LOWER SAUCON, TWP., Pa. — A hydrogeologist expert testifying Wednesday at a hearing on a proposed Bethlehem Landfill expansion said some testing needed for the expansion hasn't started yet.
Todd Lowery, project hydrogeologist with Meiser & Earl Inc. — a hydrogeologic and environmental consulting company that has worked on matters involving the landfill — also testified that approving the expansion would mean more monitor drilling in the new area.
- Additional monitor wells would need to be dug to keep up with the potential mitigation of landfill impact on nearby water, expert says
- Witness assured there would be proper standards, systems in place, according to DEP regulations
- No formal investigations regarding nearby bodies of water or drilling had taken place as of this hearing
Lowery said his company has worked historically with Martin & Martin on matters involving the Bethlehem Landfill, including the proposed Phase 5 expansion.
During the hearing, Gary Asteak, legal counsel for some residents who could be affected by the landfill, asked Lowery, “In fact, you have done no sampling, hydrogeologic or geologic sampling, testing, exploratory drilling on the expansion area in preparation for the completion of all the various applications that are required for DEP.”
Lowery responded, “No, we have not started that process yet.”
Lower Saucon Township is holding the hearing to decide whether to approve a conditional use permit for the expansion.
“We’ll provide services pertaining to geologic and hydrogeologic characterizations, and sampling and monitoring,” Lowery said.
He said the drilling would help mitigate impacts from the landfill by using monitoring wells, surface water points and stream protection.
Once installed, the monitoring system would see quarterly sampling and reports submitted to the township and state Department of Environmental Protection.
The sampling would be done by a subcontracted laboratory and not by Meiser & Earl, Lowery said.
If any degradation or compromise happened within a monitoring point, Lowery said, a groundwater assessment and investigation would be needed.
“That might require drilling additional wells to find the extent of the contamination,” he said.
Lowery said there are plans in place to “ensure that there are no impacts.”
Exclusionary criteria
Lowery said the landfill can't be within a 100-year floodplain, over bedrock where the uppermost unit is limestone, where there can be impacts to perennial streams or within a quarter-mile upgradient of a public water supply or 300 feet downgradient.
Landfill attorney Maryanne Starr Garber had Lowery explain some of the paperwork submitted as potential exhibits.
One form includes information on additional drilling, pumping tests, groundwater sampling and flow, along with more action that’ll be required with a potential expansion.
“It includes drilling to define the geologic units, correlation of the units by developing geologic cross-sections, the identification of other geologic features such as sinkholes, fracture, traces, lineaments."Todd Lowery, hydrogeologist with Meiser & Earl
“It includes drilling to define the geologic units, correlation of the units by developing geologic cross-sections, the identification of other geologic features such as sinkholes, fracture, traces, lineaments,” Lowery explained.
Plans in place
Meiser & Earl also prepared a gallery contour map that Lowery said “is used for the design of the landfill, and it’s based on a composite of seasonal highs observed in the exploratory test holes drilled throughout the entire proposed expansion area.”
He said landfill requirements call for an 8-foot separation from the bottom of its liner to the top of any water surface.
Asked whether nearby bodies of water would be affected by the expansion, Lowery said his company has to evaluate the permit area in a quarter-mile radius on the search for current or previous mining operations, with a duty to report.
“You know, based on our subsurface investigation, it’s possible that we’d have to pull back that disposal boundary based on where we define the boundary of carbonate rock in that area."Todd Lowery, hydrogeologist with Meiser & Earl
Asteak, the residents' lawyer, called the maps showing well locations and more to be “sketchy” and questioned the scales involved.
Asteak asked Lowery whether he would agree that the zoning mapping provided was unreliable and insufficient to agree with the zoning ordinance, “regulations, specific sampling and testing” required.
Lowery said his company’s investigative plan would account for those concerns.
“Until you have done that exploratory drilling, you are unable to provide us with an opinion to a reasonable degree of certainty that this site is suitable under the DEP regulations. Is that correct, sir?” Asteak asked Lowery.
“You know, based on our subsurface investigation, it’s possible that we’d have to pull back that disposal boundary based on where we define the boundary of carbonate rock in that area," Lowery said.
Thoughts from an architect
Matthew Allen, a registered landscape architect with Saratoga Associates, testified regarding his experience assembling photo simulations for the landfill expansion.
“A viewshed analysis is a map that indicates the geographic area where one would expect to have visibility of a proposed object.”Matt Allen, landscape architect with Saratoga Associates
He spoke more on his viewshed analysis of the land in question.
“A viewshed analysis is a map that indicates the geographic area where one would expect to have visibility of a proposed object,” Allen said. “The photo simulations are very simply a visualization of what the project will look like after development.”
Later, Allen said there are two primary steps in preparing a viewshed: modeling the existing landscape, complete with terrain and existing surficial features like buildings and vegetation, and modeling what's being built.
Using a point cloud data source, Allen said, he's able to identify elevation points both on the ground and on surfaces in the air.
Using that, he creates a digital terrain model highlighting the ground surface.
He also said he used light imaging and range detection to process the above-ground features.
Combining those things, he'll create a digital surface model.
A project engineer with Martin and Martin provided Allen with landscape contour and elevation gave information through an AutoCAD file.
Asteak questioned the potential manipulations done by Allen using 3D photo software.
Allen said his company consulted with nearby homeowners regarding their work.
The next hearing is scheduled 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. April 11.
