The Remedial Investigation Reports have been available at PADEP for the public for review since the time of their submittal. The reports have been posted to Evergreen’s website created for the refinery project since July 2019. The 120-day comment period consists of the time between the first Public Information Session, on Aug. 27, 2020, and the second Public Information Session on Jan. 14, 2021. The Public Comment... read more
A presentation where more than 3/4 of the time is spent in a one-way flow of information and where residents’ concerns are relegated to a still-diminishing-and-to-be-seen Q & A period at the end of the meeting does not bode well for a process that is inclusive of the public, as the City has requested and as the law requires. (Evergreen note: this comment refers to the Aug. 27, 2020 event).
Posted by Tiffani Doerr & filed under .
The first public information session held on Aug. 27, 2020, was designed to provide an overview of the technical information in the RIRs. It included discussion of questions and comments already received from the public, both on the reports and the Act 2 process in general. Evergreen is aware that the presentation went long and apologizes for any inconvenience, but intended to work in as many issues that were... read more
Thanks for being open to a community advisory group. This would be a big step forward. It would be very good to schedule a meeting of the advisory group + other stakeholder representatives in the near future to begin to discuss and compare all of the available remediation and capping methods in terms of cost and benefit, and to outline when and how choices will be made.
Posted by Tiffani Doerr & filed under .
Evergreen is open to discussing these topics with the public and is currently evaluating the most effective method of communication and engagement with all community members. Evergreen cannot proceed through the Act 2 process (including cleanup plans) until the public comment process for the approved Remedial Investigation Reports and forthcoming addendums is completed; therefore, remedial approaches can be... read more
Meeting Format: 1) As a community resident I think this media forum is not consumer friendly in allowing community members to have an opportunity to participate fully in this report out process. (Evergreen Note: comment refers to the use of Microsoft Teams Live event during the August 27, 2020 Public Information Session). 2) Many communities and cities are finding that COVID 19 doesn’t have to stifle public debate. The South Philadelphia and Grays Ferry communities are comfortable with virtual tools that allow us to see and hear each other, as well as Evergreen. It is important that you adopt tools (which you likely use in your daily meetings with colleagues) that promote a true virtual public meeting. Would Evergreen be willing to discuss with community organizations the selection of technology that is more appropriate for virtual public meetings?
Posted by Tiffani Doerr & filed under .
The Microsoft Teams Live format was selected to ensure that as many people as possible could see the presentation and participate. Other meeting platforms, like Zoom, have caps on attendance, and we knew that there was potentially a significant interest in the first meeting. We chose a platform that had a higher capacity to allow as many people as possible to attend and view the information. We also chose this... read more
We are listening to your description of evergreen communications, but after exploring the materials at length, and attending meetings, many engaged citizens don’t agree that you are offering access to materials that facilitate public conversations, delivering 1000 page documents for comment is not democratic. Your reports can easily be designed to make key data and decisions accessible to the public. And the question is are you willing to create living documents that are updated about the state of knowledge about contamination and incorporate public comment? This will make for authentic public conversation about the future of this incredibly important place in our city. The recent NYT article about PES and Philly Thrive shows that the world is watching how we do this. Evergreen can be an important leader.
Posted by Tiffani Doerr & filed under .
The reports Evergreen is required to submit to regulators are inherently long and technical due to their specific requirements as related to the site’s history, size and complexity. Reports must include the incorporation of not just current data, but all historic data with back-up documentation for all referenced activities and interpretation in the reports. While the reports have always been accessible to the... read more
The following are similar comments/questions/and sentiments and were combined for one cohesive response. However, each individual question has been listed below so that each person’s question is carried through and addressed. The Public Involvement Program should allow for proactive, two-way consultation between Evergreen and the community about the clean-up, throughout the development of the reports and the clean-up itself. ● The people affected by what Evergreen and Hilco are doing need to be involved. Equal partnership with the public needs to be achieved by: (1) creating a series of public meetings in a small-group format to allow for meaningful public engagement throughout the Act 2 process and (2) creating a community-based advisory group to solicit questions and comments, and evaluate the effectiveness of the PIP on an ongoing basis. ● As a Grays Ferry resident, I’m very concerned about the clean-up and the lack of community involvement in the process as well as minimal communication with the community as to the health hazards and potential risks. There needs to be meaningful inclusion of community members throughout the Act 2 process, which means open access to information, feedback, and frequent consultation. This can be accomplished by creating a community-based advisory group to solicit questions and comments and evaluate the effectiveness of the PIP on an ongoing basis. None of the work that’s been done so far has involved active outreach to ALL community members. ● For years have been told what was happening only to find out it was not true we need to create a community base Advisory to review everything that’s going on are you willing to do that. ● I support the demands of Philly Thrive and all fence line community members. Beyond presenting your goals to the community, it is the right of the community to demand and expect free, prior, and informed consent over the entire process given the health impacts of the air, water, soil, and aesthetics of their community. ● This process is one-sided and not meaningfully engaging the public. To follow through on your stated commitment to hear residents about how to make meetings better, listen to our feedback that we’ve repeatedly shared tonight to create public meetings in a small group format that allow the public to meaningfully share OUR insights with Evergreen and create a community-based advisory group to solicit questions and comments, and continually evaluate the effectiveness of the PIP. ● This is a once in a hundred-year opportunity to do right by the people who live by the site. People are eager to be involved and engaged. Will Evergreen consider a process that is less hierarchical? There are limitations due to COVID but past efforts at engagement indicate that communication is one-way rather than a dialogue. Will you make room for smaller, topic-targeted conversation in real-time rather than this type of Q+A.
Posted by Tiffani Doerr & filed under .
Evergreen understands the community’s interest in the site and is committed to providing meaningful public involvement. Evergreen has reached out in many ways, beyond Act 2 requirements, to work with the public and identify the best and most productive ways to engage. Evergreen has already taken several actions to involve the public in meaningful ways as bulleted below. In addition to the items listed below,... read more
Tonight’s Information Session (Evergreen note: refers to the August 27, 2020 Public Information Session) offers a strong basic primer on geology, groundwater and characterization of the contamination readings, and the presenters are very good at explaining things. Many engaged community members have already studied this material together, and with a variety of other subject matter experts, and are ready to move on to learning more about the key decisions being made now (or soon) about contamination management and clean up. Similarly, at the recent meeting held by SKEO and EPA, representatives were resistant to answering public questions beyond the scope of the TASC report. Limiting what information will be given to the public to arbitrarily defined packages does not support meaningful engagement or transparency as defined by the law. I agree with other suggestions that Evergreen and others focus future discussion on critical paths for decision making about management of risks to adjacent communities and the ecological future of the site. As this meeting approaches its end, will you commit to a part 2 of this meeting, soon, to discuss decision making?
Posted by Tiffani Doerr & filed under .
DEP requested Evergreen to re-open the comment period for previously submitted Act 2 reports and provide a venue where the information contained in those reports would be presented to the public. This was also echoed by the request from the City to begin and end the comment period with meetings about those previously submitted Act 2 reports. Therefore, the Jan. 14, 2021 meeting included an open Q&A session... read more
Please listen to the people who have no interests other than the health of their loved ones. Please understand that people are not exaggerating that generations have been suffering from the toxicity of the previous oil refinery’s existence, and do not belittle their concerns. Everything is fixable, the question is who will you choose to represent, the people and their health or corporate levers of power? I hope it’s not the latter. Clean this area up THOROUGHLY.
Posted by Tiffani Doerr & filed under .
Evergreen’s role here is very specific as it relates to environmental remediation of subsurface contamination at the former refinery site through 2012, when Sunoco sold the refinery, as required by Act 2. We are following all appropriate regulations to carry out this remediation work, including attempting to engage the public throughout the process. However, Evergreen has recently engaged a Community Engagement... read more
Off-Site Contamination – Benzene pools extend beyond the property fence line but have not been mapped. Evergreen fails to acknowledge potential responsibility for cleaning up off-site contamination of benzene or other contaminants.
Posted by Tiffani Doerr & filed under .
The RIRs and figures presented during the Aug. 27, 2020, Public Information Session show the known extent of dissolved benzene on- and off-site. Evergreen will be including additional off-site groundwater information in the AOI 9 and AOI 4 RIR Addendums. As addressed in other related comments, no off-site air impacts have been identified from off-site groundwater related to historic environmental impacts that... read more
Evergreen’s proposed site-specific standard for lead in surface soil at the former refinery site will not be protective of public health. I strongly urge you to withdraw the proposal to set a site-specific standard of 2,240 mg/kg. Evergreen’s proposed site-specific standard is more than twice the direct contact numeric value in state regulations (1,000 mg/kg). Evergreen made a flawed assumption about the target blood lead level to adequately protect a fetus of a worker at the site – an important factor in determining the site-specific standard for lead. It used a level that is twice the reference value that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention uses to address lead exposure in children. Evergreen should be using the current science to set a site-specific standard for this site.
Posted by Tiffani Doerr & filed under .
As part of the remedial investigations, Evergreen compared the lead data to the Act 2 soil-to-groundwater Statewide Health Standard, which is 450 parts per million (ppm) and the direct contact Statewide Standard, which is 1000 ppm, as well as the Site Specific Standard. This comparison is shown on the figures/tables in the Remedial Investigation Reports and in the 8/27/20 presentation. The Remedial Investigation... read more