Rasco: DEC gave the project a Negative Declaration under SEQR in June 2006, but adds “A coordinated review was not performed.”
March 29, 2010
Rasco received a “Negative Declaration” from DEC under SEQR in June, 2006. This document was brought to our attention during the FOIL process and document review conducted by members of the public.
We believe the DEC would have given this project more scrutiny if a coordinated review had been held. It is now up to the Town of Dover, residents, elected and appointed officials, and the region to protect the Harlem Valley Aquifer (our water supply) and the Great Swamp from potential petroleum contamination, and uphold our Town Code which bans solid waste facilities.
ENB Region 3 Completed Applications 06/28/2006
Dutchess County
Applicant:
Rasco Materials LLC
2241 St Rte 22
PO Box 566
Wingdale, NY 12594-0566
Facility:
Rasco Materials LLC
2241 St Rte 22
Wingdale, NY 12594
Application ID: 3-1326-00144/00005
Permit(s) Applied for: Article 27 Title 7 Solid Waste Management
Project is Located: Dover, Dutchess County
Project Description:
RASCO Materials has applied to this Department for a Part 360 Permit to reuse the former T.T. Materials Corp., facility for the processing of Petroleum Contaminated Soils (PCS) into a reusable cold-mix asphalt product known as “Earth-Pave.” The applicant would mix the incoming soils with an emulsion inside the same building at the facility which the previous operator used and temporarily store the resulting material in another existing building at the facility until it is sold. RASCO Materials is also applying for the same tonnage limitations as T.T. Materials, which would limit the facility to no more than 1,000 tons of unprocessed PCS at the facility at any time and no more than 1,000 tons of the reusable product at the facility at any time.
RASCO Materials has also applied to this Department for a Beneficial Use Determination (BUD) to allow the product they produce to be sold as a newly manufactured product, not as a waste product.
The facility is located on a portion of the 133-acre Wingdale Industrial Park, on the west side of NYS Rt. 22, opposite County Road 26 (Swamp River Road), in the Town of Dover, Dutchess County, NY
State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) Determination:
Project is an Unlisted Action and will not have a significant impact on the environment. A Negative Declaration is on file. A coordinated review was not performed.
SEQR Lead Agency:
None Designated
State Historic Preservation Act (SHPA) Determination:
The proposed activity is not subject to review in accordance with SHPA. The permit type is exempt or the activity is being reviewed in accordance with federal historic preservation regulations.
Coastal Management:
This project is not located in a Coastal Management area and is not subject to the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act.
Opportunity for Public Comment:
Comments on this project must be submitted in writing to the Contact Person no later than Jul 14 2006.
Contact: Michael D Merriman
NYSDEC Region 3 Headquarters
21 South Putt Corners Rd
New Paltz, NY 12561
(845)256-3054
r3dep@gw.dec.state.ny.us
Dover prohibits solid waste management facilities; Harlem Valley Bottom Aquifer is “sole source aquifer for Eastern Dutchess County’s 20,000 residents”
March 29, 2010
In 1999, during an almost decade long battle with a solid waste facility proposed in the Town of Dover, and with the help of a local citizen’s group, “Stop the Dump,” the Dover Town Board passed a zoning amendment prohibiting solid waste facilities. After the considerable efforts and funds spent by prior town administrations fighting to successfully keep at bay the growing number of solid waste projects proposed for various sites around town, it was particularly disappointing that the current administration chose instead to sign a Stipulation Agreement to define the currently proposed solid waste project a “pre-existing” operation and therefore apparently not subject to our zoning laws. And is is proposed for a site above our single source aquifer, “the only significant source of water for Eastern Dutchess County.”
On March 29, 2010, Constance DuHamel sent a letter to Supervisor Courtien and Planning Board Co-Chair Wylock, and attaching an article, “What’s Really Needed to Effectuate Resource Protection in Communities,” by Jayne E. Daley, describing the nine year effort to defeat the solid waste facility, culminating in the passage of a zoning law prohibiting “all classes of ECL Part 360 solid waste management facilities not owned or operated by the Town, and the use of solid waste or material that has previously been part of the solid waste stream … as fill or reclamation material for surface or underground mining:”
Hi Ryan and Dave,
In case you have not read this report recently, it touches on some of Dover’s history with the solid waste business which led to the Town’s decision to deny further applications from this industry, and in so doing further protect its water supply. The study references the Harlem Valley Aquifer.
From the study:
“In response to public demand, the Town commissioned its own engineering study that identified the existence of “a distinct valley bottom aquifer system composed of glacial sediments and a geographically distinct carbonate bedrock formation”, which met all criteria for designation as a principal aquifer (fn45.)This issue was particularly important because the aquifer supplies water to over 20,000 people (46) and represents the only significant source of water for Eastern Dutchess County (47.) This report and other pertinent information that was gathered by the Town’s consultants were forwarded to DEC for consideration and review.
36 Id. at 2-1. 37 Id. 6 NYCRR part 360 governs permits for C&D landfills. 38 Id. 39 See generally, Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law. 40 Letter from NYS DEC to Anthony Palumbo, Dated July 21, 1995, in DEIS supra note 16, Appendix Q. 41 Id. Letter from NYS DEC to Anthony Palumbo, Dated July 21, 1995. 42 A primary aquifer is defined as a highly productive aquifer system used heavily for public water supply. Principal aquifers are of similar value, but not yet as heavily used as primary aquifers. DEC, Final Upstate New York Groundwater Management Plan, May 1987 at IV-19. 43 6 NYCRR Part 360.74(a)(5)(i)(a)(1). 44 DEIS, supra note 16 at 3.7. 45 Letter to Alan Fuchs, Regional Solid Waste Engineer, Region III, NYSDEC, dated October 25, 1995. 46 Harlem Valley Watershed Investigation, supra note 14 at Table 1. 47 Town of Dover’s Memorandum in Support of Adjudicability of Principal Aquifer Issue, In the Matter of the Application of Danny Fortune and Company, Inc. for modification of a mined land reclamation permit, State of New York Department of Environmental Conservation, NYSDEC Project # 3-1326-00031/00003.”
Please view the entire article, “What’s Really Needed to Effectuate Resource Protection in Communities” by Jayne E. Daley
*Note: printed post date is for chronological clarity. Actual post date is August 13, 2010.
Rasco: DuHamel Letter in Response to Stipulation Agreement
March 29, 2010
This letter was written in response to reading the Rasco Stipulation Agreement, produced in the FOIL process. The Dover Town Board determined Rasco was a pre-existing facility, effectively allowing a solid waste project, banned under current Town Code, to begin operation, pending Site Plan Approval by the Planning Board. Surprised the Town Board chose not to to fight this determination, Stancy DuHamel wrote,
“It would appear that the alternative method of determining whether the project is grandfathered is to take it thru the courts. That route would necessarily involve legal fees, and I am curious to know the amount of the legal fees our Town Attys estimated it would cost to argue that the project was not grandfathered, and moreover should not be located above our water supply.”
This letter was read into the record at the April 5th Planning Board meeting.
*Note: printed post date is for chronological clarity. Actual post date is August 13, 2010.
Dover Knolls: Letter from Constance DuHamel on March 25th, announcing FEIS Public Comment period extended through March 31
March 25, 2010
Greetings Dover Knolls Interested Parties and Friends:
For those of you who could not make last night’s Public Hearing on the Final Environmental Impact Statement, Supervisor Courtien agreed to extend the period for Written Comment through March 31st.
For those inadvertently left off the Interested Party list (Audubon NY, Bedford Audubon, Naromi Land Trust, TNC, PNR) and for those who did not receive a hard copy of the FEIS, you may view it at http://www.townofdover.us/DoverKnollsCompleteFEIS.cfm
Tomorrow I plan to circulate CRGD’s consultants’ comments which were read into the record last night. While the Town Board is not obligated to respond to comments under SEQRA, the project has clearly benefited from your comments thus far and we hope you will take this opportunity to make your opinions heard once again.
Thank you for your contributions, and thanks again to Supervisor Courtien for permitting additional comment on this complex project.
Best,
Stancy DuHamel
*Note: printed post date is for chronological clarity. Actual post date is August 13, 2010.
Dover Knolls: Public Comment on FEIS at March 24, 2010 Public Hearing; Supervisor Courtien extends Public Comment Period through March 31, 2010
March 24, 2010
In spite of Dover Town Planner Graham Trelsted of AKRF cautioning the Town Board about “undue delay” under SEQRA, Supervisor Ryan Courtien chose to allow further Public Comment on Dover Knolls. In spite of Supervisor Courtien cautioning the public that the Town Board was not required to incorporate further public comment when adopting the Findings Statement, the public chose to comment in hopes that the Town Board and AKRF would consider further third-party review of the FEIS.
CRGD Fiscal expert PPSA comments on the FEIS
CRGD Hydrogeology expert Leggette Brashears comments on the FEIS
HVA comments on the FEIS
*Note: printed post date is for chronological clarity. Actual post date is August 13, 2010.
“Petroleum Contaminated Soil Re-use Application in Dover,” TMI, March 17, 2010
March 17, 2010
The Millbook Independent covered the Dover Planning Board Meeting of March 15, 2010 at which the Rasco Application was discussed:
“We have concerns about the contaminated soil leeching through the Swamp River and traveling up to our reserve,” [Sibyll Gilbert, Vice Chair of the Oblong Land Conservancy] said from the podium. “Why should the Harlem Valley be the site for contaminated soil dumping from other areas?”
Gilbert suggested RASCO go through the State Environmental Quality Review, or SEQR, and that the planning board extend the public hearing period. She also submitted at letter to the Planning Board that stated: “The Oblong’s preserve, located downstream on the Swamp River, could be damaged by spills of soluble contamination, and the conservation of amphibian and reptilian species, for which this preserve was created, could be irreparably harmed. These species are particularly vulnerable to low levels of contamination.” She also stated that the environmental impacts are very complicated and “require knowledgeable technical support to provide adequate advice to the Planning Board. The SEQR process must be used to advantage to provide adequate time and the necessary resources to review this application.”
The Housatonic Valley Association stated in their written comments that they are concerned that the proposed operation involving the storage and use of petroleum contaminated soils (PCS) is close to a New York State-designated Critical Environmental Area (CEA) and that they would like to see a full environmental review (SEQR) conducted for the project: “We believe that the DEC permit was issued prematurely and that a more thorough review should have been taken by the agency to account for any remnant contamination that may be present on the site.”
- See article in The Millbrook Independent, March 17, 2010.
*Note: printed post date is for chronological clarity. Actual post date is August 13, 2010.
Rasco: Public Comments to Dover Planning Board, March 15, 2010: CRGD, OLC & HVA
March 15, 2010
The Coalition for the Responsible Growth of Dover, the Oblong Land Conservancy and the Housatonic Valley Association submitted written comments at the March 15th meeting of the Dover Planning Board.
Coalition for the Responsible Growth of Dover
Oblong Land Conservancy
Housatonic Valley Association
*Note: printed post date is for chronological clarity. Actual post date is August 13, 2010.
Dover Knolls: FEIS posted on Town website; Public Hearing scheduled for Wednesday, March 24th
March 11, 2010
March 11, 2010 letter from Stancy DuHamel to area residents:
Greetings.
On March 1, 2010, Dover Knolls released the statement, “Town Accepts Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Knolls of Dover,” which I have attached here.
Today Supervisor Ryan Courtien informed me that the Final Envrionmental Impact Statemement (FEIS) has been posted on the town’s website, and confirmed that a Public Hearing on the FEIS is scheduled for Wednesday, March 24th, at 6:30 at the Dover Middle/High School Auditorium on Rt 22.
http://townofdover.us/DoverKnollsCompleteFEIS.cfm
The Town Board is under no obligation under SEQRA to allow further public comment; Supervisor Courtien has gone the extra mile to give the public another opportunity to comment on what is a particularly complex project, one which will have tremendous impact on the town, region, the environment, the Great Swamp and Duell Hollow Critical Environmental Areas, and the Houstonic Watershed. If the project is properly phased, and built with the appropriate mix of residential units and commercial/retail space clustered around the train station to the maximum extent possible in a Transit-Oriented development, the impact on balance could be very positive for Dover and the surrounding area.
The Coalition for the Responsible Growth of Dover recognized the need to weigh competing claims on our town’s and region’s resources. CRGD concentrated its Dover Knolls monitoring efforts on the hydrogeologic and fiscal challenges presented by the resubmitted Application and revised versions of the Draft Envrionmental Impact Statement. Thanks to elected officials on essentially three different Dover Town Boards, Interested Parties and Involved Federal and State Agencies, especially the NYS Department of Envrionmental Conservation and Dutchess County Planning, scores of groups and experts came together with the developer’s team to discuss issues raised over many years and during multiple Scoping Sessions, developer presentations, Public Comment and document review sessions.
Your participation in the decision-making process involving land use choices is vital, and will shape our future for generations to come.
Thank you very much,
Stancy DuHamel Wingdale, NY
- Read CRGD Statement
*Note: printed post date is for chronological clarity. Actual post date is August 13, 2010.
Dover Knolls: Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS)
March 8, 2010
read Final Environmental Impact Statement
Rasco: Dover Planning Board Meeting March 1, 2010; DEC Director Janeway: “Without local approval, [Rasco] cannot move forward”
March 1, 2010
The Dover Planning Board invited Willie Janeway, Regional Director for NYS DEC Region 3, “to discuss Planning Board concerns with the Howland Lakes site” where the Rasco project is proposed.
From the Minutes:
“Co-Chair Wylock thanked Mr Janeway for responding to his letter, there was a site walk January 16, 2010 and The Board was shocked at the site. There are bags of carbon, barrels of unknown substances, abandoned cars and trucks, and a tent like structure all within proximity of the Great Swamp. It was understood that someone from DEC did visit the site prior to the permit being issued.
[Chair Wylock] was unsure if something was overlooked, if the site was in this condition, or if this was outside the scope of the inspection. He felt that DEC and The Town should work together to get the site cleaned up, before the application moves forward; certainly prior to the Application of Cricket Valley Energy. The Landowner [Howland Lakes] not the applicant should be held accountable; it has the appearance of an environmental nightmare.”
Read further for Mr. Janeway’s response, in which he reminds the Dover Planning Board, “Without local approval, [Rasco] cannot move forward.”
- Read Dover Planning Board Meeting Minutes, March 1, 2010
*Note: printed post date is for chronological clarity. Actual post date is August 13, 2010.
