DEC Audit Finds Half of Region 3 Landfills Miss Water Data Reports
1. Updated: April 17, 2015 Total Pages following cover: 10
NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
REGION 3 OFFICE/SOLID WASTE PROGRAM
2014 Groundwater Quality
Monitoring Audit Report
for Region 3 Inactive
Landfills
A Summary of Compliance Rates
Nicole Smith
4/15/2015
2. 2014 Groundwater Quality Monitoring Audit Report for Region 3 Inactive Landfills
Updated: April 17, 2015 Page 1 of 17
Table of Contents
Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………………2
Methods ………………………………………………………………………………………......2
Results and Discussion …………………………………………………………………………...3
Conclusions and Recommendations………….…………………………………………….……..4
Tables
Table 1. Inventory of water quality monitoring reports received 2010-2014 ……………5
Table 2. Compliance rates for landfill WQM data submittals 2010-2014 ……………….7
Table 3. Landfills missing data for the years 2010-2014 ………………………………...8
Table 4. Landfills missing data for the years 2011-2014 ………………………………...8
Table 5: Landfills missing data for the years 2012-2014 ………………………………...8
Table 6: Landfills missing data for the years 2013-2014 ………………………………...8
Table 7: Landfills missing data for the year 2014 ………………………………………..9
Figures
Figure 1. Graph illustrating compliance rates for landfill WQM data submittals
2010-2014 ……………………………………………………………………..7
Appendices
Appendix A………………………………………………………………………………10
Appendix B………………………………………………………………………………13
Appendix C………………………………………………………………………………17
3. 2014 Groundwater Quality Monitoring Audit Report for Region 3 Inactive Landfills
Updated: April 17, 2015 Page 2 of 17
Introduction
After closure of a landfill, the operator of the facility is required to submit groundwater
quality monitoring data each year. When the Solid Waste program receives this data, the
sampling results are reviewed and compared to applicable standards or guidance values (SGVs)
in order to identify potential environmental concerns. Analysis of this data allows the
department to evaluate the effectiveness of the landfill cap in mitigating landfill derived
groundwater contamination.
The rate at which a landfill is required to submit groundwater quality monitoring data is
based on a number of legally binding documents. First, the operator is provided with a consent
order that sets forth a number provisions, terms, and conditions. If the respondent (operator of
the landfill) agrees to the provisions outlined in the order on consent, then he/she is required to
submit a closure plan including post-closure maintenance and monitoring procedures to the
department for approval. Once approved, the post-closure monitoring and maintenance plan
calls for annual, semi-annual, or quarterly groundwater sampling for NYSDEC Part 360 Routine
and/or Baseline parameters. After five years of post-closure monitoring, the landfill can request
a variance reducing the monitoring frequency. If approved by the department, the variance then
modified the requirements of the post-closure monitoring and maintenance report.
The author has performed an audit of all inactive, monitored landfills to determine
compliance rates for submission of data during the past five years. This report summarizes the
data submission rate for the past five years (2014-2010), collected until April 1, 2015. It also
provides a summary of which landfills are not in compliance.
Methods
To begin, an inventory of groundwater quality monitoring data submissions to the
department from 2010 to 2014 was performed. A previous intern completed the most recent
audit in August 2014 (appendix A) which included an inventory of data from January 2010 to
August 2014. This audit builds off the previous report and includes updated information
subsequent to August 2014 through April 1, 2015.
A total of 66 monitored landfills from all seven counties under Region 3 jurisdiction
(Dutchess, Orange, Putnam, Rockland, Sullivan, Ulster, and Westchester) were evaluated in this
inventory. Either digital or hard copies of reports were considered sufficient submissions as long
the report included the relevant water quality monitoring data. In a table, the number of reports
submitted by each landfill were recorded for each of the five years included in the audit and
years with no data submissions were highlighted. Landfills missing data for an entire year were
flagged. The most recent date for data submissions for each landfill was also recorded in this
table.
Next author reviewed files to better understand the submission requirements and
circumstances of each landfill. In order to reconstruct the history of the landfill, excerpts of the
4. 2014 Groundwater Quality Monitoring Audit Report for Region 3 Inactive Landfills
Updated: April 17, 2015 Page 3 of 17
consent order, post-closure monitoring and maintenance plan, and approval letter reducing the
variance were pulled from the file and assembled as packages for each landfill that was flagged
in the table. The author then made phone calls to a number of the consultants for the flagged
landfills in order to see if the required water quality testing had been done, but failed to be
submitted to the department. A call log (appendix B) was kept in order to record all
correspondence regarding the landfills.
After organization of all the submitted data into a tabular format, review of files, and
completion of phone calls, overall compliance rates were determined as a percentage of the total
number of monitored landfills based on the inventory. Landfills that were missing required data
were then organized based on degree of non-compliance. Five individual tables were created to
outline degree of non-compliance. A table was created for each of the following categories:
Those that were missing data for all the past five years (2010-2014),
Those that were missing data for the past four years (2011-2014,
Those that were missing data for the past three years (2012-2014),
Those that were missing data for the past two years (2013-2014),
And those that were only missing data for the year 2014.
Most landfills are required to submit reports annually. Landfills that had only a one-year gap in
the submission of data, but had submitted data for the 2014 monitoring year were considered to
be in compliance.
Results and Discussion
The inventory of the monitoring reports (Table 1) received by the department over the
course of the last five years indicated that not all landfills have been submitting water quality
monitoring data regularly. In fact, the rate of compliance over the past five years is steadily
decreasing. In 2010, 82% of the monitored landfills were submitting data, but in 2014, that
percentage was down to only 70% of the total landfills required to submit data. Looking at the
past 5 years as a whole, only half (50%) of the landfills submitted data consistently every year
from 2010 to 2014 (Table 2, Figure 1).
After the audit was complete, 12 landfills were considered to be non-compliant with the
monitoring regulations set forth in the applicable post-closure monitoring report. Four landfills
(Table 3) were the worst offenders and had not submitted any data at all in the past five years
(2010-2014). Three landfills (Table 4) had not submitted any data for 2011-2014, three (Table
5) were missing 2012-2014 data, and two (Table 6) were missing 2013-2014 data. The landfills
listed in Tables 3-6 make up 12 landfills that are considered “non-compliant”.
Throughout the audit process, there were a few special cases that merit mention:
Gedney Way
5. 2014 Groundwater Quality Monitoring Audit Report for Region 3 Inactive Landfills
Updated: April 17, 2015 Page 4 of 17
Gedney Way was unique because it was found that the department never received
the closure report that was due in March 2012. Steve Parisio advised Bryan Zieroff
(consultant) that we would allow until March 13, 2015 for submission of the Post-Closure
Monitoring Plan. On March 11, 2015 the Closure Plan as well as all the data collected to
date was submitted by email to the department.
Plattekill
Steven Parisio, Solid Waste Geologist has been dealing with this landfill and
advised not to pursue this case because the town has already been notified that they are
not in compliance with regulations.
After careful review of all the landfills and their unique circumstances, 11 landfills that were not
in compliance remained:
Milan, Dutchess County
Middletown Psychiatric Center, Orange County
Phillipstown, Putnam County
Marlborough, Ulster County
Olive, Ulster County
Railroad One, Westchester County
Cragston (USMA), Orange County
St. Columba, Orange County
Hurley, Ulster County
East Fishkill Joint, Dutchess County
Kent, Putnam County
Conclusions and Recommendations
The overall goal of this audit was to determine the compliance rates among landfills that
were required to submit water quality monitoring data to the department each year. The study
found that only half of landfills inventoried had actually submitted their data consistently for the
last five years.
In response, I recommend reaching out to the operators of these landfills in hopes of
bringing them back into regulatory compliance. For each of the above 11 landfills I have drafted
letters (appendix C) that I recommend be sent to the operators informing them of their non-
compliance. These letters reference the order on consent, post-closure monitoring and
maintenance plan, and the letter reducing the variance (if applicable). These documents have all
been assembled as a package and I would advise that they be sent to operators as an attachment
to the letter. These letters will give the operators an opportunity to correct their deficiencies by
working with the department. All components of these letters can be found on the S drive using
this path: ComputerSHARED (NEWP-NW-GEN2APPS1) (S:)WQM Audit(Landfill Name).
6. 2014 Groundwater Quality Monitoring Audit Report for Region 3 Inactive Landfills
Updated: April 17, 2015 Page 5 of 17
Tables and Figures
Table 1: Inventory of water quality monitoring reports received by DEC-Region 3, 2010-2015
Region 3 Inactive Landfills - Water Quality Monitoring - Number of Reports Received
Facility Name County Municipality
Most
Recent
Report
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
Beacon Dutchess Beacon Aug. 2014 1 1 1 1 1
Beekman Dutchess Beekman Sept. 2014 1 3 1
Castle Point Dutchess Wappinger Aug. 2014 1 1 1 1 1
Clayton Dutchess Hyde Park Jan. 2015 4 4
Dover Dutchess Dover Feb. 2014 1 1 1 1
DC Airport Joint Dutchess Wappinger Jul. 2014 2 1 1 2
Dutchess County Balefill Dutchess Wappinger Jan. 2015 1 4 4
East Fishkill Joint Dutchess Fishkill Sept. 2014 1 1 2
Harlem Valley Dutchess Ameinia Jul. 2014 1 4 4 4 4
Hudson River Psychiatric Center Dutchess Poughkeepsie Nov. 2014 2 3 4 3
Hyde Park Dutchess Hyde Park Aug. 2014 1 1 1 1 1
James Baird State Park Dutchess La Grange Nov. 2014 1 1 1 1 1
Milan Dutchess Milan Nov. 2001
Pine Plains Dutchess Pine Plains Sept. 2014 1 1 1
Rhinebeck Dutchess Rhinebeck Jan. 2014 1 1 1 1
Stanford Dutchess Stanford Feb. 2015 1 1 4 4 3
Tivoli Dutchess Tivoli May. 2014 1 2 1 2
Union Vale Dutchess Union Vale Dec. 2014 1 1 1 1 1
Washington Dutchess Washington Jan. 2015 1 2 2 3 2
West Hook Sand & Gravel Dutchess Fishkill Feb. 2014 2 2 4 3
Al Turi Orange Goshen Mar. 2015 1 2 2 2 2
Cragston (USMA) Orange Highland Feb. 2007
Danskammer Orange Newburgh Feb. 2015 4 3 1 1 1
Middletown Psychiatric Center Orange Middletown Dec. 2009
Monroe Orange Monroe May. 2013 1 1 1 4
Montgomery Orange Montgomery Nov. 2014 1 1 1 1 1
Spring Brook Road Orange Greenville Feb. 2015 1 1 1 1 1
St. Columba Orange Chester Aug. 2011 1
Stewart Air National Guard Orange Newburgh Jul. 2014 1 1 1 1 1
Youmans Flats Orange Youmans Flats Mar. 2015 1 1 1 1 1
Carmel Putnam Carmel Feb. 2015 1 2 4 4
Kent Putnam Kent Jan. 2013 1 1
Patterson Putnam Patterson Nov. 2013 1 1 1 1
Phillipstown Putnam Phillipstown Mar. 2004
8. 2014 Groundwater Quality Monitoring Audit Report for Region 3 Inactive Landfills
Updated: April 17, 2015 Page 7 of 17
Table 2: Compliance rates as percentages based on the number of reports submitted each year
from 2010-2014
2010-2014 COMPLIANCE STATS
# of Landfills required to submit data 66
# of landfills that have submitted data for all years 33
2010-2014 Compliance Rate (%) 50.00
# of landfills that have submitted 2014 data 46
2014 Compliance Rate (%) 69.70
# of landfills that have submitted 2013 data 50
2013 Compliance Rate (%) 75.76
# of landfills that have submitted 2012 data 51
2012 Compliance Rate (%) 77.27
# of landfills that have submitted 2011 data 52
2011 Compliance Rate (%) 78.79
# of landfills that have submitted 2010 data 54
2010 Compliance Rate (%) 81.82
Figure 1: Bar graph demonstrating the decreasing compliance rate from 2010-2014
81.81
78.79
77.27
75.76
69.70
62.00
64.00
66.00
68.00
70.00
72.00
74.00
76.00
78.00
80.00
82.00
84.00
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
ComplianceRate(%)
Monitoring Year
9. 2014 Groundwater Quality Monitoring Audit Report for Region 3 Inactive Landfills
Updated: April 17, 2015 Page 8 of 17
Table 3: Landfills missing data for the years 2010-2014
Region 3 Inactive Landfills - Water Quality Monitoring - Missing 2014-2010 Data
Facility Name County Municipality
Milan Dutchess Milan
Middletown Psychiatric Center Orange Middletown
Phillipstown Putnam Phillipstown
Marlborough Ulster Marlborough
Table 4: Landfills missing data for the years 2011-2014
Region 3 Inactive Landfills - Water Quality Monitoring - Missing 2014-2011 Data
Facility Name County Municipality
Olive Ulster Olive
Plattekill Ulster Plattekill
Railroad One Westchester Croton-on-Hudson
Table 5: Landfills missing data for the years 2012-2014
Region 3 Inactive Landfills - Water Quality Monitoring - Missing 2014-2012 Data
Facility Name County Municipality
Cragston (USMA) Orange Highland
St. Columba Orange Chester
Hurley Ulster Hurley
Table 6: Landfills missing data for the years 2013-2014
Region 3 Inactive Landfills - Water Quality Monitoring - Missing 2014-2013 Data
Facility Name County Municipality
East Fishkill Joint Dutchess Fishkill
Kent Putnam Kent
10. 2014 Groundwater Quality Monitoring Audit Report for Region 3 Inactive Landfills
Updated: April 17, 2015 Page 9 of 17
Table 7: Landfills missing data for the year 2014
Region 3 Inactive Landfills - Water Quality Monitoring - Missing Only 2014 Data
Facility Name County Municipality
Dover Dutchess Dover
Rhinebeck Dutchess Rhinebeck
Tivoli Dutchess Tivoli
West Hook Sand & Gravel Dutchess Fishkill
Monroe Orange Monroe
Patterson Putnam Patterson
Shawangunk Ulster Shawangunk
11. 2014 Groundwater Quality Monitoring Audit Report for Region 3 Inactive Landfills
Updated: April 17, 2015 Page 10 of 17
Appendix A
12. 2014 Groundwater Quality Monitoring Audit Report for Region 3 Inactive Landfills
Updated: April 17, 2015 Page 11 of 17
Region 3 Inactive Landfills - Water Quality Monitoring - Number of Reports Received
Facility Name County Municipality
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
Beacon Dutchess Beacon 1 1 1 1 1
Beekman Dutchess Beekman 1 3 1
Castle Point Dutchess Wappinger 1 1 1 1 1
Clayton Dutchess Hyde Park 4 4
Dover Dutchess Dover 1 1 1 1
DC Airpoint Joint Dutchess Wappinger 1 1 1 2
Dutchess County Balefill Dutchess Wappinger 1 4 4
East Fishkill Joint Dutchess Fishkill 1 2
Harlem Valley Dutchess Ameinia 1 4 4 4 4
Hudson River Psychiatric Center Dutchess Poughkeepsie 2 3 4 3
Hyde Park Dutchess Hyde Park 1 1 1 1 1
James Baird State Park Dutchess La Grange 1 1 1 1
Milan Dutchess Milan
Pine Plains Dutchess Pine Plains 1 1 1
Rhinebeck Dutchess Rhinebeck 1 1 1 1
Stanford Dutchess Stanford 1 1 4 4 3
Tivoli Dutchess Tivoli 1 2 1 2
Union Vale Dutchess Union Vale 1 1 1 1 1
Washington Dutchess Washington 1 2 2 3 2
West Hook Sand & Gravel Dutchess Fishkill 2 2 4 3
Al Turi Orange Goshen 1 1 1 1
Cragston (USMA) Orange Highland 1 1
Crawford Orange Crawford 1
Danskammer Orange Newburgh 3 3 1 1 1
Howell Septage Lagoons Orange Goshen 2 1 2
Middletown Psychiatric Center Orange Middletown
Monroe Orange Monroe 1 1 1 4
Montgomery Orange Montgomery 1 1 1 1 1
Spring Brook Road Orange Greenville 1 1 1 1 1
St. Columba Orange Chester 1
Stewart Air National Guard Orange Newburgh 1 1 1 1 1
Youmans Flats Orange Youmans Flats 1 1 1 1
Carmel Putnam Carmel 1 2 4 4
Kent Putnam Kent 1 1
Patterson Putnam Patterson 1 1 1 1
Phillipstown Putnam Phillipstown
Putnam County Putnam Carmel 1 3 1
Southeast Putnam Southeast 1 1 1 1 3
13. 2014 Groundwater Quality Monitoring Audit Report for Region 3 Inactive Landfills
Updated: April 17, 2015 Page 12 of 17
Haverstraw Rockland Haverstraw 1 1 1 1
Lovett Coal Rockland Tomkins Cove 2 1 4 3 2
Pfizer Rockland Orangetown 1 1 4 4 1
Rockland County Psychiatric Center Rockland Orangeburg 1 1 4 3 3
Rockland State Park Rockland Clarkstown
Bethel Sullivan Bethel 1 1 1 1 4
Fallsburg Sullivan Fallsburg 4 4 4 1 1
Lumberland Sullivan Lumberland 2 1 1 1 1
Mamakating Sullivan Mamakating 1 1 2 2
Old Sullivan County Sullivan Thompson 1 4 4
Old V-Monticello Sullivan Monticello
Esopus Ulster Esopus 1 1 1 1 1
Gardiner Ulster Gardiner 1 1 1 1 1
Hurley Ulster Hurley 1 1
Jockey Hill Ulster Kingston 1 1 1 1 1
Lloyd Ulster Lloyd 1 1 1 1 1
Marlborough Ulster Marlborough
Minnewaska State Park Ulster Rochester 1
New Paltz Ulster New Paltz 1 1 1 1 1
Olive Ulster Olive 1
Plattekill Ulster Plattekill 1
Rochester Ulster Rochester 1 1 1
Rosendale Ulster Rosendale 1 1
Saugerties Ulster Saugerties 1 1 1 1 1
Shawangunk Ulster Shawangunk 1 1 1 1
Ulster Ulster Ulster 1 1 1 1
Wawarsing Ulster Wawarsing 1 1 1 1 1
Woodstock Ulster Woodstock 1 1 1 1 1
Croton Point Westchester Croton-on-Hudson
Gedney Way Westchester White Plains
Mt. Kisco Westchester Mt. Kisco 1 2 1 1 1
Railroad One Westchester Croton-on-Hudson 2
Sprout Brook Westchester Cortlandt 1 2 1 1
Notes:
1. The following reports were received but did not include groundwater monitoring lab data: Al Turi
- 2013, Carmel - 2012, Pfizer - 2014.
2. Highlighted cells indicate zero reports.
14. 2014 Groundwater Quality Monitoring Audit Report for Region 3 Inactive Landfills
Updated: April 17, 2015 Page 13 of 17
Appendix B
15. 2014 Groundwater Quality Monitoring Audit Report for Region 3 Inactive Landfills
Updated: April 17, 2015 Page 14 of 17
PHONE LOG
Landfill: Marlborough
Date: March 25, 2015
Consultant: Tectonic, Jim Upright
Phone Number: (800) 829-6531
Spoke with:
Nature of Conversation: was unable to get ahold of anyone, left message.
Landfill: East Fishkill
Consultant: Rennia Engineering Design, Richard Rennia
Date: March 25, 2015
Phone Number: (845) 877-0555
Spoke with: Ryan
Nature of Conversation: Said that the firm does not represent East Fishkill, only Fishkill.
Offered to contact the town if they were having problems with the sampling. I said we would be
in touch with the town and did not request any further information.
Landfill: Railroad One
Consultant:
Date:
Phone Number:
Spoke with:
Nature of Conversation:
***Could not find any reports in SW digital filing cabinet or in the basement so I could not
determine who the consultant was.
16. 2014 Groundwater Quality Monitoring Audit Report for Region 3 Inactive Landfills
Updated: April 17, 2015 Page 15 of 17
Landfill: Middletown
Consultant: EA Engineering, Judith Graham
Date: April 1, 2015
Phone Number: (315) 431-4610
Spoke with: recording, left message
Nature of Conversation: No way to connect with an actual person. Tried to look up Judith
Graham in the directory and the recording said that the name did not match any results. Left a
message with the general mailbox.
Landfill: Kent
Consultant: Upstate Laboratories, Anthony Scala
Date: April 1, 2015
Phone Number: (518) 459-3134
Spoke with: answering machine
Nature of Conversation: left a message
Landfill: Cragston
Consultant: Adironadck Environmental Services, Inc.
Date: April 8, 2015
Phone Number: (518) 434-4546
Spoke with: Kelly
Nature of Conversation: Need to know the engineering firm doing the sampling in order to
look the landfill up in their system.
Landfill: Phillipstown
Consultant: Sergio Smiriglio Environmental Consultants, Inc.
Date: April 10, 2015
Phone Number: (548) 534-3816, (845) 534-3314
Spoke with:
17. 2014 Groundwater Quality Monitoring Audit Report for Region 3 Inactive Landfills
Updated: April 17, 2015 Page 16 of 17
Nature of Conversation: called the above numbers that I got from the 2003 report and it said
they were no longer in service.
Landfill: St. Columba
Consultant:
Date:
Phone Number:
Spoke with:
Nature of Conversation:
***Could not find any reports in SW digital filing cabinet or in the basement so I could not
determine who the consultant was.
Landfill: Olive
Consultant: Clark Patterson Lee
Date: April 10, 2015
Phone Number: (518) 463-4107
Spoke with: Secretary
Nature of Conversation: The secretary was unsure, but transferred me to Timothy Moot. I got
his voicemail and left a message asking him to call back.
Called me back on April 14, 2015, but I was not in the office.
Returned his call to his cell @ (845) 220-7154 as requested on April 15, 2015 and requested that
he call back on Friday.
NOTE: Steve advised me not to make calls to the following landfills: Hurley, Plattekill, and
Milan
18. 2014 Groundwater Quality Monitoring Audit Report for Region 3 Inactive Landfills
Updated: April 17, 2015 Page 17 of 17
Appendix C
