text:
Activity Browse
Browse this collection of activities that all incorporate teaching with data. Activities have been submitted via a number of projects.
Show all pages
Current Search Limits
showing only Women's and Gender Studies Show all SubjectRefine the Results
Subject Show all Subject
Women's and Gender Studies
1 matchQuantitative Skills
New Pedagogic Methods
Grade Level
Pedagogy: Teaching with Data
1 match
Teenage Pregnancy in the United States 1950-1990 : Analysis Using Census Data and Contingency Tables
Barbara Johnson
This social science lab exercise uses Census data to examine teenage pregnancy in the United States over time and by socio-demographic variables. Students will learn how to access and interpre data as well as begin to think sociologically about teen pregnancy patterns and risk factors.


text:
1 recommendation
Comcast has furnished you with router/modem combination. You need to turn off the router portion, i.e. turn the Comcast router into a bridge, and connect the modem to a switch. Your two routers then connect to the switch.
I did indeed change the public IPs as mentioned in the previous post. In the meantime I purchased another router to put the SBS behind that router/firewall so I can disable the firewall on the comcast box. That did the trick and everything works now, i.e. ping and access to the website. Thanks!

subset: commoncrawl


text:
With a stay at Barksdale House Inn, you'll be centrally located in Charleston, steps from Threshold Repertory Theatre and minutes from College of Charleston. This bed & breakfast is within close proximity of Marion Square and John Rivers Communication Museum.
Make yourself at home in one of the 14 individually decorated guestrooms, featuring refrigerators and LCD televisions. Complimentary wireless Internet access keeps you connected, and cable programming is available for your entertainment. Private bathrooms with shower/tub combinations feature complimentary toiletries and hair dryers. Conveniences include ceiling fans and irons/ironing boards, as well as phones with free local calls.
Rec, Spa, Premium Amenities
Take in the views from a garden and make use of amenities such as complimentary wireless Internet access and concierge services. Additional features at this Victorian bed & breakfast include wedding services, a fireplace in the lobby, and tour/ticket assistance.
A complimentary continental breakfast is served daily.
Business, Other Amenities
The front desk is staffed during limited hours. Free self parking is available onsite.
Expedia Affiliate NetworkAmenities
Complimentary breakfast
Concierge service
No smoking
Free parking
Pets allowed on request. Charges may apply.
Designated smoking area
Wedding services
Free WiFi
Get Rates |
Get Flight + Hotel |


text:
BOOKSWAP TEXTBOOKS -- FREE Used Book and Textbooks Exchange. Trade all used books using a simple point system. Can even trade internationally, and redeem your points for more books.
Owner: kellymcox (Details) Community Investment: 13.9pt Feedback Books total: 39 Country: United States
Book on LibraryThing Book on Amazon
Author: Tom Dougher, Ellen Dougher Number of pages: 233 Publication Date: 0000-00-00 ISBN: 0874551099 Binding: Paperback Description: (empty)
Shows a lot of handling wear, but book is intact. Spine is cracked, with loose paper, crease across front page, small tear at hinge, price sticker on back, owner's name written in ink inside front cover. Pages, however, are bright and clean with no marks.


text:
Contact Information
If you would like to send email directly to one of us, click on the appropriate email address listed below. Barring vacation or illness, that person will respond to your message immediately. Use the global address for those emergency type messages that can't wait.
All comments, question, or suggestions are welcomed.
If you do not know which person to send your comment(s) to or you want to make sure that any message sent does not sit in someone's email inbox until they return from vacation, you can send your message to firstname.lastname@example.com. Your message will then be delivered to ALL of us. The appropriate person will then contact you.
Business System (Financial and Human Resources/Payroll)
Name |
Department |
Position |
Phone |
Daniel, Sue |
Business Services |
Financial Operations Officer |
636-4732 |
Brown, Karen |
Data Processing Services |
Business Information Systems Analyst |
636-4275 |
Meier, Larry |
Data Processing Services |
Coordinator |
636-4733 |
Sullivan, Ryan |
Data Processing Services |
Systems Operations Analyst |
636-4870 |
Sue Daniel at firstname.lastname@example.com (661) 636-4732
Ryan Sullivan at email@example.com (661) 636-4870
Larry Meier at firstname.lastname@example.com (661) 636-4733
Karen Brown at firstname.lastname@example.com (661) 636-4275
Print This Page Email This Page


text:
Kevin Rarick of Brown Deer earned his doctorate in integrative physiology from the University of Iowa in August.
Gillian Shaw Weaver of Mequon made the spring semester dean's list at Colgate University in Hamilton, N.Y.
Stuart Michler of Whitefish Bay made the spring semester dean's list at Santa Clara University in California.
Sarah Weiss of Whitefish Bay made the spring semester dean's list at Marquette University in Milwaukee.
The following students have been named semifinalists in the 58th annual National Merit Scholarship Program based on their scores on the 2011 Preliminary SAT/National Merit Scholarship Qualifying Test: from Nicolet High School in Glendale, Nancy Gao, Annie Jen, Benjamin Levey, Drew Melchert, Margaret Merline, Connor Wahrman and Emma Wathen; from Homestead High School in Mequon, Benjamin Binversie, Claudia Dantoin, Michael Foulkes, Caitlin Geary, Gabriel Jacobs, Laura Kirtley, Drew Miller, Clifford Mitman, Riley Pelisek, Mitchell Plamann, Alex Vielmetti and Andrew Zhu; from University School of Milwaukee in River Hills, Nishad Agrawal, Michelle Bal, Elizabeth Bodalski, Nathan Gitter, Emma Kulick, Tiwadeye Lawal, Samuel Levatich, Madeline Lucey, Brittany Neihardt, Raythan Pillai, Connor Scott and Jacob Watton; from Shorewood High School, Rebecca Diesing, Johann Gaebler, Story Sandy and Yee Wang; from Dominican High School in Whitefish Bay, Frances Carter; and from Whitefish Bay High School, Matthew Borris, Rachel Galvao, Jack Hoge, Coretta LeMaitre, Marissa Lovell, Katherine Plaster and Nicolette Sim.
The following black students have been named semifinalists in the 49th annual National Achievement Scholarship Program, part of the National Merit Scholarship Program, based on their scores on the 2011 Preliminary SAT/National Merit Scholarship Qualifying Test: from Nicolet High School in Glendale, Martha Leplae-Arthur; from University School of Milwaukee in River Hills, Tiwadeye Lawal; and from Whitefish Bay High School, Courtney Richards.
Got some good news to share? We want to hear all about it. Send your announcements firstname.lastname@example.com .
This site uses Facebook comments to make it easier for you to contribute. If you see a comment you would like to flag for spam or abuse, click the "x" in the upper right of it. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use.
E-mail Newsletter
Your link to the biggest stories in the suburbs delivered Thursday mornings.
Enter your e-mail address above and click "Sign Up Now!" to begin receiving your e-mail newsletter
Get the Newsletter!
- North Shore Celebrations: May 15
- Celebrations: May 1
- Celebrations: April 24
- Celebrations: April 10
- Celebrations: April 3
- Celebrations: March 27
- Celebrations: March 20
- Celebrations: Feb. 11
- Celebrations: Feb. 6
- Celebrations: Jan. 23
- Celebrations: Jan. 9
- Celebrations: Jan. 2
- Celebrations: Dec. 12
- Celebrations: Dec. 5
- Celebrations: Nov. 28
- Celebrations: Nov. 21
- Celebrations: Nov. 14
- Celebrations: Oct. 31
- Celebrations: Oct. 24
- Celebrations: Oct. 10


text:
Georgia College joins partnership to restore historic Sallie Davis House
The building, located at 301 Clark St., was home to Sallie E. Davis, who is recognized as one of the region's pioneering black educators. Because of the building's deteriorated condition, it has been newly included on the "Places in Peril" list maintained by The Georgia Trust, thanks to its nomination by Milledgeville MainStreet. "Through this partnership we will work to preserve the legacy of a great educator who committed herself to nourishing the minds of the community's African-American youth at a time when true equality was still many years off," said Georgia College President Dorothy Leland. "Through the creation of this cultural center, we will seek to sustain the inspiration that Sallie Davis gave to all of those she touched during her remarkable life." Davis was born just outside Milledgeville in the mid-1870s and attended the Eddy School, which served the African-American students of Baldwin County. She decided early to pursue a career in education and enrolled in the teacher-training program at Atlanta University. After receiving her degree, she returned to the Eddy School to teach mathematics and serve as an administrator. Eventually she became its principal and remained in that position for 27 years until her retirement in 1948. The Sallie Davis Academy of the Baldwin County School District is named in her honor. In 2000, she was inducted into the Georgia Women of Achievement, a nonprofit organization honoring extraordinary women of Georgia's history. "By preserving the Sallie Davis House as a cultural center, we will provide an important link to the contributions African-Americans have made to our community," said Carolyn Thomas, a member of the Sallie Davis Foundation. "It's important for today's youth -- and the coming generations -- to know about people like Sallie Davis… people who laid the foundation upon which they stand today." The home was nominated to be placed on the "Places in Peril" list through the efforts of Milledgeville MainStreet, a public/private partnership created to preserve the heritage of Milledgeville and guide its future. "Including the Sallie Davis House on the 'Places in Peril' list will allow the building to receive a high level of preservation assistance," said Frank Pendergast, Chair of Milledgeville MainStreet. "By acting now, we can make sure this historic structure continues the legacy of Sallie Davis, providing important educational resources about the community's black heritage and history." The building was constructed in the late 1800's, although the exact date appears to be uncertain. Davis lived in the home from 1910 until her death in 1950. Georgia College purchased the building in 1989. In 1990, several of her former students formed the Sallie Davis Foundation to preserve her home and create a cultural center that would highlight her contributions to the community.
Georgia College has announced a partnership with the Sallie Davis Foundation to renovate the historic Sallie Davis House in Milledgeville and open it as an African-American cultural center.
The new partnership will oversee the formation of a steering committee that will guide the restoration project. The committee's first initiative is to access the condition of the building and determine the work needed and the estimated cost. The committee will then work to raise the money to restore the property and develop it as a cultural center that will be open to Georgia College students and the community.
ABOUT GEORGIA COLLEGE: Georgia College, the state's designated Public Liberal Arts University, combines the educational experience expected at esteemed private liberal arts colleges with the affordability of public higher education. Its four colleges – arts and sciences, business, education and health sciences – provide 6,600 undergraduate and graduate students with an exceptional learning environment that extends beyond the classroom, with hands-on involvement with faculty research, community service, study abroad and myriad internships.
Founded in 1889, Georgia College boasts one of the most beautiful campuses in the nation with Corinthian columns fronting red brick buildings and wide open green spaces. Georgia College also offers graduate education at the historic Jefferson building in downtown Macon, at Robins Air Force Base and online.


text:
MARSLAND EARNS A SPOT ON THE C-USA ALL-ACADEMIC TEAM April 16, 2014 IRVING, Texas - Clifford Marsland became the first men's tennis athlete to be named to the Conference USA All-Academic Team for fours year, announced by the league on Wednesday. "Clifford knows that someday his tennis career is going to be over and he has shown that, since he has been declared academic ineligible by the NCAA in first year here, he's been one of the top students in the conference since he's been here," TU head coach Vince Westbrook said. "He's a success story, not only on the court, but off the court and in the classroom. He's been a huge success story for us and we're as proud of that as we are with his accomplishments on the court." The senior graduated with his degree of exercise and sports science with a GPA of 3.565 and is currently enrolled in graduate school with a GPA of 4.00 in education. "It's a great privilege to win this award four times," Marsland said. "It's a great privilege to be the first person to achieve that. I couldn't have done it without the academic support at TU with Melissa Dawson, great professors and coaches that are flexible with scheduling." The Perth, Australia native is a four-time C-USA Honor Roll member and a two-time ITA Scholar Athlete. He is also a three-time All-C-USA Singles first team honoree and has been named C-USA Player of the Week nine times, including four times this season. On the season, Marsland has posted a 15-6 singles record, including a 13-5 record in dual competition and a 12-4 record at the No. 2 singles position. The No. 1 seed Golden Hurricane hosts the 2014 Conference USA Men's Tennis Championships at the Michael D. Case Tennis Center. The championship starts on Thursday with three matches and finishes with the championship match on Sunday. Tulsa received a bye into the quarterfinals and faces the winner of No. 8 seed Old Dominion and No. 9 seed Southern Miss on Friday at 2 p.m.
For all Tulsa men's tennis news and information, visit www.TulsaHurricane.com. Follow Tulsa Athletics on Twitter at www.Twitter.com/TulsaHurricane and Facebook at www.facebook.com/TulsaHurricane. Follow Tulsa Men's Tennis on Twitter (http://twitter.com/TulsaMTennis) and Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/TulsaMTennis). |
Fax: 918.631.3666 email@example.com |


text:
Pope Benedict XVI on resignation: 'I have examined my conscience' - video
The pope speaks in Vatican City on Wednesday for the first time since announcing his resignation, and thanks his followers for their support. He says he 'examined his conscience before God' before making his decision to stand down. The 85-year-old pope says his mental and physical health is declining


text:
May 1985
In a mixed-up world, mixed-up kids need somebody who really understands. In Dallas that somebody is a punk DJ called Shaggy.
Of course we know that Texas is an oasis in the midst of a wasteland. But some unenlightened folk from our neighboring states beg to differ. We let them talk, then set them straight.
My pack trip in Mexico's Sierra del Carmen wasn't exactly the Gray Line Tour.
Before Ruiz v. Estelle, prisons in Texas were the safest, most productive, and most economical in the nation. Now—after costs have quadrupled—our prisons are the most dangerous in the U.S.
Today's cowboy can thank Hollywood designers for the shirt on his back.
Is there romance after a starring role in The Texas Chainsaw Massacre? A leading man reveals all.
Dallas' Fifth Texas Sculpture Symposium proves it's time for us to look to our sculptors for public artworks.
A little gimmickry goes a long way toward making the Fort Worth Opera's current season a success.
Alamo Bay gets in over its head; Lost in America finds itself through comedy; The Slugger's Wife strikes out.
Five new albums show that Texans can get any kind of music they want from local labels.
Battles at the border; weirdos at the Starck Club; monument at the end of the tracks; Mr. Migra goes after Zopilote; Baptists at each other's throats.
Love game at Texas Commerce; Phil Gramm versus Jim Wright in East Texas; a storm over a port for Mark White; some good news—maybe—about a nuke.


text:
U.S. MAPS is committed to building churches and changing lives. This servant team ministry is helping local churches and districts with construction and evangelism needs by providing volunteer participation.
U.S. MAPS offers lay people the opportunity to use their God-given skills and experience missions firsthand. Areas of opportunity include: RV volunteers—construction and evangelism; Church Teams—construction and evangelism; and Short and Long Term Missions through Summer and Missionary Associate programs.
RV VOLUNTEERS RVers share their time and talents by volunteering from a few days a year to full time working in construction and evangelism. Presently there are 96 projects that include churches, Bible colleges and universities, Teen Challenge centers, children's homes and district camps. Last year volunteers saved projects an estimated $2,555,100 in labor costs alone, and gave more than 127,755 hours of their time.
More information and an RV Volunteer application
CHURCH TEAMS This ministry could involve an individual or several people who have a desire to work on a short-term missions project. Their length of stay can be from a few days to several weeks and involve construction or evangelism. Teams who register through the U.S. MAPS office are eligible for World Missions Giving Credit and insurance coverage while on assignment.
More information and a Church Teams application
MISSIONARY ASSOCIATES U.S. MAPS missionary associates are volunteers, 18 years of age or older, who offer their services and talents in a special field for 1-2 years. They assist U.S. missionaries and other approved Assemblies of God ministries.
More information and a Missionary Associates application
SUMMER ASSOCIATES U.S. MAPS summer associates work on stateside mission fields for 8 to 12 weeks. They are assigned to work with nationally appointed U.S. missionaries and a variety of other ministries.
More information and a Summer Associates application
OTHER WAYS TO PARTICIPATE Contributions are needed to enable U.S. MAPS to continue recruiting and placing the many volunteers in missions work.
Learn how you can contribute financially
Report technical problems with this page to firstname.lastname@example.com E-mail: | Web: USMissions.ag.org | Phone: 417-862-2781
Assemblies of God US Missions; US MAPS; Building Churches - Changing Lives 1445 North Boonville Avenue, Springfield, MO 65802.
General Council of the Assemblies of God © 2015 Terms of Use Privacy Policy


text:
Argyle Line
Argyle Line | |
Class 318 no.318257 at Glasgow Central low level
Overview | |
Type | Heavy rail |
System | National Rail |
Status | Operational |
Locale | West Dunbartonshire Glasgow South Lanarkshire North Lanarkshire Scotland |
Termini | Balloch / Dalmuir / Milngavie Lanark / Larkhall / Cumbernauld / Motherwell / Whifflet |
Services | 4 |
Operation | |
Opening | 1979 |
Owner | Network Rail |
Operator(s) | Abellio ScotRail |
Rolling stock | Class 318, Class 320, Class 334 |
Technical | |
Track gauge | 1,435 mm (4 ft 8 1⁄2 in) |
Electrification | 25 kV 50 Hz AC |
The Argyle Line is a suburban railway located in West Central Scotland. It connects the Lanarkshire towns of Lanark, Larkhall and Motherwell to West Dunbartonshire via central Glasgow using sub-surface running. It takes its name from Glasgow's Argyle Street, under which a significant section of the line runs via a cut-and-cover tunnel.
The term "Argyle Line" is loosely used in two contexts:
- to describe an urban passenger train service; and
- to describe a length of railway infrastructure.
The train service extends considerably beyond the Argyle Line infrastructure, connecting the suburban areas of North Clydeside with Motherwell, Larkhall and Lanark.
Service pattern[edit]
On Mondays to Saturdays, the off peak service each hour is:
- two trains between Larkhall and Dalmuir via Yoker
- two trains between Lanark and Glasgow Central via Bellshill
- one train between Motherwell and Milngavie via Blantyre
- one train between Milngavie and Cumbernauld via Blantyre
- one train between Cumbernauld and Dalmuir via Blantyre and Yoker
- one train between Motherwell and Dalmuir via Whifflet and Singer
- one train between Whifflet and Dalmuir via Singer
Most services terminating at Motherwell return in the 'opposite' direction. i.e. a train from Blantyre continues via Whifflet (formerly Bellshill) and vice versa.
On Sundays, the hourly service is:
- one train between Motherwell and Balloch via Whifflet and Yoker;
- one train between Lanark and Glasgow Central via Bellshill
- two trains between Motherwell and Milngavie via Blantyre
- one train between Motherwell and Glasgow Central.
Historical service patterns[edit]
At opening November 1979[edit]
- 1 tph Motherwell - Dumbarton Central via Bellshill
- 1 tph Motherwell - Dumbarton Central via Blantyre
- 2 tph Motherwell - Partick via Bellshill
- 2 tph Motherwell - Partick via Blantyre
- 1 tph Milngavie - Lanark (limited stop)
Monday - Saturday (2006/2007)[edit]
- 2 tph Larkhall - Dalmuir via Singer (Limited Stop)
- 1 tph Motherwell - Milngavie via Blantyre
- 1 tph Lanark - Milngavie via Holytown and Blantyre
- 1 tph Motherwell - Dalmuir via Bellshill and Yoker
- 1 tph Lanark - Dalmuir via Shieldmuir, Bellshill and Yoker
- Peak Services to Coatbridge Central and Carstairs
Sunday (2006/2007)[edit]
- 2 tph Motherwell - Balloch via Blantyre and Yoker
- 1 tph Lanark - Milngavie via Shieldmuir and Bellshill
- 1 tph Motherwell - Milngavie via Bellshill
Monday - Saturday (2007/2008)[edit]
- 2 tph Larkhall - Dalmuir via Singer (Limited Stop)
- 1 tph Motherwell - Milngavie via Blantyre
- 1 tph Lanark - Milngavie via Holytown and Blantyre
- 1 tph Motherwell - Dalmuir via Bellshill and Yoker
- 1 tph Lanark - Dalmuir via Shieldmuir, Bellshill and Yoker
- Peak services to Coatbridge Central and Carstairs
Sunday (2007/2008)[edit]
- 2 tph Motherwell - Balloch via Blantyre and Yoker
- 1 tph Motherwell - Milngavie via Bellshill
- 1 tph Lanark - Milngavie via Shieldmuir and Bellshill
- 1 tph Larkhall - Partick (Limited Stop)
Monday - Saturday (2014/2015)[edit]
- 2 tph Larkhall - Dalmuir via Yoker
- 1 tph Motherwell - Milngavie via Whifflet
- 1 tph Whifflet - Milngavie
- 2 tph Lanark - Glasgow Central via Shieldmuir and Bellshill
- 1 tph Cumbernauld - Dalmuir via Motherwell and Yoker
Sunday (2014/2015)[edit]
- 2 tph Motherwell - Milngavie via Blantyre
- 1 tph Motherwell - Balloch via Whifflet
- 1 tph Lanark - Glasgow Central via Bellshill
- 1 tph Motherwell - Glasgow Central via Bellshill
- 1 tph Larkhall - Balloch via Yoker
The infrastructure of the Argyle Line consists of a route from Finnieston West Junction (Eastbound), Finnieston East Junction (Westbound) (both East of Partick Station, diverging from the Queen Street and Airdrie line) and Rutherglen Junction (joining the Caledonian main line towards Motherwell). It is double track throughout, with a grade-separated junction comprising the Finnieston East and West Junctions; eastwards from there the route dives underground and is sub-surface as far as Dalmarnock station. There is one intermediate siding at Exhibition Centre, used to for turning back westbound trains. The stations are of island or two-platform design.
The route serves the commercial and shopping districts of Glasgow's central area.
Service routes[edit]
The south-eastern extremity of the train service is the two-platform station at Lanark, on a two-mile single track branch from Lanark Junction. Trains from Lanark continue northbound on the West Coast Main Line as far as Law Junction, diverging northwards there on the Holytown route as far as Wishaw North Junction, where they diverge to rejoin the West Coast Main Line at Shieldmuir Junction.
Passing through Motherwell, the trains then leave the West Coast Main Line again to call at Bellshill before rejoining the main line at Uddingston. The Hamilton Circle line converges at Newton.
Trains approaching Motherwell from Holytown or Coatbridge Central, cross the WCML to travel onto the Hamilton Circle, before calling at Airbles. Between here and Hamilton Central, a spur from Larkhall joins. The line then passes through Hamilton West, Blantyre and Newton before rejoining the West Coast Main Line as far as Rutherglen.
At Dalmarnock Junction, trains diverge northwards to enter the infrastructure of the Argyle Line, diving underground after Dalmarnock station. West of Exhibition Centre Station, the line to Partick and Hyndland, diverges to form a burrowing junction.
Westbound trains rise up a steep incline to join the North Clyde line from Queen Street station. This steep section originally gave access to the sidings at Queen's Dock from the Stobcross Railway.
Eastbound trains enter what is now known as Kelvinhaugh Tunnel, immediately to the West of Sandyford Street. This tunnel joins the original Kelvinhaugh Tunnel on the Lanarkshire and Dunbartonshire Railway from Partick Central, just South of Kelvinhaugh Street; finally meeting the disused Stobcross Depot Tunnel on the Glasgow Central Railway, just inside the common South East portal of these two tunnels. The mouth of the Stobcross Depot Tunnel can be seen from the Eastbound platform of Exhibition Centre Station.
Going North-westwards, Partick is the fifth busiest in Scotland.[1] Trains then either travel towards Dalmuir via Yoker, or go via Anniesland to Milngavie or Dalmuir and on Sundays, Balloch via Yoker.
Initial service pattern[edit]
From the opening in November 1979, the basic weekday service was one train per hour from Dumbarton to the Hamilton Circle (anticlockwise), and one train from Dumbarton to Hamilton Circle (clockwise, including Newton), two trains per hour from Dalmuir to Hamilton Circle (anticlockwise) and two trains per hour to Hamilton Circle (clockwise, including Newton), and one train per hour between Milngavie and Lanark (non-stop from Argyle Street to Motherwell).
For a few years from the re-opening, the northbound West Highland sleeping car train from London used the route on Saturdays only. It was detached from another portion at Mossend and diesel-hauled via the Rutherglen & Coatbridge line.
Rolling stock[edit]
At its opening, the rolling stock on the Argyle Line was Class 314 electric multiple units, which were then new. These were accompanied by a number of the older Class 303 "Blue Train" sets from the North Clyde route. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, Class 311 trains also operated on this route. After the 303s were retired in 2002, the route was operated by a mixture of new Class 334 Alstom "Juniper" units, alongside a small number of 1980s vintage Class 318 trains cascaded from the Ayrshire routes, with the original Class 314 sets transferred to the Cathcart Circle.
The Argyle Line is operated by Class 320s and Class 318s with the occasional Class 334 appearing.
The Glasgow Central Railway under central Glasgow had been opened in 1886, connecting the Lanarkshire and Dunbartonshire Railway at Maryhill Central and Stobcross Railway at Stobcross to the Lanarkshire and Ayrshire Railway near Kirkhill, Rutherglen and Coatbridge Railway at Carmyle, Clydesdale Junction Railway and Polloc and Govan Railway at Rutherglen and Clydesdale Junction Railway at Newton. The line closed in 1964.[2]
In November 1979, the Argyle Line was created, as joint venture by British Rail and the Strathclyde Passenger Transport Executive (SPTE), by reopening most of the former route.[3] However, the former Caledonian Railway route from Whiteinch was not to be re-opened, and a new connection with the former North British Railway route via Hyndland was created, incorporating a grade-separated junction with the Queen Street Low Level route.
A key part of the re-opening was the implementation of an intensive electrically operated passenger train service between Dalmuir and Milngavie, and Motherwell and Lanark. The service west of Partick was to be integrated with the existing North Clyde services on the Queen Street Low Level line. Outside of Glasgow's central area, the train service used sections of the North Clyde and West Coast Main Line (WCML).
Two stations were constructed for the re-opening of the line:
- Argyle Street; this was entirely new, i.e. both the site and the construction. Due to its proximity to Glasgow Cross station, the latter was not re-opened.
- Exhibition Centre station (called Finnieston until 1986); whilst this station was located only slightly to the west of the original Stobcross station on the Glasgow Central Railway, the only commonality between the two is the location of much of the eastbound platform (which was originally the westbound one).
On the central tunnel section, there are disused stations at Glasgow Green and at Glasgow Cross (adjacent to the Tollbooth), both constructed by the Glasgow Central Railway. The frontage of Glasgow Green station was demolished in March 2012,[4] whilst the entrance to Glasgow Cross station has been turned into ventilation ducts, visible from the traffic island between Trongate and London Road.
The Larkhall Line was opened as an extension to Argyle Line services in December 2005 by First Minister Jack McConnell. The line was the reopening of the Coalburn Branch and Mid Lanark Lines of the Caledonian Railway and it begins at Haughhead Junction, just east of Hamilton Central. Stations are located at Chatelherault, Merryton and Larkhall, where services terminate.[5] The branch is single line throughout, with a crossing loop at Allanton.
In 2006, Network Rail announced tentative proposals to electrify the Rutherglen - Whifflet section, as part of a £1.4bn upgrade to Scotland's railways (these were confirmed in May 2013). The main benefits of this scheme is to provide an enhanced frequency for the Whifflet-Central routes, and to provide an electric diversionary path for long distance WCML services. Electrification also would mean the Whifflet Line being added to the Argyle Line system with services through Glasgow Central Low Level to the western suburbs. This work was completed in time for the December 2014 timetable change and led to a timetable recast that saw Whifflet Line services replace those to/from Lanark in the service pattern through the core section via Central Low Level.[6]
- ^ The usage information (Station Entries and Station Exits) is based on ticket sales in the financial year 2002/03 and covers all National Rail stations. Continued usage notes, and Excel format table for all stations available.
- ^ The Railways of Great Britain - a Historical Atlas, Volume 2; Cobb, Col M H; 2003; Ian Allan Publishing Ltd
- ^ Skillen, Brian S. (1979). "The Once and Future Railway". In: Scottish Transport. Issue No. 33, Pp 13-19. Scottish Tramway Museum Society. December 1979. ISSN 0048-9808.
- ^ http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-17452063
- ^ SPT News
- ^ GB National Rail Timetable 2014-15, Table 225


text:
In a world filled with text messaging, email, Twitter and other electronic communication, letter writing and penmanship is becoming a lost art. But, for decade-long pen pals Sophia Smith, 18, of Warrensburg, and Barbara Reyes, 74, of Sedalia, they have created a letter legacy.
The pair began corresponding when Smith was in the third grade at Washington Elementary School through a Sedalia Area Literacy Council program. Through the years, and several moves for Smith, she and Reyes continued to write to each other, often once a month. Many times Smith would mail handmade art gifts and souvenirs to Reyes throughout her school years and during her travels abroad.
"They had the program over at the school for all of us to get pen pals, and learn how to write efficiently, and I got Barbara," Smith explained about the pen pal program. "I moved away about a year and a half after that, and we just kept on writing."
"I stayed in the pen pal program for about four more years after that," Reyes said. "Each year there was another little girl, and each time they wanted to keep writing to me … I wrote to them a couple times but I never heard anything."
Smith alone remained her faithful pen pal.
Making their bond tighter, while writing to each other 10 years ago, they both made a surprising discovery.
"It wasn't until after school was over that year that I found she lived down the street from me," Reyes said.
Smith eventually moved to Kansas City and then to Kansas but kept writing, and she looked forward to receiving Reyes' four to seven page letters and sometimes 12 to 13 page letters.
"I talk better on paper than I can in person," Reyes said.
Reyes said Smith wrote to her from Kansas City, from Paola, Kan., and when she attended a boarding school in seventh grade at the Thomas Jefferson School in St. Louis, after receiving an almost full-ride scholarship to the school.
"It was Thomas Jefferson, college prep," Smith said. "People down the street didn't know the school was there, but people from Korea would fly halfway around the world to go there."
Although there was homework and studies for Smith, she never stopped writing.
So why did the two women stay connected through letter writing for 10 years when it may have be easier to email or text a hello to each other?
"Nowadays people get so excited when they actually get a letter in the mail, because you don't any more," Smith said. "And so it was just kind of exciting — you had a letter in the mail and you could write back instead of sending a five letter text, you sent five pages."
Writing letters provides a record of correspondence and can be passed down to future generations to read while instant messages fizzle into cyberspace and are eventually lost. Smith saved her letters from Reyes. Reyes also saved her letters from Smith and stored them in the attic. Unfortunately a family member threw them all away recently, by mistake.
For Smith, writing letters to Reyes also filled a gap.
"Plus, I never really had much contact with my grandparents," she said. "So she is like my surrogate grandma — it was nice."
"When I found out she lived down there, I had to come up to get stuff out of her garden, and one day her mother brought me up that basket," Reyes said pointing to a woven basket sitting nearby. "So her mother brought the basket up with some cucumbers that Sophia raised. This picture here is one thing she gave me too."
Reyes pointed to a canvas painting titled, "The Secret Garden," created by Smith in 2006. It has hung on Reyes' wall since it was given to her eight years ago with the inscription, "To My Pen pal Barbara."
"Sophia couldn't believe that was still on the wall," Reyes said.
She also has a stained glass heart made by Smith in high school and a Russian shawl Smith sent to her from Moscow on a recent trip aboard.
"A lot of the ladies there were wearing them, so I saw one, and Barbara likes red," noted Smith. "I got her a red one."
Now a college sophomore at the University of Central Missouri in Warrensburg majoring in conservation wildlife biology, Smith will leave again Sunday on a 24-hour flight to study abroad for six months at the University of Tasmania, Australia — but this will not be a deterrent for the two long-term pen pals.
"I promised Barbra I would send stuff, maybe a kangaroo, I don't know," she said laughing.
"She spells much better now than she did in third grade," Reyes added.
"She's the only reason I have a signature that's better than a third grader's right now," Smith added. "All that signing letters."
Literacy Council President Betty Albrecht said in her years working with the council and the project she'd never heard of any other pen pals who had stayed in touch for so long. She said the relationship the two have built is amazing.
"This really is unique," she said. "They are to be commended. That was a lot of commitment for a young child to keep."
Albrecht said the Sedalia Area Literacy Council has managed the pen pal project at Washington Elementary School for more than 15 years and have recently implemented a "meet your pen pal" party at the beginning of the school year and a farewell party at the end of the year. Free books are given to the students at the parties.
For the 2013-14 school year the project had 53 students and 51 adult pen pals, Albrecht said. Teachers involved with the project this year were Devon Gilmore and Patrick Pyle; the pen pal project is chaired by Barbara Freund.


text:
Most of this is on my 1st gen build but since bob made an awesome new section. Here is as it sits today....
As of tonight:
Truck: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Engine- 4.0 V6
Suspension- 3" OME full kit with Toytec rear springs
Tires- 285/70/17 BFG MT KM2
Wheels- Ultra 198 Bolt Satin
Lights- TRS Morimoto mini D2S HID with Phillips 85122+K Bulb
Before Lift:
Here is buying it at the dealer= Happy wife.
Wanted to upgrade wheels/Tires:
Fit 285 BFG KM2 on stock trail suspension.


text:
Smartphones Are For Shopping, Tablets Are For Buying
Tablets and smartphones are lumped together in the same category: mobile. But that's not accurate because it blunts and obscures some of the differences in how consumers use these devices.
Both tablets and smartphones are used at home. However, generally speaking, only smartphones truly make it outside and are used "on the go." (Carrier-connected 7-inch tablets may change that in the future.) According to recent data from Nielsen, smartphones are most commonly used to find local stores, to check prices and for product research.
Product research is also something done quite heavily on tablets — even more than on smartphones. But tablet owners are much more inclined to use those devices to convert and buy things vs. smartphone owners.
As we've discussed before, most "conversions" don't happen on smartphones. They happen later offline or on other devices (PCs, tablets). Google has documented how multiple devices are used throughout any given day and how user behavior is becoming truly "multiscreen" or multiplatform.
Following consumers from device to device is complex and challenging from an attribution standpoint. However companies such as Drawbridge are using highly sophisticated methodologies to try and track users from the PC to mobile to enable ad targeting of those users across platforms.
SMX Advanced is the only conference designed exclusively for experienced paid search advertisers and SEOs. You'll participate in experts-only sessions and network with fellow internet marketing thought leaders. Check out the tactic-packed agenda!
(Some images used under license from Shutterstock.com.)
The latest analyses, insights and strategies that inspire CMOs and marketers everywhere.


text:
I think we both agree that over the course of a lifetime, these few years apart will seem like nothing. It doesn't make the process any less painful, but it's the story we tell each other, and it works for now.
Enter keywords, locations or job types to start searching for your new science career
Opening a free account lets you utilize all the tools you'll need for a successful job search including:
Register now


text:
Wednesday, April 21, 2004 | ||||||||
Ballon launch in coldwater | ||||||||
| ||||||||
Luke Ontrop, 2, left, and Blake Siefring, 18 months old, both of Coldwater, wait patiently for a balloon launch outside Stepping Ahead Learning Center in Coldwater on Tuesday. The launch was in celebration of The Week of the Young Child. Each child's balloon was tagged with the announcement of the special week and encouraged the finders to hug all the children in their life. Purchase this as a quality photograph |


text:
Sam Champion, the longtime ABC weather guy in New York, then on Good Morning America, finally came out today--in a wedding (not his own) write-up in The New York Times. But in a sense it was a double-wedding notice, as he also announced his own wedding coming up, and IDed his partner. Very subtle, very heartening. Andrew Sullivan covers here. He likens it to the case of Anderson Cooper, who came out after years of rumors.
From the report (that wedding was officiated by SF Mayor Gavin Newsom, who became a Universal Life minister for the occasion): "He took a turn on the dance floor with his partner, the photographer Rubem Robierb. 'We're getting married New Year's Eve in Miami,' Mr. Champion said in the spirit of the moment."


text:
The driver for the Department of Energy's (DOE's) groundwater and soil cleanup technology development program is the need to meet applicable federal and state regulations for the cleanup of contaminated sites. DOE will not be able to meet all of the applicable regulations with existing remediation technologies and therefore must develop new technologies, as discussed in Chapter 1. An understanding of the cleanup goals required under existing regulations is thus critical to the administration of the Subsurface Contaminants Focus Area (SCFA) because the technologies developed by SCFA will have to be capable of meeting applicable regulatory requirements.
Historically, regulators have used drinking water standards as baseline cleanup goals for contaminated groundwater. For soil, commonly regulators have set cleanup goals designed to protect the groundwater beneath the soil and to prevent exposure to contamination via soil ingestion or inhalation. However, these policies are changing rapidly. New policies for groundwater and soil cleanup will affect the range of remediation technology options that DOE can consider using at its sites and will therefore influence SCFA's priorities for technology development. This chapter first describes regulations that prescribe how groundwater and soil are to be cleaned up at DOE installations. It then reviews baseline cleanup goals for groundwater and soil contaminants under these regulations and describes in detail new policies that allow alterations to the historical cleanup process.
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 39
Ground Water & Soil Cleanup: Improving Management of Persistent Contaminants
The Changing Regulatory Environment
The driver for the Department of Energy's (DOE's) groundwater and soil cleanup technology development program is the need to meet applicable federal and state regulations for the cleanup of contaminated sites. DOE will not be able to meet all of the applicable regulations with existing remediation technologies and therefore must develop new technologies, as discussed in Chapter 1. An understanding of the cleanup goals required under existing regulations is thus critical to the administration of the Subsurface Contaminants Focus Area (SCFA) because the technologies developed by SCFA will have to be capable of meeting applicable regulatory requirements.
Historically, regulators have used drinking water standards as baseline cleanup goals for contaminated groundwater. For soil, commonly regulators have set cleanup goals designed to protect the groundwater beneath the soil and to prevent exposure to contamination via soil ingestion or inhalation. However, these policies are changing rapidly. New policies for groundwater and soil cleanup will affect the range of remediation technology options that DOE can consider using at its sites and will therefore influence SCFA's priorities for technology development. This chapter first describes regulations that prescribe how groundwater and soil are to be cleaned up at DOE installations. It then reviews baseline cleanup goals for groundwater and soil contaminants under these regulations and describes in detail new policies that allow alterations to the historical cleanup process.
OCR for page 39
Ground Water & Soil Cleanup: Improving Management of Persistent Contaminants
During most of the period of nuclear weapons production, operations at DOE installations were managed under a veil of secrecy. DOE remained exempt from federal, state, and local solid and hazardous waste laws that were developed and applied to private industries. The initial spur for DOE to act on its legacy of environmental contamination came largely from two successful lawsuits against the agency, one filed by the Legal Environmental Assistance Foundation and decided in 1984, and another filed by the Natural Resources Defense Council and decided in 1989 (Probst and McGovern, 1998). These suits required DOE to comply with requirements of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, which governs management of contaminants from active waste treatment, storage, or disposal facilities. However, DOE remained exempt from other solid and hazardous waste laws until 1992, when Congress passed the Federal Facilities Compliance Act. Cleanup of DOE's installations is therefore still a relatively new undertaking.
Table 2-1 lists laws applicable to the cleanup of groundwater and soil contamination at DOE installations. The listing is in order of significance to DOE remediation projects, rather than in chronological order.
The Federal Facilities Compliance Act, listed first in Table 2-1, is the key law underlying all DOE cleanups because, as mentioned above, it established for the first time that DOE must comply with existing environmental statutes. The act makes federally owned and operated facilities subject to state-imposed fines and penalties for violation of hazardous waste requirements. It authorizes environmental regulators to treat DOE facilities like privately owned industrial facilities and to subject them to the same rules and liabilities.
For cleanup of contaminated groundwater and soil at DOE installations, the most important laws are the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), listed second and third in Table 2-1. RCRA, enacted in 1976 and significantly amended in 1984, addresses the treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste at operating facilities. The 1984 amendments brought "solid waste management units," which are currently inactive but formerly used hazardous waste disposal sites within the boundary of an operating facility, under the umbrella of RCRA, as well. CERCLA, enacted in 1980 and amended in 1986, governs the cleanup of groundwater and soil at inactive facilities. Most DOE installations are currently regulated under CERCLA, RCRA, or both (see Table 2-2). Individual
OCR for page 39
Ground Water & Soil Cleanup: Improving Management of Persistent Contaminants
Table 2-1 Federal Regulations Applicable to DOE Remediation Projects
Federal Law (year)
General Description
Significance to DOE Remediation
Federal Facilities Compliance Act (1992)
Establishes a definition of ''mixed waste'' and requires development of plans for its management. Waives the DOE (and other federal facilities') immunity from EPA and state hazardous waste regulations and sanctions.
Establishes that DOE facilities are subject to and liable under federal and state waste management regulations, including CERCLA and RCRA.
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (1976); Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (1984)
Establishes regulations controlling generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials for active industrial facilities.
Contains requirements for groundwater monitoring. If groundwater contamination is identified, the RCRA corrective action process is implemented.
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (1980); Superfund Amendment and Reauthorization Act (1986)
Establishes regulations for cleanup of inactive hazardous waste sites and determines the distribution of cleanup costs among the parties that generated and handled the hazardous substances disposed at these sites.
Requires cleanup of inactive facilities and establishes procedures and requirements for site characterization and remedy selection. SARA provides additional requirements for documentation and distribution of information on releases of pollutants from facilities.
Uranium Mill Tailings Remediation Control Act (1978), and amendments
Establishes two programs to protect public health and the environment from exposure to contaminants from uranium mill tailings piles: one program addresses inactive sites; the other addresses active sites that are licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Requires that DOE take charge of cleaning up contaminated groundwater and soil at 24 inactive uranium mining and processing sites.
OCR for page 39
Ground Water & Soil Cleanup: Improving Management of Persistent Contaminants
Federal Law (year)
General Description
Significance to DOE Remediation
Safe Drinking Water Act (1974)
Develops drinking water standards that govern the quality of water delivered to the consumer and establishes the underground injection control program, which classifies and regulates types of injection well practices.
If groundwater beneath a DOE facility can be used as drinking water, then cleanup levels must satisfy MCLs for chemicals regulated under the SDWA.
Clean Water Act (1972), and amendments
Establishes requirements controlling discharge of pollutants to surface waters.
If groundwater beneath a DOE facility discharges to surface water bodies, then the CWA may be used to establish cleanup levels.
Toxic Substances Control Act (1976), and amendments
Establishes responsibility of manufacturers to provide data on health and environmental effects of chemical substances and provides EPA with authority to regulate manufacture, use, distribution, and disposal of chemical substances.
Includes special management provisions for handling and cleaning up material containing PCBs, which are present in environmental media at DOE facilities.
NOTE: CWA=Clean Water Act; EPA = Environmental Protection Agency; MCL = maximum contaminant level; PCB = polychlorinated biphenyl; SARA = Superfund Amendment and Reauthorization Act; SDWA = Safe Drinking Water Act
OCR for page 39
Ground Water & Soil Cleanup: Improving Management of Persistent Contaminants
Table 2-2 Primary Regulatory Drivers for Groundwater and Soil Remediation at Select DOE Installations
Primary Regulatory Driver
Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Los Alamos National Laboratory
Mound Plant
Nevada Test Site
Oak Ridge Reservation
Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant
Pantex Plant
Rocky Flats Plant
Sandia National Laboratories
Savannah River Site
SOURCE: DOE. 1998. Remediation Action Program Information Center (RAPIC). Oak Ridge, Tenn.: Oak Ridge National Laboratory, RAPIC (http://www.em/doe.gov/rapic).
cleanup sites may be regulated under both programs in situations where cleanup began under RCRA but where the installation was later listed on the National Priorities List (GAO, 1994). In other cases, RCRA cleanup sites may be very near, even next to, sites where cleanup is occurring under CERCLA (GAO, 1994). For example, at Hanford, the B-pond disposal site for liquid wastes is being cleaned up under RCRA, while abandoned trenches that once carried wastes to the pond are being cleaned up under CERCLA (GAO, 1994).
RCRA established a manifest program to track hazardous waste at active facilities from the point of generation through transport to treatment, storage, and disposal. The program is administered through a system of permits. To obtain a permit to operate a facility that is subject to RCRA, the facility owner must monitor the groundwater beneath and downgradient of the operation to determine if statistically significant increases in contaminant concentrations (higher than those occurring upgradient of the site) exist. If the monitoring program indicates that contaminant concentrations are increasing, the facility owner must determine whether concentrations exist at levels above predetermined groundwater protection standards. Where such standards are exceeded, the site owner must implement a "corrective
OCR for page 39
Ground Water & Soil Cleanup: Improving Management of Persistent Contaminants
Figure 2-1
Steps in the RCRA corrective action process. Note: EPA = Environmental Protection Agency.
action" program to clean up the contaminated groundwater and soil. Figure 2-1 shows the steps in the RCRA corrective action process.
CERCLA authorized the federal government to require cleanup of abandoned or inactive facilities where groundwater and soil are contaminated. Under CERCLA, current and former site owners can be held liable for cleanup costs. CERCLA also established a federal fund, Superfund, to pay for cleanup of sites where responsible parties cannot be identified. Because CERCLA facilities are no longer active, the program, unlike RCRA, is not operated through a permit system. Rather, the federal government is charged with identifying the nation's most highly contaminated sites, listing them in a data base known as the National Priorities List (NPL), and ensuring that the sites are cleaned up. Figure 2-2 outlines the CERCLA remedial process.
Although the regulatory mechanisms under RCRA and CERCLA differ, the processes for selecting cleanup remedies under the two
OCR for page 39
Ground Water & Soil Cleanup: Improving Management of Persistent Contaminants
Figure 2-2
Steps in the CERCLA remedial process. Note: EPA = Environmental Protection Agency.
OCR for page 39
Ground Water & Soil Cleanup: Improving Management of Persistent Contaminants
BOX 2-1 Feasibility Study Criteria for Evaluation of Alternative Remedies Under CERCLA
CERCLA regulations require consideration of the nine evaluation criteria listed below when selecting among possible cleanup remedies. Not all of these criteria receive equal weight. The first two are threshold requirements. Any remedy selected must be protective of human health and the environment, and "applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements" (ARARs—other federal, state, or tribal laws that apply to a particular site cleanup) must be followed. The next five criteria are considered balancing criteria. The selected remedy must be cost effective and use permanent solutions and treatment to the maximum extent practicable. The last two criteria are modifying criteria.
Threshold Criteria
Overall protection of human health and environment
Compliance with ARARs
Balancing Criteria
Long-term effectiveness and permanence
Reduction of toxicity, mobility, or volume
Short-term effectiveness
Cost effectiveness
Modifying Criteria
Regulatory acceptance
Community acceptance
programs are similar. For example, CERCLA's remedial investigation/feasibility study corresponds to the RCRA facility investigation/corrective measures study (see Figures 2-1 and 2-2). Development of the CERCLA record of decision (ROD) corresponds to the RCRA remedy selection step. The two programs also require consideration of similar criteria when selecting cleanup remedies. CERCLA requires consideration of nine evaluation criteria (see Box 2-1), and nearly the same set of criteria are used in remedy selection under RCRA. The groundwater and soil cleanup goals under the two programs are similar as well, as discussed below. A significant difference between the two programs is CERCLA's inclusion of a specific step in the time sequence of remedy selection for public comment; opportunities for public comment are less prominent under RCRA.
The fourth law listed in Table 2-1, the Uranium Mill Tailings Remediation Control Act (UMTRCA), applies to 24 former uranium
OCR for page 39
Ground Water & Soil Cleanup: Improving Management of Persistent Contaminants
ore mining and processing sites where cleanup is being overseen by DOE (EPA, 1995). These sites generally consist of mine tailings piles and groundwater and soil originating from these piles. When Congress enacted this legislation in 1978, members of Congress directed DOE to take charge of cleaning up 22 sites specifically identified in the legislation; DOE has since added two more sites to the list. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) oversees DOE's cleanup of UMTRCA sites, in cooperation with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, according to a cleanup process and set of cleanup standards developed specifically for UMTRCA. Because UMTRCA applies to a small and unique subset of DOE sites, most of the discussion in this chapter focuses on RCRA and CERCLA.
The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) and the Clean Water Act (CWA), listed fifth and sixth in Table 2-1, do not directly regulate cleanup of contaminated groundwater and soil at DOE installations but rather provide the basis for setting groundwater and soil cleanup goals. The Toxic Substances Control Act, listed last in the table, has limited applicability to DOE groundwater and soil remediation projects; it includes special management provisions for cleanup of material containing polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), found as environmental contaminants at many DOE facilities.
Prior to assessing which remedial technologies might be applicable to a site, site managers must determine the remediation goals, including the targeted cleanup concentrations for each constituent in groundwater, soils, and other media, as appropriate. The baseline standards used as cleanup goals vary somewhat depending on the regulatory program and the individual regulators involved in overseeing a specific site, but in general, cleanup goals under CERCLA and RCRA are intended to be consistent.
Groundwater Baseline Cleanup Goals
Guided by the Safe Drinking Water Act, EPA and state agencies have established public drinking water standards for many compounds. EPA refers to these standards as "maximum contaminant levels" (MCLs). MCLs are established based on risk (toxicity and carcinogenicity), capability of drinking water treatment technologies to remove the particular contaminant, and cost considerations. MCLs apply to drinking water supplies.
Groundwater may serve as a drinking water supply; therefore
OCR for page 39
Ground Water & Soil Cleanup: Improving Management of Persistent Contaminants
Table 2-3 Maximum Contaminant Levels for Significant DOE Contaminants
Constituents from DNAPLs
0.005 mg/liter
0.005 mg/liter
Vinyl chloride
0.002 mg/liter
0.07 mg/liter
Chromium (total)
0.1 mg/liter
0.020 mg/liter
Beta particle and photon activity
4 mrem
Gross alpha particle activity
15 pCi/liter
Combined Ra-226 and Ra-228
5 pCi/liter
Radon (1991 proposed)
300 pCi/liter
the most common cleanup standards for groundwater at RCRA and CERCLA sites are MCLs. EPA has developed MCLs for organic chemicals, inorganic chemicals, and radionuclides. Table 2-3 lists the MCLs for organic chemicals that can dissolve from dense nonaqueous-phase liquids (DNAPLs) frequently identified at DOE facilities and for chromium, uranium, and radioactivity measures. The MCL for uranium is based on toxicity rather than radioactivity. For radionuclides, such as strontium-90, that emit beta particles and gamma rays, the MCL is based on dose equivalent (the effective radiation dose that the body receives), whereas for other radionuclides, the MCL is based on activity (the number of disintegrations of the radioactive compound per unit time).
Within the RCRA program, provisions have been made for development of site-specific "alternate concentration limits" (ACLs) that can serve as cleanup goals for contaminated groundwater in place of MCLs. A corresponding procedure is available under CERCLA as part of the process of evaluating what are known as "applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements" (ARARs, which are environmental laws other than CERCLA that might apply to the site and that must be considered in setting cleanup goals). ACLs are derived through well-established procedures based on toxicity and exposure routes. Site usage and access to groundwater are important considerations.
OCR for page 39
Ground Water & Soil Cleanup: Improving Management of Persistent Contaminants
Frequently, ACLs are less stringent than MCLs, allowing higher concentrations of contaminants to remain in place.
Another situation in which cleanup targets other than MCLs may be used is when groundwater is not suitable for drinking. EPA has a groundwater classification system that identifies groundwater as
class I: special groundwater (irreplaceable source or potential source of drinking water),
class II: groundwater currently or potentially a source of drinking water, or
class III: groundwater not a source of drinking water due to insufficient yield, high salinity, or contamination that cannot be reasonably treated.
When groundwater fits class III, cleanup to goals other than MCLs is allowable.
Substantial variability exists among EPA regions and individual case managers in allowing the use of groundwater cleanup goals other than MCLs. Additionally, there are large differences in cleanup levels and types of groundwater classifications among individual states. At DOE sites, both the state within which the site is located and the EPA have influence over the required cleanup levels. Nonetheless, despite the occasional use of ACLs and the classification of some groundwater as nonpotable, MCLs have historically served as baseline standards for groundwater cleanup at RCRA and CERCLA sites.
EPA has established a separate set of groundwater cleanup targets under UMTRCA. Table 2-4 lists these requirements. For contaminants for which no goal has been established under UMTRCA, cleanup must achieve background levels. Alternate concentration limits are also allowable if DOE determines that the contaminants "will not pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health and the environment as long as the alternate concentration limit is not exceeded," according to UMTRCA regulatory documents (40 C.F.R. 192).
Soil Baseline Cleanup Goals
For contaminated soils, there is no ARAR equivalent to the drinking water MCL. Until recently, soil cleanup goals were negotiated on a case-by-case basis, which increased the time to develop cleanup goals and costs and resulted in cleanup requirements that varied with location. Recognizing this limitation, EPA (1996) developed soil screening guidance for the establishment of cleanup levels. The soil screening guidance provides a tiered approach to estimate soil screening levels (SSLs) that may serve as preliminary remediation goals under certain
OCR for page 39
Ground Water & Soil Cleanup: Improving Management of Persistent Contaminants
their own policies and guidance documents for natural attenuation. EPA's monitored natural attenuation guidance, however, cautions that its own policy, rather than these other documents, will provide the basis for approving the use of monitored natural attenuation. It states that non-EPA natural attenuation guidance manuals are not ''officially endorsed by the EPA, and all parties should clearly understand that such guidances do not in any way replace current EPA ... guidances or policies addressing the remedy selection process.''
Changes to Records of Decision
Until the mid-1990s, changes to CERCLA RODs in order to allow the use of a more effective technology were extremely rare. The inability to change to a different remediation technology once the ROD had been signed created a barrier to the use of innovative remediation technologies (NRC, 1997), both at DOE sites and elsewhere. Years can pass between signing of the ROD and construction of the cleanup remedy (Guerrero, 1998). During this time, new technologies may emerge that could improve the prospects for site cleanup or reduce costs.
Since 1995, EPA has changed its policies concerning ROD revisions and increasingly is allowing modifications to remedies specified in RODs to reflect new information about cleanup technologies or new understanding about the site. DOE and SCFA managers must be familiar with these policy changes because the new policies open an avenue for increasing use of innovative, cost-saving remedies at DOE sites. In 1996 and 1997, EPA approved remedy changes for groundwater and/or soil in existing RODs at 130 CERCLA sites. As shown in Table 2-6, the greatest number of changes (35) were approved to allow modifications to the design of the original remedy, often to reflect new performance data. Conventional remedies were changed to innovative remedies at another 11 sites. At nine sites, conventional pump-and-treat systems were eliminated and changed to monitored natural attenuation. Changes in required cleanup levels (usually to less stringent levels) were also allowed at a number of sites.
In addition to allowing more flexibility in changes to remedies once RODs are signed, EPA has instituted a formal program to review all planned high-cost remedies, either just before the ROD is signed or (in a few cases) after the ROD is signed (Laws, 1995; Luftig, 1996). These reviews are carried out by the National Remedy Review Board, formed in January 1996. The review board formally assesses planned remedies for all non-DOE sites for which the action costs more than $30 million or for which the remedy costs more than $10
OCR for page 39
Ground Water & Soil Cleanup: Improving Management of Persistent Contaminants
Table 2-6 Changes in CERCLA RODs for Groundwater and Soil Contamination, 1996–1997
Reason for Change
Number of Sites
Minor modification of original remedy designa
Treatment of full site changed to treatment of hot spots, or boundaries of remedy area decreased
Boundaries of remedy area increased
Change in required cleanup levels, intended land use, number of contaminants covered, or regulatory authority
Conventional remedy changed to innovative remedy
Innovative remedy changed to poor or uncertain performance
Pump-and-treat system changed to monitored natural attenuation
Pump-and-treat system changed to containment and/or monitoring
Pump-and-treat system downsized
In situ soil treatment or containment changed to ex situ treatment
Soil remedy changed to capping and/or containment
On-site soil treatment changed to off-site disposal or treatment
Off-site treatment or disposal changed to on-site treatment or disposal
Cleanup goals achieved; treatment discontinued
Change in duration of monitoring
NOTE: Categories were based on interpretation of data provided by M. Charsky, EPA, 1998. Total number of sites with ROD changes is 130. Changes occurred for more than one reason at some sites.
a Modifications include changes in treatment system for extracted water, location for soil disposal, design of incinerator, design of landfill, and others.
million and is 50 percent more costly than the least-cost alternative that can meet cleanup criteria for the site. For DOE sites, the thresholds for review are $75 million and $25 million, respectively. The review board consists of managers and senior scientific staff from EPA headquarters in Washington and the regional offices.
Following its review of a high-cost site, the review board issues recommendations to EPA decision makers in the region in which the site is located. The decision makers are not required to adopt the board's recommendations but must, at a minimum, prepare a written response indicating the logic of the choice to address or not address the board's concerns. The board reviewed 23 cleanup decisions, including two at DOE's Fernald facility and one at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, between its formation and January 1998 (NRRB, 1998).
OCR for page 39
Ground Water & Soil Cleanup: Improving Management of Persistent Contaminants
The existence of this board may trigger the search for more cost-effective solutions for high-cost sites; it may prompt site managers to seek new technologies that will reduce cleanup costs to levels below the board's threshold cost criteria so that they can avoid having to undergo the formal review process.
Brownfields Programs
Although historically the goal of contaminated site cleanup programs has been to return sites to conditions that would allow unrestricted future use, increasing numbers of sites are now being cleaned up to levels safe for industrial and commercial use but not for residential use. Many of these sites are being restored under the auspices of "brownfields" programs.
Brownfields are former commercial and industrial facilities that have been idled due in part to contamination problems and that could be returned to productive use provided some of the contamination can be removed. In general, sites cleaned up under brownfields programs can be converted to new uses much more rapidly than those restored under CERCLA and RCRA because the regulatory process is much less cumbersome and because cleanup standards are scaled back to provide protection for commercial and industrial users but not for potential residential users of the property. Some DOE installations, especially those that are near metropolitan areas and that DOE would like to turn over to the private sector, could be restored under brownfields programs. DOE and SCFA managers need to be familiar with the scope of these programs because their cleanup goals typically differ from those of CERCLA and RCRA, and thus the suite of possible remediation approaches differs as well.
More than 200 contaminated sites across the country are now receiving funding from EPA for brownfields cleanups under the President's Brownfields Initiative, launched in November 1993 (EPA Region 8, 1998). Under this initiative, site owners or affected communities can apply for grants of up to $200,000 to serve as seed money for brownfields cleanups. Past projects have used this funding for gathering more detailed site characterization data to clarify the nature and extent of contamination, preparing redevelopment plans, setting cleanup priorities, and establishing working relationships with concerned citizens. EPA's brownfields funds can be used for federal facilities, such as DOE installations, as well as for private-sector sites.
Many state and local governments have also created special programs to encourage redevelopment of brownfields (GAO, 1995). Key to these programs is reducing the fear of future liability for contami-
OCR for page 39
Ground Water & Soil Cleanup: Improving Management of Persistent Contaminants
nation. In the past, the resale and reuse of idle contaminated property have been hindered by fear that the new owner or a lender who provides funding for the owner will be held liable for contamination discovered onsite, even if the owner and lender were not responsible for the contamination. Many state and local governments have established mechanisms to protect purchasers and lenders against liability; these mechanisms include special legislation and written covenants not to sue. Also available through some of these programs are loans for redevelopment.
Key to brownfields programs is a formal change in the allowable land use for the site once cleanup has been completed. Case studies have shown that land use provisions have enormous effects on the residual risk at a site once a site is cleaned up. For example, Katsumata and Kastenberg (1997) demonstrated that at one CERCLA site, scenarios that assumed future residential use of the site produced risks from one to three orders of magnitude greater than scenarios assuming continued industrial use of the property. This difference was due to different assumptions about where and how humans would be exposed to the contamination. Further, they demonstrated that the planned cleanup remedy for the site (involving excavation of the soil and pumping and treating of groundwater) would not reduce risk sufficiently to protect future residential users even though the remedy was intended to do so; remaining risks would exceed EPA's general allowable threshold of one excess cancer case per 10,000 residents. The planned remedy would, however, be sufficient to reduce risks to below the 1-in-10,000 threshold for workers at a future industrial facility located on the site. The suite of acceptable remediation technology alternatives is thus likely to be broader at brownfield sites than at sites restored to residential use standards. SCFA may want to consider alternative possible cleanup end points and the availability of technologies that can achieve these end points in planning its remediation technology development program.
Involvement in brownfields programs is a potentially important component of DOE's remediation strategy for some of its contaminated installations. DOE has had limited involvement in brownfields programs so far. DOE is a member of the Interagency Working Group on Brownfields (established in 1996 as a forum for information exchange among federal agencies) and in 1997 provided $315,000 to begin working with communities at DOE installations in potential brownfields areas (EPA, 1997a).
OCR for page 39
Ground Water & Soil Cleanup: Improving Management of Persistent Contaminants
Risk-Based Corrective Action Programs
An increasing number of state environmental agencies are adopting a process known as "risk-based corrective action" (RBCA) to evaluate and select cleanup remedies for sites that the states oversee. The RBCA process was developed by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) and published in the form of two industrial standard guides (ASTM, 1995, 1998). The first standard guide, published in 1995, applies to sites contaminated with petroleum hydrocarbons. The second, published in 1998, applies to sites with other chemical contaminants. Most states allow use of the RBCA process or a variant. As of October 1998, 14 states had formally adopted ASTM's RBCA standard as part of their regulatory process for petroleum-contaminated sites, and 27 additional states were developing RBCA programs (S. McNeely, EPA Office of Underground Storage Tanks, personal communication, 1998). In addition, the Air Force has developed a methodology, the Enhanced Site Specific Risk Assessment process, similar to RBCA and is conducting an in-depth feasibility analysis to examine how the methodology will fit into the cleanup process. The Navy is considering using RBCA or a similar process for cleaning up its sites, as well. DOE cleanup managers and SCFA should be familiar with the RBCA process because its use may eventually expand beyond the cleanup of petroleum-contaminated sites, and it therefore may influence the selection of cleanup remedies.
RBCA integrates site assessment, remedy selection, and site monitoring through a tiered approach involving increasingly sophisticated levels of data collection and analysis (see Figure 2-4). The initial site assessment identifies source areas of chemicals of concern, potential human and environmental receptors, and potentially significant transport pathways. Sites are then classified and initial response actions identified based on the urgency of need (immediate, zero to two years, more than two years, no action). Based on the information obtained during the initial site assessment, project managers perform a "tier 1" evaluation (according to steps specifically outlined in the RBCA standard) to determine whether the site qualifies for quick regulatory closure or warrants a more site-specific evaluation. In determining risk, the tier 1 evaluation uses standard exposure scenarios with current reasonable maximum exposure assumptions and toxicological parameters. When the tier 1 evaluation indicates a possible risk to human health, project managers can decide to clean up the site or proceed to a more detailed site risk evaluation, known as tier 2. At the end of tier 2, project managers again have the option of closing
OCR for page 39
Ground Water & Soil Cleanup: Improving Management of Persistent Contaminants
Figure 2-4
Steps in the ASTM RBCA process. Source: ASTM, 1995.
OCR for page 39
Ground Water & Soil Cleanup: Improving Management of Persistent Contaminants
the site (if the more detailed evaluation shows that there is no risk), cleaning up the site to protect against risks as computed in tier 2, or proceeding to a final level of highly detailed evaluation, known as tier 3. Tier 3 provides the flexibility for more complex calculations to establish cleanup levels and may include additional site assessment, probabilistic evaluations, and sophisticated chemical fate and transport models.
In a recent review of application of RBCA and other risk-based approaches for cleanup of Navy installations, the National Research Council (NRC, 1998) concluded that the RBCA approach has several advantages, including the following:
Site assessment activities can be focused on collecting only information that is necessary to make risk-based corrective action decisions.
Remedial decisions may be accelerated and costs therefore reduced.
Resources can be focused on sites that pose the greatest risk to human health.
However, the NRC also concluded that the existing RBCA standards would not be suitable for application at Navy sites because the standards lack 6 of 11 criteria that the NRC determined are essential for the successful implementation of risk-based approaches at Navy facilities. In particular, the RBCA standards are lacking in the following:
They do not provide for integrated assessment of multiple sites affecting the same human or ecological receptors at the same installation.
They lack sufficient mechanisms for considering critical uncertainties in site assessment, such as those associated with models of contaminant fate and transport and with estimating health and ecological risks.
They do not adequately account for long-term risks that may remain in place even after cleanup has been completed to the extent practicable.
They do not adequately address the need for public involvement in remedy selection.
They did not undergo external, independent scientific peer review and public review.
It is not clear whether the standards can satisfy all of the regulatory requirements under Superfund and RCRA.
The NRC recommended that the Navy develop a risk-based methodology for its Environmental Restoration Program that satisfies 11
OCR for page 39
Ground Water & Soil Cleanup: Improving Management of Persistent Contaminants
BOX 2-3 NRC's Criteria for a Risk-Based Remediation Process
In a 1998 review of the potential for application of risk-based methodologies in the cleanup of contaminated Navy bases, the NRC concluded that in order to succeed, any risk-based approach must meet the following criteria:
It facilitates prioritization of contaminated sites at individual installations.
It provides a mechanism for increasing the complexity of the remedial investigation when appropriate.
It provides guidance on data collection needed to support the development of site-specific cleanup goals.
It provides for integrated assessment of sites affecting the same human or ecological receptors.
It encourages early action at sites (1) where the risk to human health and the environment is imminent and (2) for which the risks are demonstrably low and remediation is likely to be more rapid and inexpensive.
It considers relevant uncertainties.
It provides a mechanism for integrating the selection of the remedial option with the establishment of remedial goals. It also provides quantitative tools for developing risk management strategies.
It has options to revisit sites over the long term.
It is implemented in a public setting with all stakeholders involved.
It undergoes both external, independent scientific peer review and public review.
It complies with relevant state and federal statutory programs for environmental cleanup.
basic criteria (see Box 2-3). Such criteria might also be applied to the use of risk-based cleanup processes at DOE installations.
An understanding of DOE's changing legal obligations for the cleanup of contaminated groundwater and soil is critical to the effective administration of SCFA's program for developing new groundwater and soil cleanup technologies. SCFA must tailor its technology development program to ensure that DOE has the tools necessary to meet applicable legal requirements. Although groundwater and soil restoration goals have not yet been specified for many DOE sites, when these goals are established they must satisfy the requirements of applicable regulations, generally RCRA, CERCLA, UMTRCA, or a combination of these.
OCR for page 39
Ground Water & Soil Cleanup: Improving Management of Persistent Contaminants
Policies concerning cleanup requirements for groundwater and soil are evolving rapidly. SCFA managers need to keep track of these changes because new policies may affect the selection of cleanup goals for DOE sites and, correspondingly, the suite of possible remediation technologies for achieving those goals. Key trends for SCFA to monitor include the following:
Increasing use of technical impracticability waivers. EPA has clarified its policies for determining when cleanup to baseline standards is infeasible. SCFA has to plan for the development of remedial alternatives (including containment systems) that can be used at sites where technical impracticability waivers are granted. Further, SCFA has to continue to pursue development of technologies that can clean up these difficult sites because issuance of a waiver does not remove DOE's long-term liability for a site.
Increasing use of monitored natural attenuation. Use of monitored natural attenuation in place of or in conjunction with active cleanup remedies is increasing at contaminated sites nationwide, but implementing natural attenuation at DOE sites may require additional research to develop methods for predicting the fate of contaminants under conditions of natural attenuation. SCFA must understand current policy requirements for implementation of monitored natural attenuation and determine what additional research will be necessary for DOE to meet these requirements at appropriate sites.
An increase in the number of changes to groundwater and soil remedies in CERCLA RODs. At an increasing number of CERCLA sites, remediation technologies specified in RODs are being changed to reflect new technological developments or new understanding about the site. SCFA could play a useful role in determining where innovative technologies might provide more effective solutions than technologies specified in current RODs.
Emergence of brownfields programs. Increasing numbers of sites in former industrial areas are being cleaned up to industrial reuse standards, rather than residential use standards, under brownfields programs. DOE is eligible for participation in these programs, and SCFA should keep track of the types of technologies that might be appropriate for remediation under brownfield scenarios.
Emergence of risk-based corrective action programs. Increasing numbers of organizations are developing risk-based procedures designed to set cleanup priorities among contaminated sites. If DOE managers decide such a process is appropriate for their sites, SCFA could play a role in developing the protocols for DOE. SCFA should be familiar with existing risk-based corrective action procedures developed by other organizations.
OCR for page 39
Ground Water & Soil Cleanup: Improving Management of Persistent Contaminants
American Petroleum Institute. 1997. Methods for Measuring Indicators of Intrinsic Bioremediation: Guidance Manual. Washington, D.C.: American Petroleum Institute.
ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials). 1995. Standard Guide for Risk-Based Corrective Action at Petroleum Release Sites (E1739-95). Annual Book of ASTM Standards. West Conshocken, Pa.: ASTM.
ASTM. 1997. Standard Guide for Remediation of Groundwater by Natural Attenuation at Petroleum Release Sites: Draft. February 4. Philadelphia: ASTM.
ASTM. 1998. Standard Provisional Guide for Risk-Based Corrective Actions (PS104-98). Annual Book of ASTM Standards. West Conshohocken, Pa.: ASTM.
Brady, P. V., M. V. Brady, and D. J. Borns. 1997. Natural Attenuation: CERCLA, RBCA's and the Future of Environmental Remediation. Boca Raton, Fla.: Lewis Publishers.
Brady, P. V., B. P. Spalding, K. M. Krupka, R. D. Waters, Pengchu Zhang, D. J. Borns, and W. D. Brady. 1998a. Site Screening and Technical Guidance for Monitored Natural Attenuation at DOE Sites. Albuquerque, N.M.: Sandia National Laboratories.
Brady, P. V., B. P. Spalding, K. M. Krupka, R. D. Waters, Penchus Zhang, and D. J. Borns. 1998b. Site Screening for Monitored Natural Attenuation with MNA Toolbox. Albuquerque, N.M.: Sandia National Laboratories.
Buscheck, T., and K. O'Reilly. 1995. Protocol for Monitoring Intrinsic Bioremediation in Groundwater. Richmond, Calif.: Chevron Research and Technology Company.
Buscheck, T., and K. O'Reilly. 1997. Protocol for Monitoring Natural Attenuation of Chlorinated Solvents in Groundwater. Richmond, Calif.: Chevron Research and Technology Company.
DOE (Department of Energy). 1998. Accelerating Cleanup: Paths to Closure. DOE/CM-0362. Washington, D.C.: DOE, Office of Environmental Management.
EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 1990. National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan; Final Rule. Federal Register 55(46).
EPA. 1993. Guidance for Evaluating the Technical Impracticability of Ground-Water Restoration: Interim Final. Directive 9234.2–25. Washington, D.C.: EPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
EPA. 1995. Technical Resource Document: Extraction and Beneficiation of Ores and Minerals, Vol. 5—Uranium . EPA 530-R-94-032. Washington, D.C.: EPA, Office of Solid Waste, Special Waste Branch.
EPA. 1996. Presumptive Response Strategy and Ex-situ Treatment Technologies for Contaminated Groundwater at CERCLA Sites. EPA 540-R-96-023. Washington, D.C.: EPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
EPA. 1997a. Brownfields National Partnership Action Agenda. EPA 500-F-97-090. Washington, D.C.: EPA, Office of Outreach and Special Projects. http://www.epa.gov/swerosps/bf/html-doc/97aa_fs.htm.
EPA. 1998. Technical Protocol for Evaluating Natural Attenuation of Chlorinated Solvents in Groundwater. EPA/600/R-98/128. Washington, D.C.: EPA, Office of Research and Development.
EPA. 1999. Use of Monitored Natural Attenuation at Superfund, RCRA Corrective Action, and Underground Storage Tank Sites. Directive Number 9200.4–17p. Washington, D.C.: EPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
EPA Region 8. 1998. Brownfields Pilot Grant Announced for Missoula, MT. Denver, Colo.: EPA Region 8, Office of Communication and Public Involvement. http://www.epa.gov/unix0008/html/news/news98/brnfmis.html.
GAO (U.S. General Accounting Office). 1994. Nuclear Cleanup: Difficulties in Coordinating Activities Under Two Environmental Laws. GAO/RCED-95-66. Washington, D.C.: GAO.
OCR for page 39
Ground Water & Soil Cleanup: Improving Management of Persistent Contaminants
GAO. 1995. Community Development: Reuse of Urban Industrial Sites. GAO/RCED-95-172. Washington, D.C.: GAO.
Guerrero, P. F. 1998. Superfund: Times to complete site listing and cleanup. Testimony before the Subcommittee on Finance and Hazardous Materials, Committee on Commerce, House of Representatives, February 4. GAO/T-RCED-98-74. Washington, D.C.: U.S. General Accounting Office.
Guimond, R. J. 1993. Memorandum. Transmittal of OSWER directive 9234.2–25: ''Guidance for Evaluating the Technical Impracticability of Ground-Water Restoration.'' Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency.
Katsumata, P. T., and W. E. Kastenberg. 1997. On the impact of future land use assumptions on risk analysis for Superfund sites. Journal of the Air and Waste Management Association 47(August):881–889.
Laws, E. P. 1995. Memorandum. November 28: Formation of National Superfund Remedy Review Board. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
Luftig, S. D. 1996. Memorandum. September 26: National Remedy Review Board. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 1997. Draft Guidelines: Natural Attenuation of Chlorinated Solvents in Groundwater. Working Draft. December 12. St. Paul, Minn.: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency.
NRC (National Research Council). 1993. Pesticides in the Diets of Infants and Children. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
NRC. 1994. Alternatives for Groundwater Cleanup. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
NRC. 1997. Innovations in Groundwater and Soil Cleanup: From Concept to Commercialization. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
NRC. 1998. Assessing the Use of Risk-Based Methodologies for Environmental Remediation at Naval Facilities. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
NRRB (National Remedy Review Board). 1998. NRB Fiscal Year 1997 Progress Report. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. http://www.epa.gov/superfund/oerr/nrrb/report.htm
Probst, K. N., and M. H. McGovern. 1998. Long-Term Stewardship and the Nuclear Weapons Complex: The Challenge Ahead. Washington, D.C.: Resources for the Future.
Remediation Technologies Development Forum. 1997. Natural Attenuation of Chlorinated Solvents in Groundwater: Principles and Practices. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency, Technology Innovation Office.
Wiedemeier, T. H., and F. H. Chapelle. 1998. Technical Guidelines for Evaluating Monitored Natural Attenuation at Naval and Marine Corps Facilities: Draft, Revision 2. Washington, D.C.: Department of the Navy.
Wiedemeier, T., J. T. Wilson, D. H. Kampbell, R. N. Miller, and J. E. Hansen. 1995. Technical Protocol for Implementing Intrinsic Remediation with Long-Term Monitoring for Natural Attenuation of Fuel Contamination Dissolved in Groundwater, Volumes 1 and 2. San Antonio, Tex.: Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence, Brooks Air Force Base.
Wiedemeier, T. H., M. A. Swanson, D. E. Moutoux, E. K. Gordon, J. T. Wilson, B. H. Wilson, J. H. Kampbell, J. E. Hansen, P. Haas, and F. H. Chapelle. 1997. Technical Protocol for Evaluating Natural Attenuation of Chlorinated Solvents in Groundwater. San Antonio, Tex.: Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence, Brooks Air Force Base.


text:
Grothe Contact David or Rachel for Password
Reunion 2009 Contact Rachel or David for password. Please note the ...
Updated: Dec 20, 2009 6:49pm PST
Fort Concho Christmas 2008 San Angelo, Texas
These photos were taken at Fort Concho National Historic Landmark oper ...
Updated: Jan 04, 2009 5:49pm PST
These photos may be printed by Smugmug. Any monies received will be d ...
Updated: Nov 05, 2008 7:16pm PST
Texas Early Days Tractor and Engine Association Show 2008, Temple, Texas
Please visit www.tedtea.org to learn more about this great organizatio ...
Updated: Oct 19, 2008 2:50pm PST
Lone Star Flight Museum Galveston, Texas
These photos were taken 2 months before Hurricane Ike.
Updated: Oct 16, 2008 8:44pm PST
Chakaba Entourage at the Brazoria County Museum
African Drumming, Dancing, Stilt Walking and Story Telling at the Braz ...
Updated: Aug 02, 2008 7:20pm PST


text:
Adamsville TDOT worker killed
By: Jeff Whitten Published: June 22, 2011
Related Articles
No Related Articles |
Adamsville resident and Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT) employee Robert Nowicki was killed in a crash near West Memphis, Monday.
According to TDOT spokesperson Nicole Lawrence, Nowicki's TDOT HELP truck had pulled off to the side of I-55 in order to help a disabled semi truck, when another big rig hit both the other truck and Nowicki's, pinning him against a wall.
Nowicki was a retired New York Police Department officer and once delivered a baby during his service with TDOT.
"It's just a reminder of how dangerous our highways are for our workers. Everyone needs to be on their toes," said Lawrence.
Read more from: News
Tags: None
Digg | Del.icio.us | Google+ |
ERROR: adman element function 'groupad' doesn't exist.


text:
Top 10 Viral DNews Vids From YouTube
Nov 20, 2012
UP next
Pregnant Robot Trains Students
Medical students at Johns Hopkins University are getting a real-life birthing experience when a robot goes into labor. Kasey-Dee Gardner reports.
Swimming With Sharks
Discovery News' Kasey-Dee dives in for the chance to swim with sharks and explains how you can too.
Giant Pacific Octopus
The Giant Pacific Octopus is smarter than you might think. And at the Smithsonian's National Zoo, Jorge Ribas watches one use its wits - and many arms -to get a snack.
Alien Speculation
Will the real ET be little green men or little green bacteria? SETI Institute Senior Astronomer Seth Shostak theorizes what our first alien encounter might be like.
The Skinny on Smooching
Ever wonder why we kiss? James Williams looks into one theory that explains it.
Top 5 Superorganisms
Superorganisms are a lot more common than you might think. James Williams counts down why.
Apes Giggle Like Humans
Apes laugh similar to humans, according to new research exploring the evolution of laughter. James Williams takes a look at the video.
New Species Thrive in Mekong
The Mekong region in Southeast Asia is home to more than a thousand new plant and animal species, says the World Wildlife Fund. But challenges are ahead in balancing conservation and growth.
Jorge Ribas reports.
Top 5 Volcano Webcams and Videos
Volcanoes at work? Why not! James Williams counts down our top five favorite volcano webcams you can view on the Web.
Spider Sex Dangerous For Some
The longer a male Australian redback spider woos the female, the better chance she won't eat him the first time they mate. James Williams explores this tangled web of poisonous spider sex.
0 Views
0 Views


text:
Published: February 23, 2014;
Last modified: February 26, 2014 12:12PM
Here is the scheduled highway construction this week in the Southern Colorado region, weather permitting:
Canon City area Colorado 120 over the Arkansas River east of Florence
7 a.m. to 5 p.m. today through Friday — There will be one-lane alternating traffic for bridge construction with delays possible.
La Junta area U.S. 50 west of La Junta
24 hours — Only one lane will be open in each direction for pipe installation. Delays possible.
Trinidad area U.S. 350 near Hoehne
24 hours — There will be one-lane alternating traffic with traffic signals for bridge demolition. The speed limit is reduced to 40 mph with 10-minute delays possible. A 14-foot width restriction is in effect.


text:
Huawei SIMLock block Unlock Reset Key
With this service you will get 1 reset unlock code for all phones and new models 3G modems Huawei.
Factory Unlock code Huawei - the source of both codes unlock: SIM Lock, and SIM Pin is the default base of the manufacturer, it gives You a 100% guarantee of efficiency unlock code.
Buying Huawei SimLock unlock reset Key) , You get 1 code to unlock the operator.
This service will also help you in case if You have exhausted attempts to enter the NCK SIM PIN Network code, having code, you can use the first key (SIM card Lock) reset the counter attempts to enter the unlock code, and with the help of the second code (SIM PIN) unblocking from the operator to use the phone or modem in any GSM networks.
All these and other models can be enabled by using unblock code Huawei factory database.
To one free unlock Huawei phone/tablet/modem, which blocked by any operator is possible, if down page it is not in list available devices to unlock (warning! use search (Ctrl+F in your browser) on page to looking your model.
You need register and post topic on forum:
In message write your login on site, IMEI, model, device type (modem, tablet or phone) write requires text for device unlocking, country\operator to which locked.
Also you must take display photo and photo back under battery or display screen, where device ask unlock code with another SIM card.
Upload these photos on any web site, and paste link in your message, click "Submit new Thread".
After create Thread you wil see social networks buttons (Facebook, Google+, Twitter, LiveJournal). You need to make at least any 3 repost (after this paste URL link to your reposted page)
Supported Huawei mobile 3G/4G modem for unlock by IMEI:
E171, E352 Megafon, E303 HiLink, E353, E353s-1, E353s-2, E353u-1, E363, E367, E372, E392, E1820
E5331s-2, E5830, E5832, E583x, E5836, E5837 Orange, U2801, Y511, B593
Impulse 4G, Impulse 4G AT&T USA, E960
E367 Megafon Russia\Orange, B183, B220, U9500 D1, U9000
U120, U1220s, U1270, U1250, U1280: UCELL UZ
U5110, MTC 752, U5700, U5900 Velcom, U7510, U6150, U7512 Wind, U7517, U7519, U7519
U7520, U8110, U8150 Ideos Orange Moldova, U8666-1 (Ascend Y201)
U8150, U8160: МТС Mini \МТС 950\Vodafone 858 Smarti, U8180 Ideos X1\Gaga\Orange Stockholm, U8185-1 Ascend Y100 U8220, U8230, U8100, Mediapad, T-Mobile Springboard,
U8300, U8350 Boulder МТС Pro\Orange Barcelona, U8500 МТС Evo, Е300, Beeline E300, U8510 Ideos X3, U8650 МТС 955, U8652, U8655, U8655-1, UMG 587 T-Mobile Sonic 4G Mobile Hotspot, G7206 (Peru Movistar), G610, G700, G700-U20, E1756 U8651T (T-Mobile Prism),
U8800, U8815 (Ascend G300), U8816 (Ascend G301), Ascend Mate, U8950-1, G500 Pro, MTC VIVA U8660, U8836d, U8860 Honor, Honor 3 HN3-U00, U8825d G330d, W1, W1-U00
G2200, G2200c, G2201, G6600, G6620, G7210, G7300
S7 Ideos, T-mobile Pulse Mini, MediaPad (Orange Tahiti)
Vodafone 725, 810, V830, Ideos X5, INQ Chat 3G, INQ Mini 3G
Support for unlock Huawei ALL GSM networks: Belorussia MTS, UK 3, UK Orange, Ukraine MTS, Ukraine Life, Yoigo Spain, UK Vodafone, Kyivstar Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan Bitel, Armenia Karabakh Telecom Belorussia Life, Ucell UZ, Comviq GSM, Etisalat Egypt, Russia Megafon, Uzbekistan MTS, Vivacell Armenia, Moldova Unite, Moldova Moldcell, Russia Beeline, Rus MTS, Switzerland Swisscom Natel, T-mobile, Moldova Orange, LMT Latvia, Norway Tele2 etc...
thank yoy
imei 862886011918512
imie 861521012612225
IMEI 862752023760518 in afghanistan
Please assist me to unlock my phone.
model: Huawei U8800 phone
Carrier AT&T, need to unlock so phone can be used in
Hong Kong
Many Thanks.


text:
I have recently added fireforce add-on to my mozilla 18.2 on lubuntu. However I can't find any short cut to launch the add-on. It is not listed in none of the menu items. Furthermore there is no option to add it to any toolbar
Please help.
↓ Show more
↑ Show less
iamjayakumars 2 years ago Check whether you installed the addon and enabled.
Type "about:addons" in the URL and check in the extension
alan_r 2 years ago I'm not familiar with this extension but have you looked for an appropriate icon in your "Customize" box? Right click on menu bars space>Customize> If found move to a suitable spot on your toolbars.
gvajpai 2 years ago Dear Kumar, the extension is installed and it is showing in the extension manager.
gvajpai 2 years ago Dear Alan, the icon does not appear in the customize menu.