A Huntingdon County non-profit environmental group is charging the state Department of Environmental Protection has been negligent and continues to be negligent in dealing with sewage dumping issues in the Warriors Mark area.
A representative of Save Our Streams Inc., Dorothy Gurney of Spruce Creek, attended Tuesday’s Warriors Mark Township Supervisors meeting to voice concerns about sewage dumping by waste hauler Richard Barefoot relating to property owned by farmer and developer John Gilliland.
She asked the supervisors to contact the DEP and request it to do a more extensive search for possible problems involving all of Gilliland’s property and not resolve the current issues quickly. DEP officials had already conducted a walk-through of Gilliland’s property in the Dry Hollow Run area which are listed in a March 2 order issued by the DEP. She also asked for records regarding the issue be made available to the organization at its expense.
“Where has all the sewage gone?” asked Gurney. “What’s in the commercial sewage?”
Those were two of the points Gurney wanted answered when she addressed the supervisors about what she described as problem which dates back to 1991. Gurney referenced the DEP’s order which notes, “The activity of Gilliland and Barefoot is part of a continuing course of conduct that has been ongoing for at least 13 years.”
In a press release issued earlier this week, Save Our Streams said,“the DEP with being ‘extremely negligent’ in failing for 13 years to stop sewage dumping that may have imperiled two trout streams and residents’ drinking water.”
During the walk-through conducted at the end of March in the Dry Hollow Run area, surface sewage debris was found in a small area at the Hickory Ridge II property.
At the supervisor’s meeting, Gurney explained that Save Our Streams wanted a more extensive search because it was concerned only one problem was found but the DEP order indicated on-going problems.
Township supervisors agreed to draft a letter to DEP which would include not only Gurney’s comments but also comments from the supervisors and others who spoke on the issue including Gilliland’s attorney, Tom Scott.
“Warriors Mark should be grateful to its supervisors for its support of its property owners as well as the safety of the drinking water, the land and the streams,” said Gurney.
In follow-up to its concerns, Save Our Streams has filed a letter with DEP’s attorney, M. Dukes Pepper Jr.,. and is considering other action if necessary.
In the letter, the group addresses the spector of toxic waste and claims the DEP was negligent in allowing the growth.
The DEP’s March ‘02 order references Barefoot’s 1991 indication of once-a-year dumping on Gilliland’s farm.
The order also indicates former Barefoot employees told the agency, at the height of the activity, they were dumping sewage “approximately 87 times a year for a period of three and a half years,” on the Gilliland property.
The order does not make it clear exactly when the majority of the alleged activity occured.
Save Our Streams contends DEP was negligent after Barefoot’s admission in 1991 regarding dumping, its acceptance of assurances by Karen Gilliland in 1995 the dumping had stopped, a long history of violations by Barefoot which the group notes were documented in a December 2003 settlement between DEP and the waste hauler.
The group also contends, “The DEP is still being negligent by accepting Barefoot’s word as to where sewage was dumped on Gilliland’s property.”
A spokesperson for the DEP, John Repetz was reached for a telephone interview midday on Friday and indicated he was aware of the letter sent to attorney Pepper but had not seen the press release issued by Save Our Streams.
“We don’t agree with the characterization about toxic waste,” said Repetz. “We were asked to investigate illegal sewage dumping. We did find evidence of that and that is what we are investigating.
“The 1991 and 1995 investigations were performed and to the best of my knowledge those issues were resolved,” Repetz told The Daily Herald.
“We have not found evidence of anything else at this time and we have no reason to believe it has taken place anywhere else,” said Repetz. “Legally, we can’t just go and investigate something unless we have a reason to do so.”
Repetz explained some of the reasons to investigate further might include an eyewitness to some type of illegal dumping but no one had stepped forward at this time to offer such information regarding other Gilliland properties.
“We continue to have discussions with the Gillilands and hope we are able to work out a resolution,” said Repetz.
He also indicated he could not discuss or give an estimate as to how long it would take to resolve the issues. He also explained letters such as the one from Save Our Streams are kept on file. Repetz said the issues they brought to the DEP’s attention would be revisited if substantial evidence were to be received regarding the group’s contentions.
A spokesperson for Gilliland, Rebecca Walter was asked about the group’s contentions and offered this response.
“It’s more of the same, the DEP file is empty, there was no file on Mr. Gilliland when we researched the issue with the DEP after the original allegations were made,” said Walter.
The original allegations to which Walter was referring are in regard to the properties detailed in the March 2 order.
Walter indicated at the time of her research in February, she did find a DEP file regarding Barefoot and “in part of that file there is a deposition which makes reference to an interaction between Walter Dinda of DEP and Mrs. Gilliland.”
Walter contends other issues covered in the DEP order do not have documentation in DEP files researched in February by her.
After the Tuesday meeting, one of the attorneys for Gilliland, Tom Scott, was asked for his thoughts about the concerns of Save Our Streams.
“The original DEP order made a lot of statements in which there was no factual support,” said Scott. “The land owners are working directly with the department through counsel to do appropriate studies any place there may have been improper disposal, to clean up anything that’s been found and to test all the water in the area that needs to be tested to make sure there hasn’t been any pollution.
Scott was also asked about Save Our Streams suggesting areas other than the ones in the DEP order should be searched for problems.
“Unfortunately, some people would chose to personalize this,” said Scott. “I think that’s evident in that type of thinking. The Gilliland family owns property right outside the village which is probably within sight of 500 people. The notion that the department should come and study that property is ridiculous. Some people have a vested interest in making it difficult for other people to use their property the way they want to.”
