Synagro had requested 15 minutes to give a presentation at the beginning of the meeting. The township announced that after this, each of five of the township's consultants would go over the most important outstanding deficiencies in the application.
Synagro project manager Jim Hecht wasted the first 15 minutes giving a justification why this plant is needed. Not in Plainfield Township, but in general. At a critical juncture in the application, Hecht peed away 15 minutes speaking in generalities about why biosolids are the best thing to happen since wifi was invented. Who was his audience - the reporter(s) in the room? The only item of interest to this observer was that on one slide where the goal seemed to be to reassure the community biosolids are safe, it was stated "If an element in biosolids not currently regulated is found to be a risk, it will become regulated and we will test for it." How reassuring! Your husband and four others living nearby die of cancer a few years from now, and eventually the cause is found to be something in crap "fertilizer". The gall. Hecht did not waste even one second trying to argue that this plant would be good for this community. Been there, done that. The argument this project is green and good for the community was debunked many months ago, not the least of which was by Grand Central Landfill founder's granddaughter Lisa Perin - who informed the planning commission this project would be a negative for the community, and there would be no way to ever get rid of it. $100,00 per year to three communities, MAXIMUM. 16 jobs pushing crap around, MAXIMUM.
As the planning commission readied to transition to its 5 consultants to give their top remaining unresolved issues, Synagro attorney Elizabeth Witmer got up and started presenting on a second overhead under the control of co-counsel Matthew Goodrich. Witmer started talking over the chairman - not a good start. Witmer insisted that Synagro should present a "list" of issues that it was addressing in a review letter sent to Synagro just today. The chairman pleaded to let the township consultants each present their items, so Synagro could respond to them or make a note to reply later. Witmer refused to change course, and began leading engineer David Allen P.E. representing Synagro through a list of items the planning commission was not even familiar with since they hadn't read these reviews yet. Mind you, Synagro has been inundating the township with large piles of useless paper on average once a week - the last time this past Monday. No one expected these items to be addressed this evening, and certainly not anyone responding to a review sent this same day.
The list of items Witmer went through was relatively trivial stuff like drafting errors and missing signatures on plans - minutia compared with larger issues everyone knows remain - and so should Witmer. After 15 minutes, multiple planning commission members and Solicitor Backenstoe attempted to bitch-slap Witmer using a dose of common sense, and asked to proceed to the townships' consultants. Planner Bob Simpson said "Look, it's you prerogative if you really want to do this. Realize that you are demanding a decision from us by the end on March, and time is running out. (It is the Applicant who approves extensions of deadlines) By not letting our consultants who advise us speak, you risk causing us not to hear what they have to say and you being unable to address their concerns - which in the long run is detrimental only to you." Planner Robin Dingle echoed this, stating "it is our experts that we will largely be basing our decision on, not what you are telling us. We need to hear from them." Witmer ignored Simpson and pressed on for an hour total, accomplishing something only in her own mind. It is possible she didn't want everyone in the room, including the stenographer Synagro is paying, to learn about the significant outstanding issues. This would be a gross disservice to a typical applicant, in a normal circumstance where everyone is acting in good faith and you aren't attempting to erect a freshwater pond-side shit factory.
At one point, Scott Perin representing the landfill got up to misrepresent what is in a letter that DEP sent on February 14, 2019 (new - see the letter here), in which it rescinded a letter issued on August 10, 2018 that indicated Synagro would be granted a waiver to not require a permit to partially fill in the pond adjacent to the proposed plant. Perin claimed once again that the pond was properly engineered to become a sedimentation basin (there has been nothing produced to date to prove this), and in any event he stated the period to appeal a previous 2008 waiver for the same pond has long since expired. Township consultant Jack Embick corrected some of Perin's misrepresentations, which caused Witmer to become agitated. When Embick pointed out that he had requested Waste Management to provide said engineering during the appeal of the opinion in the August 10 letter, and has received NOTHING to date, Witmer went off on a rant that Embick was attempting to get information that he could use in a court case. No, Embick was only mentioning he had requested what planners have been requesting for months - show us the conversion was properly engineered as required in the regulations to make it qualify for a waiver. Not only the 2008 waiver, but a new one that would be needed for the proposed development. Witmer was totally irrational - "there is nothing in the law that requires us to produce that!" Maybe not, but the planning commission and its consultants are requesting it as part of their job, you thick-headed idiot.
At 8:15, Simpson looked at Witmer and Goodrich and said in restrained exasperation "I advised you an hour ago to start what we are now, and you said it would only take 15 minutes." At this point David Allen P.E. and Jim Hecht remained standing at the podium, reluctant to give up their post serving Witmer's senseless charade. Someone in the audience muttered "sit the hell down" and chairman Levitz looked at them as if to say "we''re moving on". If Witmer thought that Synagro had to only address some issues brought up today and they would be home free, she was badly mistaken.
The first consultant to present was Jack Embick, who pointed out that months ago he had advised that Synagro provide an environmental impact statement. At this point, Witmer climbed onto her "we ain't doing nothing that isn't required in your ordinance" horse, with Goodrich riding bareback - his arms tightly around her formidable waist. The problem is, Goodrich isn't a municipal law attorney, and Witmer doesn't appear to be competent. Embick was going over how sections 4 and 5 of the township zoning ordinance lay out criteria and standards for protecting the health safety and welfare of the citizens. Also, he mentioned the Environmental Rights Act and the PA Constitution, which guarantee citizens rights to clean air, water, etc. Witmer sat looking around rather bored as Embick concluded that if Synagro will not submit an EIS, his advice will be the application should be denied.
Witmer claimed that PA DEP regulations will protect the citizenry - which is patently false. First of all, the fact that DEP directed Syangro to apply for a general permit and not an individual one means that Synagro will not have to submit a Harms and Benefit Analysis. Just look around at all the fuck-ups of DEP. They don't protect anything except big business. Look at how DEP garbage specialist Roger Bellas has ruled "just fill that pond in, we don't care." Witmer demanded to know where in the ordinance there are specific requirements that Synagro had to meet. Planner Robin Dingle told her - and then another planner pointed out that the Municipalities Planning Code provides for protection of the health safety and welfare of the community. The township could potentially be sued if Synagro's proposed project causes pollution of the water supply.
Witmer then tried a new tack - this is new - why didn't you suggest an Environmental Impact Statement previously? Why now late in the game? Embick in frustration replied "I asked for it months ago".
At one point, Bob Simpson wanted to find out "are you going to do a hydrogeological study, or not?" Witmer hemmed and hawed. Simpson asked "yes or no?" and then gave up saying "I'll take that as a "no".
Witmer got so testy that eventually Chairman Levitz gave Synagro and its consultants a dressing down. He pointed out that not a single person from Synagro lives in Plainfield Township. "This is our town, we will have to live with this plant for generations. You should come in here with some humility, but you are doing the opposite by attempting to set the agenda and tell us what we do and don't need." Humility did not emerge as the evening wore on and more consultants spoke.
Next to speak was Jason Smith, wetlands specialist from Hanover Engineering for the township. Smith's main issue was with the pond (big surprise). Since the retraction of August 10 letter, there is no assurance that Synagro will receive a waiver to fill in the pond. If a permit is required, more strict Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be required by DEP. Smith reported that data shows that 16,400 gallons of water a day infiltrates into a shallow aquifer and walls of the quarry, which ultimately is transferred to the Waltz and Little Bushkill Creeks. Smith stated that sedimentation basin #2 was not constructed as such - an outlet was in the design but never installed. How can one have a sedimentation basin with no outlet?
Smith stated that a 50' open space buffer applies to the pond PRIOR to modification, which would fuck up Synagro's plans - destroy them in fact. Witmer and Goodrich demanded to know where in the ordinance it is stated it must be prior to modification. Township manager Petrucci provided the answer - in the Riparian Buffer section 22-1023. It was then Goodrich's turn to become testy, demanding to know if Smith was familiar with something in a permit application. Smith replied "I feel like I am being interrogated. I have read part of it." Goodrich continued "I am just asking for an answer! Tell me the answer!" Go fuck yourself - how is that for an answer?
During Smith's testimony, Witmer pulled another Witmer. When pressed to provide as-built information on the sedimentation basin (since there is evidence it was not built as designed), the airhead said incredulously "We would not have that data - that is Waste Management/Grand Central - why are you asking Synagro?!" Township Solicitor Backenstoe looked surprised, glanced at the Land Development Plan, and chuckled "Waste Management signed the application as the land owner." Really not cool, Liz!
Next was the township's traffic consultant Peter Terry of Benchmark Engineering, who pointed out that the zoning ordinance requires a traffic hazard impact study. Synagro's traffic consultant Jason Shelter had appeared earlier at the meeting, and claimed that the Grand Central haul road does not qualify as a street, so in his opinion a study of the intersection of the proposed entrance from Pen Argyl Road and the haul road does not need to be conducted as Terry had determined. This access point looks prime for both hazards and impacts! Terry stated he would defer to the PennDOT highway occupancy permit process to address some of the issues with this access point. Looking at the diagram below, a marked-up version of Synagro's proposed access to Pen Argyl Road, what is your opinion?
Synagro's traffic expert testified that a hazard impact study of the lower intersection is not required.
With the haul road used by all the trash haulers to and from the landfill.
- Looks like a great design and will work with no problem
- Looks like a truck can't get into a proper position as shown in red, to look both ways before exiting onto Pen Argyl Road, and if it did it would totally block the haul road.
- Looks like a truck driver exiting will have to turn his head 190 degrees (more than all the way backwards) before committing to block the throat of the driveway - which will block any trucks coming north from turning into the entrance, and in turn create a hazard to vehicles following it travelling north on Pen Argyl Road.
- It sucks, both 2. and 3. are true, and this proposal would create a highly hazardous situation..
The astute observer will recall that attorneys Goodrich and Witmer attempted to make the case that the haul road is a "street", in the fall of 2017. Doh! Not anymore. Whatever is convenient for the current argument, whatever shit might stick to the wall and not slither off into a heap.
Highway Occupancy Permit scoping meeting with PennDOT has not taken place
Synagro traffic expert Shlter announced that an application for a scoping meeting with PennDOT was filed on January 17, 2019 to discuss access via Pen Argyl Road and Route 512. This is the scoping meeting that Synagro stated on July 16, 2018 they would request. They waited six months. PennDOT is backed up two or three months, according to its highway occupancy permit manager. Synagro placed no urgency on getting access to its site resolved - incredible, but true.
Next township engineering consultant Robert Lynn of Hanover Engineering spoke with some general and specific zoning and SALDO concerns. He stated he believes that Ordinance 229 that addresses driveways in his opinion would call for the calculations at the haul road intersection as Terry advised. Lynn pointed out that there are several locations where Synagro trucks will conflict with each other, and other trucks. Where will trucks "stack," what specific signs will be posted and where to control traffic? Lynn's colleague Farley Fry requested that Synagro provide data that shows Synagro's trucks covered with tarps will not affect the surroundings. Synagro admitted at a previous review meeting that tarps will not block odors from truck as they pass through town, past homes and businesses, sit in traffic, travel in front of other vehicles. Yikes - ever ride behind a "municipal waste" hauler on the highway? Fry pointed out that in Hawaii at a Synagro facility, a regrowth of bacteria occurred after shit was baked.
Next was Mike Brunamonti, an environmental consultant with BCM Engineers. Brunamonti had spoken with hydrogeologist Phil Gray, who found that Synagro's responses to requests for data and a hydrogeologic study did not satisfy his concerns. Brunamonti stated that disposal of waste to an underground aquifer is potential pollution. Further, sedimentation basin #2 in his opinion does not meet the requirements for a storm water control facility.
Brunamonti then made a reasonable suggestion - that runoff from roadways in the area not drain into the basin, but rather be collected and disposed of elsewhere.
Now it was time for EarthRes engineer for Synagro Thomas Pullar to take his turn at acting frustrated and indignant. "We have provided you with everything you asked for. Maybe you didn't read it. We've submitted thousands of pages. Baseline data on the creeks. What more do you want? Everything is contained - there will not be pollutants running into the sedimentation basin (pond)." Well, you haven't provided any baseline data on the pond, and the baseline data on the creeks are standard water quality metrics - which do not include the nasty elements and compounds in biosolids. As he spoke however, he tripped over his white lie about pollutants. Planner Terry Kleintop questioned him on if the vegetated swale would really protect the pond. Pullar stated that any pollutants should be filtered out by the swale. Kleintop countered that the proposed route of trucks is through the current boundary of the pond, before it is partly filled. Suddenly Pullar had his ass in a sling - both claiming there will be no pollutants heading towards the pond, but if they do (?) the vegetated swale should block them, and oh yeah they may infiltrate into the ground and into the pond before they ever get to the swale. It's a crock of shit.
Synagro legal and engineering team recoil in disbelief that more than scrivener's oversights remain - why didn't someone tell us?
At about 9:20 pm, Witmer was seen chuckling with Goodrich while looking at the clock. She looked very relaxed - which is odd under the circumstances. Perhaps they were laughing about all the money they are being paid for sitting through meetings, because there is nothing funny about the prospects of Synagro's application. Hecht is asking what would be required for a hydrogeological analysis (he was advised to ask his own hydrogeologist) and the planners are being advised to recommend disapproving the land development plan because Synagro has not done an Environmental Impact Statement. The proposed Pen Argyl Road access is a pathetic joke. Without approval from DEP to partially fill the pond, there isn't enough space to build the proposed plant. What is funny about this situation,Ms. Witmer?
Next was Trudy Johnston, who had comments on the land development plan as well as the nuisance mitigation plan. The most interesting factoid to this observer in her comments was when someone asked how odors from the landfill will be discriminated from those of the shit factory. The answer was that an "odor observer" (human) uses a "smells like" test. Smells like crap, smells like trash...
Johnston reported that ammonia, which will be produced as a byproduct in very large quantities, is not one of the substances that is covered by the nuisance mitigation plan draft, and she would like to see tighter controls on hydrogen sulfide.
"We've produced thousands of pages of answers."
Both Witmer and Pullar made reference to the stacks and stacks of paper that Synagro has submitted to the township. This is true. One planner was seen hauling an old milk crate full to the brim with submissions from Synagro. But Pullar referred to what was contained in these pages "answers". Quantity does no equal quality. Bodacious girth does not imply "answers" or that all of them have been answered Planner Dingle early in the meeting challenged Witmer and Daivd Allen P.E. - "You are providing answers to a few selected questions here. Does this mean that you aren't going to address all these other unanswered questions, including important environmental ones "Applicant has provided no further information" (citing a consultant's review letter)? Is that your position? I just want to know for the record." This wasn't being rude - but rather Dingle sees numerous outstanding unanswered questions, and according to Witmer, David Allen P.E. was only going to address "five or six" responding only to questions received that same day. Witmer is acting like "we're at the end, dotting i's and crossing t's" when that clearly is not what the planners or their consultant see.
Synagro's attormeys and Mr. Pullar appeared taken off guard that at this late stage there could be significant differences of opinion. But there are, and they shouldn't be surprised. They have received numerous review letters. They asked if planners were reading the voluminous submissions of crap they have generated. Have they read the much shorter review letters they have received back? Read the transcripts that Synagro itself is paying for? Where is the environmental impact statement that can inform the planners that there will be no impact to the health safety and welfare of the public?
Synagro rep Jim Hecht finally asks what would have to be in a hydrogeologic study
Late in the meeting, Hecht almost inaudibly asked from the audience what the township would like to see in a hydrogeological study. Apparently the obvious to everyone else except Witmer, is that without the pledge of the waiver from DEP that has been withdrawn, knowing something about that pond has increased importance. The township has maintained this all along. Hecht's questions were uninformed - and no one from EarthRes was able to assist him. Synagro should have been starting this discussion over a year ago.
Synagro not ready to accept that only one more meeting will be sufficient
At the end of the meeting, Chairman Levitz asked "are you still planning for a decision from us in March?" The answer after a pause was "we'll see". Yeah, we'll see.
It was overheard following the meeting that a representative of Synagro had approached a planner and apologized for the behavior of their own attorneys at this meeting. Yup, even Synagro saw what everyone else saw.
Synagro rep reportedly apologizes for attorney behavior
No comments:
Post a Comment