affidavit of thomas cusack

7/25/2019 Affidavit of Thomas Cusack

1/147

SUPREME COURT OF

THE

STATE OF NEWYORK

COUNTY OF

ORANGE

NINTH JUDICIAL

DISTRICT

ENVIRONMENTAL

CLAIMS

PART

VILLAGE

OF

SOUTH

BLOOMING

GROVE

et al.,

Index No. 7410/2015etitioners,

Proceeding

No.

1

For a Judgment

Pursuant

to

Article

78 of

the

Civil

Practice

Lawand

Rules

AFFIDAVIT OF

THOMAS

CUSACK

against

VILLAGEOF

KIRYAS JOEL BOARD OF TRUSTEES et

al., Hon.

Francesca E. Connolly

Respondents,

EMANUELLEONOROVITZ et al.,

Additional Respondents.

PRESERVE

HUDSONVALLEYet al.,

Index No.:

8118/2015

etitioners/Plaintiffs,

Proceeding No.

2

- against -

TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF MONROE et al.,

Respondents/Defendants

.

STATE OF NEWYORK

)

)

ss .

COUNTY

OF

ORANGE )

THOMAS

CUSACK,

being duly

sworn, hereby deposes and says:


2/147

ye

ars

of e

xperien

ce

in

variou

s facets o

f

Hydroge

ology. A

c

opy

of

my

resume

is atta

ched

as

Exhib

it

A.

I

have

been

the Villag

e s princ

ipal hydro

geolog

ist f

or

over

2

0 yea

rs.

D

uring

that

.

time

,

I have been

respon

sible for ide

ntifying an

d

develo

ping

new water sourc

es for

th

e

V

illage

a

s

well

as

mana

ging

and

mainta

ining

ex

isting sou

rces.

I

su

bmit t

his affida

vit in s

upport of

th

e

V

illage of

Kiry

as Joel s (

Kiry

as

Joel )

.

re

sponse to

the pe

titions

in the

ab

ove-cap

tioned p

roceedi

ngs, P

roceedi

ng

N

o.

( M

unicipa

l

Petitio

n ) c

ommen

ced by P

etitioner

s V

illage of

South Bl

ooming

Grove,

et

al. (collect

ively,

Munic

ipal Petitio

ners )

and Pr

oceedin

g No.

2 (t

he P

HV Pe

tition ) comm

enced

P

reserve

Hu

dson

Va

lley,

et al.

(colle

ctively,

PHV

Petit

ioners )

seeking

to annul

Ki

ryas Joel s

State

Enviro

nmenta

l

Q

uality

Rev

iew Act (

SEQR

A )

findings

and

Kiryas Joel's

r

esolutio

n and

fin

dings app

roving p

etitions

fo

r

a

nnexatio

n of50

7 acres a

nd 164

acre

s

fro

m th

e Tow

n

of

Monroe

to

the Kiry

as Joel,

all da

ted

Septem

ber

6

20

15.

I

n par

ticular,

I subm

it this

affid

avit

in respons

e

t

o allegat

ions co

ncernin

g

K

iryas

.

Joe

l's

pe

rmit for constr

uction

of a groun

dwater

well at sit

e in

the Town

ofC

ornwa

ll

k

nown as

the Mou

ntainvil

le

W

ell

and its o

ngoing

munic

ipal p

roject to con

struct a

pipe

line conne

ction

to

t

he N

ew

Y

ork C

ity Aq

ueduct

sys

tem for m

unicipa

l water

supp

ly,

a

s w

ell as

in respo

nse to

alleg

ations t

hat the V

illage s

SEQR

A review o

f

th

e an

nexation

petitio

ns did

not sufficie

ntly

co

nsider water

supp

ly.

As

deta

iled below

,

the V

illage

f

ully c

onsider

ed

the potenti

al im

pacts of

the

.


3/147

I

m

ake this

affidavi

t bas

ed upo

n my

pers

onal knowle

dge o

f the

facts a

nd

.

circumstances

stated

herein,

m

y revie

w

of

the documents and reports

that

were prepared

by

LBG

for

the Vill

age

with

respect

to the

applic

ation

to

the New

York St

ate

Depart

ment of

Environ

mental

Conse

rvation ( NYS

DEC )

to con

struct

th

e

Mou

ntainvil

le Well,

NYSDE

C

docum

ents rel

ated to

the w

ater su

pply pe

rmit

for the

Villa

ge s water

sup

ply, incl

uding

the

M

ountai

nville Well,

and m

y re

view o

f docu

ments

prepare

d in c

onnecti

on wi

th the

Village

s

SE

QRA revie

w of

the anne

xation

petiti

ons.

I n

ote that th

is Cou

rt pr

eviously

uphe

ld the

well-tes

ting a

nd analys

is I

made

for

.

the

Villag

e in

sup

port of the Mo

untain

ville w

ell

permi

t.

Town

ofW

oodbur

y v. Vi

llage of

Kirya

s

Jo

el. No.

2877

-2013

(A

pr. 7

, 201

4) (Le

fkowitz

,

J

.).

The Village

water su

pply is

source

d fro

m a serie

s of 1

6 bedr

ock gro

undwa

ter

.

wells

and two san

d

and gravel

wells.

The water su

pply

w

ells are gene

rally

located

in th

ree we

ll

fields. Ten

o

f

the

wells a

re

loca

ted within

the V

illage bo

undarie

s

[wells

1, 5 6,

8 A, 9B, 13

A

,

13B

,

14

A,

17 an

d 22

in the N

YSDEC

wate

r

supp

ly p

ermits

].

Seven w

ells ar

e

loc

ated

in the

B

renner

w

ell

fie

ld, w

hich is

locat

ed

o

n Lark

inRoa

d in

the Town ofM

onroe

[2IB

, 2

3, 24, 25,

26,

27 a

nd 28

],

We

ll 28

is a hig

h

capacit

y

sand

and

grave

l

w

ell lo

cated near t

he Ram

apo

River in

the V

illage o

fMonro

e. One

well,

Mount

ainville

Well 1

is locate

d on

the M

ountain

ville

well

f

ield on

Route

32

in

th

e Town ofCor

nwall.

The

wells and the

a

llowab

le

amou

nt o

fwa

ter wit

hdrawn

are prese

ntly

permit

ted

.

b

y the

NewY

ork Stat

e

D

epartm

ent

ofEnv

ironme

ntal

C

onserv

ation

(NY

SDEC)

(exis

ting

permit


4/147

ex

isting wells in

the Village system

, based

u

pon existing permit co

nditions.

Under

s

pecial

condition

of

WSA

11,6

09, the Village is

authorized to

withdraw

up to 2.54 mgd

temporarily

to

mee

t peak

water

demands.

10. The reason

for the

differen

ce

in

these figures is

that NYSDEC

has

imposed a cap

for

certain hi

gher yielding

wells in

the

Village on

the

volume that can

be regul

arly used, but

which h

igher amounts abo

ve the NY

SDEC perm

itted

takin

g

are

av

ailable for

use on those

limited

occa

sions when nec

essary to

meet the Villages maximum

peak water

demand.

In all of

2014,

the

Village

s maximum

daily

demand exceeded 2 mgd

on

on

ly

four

occasion

s.

The Village

currently has an

averag

e daily demand

for

water

of 1

.61 mgd,

which

1.

it is easily

capable of a

ccommodating

, in

contrast to Pe

titioners

claim

that

K

iryas Joel is

straining

wat

er resources. See Muni

cipal

Petition, at

12. B

ased on the projected w

ater

d

emands provided

in

th

e Amended

Fina

l Environmen

tal Impact Statement

( AFEIS

) for the

Villag

e s

Aqueduct

c

onnection project

and the antic

ipated conne

ction to the Aqueduct

in 2017,

the Vil

lage s dema

nd will be ap

proximately 1.76 mg

d at that t

ime, also

within the

capability of

the Villag

e s existing t

otal

w

ell yield

capacity

and

permit

limits

.

The Village

of

Kiryas

J

oel

owns, operates and

maintain

s its w

ater supply

2.

infrastruc

ture, inclu

ding: tw

o

pu

mping sta

tions, five water

storag

e tanks, three water

treatment

p

lants

and the

distribu

tion

syste

m. The five water

storage tank

s have a combin

ed

c

apacity

of

4

.

mgd which allow

the Village

to meet ma

ximumdail

y

dema

nd,

water demand

fluctuation

s

and

to

provid

e

fire

protection

servic

e

fo

r

the

Vil

lage.


5/147

ex

tended

perio

ds of time

. Ba

sed on the V

illage s

curre

nt

well

invento

ry a

nd storage

capa

bilities

,

I

am able to

certi

fy

that

the

V

illage

will be

able

to

endure the

shutdown

of

the

Aqueduct

at

the

time of

the conne

ction and fo

r some

time

th

ereafte

r.

In

the fut

ure,

howev

er, it is

likely

that the

V

illage w

ill

be r

equired t

o

ide

ntify

additio

nal measu

res

to su

pport

its abilit

y to en

dure futu

re

shu

tdowns

.

These

wo

uld

inclu

de

meas

ures

such

a

s increas

ed tak

ings from

existin

g w

ells;

additio

nal

gr

oundwa

ter

a

nd surface

water

sour

ces; additio

nal stor

age capab

ilities;

d

emand si

de

co

ntrols

and

cons

ervatio

n

meas

ures. Thi

s futu

re sc

enario

is no

diffe

rent than

for

a

ny

other

It is un

reason

able to

expec

t any

of these

uni

cipality

with

a co

nnectio

n to t

he Aqu

educt.

municip

alities

to have

identif

ied,

m

uch les

s

h

ave

obta

ined perm

its fo

r

a

ll po

tential

future so

urces

o

ut into

the

dista

nt

f

uture

as wa

s sugge

sted in t

his c

ase.

In

fac

t,

NYS

DEC wou

ld

n

ot

eve

n

consid

er

such p

ermits

with

out

an

identifi

ed

c

urrent n

eed,

as

was pre

cisely the c

ase

when

NYS

DEC

sugge

sted

tha

t th

e V

illage w

ithdraw

its

permi

t applica

tion for

the Star

M

ounta

in

wellfie

ld

at

the

time it was

review

ing Mount

ainville

.

As

deta

iled in

the DGE

IS

Vol. at pages

3.5-

7 to

3.5-1

0,

prepare

d for the

4.

V

illage's S

EQRA

revie

w of the an

nexation p

etitions

, the

Villa

ge

ha

s

secu

red

r

ights

to seve

ral

exi

sting or prosp

ective

wellfiel

ds in a

ddition

to t

he Mo

untain

ville Well

, in

cluding the

Star

M

ountain

w

ellfield

a

nd t

he Woodb

ury

Heights

Estat

es we

llfield.

Howe

ver,

any new

source

of

groun

dwater f

or th

e

Village f

rom wells

will lik

ewise be

subjec

t to revi

ew and app

roval

by

NYSD

EC an

d New Y

ork

State

Departm

ent of H

ealth

( N

YSDO

H ), In

addition

to SE

QRA

review, p

ermit r

eview incl

udes

techn

ical assess

ment of

t

he

s

ustaina

ble pumpin

g

rate ofwe

lls a

nd


6/147

The

Mountai

nvilleWell

1

5. T

he Mountain

ville

Well is

in

tended to

provide add

itional suppo

rt for t

heVilla

ge's

w

ater dem

ands now

and

in

the

future. In th

e intervening time

be

fore the Aqueduct

con

nection,

the well will

suppo

rt

th

e

Villag

e's

maximu

m

dail

y demand.

Once

the Village con

nects t

o the

Aqueduc

t, this well

will supp

ort th

e

Village

's

demand

in

times of

future Aque

duct shutd

own.

Co

ntrary to

the alle

gations in

the

Municipal

Peti

tion, the in

tended use of

the

6.

Mountainv

ille Well

has n

ot changed s

ince itwas firs

t

proposed, see

M

unicipal

Petitio

n, at

22,

but rath

er as the Village has

alw

ays

m

aintained,

the

Mountain

ville

W

ell

will be

use

d

to

serve the

V

illage

in

the

interim

period until

conn

ection with the

Aqueduct and

thereaf

ter

as

a

backup

supply.

17 . Th

e allegations

concer

ning i

mpacts on other

municipa

l

wel

ls

and

on

Woodbury

Creek,

se e

M

unicipal Petition

,

at Tflf 12, 16, 1

7, 18, 22

, 23, and

27,

were

rai

sed

b

y many of

these

same

parties and

rejected by

NY

SDEC

during

the

SEQ

RA

and perm

itting review o

f the

Mo

untainville

Well

projec

t. In addition,

the

Muni

cipal Pet

itioners

raised these

very

sa

me cl

aims

in a prior

Article 78 pro

ceeding brou

ght to challen

ge th

e

SEQ

RA review of

th

e Mountainv

ille

w

ell pro

ject, an

d

this

Court

dismissed

them. See D

ecision, Order

and

Judgm

ent,

Tow

n of

W

oodbury v

.

Villag

e of Kirv

as J

oel. No. 2877-

2013 (Apr.

7, 2014) (Lefkow

itz,

J.) att

ached

h

ereto a

s Exhibit

B.

18.

Ba

sed on

the a

pplication mate

rials su

bmitted, responses

to age

ncy comments

and


7/147

19.

There

after, NY

SDEC

continu

ed its com

prehen

sive r

egulat

ory revie

w of the

Draft

Permit,

including

consideration

of

numerous comments

from

the

public

and

potentially

affected

m

unicip

alities, a

nd in

cludin

g t

he same i

ssues

raise

d by

M

unicip

al

Petitio

ners.

The

claims

allege

d

i

n the Mu

nicipal P

etition

were

id

entifie

d,

thoro

ughly

analyze

d,

0.

c

onside

red an

d ultima

tely

rejecte

d

by

N

YSDE

C in the

course of

this

environ

menta

l review

of t

he

Moun

tainvill

e

We

ll

site.

The Vill

age's

exte

nsive

resp

onses to com

ments

submi

tted

to N

YSDE

C

t

hat

1

.

addre

ssed th

ese issue

s dur

ing consid

eration

of

t

he Vil

lage's

wa

ter su

pply p

ermit

appl

ication are

attache

d he

reto

as Ex

hibit C.

22. N

YSDE

C

's own res

ponsive

ness s

umma

ry is att

ached

hereto a

s E

xhibitD.

2

3. After

c

arefully cons

idering

the

se comm

ents

and res

ponses

and re

jecting

the v

ery

same

claims

alleg

ed in

the

Munici

pal

Petitio

n,

NY

SDEC

issued Ki

ryas Joe

l a

fina

l

water

supp

ly

perm

it

that

inclu

ded

the M

ounta

inville W

ell on O

ctober

1, 2015,

Rev

iew ofWate

r

Supply I

n Co

nnectio

n With

T

he

A

nnexa

tion P

etition

s

24.

In conn

ection wi

th t

he annexa

tion pe

titions

that

the Vil

lage rece

ived,

I as

sisted

in

the Vil

lage's SE

QRA

revie

w,

led by Ti

m Mi

ller Associa

tes,

of

the Village

's

ability to

mee

t the

wate

r ne

eds of the

propos

ed a

nnexat

ion

areas

,

ba

sed on

reason

able pop

ulation

pro

jection

s and

e

xisting per ca

pita

dail

y

w

ater us

age

i

n the

Villag

e. See

DGEI

S

Vo

l

3.5; F

GEIS

Vol.

3

.5.7

and Vol.

2,

Appd

x.

G

.

The ann

exation

territ

ory

is not w

ithin the

V

illage'

s

c

urrent w

ater se

rvice a

rea.

5.


8/147

would

have a r

ight

o

f

access to

the Vill

age

water

system, and

it is

assume

d that all de

velopm

ent

in

the

annexed

te

rritory would

obtain water

from

the

Village

system.

26.

Pop

ulation g

rowthan

d es

timated future

wa

ter de

mand i

ndicate

d a 2025

study area

popula

tion o

f 42,

297 and

an e

stimate

d daily wa

ter demand

of

2.79 mill

ion mgd

.

Futur

e

wate

r

d

emand fo

r

the

Villag

e was

estimate

d

us

ing an

esta

blished wa

ter

u

se

rate of66.0

gallo

ns per d

ay,

per ca

pita.

Th

e wa

ter

us

e

rate

w

as based

u

pon

his

toric

reported

water usage

in

the

Village

.

27.

Becaus

e no

spec

ific

d

evelopm

ent

propo

sals

w

ere adv

anced in

conn

ectionw

ith the

anne

xation petit

ions, the V

illage s

review o

f water

i

mpacts was

based

on

t

he

proj

ected

p

opulatio

n

growth and

exist

ing usag

e rates

describ

ed

abov

e. It is

m

y under

standing

that an

y

fut

ure,

conc

rete d

evelopm

ent project

s

w

ill be

subject to Villa

ge review

a

nd appr

oval and

that

V

illage appro

val of

any individ

ual resid

ential

project

cannot

proce

ed witho

ut an adeq

uate w

ater

supp

ly.

W

hen a new

d

evelopm

ent pro

ject i

s

applie

d

for in

the

Village

,

I

review

the

8.

calcu

lated av

erage an

d

maximu

m daily wate

r dema

nds fo

r the prop

osed d

evelopm

ent. Us

ing

the

mos

t curren

t

avera

ge and peak

water

usag

e

da

ta

av

ailable

f

rom th

e village an

d the

curren

t well

yie

ld capac

ities,

I

d

etermin

e whe

ther a

dequate

surp

lus capaci

ty w

ould

be

a

vailable

in

the

Villa

ge s wat

er system

to m

eet t

he

w

ater dem

ands

ofth

e prop

osed deve

lopment

.

The r

eview

of project

ed

water sup

ply

impact

s in the

DGEIS

and

FG

EIS

9.

deter

mined tha

t the

Vi

llage w

ill be able

to meet

the fu

ture w

ater n

eeds

of the pro

posed

anne

xation terri

tories.

Moreo

ver, i

ts abilit

y

to

meet the

se

water su

pply nee

ds

w

ill

be

pa

rticula

rly


9/147

Vol.

at pag

es 3.5-7

to 3:5-1

0,

the

Villa

ge ha

s o

wner

ship inte

rests in

sev

eral

othe

r

w

ell

field

s,

including

those

at

Star

Mountain

and

Woodbury

Heights

that have the

potential

for

development

in

the futu

re to se

rve

th

e

V

illage

's fut

ure p

opula

tion.

30.

T

heNY

CDE

P Bu

reau

ofW

ater Supp

ly has

c

onfir

med

the V

illage

s

right to

take a

wate

r

sup

ply

from

the C

ity's

w

ater sy

stem,

pip

eline

c

onstr

uction for

the

co

nnec

tion

has

pro

ceede

d,

a

nd fina

l

en

ginee

ring

pl

ans f

or

th

e co

nnect

ion to

the

NY

C Aqu

educt are

n

ow bein

g

f

inaliz

ed by

th

e V

illage

an

d City

engin

eering s

taff.

The NYC

DEP

requ

ires

that t

he

Vill

age

ma

intain

100

pe

rcent

back-

up fo

r th

e volu

me of

i

ts wa

ter

ta

king

from

the

Aque

duct.

As

d

iscuss

ed

abo

ve, th

e

Villag

e

h

as s

ecure

d the righ

ts

to

groun

dwat

er we

lls

with

test

ed wate

r

cap

acity th

at e

xceed

s th

e pro

jected

Villa

ge w

ater d

eman

d

w

ell i

nto th

e futu

re aft

er its co

nnec

tion

to the A

qued

uct.

The

Villa

ge's revie

w of

p

otenti

al wa

ter s

upply

impa

cts from

t

he a

nnex

ation

31.

in

clude

d de

tailed con

sider

ation

ofmit

igatio

nme

asure

s.

32. Al

l

of the

Villag

e s wa

ter supp

ly

sour

ces

are

s

ubjec

t to re

gula

tory

contr

ol

of the

NYSD

EC

and N

YSDO

H. T

he N

YSDE

C wa

ter su

pply

perm

its

r

egula

ting

the Villa

ges e

xistin

g

w

ater

sup

ply con

tain sp

ecific

cond

itions

inclu

ding:

estab

lishe

d l

imits

for wate

r tak

ing

from

indi

vidua

l

w

ells, wat

er co

nserv

ation

me

asure

s and

mand

atory

enf

orcea

ble con

dition

s

to m

itiga

te

impa

cts to

other

exist

ing n

earby

su

pply wel

ls.

33.

In

add

ition,

each

NY

SDEC W

ater

Sup

ply Perm

it w

as

subje

ct to r

eview

pursu

ant

to

SEQ

RA,

an d

as

n

oted a

bove,

any

new s

ource

o

f groun

dwat

er for

the V

illage

from

we

lls w

ill


10/147

th

is con

necti

on a

re sub

ject to revie

w an

d

ap

prova

l by

t

heNY

CDE

P.

Th

e

wa

ter s

upply

agre

ement

between

NYCDEP

and

the

Village

requires

a

City-approved water conservation plan

as well as

state

-of-th

e-art

mete

ring

and othe

r tec

hnolo

gies to

prev

ent

wast

e and cont

amina

tion

of the

wa

ter

sourc

e. In

additi

on, t

he

use of

Aque

duct wa

ter

is str

ictly li

mited

to t

he

te

rritor

ial

bou

ndar

ies of

the

Villa

ge

unles

s

otherw

ise ap

prove

d by NY

CDEP

a

nd

the allo

wance

volum

es

a

re

likewi

se

st

rictly

limi

ted by a

form

ula

in the N

ew

York

City

Admi

nistra

tive Code

based

on U.S.

Census

popul

ation fi

gures

an

d per

cap

ita

us

age in

New

York

City.

35.

I

have

also re

viewe

d

the Affid

avit

of Je

ffrey F

reder

ick,

CPG

d

ated Oc

tober 2

1,

2

015, su

bmitt

ed by

th

e

Muni

cipal Pet

itioner

s

in

s

uppor

t

of t

heir p

etitio

n (the

Fre

derick

Affid

avit )

.

36

. Upon

info

rmatio

n

an

d

belie

f,

Mr. Fr

ederic

k did

not s

ubmi

t an

y

of

the

com

men

ts

includ

ed in

his

l

itigati

on

Affi

davit

during t

he

rev

iew by

the

Vi

llage and

NY

SDE

C of the

Mou

ntain

ville W

ell proj

ect

or th

e Vi

llage

s

S

EQR

A re

view

of

the annex

ation

peti

tions.

37.

The

issu

es raise

d in

the F

reder

ick Af

fidav

it at

Parag

raphs 4

and

5

(f), (g),

and (h

)

rela

ting

to i

mpact

s from

th

e M

ount

ainvil

le W

ell

have

be

en discus

sed

a

bove and

were

comp

rehen

sively

addre

ssed

in the

full, c

ompl

eted SEQ

RA

revie

wof tha

t proje

ct. Mo

reove

r, t

he

conc

erns all re

late

to th

e N

YSD

EC wate

r sup

ply perm

it, n

ot

th

ese

an

nexat

ion pe

titions

,

whic

h

prop

osed n

o ch

ange i

n the

Vill

age s p

ermit

as pres

ently

i

ssued by

NY

SDEC

.

38.

S

imilar

ly,

the

pot

ential

issue

s in Para

graph

5 (g)

relatin

g to

the

Cats

kill Aque

duct

proje

ct

were ful

ly

evalu

ated

in the

conte

xt of the

SEQR

A rev

iewo

f th

at p

roject

,


11/147

dev

elopme

nt

prop

osals,

the 10

-year

popu

lation

projec

tion

wa

s

a

rea

sonabl

e,

no

n-specu

lative

method

for

estimating

future water supply

demand.

The

Frederick

Affidavit s

comparison

of

this

10-year

pr

ojection w

ith the

3

0-year pe

riod requir

ed

by

th

e New

York

En

vironm

ental Fa

cilities

C

orpora

tion (N

YSEFC

)

c

onfuses

t

he

V

illage s r

easona

ble

use

of a sho

rter

land use

plann

ing

scen

ario d

riven by

popu

lation

dynam

ics w

ith the

long

er capi

tal

fina

ncing

req

uiremen

ts of

NYSE

FC

tied

to

the

30-year term

of

the loan to finance the

project.

40.

Th

e comm

ent in

Para

graph 5 (e) o

f t

he Freder

ick A

ffidavit

that the

water

supp

ly

p

rojectio

ns

failed

to co

nsider the

develo

pment

of the a

nnexat

ion territ

ories

with priva

te w

ater

wells wa

s not

raised

during

the pu

blic co

mment

on t

he

V

illage's

SEQ

RA rev

iew, a

nd in any

even

t is mispla

ced,

as poten

tial de

velopm

ent using

privat

e wa

ter we

lls

in the annexa

tion area

s

was

fully e

valuate

d

in

DGEI

S

3.5.2

(at

3.5

-14 t

o 3.5-18)

.

The comm

ents

in

Fr

ederick

Affida

vit Pa

ragraph

s

5

(f) (i)

(iv)

relate

d to

int

er-

1.

b

asin impacts

were fully

eva

luated in

the con

text o

f the SEQ

RA

revie

w of t

he M

ountain

ville

Well

and

respon

ses to

comme

nts prese

nted to

and

conside

red b

y NYSDE

C. A

s these comme

nts

rela

te to othe

r Villa

ge-ow

ned w

ellfield

s suc

h

as

Star

Moun

tain a

nd Woodb

ury Hei

ghts E

states,

any evalu

ation

of impa

cts at the

se fiel

ds at th

is tim

e would be

ove

rly spe

culativ

e.

4

2.

The co

mment in

Freder

ick Aff

idavit

Parag

raph

5

(h) th

at th

e Villa

ge sho

uld have

analy

zed th

e

im

pacts

o

f a blende

d

use of gro

undwat

er an

d A

queduc

t

water

ag

ain relates

to

Aqu

educt imp

acts and

the M

ounta

inville Well

,

no

t t

he anne

xation.

Moreo

ver,

the

Village

is

presen

tly

in

curring trem

endous

expens

e to develo

p th

e Aqued

uct co

nnectio

n, w

hich it fully


12/147

pro

posals for t

he anne

xation t

erritory

,

an

d

again wil

l be

m

ore

prop

erly

addre

ssed

to

th

e ex

tent

not already examined

n

the

context

of

specific development projects

and

NYSDEC

water

s

upply

ap

plication

s,

n

ot in asses

sing t

he p

otential

imp

acts from the

annexa

tion itself.

C

ontrary to the

Fre

derick

Affi

davit s assertio

ns in

Para

graph

6,

the V

illage

s

44.

DGEIS and

FGE1S

ful

ly

c

onsider

ed pote

ntial m

itigatio

n of

water su

pply

impacts to

the ful

lest

extent practicable in

the

absence

of

any specific development

proposals

for

the

annexation

areas.

To the

extent the

F

rederick

A

ffidavit raised

issues

rela

ted to m

itigati

on o

f

i

mpacts

at sp

ecific

wellf

ields, thes

e

imp

acts

a

nd

propo

sed

miti

gation

measu

res re

late

to the V

illage s

water

supply

p

ermits,

which h

ave been s

ubjecte

d to fu

ll

S

EQRA

r

eview o

r

will

be a

t the

time

the V

illage

make

s

s

uch spe

cific ap

plication

s.

Moreo

ver, these

water

supp

ly sour

ces are

or will be

under

con

tinuing reg

ulation

by

N

YSDE

C

an

d N

YSDO

F1

a

nd

subjec

t

to

applic

able per

mit

terms and

c

ondition

s.

Para

graphs 7,

8, an

d 9 of the Fr

ederick

Af

fidavit r

efer to

spe

culative

impa

cts that

5.

could

n

ot

be

mea

ningful

ly

exa

mined

in t

he con

text o

f the propose

d

annexa

tions,

but

r

ather

wi

ll

be th

e sub

ject of re

view as n

ecessa

ry w

hen specif

ic d

evelop

ment

propos

als

and

pro

jects

come

before t

he

Vill

age

and/or

other

age

ncies.

I hav

e also

review

ed the

Affid

avit of

Thom

as E. Dw

yer, P

.G. dated

O

ctober 26,

6.

201

5, submit

ted

by Petitio

ners

Villag

e

of

C

ornwall

on Huds

on

and the

Town

of Corn

wall

in

su

pport

of

their

petitio

n

(the

DwyerA

ffidav

it ).

Th

e Dwy

er Aff

idavit qu

estioned

wheth

er

the p

umping t

est

perform

ed on

the

7.


13/147

Trou

t Bro

ok Road we

llfield

and

the T

own

and Vill

age

Co

rnwal

l s

Ta

ylor R

oad w

ellfiel

d.

The

Dwyer

Affidavit

also

expressed

concern that the

well would

negatively

impact

nearby surface

waters

,

incl

uding

W

oodbu

ry

an

d M

oodna

Creek be

cause

of

h

ydrolo

gic

conne

ction to

the

aqui

fer,

and

the

Ramap

o River.

First, all

of th

ese iss

ues w

ere

adeq

uately a

ddress

ed a

s

part

of

the M

ounta

inville

8.

We

ll perm

it pr

oceed

ing

and NY

SDEC ha

s concu

rred

with

our analysis.

In

response

to

com

ments

ab

out imp

acts

on

the a

quifer

, comp

rehen

sive

stan

dard te

sting pe

rform

ed on

beh

alf of t

he

Vill

age of Ki

ryas

Joel

pursua

nt

to

Sta

te

pum

ping

test

stand

ards su

pports

the

conc

lusion

that n

o

imp

acts

to t

he

p

rincip

al aqu

ifer

will

re

sult

from th

e

Villag

e s use of

th

e

Mou

ntainv

ille We

ll

1. LBG

comple

ted a 72-ho

ur pum

ping

test on W

ell

loca

ted on the V

illage

ofKirya

s

Joels

Moun

tainvi

lle pu

mp stati

on

and w

ell fie

ld

par

cel on

Rou

te 32

in

Co

rnwal

l, N

ew

York

in June 2

011. Th

e pu

mping

test

was con

ducted

with st

rict

adhe

rence to the

NYS

DEC

p

umpin

g te

st sta

ndards (

Reco

mmen

ded

Pump

Test Pro

cedure

s for W

ater

Supp

ly Ap

plicat

ion,

TOGS

3.2

.1, App

endix

10).

The

NYS

DEC pump

ing

test st

andard

s ar

e

des

igned to

determ

ine the

safe

yield

of pro

posed w

ells

and poten

tial impa

cts to

neighb

oring

w

ells

and surfac

e-wate

r

fea

tures.

As

Appen

dix 10

to

TOGS state

s,

the pum

p tes

t

proced

ures have

been

de

signed

to

prod

uce the

accu

rate an

d co

mplet

e inform

ation th

at

is vit

al

to

thes

e

de

termin

ations,

Pro

per

met

hodolo

gies

fo

r

this

test

were

also

c

onfirm

ed

by

NYS

DEC D

ivisio

n ofWater

inAlb

any.

49. D

ata

from the

pum

ping

test were

inclu

ded i

n Exhib

its II

an

d III to the

Villa

ges

wa

ter supp

ly permi

t

da

ted

N

ovem

ber

17, 20

11

and pre

pared by

LBG.

F

ull respo

nses

to thes

e


14/147

groundwa

ter

level

dra

wdown in

Woodbury Creek. T

hree

piezome

ter locatio

ns

were

mo

nitored

during

the

2011

pumping

test.

The

first

piezometer

location

was

installed

in

the

in

the

intermitten

t stream nort

h of Well

1.

The g

roundwate

r and

surfa

ce

wate

r in this inte

rmittent

stream

were d

ry throu

ghout the

entire

da

ta co

llection period

(p

re-test

and

po

st-test), with

the

exception ofbr

iefapp

earances

of

su

rface w

ater

f

ollowing

rain ev

ents.

Th

ese d

ata indica

te t

his

is

a

tempo

rary storm-w

ater

runoff

channel

and

not

a

permanent

stream.

LBG

was

doing

due

diligen

ce

by

at

tempting tomo

nitor the s

tream as

required by the

TOGS. T

he

s

econd

piezo

meter

locat

ion was i

nstalled in

t

he

wetland south

west of We

ll 1

Surface

wate

r

on

the

exterior of the

piez

ometer

went dry several day

s

before the sta

rt ofpumping

becaus

e of

hig

h

temperature

s

and

low pre

cipitation.

G

roundwater

in

the

wetland

piezomet

er

was present througho

ut th

e

d

ata

collection

period and

showed

no impac

t

fro

m

pumping of Mo

untainville

Well

1. The th

ird

piezomet

er

locat

ion

was installed

in Woodb

ury Creek

, northw

est of Well

1. S

urface water and

groun

dwater we

re present

at

this

piezom

eter locati

on

th

roughout

th

e data collection

period,

and

no im

pact was meas

ured

in

either

the surfa

ce-water or

groun

dwater level

from pum

ping

of

Moun

tainvilleWell

Well

l

ogs were provided

in

LBG's

A

ugust

2011 report.

Th

e geologic lo

g for

1.

Well wa

s

pro

vided

in

Ap

pendix

I.

The geology

at this location

was logg

ed

f

rom 35 fe

et

belo

w

grade

(ft

b

g)

to

00

ft

bg

at fiv

e-foot inter

vals. Ge

ologic logs

for

the

two

existin

g monitorin

g

wells MW

-1 a

nd MW-2

were p

rovided in Ap

pendix I

II

of

LBG

's repor

t.

Th

e l

ogs were

sufficie

ntly detailed to docum

ent

the uppe

r 35 feet that

was no

t

logg

ed in

Well 1.

Th

e


15/147

The

re

sults

from the

72-hou

r pum

ping

test

show

ed no

outsta

nding

issues of

2.

concern related to

well

stabilization, water-level

recovery

and

water

quality.

53

The res

ults

of

t

he 72

-hour

p

umping

tes

t dem

onstrate

d a

stabil

ized yield

a

nd water

-

level

drawdo

wn on

W

ell

a

t a

rate

of

425

gpm

(g

allons per

minute

); rapid w

ater-leve

l recove

ry

follow

ing shutdo

wn of the

test

(90% w

ithin o

ne

h

our); adeq

uate

gro

undwate

r

r

echarge

(1.

00

to

1.38

mgd)

to

support the

taking

of

up

to

425

gpm

from

Well

1.

There

was no

water-level

d

rawdow

n measur

ed in

the

pie

zometer

s

durin

g the tes

t, in

cluding

no su

rface-wa

ter

or

groundw

ater le

vel

d

rawdown

in W

oodbu

ry Cree

k. The

refore, cont

rary

to c

omment

s

in

the

affidavit

s, the d

ata

colle

cted

pursuan

t to Sta

te

T

OGS

standard

s

demon

strate

that no

additio

nal

pumping

tests, such

as lon

g-term

testing

, are req

uired.

In

resp

onse

to Dwyer

A

ffidavit com

ments

about

impac

ts to neig

hboring

wells

,

4.

part

icularly

g

roundw

ater

av

ailability

pu

rsuant

to

NY

SDEC

pu

mping t

est

st

andards,

w

ater-lev

el

measure

ments

we

re co

llected

from

onsite a

nd offsite

observa

tional w

ells lo

cated with

in 1,5

00

M

ost of the lan

d with

in 1,

500 feet

of Wel

l

is

eet

o

f th

e test well

(T

OGS sec

tion 7

).

undeve

loped and

subject

to a conser

vation

easeme

nt

that l

imits f

uture de

velopme

nt. The

p

ortion

o

f the rad

ius east and

south

east ofW

ell enc

ompasse

s a lim

ited

number o

f

r

esidence

s.

A

ll

eight

offsite

prop

erties w

ere solicite

d for perm

ission

to collect

water-l

evel data

from

their we

lls. Fo

ur

pro

perty owners gra

nted

permis

sion to col

lect mea

suremen

ts from

their

wells

.

T

wo o

f

th

e

f

our

wells

(250 an

d 280 Old

Ro

ute 32) were l

ocated in

well pits,

and the w

ells

couldnot be o

pened

to

colle

ct

wa

ter-level

mea

suremen

ts with

out crea

ting a sa

nitary risk.

The

other two,

230 Ol

d Rout

e


16/147

ons

ite mo

nitorin

g

w

ells

wou

ld not a

ffect

the

observ

ed data

in the offs

ite

bedroc

k

r

esiden

tial

wells.

Wa

ter-leve

l data

, inc

luding

water-l

evel dr

awdow

n,

wer

e colle

cted from

two

6.

a

ddition

al o

nsite mon

itoring

we

lls com

pleted

in the stra

tified-

drift

aquifer

(MW-

1 and

MW-

2)

tha

t

w

ere

d

rilled

near

Well

1. The w

ater-le

vel data

collec

ted durin

g the

pumpi

ng test all

ow for

the

calculation

of

aquifer

parameters

and

the

assessment

of

potential regional water-level impact

from

p

umping

o

the

test

w

ell.

5

7.

Th

e on

site Moni

tor

W

ells M

W-1

andM

W-2

w

ere

c

onstruc

ted 51

feet and

94

feet,

respe

ctively

,

fro

m Well

1 , con

sistent

wi

th

T

OGS

S

ection 7. Ba

sed on

the dat

a c

ollecte

d during

the pumping

tes

t,

the

drawdown

in

MW-1

and

MW-2

at

the end

of

the test was 9.26 feet and 0.42

fo

ot, r

espect

ively.

As expe

cted, th

e

drawd

own

da

ta

sh

owed that pu

mping

-relate

d

impa

ct to

the s

hallow

portion o

f th

e aq

uifer d

ecreas

ed

w

ith dis

tance.

58

. Wate

r-level

data w

ere collect

ed

from th

e

two o

ffsite

res

identia

l

wel

ls

lo

cated

at

230 Old

Route

32 and

1

470 Old R

oute 2

at appro

ximate

ly 1,150

feet

an

d

87

0 fe

et,

res

pective

ly,

The wa

ter-leve

l data

from th

ese

we

lls s

howed no

dra

wdown im

pact

aw

ay

fro

m W

ell

1.

a

ttribute

d to

the pumpin

g of

W

ell

on the

Mou

ntainv

ille

pa

rcel. T

herefo

re, it

w

as

conc

luded

that these

we

lls appear

to

be

outside t

he area o

f influen

ce of

Well

I

n

resp

onse to

the Dw

yer A

ffidav

it s com

ments t

hat LB

G a

nd the V

illage

of

9.

Kir

yas Joe

l

n

eglecte

d to c

onside

r the pot

ential

for im

pact o

n th

e Villa

ge of

Wood

bury's

Trou

t

Br

ook well

field wh

en it ass

essed

the

Moun

tainvil

le Well

site,

LBG

was well

awa

re o

f and


17/147

dow

n-gradie

nt from the T

rout

Brook

well field

to have

any

direct

impact on

the Trou

t Broo

k

aquifer.

To

furthe

r suppor

t the

conclu

sions ab

ove,

LBG

complete

d

additio

nal

0.

analysis o

n the da

ta deriv

ed fro

m the J

une

201

a

quifer

test, attache

d her

eto as

Exhibi

t E. T

he

ad

ditional

analys

is

w

as co

mpleted

to assess the

effe

ct ofp

otential

aquife

r boun

dary condit

ions

and

determine

if

the

distance

drawdown effect from

the

pumping

of

Well

would potentially

a

ffect the

proposed

Trout B

rook

Road w

ells. T

he transm

issivity (T

) (38,720

gpd/ft

[gallo

ns per

d

ay pe

r foot]) and

th

e

stor

age coef

ficient (

S) (0

.38)

were calcula

ted u

sing d

rawdow

n

ver

sus tim

e

data

in the

tes

t well

d

uring

the a

quifer tes

t. T

he

T

was

derived u

sing

the The

is matc

h point

method. The

drawdown

data

were corrected

utilizing

the

corrections

presented

in Kruseman

and

DeRidde

r,

990 so

that th

e solution

is

app

licable

for unc

onfmed

aquif

ers

T

he curv

e

shown on

the

pl

ot

is

a

fitted

type curve and

the

points rep

resent

the

1

.

me

asured draw

down

in the w

ell. The

type

curve

was ge

nerated

by

a

djusting

th

e aquife

r

p

aramete

rs pres

ented in the

solutio

n p

ortion on

the

p

lot until th

ere

is a good

match be

tween

the

type cur

ve

and

the me

asured d

ata (i.e

., the aqu

ifer

parame

ters have bee

n calcu

lated).

Th

is

p

rocess is

expedite

d

with the

aid o

f

an

a

quifer par

ameter esti

mation

2.

p

rogram c

alled

A

QTESO

LVE (Duffie

ld, 200

2).

AQTE

SOLVE

a

llows

the user

to

use visual

c

urve

match

ing

or

an auto

mated me

thod t

o

m

inimize

the

differe

nce

be

tween

the t

ype

c

urve a

nd

the observ

ed data

. In

addit

ion, AQTES

OLVE

a

llows boundar

y

ef

fects (suc

h as

the

strati

fied

drif

t

boun

daries

observed

in t

he stud

y area)

to be incor

porated

in

to

t

he analys

is b

y autom

atically


18/147

plot

was develope

d assuming Mou

ntainville Wel

l was pump

ing

at

a

constan

t rate of 42

5

gpm

for

approximately

22 days.

As

stated above, data

from

the June

2011

aquifer

test

of

Well

show

th

at

the

wate

r level in

the well

had reach

ed a near stabiliz

ed level

after

three

days o

f pumpin

g.

T

wenty

two (22)

days was

used

for the

con

struction

of

the

draw

down vers

us distance

plot to be

conserva

tive. The 22

-day timefra

me was ne

cessary because

the a

nalytical equ

ation used

to

construct

theoretical

curve

does

not

simulate

the

effects

of

leakage,

river

and/or

wetland

recharg

es, w

hich are the c

auses of

stabilization

. The stratified-d

rift bou

ndaries w

ere accounted

for in

the developm

ent

of

the

theoretica

l

plot

using bou

ndary fea

tures inAQTES

OLYE.

64.

The draw

down vers

us distan

ce

plot

shows that

the Village of

Woodb

ury

w

ell field

is

located beyond

the

expected

area of

influence

of

Well

(2,980

feet)

even

i

the

stratified

drift

till bound

aries a

re incorpo

rated

into

the analysis. Note,

for this

analysi

s the

are

a of influence

of

Well

was c

onservativel

y

d

efined

as

the

ar

ea

o

f land in

which the w

ater table o

r

poten

tiometric

surfa

ce was low

ered by

0.01 foot.

Furthe

rmore, in

respons

e

to

the

Dwye

r

commen

ts

th

at LBG

's standar

d

testin

g was

5.

someho

w

an

inade

quate bas

is alo

ne

f

or

reac

hing the

conclusi

on

that

there w

ould be

no

influen

ce

on wells as far

away as

the

Trou

t Broo

k well,

one need only

consider the

self-su

staining

nature

of

the

M

ountainville

Well

site to further re

fute this

assertio

n.

It

is

cl

ear t

hat,

as

a self-s

ustaining

well

which is

capab

le of

fully

rechar

ging

without any im

pact on th

e recharg

e

p

otential

of

Wo

odbury's well

fields,

the

Mo

untainville

Wellwill

have no

impact on Woo

dbury's we

lls.

In re

gard to Cornw

all's Taylor

Ro

ad wellfield, whic

h is approxima

tely two m

iles

6

.


19/147

aquifer

because

the distance

and separa

tion

the aquifers

as

d

emonstrated

in the

above

analysis.

6

7. The D

wyer ffi

davit qu

estioned the

potential

impacts

a

425

gpm interb

asin

tran

sfer removing

water from

the Wood

bury Cree

k

Tributa

ry

watershed

a

nd

its dow

nstream

Moodna

C

reek watershe

d

as w

ell as impacts

to

the

Ra

mapo River,

and questio

ned whether th

e

Village s

Wastewater

Treatment Plant

(WWTP)

and

the

County s

Harriman

WWTP

could

han

dle

inc

reased sewer

flowalleged

to be

cause

d by

the well.

6

8. Conce

rning impacts

to Woodbur

y Creek, th

e pumping

test on

Mountainv

ille

We

ll

wa

s conducted with st

rict adh

erence

to

the

NYSDE

C

pumping

test s

tandards, wh

ich

are

also

designed to determin

e

potential

impacts

to

surface water.

Extensiv

e hydrogeolo

gical t

esting

in

acco

rdance

with

NY

SDEC stand

ards

9.

indicate

d that

there

is

no direct

hydro

logic connection

with nearby

surfa

ce

water

features,

inclu

ding no

direct

impact onwater level

s in

an

d

belowWoodb

uryCreek.

To me

asure

po

tential

surface

-water impact, water

-level

measure

ments were

0.

collecte

d from

three piezometer locat

ions. P

iezometers are

regularly

used

dur

ing

such tests to

measu

re

wa

ter levels (s

ee

TO

GS Section

10),

and were

in

stalled

near We

ll

f

or

the

pumping

tes

t

to

assess potential su

rface-water

interc

onnection w

ith the test

well under pum

ping conditio

ns.

As descr

ibed above,

piezometers

were installe

d in an on

-site intermitten

t stream,

in an on-site

w

etland, a

nd

in and

belo

w

Wo

odbury

Creek

t

o

the

n

orthwest

o

f the parc

el.

No

w

ater-level dr

awdown interference

was discernible i

n the

p

iezometers

1

.


20/147

72. The

Village acknowledges

that a

scenario might

exist where prolonged drawdown

during

times

of

extreme

drought

or other

compromised natural

condition

could result

in

potential

It is

reasonably

expected that

under

such

ndirect

impact to the

surface-water resource.

conditions,

mitigation or other

conservation

measures

could

be required to minimize

any

such

impacts. Such measures

might

include source reduction;

time

limitations onwithdrawals;

and,

in

severe

circumstances,

complete

closure

of the

well until

circumstances

moderate.

A

stream

gaging program (measuring stream stage and flow) to

continuously

monitor and record

stream

flows in Woodbury Creek

was

submitted and approved

by

the NYSDEC per special conditions 8

and

9

of WSA

#11,609

which permits the use

of

Mountainville Well 1.

This

monitoring

program

will be used

to determine

what

percentage,

if

any,

impact

on

flow

in

Woodbury

Creek

may occur from

pumping

of the Mountainville Well 1.

Background flow

conditions in

Woodbury

Creek

will

be measured prior to placing the

well

into

service as

part

of

the monitoring

plan.

Potential impacts to the

Ramapo River and

Interbasin Diversion impacts

were

3.

extensively discussed in the Village's response

to

comments

attached hereto

as

Exhibit C.

In

addition, relevant

to concerns about the Village's

existing sand and

gravel

well

#28,

water-level

monitoring

in

the

Ramapo

River was

conducted from2007 through 2009

(23

months) per special

condition #8

for WSA #10,612 after

Well

28 was placed

into

service.

Daily water-level

measurements were collected

from

locations

in the

Ramapo

River upstream

and downstream of

Well

28.

This monitoring program showed no direct impact

from pumping

of Well

28

on

the


21/147

74. In response to

Dwyer

ffidavitconcern

s

abou

t emergency r

esponse

in times of

drought,

LBG has

drafted

and

submitted

for

agency

comment

an

Emergency

Response

Plan

to

the

O

range

County

Department ofHealt

h. This plan (w

hich incorporates

a drought management

p

lan

is

not yet approved,

and LBG and

the

Vill

age

are presently engag

ed in re

sponding to

commen

ts

provided

by Orange

County DOH.

It is anticipated

that this plan

will be

in

p

lace by

the

time

the

Mountainville Well

is activated.

This

emergency response

plan

will

address

poten

tial situa

tions where one or

more of the Villagewells

are

sub

ject to yield re

striction.

In response

to

allegations th

at

que

stioned

th

e Villa

ge s assessment

of water

5.

dependent

natural

resources inclu

ding aquatic life, flora

fauna and re

creational use

s the

pumping

test

confirmed

that

water

levels

in Woodbury

Creek

will

not

be

affected

by

the safe

yield

levels ofwithdrawal

from the well

. Pr

ovisions

for implem

enting

a stream g

aging program

to continuously

monitor and

record s

tream have bee

n

incorpo

rated

co

ndition i

n the

p

ermit

toge

ther

with

other conser

vation meas

ures durin

g times of extrem

e drought

or

oth

er

comprom

ised

natural

cond

ition

that

cou

ld result inpotential

indirect

impact to

the

surface water

resoure

In response

to the Dwyer

ffidavit s questions

about

th

e m

ethodology

of

the

6.

pum

ping

test

used b

y

the

Village s

consultant the resulting sa

fe yield

determination,

potential

sites or

effects

not

mon

itored and whether

the Village is un

derstating its intend

ed wit

hdrawal

rate these issues ha

ve been a

ddressed abo

ve and

extensiv

ely

inExhibit C

77.

In response

to the Dwyer

Affidavit s comment

s

que

stioning the

nu

mbers

used fo

r


22/147

S

ection 13.

This

T

wa

s no

t

use

d

in

an

y subse

quent an

alysis.

The

T

used

in the s

afe

yi

eld

analysis

was

calculated using

the

Jacob

approximation (drawdown

versus

time)

from

the

pump

ing

we

ll

during the tes

t.

The safe yi

eld a

nalysis inLBG'

s Augu

st 201

report w

as pur

ely

theor

etical.

Any ad

ditional

withdra

wals

beyond the pe

rmitted

425

gpm

w

ould requi

re add

itional

testin

g

and

monitori

ng ina

ccordanc

ewithN

YSDEC

g

uidelines

.

78.

In addition,

the

withdrawal

limits

are

not understated. The

Village

is

permitted to

wi

thdraw 42

5 gpm

(

610,560 gpd)

from Mo

untainvil

le Wel

l 1.

L

BG co

nducted a

theor

etical

evaluat

ion of the

sustain

able yield i

additio

nal wells

were

comple

ted at the Mountai

nville

Well

Field.

The sust

ainable

yield an

alysis

o

f

up

to

t

hree

well

s indica

ted

a

th

eoretical

yiel

d of up

to

1,212

gpm

(1.7

mgd).

However, the

permit

issued

by

the

NYSDEC limits

the

taking

of

Well

to

425

g

pm. Any ac

tion t

o increase

the taki

ng l

imits

f

or the

well f

ieldwi

ll

req

uire an a

mendme

nt

to

the wa

ter

supply permit.

In

respon

se to

the

Dwy

er Affid

avit's

comm

ents that

th

e

Moun

tainville

Well

9.

would dim

inish o

ther mu

nicipaliti

es abil

ities

to

m

anage their

own

water

resources, the

M

ountain

ville

Well pump

test indicate

d itw

ould have

no effec

t on ne

ighborin

g

wate

r supp

lies.

In

summ

ary, based

on

m

y 3

0 years

of exp

erience

in

Hydrogeo

logy

and

over

20

0

.

y

ears'

expe

rience

as the

Village s principa

l hydr

ogeologis

t,

I

co

nclude

that

the Vill

age

thor

oughly

took

a hard

lo

ok at all poten

tial w

ater sup

ply impacts

from

the propose

d

ann

exations us

ing reasonab

le pro

jections o

fpopulatio

n

and

wat

er

usage, and fully

cons

idered

all

r

easonable miti

gation

meas

ures that could

be implem

ented

when fu

ture dev

elopmen

t pr

ojects

are


23/147

THOMAS

CUSACK,

CPG

Sworn to

before me

this

21

day ofJanuary, 2016

A.

y-i

/

Notary

Public

1/

MARYACURRAN

NOTARY

PUBLIC

S T AT E O F

CONNECT ICUT

MyCommissionExpires March 31 ,

2017


24/147

EXHIBIT A


25/147

Th

omas P.

Cu

sack

Thomas C

usack is a

hydrogeo

iogist with over

25

years of

experience

in the

water-supp

ly

devel

opment

field s

pecializing

in la

rge-scale grou

ndwater

explo

ration, groun

dwater

contamination

issues,

aquifer protection,

well field

management, impacts related

to

developm

ent, an

d

re

gulatory

approva

ls and permit

ting.

Experienc

e includes

conducting

groundw

ater explorati

on and

feasibility stud

ies, o

versight res

ponsibilitie

s,

d

ata ev

aluation,

repo

rting,

client/r

egulatory int

eraction and

exper

t

test

imony.

i

Bl

p.

Techn

ical

e

xperience

includes s

upervision

of

drilling and

well de

sign/const

ruction;

develo

pment/sup

ervision o

f pumpin

g te

st program

s

of

water

supply

and recov

ery we

lls;

im

plementat

ion

of

on

site/offsite w

ell monitor

ing to de

termine poten

tial wat

er-level int

erference

effects

in

study

region from pumping

wells; conduct

Groundwater

Under

the Influence

Studies;

well redevel

opment

program

s; groundwa

ter contam

ination inves

tigation

stud

ies;

implem

entation

of sm

all to large-sca

le gr

oundwater s

ampling pro

grams; c

onduct water

budget/re

charge ana

lysis to d

etermine

impact from

site-s

pecific

d

evelopme

nt

to build-o

ut

analysis

of

lar

ge

watershe

ds or within

municipa

l boundaries

. Int

erpret and

evalua

te

in

vestigation

results relatin

g to

site/

regional ge

ology and

hydroge

ology;

groundw

ater

co

ntaminatio

n

relate

d

is

sues;

stora

ge deplet

ion of regiona

l aquif

ers; regulat

ory compl

iance;

d

ata qua

lity con

trol

and

reporting

requ

irements. His

exper

ience includ

es the pr

eparation an

d

subm

ittal of a w

ide array

of docum

ents. The

document

s include

Groun

dwater

Expl

oration

Rep

orts; A

quifer Pr

otection

Programs

; Water

Conse

rvation

Program

s/Water Audits;

e

ducation lit

erature

for

mu

nicipal w

ater purv

eyors;

Town

-Wide Hydrog

eologic Assess

ment

Reports

; F

ederal/Sta

te/Local pe

rmit a

pplications and

supp

ort docume

nts; Cont

racts and

Mas

ter Servic

e

A

greement

s.

E

DUCATI

ON

B. S.

in

G

eology, 1982,

S

yracuse

Univers

ity,

Syra

cuse,

New York

REGISTR

ATION

Cer

tified as

Profession

al Geolo

gist by the

American Institu

te

of Professio

nal Geologi

sts

TECHN

ICAL S

OCIETIE

S

A

ssociation

of Groun

d-Water S

cientists and

Engineer

s {National Gr

ound Wate

r As

sociation)


26/147

Th

oma

s

P. Cus

ack

c

ontin

ued

)

S

UM

MA

RY

O

F

PR

OFE

SS

ION

AL E

XP

ER

IEN

CE

2009

to

present

Sen

ior V

ice

Pr

esid

ent a

nd

Di

recto

r o

f

Le

gget

te,

B

rash

ears

& G

raha

m,

Inc

., She

lton,

Con

nect

icut

2

006 t

o 2

008

V

ice P

res

iden

t an

d

Direc

tor of

Legg

ette

,

B

rash

ear

s G

rah

am, In

c.,

S

heit

on, C

onn

ectic

ut

2

002 to

2

005:

Sen

ior A

sso

ciate

wit

h Leg

gette

, Br

ashe

ars

Gra

ham

, Inc.,

Tru

mbu

ll, Con

nec

ticut

199

5

to 2002

:

As

soci

ate wi

th

Leg

gett

e, Bras

hea

rs

G

raha

m, Inc.

, Wilt

on

and

T

rumb

ull, C

onne

ctic

ut

19

94 to

199

5:

S

enio

r Proj

ect

Man

ager

at

Legg

ette,

Bras

hear

s

Gra

ham

,

I

nc.,

Fish

kill, N

ew

Yo

rk an

d

W

ilton

,

Con

nect

icut

1

988

to 1

994

:

Seni

or Hy

drog

eolo

gist

at L

egg

ette, B

rash

ears

Gra

ham

,

Inc.

,

Fish

kill,

New

Yo

rk

198

7 to1

988:

H

ydro

geo

logis

t at

Legg

ette,

Bras

hear

s & G

raha

m, In

c.,

W

ilto

n, Con

nec

ticut

198

5 to

198

7:

Hy

drog

eolo

gist an

d A

ssis

tant P

roje

ct M

anag

er

at L

awle

r, Ma

tusky

S

kelly

E

ngine

ers.

Pearl River,

New

York

1

984 to

1

985:

Geo

logis

t at

Ca

toh

Env

iron

men

tal C

omp

anies

,

I

nc.,

Wee

dspo

rt,

New

Yo

rk


27/147


28/147

T

hom

as

P.

C

us

ack

(

con

tinu

ed

)

SP

EC

IFI

C E

XP

ER

IE

NC

E I

N G

RO

UN

DW

A

TE

R S

U

PP

LY

(co

ntin

ued

)

Village

of

Montgomery

Co

ndu

ct a

hy

dro

geo

log

ic

s

tud

y

of m

ultip

le

we

ll f

ield

s

to

ad

dres

s

wate

r-q

uali

ty c

onc

ern

s

a

nd

bio

foul

ing

res

ultin

g

in si

gnif

ican

t

l

oss

in

y

ield

s

of

high

-yie

ldin

g san

d

an

d

gra

ve w

ells.

Dev

elo

ped an

d

im

ple

men

ted

o

f a lo

ng-

term

well

red

eve

lop

men

t

p

rog

ram

.

Or

ang

eCo

un

tyW

ater

A

uth

orit

y

Au

tho

r

of M

ode

l

Gr

oun

d-W

ate

r Pro

tec

tion

Pl

an,

pr

epa

red

f

or the

OC

WA

.

G

rou

nd-

Wa

ter Pro

tec

tion

P

lan

(

GW

PP

) i

s util

ized

a

s

a gu

ide

line

do

cum

en

t fo

r the

d

eve

lopm

en

t of loc

al

GW

PP

's

for

wat

er s

upp

lies

in th

e

Cou

nty a

nd

s

out

hea

ster

n Ne

w

Y

ork

S

tate

.

The

pla

n is

util

ized to

imp

lem

en

t aq

uife

r pro

tec

tion p

lan

f

or th

e ed

uca

tion

use

.

Th

e Mod

el

Vi

llag

e of

Ki

rvas

J

oel.

N

ewY

ork

Ser

vice

s

r

elat

ed

to

th

e d

eve

lop

me

nt o

f

r

egio

nal

wat

er-s

upp

ly so

urc

es f

or th

e

Vil

lage

of K

irya

s

Jo

el,

th

e f

ast-

gro

win

g mu

nic

ipali

ty

in

the

St

ate

of Ne

w

Yo

rk.

To

date

, LB

G

h

as co

mpl

eted

ex

tens

ive

regi

ona

l hyd

rog

eolo

gic

stu

die

s an

d

g

roun

dw

ate

r exp

lora

tion

f

or

the a

ddi

tion

al

d

eve

lopm

en

t of 1.

4

mg

d f

rom b

edr

ock

we

lls a

nd

2.1

mg

d fr

om

hig

h-yi

eldi

ng

sa

nd

and

grav

el

w

ells

. T

he g

rou

ndw

ate

r exp

lora

tion

pro

gra

m inc

lude

d

ext

ens

ive te

st

we

ll dr

illin

g;

p

ump

ing

test

and

groundwater withdrawal impact evaluations; water-quality

analysis; and

permitting

and

re

gul

ator

y

app

rov

al. On

goi

ng

w

ell fie

ld

ma

nag

eme

nt a

nd

red

eve

lop

men

t

prog

ram

s.

To

wn

of

Wa

ppi

nge

r. Ne

w

Yo

rk

LB

G

c

ond

uct

ed dri

lling

s

upe

rvis

ion

a

nd

well

des

ign f

or

the

de

velo

pm

ent

of

fou

r n

ew

high

-yie

ldin

g san

d

and

grav

el w

ells

.

The stu

dy

inc

lude

d

an

ex

tens

ive pu

mp

ing

te

st pr

ogra

m

and

wat

er-q

ual

ity a

na

lysis

. B

ase

d

o

n

th

e

res

ults

from

the

op

timu

miz

atio

n a

naly

sis

,

the

we

ll

f

ield

h

as a

max

imu

m

sus

tain

abl

e y

ield

o

f 1,6

55

gpm

or

2.

38 m

gd.

C

on

duc

ted

stu

dies

t

o

de

term

ine

if

t

he we

lls

are u

nde

r

the dir

ect

in

flue

nce

o

f sur

face

w

ate

r a

s req

uire

d u

nde

r

the

S

urfa

ce

W

ate

r Tr

eatm

en

t

R

ule

.

In ad

diti

on,

d

eve

lop

me

nt and

im

ple

men

tati

on

of a

lon

g-te

rm

red

eve

lopm

en

t

p

rog

ram

.

Sn

oo

k R

oad

We

d F

ield

. Tow

n o

fFf

shk

ill.

Ne

w Yo

rk

De

vel

ope

d a

w

ater

-sup

ply

sou

rce

fo

r

a

n

ew Wa

ter

Dis

trict f

or

the

Tow

n

whic

h

incl

ude

d

t

wo

hig

h-y

ield

ing

san

d an

d

gra

vel w

ells

. W

el

l y

ield

s are

in

exc

ess

of 1,

000

gpm

an

d

a

saf

e yi

eld

est

ima

te fo

r the

w

ell fie

ld

is

3.0 m

gd.

A

dd

ition

al wo

rk

incl

ude

s th

e

dev

elo

pme

nt of a

n

aq

uife

r

pr

ote

ction

p

rogr

am

an

d

o

ngo

ing

stu

dy ad

dre

ssin

g

the

re

gio

n app

lica

tion

o

f

road

s

alt, its

impact

on

the regional sand and grave aquifer, and mitigation

alternatives.

LBG assisted

in

o

btai

ning re

gula

tor

y ap

pro

vals

an

d

per

mits

for t

he

w

ell field

.

V

illag

e

ofW

ap

pin

aer

s Fa

lls.

N

ewYo

rk

Co

nd

ucte

d

a hy

dro

geo

log

ic stu

dy

o

f

e

xist

ing

w

ell

fiel

d to

add

res

s w

ater

-qu

ality

con

cer

ns

a

nd

lds

.

Ser

vice

s in

clu

ded

the

dev

elop

me

nt and

e

xec

utio

n of

a

w

ell re

dev

elo

pm

ent


29/147

Th

oma

s P

.

C

usac

k (

contin

ued)

S

PEC

IFIC

EXP

ERIE

NCE

IN

G

ROU

NDW

ATE

R SUP

PLY

(c

ontin

ued)

Par

kwoo

d

affidavit of thomas cusack

Documents