Institutional Controls a. On the Effective Date of this Settlement and thereafter, Purchaser shall comply with the land and groundwater use restrictions established in the Environmental Covenant recorded on the Site on August 30, 2014.
Institutional Controls. This section does not provide adequate attention as to why none of the participating agencies in the FFA feel it is necessary to provide warning signage or physical access restriction such as fencing at the SED-Katy Trail crossing or Burgermeister Spring (DOE 6301). Both sites are located on heavily traveled areas (by hikers and bikers) within the MDOC Xxxxxx Spring and Busch Memorial Conservation areas and land leased to MDNR for Katy Trail State Park. Neither the “historical signs” that are in place or the recently prepared MDOC brochure adequately warn the public of the real risks due to groundwater and sediment contamination by uranium, TCE, nitroaromatics and nitrosamines. The FFA needs to address this issue. At a minimum, it needs to state why the three partner agencies feel the present ICs in the Final LTS&M plan for Xxxxxx Spring site are adequate in this regard.” Response: This comment, much like the prior comment, appears to be directed more at the particular institutional controls selected in the 2005 ESD, as they would be implemented in the LTS&M Plan, than it does the terms of the FFA. The LTS&M Plan currently contains no requirements for access controls or “warning” signs because the remedies are protective of public health under current uses. Residual contaminant levels at the SED and Burgermeister Spring do not present significant exposure concerns to recreational visitors at these locations. There are no water xxxxx or other mechanisms for ongoing human consumption of the contaminated groundwater under current conditions. Comment: “A second comment is that the language in section 30 on p.11 ignores the fact that leaving the engineered disposal cell totally open and unprotected by warning signs or physical barriers obviously does negate the first part, i.e., “DOE agrees to refrain from either using or allowing the use of all portions of the SITE, or such other property, under its jurisdiction, custody or control, in any manner…” by concluding that : “that would interfere with or adversely affect the implementation, integrity, or protectiveness of the remedial measures.” Obviously this “openness” and “tourism friendly” policy exposes the site to vandalism, undue wear and tear, and possible terror attacks.” Response: This comment appears to be directed more at the remedy selected for the Site in the 1993 Chemical Plant Area ROD as supplemented by the institutional controls selected in the 2005 ESD than it does the terms of the FFA. Paragraph ...
Institutional Controls. IC § 455H.206 and Department rules in chapter 567 IAC 137 authorize the use of an environmental covenant as an institutional control. The purpose of this environmental covenant is to manage the risk of future exposure to existing contaminant conditions by limiting specified land use activities at this property, establishing affirmative obligations and enforcing the terms of this covenant.
Institutional Controls. It is expressly acknowledged and agreed by the parties that the Company and Pfizer may, if approved or permitted by the applicable Governmental Authority or Environmental Law, use Institutional Controls to complete a Remedial Action at or related to a Co-Located Facility. Where the use of such Institutional Controls are necessary or appropriate, the parties agree, on behalf of their respective Groups, to cooperate with the other to seek, execute and record such controls.
Institutional Controls. The above cleanup levels are considered protective for non-food related or industrial related commercial settings. Therefore, institutional controls (e.g., deed restrictions limiting the future use of the building) will be necessary. Such restrictions on use will need to be implemented by the appropriate party. In the event that the imposition ojf institutional controls cannot be accomplished, cleanup to health- based levels suited to unrestricted future use of the building or demolition of building will be necessary.
Institutional Controls. Lessee hereby consents to the recordation of Institutional Controls, as defined in RCW 70.105D.020(15), as required by the Remedial Action and agrees to (i) subordinate this Lease to the Institutional Controls and (ii) to abide by the terms and conditions of the Institutional Controls.
Institutional Controls. Seller agrees that, where its remedy requires institutional controls at a Purchaser facility that is part of the Assets, Seller will initially propose to the governmental authority involved and seek to convince the authority to accept only a “general industrial use” deed restriction, with no groundwater used as potable water (collectively “General Industrial Use”). Purchaser will accept General Industrial Use restrictions in its deeds on properties comprising the Assets without compensation. If the governmental authority requires a more extensive institutional control, Seller and Purchaser will work together in good faith and will each use its reasonable efforts to limit the extent and terms of any restriction on the use of Purchaser’s property as much as possible including defining the Purchaser’s process area in a manner reasonably acceptable to Purchaser. In particular, Seller will notify Purchaser prior to proposing any institutional control restrictions to any governmental authority and will act reasonably and in good faith to limit the restrictions to either a General Industrial Use limitation or to other use limitations that do not substantially interfere with Purchaser’s ordinary conduct of the Business, including any Planned Changes, and that do not impose on Purchaser an obligation to implement an auditing, monitoring or oversight program related to the effectiveness of the institutional controls. Seller will be responsible for implementing any required auditing, monitoring or oversight program related to the effectiveness of the institutional controls. For any material proposed limitations of which it is aware, Seller will timely report all such material proposed limitations on Purchaser’s ongoing operations resulting from proposed institutional controls to Purchaser’s Vice President, Safety, Health and Environmental Affairs or other designee prior to agreeing to or implementing such institutional controls. At the conclusion of such Seller and Purchaser efforts, Purchaser agrees that, with no compensation to Purchaser from Seller other than as may be required by Section 7.08(h), Purchaser will impose on its facility constituting a part of the Assets, and subject its property to, those deed restrictions, institutional controls and other controls, use limitations, restrictions and terms required by the governmental authority.
Institutional Controls. F. The certificate may be revoked by the director at any time in the event that contamination posing an unacceptable conditions at the site, unknown at the time of issuance of the certificate, pose a risk to human health or the environment is rediscovered on site or in the event that it is discovered that the certificate was based on information provided by the participant that was materially false, inaccurate, or misleading. Any and all claims may be pursued by the Commonwealth for liability for failure to meet a requirement of the program, criminal liability, or liability arising from future activities at the site that may cause contamination by pollutants. By issuance of the certificate the department director does not waive sovereign immunity.
Institutional Controls. Following completion of the CAP-required cleanup construction, the Port and Ecology will develop an Institutional Controls Plan for the PTM XXX that includes environmental covenants in accordance with WAC 000-000-000 and RCW 64.70. It is anticipated that institutional controls will: • Notify Proponents of the presence of residual contaminated materials, and regulate the disturbance and management of those materials and the cleanup action components; • Require project specific design to reduce risk of creating preferential pathways for contaminant migration or run-off and sediment impacts to Whatcom Waterway (e.g., utility excavations or site grading); • Prohibit extraction of groundwater for drinking or any other use. Groundwater extraction for construction dewatering is allowed, but that is not a beneficial use of water; • Provide for long-term monitoring and stewardship of the cleanup action; and • Require that VI potential be evaluated and/or VI controls constructed beneath future buildings in the LP-MW01 subarea if groundwater compliance monitoring indicates that vinyl chloride and PCE concentrations have not naturally attenuated to below cleanup levels in that subarea.
Institutional Controls. In the event that the Environmental Governmental Authority with jurisdiction over the Remedial Work agrees that the level of remediation required at a Real Property at which Remedial Work is being performed may be reduced by the imposition of restrictions limiting the use and occupancy of the Real Property to non-residential uses, Purchasers shall not unreasonably withhold its consent to the imposition of such use restrictions and shall not seek any compensation therefor from Vendors. Vendors shall not propose to any Environmental Governmental Authority or agree to the imposition of any other institutional controls without Purchasers' written consent which consent Purchasers may withhold if Purchasers, in their reasonable discretion, determine that such controls will substantially reduce the value of the Real Property or unreasonably interfere with its current use of the Real Property. 153 157
