DEP Biweekly Reports Folder 0049, 2000-2001

NYC 9/11 Public Portal Document

NYCDOT may want to review sites where it has long term permitted occupancy from Parks in cast a challenge is now made to that occupancy. Con Edison - Right to Know Law We recently concluded two years of negotiations with Con Edison, in an effort to make the company provide accurate and timely data on PCBs contained in its underground and pole-mounted transformers, pursuant to the City's Right to Know Law. Con Edison will enter into a three-year Memorandum of Understanding with DEP, in which the company will agree to submit certain data annually, in an agreed-upon format, and to pay an annual filing fee of approx. $1.1 Million. The MOU also calls for joint inspections by DEP and Con Edi win of sam les at EP s reques . e OU will put the inspection of iso 's and r d o e-mounted transformers, and the i ing o re ate Right to Know Law data on PCBs, on a firm footing. It will also enable us to resolve approximately 200 Notices of Violation gains+ Con Fdisnn c„rrPntTy pending before the Environmental Control Board (ECB).

Shandaken Tunnel Litigation We previously reported that Riverkeeper, along with several sporting groups, had filed suit against the City in the US District Court for the Northern District of New York, with respect to operation of the Shandaken Tunnel. The plaintiffs claim that the City is violating the Clean Water Act when it discharges water from the Tunnel into the Esopus Creek, because Schoharie Reservoir basin water conveyed through the Tunnel becomes very turbid after heavy rains. The plaintiffs claim that when the City allows this turbid water to leave the Tunnel, it is "adding a pollutant" to the Esopus Creek, and that the City therefore needs a SPDES permit before it can operate the Tunnel. The City essentially contends that the turbidity is a natural phenomenon, that it adds nothing to the water conveyed through the Tunnel, and that it is therefore not "adding a pollutant". If the City were forced to obtain a SPDES permit, it would subject operation of the Tunnel and of the Catskill Water 7upp y to burdensome levels of State control, and could expose the City to additional lawsuits under the Clean Water Act. The City won a major victory several months ago, when the District Court ruled firmly in its favor ho did not "add a ollutant" to the Esopus Creek en it discharged water from the Tunnel that was turbid. The plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration, claiming that the Court misread applicable law. The District Court just issued a second opinion, rejecting the plaintiffs' motion and reconfirming its original ruling in favor of the City. The plaintiffs have filed a notice of appeal to the Second Circuit, but we are confident that our position will again be sustained.

Radiation Incident - Illegal dumping In the early morning hours of February 6`", a contractor's truck transporting grit and residuals from the Newtown Creek WPCP to a private (non-DOS) solid waste transfer site set off radiation-detector alarms. As soon as DEP was notified, we called in NYC Department of Health (DOH) and HazMat personnel. We also contacted NYSDEC, but were told that as long as the material was confined, we did not have to report it to them. During the course of our investigation, not only the original 30- yard container was found to be `hot', but additionally, two other containers gave off radiation readings. We next initiated contact with a nuclear waste handler, to assist DOH in tracing the source of the radiation. That source was initially believed to be Iodine-131 pills a low-dose nuclear medicine almost exclusively used in the treatment of thyroid cancer. It has a half-life of only eight

bra

NYC-WTC 0001 37968