CORRESPONDENCE_1982-1983 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

HONORABLE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS May 5 , 1982 Page Eleven common formulations as Black Leaf 40. Alcohol is restricted from disposal at the Forward, Inc. site and when it is used as a social beverage we all know the potentially toxic effects of that chemical substance. Too much of any substance is harmful! The question is whether or not-- the state approved site provides safe containment for materials stored there. This question has been exhaustively reviewed by professional engineers and geologists at all levels of government. In approving permits to store waste materials at the site the answer to the safe containment question has been consistently and overwhelmingly. . .YES! . . . . it is safe and practical to store these materials at the Forward Inc. site. In Mr. Konig' s letter of March 4, 1982 , he refers to "secret burials" ; there are no secret burials. All items are reported and authorized by the appropriate agencies. Mr. Konig' s problem is that he seems to feel that the Farm Bureau is the appropriate agency. He refers to a "Love Canal type disaster" ; this is exceedingly inflammatory, and is basically a claim that the Farm Bureau simply does not believe or trust the State, County, or Local Health district officials who monitor the site' s operations. Since the report, we have received Letter No. 3 , dated March 11, 1982 , which again talks about the cadmium waste which was never received at the site. 4) We have received Letter No. 4, dated March 18, 1982 , which discusses arsenic, and points out that arsenic is dangerous. The disposal of waste from the Valley Wood Preserving Company was authorized and approved by all appropriate agencies - indeed, this is the purpose of the site - to dispose properly and lawfully of wastes which may be dangerous. We have received a copy of a letter dated March 23 , 1982 in which Mr. Konig withdraws his submission of a consent on the grounds that the consenting company will not allow him to use it as evidence in an administrative proceeding. We refer to this letter for one purpose: We wish to correct Mr. Konig' s assumption that this is an administrative proceeding and that evidence will be given. THIS IS NOT AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING - NO REVOCATION OR MODIFICATION OF FORWARD' S USE PERMIT IS AT ISSUE; IF IT IS, DUE PROCESS HAS NOT BEEN FOLLOWED, AND NO NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN TO FORWARD. "Evidence" should not be taken; this hearing is nothing more than an opportunity for the public to comment on the report. We have received Letter No. 5, dated March 24 , 1982 , in which Mr. Konig points out that fluoride is a poison. Again,