DOCSLIB.ORG

General Electric Aviation (GE)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
General Electric Aviation (GE) EXHIBIT 4 NPDES Permit No. MA0003905 Response to Comment Response to Comments on Draft National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. MA0003905 - General Electric Aviation (GE) Introduction ....................................................................................................................................3 Changes to Draft Permit ...............................................................................................................4 Comment 1.1: ...............................................................................................................................12 2. Facility Background...............................................................................................................13 Comment 2.1: Lynn Facility History and Operations ..............................................................13 Comment 2.2: Economic Considerations ................................................................................14 Comment 2.3: Environmental Good Citizen ...........................................................................15 Comment 2.4: Permitting History ............................................................................................16 Comment 2.5: Recent Changes to Drainage at the Facility .....................................................18 3. EPA’s Assumptions about Groundwater Contamination are not Accurate; as a Result, EPA’s Limits and Conditions Derived from these Assumptions are not Appropriate. ...........................................................................................................................24 Comment 3.1: EPA’s Assumptions .........................................................................................24 Comment 3.2: EPA’s Assumptions Overlook GE’s Extensive Pipe Relining and Replacement Effort ........................................................................................................29 Comment 3.3: EPA’s Assumption about Contaminated Groundwater at Outfalls 014, 018 and 020 do not Reflect Key Changes to the Facility ..............................................30 Comment 3.4: EPA’s Assumptions about Groundwater Quality Overlook GE’s Extensive Site Remediation Activities. .........................................................................31 4. Numeric Limits Applied to Wet Weather Flows are not Appropriate. ..............................38 Comment 4.1: Numeric Water Quality-based Limits are not Feasible or Necessary and in any Event are not Justified Here. ........................................................................39 Comment 4.2: EPA Lacks a Legitimate Technical Basis to Derive or Impose Numeric Technology-Based Limits. ............................................................................................43 5. Monitoring Requirements are Burdensome and Unreasonable. .........................................57 Comment 5.1: Chemical Monitoring. ......................................................................................58 Comment 5.2: WET Testing. ...................................................................................................73 Comment 5.3: Bioaccumulation Study. ...................................................................................78 6. EPA’s Assumption that there is no Available Dilution in the Receiving Water is Overly Conservative and not Supported Factually. ...........................................................81 Comment 6.1: Qualitative Assessment Supports Allowance for Dilution and Mixing. ..........82 Comment 6.2: Quantitative Evaluation Supports Allowance for Dilution and Mixing. .........85 7. EPA must Correct Errors in its Approach to Assigning Limits and Monitoring Conditions on GE’s Noncontact Cooling Water and Unused River Water Discharges. ..............................................................................................................................87 Comment 7.1: Outfall 018 does not Discharge Stormwater and, in Turn, Should not be Assigned Wet Weather Limits or Conditions. ..........................................................87 Comment 7.2: Any Groundwater Infiltration into Outfalls 014, 018 and 020 is de minimis. .........................................................................................................................88 Comment 7.3: The Copper and Selenium Limits at Outfall 018 limits are not Appropriate. ...................................................................................................................88 Page 1 of 242 NPDES Permit No. MA0003905 Response to Comment 8. Antidegradation Authorization is Neither Necessary nor Appropriate for this NPDES Renewal Proceeding. ................................................................................................90 9. The Draft Permit would Result in Redundant and Internally Inconsistent Requirements that do not Reflect best Professional Judgment, are not Necessary in Order to Achieve Water Quality Objectives, and are Infeasible to Implement. .........92 Comment 9.1: Wet and Dry Weather Flows. ...........................................................................93 Comment 9.2: Allowable and Non-Allowable Stormwater. ....................................................95 Comment 9.3: MEP. ................................................................................................................96 Comment 9.4: During Dry Weather Conditions, the CDTS Reflects Best Available Technology and is Protective of Water Quality. ...........................................................97 Comment 9.5: The CDTS is not Designed to Handle Wet Weather Flows. ............................98 Comment 9.6: Neither the Prohibition nor the MEP Requirement is Necessary to Achieve Water Quality Objectives. ...............................................................................99 10. EPA’s Proposed Thermal Limits for Outfalls 018 and 014 are more Stringent than Warranted by Applicable Law. .................................................................................100 Comment 10.1: Overview of EPA’s Approach to Deriving the Proposed Thermal Limits. ..........................................................................................................................100 Comment 10.2: EPA’s Proposed Determination that Retrofitting Closed-Cycle Cooling Reflects BAT for the Facility is Fundamentally Flawed. ..............................107 Comment 10.3: EPA’s Determination that Alternative Thermal Limits of 90°F for Outfalls 018 and 014 are Necessary to Assure the Protection and Propagation of a Balanced, Indigenous Population in the Saugus River is Flawed. .......................120 11. EPA’s Proposed BTA Determination for the Facility’s CWIS Require Reconsideration. ...................................................................................................................137 Comment 11.1: Background. .................................................................................................137 Comment 11.2: GE’s Proposed Operational Measures. ........................................................151 Comment 11.3: EPA’s Proposed BTA Determination. .........................................................155 Comment 11.4: EPA’s Analysis Mischaracterizes the Impacts of the Existing Power Plant and Test Cell CWISs. .........................................................................................167 Comment 11.5: EPA Incorrectly Assumed that Impingement and Entrainment from the CWIS, at the Levels Estimated by the Agency, would cause Adverse Environmental Impact. ................................................................................................177 Comment 11.6: EPA’s Assumption that Achieving the Predicted Reductions in Impingement and Entrainment will Produce Appreciable Benefits for the Saugus River is Unfounded. ........................................................................................187 Comment 11.7: EPA’s Erred in Concluding that Retrofitting the Power Plant with Closed-Cycle Cooling is Technologically and Economically Available Cooling Water Intake Structure Technology for the Facility. ...................................................190 Comment 11.8: EPA’s Proposal to Require the Power Plant CWIS to Retrofit fine Mesh Wedgewire Screens Ignored Technical Impediments and Significant Costs. ...........................................................................................................................195 Comment 11.9: EPA’s Proposed BTA Determination for the Test Cell CWIS Requires Reconsideration. ...........................................................................................203 Comment 11.10: The Proposed Monitoring Requirements for Impingement and Entrainment are Unreasonably Burdensome and Unnecessary to Ensure Proper Operation and Maintenance of BTA Technologies. ....................................................205 Page 2 of 242 NPDES Permit No. MA0003905 Response to Comment 12. EPA Needs to Correct and/or Clarify Certain Aspects of the Draft Permit. .................210 13. Some of EPA’s Expectations and Assumptions Related to Operations and Practices at the Facility are not Accurate and Need to be Corrected. ............................215 Comment 13.1: Treatment by GAC Alone is more Effective than Treatment using both the GAC and DAF. ..............................................................................................215 Comment 13.2: GE has Concerns about the Feasibility, Effectiveness
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Horizons-Vol-2-Issue-2-2016
    Vol. 2 Issue 2 Copyright © 2016 Massachusetts Air and Space Museum 200 Hanscom Drive Bedford, MA 01730 www.massairspace.org General Electric Aviation It would not be uncommon for many to believe that era of the Spanish-American War. Then, the company a company like General Electric focused primarily on seized upon the public’s new-found fascination with all the manufacture of household things electrical. It developed appliances and large-scale gen- an elastic manufacturing model erating systems used in the that is still in use today; one production of electrical power. where innovation is the key ele- The company name in itself ment and driving force that al- M.I.T. Lincoln Laboratory photograph suggests just that. While such lows the business to turn its GEPhoto Aviation of L.E.S. CF6—-80C1 & jet 2 design engine an assumption would be par- eye toward the skies. tially correct, it would not rep- During the latter Nineteenth resent the complete scope of this very large and di- and early Twentieth Centuries, GE was intimately asso- verse modern corporation. Owing to its roots from the ciated with major advances in the general field of Edison General Electric Company, GE dates back to the Continued on Page 2 Continued from Page 1 witnessed first-hand what the amazing Whittle engine could do, and he was convinced that the mighty Arse- transportation. From railroad locomotives to piston- nal of Democracy needed them to stay ahead of the driven airplane motors, the company was involved in technological curve. both manufacturing and recon- figuring the motors that moved GE had extensive experience in America and the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Lynn Gear Works Redevelopment
    Lynn Gear Works Redevelopment Final Environmental Impact Report EEA #15441 PROPONENT PREPARED BY Lynnway Associates, LLC 130 Atlantic Avenue Swampscott, MA 01907 99 High Street Boston, MA 02110 SUBMITTED TO IN ASSOCIATION WITH The Executive Office of Energy D’Angelo Engineering and Development and Environmental Affairs Commercial Construction Consulting, Inc. MEPA Office Elkus | Manfredi Architects 100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900 Carol R. Johnson Associates Boston, MA 02114 TEC, Inc. Tech Environmental, Inc. GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc. Hancock Associates March 10, 2017 Final Environmental Impact Report – EEA# 15441 Lynn Gear Works Redevelopment Lynn, Massachusetts SUBMITTED TO Secretary Matthew A. Beaton Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs Attn: MEPA Office 100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900 Boston, MA 02114 PROPONENT Lynnway Associates, LLC 130 Atlantic Avenue Swampscott, MA 01907 PREPARED BY VHB 99 High Street, 10th Floor Boston, MA 02110 In association with: D’Angelo Engineering and Development Commercial Construction Consulting, Inc. Elkus | Manfredi Architects Carol R. Johnson Associates TEC, Inc. Tech Environmental, Inc. GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc. Hancock Associates March 10, 2017 March 10, 2017 Ref: 12341.00 Matthew Beaton, Secretary Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs 100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900 Boston, MA 022114 Re: Final Environmental Impact Report, Lynn Gear Works, EEA No. 15441 Dear Secretary Beaton: On behalf of Lynnway Associates, LLC (the “Proponent”), VHB is pleased to submit the enclosed Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the Lynn Gear Works Redevelopment Project (the “Project”). This FEIR has been prepared in accordance with the Secretary’s Certificate on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for EEA No. 15441, issued November 30, 2016.
    [Show full text]
  • General Electric Aviation; Draft Permit Minor Modification; MA0003905
    Permit Modification No. MA0003905 Page 1 of 35 DRAFT MODIFICATION OF AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM In compliance with the provisions of the Federal Clean Water Act as amended, (33 U.S.C. §§1251 et seq.; the "CWA"), and the Massachusetts Clean Waters Act, as amended, (M.G.L. Chap. 21, §§26-53), General Electric Company is authorized to discharge from a facility located at General Electric Aviation 1000 Western Avenue Lynn, MA 01910 to the receiving water named Saugus River in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements and other conditions set forth herein. If there are no comments, this modified permit shall become effective on the date of signature. If comments are received, this modified permit shall become effective on the first day of the calendar month following sixty (60) days after signature. This modification and the underlying authorization to discharge expire at midnight, five (5) years from the last day of the month preceding effective date. This modified permit is issued pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 124.5, and revises and supersedes the permit modification that was issued on August 19, 2015. This permit consists of 35 pages in Part I including effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, 10 pages in Attachment 1: Marine Acute Toxicity Test Procedure and Protocol (2012), 12 pages in Attachment 2: Marine Chronic Toxicity Test Procedure and Protocol (2013), 1 page in Attachment 3: Outfalls/Intakes Map, 1 page in Attachment 4: Approved Additives, 3 pages in Attachment 5: Standard Operating Procedures, 1 page in Attachment 6: Reporting Form for Gate Openings, 1 page in Attachment 7: Reporting Form for Dry Season Vault Elevations, and 25 pages in Part II: Standard Conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • Preliminary Assessment and Phase I Site
    PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT AND PHASE I SITE INVESTIGATION REPORT for the GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY Bennett Street Site Lynn, Massachusetts PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT AND PHASE I SITE INVESTIGATION REPORT for the GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY BENNETT STREET SITE LYNN, MASSACHUSETTS Prepared for General Electric Company 1000 Western Avenue Lyn n, Massachusetts 01910 Prepared by Wehran Engineering Corporation 100 Milk Street Methuen, Massachusetts 01844 Wehran Project No. 08257.05 November 1988 GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY TABLE OF CONTENTS (Page 1) Page No. 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 2-1 2.1 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 2-1 2.2 SITE RECONNAISSANCE 2-2 3.0 SITE HISTORY 3-1 3.1 PROPERTY HISTORY 3-1 3.2 REGULATORY COMPLIANCE 3-3 4.0 FIELD INVESTIGATIONS 4-1 4.1 SOIL-GAS SURVEY 4-1 4.2 TEST BORINGS AND GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING 4-2 4.2.1 Part 1 Activities 4-2 4.2.2 Part 2 Activities 4-4 4.2.3 Well Elevation Survey 4-5 4.3 GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS 4-6 5.0 RESULTS OF FIELD INVESTIGATIONS 5-1 5.1 SOIL-GAS SURVEY 5-1 5.2 SUBSURFACE SOILS 5-1 5.2.1 Geological Assessment 5-1 5.2.2 Soil Analytical Results 5-2 5.2.3 Geophysical Survey Results 5-4 5.3 GROUNDWATER 5-6 5.3.1 Hydrological Assessment 5-7 5.3.2 Groundwater Analytical Results 5-8 6.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 6-1 6.1 SUMMARY 6-1 6.1.1 Site Description and History 6-1 30 11/88.0825705 GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY TABLE OF CONTENTS (Page 2) Page No.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Corrective Action Baseline: 3,779 Facilities Sorted by Location (EPA Region, State, City) Last Updated September 30, 2017
    2020 Corrective Action Baseline: 3,779 facilities sorted by Location (EPA Region, State, City) Last Updated September 30, 2017. For addititonal information on Corrective Action Facilities, please visit our Cleanups in My Community page at: https://www.epa.gov/cleanups/cleanups-my-community Region EPAID Handler Name Address City State Zip Code CA725 CA750 CA550 CA900 Federal Facility 1 CTD001165224 BRONSON HOMER D CO MAIN ST BEACON FALLS CT 6403 1 CTD001168137 IDEAL PRODUCTS LLC 158 PINESBRIDGE ROAD BEACON FALLS CT 6403 YE YE YE 1 CTD052541695 CORBIN RUSSWIN INC 225 EPISCOPAL RD BERLIN CT 6037 YE YE 1 CTD001181205 VANDERBILT CHEMICALS LLC 31 TAYLOR AVE BETHEL CT 6801 YE YE YE 1 CTD001449602 SANDVIK WIRE AND HEATING TECH 119 WOOSTER ST BETHEL CT 6801 YE YE YE 1 CTD001144062 BIRKEN MANUFACTURING COMPANY 3 OLD WINDSOR ROAD BLOOMFIELD CT 06002-1397 YE YE 1 CTD001145671 BASS PLATING CO 82 OLD WINDSOR RD BLOOMFIELD CT 6002 YE YE 1 CTD001155225 KAMAN AEROSPACE CORP 50 OLD WINDSOR RD BLOOMFIELD CT 6002 YE YE YE 1 CTD980667927 SAFETY KLEEN SYSTEMS INC 11 TIPPING DR LOT 4 BRANFORD CT 6405 YE YE YE 1 CTD000638627 BRIDGEPORT HARBOR STATION 1 ATLANTIC ST BRIDGEPORT CT 6604 YE YE 1 CTD000651927 SEASIDE PARK LANDFILL SEASIDE PARK BARNUM BLVD BRIDGEPORT CT 6604 YE YE 1 CTD001174580 SPECIFICATIONS PLATING INC 740 SEAVIEW AVE BRIDGEPORT CT 6607 YE 1 CTD001180587 O & G INDUSTRIES INC 325 HANCOCK AVE BRIDGEPORT CT 6605 YE YE YE 1 CTD001183078 WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORP 1421 STATE STREET BRIDGEPORT CT 06605-2032 YE YE YE 1 CTD001449735 SIKORSKY AIRCRAFT CORP
    [Show full text]
  • General Electric Aviation; Final Permit; MA0003905
    EXHIBIT 1 Final Permit No. MA0003905 Page 1 of 36 AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM In compliance with the provisions of the Federal Clean Water Act as amended, (33 U.S.C. §§1251 et seq.; the "CWA"), and the Massachusetts Clean Waters Act, as amended, (M.G.L. Chap. 21, §§26-53), General Electric Company is authorized to discharge from a facility located at General Electric Aviation 1000 Western Avenue Lynn, MA 01910 to the receiving water named Saugus River in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements and other conditions set forth herein. This permit shall become effective on the first day of the calendar month following 60 days after signature. This permit and the authorization to discharge expire at midnight, five (5) years from the last day of the month preceding the effective date. This permit supersedes the permit issued on September 29, 1993. This permit consists of 36 pages in Part I including effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, 10 pages in Attachment 1: Marine Acute Toxicity Test Procedure and Protocol (2012), 12 pages in Attachment 2: Marine Chronic Toxicity Test Procedure and Protocol (2013), 1 page in Attachment 3: Outfalls/Intakes Map, 1 page in Attachment 4: Approved Additives, and 25 pages in Part II: Standard Conditions. Signed this 30th day of September, 2014 /S/SIGNATURE ON FILE /S/SIGNATURE ON FILE _________________________ __________________________ Ken Moraff, Director David Ferris, Director Office of Ecosystem Protection Massachusetts Wastewater Management Program Environmental Protection Agency Department of Environmental Protection Boston, MA Commonwealth of Massachusetts Boston, MA Final Permit No.
    [Show full text]
  • IUE-CWA Local 201 News
    Post Master: Send Address Changes To: IUE-CWA Local 201 News Celebrating 86 Years 112 Exchange St., Lynn, MA 01901 IUE-C WA as a Chartered Local Loc al 2 01 News 1933 – 2019 Local 201 is an amalgamated local representing approximately 1,600 members employed by GE River Works (Lynn), Ametek Aerospace (Wilmington), Veolia Water (Lynn), Avis-Budget Group (East Boston), Avis (Boston/Cambridge), and the Saugus Library (Saugus) and thousands of lifetime Retiree members across the country . www.local201iuecwa.org PERIODICALS POSTAGE PAID AT LYNN, MASS. USPS 171-720 Vol. LXXVIII NOVEMBER 12, 2019 Number 10 Published By EDITOR MANAGING-EDITOR Subscription IUE-CWA Local 201, AFL-CIO Bill Maher Tom O’Shea $1.00 Per Year (781) 598-2760 T408-GE-400 First Production Engine Delivered to the United States Marine Corps. On October 25, 2019, GE- tions. The T408 has 57% more Lynn hosted a ceremony in power, 20% better SFC and the 2-96 Auditorium, com - 63% fewer parts. The T408 is memorating the delivery of assembled (Bldg. 81) and the first T408 Production en - tested by Lynn Assembly, gine to the United States Ma - Test & Overhaul (LATO) em - rine Corps. The T408 engines ployees. will power the Marines CH- Representative Seth Moul - 53K Heavy Lift helicopter, re - ton (D-MA), a member of the placing the T64 engine that House Armed Services Com - powers the CH-53E helicop - mittee stated in his recent ter. The T408, with 7,500 – press release, “For the first Sikorsky CH-53K King Stallion – rated horsepower can lift time in a generation, the The Most Powerful U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • GE Aviation PSD Permit Application Test Cell 2 and 5 Modification
    GE Aviation PSD Permit Application Test Cell 2 and 5 Modification Prepared for GE Aviation Lynn, MA September 2007 Contents Section Page 1.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1-1 2.0 Facility and Project Description ............................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Site Description ...................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Permitting History and Historical Emissions .................................................... 2-3 2.3 Engine Test Cell Description and Proposed Modifications ............................. 2-3 2.4 Test Cell Planned Operation ................................................................................ 2-7 3.0 Emission Estimates...................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Historical Emissions .............................................................................................. 3-1 3.2 Existing Permitted Emission Limits .................................................................... 3-1 3.3 Emission Estimates for Permitting ...................................................................... 3-1 4.0 Federal Regulations .................................................................................................... 4-1 4.1 Prevention of Significant Deterioration .............................................................. 4-1 4.2
    [Show full text]
  • This Is GE-Lynn GE Aviation
    This is GE-Lynn GE Aviation 2013 GE Proprietary Information – The information contained in this document is GE proprietary information and is disclosed in confidence. It is the property of GE and shall not be used, disclosed to others or reproduced without the express written consent of GE, including, but without limitation, it is not to be used in the creation, manufacture, development, or derivation of any repairs, modifications, spare parts, designs, or configuration changes or to obtain FAA or any other government or regulatory approval to do so. If consent is given for reproduction in whole or in part, this notice and the notice set forth on each page of this document shall appear in any such reproduction in whole or in part. The information contained in this document may also be controlled by the U.S. export control laws. Unauthorized export or re-export is prohibited. Engineering and Mathematics Practical Applications GE Aviation Lynn, MA Facilities Engineering and Edmund (Ted) Tarallo Salem High School GE Proprietary Information Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restrictions on the cover or first page. GE Lynn Facility 225 acres 20 buildings Prominent Role Facility Highlights Largest Aviation manufacturing site Mechanical Integrity Program rd Represents 2/3 of MSO sales Plant Electrical Updates GE38, 701K, HF120 Development Key Product & Technology Engineering Largest GE Massachusetts business GE Proprietary Information 3 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet GE Aviation is subject to the restrictions on the cover or first 11/26/2013 page. General Electric Company Fox Hill Bridge River Works Plant N Lynn, Massachusetts Effective 9/25/2001 Fairchild St.
    [Show full text]
  • The History of the GE Monogram GE’S Logo and Brand Through the Years
    The History of the GE Monogram GE’s Logo and Brand Through the Years GE Art Program 3135 Easton Turnpike Fairfield, CT 06828 T: 203 373 2868 The GE Monogram At Work in the World Dates: January 1 — April 30, 2013 Location: GE World Headquarters 3135 Easton Turnpike Fairfield, CT 06828 A Deep Dig into the Origins of the GE Monogram Evolution of the GE Monogram Messrs. Rich? Stalberg? Glen? Or was it an unnamed contest winner? Who originally designed our famous 112-year-old Monogram? It depends on what you mean by designed. The exact origin of the Monogram remains elusive. And while this article is one of many that have offered a guess over the past century, regrettably the mystery remains unsolved. Theories, of course, abound, with most arising from historic memos identifying differ- ent executives who may or may not have come up with the original Monogram. These theories, of course, have become a part of our lore, binding us as a corporation and serving as part of the historic testament to who we are and what we stand for. With this mythology in mind, we return to the subject of the genesis of the Monogram, hoping not to reveal some unknown truth, but rather to give light and example to our longstanding spirit of innovation and the pride that comes with being part of a dynamic, forward-moving company. The fi rst appearance of the Monogram In 1892, almost a full decade before the Monogram was trademarked, the Edison General Electric Company and the Thomson-Houston Electric Company merged to form the General Electric Company.
    [Show full text]
  • Directory of Labor Organizations in Massachusetts
    V'^ Public Document No. 15 ®I|r Qlnmrnonui^altlj of MasBntl]ix&ettB DIRECTORY OF LABOR ORGANIZATIONS 1965 ANNUAL REPORT ON THE STATISTICS OF LABOR Published by the Massachusetts Department of Labor and Industries Rocco Alberto, Commissioner ^H1 Publication of this Document Approved by Alfred C. Holland, State Purchasing Agent. 1400-5-65-940178 Estimated cost per copy: $.525 ,v gT o^-.re^ur^'- BOSTo:; -^ - -3RARY lAassachusetts fi^l ^"^ Directory of Labor Organizaticns 1965 BDTD RED DIRECTORY OF LABOR ORGANIZATIONS IN MASSACHUSETTS 19 6 5 (With Statistics of Membership, 1963-6Ii-65) Labor Bulletin No. 208 Compiled by the DIVISION OF STATISTICS Thomas M. Raftery, Director MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRIES Rocco Alberto, Coraraissicner INTRODUCTION The raateirial here presented constitutes the Sixtieth Directory of Labor Organizations in Massachusetts. The first Directory of this kind was published in August, 1902. The tem "Labor Organizations" as used in this Directory is a group of employees or wage earners organized for the purpose of improving their status through negotiations with employers. The organization is usually a party to either a written or verbal agreement concerning wages and conditions of em- ployment . Since the last Directory was issued many new unions have been organized, others have become inactive or disbanded. The Department has records of unions in existence by reason of "statements" required by Chapter 6I8, Acts of I9I46 (Revised by Chapter 39U, Acts of 19h9)- This edition consists of four divisions, as follows: I. " National and International Organizations " having one or more affil- iated local unions in the United States, (pages 3-13)' H.
    [Show full text]
  • Deal Developing for River Works Rail Station
    TUESDAY, MAY 16, 2017 Deal developing for River Works rail station By Thomas Grillo lion project that would include 1,160 ITEM STAFF apartments, has signed an agreement with the state to improve the modest The River LYNN — The prospects of nanc- station. Works stop ing a new waterfront neighborhood Under the terms of the deal, the Riv- could be rebuilt improved late last week after the de- er Works stop on the Newburyport/ to accommo- veloper agreed to spend more than $1 Rockport Line that is used only for GE date new resi- million to expand the MBTA’s River workers, would be rebuilt to accommo- dents and the Works Commuter Rail Station. date new residents and the public. It public. Charles Patsios, the Swampscott will be paid for by Patsios’ company, developer who is planning to trans- Lynnway Associates. ITEM FILE PHOTO | form the former General Electric Co. OWEN O’ROURKE Gear Works property into a $500 mil- RIVER WORKS, A7 Reasons why Eagle suicide series lands on is of concern to supers Saugus By Gayla Cawley agenda ITEM STAFF Local superintendents have alert- By Bridget Turcotte ed parents to their concerns about a ITEM STAFF new show, “13 Reasons Why,” which SAUGUS — The Saugus Planning is centered around a teenage girl’s Board will discuss whether four suicide. properties near Route 1 should be According to a description of the rezoned at Thursday’s meeting. Net ix show, based on a novel by The panel will make a recommen- the same name, after high school dation on two proposed articles for student Hannah Baker’s suicide, a Town Meeting, which resumes on classmate receives a series of tapes Monday, May 22 at 7:30 p.m.
    [Show full text]