograph of Wetland N from the edge of the I-295 highway. Dresdner Robin Photo Plate 17: View of the Upland Data Point 1 for Wetland TF.
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Geology Sand Mineral Deposits in and Mear the Oentral
    Regional Geology sand Mineral Deposits In and Mear the Oentral Part of the Lemhl Range, Lemhi County, Itlaho tJ.S, GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER Regional Geology and Mineral Deposits In and Near the Central Part of the Lemhi Range, Lemhi County, Idaho By EDWARD T. RUPPEL and DAVID A. LOPEZ U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1480 A descriptive summary of the rocks and structure in part of east-central Idaho UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1988 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DONALD PAUL HODEL, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director Any use of trade names in this report is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorse­ ment by the U.S. Geological Survey. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Ruppel, Edward Thompson, 1925- Regional geology and mineral deposits in and near the central part of the Lemhi Range, Lemhi County, Idaho. (U.S. Geological Survey professional paper ; 1480) Bibliography: p. Supt. of Docs, no.: I 19.16:1480 1. Geology Idaho Lemhi Range. 2. Ore-deposits Idaho Lemhi Range. I. Lopez, David A. II. Title. III. Series. QE104.L43R86 1988 557.9678 87-600492 For sale by the Books and Open-File Reports Section, U.S. Geological Survey Federal Center, Box 25425, Denver, CO 80225 CONTENTS Page Page Abstract ........................................... 1 Granitic intrusive rocks Continued Introduction ....................................... 2 Petrography Continued Topography and drainage ......................... 2 Early Paleozoic granite in the Beaverhead Mountains 59 Present work and acknowledgments ................ 4 Eocene granitic rocks in the Lemhi Range ....... 62 Summary of earlier geologic studies ................ 7 Descriptions of intrusive masses ..................
    [Show full text]
  • Quaternary and Late Tertiary of Montana: Climate, Glaciation, Stratigraphy, and Vertebrate Fossils
    QUATERNARY AND LATE TERTIARY OF MONTANA: CLIMATE, GLACIATION, STRATIGRAPHY, AND VERTEBRATE FOSSILS Larry N. Smith,1 Christopher L. Hill,2 and Jon Reiten3 1Department of Geological Engineering, Montana Tech, Butte, Montana 2Department of Geosciences and Department of Anthropology, Boise State University, Idaho 3Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology, Billings, Montana 1. INTRODUCTION by incision on timescales of <10 ka to ~2 Ma. Much of the response can be associated with Quaternary cli- The landscape of Montana displays the Quaternary mate changes, whereas tectonic tilting and uplift may record of multiple glaciations in the mountainous areas, be locally signifi cant. incursion of two continental ice sheets from the north and northeast, and stream incision in both the glaciated The landscape of Montana is a result of mountain and unglaciated terrain. Both mountain and continental and continental glaciation, fl uvial incision and sta- glaciers covered about one-third of the State during the bility, and hillslope retreat. The Quaternary geologic last glaciation, between about 21 ka* and 14 ka. Ages of history, deposits, and landforms of Montana were glacial advances into the State during the last glaciation dominated by glaciation in the mountains of western are sparse, but suggest that the continental glacier in and central Montana and across the northern part of the eastern part of the State may have advanced earlier the central and eastern Plains (fi gs. 1, 2). Fundamental and retreated later than in western Montana.* The pre- to the landscape were the valley glaciers and ice caps last glacial Quaternary stratigraphy of the intermontane in the western mountains and Yellowstone, and the valleys is less well known.
    [Show full text]
  • The Armewamus Band of New Jersey: Other Clues to Differences Between the Lenopi and Lenape
    West Chester University Digital Commons @ West Chester University Anthropology & Sociology Faculty Publications Anthropology & Sociology Fall 2010 The Armewamus Band of New Jersey: Other Clues to Differences Between the Lenopi and Lenape Marshall Joseph Becker Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.wcupa.edu/anthrosoc_facpub Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons Pennsylvania Archaeologist Bulletin of the SOCIETY FOR PENNSYLVANIA ARCHAEOLOGY, INC. ISSN: 0031-4358 Printed by: Prestige Color Lancaster, Pennsylvania Volume 80 Fall 2010 No. 2 Table of Contents The Discovery of Fort Morris, Shippensburg, Pennsylvania Stephen G. Warfel and Paul G. Marr 1 The Enigmatic Vestal Phase of the Late Archaic .... Laurie Miroff 30 Birdstones: Some Clarifications from Maryland Dennis C. Curry 50 The Armewamus Band of New Jersey: Other Clues to Differences Between the Lenopi and Lenape Marshall Joseph Becker 61 Human Head Effigy Found at the Ebbert Spring Site (36FR367), Franklin County, Pennsylvania Ronald D. Powell 73 Artifact 78 ©2010 The Society for Pennsylvania Archaeology, Inc. 61 THE ARMEWAMUS BAND OF NEW JERSEY: OTHER CLUES TO DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE LENOPI AND LENAPE MARSHALL JOSEPH BECKER ABSTRACT During the Contact era, the Lenape and Lenopi occupied southeastern Pennsylvania and New Jersey respectively. The dozen or more bands of Lenape, all living west of the Delaware River in southeastern Pennsylvania, are rarely identified by band name in the colonial records. However, colonial documents often identify band names of the Lenopi, who lived just across the Delaware River from the Lenape in southern New Jersey. Lenopi band names derive from specific locations; for example, the people called Armewamus who lived at Armewomink, an area north of Big Timber Creek.
    [Show full text]
  • Dutch Colonial Fortifications in North America 1614-1676 Jaap Jacobs
    Dutch Colonial Fortifications in North America 1614-1676 Jaap Jacobs New Holland Foundation, Amsterdam 2015 Dutch Colonial Fortifications in North America 1614-1676 Historical Research in the Netherlands and the United States of America Contributions to the Atlas of Dutch North America 1 Jaap Jacobs © 2015 The New Holland Foundation & Bommelstein Historical Consultancy Ltd. ISBN/EAN 978-94-90246-13-6 Jaap Jacobs asserts the moral right to be identified as author of this work. 2 Dutch Colonial Fortifications in North America 1614-1676 Table of contents Introduction 4 III. Middle and Upper Hudson River Valley 45 I. New Amsterdam and Vicinity 5 1. Fort Nassau (Albany) — 1614 46 2. Fort Orange (Albany) — 1624 49 1. Nooten Eylandt/Governors Island — 1623/1624 6 3. Rensselaersstein (Beeren Island) — 1643 54 2. Fort Amsterdam — 1625/1626 7 4. Redoubt at the Fifth Kill — 1653 56 3. Staten Island — 1641 14 5. Beverwijck (Albany) — 1654 57 4. New Amsterdam Perimeter Defences — 1653 16 6. ‘A stone fort’ (Kinderhook) — ca. 1654 58 5. New Amsterdam City Hall — 1654 20 7. Wiltwijck (Kingston) — 1658 59 6. Oyster Bay — 1655 20 8. Rondout (Kingston) — 1660 62 7. Fort Massapeag (Oyster Bay) — 1656 22 9. Fort (Greenbush) — 1663 63 8. ‘s-Gravesande (Gravesend, Brooklyn) — 1656 23 10. Nieuw Dorp (Hurley) — 1664 63 9. Midwout/Amersfoort (Flatbush/Flatlands, Brooklyn) — 1656 23 1 1. Schenectady — 1671 63 10. Bergen (Jersey City, New Jersey) — 1660 23 11. Breuckelen and New Utrecht (Brooklyn) — 1660 24 IV. Other Regions 65 12. Gemoenepa (Communipaw, Jersey City, New Jersey) — 1661 25 13. Navesink (Middletown, New Jersey) — 1664 25 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Space Plan.Pdf
    TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Introduction ............................................................………...............… 5 Overview .............................................................................….........…. 7 1. Open Space Preservation in Camden County ................ 17 State Open Space ........................................................................ 17 Wharton State Forest ...................................................................... 17 Winslow Wildlife Management Area............................................ 18 County Open Space ........................................................... 19 Camden County Park System .................................................. 19 Municipal Open Space ...................................................... 39 Municipal Open Space Inventory ........................................... 39 Municipal Greenways ............................................................. 39 2. Farmland Preservation in Camden County .................... 41 3. Historic Preservation in Camden County ........................ 43 Early History of Camden County ............................................ 43 Local Historic Preservation Efforts ........................................ 46 4. Planning Goal and Objectives ............................................. 49 5. Criteria Ranking for Site Prioritization ........................... 51 6. Application Procedures ......................................................... 57 APPENDICES PAGE Appendix A - Inventory of Municipal Open Space in Camden
    [Show full text]
  • Instream Flow Assessment: Big Timber Creek, Idaho
    Flow Characterization Study Instream Flow Assessment Big Timber Creek, Idaho U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Technical Service Center Denver, Colorado June 2004 Flow Characterization Study Instream Flow Assessment Big Timber Creek, Idaho Prepared for: U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Snake River Area Office Boise,Idaho by: Ron Sutton Chelsie Morris U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Technical Service Center Denver, Colorado June 2004 Table of Contents SUMMARY.....................................................................................................................................................................1 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................2 2.0 STUDY REGION...................................................................................................................................................4 3.0 LIMITING FACTORS ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................7 4.0 METHODS ............................................................................................................................................................15 5.0 RESULTS AND DIS CUSSION........................................................................................................................23 6.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...............................................................................................................................44
    [Show full text]
  • Forefather Family Profile Binder
    The Toy and King Families Qualification & of Senamensing, New Jersey Procedure Anders Andersson the Finn List of Qualifying Forefathers and his Descendents Forefather 2012 Application Måns Andersson and his Mounts Descendants Forefather Family Nils Andersson and his Lykins Descendants Profiles List of Current Anders Bengtsson and his BanksonSociety & Bankston Forefather Mambers Descendants Anders Svensson Bonde and his Boon Family Sinnick Broer theColonial Finn and his Sinex, Sinnickson & Falkenberg Descendants Peter Larsson Cock (Cox) The EnochSwedish Brothers and their Swedish Descendants Johan Fisk of New Sweden and his Fish Descendant Nils Larsson Frände (Friend) Copyright Johan Grelsson and his Archer, Urian and Culin Descendants Sven Gunnarsson and his Swanson Family Johan Gustafsson, Soldier from Kinnekulle Jöns Gustafsson of Östergötland, Sweden, and His Justason Descendants Captain Israel Helm Hendrickson House: Oldest Stone House in America? Matthias Claesson and his Holstein Family Peter Jochimsson and his Yocum Descendants Lars Carlsson Lock, Pastor of New Sweden and his Family Måns Svensson Lom, Forgotten Forefather, and his Seven Daughters Peter Andersson of Siamensing 2012 and his Longacre Descendants Nils Andersson and His Lykins Descendants Society The Mattson & Dalbo Families of West Jersey Olle Matthiasson, alias Olof Isgrå, alias Oliver Caulk and his Caulk/CalkColonial Descendants Hans Månsson and his Steelman Family Mårten Mårtensson and his Morton Family Pål JönssonSwedish Mullica the Finn and his Descendants Jonas
    [Show full text]
  • The Value of a Clean and Healthy Delaware River
    RIVER VALUES The Value of a Clean and Healthy Delaware River Delaware RIVERKEEPER® Network April 2010 RIVER VALUES The Value of a Clean and Healthy Delaware River Delaware RIVERKEEPER® Network April 2010 Printed on Recycled Paper Delaware RIVERKEEPER® Network The Delaware Riverkeeper is an individual who is the lead voice for the Delaware River, championing the rights of the Delaware River and its streams as members of our community. The Delaware Riverkeeper is assisted by seasoned professionals and a network of members, volunteers and supporters. Together they are the Delaware Riverkeeper Network, and together they stand as vigilant protectors and defenders of the River, its tributaries and watershed. Established in 1988 upon the appointment of the Delaware Riverkeeper, the Delaware Riverkeeper Network (DRN) is the only advocacy organization working throughout the entire Delaware River Watershed. DRN is committed to restoring the watershed’s natural balance where it has been lost and ensuring its preservation where it still exists. The Delaware Riverkeeper Network's focus is the ecological health and integrity of the river ecosystem recognizing we best protect ourselves only when we best protect our River. The Delaware Riverkeeper Network works to: 9 Protect and defend the Delaware River through advocacy and enforcement; 9 Inform, organize, activate and strengthen citizens and communities that appreciate and rely upon the River, its tributaries and watershed and want to get involved for their protection and restoration; 9 Monitor the health of the River and tributary streams – gathering reliable data that is then used to bring about meaningful change; 9 Secure and enforce strong legal protections for waterways and associated ecosystems; 9 Restore damaged streams and ecosystems; and 9 Ensure that the voice of the River is heard and its needs are given highest priority in all decision making.
    [Show full text]
  • The Story of the Discovery of Scheyichbi
    The Story Of The Discovery Of Scheyichbi By Frank Richard Stockton The Story Of The Discovery Of Scheyichbi The North American Indians, the earliest inhabitants of this country of whom we know anything definite, were great storytellers; and their histories consist entirely of stories handed down from parents to children, or, more likely, from grandparents to grandchildren, for grandfathers and grandmothers are generally more willing to tell stories than fathers or mothers. And so these traditions, probably a good deal brightened by being passed along century after century, came down to the Indians who were first met by white people, and thus we have heard many of them. The stories told by the Indians inhabiting the country which is now the Middle States, all agree that their remote forefathers came from some region beyond the Mississippi River. Like the traditions of most nations, these go so very far back that they are vague and misty; but, as this gave the Indians a great opportunity for their imaginations, it is not wonderful that they improved it. These Indians believed that in the very earliest stages of their existence they were all animals, and lived in caves under the earth. They were hunters; but their game consisted of mice, and creatures of that sort. One of them accidentally discovered a hole by which he got out on the surface of the ground; and, finding it so exceedingly pleasant, it was not long before the whole of his tribe came out, and began life in the light of day. It may be supposed that these animals gradually changed to human beings, and built villages, and planted corn; but in one respect they did not change, nor have they changed at this present day.
    [Show full text]
  • Delaware Estuary Salinity Model Validation
    Philadelphia Water Department Watershed Protection Program Delaware Estuary Salinity Model Validation May 2020 Philadelphia Water Department May 2020 Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Numerical Model ........................................................................................................................... 1 2.1 Model Objectives ........................................................................................................................ 1 2.2 Modeling Approach ................................................................................................................... 1 2.3 Study Area .................................................................................................................................. 3 2.4 Salinity Conversion Methods ................................................................................................... 5 2.5 Boundary Conditions ................................................................................................................ 5 2.5.1 Tributaries ........................................................................................................................... 5 2.5.2 Open Boundary Condition -Salinity .............................................................................. 18 2.5.3 CSOs ..................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Gary Brown, President of RT Environmental Services, Inc. (RT
    www.bellmawrwaterfront.com Bellmawr Redevelopment Newsletter Volume 4, Winter 2008 REMEDIAL INVESTIGA- REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION STAGE NEARS COMPLETION Gary Brown, President of RT REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION Environmental Services, Inc. STAGE NEARS COMPLETION (RT), and Glennon Graham, Jr., Project Geologist recently announced that the remedial investigation stage of the Bellmawr Waterfront Development (BWD) is nearing completion. Comments were received on the Remedial Investigation Report from the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP), and, as a result of discussions between DEP and BWD officials, several enhancements will be added to the Landfill Closure Plan. A deep well installed to the east of the site, beneath a shallow clay aquiclude, and screened within the Englishtown Sand, shows that lead concentrations in groundwater meet the NJDEP’s most stringent groundwater quality standards. As lead is a “key indicator” for older landfills, due to its ubiquitous presence in consumer wastes, this well demonstrates that the historic landfill activities conducted over several decades, terminating before 1980 have had no significant effect on groundwater aquifer supplies. Groundwater in the area is actually drawn from a deeper aquifer, the Potomac Raritan Magothy (PRM) aquifer, and another layer of clay separates the Englishtown Sand from the PRM. Enhancements to the Closure Plan for the site include: • More extensive capping in the Bellmawr Fazzio Landfill area where the largest volume of waste was historically placed. _space RT ENVIRONMENTAL “Trucks arriving with landfill materials are inspected and weighed” • Installation of an upgradient shallow groundwater cutoff wall and underdrain to divert shallow groundwater from flowing into the deposited waste mass. • Installation of a driven sheet pile wall behind which compacted clay will be placed in the former Fazzio Deptford Landfill Area.
    [Show full text]