PA DEP takes cover in extending waiver granted in 2008 to Waste Management to Synagro at planned biosolids site - Plainfield Township pushes back

A few years after the Green Knight Energy Center was built, the PA Department of Environmental Protection (a misnomer) approved the partial filling of the former Doney Quarry #2 near the energy center.  This quarry was originally a few hundred feet deep, and is connected to a ground water aquifer.  Within a few hundred feet are the Waltz Creek and the headwaters of the Little Bushkill Creek.

In issuing this approval in 2008, DEP granted a waiver of permit requirements under Chapter 105.12(a)(6) - which addresses obstructing stormwater facilities and sedimentation basins that meet the requirements of Chapter 102.  Now, DEP is planning to extend the same waiver for Synagro to allow it to further fill the basin in order to create space for a parking lot and maneuvering area, under the guise of "we did it before."  Here is a letter sent from Roger Bellas of the DEP to Synagro/Waste Management on this subject:

DEP Letter to Synagro/Waste Management in regards to sedimentation basin on Scribd

Note that attached to the Bellas letter is an email in which Synagro engineer EarthRes mentions open space requirements as well as refers to the water body as a basin that was originally "engineered".  Synagro is attempting to argue the basin is just a stormwater feature and that (local) open space requirements do not apply.  In response, Bellas's letter parrots that "engineering" was done back in 2008, and as a result again the basin will be exempt a permit under Chapter 105.12(a)(6).  What if Bellas is taking the Applicant word for it here?  The DEP is overworked and understaffed - could Bellas have drafted this letter, signed off, and headed out for a two hour lunch?  But DEP does find that the basin a "regulated water body" (not just a detention basin, which would not be regulated) and states that Chapter 105 otherwise applies.  DEP is not in a position to preempt Plainfield Township's buffer requirements adjacent to ponds, which is what the former quarry now is.

Plainfield Township is requiring a zoning variance, since there is a 50' setback requirement from water bodies.  But Plainfield Township is further concerned about the fact that the pond is connected to the aquifer, and that there may be other considerations (wetlands, etc) that should be taken into consideration in determining if a DEP permit should in fact be required under Chapter 105.  The township's wetlands consultant issued a report found at the bottom of this blog post.  Here is a letter sent by the township to Mr. Bellas at DEP following his communication to Synagro/Waste Management, which does not mention the consultant's report but incorporates its findings:

Letter to PA DEP from Plainfield Twp re: Synagro proposed biosolids plant near pond on Scribd

The township is essentially challenging the DEP's voracity in its determination that the proposed activities are exempt from a permit, and that "engineering" was done in 2008.  Is this based on EarthRes' claim in its letter that engineering was done?  What if DEP just granted the waiver in 2008, without doing its homework?  This would not be unheard of, and DEP has made other errors in allowing quarries to be filled.

Notable errors PA DEP has made in permitting filling of other quarries local to Synagro site

In 2011, the DEP issued a permit that allowed a quarry near Nestle Deer Park's wells in Washington Township, Northampton County to be filled, and this process contaminated the water drawn from Nestle's wells.  DEP then withdrew said permit.  To this day, Nestle operates an "interceptor well" that diverts water from the aquifer flowing from this quarry towards Nestle's production wells.  Here is the DRBC approval for the interceptor well (see underlined text on page 3):

DRBC permit for Nestle Deer Park's interceptor well to reduce groundwater pollution at its Bangor PA facili... on Scribd

In about 2000, DEP approved the Buzzi Unicem quarry to be mined to an additional 50' of depth.  Within a few years, sinkholes began developing along the Bushkill Creek.  A few houses were swallowed/destroyed, as well as the bridge connecting Stockertown and Tatamy, which will not be replaced - partly because no one has a clue how to do it with Swiss Cheese for ground.  Sinkholes have spread as far as 2 miles downstream.  Two bridges on Route 33 over the creek were replaced at a cost of millions of dollars, and at least one of the "new" bridges is sinking and will need to be replaced.  Yeah - DEP is on top of it, and we're all underneath getting pounded.

The basis for what the township is requesting of DEP

The township references a section of Chapter 105.12(a) that provides for permits to be required in cases where threats to life, health, property or the environment are present, even though a project may be eligible for a waiver.  This request may result in DEP agreeing a jurisdictional determination is required, starting the ball rolling to real evaluations of the pond, its surrounding area, and interaction with the aquifer.

What could happen if DEP simply ignores Plainfield's request, and follows through in not requiring a permit under Chapter 105, and a permit is issued by DEP for the landfill modification that adds Synagro's use?   Plainfield and/or the Delaware Riverkeeper could appeal that issuance to the PA Environmental Hearing Board, if they believe the DEP's decisions are not based on sound analysis.

The swords are out.  DEP is taking the side of big money.  There will be a public hearing held locally by DEP, to allow citizens to give their input on this project.  This should occur within the next few months.  If DEP has not altered its position on this issue prior to the hearing, citizens need to add their voices to that of the township.  Protect our water.  You know, you are responsible for environmental protection.  Duh!