After 18 Years, Connecticut Finally Has A State Water Plan

SOURCE:

https://patch.com/connecticut/wallingford/after-18-years-connecticut-finally-has-state-water-plan

After 18 Years, Connecticut Finally Has A State Water Plan

State Representative Mary Mushinsky (D-Wallingford) has been seeking creation and adoption of a State Water Plan since 2001.

By News Desk, News Partner | Jun 10, 2019

From CT General Assembly:The legislature on June 5, 2019 finally ratified the State Water Plan, a technical and policy document four years in the making and 18 years in the planning since the legislature first required a water plan in 2001.

According to the CT Dept. of Public Health, the State Water Plan lays out a framework for managing Connecticut's water into the future and for achieving balance with human and environmental needs as climate trends emerge and new needs develop. It addresses the quality and quantity of water for drinking, ecology, recreation, business, industry, agriculture, energy, and wastewater assimilation.

State Representative Mary Mushinsky (D-Wallingford) has been seeking creation and adoption of a State Water Plan since 2001.

"We have had numerous warnings of the fragility of our water resources, including drying up of rivers such as the Fenton at UConn and the Shepaug in northwest CT," Rep. Mushinsky said. "It was clear to me that the state needed to apply science and conservation to this challenge to ensure we have sufficient clean water for all the state's needs well into the future."

The legislature established the Water Planning Council (WPC) in 2001 to bring together multiple state agencies that had jurisdiction over water. Rep. Mushinsky said one significant roadblock to water management was the separation of water regulation among multiple state agencies, which the Council was designed to solve.

Following a new threat to another state river, the Farmington, legislators passed Public Act 14-163, directing the WPC to create the plan that would help planners, regulators, and lawmakers make decisions about managing Connecticut's water in a manner that is consistent throughout the state.

"Until we gave them funding to do the analysis, the plan wasn't moving," Rep. Mushinsky said. The completed plan reflects the input of various stakeholders, committee members and public participants. The council held public hearings on the draft plan across the state in 2017.

The Council presented a final document to the Governor and legislative committees in 2018. Mushinsky said the phrase "water is a public trust" in the plan caused some disagreement and a one year delay in legislative approval. In 2019, legislators with the help of attorneys in Gov. Lamont's staff crafted language to make clear the statutes decide any perceived conflict between the plan and the statutes.

The WPC is comprised of four members: John W. Betkoski (Chair), Vice Chairman, Public Utilities Regulatory Authority; Garrett Eucalitto, Undersecretary, Office of Policy and Management; Betsey Wingfield, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Energy and Environmental Protection; and Lori Mathieu, Drinking Water Section Chief, Department of Public Health.

Mushinsky, who worked with colleagues including State Representatives John Hampton (D-Simsbury), Jonathan Steinberg (D-Westport) and State Senator Mary Abrams (D-Meriden), and clean water groups including Rivers Alliance, CT Fund for the Environment and Citizens Campaign for the Environment to pass the plan, said Connecticut now joins a small number of states in the U. S. with science-based water plans.

###

America at the crossroads: What LIers think of our future

SOURCE:

https://www.newsday.com/long-island/united-states-future-2050-long-islanders-1.32100721

America at the crossroads: What LIers think of our future

Matthew Elgut prays that future generations will be better off than his — but doesn't think it's likely.

The 45-year-old Shoreham father of two says the threats of climate change and a possible mass extinction of species are a key reason for his worry.

"If we fail to act soon I fear we will fail our children and the world we leave them will be but a shell of what once existed," he said.

Still, Elgut said he's not sure whether he's optimistic or pessimistic about the United States' future.

That mix is reflected in a recently released Pew Research Center survey which found that 56 percent of Americans said they are somewhat or very optimistic about the country in 2050. But Americans were pessimistic about key parts of our future, with majorities predicting "the economy will be weaker, health care will be less affordable" — and 59 percent saying the environment will be worse.

"I don't think that's pessimism but rather realism. The truth is our environment will get worse before it gets better," said Adrienne Esposito, the Farmingdale-based executive director of Citizens Campaign for the Environment.

"We are on the verge of transitioning away from fossil fuels to renewable energy, advancing promising technologies including battery storage and geothermal, and building strong public support to usher in these changes. It will take a little time but we will get there."

The future of our environment is affecting major decisions today for some Long Islanders. Jessica Morgan, 31, a Sound Beach resident, said climate change is top of mind as she and her partner save for a house.

"It's very real that sea levels are rising. The landscape of Long Island is going to change. Do we invest here for a 30-year mortgage?" Morgan asked.  

The social worker said she tries to practice "active hopefulness," and do everything she can to ensure her future, Long Island's and her community's.

Chris Jones, 65, senior vice president and chief planner of the Regional Plan Association, said what comes through very clearly in the Pew numbers "is just how much more pessimistic we've become as a society. And I think that's particularly striking for a lot of suburban areas, and particularly Long Island, that really developed on this surge of optimism about the future."

"It's largely consistent with previous polling that's been done on Long Island. And there certainly are a lot of trends that explain why some of these attitudes are changing at this point," he said. "We've certainly come through a fairly extensive period where incomes have not grown that much."

"It's interesting that people seem bipolar on this," former Suffolk County Executive Steve Levy said about the Pew study.

"On the one hand, they have hope, but on the other hand when they look at specific items, it's very depressing. We're really at a crossroads, on the local level and nationally," said Levy, 59, a Republican from Bayport.

"And what we do policy-wise, and culturally, over the next several years will point us either in a direction of maintaining a traditional status as a productive nation, or we go down the path of the European socialistic entitlement type of nation."

For Levy, the vibrant economy he attributes to President Donald Trump's 2017 tax cuts shows "the policies that you adopt make all the difference in the world."

Noret Bazemore, 47, is concerned about isolation and social awkwardness with "online everything taking over every aspect of our lives."

"Kids are not learning on their own how to develop relationships with each other, which means they'll grow into adults that don't know how to develop relationships with each other," said the custom cake designer from Freeport.

She wants her three sons to be as self-sufficient as possible with life skills like doing laundry, chores and cooking. She explained how her 8-year-old and 10-year-old made breakfast the day before.

"They're taking the initiative to do these things. And these are the men that I want them to be. Feeling very capable and empowered, where they know they can take care of things," Bazemore said. "And I'm not finding that within my peer group. A lot of the moms, they do everything for the kid."

Elgut's concerns are big picture and fundamental. He says he worries about "what's becoming of this country, what can be done still to mitigate some of the unfortunate events that have taken place, and how we can get back to what seemed like normal," the registered nurse said. "The lack of interest in a good portion of this country to accept science is just baffling to me."

But, Elgut said, "If we could somehow for the greater good come together as a country, I really do think that we have tremendous tools with technology and perseverance to at least, at the very least, mitigate some of the worst possibilities that may occur" environmentally.

Esposito sees the environment as a bipartisan issue that affects public policy and quality of life.

"I have great faith in the public to be engaged and to fight this battle with us," the Patchogue resident said, adding this: "If you don't see the light at the end of the tunnel, you're doomed to be in perpetual darkness."

Court Puts Hold on Sand Land Mine Expansion

SOURCE:

https://www.easthamptonstar.com/201966/court-puts-hold-sand-land-mine-expansion

Court Puts Hold on Sand Land Mine Expansion

A coalition of local civic groups, neighbors, nonprofit organizations, and government officials was successful Friday in obtaining a preliminary injunction against the Sand Land mine in Noyac that puts expanded mining on hold.

Acting New York State Supreme Court Justice James H. Ferreira granted the injunction and said the petitioners, including the Noyac Civic Council, Citizens Campaign for the Environment, Group for the East End, Southampton Town, State Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele Jr., and others, showed evidence “sufficient to demonstrate that there is a danger of irreparable harm” if mining is allowed to widen and deepen at Sand Land. According to Justice Ferreira’s decision, Sand Land has denied as much, but has “failed to demonstrate how they will be harmed or prejudiced if the injunction is granted” with respect to the expanded mining area in question.

“This is a major victory for the environment, our drinking water, and the community at large,” Mr. Thiele said in a statement Monday. “This will permit the neighbors, the civics, and elected officials to make the case to the court that the expansion of this mine is an illegal threat to the environment without fear of additional harm to our drinking water.”

Neither John Tintle, owner of Sand Land, nor Brian E. Matthews, the attorney representing the mine, could be reached for comment by press time this week.

The court challenge stemmed from a decision in March by the State Department of Environmental Conservation that would allow Sand Land to expand its mine across about three more acres, and dig 40 feet deeper than its previous permit allowed. That decision was part of a settlement that would also allow the mine to operate for eight more years before it would have to begin land reclamation efforts over a 10-year span. The agreement also established a groundwater-monitoring program.

The expanded mining area in question has been dubbed the “stump dump,” a former disposal area for vegetative organic waste, which Sand Land’s opponents claim could pose a severe threat to the environment. According to court documents, the D.E.C. settlement included the three-acre stump dump in Sand Land’s “mined land use plan.” It had not been included in previous plans or permits.

Sand Land’s opponents tapped Dr. Stuart Z. Cohen, an organic chemist and groundwater expert, who analyzed previous groundwater testing results that found significant evidence of pollution. He provided a written affidavit testifying that mining the stump dump would likely further contaminate groundwater in the area.

Dr. Cohen also wrote that “excavating the bottom of the pit deeper will be conducive to increased water flow . . . thus mining activity in this area is likely to result in a funnel effect of the contaminants, essentially increasing the speed at which they enter the aquifer.”

The Article 78 complaint against Sand Land, owned by Sand Land Corporation and Wainscott Sand and Gravel, also targeted the D.E.C., with the goal of forcing it to stop processing Sand Land’s mining permit application. However, Justice Ferreira did not order the D.E.C. to push pause on the application.

According to Mr. Thiele, the D.E.C.’s settlement with Sand Land in March was a reversal of its previous directive in September 2018 to close the mine. He called for the D.E.C. to reconsider its settlement.

“They need to be on the side of the public, not the polluter,” Mr. Thiele said. “We desire nothing more than to protect our drinking water. That should also be the mission of the state D.E.C. The public should be heard. No permit should be granted for expansion. The mine should be closed.”

The D.E.C. issued a statement Tuesday saying it could not comment on pending litigation, but said, “Our comprehensive settlement has put this facility on the path to closure and secured the most stringent and aggressive oversight and protection of water quality over any facility of its kind in New York State. D.E.C. will continue to be a regular presence on the site and will take immediate action if any violations are found.”

Elena Loreto, president of the Noyac Civic Council, called Justice Ferreira’s decision “wonderful.”

“It’s about time a judge opened up his eyes and looked at what was really going on,” she said Tuesday. “I think it’s a huge win for us.”

The Noyac Civic Council recently sent the D.E.C. a petition with 757 signatures opposing the settlement and calling for a public hearing, but Ms. Loreto said they have not heard back.

“We’re in limbo,” she said. “We have many questions, and we want answers.”

Single-use plastic bag fee included in new state budget

SOURCE:

https://www.wfsb.com/news/single-use-plastic-bag-fee-included-in-new-state-budget/article_14d2f3a2-888c-11e9-a6d1-4b0dae40af6a.html

Single-use plastic bag fee included in new state budget

HARTFORD, CT (WFSB) -- With the new budget passed by the General Assembly, shoppers will see a $0.10 fee on single-use plastic bags at checkout.

The fee will go into effect this July, and was included in the two-year budget approved by lawmakers this week.

After July 1, 2021, a ban on plastic bags will be implemented.

Once that happens, no retail or grocery store will be permitted to distribute single-use plastic bags at checkout.

The bill will also allow municipalities with existing bag ordinances to keep their bans.

It also allows towns to establish their own fee on paper checkout bags.

Connecticut is the third state in the country to implement a law like this. California and New York already have.

In a statement, Citizens Campaign for the Environment said they applaud CT lawmakers for taking action on plastic pollution.

“CT has an obligation to be protectors of the Long Island Sound and this bill advances that critical objective. Congratulations Connecticut! You have proven yourself once again to be a leader on fighting plastic pollution in our oceans and estuaries. This law gives consumers and businesses alike the time they need to make the switch, and the “opt-in” provision allows municipalities to promote reusable bag use by establishing their own charge on paper bags. This policy is a common sense-approach towards reducing plastic pollution in our environment, saving taxpayers money and more sustainable consumer behavior-Bringing Your Own Bag. We are thrilled that Connecticut has joined the “bag ban wagon,” CCE said.

A win on plastic bags for environmentalists; not so on bottles, plastic straws

https://ctmirror.org/2019/06/04/a-win-on-plastic-bags-for-environmentalists-not-so-on-bottles-plastic-straws/

A win on plastic bags for environmentalists; not so on bottles, plastic straws

by Kathleen Megan and Maya Moore

House Speaker Joe Aresimowicz and Rep. David Michel talking about the plastic bags language.

Customers who fail to grab their reusable shopping bags before heading to the store have two more years to perfect new habits before plastic bags are banned in Connecticut, but in the meantime they will pay a 10-cent tax on every plastic bag they take home.

The tax – and the eventual ban on single-use plastic bags – were approved as part an amendment to the state budget bill passed Monday night in the House of Representatives and approved Tuesday by the Senate. If signed into law by Gov. Ned Lamont, the tax would go into effect Aug. 1, while the ban would begin July 1, 2021.

The tax is expected to raise $30.2 million in fiscal year 2020 and $26.8 million in 2021 for the state’s coffers.

Environmentalists consider the legislation a victory because it revises language in the budget that would have exempted plastic compostable bags from the tax and would have blocked towns from enacting ordinances requiring a charge on paper bags.

Lori Brown, executive director of the Connecticut League of Conservation Voters, said her organization brought a lot of pressure to bear on house members and on the governor’s office.

“We really needed to give some kudos to the House,” said Brown, noting that it’s a rarity to get a budget bill amended on the floor. “This was a really bloody battle.”

Brown said it makes sense not to exempt so-called compostable plastic bags from the ban because those bags don’t biodegrade on their own and must be put through a special process.

She is also pleased that the bill now leaves towns free to enact their own ordinances concerning single-use checkout bags as long as the local regulations are equally or more restrictive than the state provisions. This means, she said, a town can pass an ordinance requiring a charge on paper bags if desired.

Rep. Jonathan Steinberg, D-Westport, said 10 municipalities have already passed some version of a plastic bag ban.

“We wanted to honor their efforts to make sure that whatever we did legislatively at the state level would not preempt those efforts or future efforts by municipalities to create regulations that might actually be stronger than the state’s,” he said. “So that was very important that we clarified that.”

On compostable bags, Steinberg said, “It’s a broader subject that we felt needed further exploration. I believe we’ll be looking at doing a study and we’ll contemplate biodegradable bags and compostable bags more broadly in the broader context of waste management and what’s best for Connecticut, hopefully in the coming year.”

Although the plastic bag ban was hailed by environmentalists, concerns still exist.

For one, by not also banning paper bags, the state could leave itself open to a loophole. Namely, that if paper bags are still available, people will simply switch from plastic to paper bags, which come with their own set of problems. One is that the carbon footprint from their manufacture and transport is actually greater than that of plastic bags.

Paper bags are also more expensive than plastic – as much as 10 times as expensive. That’s why in other places in the U.S., at least part of the fee on plastic bags has gone back to retailers to help compensate them for paper bag costs.

The legislation doesn’t require a charge on paper bags — which is what Wayne Pesce, executive director of Connecticut Food Association, wanted. It doesn’t prevent stores from charging for paper bags either.

Another concern is a lack of consistency. Part of the goal of a statewide mandate was to prevent grocery and other retail chains from facing different regulations from municipality to municipality. By allowing municipalities to still implement their own, potentially stronger, ordinances, the provision in the budget may do less than anticipated to solve that problem.

Pesce, while disappointed with some aspects of the legislation, is still supportive of the state’s efforts.

“It’s a good bill directionally. It’s the right way to go,” he said. “It was just how we got to it.”

But bottle bill, plastic straws untouched

Other environmental measures aimed at reducing the waste stream have not been as successful this legislative session.

On Saturday, the House passed a strike-all amendment that derailed efforts to update bottle redemption legislation in House Bill 7294. The bill would have expanded the types of redeemable bottles to include most teas, juices and sports drinks. It also would have increased the beverage container deposit to 10 cents, up from five cents.

Instead, the House approved an amendment that establishes a task force to study the existing law, assess its efficacy and report back by Dec. 31, 2019.

“We needed the bottle bill fixed and they killed it,” Brown lamented. “We were just absolutely beside ourselves.”

Lou Rosado Burch, Connecticut program director for the Citizens Campaign for the Environment, said he is “very disappointed at the legislature’s failure” to address the bottle issue.

“It’s a betrayal of the public interest,” he said.

Rep. Joseph Gresko, D-Stratford and vice-chairman of the legislature’s environment committee, defended the task force, however.

“There have been task forces done before but not everyone was in the room and the other task forces didn’t have the weight of the Speaker’s office behind them,” he said.

“We’ll meet during the course of the rest of this year and then hopefully come back with a recommendation on how to modernize the bottle bill going forward and if that means a series of bills over the course of the next few years then so be it,” Gresko said. “I don’t think that there’s a magic wand out there that’s going to fix all the concerns from everyone all at the same time.”

Meanwhile, a bill that banned single-use plastic straws — House Bill 5385— was the subject of such lengthy debate last week in the House that it was put on hold temporarily.

“It fell into the filibuster abyss,” Brown said. She said it’s unclear whether it will die there or eventually be resurrected.

Two other waste-stream bills — reducing the use of styrofoam — have been passed by a single chamber.

House bill 5384, banning the single-use styrofoam containers — was passed in House and awaits consideration in the Senate. While, a bill that would ban styrofoam trays in schools — Senate Bill 229 — was passed in the Senate but hasn’t been raised yet in the House.

'This bill is very much alive'

SOURCE:

https://www.newsday.com/opinion/newsday-opinion-the-point-newsletter-1.31978624

'This bill is very much alive'

Intense negotiations in Albany over climate change legislation are sucking the air out of most every other environmental measure. A bill sponsored by Sen. James Gaughran that passed earlier in the Senate was approved Tuesday by the Assembly that makes it easier for water suppliers to sue polluters to recover cleanup costs. Now on the runway is a bill to ban from consumer products the probable carcinogen 1,4-dioxane, which is emerging as one of the biggest headaches for Long Island water suppliers.

And environmentalists are turning up the heat on that second bill to get it approved.

Citizens Campaign for the Environment delivered some 14,300 signatures on petitions Tuesday morning to Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins and Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie supporting the legislation. The signatures came from Long Island, the Syracuse area and Stewart-Cousins’ legislative district. CCE members also sent at least 1,950 letters.

“This bill is very much alive,” CCE executive director Adrienne Esposito told The Point. “We are very hopeful it’s going to make it over the finish line because of the outpouring of public support and the need to protect our water.”

The bill is being sponsored by the two Long Island environmental conservation chairs, Assemb. Steve Englebright and Sen. Todd Kaminsky. It has progressed further in the Assembly but Kaminsky is negotiating with Stewart-Cousins in that chamber.

An emerging contaminant that has been showing up in water supplies on Long Island, in particular, 1,4-dioxane was found in more than 80 percent of common household products like shampoos, laundry soaps, dish soaps and baby products, according to a CCE study. The chemical has been linked to various cancers and liver and kidney damage.

Esposito met Friday with several chemical industry and consumer product company representatives, and said, “It was apparent that the industries did not understand their role in contaminating Long Island’s groundwater.”

They do now.

“The bill has legs,” Esposito said as the talks continue..

We’ll find out soon if it’s quick enough to beat the June 19 scheduled end of session.

Report: Long Island's drinking water has most contaminants in state

SOURCE:

https://www.newsday.com/long-island/long-island-drinking-water-quality-1.31846574

Report: Long Island's drinking water has most contaminants in state

The drinking water on Long Island has “by far” the most emerging contaminants of any region in the state, according to a review of detections of the substances by the New York Public Interest Research Group.

The review, “What’s in My Water,” was done by the Albany-based group using data collected between 2013 and 2016, and it concluded that “one or more emerging contaminants” could affect the supplies of about 16 million New Yorkers. The review was released May 28.

The report cautioned: “It is unclear if certain detections are health concerns” but noted that some emerging contaminants were detected above federal health advisory levels.

An emerging contaminant is one that either wasn't known about in the past, wasn't detectable with available science or wasn't present in the supply, said Christopher Gobler, marine sciences professor at Stony Brook University.

Those contaminants include industrial chemicals from spills, wastewater and components in personal-care products like shampoo and detergent.

The Island’s state of drinking water contrasts with the supply serving New York City, which gets its water from upstate and has acquired land surrounding the reservoirs, protecting the supply. The drinking water on the Island comes locally from below ground.

Among the recommendations in the group’s report: implement testing of the emerging contaminants for every water system maintained by the public, strengthen standards for potentially unsafe chemicals, mandate testing of private household wells and bar the use of certain chemicals until proved safe.

Long Island has some of the highest detections in the nation of chemicals like 1,4 dioxane, a solvent used to keep machinery greased that is also a byproduct of certain personal-care products. The chemical 1,4 dioxane is a likely carcinogen.

Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, speaking Friday at his office in Manhattan, told Newsday in a response to a question about the report that water quality is “a very big problem, all across the state” and pointed to the state’s $3 billion program for testing, filtration and new pipes.

“I’m worried about the water quality all across the state. We’ve seen it in upstate New York. We see it on the Island. The Island tends to be worse,” he said.

His counsel, Alphonso David, said that $200 million of the money is available for municipalities.

Gobler, chairman of coastal ecology and conservation and professor at the School of Marine and Atmospheric Sciences at Stony Brook, said that the quality of drinking water on Long Island varies.

Some jurisdictions — such as the Suffolk County Water Authority — are good stewards of drinking water, Gobler said. He stressed that the supply to the estimated 100,000 Long Islanders who live in homes with private wells unreached by public pipes should be tested regularly for contaminants.

"It's a misnomer to lump all of Long Island's drinking water into a single category," he said. "If you were to do an honest comparison of the data for the water that Long Islanders drink, you'll find plenty of supplies that compare favorably with New York City."

Dennis Kelleher, a spokesman for the Long Island Water Conference, which represents the area’s drinking water providers, said in a statement following the report: “Long Island’s drinking water providers work tirelessly to ensure tap water meets or exceeds all state and federal standards. We are working closely with regulators on all new standards to ensure the health and safety of our residents.”

Adrienne Esposito, the executive director of Citizens Campaign for the Environment, said she wasn't surprised by the report.

"Tell me something I don't know. I don't need a report to tell me that Long Island has drinking-water challenges that surpass the other parts of the state," she said. "I don't think it's surprising to anybody who actually lives here."

She said the contaminants come from the legacy waste of Long Island's industrial past, but also "the greater challenge today is sustaining a water supply that 3 million people live on top of. We discharge our sewage into our drinking water. We have all our surface activities," including pesticides, fertilizers and household chemicals.

Said Esposito: "The point is that everything we do on Long Island impacts the quality of the water underneath our feet."

On Long Island, 19 "distinct emerging contaminants" were detected. Most frequent: Strontium, followed by chromium-6, chlorate, chromium, and 1,4-dioxane.

Nassau County had the most number of systems with detections, with 1,4-dioxane, PFOA and PFOS being detected in both counties. Two other PFAS chemicals were detected in Suffolk County.

Bill Looks to Ban Single-Use Plastic Bags Statewide

SOURCE:

http://www.branfordseven.com/news/local/bill-looks-to-ban-single-use-plastic-bags-statewide/article_46cddc7e-8250-11e9-989f-1b12b816f256.html

Bill Looks to Ban Single-Use Plastic Bags Statewide

HARTFORD, CT – Today, Environment Committee co-chairs state Senator Christine Cohen (D-Guilford) and state Representative Mike Demicco (D-Farmington) were joined by fellow lawmakers, the Connecticut League of Conservation Voters and the Citizens Campaign for the Environment at a press conference to unveil the details of legislation to ban single-use plastic bags.

“As municipalities across the state enact bans on single-use plastic bags it sends a clear message that action must be taken,” said Sen. Cohen. “The time is now to pass legislation that will ban these bags that are contributing to pollution in our oceans and forests, as well as on our highways, beaches and in our parks. This bill will get us one step closer to ensuring that our environment and wildlife are not harmed by plastic bags and provides Connecticut’s businesses with enough time to find environmentally conscious alternatives.”

Senate Bill 1003, “An Act Concerning the Use of Single-Use Plastic and Paper Bags,” will prohibit stores from providing and/or selling plastic single-use carryout bags at the point of sale. It will also require any paper single-use carryout bag to be 100 percent recyclable and have at least 40 percent post-consumer recycled content. Paper bags will also be required to conspicuously display, “please reuse and recycle this bag,” on the bag.

SB 1003 will go into effect upon passage, setting these changes in motion for a state ban by July 1, 2021. The bill passed the Environment Committee by a bipartisan 25-4 vote on March 25. This legislation awaits action by the state Senate and House of Representatives. The Senate anticipates hearing the proposal this week. Rep. Demicco said this legislation will curb the single-use plastic habit that is harming the environment.

“There is a dire need to address the single-use plastics our society uses on a daily basis and acknowledge that it directly impacts our environment, waterways and wildlife,” said Rep. Demicco.

Single-use plastic bags contribute to pollution at parks, beaches, roads, waterways and can easily be swept into storm drains and cause severe blockages. According to the Citizens Campaign for the Environment, these single-use bags do not fully break down and are oftentimes mistaken as food by aquatic wildlife. State Senator Will Haskell (D-Westport) spoke at the press conference and said a plastic bag ban will greatly benefit the state.

“Ten years ago, my hometown became the first municipality in Connecticut to ban plastic bags,” said Sen. Haskell. “It’s about time we bring the ban to the state level. Plastic bags pose a tangible threat to our environment, and Hartford needs to stand up for communities that rely on the Long Island Sound. I’m grateful for the hard work of my colleagues on the Environment Committee as well as the many activists in my community who have worked on this issue for years. Together, I’m hopeful we can cross the finish line and adopt more sustainable habits.”

Single-use paper bags pose a risk to the environment as well, as 14 million trees are cut down annually and these single-use paper bags take up more space in the municipal solid waste stream than plastic bags, according to the Citizens Campaign for the Environment. Louis Burch, the Connecticut Program Director of the Citizens Campaign for the Environment, said the time is now to pass legislation to rid our state of single-use checkout bags.

“It’s time to make single-use checkout bags a thing of the past in Connecticut,” said Burch. “The dominoes are falling all around us—more than 15 towns in CT have taken action to eliminate plastic bags, and a dozen more stand poised to do the same. Now it’s the state’s turn to kick the plastic bag habit. The people want the state to pass an effective bag law; one that eliminates plastic pollution and promotes reusable bag use. The people of Connecticut are ready to give up single-use bags for good. Now it’s time for state lawmakers to answer the call.”

Currently, New York, California and Hawaii have statewide single-use plastic bag bans. Across the country, cities and towns are implementing their own bans and across the state, Hamden, Mansfield, Middletown, New Canaan, New Britain, Norwalk, Stamford, Weston, Greenwich and Westport have passed single-use plastic bag bans.

About Christine Cohen: Sen. Cohen was first elected in 2018 to represent the 12th Senate District which consists of Branford, Durham, Guilford, Killingworth, Madison and North Branford. Christine is a small business owner; the proud owner of Cohen’s Bagel Company.

Long Island's water systems top the state in detected contaminants, study says

SOURCE:

http://www.fox5ny.com/news/long-island-water-detected-contaminants

Long Island's water systems top the state in detected contaminants, study says

CENTRAL ISLIP, N.Y. (FOX 5 NY) - New York State is known for having some of the cleanest drinking water in the nation but the same doesn't hold true for all of its suburban counterparts, especially Long Island, according to a study by the New York Public Interest Research Group.

"Long Island had more water systems that detected emerging contaminates when compared to the rest of the state," NYPIRG environmental policy director Elizabeth Moran said.

The big difference is where the water comes from.

New York City has a unique water protection program that limits development near its upstate reservoirs, keeping pollutants far away from its water sources.

On the other hand, Long Island's public water systems are rooted in the ground and are easily contaminated by chemicals like 1,4-dioxane, a solvent used in the production of other chemicals.

"It's listed by the U.S. EPA as a 'likely carcinogen,' which means it causes cancer, and unfortunately, it's found in 80% of our household products," said Adrienne Esposito, the executive director of Farmingdale-based Citizens Campaign for the Environment.

Low levels of exposure to 1,4-Dioxane can cause other health risks, too, like thyroid disordersand high cholesterol.

The Suffolk County Water Authority has invested in treatment systems to rid the groundwater of chemicals like 1,4-Dioxane but the cost doesn't come cheap. In fact, much of that cost gets tacked onto Long Islanders' water bills.

"‪We started detecting 1,4-Dioxane in the water supply… over a decade ago," Suffolk County Water Authority's Joseph Pokorny said. "And we started testing for it and we started to develop this type of system here as a small-scale pilot."

An advanced oxidation system, which costs roughly $1 million, is capable of removing up to 99% of 1,4-Dioxane from the water.

Report: Long Island has most contaminated water in NY

SOURCE:

http://longisland.news12.com/story/40569455/report-long-island-has-most-contaminated-water-in-ny

Report: Long Island has most contaminated water in NY

WOODBURY -

Long Island's water has the highest levels of certain dangerous chemicals in the entire state, according to a recent report from New York Public Interest Research Group.

"By reviewing all this data, we found that 176 water systems detected one or more emerging contaminants, which impacts 16 million New Yorkers," says Liz Moran, director of NYPIRG environmental policy.

Among the contaminants is 1,4-dioxane, a chemical found in many common household products. The compound is suspected of causing cancer and other health issues.

Adrienne Esposito, of Citizens Campaign for the Environment, says the report should make all Long Islanders want to know more about what's in their water. She says anything that seeps into the ground can seep into the water supply.

According to the report, Hicksville, Greenlawn, Hempstead and municipalities serviced by the Suffolk Water Authority are just some of the places with the highest levels of contaminants.

Suffolk Water Authority's CEO sent a statement saying: "Though emerging contaminants in groundwater caused by industrial pollution and others factors are certainly a significant concern, the Suffolk County Water Authority has addressed the issue through years of proactive and voluntary testing.”

And Huntington Town Supervisor Chad Lupinacci said: "The report is alarming, not only for Greenlawn residents but for all residents of the Town of Huntington...We filed a civil suit against the entities responsible for 1,4-dioxane contamination on May 20th to hold them accountable for the costs of removing 1,4-dioxane from our local water supplies.”

NYPIRG says it hopes that alerting people to what's in their water will lead New York lawmakers to make changes to get rid of the contaminants and keep it that way.

The report, called "What's in My Water," also says that while having contaminants in our water doesn't mean the public health is at risk, lawmakers should be pushing for more testing and tougher standards for water quality testing.

Proposed bag ban gives retailers, grocers another year

SOURCE:

https://www.theday.com/local-news/20190530/proposed-bag-ban-gives-retailers-grocers-another-year

Proposed bag ban gives retailers, grocers another year

Hartford — The latest proposal to eliminate single-use plastic bags from checkout lines across the state — and, in turn, the waste stream and Connecticut waterways — gives retailers an additional year to put the ban in place, lawmakers announced this week.

Senate Bill 1003, as introduced earlier this year, would have prohibited stores from offering the nonbiodegradable bags starting next January. But an amended proposal announced Wednesday by Environment Committee Co-Chairs state Sen. Christine Cohen, D-Guilford, and Rep. Mike Demicco, D-Farmington, calls for a statewide ban beginning July 1, 2021, with Cohen saying the bill ensures "that our environment and wildlife are not harmed by plastic bags and provides Connecticut's businesses with enough time to find environmentally conscious alternatives."

Environmentalists and the Connecticut Food Association, whose members operate about 300 retail food stores and 135 pharmacies, expressed support for the measure, which could be up for a vote in the state Senate within days.

"Single-use plastic bags are a huge source of pollution in our cities, our suburbs, and our open spaces. They're a threat to our oceans, our wildlife, and our quality of life," Amanda Schoen, deputy director of the Connecticut League of Conservation Voters, said Thursday. "Towns and cities across Connecticut have passed their own bans, but we cannot afford to take a piecemeal approach. A statewide ban will provide clarity for businesses while also reducing waste. It is a win-win for everyone."

More than two dozen Connecticut communities, including Waterford, Stonington and Groton, have considered bans, and several local restaurants have given up plastic straws in favor of paper or metal ones. Mystic Seaport Museum announced an environmental stewardship campaign to use plant-based straws, paper shopping bags and to-go containers, and strands of pasta instead of plastic stirrers. New York, California and Hawaii already have enacted statewide bans, and Rhode Island is considering one.

"In my eyes, a state ban is preferable to a town ban, as it will both remove more plastic bags from our local ecosystems and remove concerns about negative economic impacts on local businesses," Waterford Representative Town Meeting member Joshua Steele Kelly said Thursday. Kelly added that he remains "cautiously optimistic" the proposal will become law and described Waterford's inaction on the subject for more than a year as inexcusable.

The proposed statewide bill would force stores to provide only single-use carryout bags made of 100 percent recyclable paper containing at least 40 percent previously recycled material. The paper bags must "conspicuously display ... 'Please Reuse and Recycle This bag," and stores could be slapped with $250 fines for any violations after an initial warning from a town, health district or officials with the Departments of Consumer Protection or Energy and Environmental Protection.

The bill allows municipalities to enact their own ordinances regarding the bags, so long as the ordinances are "as restrictive" or tougher than the state law. Trash bags, bags without handles designed for newspapers and clothing, and bags provided by pharmacies to customers buying prescription medications are among those excluded from the ban.

Wayne Pesce, president of the Connecticut Food Association, noted the law could pair with Gov. Ned Lamont's proposal for a 10-cent fee on the bags, potentially producing about "$30 million in revenue to the budget before an eventual phase-out of all single-use plastic bags is complete."

Based on CFA's research, more than 600 million plastic bags are distributed in Connecticut annually, only 5 percent of which are disposed of properly, with "far too many (ending) up in the wrong places: coastal waterways, recycling facilities and incinerators," Pesce said Thursday.

Last year, volunteers snatched up more than 1,000 plastic grocery bags along the shoreline during the International Coastal Cleanup, according to Connecticut Fund for the Environment/Save the Sound Soundkeeper Bill Lucey.

Lucey recently said that the bags and large pieces of plastic "can choke wildlife and fill the stomachs of whales, birds and turtles, causing starvation. They eventually are broken into tiny pieces by sunlight and water action, becoming a form of microplastic that is emerging as an enormous threat to our health and wildlife.”

Pesce said CFA's "goal all along was to have a policy meant to change consumer behavior with the hope that the vast majority of consumers will utilize reusable bags. This law will accomplish that. Over the next two years, it will eliminate the production, distribution and usage of over 80 percent of all single-use bags distributed in Connecticut, reducing in its wake more than 450 million plastic bags."

Pesce added that CFA's member organizations recognize that increased paper production — which emits greenhouse gasses and leads to deforestation — isn't a real solution.

"The most sustainable option for consumers is the use of reusable bags that should be washed regularly with soap and water or wiped clean with a disinfectant wipe," he said. "Connecticut's grocers will continue working to get as many reusable bags into customers' hands during the transition through promotions, giveaways and rewards."

In a statement, the Citizens Campaign for the Environment noted that single-use paper bags pose an environmental risk, as well, with 14 million trees cut down annually and paper bags taking up even more space than plastic bags in the municipal solid waste stream.

Jennifer Brogan, director of external communications & community relations for Stop & Shop, on Thursday also encouraged customers to use reusable bags. Brogan said the grocer shares "customers' concerns regarding the environmental consequences of plastic waste and are actively working on ways to reduce our impact as a brand."

Stop & Shop and parent company Ahold Delhaize have removed 1 billion plastic bags from the waste stream in recent years and are part of the New Plastics Economy Global Commitment, so by 2025, "all our plastic packaging will be fully reusable, recyclable or compostable" and the store will eliminate all "unnecessary single-use plastics" in favor of reusable alternatives, Brogan said.

Suffolk to test water near Brookhaven lab for firefighting foam contaminant

SOURCE:

https://www.newsday.com/long-island/environment/water-testing-brookhaven-national-lab-1.30478990

Suffolk to test water near Brookhaven lab for firefighting foam contaminant

The research facility has agreed to pay for the tests, which will measure six per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances, known as PFAS. Firefighting foams used at the lab from the 1960s until 2008 include perfluorooctane sulfonic acid, known as PFOS.

Suffolk County will test drinking water at about 97 homes south of Brookhaven National Laboratory for contamination associated with firefighting foam, almost six months after a citizens advisory board expressed concern that the emerging contaminant had spread outside the lab.

Suffolk will contact property owners in the East Yaphank neighborhood beginning this week and collect water samples "as early as next week," according to a letter sent Monday by Brookhaven National Laboratory director Doon Gibbs to the Community Advisory Council.

“This is good news," said Adrienne Esposito, executive director of Farmingdale-based Citizens Campaign for the Environment and a member of the community advisory council. She added: "It’s been six months that the public's been at risk, which is very concerning.”

The federal research facility also has agreed to pay for the tests, which will measure six per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances, known as PFAS. Firefighting foams used at the lab from the 1960s until 2008 include perfluorooctane sulfonic acid, known as PFOS, which the state is expected to regulate this year.

Groundwater tests at Brookhaven National Laboratory have shown high levels of the contaminant PFOS on the base and around the perimeter. Suffolk County health officials had recommended the testing of the private wells outside the lab, but the lab said in December it was consulting with state and federal regulators on whether the testing was necessary.

"The issues are complex, and we’re pleased to be moving forward quickly together with the county," Will Safer, a spokesman for the laboratory, said in an email.

Suffolk County Department of Health spokeswoman Grace Kelly-McGovern said in an email that the length of time was "due to the requirement for a formal legal agreement that required input from both legal departments."

The group of chemicals increasingly have become a concern among regulators and environmentalists. Possible health effects from high exposure include liver damage, decreased fertility, and developmental delays in fetuses and children, as well as links to cancer, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

The tests, which will be performed at a private lab contracted by BNL, will detect down to two parts per trillion. A state panel of experts recommended a drinking water standard of 10 parts per trillion for PFOS and a related chemical, PFOA, commonly found in products meant to repel water, grease and oil.

The letter from Gibbs said the results would be shared with the county, though it was unclear how long it would take to get the test results.

Testing wells installed near the lab's current firehouse found levels of PFOA and PFOS up to 12,400 parts per trillion, and at 5,370 parts per trillion at the lab's former firehouse, the lab has said. Those two sites were believed to be the "primary locations" where firefighting foam was used during training.

Historical photos included in the lab's presentation to the advisory group last year show firefighting foam spilling onto the ground during training exercises in 1966 and a demonstration of a fire suppression system in 1970.

The contamination has been found at three of the five drinking water supply wells at BNL; two at levels of up to 27 parts per trillion, and one at up to 70.4 parts per trillion. Other samples were below 70 parts per trillion, which is the current EPA health advisory level for PFOS.

Private wells are not regularly tested or treated, and are generally shallower than those drilled by public water providers, meaning health officials fear they're more susceptible to pollution.

Legis. Al Krupski (D-Cutchogue), whose district includes the lab, said he's happy the testing will take place, but said if PFOS contamination is found at the homes, the lab shouldn't immediately be blamed.

"You can’t automatically assume it came from the lab," he said.

BNL is a research institution funded primarily by the U.S. Department of Energy, with almost 3,000 employees and 4,000 visiting researchers studying physics, chemistry, biology, medicine, and applied science.

Environmentalists Hail 'Landmark' Green Initiatives In NYS Budget

SOURCE:

https://www.wshu.org/post/environmentalists-hail-landmark-green-initiatives-nys-budget

By Darwin Yanes

The New York State budget will provide funds to create a food scrap recycling program, help Long Island’s water infrastructure and ban plastic bags.

Environmentalist groups hail this as “landmark” legislation.

Adrienne Esposito, executive director of Citizens Campaign for the Environment, says the food scrap program will set a precedent for other states.

“We think that this is the beginning of a new technology and a new way to deal with food scraps throughout the state of New York and our nation. Food waste should not be looked as a waste item, but rather as a resource.”

She says food scraps will be recycled for renewable energy.

The budget also gives $500 million to pay for sewer upgrades and water filtration systems throughout the state.

Long Island’s Problem With Recycling Glass May Have Fix In Oyster Bay

SOURCE:

https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2019/04/04/long-islands-problem-with-recycling-glass-may-have-fix-in-oyster-bay/

April 4, 2019 at 5:08 pm

SYOSSET, N.Y. (CBSNewYork) – A worldwide recycling crisis has forced many local governments to stop collecting or recycling glass.

But the Town Of Oyster Bay will become the first in Nassau County to set up glass recycling stations for residents, CBSN New York’s Carolyn Gusoff reports.

They call it “wishful recycling.” Folks hope their glass bottles are getting recycled. Chances are, these days, they’re not.

Much of our glass ends up in landfills mixed in with non-recyclables. The Town of Oyster Bay, like municipalities around the nation, had to give up glass recycling because oversea markets dried up.

“China wouldn’t take that, because once the glass was involved with paper it’s really… they can’t make another product out of it. And it was also breaking down their equipment,” said Daniel Pearl, the deputy commissioner of public works of Oyster Bay.

Heavy glass is too expensive to haul out of state for limited recycling options.

Now, there’s a possible local use. Oyster Bay is the first in Nassau County to set up five glass collection igloo pods and asking the public to drop off their cleaned-out glass.

The pilot program requires residents to do their part.

“Residents have to take tops off,” noted Commissioner of Public Works Richard Lenz. “They have to remove all the labels and make sure they are washed out.”

“We hear the public’s cry that these products need to be recycled,” said Town Supervisor Joseph Saladino. “We’re coming up with alternatives, we’re coming up with solutions.”

A company in Jamaica, Queens, plans to take Oyster Bay’s glass and grind it down into the consistency of sand and turn it into landscaping gravel.

“We are looking for ways to keep the glass here on Long Island,” Saladino said. “We are looking for a regional approach as a bigger solution.”

Glass is no longer accepted for recycling by many municipalities since there is no commercial market for it.

Last fall, communities across Long Island that had adopted single-stream recycling ran into trouble. While single-stream sorting can mechanically separates different materials that consumers throw out all at once, they found the end product in single stream was not pure enough to be sold.

China, the world’s leading buyer, no longer accepts such mixed recyclables. As a result, neither do many Long Island municipalities.

Environmentalists say solving the crisis means more ways to recycle closer to home.

“We can’t just sit around and blame China. We have to have American markets to utilize recycled glass,” said Adrienne Esposito of the Citizens Campaign for the Environment.

While Oyster Bay currently pays to haul away its household trash, paper and plastics, it’s glass will now be recycled for free.

After a 90 day pilot program, both the town and the recycling company will evaluate whether or not to continue.

Lynbrook, East Rockaway residents react positively to New York's plastic bag ban

SOURCE:

http://liherald.com/stories/lynbrook-east-rockaway-residents-react-positively-to-new-yorks-plastic-bag-ban,113344

Under an agreement reached as part of the state budget passed by lawmakers over the weekend, plastic bags will be banned in all New York retail stores starting next March. 

“You drive through urban areas in this state and you see plastic bags hanging from trees like some bizarre Christmas ornaments,” Gov. Andrew Cuomo told reporters on March 31. “You see [them] in waterways all across this state, plastic bags.”

The ban is supported locally by many Lynbrook and East Rockaway residents. Reacting to a Herald post on Facebook about the legislation, many wrote that they were happy to see it pass.

“It’s about time we start to care about the future,” Vicki Perlman wrote. 

Julie Sheehan Bergin wrote that she was also pleased to see the legislation approved, and noted that she keeps reusable bags in her car. “You get used to it, and it’s going to help the environment,” she said. “It’s a shame to see the plastic bags all along highways and roads, stuck in trees. Hope the new law helps.”

Kenny Olson said he approved of the measure because “we don’t need plastic bags killing our oceans.” 

With the agreement, New York becomes the second state to ban plastic bags — California was the first. State Sen. Todd Kaminsky, a Democrat from Long Beach who heads the Senate Environmental Conservation Committee, sponsored the bill to ban the bags. “We will score a big win for our environment and our future,” he said in a social media post shortly before the budget was approved.

Plastic bags are used for 12 minutes on average before they become garbage, according to Adrienne Esposito, executive director of the Farmingdale-based Citizens Campaign for the Environment. At that point, she said, they can blow into waterways, where marine life might suffocate on them or ingest them. Plastic in general, Esposito said, breaks down into micro-particles, which have been found in a variety of oceangoing wildlife. 

“It’ll take a generation to fix, but we must start now,” Esposito said, acknowledging that using reusable bags can be a challenging transition for residents. “Sometimes it’s inconvenient to protect the Earth, but it’s worth it.”

Under the plan, counties can opt to levy a 5-cent fee on paper bags, with 3 cents going to the state’s Environmental Protection Fund, used to expand New York’s Forest Preserve and restore historic sites. Two cents would go to counties to purchase and hand out reusable shopping bags. A spokeswoman for Nassau County Executive Laura Curran did not respond to a call requesting comment on whether the county would seek a 5-cent fee on paper sacks. 

Some municipalities had already sought to decrease the use of plastic bags in stores — Long Beach and the Village of Sea Cliff had implemented a 5-cent surcharge on plastic bags. In Long Beach, the legislation was passed in the hope of reducing plastic-bag use by 75 percent, according to city officials. Suffolk County also has a fee on plastic and paper bags. 

Nassau County Legislator Debra Mulé, a Democrat from Freeport, had sought the same fee countywide, but the Republican majority blocked a vote on legislation she propsed. After the announcement that bags would be banned statewide, Mulé said she would drop her bill. 

“I’m happy there’s a ban on plastic bags — it’s great,” she said. Mulé added, though, that she was disappointed that the fee on paper bags would not be mandatory, a point that many environmentalists agreed with. 

Lynbrook resident Susan Brockmann was a vocal supporter of Mulé’s proposed legislation. On May 7, 2018, Brockmann stood outside the county’s Legislative Building in Mineola wearing 500 plastic bags. She did so to demonstrate how the average person uses 500 plastic bags per year, contributing to an annual total in New York state of about 23 billion. The bags, Brockmann said at the time, get stuck in trees or end up in the ocean, where marine creatures can ingest them and die from the chemicals used to make them. 

“It’s such a good visual,” Brockmann said of her get-up. She could not be reached for comment after the state ban was approved. 

Students in the Lynbrook School District were also proponents of change. They presented the village’s board of trustees with letters urging officials to tax plastic bags in April 2017.

The state budget also made the 2 percent property tax cap permanent, a measure that the State Senate’s Long Island delegation advocated leading up to the spending plan’s passage. The cap limits the yearly growth of taxes levied by local governments and school districts to 2 percent or the rate of inflation, whichever is smaller, in an effort to keep communities affordable for homeowners. The cap was first passed in 2011, and was set to expire in 2020. 

The budget also included congestion pricing, which will charge drivers $11.50 to enter Midtown Manhattan’s central business district, south of 60th Street. According to Newsday, the Long Island Rail Road could receive up to $4 billion over five years from money raised by congestion pricing and earmarked for capital improvements. 

Long Island’s state senators said they would not have supported congestion pricing if part of the revenue had not been allocated for the LIRR. “If we’re going to ask Long Island drivers to pay more,” Kaminsky said, “it better come with an incredible influx of money for the Long Island Rail Road.” It is not known when congestion pricing will take effect. 

Recreational marijuana was not included in the budget, as Cuomo had hoped.

Great Lakes funding restored

SOURCE:

https://www.eveningtribune.com/news/20190404/stronggreat-lakes-funding-restoredstrong

WASHINGTON — On Wednesday, Rep. Tom Reed (R-Corning) praised President Trump for his support of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative after his budget originally called for cuts to the program.

“After continued advocacy over the last several years we are pleased to see the President recognizes the benefits of this great program – not only for the environment, but for jobs in our community,” Reed said. “We will continue to fight to ensure programs important to our region remain protected.”

“We are so fortunate to have the single largest source of freshwater in the world right here at our doorstep,” Chautauqua County Executive George Borrello said. Protecting and enhancing that precious resource is vital to our future here in Chautauqua county and throughout the region. GLRI funding is a critical component in that effort and I appreciate Tom’s unwavering support for this crucial funding.”

“The Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) funding supports programs and projects that help protect the Finger Lakes and Great Lakes from the harm posed by invasive species,” Finger Lakes- Partnership for Regional Invasive Species Management Coordinator Hilary R. Mosher said. “GLRI funding has funded prevention programs such as the Finger Lakes Institute at Hobart and William Smith Colleges’ watercraft stewards on boat launches as well as education and control programs such as our giant hogweed, Hydrilla, Starry Stonewort and water chestnut programs. The GLRI funding is vital to protect the health and prosperity of the region.”

“By continuing to invest in the successful Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI), millions of New Yorkers will continue to benefit from clean drinking water, healthy fisheries, new jobs, and increased economic development,” said Brian Smith, Associate Executive Director for Citizens Campaign for the Environment (CCE). “Every dollar invested in the GLRI is providing over three dollars in economic returns—that’s a win for environment and economy. CCE commends Congressman Reed for his work to protect and restore the Great Lakes for current and future generations.”

Reed fought to guarantee a 900 percent increase from the President’s proposed budget for the Great Lakes Restoration initiative last year.

Sand Land Settlement Irks Many

SOURCE:

https://www.easthamptonstar.com/Government/2019404/Sand-Land-Settlement-Irks-Many

Southampton urged to challenge D.E.C. mine ruling

Calling the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation’s reversal on the shutdown of the Sand Land industrial mine in Noyac “shocking” and “ridiculous,” local residents and environmentalists appeared at Southampton Town’s March 26 board meeting to urge the town to challenge the controversial settlement the D.E.C. announced with the mine on March 15.

Despite the test results by the Suffolk County Department of Health and an independent expert that showed dangerous contaminants at the 50-acre site on Middle Line Road are leeching into the soil, the D.E.C. extended the mine’s permit another eight years last month and granted permission to dig another 40 feet deeper at the site. 

The settlement is a sharp about-face from the D.E.C.’s ruling last September that ordered Sand Land to stop its mining operations when its permit expired in November and remediate the site by 2020. Now that might not happen until at least 2028.

The settlement was struck after Sand Land’s owner, John A. Tintle, exercised his right to appeal the original ruling.

But it still came as a surprise to local elected officials such as Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele Jr., and Southampton Town Supervisor Jay Schneiderman, who had no idea such talks were even underway. The Group for the East End and Citizens Campaign for the Environment were among the environmental organizations that also blasted the new agreement, calling it a “mind-boggling backroom deal.” 

They are not the only ones who remain upset.

“I am asking you to sue the pants off the D.E.C.,” Elena Loreto, president of the Noyac Civic Council, told the Southampton Town Board at last week’s meeting, after praising the town’s stiff opposition to the mine in the past.

“Do we wait till we have a Love Canal up there before we start acting?” asked John Arendt, another of the Noyac Civic Council’s 500-plus members. “We know there’s a problem.”

Sand Land “scares the hell out of me,” Larry Penny of Noyac told the board, noting that the D.E.C. has also extended the permit for Wainscott Sand and Gravel, another mining operation run by Mr. Tintle. “The D.E.C. has been just god-awful,” said Mr. Penny, a former East Hampton Town director of natural resources (and a Star columnist).

Sand Land is located over a special groundwater protection area that is important to the South Fork’s long-term drinking water supply, not just that of nearby residents. The mine and its numerous opponents have been locked in various iterations of this environmental impact fight for nearly two decades.

Southampton Town sued Sand Land a few years ago for reneging on an agreement to allow the town access to drill and monitor wells on the site. Using those data, the Suffolk Health Department issued a report in July of 2018 stating for the first time that Sand Land’s mining and other operations such as processing vegetative waste, construction debris, compost, and mulch resulted in the release of iron, manganese, ammonia, gross alpha (radioactivity) and numerous other contaminants into the aquifer and deep-water recharge area beneath the site. 

Iron was found in the deepest parts of the water table at concentrations over 200 times the drinking water standard and manganese was found at concentrations at almost 100 times the drinking water standard, the county report stated.

Sand Land’s attorney, Brian Matthews of Matthews, Kirst & Cooley in East Hampton, said in an interview Monday that part of Sand Land’s prevailing argument to the D.E.C. challenged the county’s findings. Mr. Matthews said Sand Land asserted that sand mining alone has never been conclusively shown to cause groundwater pollution, and that Sand Land’s own hired experts had found the vegetative/organic waste the mine was taking in was not polluting the groundwater.

“Still,” Mr. Matthews added, “our client voluntarily agreed to abandon that vegetative [and] organic waste use and focus on the mining operation to mitigate those concerns. We think that went a long way with the D.E.C. That, and there will be monitoring.”

Hardly anyone involved seems convinced the D.E.C.’s latest move is the end of this fight.

Mr. Thiele, speaking in a phone interview Monday, challenged Mr. Matthews’s assertions about sand mining, saying such soil disturbances can reduce the filtering buffer that protects the water table from the contaminants above. “That site is already contaminated, and you can’t wave a wand and make it pristine again,” Mr. Thiele said.

The assemblyman added the path ahead for him and Sand Land’s many other opponents likely will be three-pronged: demanding a formal public hearing on the D.E.C. settlement before the permit is granted, legal action, and legislative action. 

Mr. Thiele previously co-sponsored a bill that allows towns to monitor water quality at mines, and he said he is now researching how to craft new legislation to prevent the issuance of permits for mines over contaminated sites. “There has to be consequences if you find these mines have been contaminated,” he said.

Ms. Loreto, near the end of her remarks last week to the Southampton Town Board, polled the members one by one asking them to declare on the record whether they supported three actions the Noyac Citizens Council was asking for: legal action against the D.E.C., a resolution condemning the D.E.C. settlement, and that the town fight to insert more sophisticated monitoring wells at the mine where it wants them, and not where Sand Land wants them.

All four board members — Tommy John Schiavoni, John Bouvier, Christine Scalera, and Julie Lofsted — said they supported the requests, as did Town Supervisor Jay Schneiderman.

Mr. Schneiderman said the town will indeed seek greater control of the monitoring process and added, “We are exploring various legal options, and other options” to counteract the settlement.

When Bob DeLuca, president of the Group for the East End, also addressed the board, he said the D.E.C. settlement got the size of the mine wrong — again to the benefit of Sand Land. 

“They’ve added acreage,” Mr. DeLuca said, noting the mined portion of the 50-acre site is now listed at 34 acres, not 31. “This is madness.” 

Ms. Loreto agreed.

“There’s too much shady stuff going on,” she said by phone this week. “Sand Land is allowed to continue, yet the D.E.C. will bust the stones of a fisherman for taking a striped bass that’s a quarter of an inch too short. Many of us have written Governor Cuomo. He’s ignoring us. He needs to get involved.”

NY State Expected To Ban Plastic Bags, But Lack Of Paper Bag Fee Raises Concerns

SOURCE:

http://gothamist.com/2019/03/29/ny_state_plastic_bag_ban.php

The state legislature is poised include a ban on plastic bags in the new budget, which will make New York the second state in the union to implement an outright ban on single-use plastic bags. The ban is expected to go into effect in March 2020.

Governor Andrew Cuomo proposed the plastic bag ban in January, saying at the time, "While the federal government is taking our environmental progress backwards and selling out our communities to polluters and oil companies, in New York we are moving forward with the nation's strongest environmental policies and doing everything in our power to protect our natural resources for future generations. These bold actions to ban plastic bags and promote recycling will reduce litter in our communities, protect our water and create a cleaner and greener New York for all." 

In 2017, Cuomo and the State Senate intervened to stop a plastic bag fee in NYC, which had been approved by the City Council.

Some critics don't think the current plastic bag ban goes far enough, because it doesn't charge a fee on paper bags—cities and counties will just have the option to charge 5 cents for paper bags. NYPIRG environmental policy director Liz Moran told the Times Union, “New York decided to trade one environmental issue for another by opting to ban plastic bags without including a fee on paper bags." 

She added, "The State should have learned from other areas that also only banned plastic bags without a paper bag fee—they just don’t work. California has documented success with a ban coupled with a fee, and New York missed the mark. Now, water resources and climate in New York will pay the price."

The NY Times reports there are "a number of carveouts, including food takeout bags used by restaurants, bags used to wrap deli or meat counter products and bags for bulk items. Newspaper bags would also be exempted, as would garment bags and bags sold in bulk, such as trash or recycling bags."

In January, Citizens Campaign for the Environment, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and Riverkeeper were glad Cuomo was taking this step—but with a caveat, "This is the beginning of the end for the scourge of plastic bag pollution in New York. However, experience shows that a fee on paper bags must accompany the proposed ban on plastic bags, to avoid a serious increase in paper waste and pollution."

Eric Goldstein, NYC Environment Director for the NRDC, told us last year, "It's a flawed solution. Experience elsewhere has shown that a simple ban on plastic bags leads to much greater use of paper bags—or thicker plastic bags—and doesn’t accomplish the primary objective of triggering a shift to reusables."

After California passed its plastic bag ban-and-paper bag fee, an LA Times editorial confirmed, "the world didn't end." Chicago has charged a fee for using either plastic or paper bags, and usage of both apparently was reduced by 42%. 

But last week, Cuomo signaled his intention to move forward with the no-fee bag ban no matter what, saying, “I don’t want to lose the plastic bag ban for disagreement over the paper fee." 

The state budget is due April 1st. 

Our View: Bag ban a first step forward

SOURCE:

https://www.norwichbulletin.com/news/20190330/our-view-bag-ban-first-step-forward

This week, a Cuvier beaked whale washed ashore in the Philippines with more than 40 kilos of plastic found in its stomach – the United Nations says 8 million tons of plastic ends up in the oceans each year. 

It’s proof the harm of plastics isn’t going away.

The state finally acted on a single-use plastic bag ban this week – the Environment Committee voted in favor of a bill that would ban the sale of single-use plastic bags starting in 2020, but stores would still be allowed to offer customers recyclable paper bags.

Stores that do not comply, according to the bill’s language, will be issued a warning on the first violation; after that a store would be fined $250 for a second and any subsequent violations.

More than 20 communities in Connecticut have passed plastic bag bans, joining neighboring states like Massachusetts, where 81 cities and towns have regulated plastic bags, either imposing a five or 10 cent fee per bag or banning them outright.

Recently, supermarket chain Big Y, which has 30 stores in Connecticut, announced it will phase-out single-use plastic bags in its stores by next year. National chains Costco and Aldi, which both have stores in Connecticut, already do not provide free single-use plastic bags.

A statewide ban on single-use plastic bags has been a top priority for environmental groups, and reaction to the panel’s plastic bag bill was mixed, drawing partial applause from environmental groups only because, like Amanda Schoen, deputy director of the Connecticut League of Conservation Voters, said of the committee’s action, “it’s a really big step forward.”

The Citizens Campaign for the Environment said a plastic bag is used for an average of only 12 minutes but can remain in oceans, landfills, parks and on beaches for thousands of years.

Bill Lucey, the Long Island Soundkeeper, told the Connecticut Post last August that “it’s become common in the ecosystem,” referring to plastic bags and other products. “It’s coming into the Sound from the shoreline and from rivers,” Lucey said. “This stuff can last for ... years.”

Along with banning plastic bags, the state can and should do more, including begin thinking about a ban on plastic straws.

If it did, it would follow in the footsteps of the Beardsley Zoo in Bridgeport that recently banned plastic straws and is now using only biodegradable food containers.

Lucey has seen the volume of plastic in Long Island Sound first-hand. He said boats towing a special net routinely pull up shellfish with plastic microfibers inside them.

Activists say plastic, whether in the form of a bag, bottle, straw or microfiber that slips through sewage treatment plants, causes severe damage to animals such as clams, fish, birds, turtles and seals.

Banning plastic bags is a great start, but we have a long way to go to cut down on plastic pollution.

Say so long to single-use bags: Budget bringing bag ban to NY

http://longisland.news12.com/story/40232450/say-so-long-to-singleuse-bags-budget-bringing-bag-ban-to-ny

WOODBURY -

New York will soon become the third state in the nation to ban single-use plastic bags.

The measure was included in the $175.5 billion budget passed by lawmakers in Albany.

Lawmakers say the ban aims to get consumers to use reusable bags to bring home their groceries. The move is being heralded by environmentalists as a win for wildlife and nature.

Suffolk County has charged a 5 cent fee for paper or plastic bags for just over a year. But under the new law, plastic bags will not be available anywhere. For Nassau County consumers and stores owners, the bag change will bring a whole new shopping experience.

Not everyone is thrilled with the new state law, including many in the food and convenience store industry. They say the law is unfair because an exception is being carved out for restaurants and delis, but not grocery stores and big box retailers.

Jay Peltz, with the Food Industry Alliance of NY, says the law will likely lead to more paper bag use, which he says will cost stores more money.

"Under the state law, retailers will not be reimbursed at all," Peltz says.

But environmentalists say the ultimate goal is to encourage reusable bags.

"We want people to bring their own bag -- not use plastic, not use paper -- and that is what really helps the environment," says Adrienne Esposito, with Citizens Campaign for the Environment.

The single-use bag ban will take effect in New York on March 1, 2020.

California and Hawaii have statewide bans on the bags.