22 Questions to the FMC and the DEP by Karen Argenti, June 18, 2009

1. Why is the Demonstration Building surrounded by a chain link, not an opaque fence as required by law? Why is this temporary building standing, if the Buildings Department permit approved demolition in January 2009?[1]
2. Why are there depressions in the roadway on Goulden Avenue at various work sites extending from Sedgwick to 205^th Street where the DEP contractor dug up and filled in?
3. Can you specify the new “information not previously available” as mentioned in the Minor Modification (MM) on page 2 that you received to make changes to the work at the Jerome Park Reservoir (JPR)?[2] Why has work stopped on the sound barrier?
4. Can you provide access to review all geologist reports for JPR?
5. Can you reference the page in Table 1 for the project element discussion “As Discussed in the Final SEIS” as well as the “As Currently Proposed (Minor Modification)?
6. Can you reference the page in the old FSEIS[3] referenced on page 9 of the MM[4] when you compare the work proposed in the FSEIS to the new work for the south basin ramp?
7. What other alternatives did you review in the site and the method of excavation for the Shaft and Meter Chamber?
8. What other alternatives did you review for the site and construction of the ramp for the south basin, such as attached to the dividing wall?
9. Where in the FSEIS did you study the impact of the construction of the south basin ramp, as well as the traffic impact for its use?
10. Where are the plans for the Outdoor Urban Ecology Lab (OUEL)?
11. Where are DEP’s plans for the restoration of the Harris Park Annex after the work is completed?
12. Where is the geologist report mentioned on page 15 of the MM?
13. Why did the city claim[5] the community’s court case was not ripe in August 2008, when it already had a complete statement of the process in an addendum to the original Cultural Resources Assessments related to CRO-313 and CRO-312OS with a state agency (no more an interested party than the public or the court) and made an agreement concerning impacts?[6]
14. What is the basis for holding executive sessions of the FMC? All public bodies must hold meetings open to the public unless certain reasons for executive sessions apply.[7]
15. Where is the public participation for the evacuation plan as stated in the document you provided to the EPA?[8]
16. What is the timeline and status of the work on the pipeline from the plant to the Hunts Point Dewatering Plant?
17. When is the DEP’s hearing for the MM?
18. When will the FMC meet during the summer?
19. Can the community have input in the plans for the vacated Jerome Avenue Pumping Station, and when will it be offline?
20. Where are the permits posted for the work ongoing at JPR?
21. Will the DEP discuss these projects at the DSC of the affected community boards and/or borough board?
22. What is the status of the park work at JPR?

Posted by karen | Comments Off

Editorial comment:

A shareholder’s report on NYC, Inc.

As he campaigns for a third term as mayor, Michael Bloomberg portrays himself as a man above politics and as a savvy businessman who can get us through tough times by his careful management of our dollars.

Residents of the Northwest Bronx know better – or should. They have had years of bad news about the huge project that Mr. Bloomberg personally arranged to have dumped in their backyard – the water filtration plant under construction in Van Cortlandt Park.

When he made the deal in the back room of Bronx Democratic Party headquarters that brought the plant to the park, Mr. Bloomberg notoriously enticed legislators to vote for the project with a promise of $220 million in city funds to be spent on parks in their districts. But that was just a down payment.

Mr. Bloomberg may be able to finance his own campaigns, but for the others who sat around the table that day the real windfall was campaign cash from the contractors and construction unions that would build the plant. Our mayor waded waist-deep in the pay-to-play culture of city politics.

Let’s turn to the other side of the ledger, to Mike Bloomberg, the CEO of NYC, Inc. Let’s observe his Department of Environmental Protection in action. Seldom has there been more comprehensively- documented proof that a city agency is managed by a gang that can’t add straight or that its projections and promises are as evanescent as a spring shower that no sooner sprinkles the ground than it evaporates into thin air.

The DEP’s most recent broken promise is its pledge to excavate in the vicinity of the Jerome Park Reservoir without resorting to blasting. Its decision to dynamite after all needs to be viewed in the context of its sorry record of miscalculation and misstatement. Here’s some of that record:

• The DEP’s inability to comply with the schedule it set itself has cost taxpayers thousands of dollars in fines.
• When the agency’s own draft environmental impact statement showed that our water bills would be lower if the plant were built in an industrial park in Westchester, the price tag underwent an unexplained $200 million increase. The new estimate in the final environmental impact statement was just enough to wipe out the potential savings and blunt an argument against building in Van Cortlandt.
• With years of construction still to go, the project has already exceeded its budget by more than $2 billion.

The only question that remains to be answered about the filtration plant is whether the decision-makers were knaves or fools: did they deliberately lie about the cost and consequences of building the plant in the park, or were they too dumb to figure out where to put the decimal points when they estimated the price?

The evidence is mixed.

The DEP did lie to cover its tracks when it upped the estimate for building in Westchester. A spokesman said town officials had negotiated a monetary trade-off for the inconvenience of hosting the plant. Not true, the town supervisors told The Press.

What about what the DEP characterizes as the “minor modification” of using dynamite? It’s tempting to conclude that it kept plans to blast in its back pocket, but there’s no way to know.

As to the DEP’s inability to contain costs, its track record argues for incompetence rather than dishonesty. It has been almost as wrong about the ultraviolet water treatment plant it is building in the Westchester industrial park as about the filtration plant. The cost of building the UV plant has ballooned from $597,000 to $1.6 billion.

Duplicity or ineptitude: either way, this sorry history has had real consequences. It has cost the residents of Norwood their tranquility, and now threatens the tranquility of Van Cortlandt Village and the schools along Education Mile.

And it has contributed to a rise in water rates that threatens the ability of non-profit organizations to maintain thousands of affordable apartments in the Bronx and elsewhere.

Is the mayor who boasts of his businesslike approach accountable for the performance of his agencies? Or is the CEO of NYC, Inc. like those other CEOs, of banks and insurance companies and automobile manufacturers, we have come to know recently, reaping the bonus of re-election for presiding over a failed enterprise?

http://riverdalepress.com/full.php?sid=8617&current_edition=2009-05-14

Posted by karen | 1 Comment

DEP backtracks on excavation explosives vow

Less than nine months after telling a judge it would not use blasting on a Bronx water tunnel project, the city has gone back on its word – possibly lighting the fuse on a new lawsuit.

Posted by karen | Comments Off

Below are the two files we got from the State via Assemblyman Dinowitz’s office.

Posted by karen | Comments Off

http://www.fipna.org/2009/05/03/dep-admits-they-did-not-do-a-good-job-on-the-eis-for-jerome-park-reservoir/

Go to the site and vote, and express your feelings.

Posted by karen | Comments Off

1. Affidavit of Angela Licata, January 2005 – see in particular page 24 on JPR
2. Court of Appeals Decision, February 2001
3. Prior notice of DEIS, December 2003 – see page 3 for impacts at JPR
4. DEIS Exec Summary, December 2003 – see Table 4 on page 40
5. Letter from the Friends of Jerome Park Reservoir asking same questions in 2004 as we did in 2009.

Posted by karen | Comments Off

You remember our past notes on what the DEP flip flop at the Jerome Park Reservoir. If not check out this link: Grass Roots Insure that Environmental Promises are Kept

Meanwhile, at the April 30, 2009 Meeting of the Facilities Monitoring Committee, NYC DEP Deputy Commissioner Angela Licata said, “we did not do a good job on the EIS for Jerome Park.”

This was her response after she commented that they had a choice between using a hoe ram or blasting as a method for removing rock across the street from the Bronx High School of Science. And when someone from the audience (could have been me) yelled where is it in the EIS, she replied, we have a list of methods so the word “hoe ram” is on the list. Excuse me? List? GMAB!

Deputy Commissioner Licata, you are in over your head.

Meanwhile, on this same day, the Mayor published an unbelievable press release and public survey. In the same way the Mayor Koch used to say, how am I doing, Mayor Mike is asking how he is doing with his environmental reviews. Check it out, it is a hoot. Comment if you like, but I am sure he has it rigged already.

Be sure to search waterblogged for the “court related” articles and/or something on “Jerome Park Reservoir.” Or check it out here

Check back for the next blog on: Why the DEP keeps refusing to do a supplemental EIS? If they had done it in June 2008, when first asked by the community, it would be over by now. So, what’s up with that? These changes are not minor modifications, but major changes to the FSEIS.
/Karen

Posted by karen | 2 Comments

Assemblyman Jeffrey Dinowitz:
For Immediate Release: March 29, 2009 download here

• CITY IS NEGLIGENT ON BRONX HS of SCIENCE EMERGENCY PLANNING
• NOT PREPARED IN CASE OF CHLORINE ACCIDENT

Assemblyman Jeffrey Dinowitz warned that poor city agency response to the March 20 bomb scare at the Bronx High School of Science underscores the city’s negligence in emergency planning for its most prestigious school.

“With the irresponsible DEP handling deadly chlorine across the street, it’s alarming that first responders and other emergency teams have no clear evacuation plan.” the Assemblyman said, “Looking at the response from a risk management perspective, I give them a ‘D’.“

Two times between June, 2007 and October, 2008 the DEP spilled chlorine at the Jerome Park Reservoir — directly across the street from Bronx Science.

“Thankfully those accidents weren’t large enough to directly affect the school,” Assemblyman Dinowitz said. “But incredibly, there is nothing in place for any of the schools in the area in case something more serious does happen” he said. “One would think emergency planning would be the City’s first priority, but judging from their non-existent plan in case of a chlorine leak and how last week’s bomb scare was handled, clearly it’s the farthest thing from their minds.”

In the most recent incident at Bronx Science, after an emailed bomb threat was received, a fire drill was called, followed by an announcement to evacuate the building. But without effective communication systems to help coordinate and no support from the NYPD to direct traffic, the process to get students to a safe haven was severely hampered. As a result, hundreds of students were limited to walking on the sidewalk and when they got to nearby Clinton High School, the metal detection process meant they would have to stand in the street and wait.

“During this sort of emergency, you want to close the streets to traffic and have everyone move into shelter as soon as possible,” said Assemblyman Dinowitz, who graduated from Bronx Science in 1971. “School officials reacted to the bomb scare as best they could, but without proper guidance from the NYPD, FDNY, OEM, and DEP, there’s no question that student safety was compromised,” said Assemblyman Dinowitz. “Does something have to go terribly wrong before the city reacts?”

“The school did a good job but there’s need for more support from the City and NYPD,” said Bob Lang, head of the school’s UFT chapter. “It’s also troublesome that they are handling chlorine gas right across the street. If there is a chlorine spill are we supposed to be in the building or out of the building? We need professional advice in terms of planning.”

“Bronx Science’s parents are very concerned about potential threats to the health and safety of our children in the Jerome Park Reservoir area, whether due to noise, dirt, dust, and truck traffic related to the DEP’s drilling, possible deadly chlorine gas leaks, or emergency evacuations,” said Jennifer Nelson, Co-President of the Bronx H.S. of Science Parents Association. “The responsible city agencies have not demonstrated to us that they have well-thought out and developed procedures in place.”

”Also, communication with Bronx Science and the other schools in the area has not been very effective. We call upon the City to lay the necessary groundwork and increase our confidence that emergency situations, should they occur, would be effectively dealt with,” Ms. Nelson said.

Emergency planning in the area has other problems, too. “Just as the DEP did not notify us about the chlorine leaks, no one notified the residents in Scott Tower to remain inside during the evacuation and investigation,” stated Sonia Lappin, a long time resident of nearby Scott Tower Housing Cooperative.

Ironically, two hours after the ‘all-clear ‘in the bomb scare, the DEP sent out an email notifying local community groups and schools that they would begin hoe-ram digging across the street near the Jerome Park Reservoir. “With all this going on, we can only hope the contractor’s employees are prepared to take positive steps in case of an emergency,” stated Karen Argenti of the Bronx Council for Environmental Quality (BCEQ), “because the city is not ready to.”

Posted by karen | Comments Off

Jerome Park Reservoir Parks Schematics:

http://www.waterblogged.org/parks-schematics-from-january-8th-cb8-meeting-on-jerome-park-reservoir-pathway/

Documents on the Valve and Meter Chamber at JPR – NOISE from the Off-Site Noise Analysis Sections in the 2004 FSEI

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/html/environmental_reviews/crotoneis.shtml

Methods for the noise analysis:

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/pdf/croton/4-10noise.pdf

The actual noise impact analysis conducted for JPR and the surrounding area can be found on page 87 to 95, 176, 181-190 within this section:

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/pdf/croton/8-02jeromepark.pdf

Lists of birds found at JPR is in the above section 8-02 on page 153-4

The mitigation plan including Maps suggests portable noise attenuating barriers — page 15-19 of this Mitigation section 9-04:

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/pdf/croton/9-04offsite.pdf

Judge’s Decision

http://www.waterblogged.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/decisionbceqvdep090908.pdf

DEP’s Technical Memorandum for change in CRO 313

http://www.waterblogged.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/citytechmemo082908.pdf

Affidavit of Heath explaining the work

http://www.waterblogged.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/cityheathaff082908full.pdf

Meter can be gotten at Radio Shack – $49.99 Digital Display Sound Level Meter Model 33-2055

Outdoor Urban Ecology Lab – old documents:

http://www.waterblogged.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/outdoorurbanecologylab-jpc-2008.pdf

Posted by karen | Comments Off

Today it is very very cold, but I chose to take a walk to the reservoir to see what was going on.  It was morning and the temperature was in the twenty degrees area.  There was no work going on at the site of the Shaft and Valve Chamber.

In May 2008, the Harris Park Annex along the edge of  Jerome Park Reservoir looked like the left photo. Then in July 2008, they started work on the connection to the water supply system.

Today, the project has taken enormous proportions – almost as long as the Bronx High School of Science. The aesthetic nature of the structure is so compelling that I am certain the Design Commission will use this as a model for the rest of the city, especially Manhattan!

I also saw some nice fire persons from the Tower Ladder 46 who went inside the JPR property but were unable to get the answers they needed.  I did not ask as it does not really matter — the DEP answers to no one as we have come to learn.

The DEMO plant does not seem to be getting demolished and looks more like an UNSAFE BUILDING every time I see it.  What is taking so long to tear down a temporary building built in 1984 ?????  The DEP is using the area for a staging area and trailers.  I saw some workers bringing lunch to the second trailer (maybe the contractor?).

Oh, and what ever happened to the sign that Parks put up at the turn of the century?

That about sums it up, from the reporter on the scene,

/Karen

Posted by karen | Comments Off