Skip to content

Beaver Creek, Delaware County, PA

Overview

Beaver Creek – Following up on work begun in 2015, DRN continued its advocacy supporting stronger protections for Beaver Creek in Delaware County. This stream flows from Pennsylvania into the Delaware and portions of its landscape are included in the First State National Historical Park. DRN supported the Beaver Creek Conservancy’s 2015 effort to petition for an upgraded designation of Beaver Creek. 

In 2020, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) released its antidegradation investigation, proposing only a short segment of the stream receive stronger protections (High Quality or “HQ” designation). When the PADEP called for comments on its draft report, DRN secured an extension to the December comment deadline. We are now engaged in mobilizing public comment and we are also advocating for stronger protections (Exceptional Value or “EV” designation) than PADEP is proposing based on the national historical park designation. The comment deadline is February 12, 2021. 

Related

Tohickon Creek

Whetstone Run

Upper Delaware Regional Upgrade Petition to PA DEP

Upper Perkiomen Regional Stream Upgrade Petition

Upgrade Petition for the Hosensack Creek

Upgrade Petition for the Hosensack Creek

Overview

On February 3, 2015, Delaware Riverkeeper Network and co-petitioners submitted a petition to the PA Dept. of Environmental Protection (PA DEP) to upgrade the Hosensack Basin and all of its tributaries to Exceptional Value status. You can view and download the full petition here

The Hosensack Creek, a tributary to the Perkiomen Creek flows through a rich area of forested and preserved country farms with rolling hills and historical features throughout that make it a unique natural region for Lehigh and Montgomery County residents and visitors alike. Within the Hosensack’s waters, reproducing wild brown and brook trout thrive and help indicate this stream deserves a stronger protection than its existing Cold Water Fishery, Migratory Fishery designation. The stream is also host to a diverse macroinvertebrate community and healthy thriving wetlands where endangered and threatened species reside, which makes it an ever more important watershed to protect. 

Graphic with the map and legend

The petition regulatory process is a lengthy one. Delaware Riverkeeper Network is urging the PA DEP to provide existing use EV designation promptly so this watershed can be protected from future potential threats while the stream works its way through the regulatory process. Organizations and individuals can help garner support for this submitted petition by writing a letter to the PA DEP at:

Honorable Patrick McDonnell
Chairperson, Environmental Quality Board
Secretary of Environmental Protection
16th Floor, Rachel Carson State Office Building
400 Market Street, Harrisburg, PA 17101


You can also email RA-EPEQB@pa.gov.  Please be sure to also send a copy of your letter to Delaware Riverkeeper Network as well. 

If you live in the Hosensack Watershed and have photos of the scenic beauty of the watershed, please share them with us. If you have fished the stream and observed trout, let us know that too. You can share photos by sending them to faith@delawareriverkeeper.org. Finally, be sure to contact your elected representatives and urge them to write to PA DEP in support of the redesignation petition to protect the Hosensack Creek and grant it Exceptional Value (EV) status.

Related Issue

Beaver Creek, Delaware County, PA

Geryville Quarry (Dormant)

Tohickon Creek

Whetstone Run

Upper Delaware Regional Upgrade Petition to PA DEP

Upper Perkiomen Regional Stream Upgrade Petition

Geryville Quarry (Dormant)

Editor’s note: This issue is currently dormant. We will continue monitoring the situation and may take up the issue in the future.

Overview

Map graphic showing the site

Geryville Materials, Inc, first submitted an application to the PA Department of Environmental Protection (PA DEP) to operate a noncoal surface mine in Lower Milford Township, Lehigh County in 2008. At that time a stream upgrade petition for the Upper Perkiomen Creek and Macoby Creek, submitted by DRN and partners was being considered. That petition closed with no change in the designations of the Upper Perkiomen Creek and Macoby Creek. However, the Delaware Riverkeeper Network (DRN) subsequently submitted an upgrade petition for the Hosensack Creek watershed. The proposed quarry would be located in this watershed.

As first proposed, this project would have opened a 628.5 acre quarry, impacting three unnamed tributaries to the Hosensack Creek and as well as an unnamed tributary to Macoby Creek. Geryville Materials’ withdrew its 2008 application proposed quarry operation, resubmitting a revised application in 2014. In 2015, Geryville Materials submitted a further revised application that reduced the area to be mined to 127 acres.

On June 3, 2015, the PA DEP held a public hearing in Lower Milford Township to take comments on a proposed quarry, stone crushing operation, and asphalt plant. These facilities would be located along the Hosensack’s cleanest tributaries. Local residents packed the Lower Milford Township Building to express their concerns about the impacts of the quarry and associated facilities on the quality of the environment and quality of life. View video of testimony from that hearing here.

On October 22, 2015, PADEP issued a deficiency letter to Geryville Materials regarding its quarry with a list of 95 deficiencies to be addressed. Among the listed deficiencies were many issues raised by DRN, including some issues that DRN alone appears to have raised. Geryville Materials had 30 days to let PADEP know how long it would take to address the list of deficiencies, but did not do so. The company did ask to meet with PADEP and, after an early 2016 meeting, Geryville Materials was given 14 months to address the list of deficiencies.

In May 2017, Geryville submitted additional materials in response PADEP’s 2015 list of deficiencies, but PADEP noted there were still many remaining deficiencies. PADEP issued a second deficiency letter to Geryville Materials on September 30, 2019. Again, Geryville Materials requested a meeting with PADEP. After a meeting in January 2020, PADEP gave Geryville Materials until June 30, 2020 to address the deficiencies in its application.

On July 29, 2020, Geryville Materials’ communicated to PADEP that it had decided to with draw its application to open a quarry in the Hosensack Creek watershed. On July 31, 2020, PADEP processed Geryville Materials’ request and affirmed that this application is no longer valid.

Geryville Materials has indicated it intends to refile in the future, but this project will be starting from scratch and will need to overcome the same barriers that prevented the project from moving forward previously.

Salem 4 – New Nuclear Plant Being Pursued for Artificial Island

Overview

For years PSE&G has been seeking approvals from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to construct a new nuclear power plant on Artificial Island, right next to the two existing nuclear plants:

    Salem Nuclear Generating Station & 
    Hope Creek.

There are many dangers to constructing this new power plant.  It would be constructed on wetlands, in the floodplain, in a reach of river that will be subject to increasing flood risks with the onslaught of sea level rise and climate change.  

The Delaware Riverkeeper Network has proactively opposed NRC licensing.

The US Army Corps of Engineers has sought to enter into a land swap with PSE&G that would give them the lands they need for Salem 4, while giving the Army Corps a new area in Logan Township and Oldmans Township, NJ to construct a confined disposal facility for the dumping of dredge spoils. 

In This Proposed Land Swap:

 the Army Corps would be the recipient of 354 acres of land located in Oldmans Township, Salem County and Logan Township, Gloucester County, NJ; and 
    PSE&G would, in exchange, be the recipient of 631 acres (94 acres of CDF and 537 acres of coastal wetlands) on Artificial Island. 

July 15 the Army Corps issued an Environmental Assessment of the land swap that ignores the reality that it paves the way for construction of Salem 4, and does not well consider the implications of the CDF on New Jersey communities or the River.  See the Delaware Riverkeeper Networks’ comments listed below.

The Delaware Riverkeeper Network wrote its first letter to the Army Corps opposing this idea way back in 2010 when it was still just an idea. Now we are leading the challenge to the idea as the Army Corps begins to work to press it to fruition.

Delaware Riverkeeper Network has remained in opposition to the landswap that would provide the property needed for this project to advance. To date, the land swap did not advance.

In 2020, New Jersey put forth a proposal to build a Windport project on the very same site.  If that project were to advance the landswap would not advance apparently displacing the opportunity for Salem 4.  The Delaware Riverkeeper Network is proud that our opposition to landswap helped to prevent it from advancing and bringing us to a point where the project may be unable to advance due to a lack of the needed proposed site.

Dragon Springs Development – Neversink River Threat

Overview

Dragon Springs Buddhist Inc is proposing to dam a headwater stream, destroy headwater wetlands, discharge poorly-treated wastewater to a Basher Kill trout stream, create acres of impervious cover and runoff, all of which would adversely impact the Basher Kill and the Neversink River. This development has already damaged the aesthetics and quality of the Basher Kill and the Neversink River, impacting fish, mussels and other aquatic life that are both ecologically and recreationally important to the region.  The Basher Kill and Neversink River are important recreational resources supporting highly valued swimming and fishing opportunities for both residents and visitors. 

Photo with areal view of Dragon Springs Buddhist Inc

One of the biggest threatened impacts is the proposal to dam a headwater stream in order to manage stormwater runoff.  An extensive forested headwater wetland with amazing ecological biodiversity and ecosystem function would be lost. 

The proposed wastewater treatment plant would pollute both a local trout stream and the Basher  Kill and the Neversink River, with problems such as excessive nutrients impacting trout and endangered species living in these streams and rivers. 

Threatened and Endangered Species

A number of state and federally listed Threatened and Endangered species are also located on-site or in areas affected by on-site activities. Among the biggest impacts that need to be evaluated are the water quality impacts to the Dwarf Wedgemussel and the Brook Floater, two freshwater mussels whose last remaining strongholds in New York state are here in the Neversink River but whose populations have severely declined already in recent decades.

Photo of the wastewater entering the stream

The Delaware Riverkeeper Network is actively working with concerned residents and local organizations to address this major threat.  Dragon Springs included a Draft Environmental Impact Statement with its proposal, but neither a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement nor a Final Environmental Impact Statement have been shared.  Scathing testimony at the public hearing from the Delaware Riverkeeper Network and all of our partners and residents has slowed the impacts from this proposal. 

Delaware River and Bay Oil Spill Advisory Committee

Overview

The Delaware Riverkeeper was appointed a member of the Delaware River and Bay Oil Spill Advisory Committee created by federal legislation in response to the Athos I oil spill.  This Federal Advisory Committee, which held its first meeting in December, 2008, was given an 18-month life during which it is charged with identifying recommendations to better protect the Delaware River from oil spill events in terms of prevention, response, recovery and mitigation.  The work load  for participants of this Federal Advisory Committee has been daunting but clearly critical.  There are few voices in the group to ensure that the needs of the River and all those who rely upon the River are given the highest priority.  The Delaware Riverkeeper is a member of both the main committee as well as three of the four subcommittees that it has established.

The Report Remains In Stasis

The Committee’s work was to be completed by April 30, 2010.  Due to opposition to key recommendations brought mainly by the Pennsylvania representative and a lack of voting members showing up for the last meeting the committee was unable to render a final vote on the report.  As a result the report remains in stasis.  Efforts are underway to secure a legislative extension that would allow the report to be revisited and finalized hopefully by the end of 2010.

Artificial Turf

Overview

Communities continue to install an increasing number of artificial turf fields. 

The Delaware Riverkeeper Network receives regular calls for information, assistance and comment letters to help resist these economically costly endeavors that bring a variety of harms to the kids and communities where they are placed.  

Environmental & Human Health Impacts

Our comments and concerns include both the environmental and the human health impacts of Artificial Turf.

Synthetic turf is generally made with rubber from waste tires.  Recycled rubber varies considerably in its chemical composition, even when from the same manufacturer. Hazardous substances found in tires may persist in the environment including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), phthalates and certain metals.  These substances may be bioaccumulative, carcinogenic, reprotoxic, mutagenic and/or endocrine disrupting.

Research has demonstrated concerns regarding water qualtiy and toxic affects for aquatic life. 

Direct human exposure to the hazardous substances contained in the rubber in-fill of artificial turf is believed to occur via three pathways:  inhalation, skin contact, and/or ingestion including by children who come into contact with the material.  Each pathway creating its own set of health concerns. 

Excessive heat is a major threat for those that play on artificial turf. High surface temperatures found on artificial turf fields can contribute to physiological stress and cause “serious heat-related illnesses”. Heat stress, heat stroke and burns are all of concern.  

If you are faced with an artificial turf proposal in your watershed community reach out if you think Delaware Riverkeeper Network can be of assistance.  In addition, the fact sheets and comment letters provided below include a wealth of information that can help get you better educated on this important issue and provides key points and information you could borrow for your own local advocacy efforts.

DRBC Moratorium & Authority Challenged – WLMG v. DRBC & Delaware Riverkeeper Network

Overview

On May 17, 2016 a case was filed in US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania challenging the DRBC’s authority over drilling and fracking actitivies and challenging its defacto moratorium that currently prevents such activities anywhere within the Delaware River watershed.

The case was filed by the Wayne Land and Mineral Group. The action was filed  against the Delaware River Basin Commission.  The Delaware Riverkeeper Network successfully intervened in the case.

March 23, 2017 the case was dismissed with an important legal determination that the DRBC does in fact have jurisdication over drilling and fracking activities in the watershed.   

 

 

Transcontinental’s Northeast Supply Link

Overview

County in the Delaware River Watershed Where Planned — Monroe County (Ross Township) 

The Transcontinental [Transco] Northeast Supply Link Project is an expansion of Transco’s existing pipeline system that will enable Transco to provide natural gas transportation supply interconnections on Transco’s Leidy Line in Pennsylvania to Transco’s Market Pool in New Jersey and delivery points in New York City.  The Project will involve the construction and operation of approximately 13 miles of new 42-inch pipeline looping facilities on Transco’s existing mainline; pressure uprating of approximately 27 miles of existing 24-inch, 26-inch, and 36-inch pipeline; a new 25,000 horsepower compressor station; addition of 16,000 horsepower at an existing compressor station; compressor unit modifications at an existing compressor station; and construction or modification of associated underground and aboveground facilities. As part of this project and in the Delaware Watershed, nearly four miles of 42 inch pipe is being proposed to cut through sensitive habitats and woodlands in Monroe County, crossing eight water bodies including 6 streams of the Aquashicola Creek Watershed (a designated High Quality stream) and 2 streams of the Buckwha Creek Watershed and residential areas.  Much of the area proposed for the pipeline expansion is in steep slopes and hillsides that include Chestnut Ridge that rises to 1,265 feet. 

Size and Scope 

The size and scope of the construction activity and stream crossings associated with this project will have a deleterious effect on the water resources of the Delaware River Basin.  There are significant concerns related to the cumulative impact that continuous water body crossing pipeline construction activity has on the health and vitality of the Delaware River Basin.  In addition to the NEUP, there are at least two other major pipeline upgrade projects (including Texas Eastern’s Philadelphia Lateral, and TGP’s Northeast Upgrade Project) that are either currently or soon-to-be under construction within the Delaware River Basin.  These construction projects will facilitate the further development of new wells, access roads, gathering lines, compressor stations, and other supporting infrastructure, which will further degrade the local environment.

There have also been numerous regulatory compliance failures associated with this type of construction activity.  In a recent pipeline upgrade project conducted by Tennessee Gas and Pipeline (TGP), called the 300-Line Upgrade Project, multiple violations were reported by the Conservation Districts in Pike, Wayne, and Susquehanna counties.  In Pike County alone numerous Notices of Violations were have been reported, including: 17 instances of dirt and sediment being discharged into water bodies, 7 violations for worksite conditions, and 21 instances of failure to properly institute Best Management Practices for erosion and sediment control.  This high frequency of violations demonstrates that there are systemic and continued failures in TGP’s compliance with regulatory controls, which suggests improper oversight, and or, inadequate enforcement.  In Wayne County, out of 16 inspections conducted by the County Conservation District during the 300 Line Extension Project, 15 violations were found.  This startling 93% failure rate provides further evidence of systemic compliance failures.

Furthermore, at the federal level, during the 300 Line Extension Project, in 28 out of 38 “Environmental Compliance Monitoring Program Weekly Summary Report[s]” that were provided on Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s [FERC] website there was at least one recorded incident where construction activity did not come into “compliance with Project specifications, mitigation measures, and applicable FERC-approved Project plans.”  Additionally, there were also at least 10 separate instances where an inspector in their “Environmental Compliance Monitoring Program Weekly Summary Report” indicated that a noncompliance report would be filed at a later date, but where the inspector failed to file a noncompliance report with FERC (and no reason was provided for the failure to issue that report in the following week’s report).  These 10 separate instances indicate that either FERC has maintained incomplete records for the project, or that there were multiple failures to follow-up on potentially enforceable noncompliance matters by FERC sanctioned environmental inspectors.  It is clear that the regulatory system, at both the state and federal level, is not adequately protecting the resources of the watershed.

The Delaware River Basin Commission has the authority to regulate pipeline construction activity if it involves a “significant disturbance of ground cover” affecting water resources. However, up to this point the DRBC has failed to exercise its authority in this arena.  In light of the regulatory compliance failures overseen by both the FERC and PADEP, the DRBC should exercise their statutory mandate to regulate pipeline construction activities in order to effectively preserve the natural integrity of the watershed.

DRN is committed to restoring natural balance in the Delaware River and watershed where it has been lost, and ensuring preservation where it still exists.  As such, we are actively engaged at the local, state, and federal government levels to ensure that full weight of legal environmental protection laws are brought to bear on all pipeline projects under consideration. 

 

Transcontinental Regional Energy Access Expansion (REAE Project)

Overview

Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC (“Transco”) proposes to construct a new natural gas pipeline called the Regional Energy Access Expansion (REAE). The project consists of 22.3 miles of 30-inch-diameter pipeline in Luzerne County, PA; 13.8 miles of 42-inch-diameter pipeline in Monroe County, PA; a gas-fired turbine driven compressor station in Gloucester County, NJ; and several other modifications to existing pipeline and compressor stations.

Transco REAE would impact 114 Exceptional Value (EV) wetlands and cross 77 waterbodies supporting cold water fisheries, 39 High Quality (HQ) streams, 2 Exceptional Value (EV) streams, 17 Class A Wild Trout Streams, and 57 waterbodies with naturally reproducing trout. Transco also inappropriately proposes to use an existing EV wetland as a mitigation site. Many of the streams that would be crossed by the project are cold water trout streams that are very sensitive to degradation. This project would also impact approximately 297 acres of forested woodlands. Clearing the forest around these streams exposes them to direct sunlight, raising the water temperature and jeopardizing their suitability as trout waters. Cutting forests and riparian buffers also creates habitat fragmentation. Transco fails to factor in not just the impacts of the fragmentation of the forest for these particular pipeline segments, but also by other cuts in the same region, either by Transco on its other pipeline pieces or by other pipeline/linear projects both within and outside the watershed. The project is also proposed to be constructed within the habitat of several threatened and endangered plant and animal species including white-fringed orchid, Indiana bat, northern long-eared bat, timber rattlesnake, and bog turtle. Transco also completely ignores impacts to vernal pools, which are not mentioned once in FERC’s Final Environmental Impact Statement.

Furthermore, Transco REAE would be an extreme detriment to regional climate change goals because it will consist of 47.8% of New Jersey’s GHG budget in 2050. Nothing is stopping FERC from certificating a second project that would consist of 65% of New Jersey’s 2050 GHG budget, thus, FERC would be virtually guaranteeing that New Jersey would not meet its emissions reductions goals, which is a large-scale issue that affects Pennsylvania as well. FERC also concluded that the REAE Project effects would be reduced to less-than-significant levels. This is despite the fact that FERC admitted that certain project components may be predominately borne by environmental justice communities and that climate change impacts would result in annual operation and downstream emissions of 16.62 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent. These levels would exceed FERC’s presumptive significance threshold based on 100 percent utilization.