Skip to content

Tennessee Gas Pipeline – Northeast Upgrade Project (Dormant)

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

Big Victory! 

Delaware Riverkeeper Network, et. al. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company

In a decision issued June 6, 2014, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, ruled that the Delaware Riverkeeper Network, the NJ Sierra Club and New Jersey Highlands Coalition were correct in their legal challenge to the Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company’s Northeast Upgrade Project and ordered additional analysis and review.

The Court stated: 

“On the record before us, we hold that in conducting its environmental review of the Northeast Project without considering the other connected, closely related, and interdependent projects on the Eastern Leg, FERC impermissibly segmented the environmental review in violation of NEPA. We also find that FERC’s EA is deficient in its failure to include any meaningful analysis of the cumulative impacts of the upgrade projects. We therefore grant the petition for review and remand the case to the Commission for further consideration of segmentation and cumulative impacts.” 

“On the record before us, we find that FERC acted arbitrarily in deciding to evaluate the environment effects of the Northeast Project independent of the other connected action on the Eastern Leg.” 

In May 2012 the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issued a certificate of public convenience and necessity to Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company authorizing construction and operation of its Northeast Upgrade Project. Delaware Riverkeeper Network, the NJ Sierra Club and New Jersey Highlands Coalition argued that the approval was inappropriate because FERC had illegally segmented its environmental review of the Northeast Project by failing to consider three other connected and interdependent projects – the 300 Line Project, the Northeast Supply Diversification Project, the MPP Project – and by failing to provide a meaningful analysis of the cumulative impacts of the projects. 

DRN on the Decision

Maya van Rossum, the Delaware Riverkeeper said about the decision: “This is important vindication of the rights of our communities and environment to be honestly considered and protected by our federal agencies. FERC has been allowing illegal segmentation by pipeline companies for years, it has ignored the pleas of the public for equity and for honest review of impacts, and as such FERC has been complicit with the pipeline companies in their ongoing efforts to avoid the rule of law and to ignore the devastating impacts they are having on our environment, impacts that will harm not just present, but also future generations. It is rewarding that a federal court has finally held FERC to account.” 

The case was argued before the Court of Appeals by Delaware Riverkeeper Network attorney Aaron Stemplewicz. Said Stemplewicz of the decision, “The D.C. Circuit’s decision today should put other pipeline companies on notice that the practice of segmenting pipeline projects before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission will no longer be tolerated, and that the cumulative environmental impacts resulting from these projects must be fully considered before a project is approved.” 

Added Delaware Riverkeeper Maya van Rossum: “This decision is important and powerful for every pipeline, related infrastructure and LNG project to come, but sadly for the communities, forests, streams, wetlands and critters impacted by the four projects at issue here, the decision comes too late to ensure their full consideration and protection. We will be able to press for important mitigation and efforts to undo the harms already inflicted, but as for avoiding the full array of harms, that is now impossible. FERC needed to do its job when it had the opportunity – but they were too busy servicing the gas pipeline companies to care.” 

Of particular note – all three justices ruling on this case concurred on the final judgment rendered. 

Update:  FERC has failed to comply with the court’s ruling and revisit its NEPA review of this project – DRN is pressing the issue with the court.

Background

Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company’s (“TGP”) Northeast Upgrade Project (“NEUP”) is an interstate transmission line upgrade project.The NEUP is the final pipeline upgrade project in TGP’s multi-stage 300 Line upgrade project, (although TGP has misrepresented that reality in order to avoid critical environmental regulation and oversight) designed to allow over 600,000 dekatherms per day of natural gas to be transported through Wayne, Pike Counties in Pennsylvania, and Sussex County in New Jersey, to be delivered to markets in the Northeast. To create this additional capacity, TGP proposes upgrading its existing 24-inch diameter 300 Line by constructing five, 30-inch diameter pipeline loops and modifying four existing compression stations. A pipeline loop is a segment of pipeline installed adjacent to an existing pipeline and connected to the existing pipeline at both ends. These five loops will close out the remaining un-looped segments of TGP’s existing 300 Line east of Bradford County, Pennsylvania, into New Jersey. Three of these loops are located within the Delaware River Basin (Loops 321, 323, and 325), which span Wayne, Pike, and Sussex counties. The project includes pipeline drilling activities under the Delaware River, significant new grading and clearing of previously undisturbed forested land and steep slopes, 90 stream crossings, 136 wetland crossings, and 450 acres of land development within our watershed alone. Highpoint State Park and Delaware State Forest are among the public lands to be damaged by this project. 

Currently, the western leg of the 300 Line runs from compressor station 219 in Mercer County, Pennsylvania to compressor station 313 in Potter County and consists of a 24-inch-diameter pipeline with a completed 30-inch-diameter loop along its entire length. Within the last 24 months Tennessee has applied to FERC for approval of four projects that together will compose the Eastern Leg of the 300 Line, starting at compressor station 313 in Potter County, Pennsylvania and stretching east to a delivery point in Mahwah, New Jersey.

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 13 other major pipeline upgrade projects that are being proposed for construction within the Delaware River Watershed. These construction projects will facilitate the further development of new natural gas wells, access roads, gathering lines, compressor stations, and other supporting infrastructure, which will further degrade the local environment.

There are also numerous documented regulatory compliance failures associated with this type of pipeline construction activity.  In a recent pipeline upgrade project similar in both size and scope conducted by 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 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 were 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. 

On November 21, 2011 TGP presented an Environmental Assessment of the NEUP to FERC.  Comments were submitted on behalf of the Delaware Riverkeeper Network, the New Jersey Highlands Coalition, the New Jersey Chapter of the Sierra Club by the Columbia Environmental Law Clinic before the December 21, 2011 deadline.  Click here for comment submitted
 
In summary of some of the impacts identified in the December 21, 2011 comment to FERC:

    “FERC’s conclusion that the Project will have no significant environmental impacts is unsupportable in the face of evidence demonstrating the potential severity of the Project’s impacts.” 
    “…the project will result in environmental impacts to over 800 acres of land over the 40-mile long project area…” 
    “The transmission of highly flammable natural gas creates significant risks of loss of life and major property damage. The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration reports that, in the past twenty years, significant on-shore gas transmission incidents have caused 43 fatalities, 219 injuries requiring in-patient hospitalization, and over $1 billion in property damage resulting from significant on-shore gas transmission incidents.3 Within the past year alone, three pipeline segments owned and operated by TGP have exploded, causing large fires, forcing residential evacuations, and threatening public safety.4” 
    “The EA identifies no fewer than thirty-five hazardous waste sites within 1,700 feet of the Project.” 
    “Each of the five pipeline loops will cross through sensitive and unique vegetative communities.” 
    “Loop 323 will cross the Delaware State Forest, High Point State Park, the Appalachian National Scenic Trail, and the Clove Brook Road Corridor Important Bird Area. EA at 2-73, 2-74, 2-45. Loop 323 will also cross the Delaware River, a National Wild and Scenic River. EA at 2-13. Loop 325 is located entirely within the Highlands Region, and will cross the Long Pond Ironworks State Park, the Monksville Reservoir, and Ringwood State Park. EA at 2-75, 2-76, 2-78, 2-79. The pipeline loops will also cross more than seven miles of prime farmland, EA at 2-4, dozens of high quality and exceptional waterbodies that serve as coldwater and warmwater fisheries, EA at 2-19, and almost fifty acres of wetlands, EA at 2-25.” 
    “The areas affected by the Project serve as habitat for four federally listed threatened or endangered species, the Bald Eagle, and sixty-five state endangered, threatened, or special concern species. “ 
    “The Project will permanently convert approximately eighty acres of forested land, potentially leading to increased erosion, fragmentation, and edge habitat, which could “decrease the quality of habitat for forest wildlife species.” EA at 2-36.” 
    “Construction of the Project will substantially degrade an additional 265.4 acres of forested land, which the EA admits will take “many years to regenerate.” EA at 2-36, 2-80. The Project will also cause “a permanent conversion of previously forested wetland areas to non-forested wetland areas,” 

The Delaware River Basin has the authority to regulate pipelines construction activity that involves a “significant disturbance of ground cover” affecting water resources.  Specifically, Article 3, section 2.3.5 (12) of the DRBC’s Rules of Practice and Procedures states, that the following activities are excluded from DRBC jurisdiction, “Electric transmission or bulk power system lines and appurtenances; major trunk communication lines and appurtenances; natural and manufactured gas transmission lines and appurtenances; major water transmission lines and appurtenances; unless they would pass in, on, under or across an existing or proposed reservoir or recreation project area as designated in the Comprehensive Plan; unless such lines would involve significant disturbance of ground cover affecting water resources. . . ” (emphasis added).  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.  Pressure should continue to be levied against the DRBC to take such action. 
 
Delaware Riverkeeper Network 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 enforcement authority is brought to bear on pipeline construction projects where operators have failed to comply with their statutory and regulatory responsibilities, and will vigorously facilitate the enforcement those regulations and permit terms and conditions where necessary.

To keep abreast of the latest on this project be sure to read the Delaware Riverkeeper’s Countdown blog posts.

DRN & Delaware Riverkeeper v. PA DEP & Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co.

In a December 18, 2012 legal filing, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection’s Environmental Hearing Board (EHB) was asked to issue an Order of Supersedeas that would prevent the Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company from proceeding with mobilization and tree clearing, the first steps in construction of its proposed NorthEast Upgrade Project (TGP’s NEUP). The Delaware Riverkeeper Network and Responsible Drilling Alliance filed the petition, essentially a request for a stay of construction activity, together with their notices of appeal of three DEP permits issued for the project, in order to allow the groups enough time to pursue their legal challenge while maintaining the status quo. 

The Petition for Supersedeas requests the EHB to supersede the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection’s (DEP) decisions to approve an Erosion & Sedimentation Control General Permit and to approve Water Obstruction & Encroachment permits for Wayne and Pike Counties for the TGP NEUP project. 

The Petition

The Petition, filed by attorneys on behalf of the Delaware Riverkeeper Network, the Responsible Drilling Alliance, and the Delaware Riverkeeper, Maya van Rossum, asserts that DEP’s decisions to approve TGP’s applications for these various permits violated the law in at least three ways. 

  • First, TGP has a record of recent and on-oing environmental violations on pipeline upgrade projects on the same pipeline that clearly shows TGP cannot be trusted to comply with environmental laws. 
  • Second, DEP approved the permits even though the permit applications failed to meet the substantive requirements of the regulations. 
  • Third, DEP issued the Erosion and Sediment Control permit despite unrebutted expert analysis from the Pike County Conservation District finding that TGP’s plans contained serious technical deficiencies. 

 The petition goes on to say: “Because DEP’s improper approval of TGP’s activities will result in the irreversible discharge of sediment into the tributaries of the Delaware River; the improper destruction of mature trees that prevent sediment from flowing into these tributaries and provide shading to regulate temperatures in streams and wetlands; long-lasting damage and even permanent destruction of Exceptional Value wetlands; and the disruption of macroinvertebrate populations during the time that DRN’s appeal is pending, DRN will suffer irreparable harm unless the Board supersedes DEP’s decisions and suspends the permits and permit authorization.” 

 

Constitution Pipeline

March 24, 2017

The NDNY court dismissed Constitution Pipeline Company’s lawsuit against NYDEC. DRN had submitted a motion to intervene on behalf of NYDEC, and while our pending Motion to Intervene and pending Motion to Dismiss were dismissed as moot, the Court largely followed our argument that the harm suffered by Constitution was purely speculative at this point and that therefore the case should be dismissed.

Commonwealth Pipeline (Dormant)

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

Project Suspended!

Posted April 2013 to the Commonwealth Pipeline’s website (www.commonwealthpipeline.com): 

 “The sponsors of Commonwealth Pipeline have suspended development of the project. We will be updating the website periodically to provide current information regarding the project’s status. Thank you for your continued interest and patience.”      

Project basics as originally proposed:

Inergy Midstream, L.P., UGI Energy Services, Inc. and Capitol Energy Ventures, a subsidiary of WGL Holdings, Inc., are proposing construction of a new interstate natural gas pipeline they call the Commonwealth Pipeline. 

The Commonwealth Pipeline project would span approximately 120 miles in order to lay a 30-inch pipeline. The pipeline project is proposed to begin in Lycoming County, PA and to cut through Columbia, Montour, Northumberland, Schuylkill, Berks and Chester Counties, also in Pennsylvania. 

The Pipeline as proposed would transport an estimated 800,000 dekatherms per day of gas drilled and fracked from the Marcellus shale.

Warwick Township, West Vincent Township, and East Nantmeal worked with the Delaware Riverkeeper Network to oppose the project.  Communiities passed resolutions of opposition, issued public statements, and were well organized in opposition.  Organizing happened along the entire proposed route.

On February 2, 2013 the Delaware Riverkeeper Network urged DRBC to undertake review of the project and to mandate it secure a DRBC docket.  This was another pipeline that DRBC, early on, failed to act upon.  But in the end, our victory mooted the importance of their failure.

Atlantic Sunrise Pipeline

Atlantic Sunrise Pipeline (ASP) Will Move Marcellus Shale Gas 

The Atlantic Sunrise Pipeline (ASP) will move Marcellus Shale gas from Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania to as far as south as Alabama. The ASP is a Williams Energy Partners project, which currently operates the Transco system (a network of over 10,000 miles of pipeline).  ASP will consist of compression and looping of the Transco Leidy Line in Pennsylvania along with a greenfield pipeline segment, referred to as the Central Penn Line, connecting the northeastern Marcellus producing region to the Transco mainline in southeastern Pennsylvania. In addition, existing Transco facilities are being added or modified to allow gas to flow bi-directionally. The line cuts through 10 central Pennsylvania counties (Columbia, Lancaster, Lebanon, Luzerne, Northumberland, Schuylkill, Susquehanna, Wyoming, Clinton and Lycoming).

FERC issued a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for the project on Feb. 3, 2017. And, despite active litigation that questions permits issued by the states as well as certification from FERC, construction began in March 2017 and, in October 2018, FERC allowed for the project to go into service.

 Two Avenues of Litigation 

Delaware Riverkeeper Network has pursued two avenues of litigation in order to prevent this destructive pipeline, including a case that was just applied for certification to the Supreme Court of the United States. The first case brings a challenge to a permit issued by Pennsylvania for the project and is still pending in front of the Third circuit. In this case, Delaware Riverkeeper Network claims that the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection failed to allow for public partition in the issuance of a NPDES permit for the project, in violation of the federal Clean Water Act.

The second case, first filed at both the Pennsylvania Environmental Hearing Board and the U,S Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, alleges that PADEP improperly issued a Clean Water Action Section 401 Water Quality Certification for the project, and that Delaware Riverkeeper Network, as well as other groups appealing similar natural gas permits, have the right to appeal the 401 Certification to the Pennsylvania Environmental Hearing Board, the state administrative body. The second conflict, whether the appeal of a permit goes to the U.S. Court of Appeals or to the state administrative adjudicatory body, arises due to language in the Natural Gas Act that requires permits issued for natural gas projects to be appealed to U.S. Courts of Appeals. In argument in front of the Third Circuit, Delaware Riverkeeper Network argued that under the Natural Gas Act, the Clean Water Act, the federal constitution, and Pennsylvania’s laws and regulations, any permits issued by the state of Pennsylvania should be first appealed to the PA Environmental Hearing Board (EHB). While the EBH agreed with the DRN, in the case filed at the EHB, the Third Circuit did not. Instead, the Third Circuit found that the EHB has no authority to review the issuance of permits under the NGA. This holding is contrary to fundamentals of federalism, the Clean Water Act, and Pennsylvania law. Further, it is contradictory to holdings in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit and within the Third Circuit itself.

After receiving the opinion from the Third Circuit, Delaware Riverkeeper Network felt that it was necessary to appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States. On January 9, 2019, Delaware Riverkeeper Network submitted a petition for certification to the Supreme Court of the United States arguing both that Third Circuit was wrong in its interpretation and that if this decision is left to stand, it will create uncertainty for states in the Third Circuit (which includes Delaware, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania) as well as nationally as it conflicts with other opinions issues by the First Circuit (Berkshire Envtl. Action Team, Inc. v. Tenn. Gas Pipeline Co., LLC, 851 F.3d 105 (1st Cir. 2017) and with an opinion issued by the Third Circuit itself (Twp. of Bordentown v. FERC, 903 F.3d 234 (3d Cir. 2018).

Below are some photos of monitoring and community watchdogging underway at the Transco Williams Atlantic Sunrise gas pipeline. DRN has trained over 50 volunteers to document construction conditions over the last few months. These pictures were taken in the vicinity of a trout stream located in Schuylkill County after the landowner called us with concerns and complaints. 

Transco Williams Atlantic Sunrise gas pipeline photo

Adelphia Gateway Project

FERC Docket Number: CP18-46

In November, Adelphia Gateway, L.L.C. (Adelphia), a subsidiary of New Jersey Resources Corporation, announced that it was buying an 89 mile pipeline from Talen Energy Corp. On January 12, 2018, Adelphia filed an application with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for its proposed Adelphia Gateway Project (AGP). The proposed $143,00,000 pipeline project consists of acquiring and converting 89 miles of existing oil and natural gas pipelines, including constructing and operating two new 5,625 horsepower compressor states, installing 4.75 miles of new 16-inch diameter lateral pipelines, and constructing 8 new meter stations. The project will run from Martins Creek, PA to Marcus Hook, PA crossing Delaware, Chester, Montgomery, Bucks, and Northampton Counties, PA. It proposes to ship a total of 250,000 dekatherms a day of natural gas per day.

The whole of the pipeline would lie in the Delaware River watershed and in a portion of the watershed where numerous other pipeline projects are currently in operation, being construction, or are being proposed including, but not limited to, two Mariner East 2 pipelines, Marcellus to Market project, the PennEast project, and the Greater Philadelphia Expansion Project.

See below for a fact sheet describing the resources impact by the Adelphia Gateway Project.

UPDATE 9/19/2018: 

DRN wrote to the Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC) asking that DRBC exercise jurisdiction over the Adelphia project, and require that the project receive a DRBC docket before it is allowed to proceed.

UPDATE 5/1/2018: 

On May 1, 2018 the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) released a notice of intent to prepare an environmental assessment (EA) for the proposed Adelphia Gateway Project (AGP). Comments to FERC on the scope of all potential environmental and community impacts are due.  Two scoping hearings were held on May 30 and May 31 in Center Valley, PA and Essington, PA.

UPDATE 2/22/2018: 

FERC requested for Adelphia to initiate the process of providing a third party contractor given concerns that have already been voiced about the project by stakeholders and interveners.

References:

Adelphia Unveils its 84-mile natural gas pipeline through Philly; Will it spur protests?, Andrew Maykuth, Philly.com, January 16, 2018, http://www.philly.com/philly/business/energy/adelphia-gateway-files-ferc-application-20180116.html.

Clean Air Council’s Initial Comments on the Adelphia Gateway Pipeline Project, Clean Air Council, Docket ID No. CP18-46-000, https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/file_list.asp?accession_num=20180213-5358.

Resource Report No. 1: General Project Description, Adelphia Gateway, LLC, https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/File_list.asp?document_id=14634543.

Request for Third Party Contractor, FERC, Docket ID No. CP18-46-000, https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/file_list.asp?accession_num=20180222-3040.

Bushkill Creek Protection, Northampton County, PA

High Quality, Cold Water Fishery

The Bushkill Creek is a High Quality, Cold Water Fishery in Northampton County, Pennsylvania. It is a prized wild trout stream, fished and enjoyed by many, spanning several boroughs, townships and communities, flowing into the Delaware River at Easton. As a stream that is protected under Pennsylvania’s Special Protection Waters program, it is protected by regulation against degradation and its existing use as a Fishery is required to be preserved. Substantial evidence, gathered over several years by various agencies and experts, shows that the Stockertown Quarry (the Quarry) owned and operated by Hercules Cement, doing business as Buzzi Unicem USA, is contributing the repeated dewatering and pollution of the Bushkill Creek and surrounding region, including the formation of sink holes in the creek that remove water that is diverted to the quarry. Reports are that adverse impacts occur in the Little Bushkill Creek and on land as well. The Quarry mines limestone.

The Quarry pumps approximately 55 million gallons of water per day from the Quarry into the Bushkill Creek to replace a portion of the lost water that has been uncontrollably diverted there by their mining activity, which has destabilized the hydrologic balance.

DRN believes that in the past twenty years there have been at least 15 events of pump failure resulting in the dewatering of the Bushkill Creek and significant fish deaths, including a severe event on June 5, 2020, killing approximately 2,000 fish and an unknown number of other aquatic species. This event lasted for 15 hours, causing a significant fish kill, including the death of wild brown trout. This is a grievous loss, especially because these are wild reproducing brown trout, not stocked trout, and these fish and the ecosystem they require to thrive is gravely harmed by these events. The last such event occurred on October 15, 2020. Hercules/Buzzi Unicem does not have backup systems in place to operate the pumps when there is an outage or, in the case of October 15, a planned maintenance operation. There is no excuse for his, yet it has been occurring for years and many fish and aquatic species have been lost.

Notification of a Citizen Suit 

Notification of a Citizen Suit was mailed by Delaware Riverkeeper Network to Hercules Cement/Buzzi Unicem on November 6, 2020. This letter served as a pre-suit 60-day notification for a Citizens’ Suit on behalf of the Delaware Riverkeeper Network, its members, and Maya van Rossum in her role as the Delaware Riverkeeper (collectively “DRN”). DRN is demanding that the situation be remedied so that no more dewatering events occur as a result of the Quarry’s mining operation or the quarry operations should be shut down. DRN is prepared to file suit under the Clean Streams Law and the Non-Coal Surface Mining Act, and is also willing to engage in discussions with Hercules Cement should they wish to prevent further harms to the environment and the community that relies upon it. See the Notification letter and other supporting materials below.

Right to Know Requests 

DRN continued to file Right to Know requests with PADEP to discover what the plans are for addressing the issue. Through file reviews and other research it was made clear that the quarry was considering installing generators to back up the electric system that operates the pumps from the quarry into the creek. These generators would prevent the pumping from stopping in case electric power was lost, as in the 2020 storm that caused a 15-hour outage.  But the cost was considered too high by the company. DRN, members of the public, and local partners at Trout Unlimited advocated for backup generators to be installed.

The quarry also was in the process of securing permission from PADEP to deepen the quarry, expanding their operations. There is tremendous community concern over the effects that would have on the stream. The Bushkill Creek is pulled into the quarry through sinkholes that have developed over the years due to the mining operations, disrupting the natural flow of the stream and the aquifer.

Trout Unlimited members presented organized testimony from many members of the local chapter – the Forks of the Delaware. Other members of the public spoke as well. DRN testified verbally at the Hearing and submitted written comment to PADEP. DRN’s comments are under Supporting Documents below. Hercules Cement Company, LP d/b/a Buzzi Unicem USA announced that they would be installing backup generators to prevent any future dewatering of the Bushkill and any fish kills.

Since then DEP has not made any pubic announcements or shared any new information about the plans to deepen the quarry.

On May 17 and 18, 2023 Hercules/Buzzi Unicem started to install the generators. Why they waited almost 2 years to install the generators is unknown. However, they chose a dry spell with little rainfall. The Bushkill Creek was dewatered and a fish kill and the loss of aquatic life occurred on the second day of installation operations (May 18) because of the company’s actions. This latest catastrophe is documented as a catastrophic pollution event that DRN responded to starting when we were notified on May 18. The letter documenting the event, which recounts DRN’s report to PADEP and PA Fish and Boat Commission, is posted below under Supporting Documents. DRN is advocating that action be taken by PADEP and the Fish and Boat Commission immediately to ensure no further dewatering or fish kill events occur, that reparations be made by the company, and that the quarry not be allowed to expand its operations, based on its inability to manage their operations without harming the creek and its inhabitants. Trout Unlimited members of the Forks of the Delaware Chapter who were at the creek as a result of the notification of an planned outage to install the generators, responded swiftly and with dedication to the dewatering event and fish kill, trying to save fish and documenting with photographs and a location map what occurred. This evidence was included in DRN’s letter to the agencies.  Copies of the photographs and location map and copies of the USGS gauge graphs are included in the letter.

DRN has engaged a geologist who is a karst expert to assist in the review of technical reports and proposed permits related to the Hercules Cement Company/Buzzi Unicem mining operation. The quarry is planning to expand by increasing the depth of their mining and the environmental impacts of that expansion are of great concern, as are the ongoing effects of mining operations there, alongside the Bushkill Creek. PADEP has not announced any final action on the permitting or conditions for the permits to expand the mining operations as of January 2024.