Meeting Overview

MINUTES

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS JANUARY  21,   2015

 

MEMBERS  PRESENT:            JOAN  SALOMON DAN  SULLIVAN MICHAEL  BOSCO THOMAS  QUINN

PA TRICIA   CASTELLI

LEONARD  FEROLDI,   ALTERNATE

 

 

 

ABSENT:                                  NONE

 

 

 

ALSO PRESENT:                    Dennis  Michaels,    Esq.

Alm Marie Ambrose,

Deborah  Arbolino,

Deputy  Town Attorney Official  Stenographer Administrative    Aide

 

 

 

 

This meeting   was called to order at 7:  00 P.M.   by Mr. Sullivan,   Chairman.

Hearings  on this meeting’s   agenda,  which   are made a part of this  meeting,  were held as noted below:

 

 

 

PUBLISHED   ITEM APPLICANT                                           DECISION

 

CONTINUED   ITEM:

 

ANELLOTECH

PERFORMANCE   STANDARDS

APPROVED

WITH  CONDITIONS

ZBA#l4-81

 

401  N.  Middletown    Road,  Pearl River

68.08   I 1   I lB;   LI zone

 

 

 

THE DECISION   RELATED  TO THE  ABOVE  HEARINGS  are inserted   herein  and made part  of these minutes.

 

The verbatim  minutes,  as recorded  by the Board’s   official  stenographer  for the above hearings,  are not transcribed.

 

There being  no further  business   to come before  the Board,  on motion  duly made, seconded  and carried,    the meeting  was adjourned  at 9:00 P.M.

 

Dated: January  21,   2015

 

DISTRIBUTION: APPLICANT

TOWN  ATTORNEY

DEPUTY   TOWN  ATTORNEY TOWN  BOARD  MEMBERS

BUILDING    INSPECTOR     (Individual    Decisions) Rockland   County   Planning

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

 

By~

 

Deborah  Arbolino,   Administrative    Aide

 

 

381~.:W   S>IH318    NCM(H

 

1$ ii  hid   9    lUJ  SIOl

 

N-MQJ.3~NV’HO     .:W N~Ol

 

DECISION

PERFORMANCE     STANDARDS   APPROVED    WITH   CONDITIONS

 

To: Marc Schneidkraut,  P .E. (Anellotech)

401 N. Middletown  Road Building  170A Pearl River, New York  10965

ZBA # 14-81

Date:  November   19, 2014

January  21, 2015

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown

 

 

 

ZBA#14-81:  Application  of Anellotech  for Performance   Standards  Review pursuant  to Zoning  Code (Chapter  43) of the Town of Orangetown  Code, Section 4.12 for an addition to an existing  building  to house a research  and development  facility to produce  organic chemicals  from sustainable  and renewable  biomass.    The building  is located  at 401 North Middletown  Road, Pearl River, New York  and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax

Map as Section  68.08, Block  1,  Lot lB; in the LI zoning  district.

 

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at  meeting  held on the following   Wednesdays,  November  19, 2014 and January  21, 2015 at which time the Board made the determination  hereinafter  set forth.

 

At the November   19, 2014 Donald  Brenner,  Attorney,  Matthew  Oscar, Architect,   Donald Wanamaker,   President,   Environmental    Management,    LTD.,  Marc   Schneidkraut,   P.E., Process  Engineer   II,  Anellotech,   Bill  Greenlaw,   Operations   Manager,   Anellotech,   and Charles  Sorensen,   PhD,  P .E.,  Vice  President,   Research   and  Development,   Anellotech, and Rachel Barese,  Civil Engineer,  appeared  and testified.

 

The following  documents  were presented:

 

1. Site plan for Anellotech,  Inc. dated 6/17 I 2014 with the latest revision date of

913012014  signed and sealed by Lawrence Torro, P.E.

2. Two CD’s labeled Anellotech Equipment Brochures dated 10/6/2014 and

Anellotech Material Safety Data Sheets dated 10161 2014.

3. Use Subject to Performance Standards Resume of Operations and Equipment form and Fire Prevention Supplement form with six pages of attachments.
4. A color print labeled “Anellotech: Addition to Building 123 Floor Plan dated

912912014  with equipment legend and materials legend.

5. Planning Board Decision dated September 10, 2014 with Neg. Dec..
6. A letter dated October 8, 2014 from the Town of Orangetown, Department of Environmental Management and Engineering signed by Joseph J. Moran, P .E., Commissioner.
7. A letter dated November 17, 2014 from the Town of Orangetown, Bureau of Fire

Prevention signed by Michael B. Bettmann, Chief Fire Inspector.

8. A letter dated November 3, 2014 from the County of Rockland Department of

Planning signed by Douglas J. Schuetz. Acting Commissioner of Planning.

9. A letter dated October 23, 2014 from the County of Rockland Drainage Agency signed by Vincent Altieri, Executive Director.
10. A letter dated October 23, 2014 from Shirley J. Thonnann, Chairwoman, Town of Clarkstown Planning Board to Cheryl Coopersmith, Chief Clerk Board and Commissions.
11. A letter dated November 17, 2014 from the County of Rockland Department of

Highways signed by Sonny Lin, P.E..

12. A memorandum dated September 10, 2014 from John Giardiello, P.E. to Cheryl

Coopersmith and the Planning Board.

13. A letter dated July 23, 2014 from the County of Rockland Department of Health signed by Scott McKane, P .E. Senior Public Health Engineer.
14. An e-mail dated September 15, 2014 from Jennifer P. Clark, P.E., Resident

Engineer, Department of Transportation.

15. The ~a~gon Carbon D~ffere?ce(~ pagesjsubmitted by applicant at t~~fj~n§)tH310 NMOl

explammg low-flow air purification applications.                               –                                   .

it  &1 lild     9     B~~ SIDZ

 

ttMOl3~NVHO dO NMOl

 

 

ZBA#l4-81

Page 2 of  11

 

 

 

Mr. Sullivan,  Chairman,  made a motion  to open the Public  Hearing which motion  was seconded  by Ms. Castelli  and carried unanimously.

 

 

 

On advice of  Dennis Michaels,  Deputy  Town  Attorney,   counsel to the Zoning  Board of Appeals,  Mr. Sullivan   moved  for a Board determination,   based upon the testimony  heard by this Board and the facts as presented  in the application  submissions  and in the record,

‘                that since the application  entails the ZBA engaging  in a review  to determine  compliance

with technical  requirements   the application  is a Type II action  exempt  from the State Environmental   Quality Review  Act (SEQRA),  pursuant  to SEQRA  Regulations  §617.5 (c) (28); which  does not require  SEQRA  environmental  review.  The motion  was

• seconded by Ms. Castelli  and carried  as follows:   Ms. Salomon,  aye;  Ms. Castelli,  aye;

Mr. Bosco,  aye; Mr. Quinn, aye; and Mr. Sullivan  , aye.

 

 

 

Donald  Brenner,  Attorney,  testified  that Anellotech  moved  into this space two years ago; that this is a building  that was previously  part of Pfizer; that they are a green company;  that they are a research  and development  company  that is planning  to produce  organic  chemicals  from sustainable  and renewable  biomass;  that the application  was before  the Planning  Board on September  10, 2014 and received  a preliminary  approval  and a neg dee for SEQRA;  that this is a pilot plan not a manufacturing  plant; that they are testing  findings  in the laboratory;  that they meet all the standards  required  by New York State; that they are taking an extra step and installing  a carbon system;  that they are not discharging  any toxic chemicals;  that

they are not villains,  they are scientists  and professional  engineers  and chemists;  that this proposed  kind of green industry  will cut down on oil use; that they will get the velocity  when they return;  that the stack is not a smoke  stack but a team flume and is mislabeled  on the drawing;  that they are not looking to effect the health of the neighbors;  that they are a research  laboratory  and will be regulated  by OSIA; that

they have no plan to expand  at the present;  and that they will return on January  21,

2015 after the Health  Department  reviews  the application.

 

Marc Schneidkraut,  P .E., Process  Engineer  II for Anellotech,  testified  that they are using non-food  biomass  products  to produce  liquid products  that are collected  in small quantities;  that any waste products  are collected  are removed  by a licensed contractor;  that the building  is 84 feet tall and the stack/vent  pipe is 3 to 6′ in

diameter  and it is a gravity driven  system;  that he does not know the exact velocity  of discharge  through  the carbon  system but will get that answer  when they return to the Board; that  the biomass  material  such as sawdust,  com husks,  are trucked  in to the facility in super sack  1500 lbs. and stored in the building;  that there will be no

outdoor  storage of materials  and no composting;  that the materials  are used at a rate

of about 50 lbs. per hour; and that they will return  after the Health Department reviews  the submission.

 

Bill Greenlaw,  Operations  Manager  for Anellotech,  testified  that there will be no discharge  of materials  into the sewer system;  that all materials  are taken to a licensed treatment  center;  and no modification  is needed to the sewer system.

 

Charles  Sorensen,  PhD, P .E., Vice President  Research  and Development,  Anellotech, testified  that the Rockland  County  Health Department  review  would be welcome  and could answer some of the concerns  of the public.

 

The Performance  Standards  Resume  of Operations  and Equipment,  and the Fire

Prevention  Supplement  completed  by the applicant  were thereupon  reviewed  in detail.

301.:1.:10  S)tH310  NM01

s.11 LJd    s   eia m.oz

 

N/M)13~NV~O :JO  NMO!

 

 

 

Anellotech   Performance  Standards

:             ZBA#14-81

Page 3 of  11

 

 

 

Public Comment:

 

 

 

Alex Gromac,  Supervisor,  Town of Clarkstown,  testified  that on July 23rd  the Clarkstown Planning  Board reviewed  a referral  sent from Orangetown  that stated the application  was for an addition  to Building  123, Addition  would house  a Research  and Development facility to produce  organic  chemicals  from sustainable  and renewable  biomass;  that the

applicant’s   attorney  is stating that they will work with the right people to work things out;

that this is a pilot project raises red flags; that Nanuet  residents  that attended  the Planning Board meeting  in Orangetown  brought  the matter to the attention  of the Clarkstown Planning  Board their concerns  at the October  22, 2014 meeting;  that they are concerned about noxious  gases benzene,  toluene  and xylenes;  that he knows that they do not have legal jurisdiction  but as the Supervisor  he would  like to gather additional  information;

that the answers  from the applicant  have been  sketchy  and the toxic fumes will travel across the border;  that he is glad that this will be sent to the Rockland  County Health Department.

 

George Hochman,  5 Lakeshore  Drive, Nanuet;  testified  that this re-iterates  a pattern of limited information  and this just  happened  with the Town of Ramapo;  that he would like to have more information;  that there will be impacts  on the County roads from this operation;  and he requests  that the Board collect all the residents  names and addresses

and notices  of future meetings  be mailed  to them.

 

 

Ken Cully, 21  Nanuet  Avenue,  Nanuet,  testified  that Anellotech  announces  on May gth that they are producing these products in Kilograms; that this is not a small pilot plan; that benzene is an extremely dangerous material; that it is toxic to blood and the central nervous system; that the applicant is asking to see if this works; that these materials would be trucked in over roads in Clarkstown; and that this could end up being a super fund site.

 

Scott Parness, 162 Grandview Avenue, Nanuet, testified that he lives .5 miles from the site; that he has concerns regarding the smoke stack and the velocity of discharge from it; that the company is producing 2 kilogram blocks of benzene and benzene is known for causing fatal cancers of the liver, kidney, lung, heart, and that vapors from it cause birth defects; that he would like to town to look at the risk verses reward for allowing such a use; that he wants to know if getting residents sick is worth the taxes gained from the property; that he is concerned if poison gases are going to blow noxious fumes into the

air through the smoke stack and the employees will be protected.

 

Ray McCarthy, 35 West Palisades Avenue, Nanuet, testified that he has the same      _,.   ~      -4 concerns as other members of the public about carcino~ens from the smo~e stack but~    .    ~   .         ~ is also concerned about how the products to be used will be stored; that his property  z      ~      z backs up to the Pfizer property and he put up with smells from the mulch and compo~~  cc .                 ~

for years; that he wants to know where the com husks and such will be stored.           ~     m    ~

 

”                             )> Marie Gartshorte, 24 West Palisades Avenue, Nanuet, testified that she works.in the ~     ~       ~ fragrance industry and all three of the substances that Anellotech are producing are   ~     i:; :        ~

 

banned from use in the fragrance industry ; that they stay in the air, water, soil and thf)

M  •         ~

1

 

Board should consider this.                                                                                           m    N       :z

 

Laura Woodward, 63 East Carrol Street, Pearl River, testified that she is a Pearl River resident and she is concerned and confused; did the Health Department review this?; and this is in her backyard and she wants to know what is going on.

 

 

ZBA#14-81

Page 4 of  11

 

Pat Linekin, 442 Somerset  Drive, Pearl River,  asked how long Anellotech  has been a resident  of the Pfizer campus.

 

 

 

Eileen Larkin,  15 Horn Tooke Road, Palisades,  questioned  what SEQRA  form was used for the Neg Dec; and asked when the code was written  for the performance  standards review;  that chemical  companies  cannot be trusted;  that she wants to know how the chemicals  are delivered  to the site and is it a 24 hour operation;  that the chemicals  could be googled  and the Board  should be more respectful.

 

 

 

Ed Walkley,  18 Nanuet  Avenue,  Nanuet,  asked if this use will be expanded.

 

 

Dale Shields,  60 Forest Avenue,  Pearl River, New York, testified  that she heard Mr. Brenner  say that he can’t  answer certain questions  because  of trade secrets;  that this operation  was done up in Massachusetts    and the applicant  should have answers  if this operation  has been done before.

 

Marc Goldsmith,  1   “Baltic  Road, New Cite, New York, testified  that he grew up in Pearl River, that his son lives there now; that he has two grandchildren  living not far from this location;  that he is concerned  because  the chemicals  are deadly  and that he would like to know if the applicant  has a plan in case of a catastrophic  event.

 

 

 

Pat McCarthy,  35 West Palisades,  testified  that building  210 & 211 are behind  her house; that she did not get notice  and that this is wrong;  and if the compost  stinks who does she call?

 

Nick Vento, 28 Rockland  Avenue,  Nanuet,  testified  that all of the “what ifs”   need to be answered.

 

Jean Willock,  42 East Carroll  Street, Pearl River, testified  that she has concerns  about the emissions  hitting  the ground;  asking if the ground  will be tested;  is there a plan for

testing;  and will the operation  be shut down if there are dangerous  emissions.

 

 

 

Dolores  Vento, 28 Rockland  Avenue,  Nanuet,  testified  that she is concerned  for her mother  and grandmother  and the schools  that are a ‘l’2  mile from this property;  that she hopes the Health Department  acts on it; that the EPA and OSIA should take action; that everyone  should make calls and let everyone  know that we don’t  want this flammable explosive.

 

Ann Mare Berkowitz,  18 Englewood  Avenue,  Nanuet,  testified  that she does not want the air poisoned.

 

 

January 21, 2015

  .       ~

:0:e  .     ~-

:z    ~

0

-t

::e

z

 

Q             t:D   0

At  the  January   21,  2015   Donald   Brenner,   Attorney,   Donald   Wanamaker,    Preiti<lent,  .                   ,, Environmental   Management,    LTD.,   Marc   Schneidkraut,    P.E.,   Process   Engin~      IP,)     g Anellotech,   Charles  Sorensen,   PhD,  P.E.,  Vice  President,   Research   and  Develo@ient,,        s;

Anellotech,  David  Sudolsky,  President  and  CEO,  Anellotech,   and  Libby  Bowen,  S:enieP      e:>

Scientist,  appeared  and testified.                                                                                         ~      C !     ~

 

 

The following  items were submitted  for review:

J(!;’1):J     .,. •·

z::e

 

 

1. A letter dated November  24, 2014 to the Rockland  County  Department  of Health from Donald J. Wanamaker,  President,  Environmental   Management,   LTD ..

 

 

ZBA#l4-81

Page  5  of  11

 

 

2. A letter dated December  1, 2014 from the County of Rockland  Department  of Health,  Environmental  Health  Program  signed by Judith M. Hunderfund,  P .E., Director,  Environmental   Public  Health.
3. A letter dated December  3, 2014 from the.County  of Rockland  Department  of Health  Enviromnental  Health  Program  signed by Scott McKane,  P .E., Senior Public Health  Engineer.
4. A letter dated December  22, 2014 from Condon  & Associates,  PLLC to Kevin Garvey,  Chairman,  Orangetown  Planning  Board,   signed by Brian K. Condon.  (2 pages  attachments)
5. A letter dated December  22, 2014 from the Town  of Clarkstown  signed by Jose C.

Simoes,  Principal  Planner.

6. A letter dated December  24, 2014 from Alexander  J. Gromack,  Supervisor,  Town of Clarkstown.
7. A letter dated January  8, 20015 from David  Sudolsky,  President  and CEO, Anellotech,  Inc. to Andrew  Stewart,  Supervisor,  Town of Orangetown  and Alexander  Gromack,  Supervisor,  Town of Clarkstown.
8. A letter dated January 15, 2015 from the New York  State Department  of

Environmental   Conservation  Division  of Environmental   Permits,  Region  3, signed by Joseph  R. Murray,  Enviromnental   Analyst,  Division  of Environmental Permits with 5 pages of attachments.

9. Site plan for Anellotech,  Inc. signed  and sealed by Lawrence  E Torro,   P.E. last revised  12/15/ 2014 ( 2 pages).
10. Falco 300 with VFD controlled 1 Ohp dilution blower  (1 page) dated  12/17 /2014.
11. Anellotech: Addition to Building  123 Floor Plan dated  12/16/2014  revision  18.
12. A letter dated January 16, 2015 from Veolia Environmental  Services  signed by

Donald  G. Lee, Technical  Services  Manager,  to Ms. Monica  Arango,  Anellotech.

13. A review of Anellotech Air Emissions  for the Town of Orangetown  by Triumvirate  Environmental   dated January  21, 2015 (7 pages including  cover and attachments).
14. Review of Air Quality  of Anellotech  Zoning  Board of Appeals  Application  from Trinity  Consultants  dated January  21, 2015 ( 6 pages)  signed by Elizabeth Gorman,  Senior Consultant.

 

Dennis  Michaels,  Attorney,  read the new correspondence   into the record.

 

Donald  Brenner,  attorney,  testified  that the applicant  appeared  before the Board on November  19, 2014 and asked for a continuation  so that the application  could get. reviewed  by more regulatory  agencies,  such as the DEC; that the Zoning  Board also provided  the performance  standards  application  to two independent  consultants  for their review  of the air quality  from the Anellotech  proposal;  that the D EC report dated January  15, 2015, Trinity  Consultants  and Triumvirate  Environmental  provide data to help the public understand  that the company  won’t  harm the community;  that

the company  is made up of engineers  and scientists  working  for a green industry;  and he will have one of the scientists  answer some of the questions  that the public brought up.

 

David  Sudolsky,  President  & CEO, Anellotech,  testified  that the company  has a miss~       ·~       ~

to reduce the dependence  on gas with renewable  biomass  that can be converted  into   ·~     ·       ~   ·                        z

.chemicals   that are ordinarily  produced  by gas; that taking sawdust  and making  benzeqs     ~       ~ toluene  and xylene will cut down on our dependency  on petroleum  and is beneficial  tq:;;    CD     o the enviromnent;  that the facility in Pearl River is a research  and development  facility~              ~ that will be used to produce   data necessary  for commercial  production  elsewhere;  thaf-1′>       ~       ~ there will not be commercial  production  at this facility; that they are hoping  to get       ~      ~1       ~

.      investors  to purchase  the licensing  for manufacture  after the testing  is complete; and     ::!!       ~· 1             o

successful;  that at that time plants  would be built  around the world  for production;  that~     ) fl ‘    ~

these plants would be built  closer to where the biomass  exists; that they would  like to

support the tax base in Orangetown  , offer well paid jobs,  support  local contractors  for construction  and provide  a partial  solution  to global warming;  and hopefully  have a

 

Anellotech   Performance  Standards

ZBA#14-81

Page 6 of  11

 

 

mutual beneficial  relationship  with Orangetown;  that the report from the DEC gives the worst case scenario  and the last paragraph  on page one of their letter clearly states that Anellotech’  s proposed  exhaust vent pipe parameters  and benzene  emission  rates listed in the tables below.  The emission  rates assume  a 98% benzene  abatement.  Projected  actual benzene  destruction  percentage  is 99.5% from the catalytic  oxidizer.”;  that the vent pipe is 80′ tall and 6″ wide; that they use gravity  to move the catalyst  around; that there may be a vapor of condensed  steam which  would consist  of carbon dioxide,  nitrogen  and

water; that the catalytic  oxidizer  is for additional  safety; that they are not releasing  any of the petro chemicals  into the air because  the catalytic  oxidizer  eliminates  them; that the carting company  is Veolia;  that if they are successful  in converting  com stoveer  into BTX and accumulate  information  an outside  company  comes in and pays them a licensing  fee (ex: Honeywell  —UOP)   and the license gets royalties  to build plants in other places around the world;  that they could possibly  be built in the southeast  US and the northwest forestry  land; that at this time in the production  it becomes  an economic  process  and it makes  sense to be located  where the biomass  is located.

 

Charles  Sorenson,  PHD, Vice President  of Research  and Development,  testified  that the catalytic  oxidizer  combusts  trace levels of vent gas to water; that he is not familiar  with how Triumvirate  compared  emissions  to cars and lawnmowers;  that if any pesticides  are present  they would be destroyed  by the high temperatures  before  reaching  the catalytic oxidizer;  that under  10,000 lbs. would be used for testing;  and there is a built in monitoring  that works before/after  and during  start up; that they will be keeping  records in case the DEC would like to see them; that if there was a fire in the lab, there is a fire protection  system;   that the building  is sprinklered;  and that the drums are sealed drums and they are in double containment.

 

 

Public  Comment:

 

Andy  Stewart,  Supervisor,  Town of Orangetown,  testified  that he would like to thank the public  for their extraordinary  work going over all of the materials  and that he appreciates hosting  the meeting  in the courtroom,  which is underutilized;  that quite a bit of information  was given to the Board  and the public today; that he would not be surprised

if the final decision  was put off and all the questions  related  to safety were resolved before  a decision  is made.

 

Dan Sullivan,  Zoning  Board Chairman,  responded  to the Supervisor’s   comments;  stating the  Zoning  Board of Appeals  has no grounds  to deny this application  and that they have three expert reports regarding  air quality  and a decision  will be made tonight.

 

Kathleen  Kelly,  18 Van Buren Street, Pearl River, testified  that she is very disappointed in Dan Sullivan’s   statement;  that she is a P.E., a professor  of health  science  and a doctor of nursing;  that this project  is hiding behind  the guise of research  and development;  that Anellotech  has already been  selling samples  to strategic  partners  for investment;  that this is not right; that the RCDOH  has no regulatory  development  for research  and development;  that the data submitted  by the company  was submitted  to appease us and if they are not doing anything wrong they should let us do the testing; that they should prove the safety is valid.

 

 

30\;!;!0  S)t):!31~ N:~Ol

6i ~!Yd     9 _        QUSU!l

N~Ql3~N~HO so Nh\Ol

 

 

Alexander  Gromack,  Clarkstown  Supervisor,  testified  that the Town  of Clarkstown  has continued  to closely monitor  the application;  that the primary  concern  is that the substances  manufactured  by the facility  should be monitored  ; that he questions   the nature of the facility as a research  and development  facility;  that according  to their own press release  they are  planning  to make large quantities  available;  that he read the letter dated January  15, 2015 from the DEC and they seem to have concerns  regarding  the disposal  process;  and that the Article  78 concerned  citizens  filed by Brian Condon  has named the Town of Clarkstown  as an interested  party.

 

Jose Simoes,  Director  of Planning,  Town of Clarkstown,  testified  that this is procedurally strange that environmental   information  is being reviewed  by the ZBA after the Planning issued a Neg.Dec.;that  typically  environmental   information  is reviewed  before the issuance  of a neg. dee.;  that he is happy  with the letter from the DEC stating that the annual concentration  is shown to be 18 times lower than the DEC’s  annual guidance concentration  and the EPA’ s “one in a million”  cancer risk level; that the emission

control  should be recorded;  that the Town  should  consider  taking  additional  steps by putting  money  in escrow  for periodic  air quality monitoring;  that the DEC letter asks for more details regarding  solid waste management   and operating  hours;  that he was going over the Orangetown  code and he doesn’t  know if the items being used in the operation are permitted  or prohibited  by code; and stated that processes  related  to wood pulp and fiber are prohibited  by Orangetown  Code.

 

Christina  Orfanoudakis,   129 East Lewis Avenue,  Pearl River, testified  about her concerns regarding  a fire on site; and questioned  who is equipped  to handle  it and how would that affect the emissions?

 

 

 

Dennis Michaels,  Deputy  Town Attorney,  responded  that the Bureau  of Fire Prevention answered  those concerns  in their letter that was read into the record at the last meeting.

 

Larry Aufiero,  3  Loeser Drive, Nanuet,  testified  that he is not a scientist  or a chemist;  that this is the first town meeting  he has attended;  that he heard about companies  coming to

fill up the Pfizer campus;  that he thought  he should do some investigating  when he heard about all the serious  concerns;  that he came to the conclusion  that this is a green company that uses biomass  to manufacture  biochemical  that lessens  our dependency  on petroleum; that this is a good thing and that the public  is aiming their arrow at the wrong company.

 

Irving Zuckerman,  471 Bull Mill Road,  Chester,  New York, testified  that he is a member of the Rockland  Economic  Board; that he has family working  in Orange  and Rockland Counties;  that he is for economic  development  but not at the expense  of the environment; that this company  is looking  to do research  and development  and this would be a great tax base for the county.

 

Denise  Schorn, 204 Hobart  Street, Pearl River, New York, testified  that there is an extraordinary  amount  of biomass  storage being  done at the location;  that the biomass  is undefined;  that the Board should insist on formal  documentation   of the type and amount of biomass  to be stored in their super stacks;  and she questioned  if the biomass  includes agricultural  waste, manure,  metabolic  waste and municipal  garbage;  and how much will be cycled through  the system over a specific  amount  of time.

 

at

~O\:J:lO  S)tt\310 NM01

 

i11dd    9 ·.      a~~’·lID2

.   —

NM013~NVBO .:W  NMOl

 

 

Scott Parness,  162 Grandview  Avenue,  Nanuet,  testified  that he finds it hard to believe that a decision  can be made tonight,  when the DEC wants more information;  that all of the data has been provided  by Anellotech;  that he caught Mr. Sorenson  in a fib at the Pearl River meeting;  that he left out that he is primarily  interested  in making  money,   not saving the environment;  that this application  primarily  effects Clarkstown  residents;  that the first application  stated that they would have a smoke  stack and now it is a vent pipe; that a long form EAF should have been done instead  of a short form; that Veolia,  their hazardous  waste company  has been sued for dumping  chemicals  illegally;  that they hired a high price lawyer to push this through;  and they expect  the Board to do the right thing.

 

Heather  Hurley,  202 Hobart  Street, Pearl River, testified  that there has been a lack of information  from Anellotech;  that there has been a lot of discrepancies  in statements

made by representatives   from Anellotech;  that at the November   19th meeting they refused

to answer questions and the Attorney said they couldn’t reveal their Secret Sauce; that all of the chemicals used by them should be listed on the performance standards form; that at the library meeting they changed their answer from 2 to 5 cars; that she was invited to a meeting at Anellotech in December with Supervisor Stewart and Councilman Valentine and could not get an answer about the com stoveer, and if the methane gases collected are full of pesticides; and she questioned if the seeds are genetically modified and Mr. Sudolsky said “we don’t know”.

 

Paul Frisch, 2 Kirchner Drive, West Nyack, testified that this issue is important for Orangetown and Clarkstown residents; that everything should be clear and transparent; that they cannot rely on Anellotech’s information because it keeps changing; that the discourse has been misleading; that you forgot to state your third goal, which is to make a ton of money; and the data given to the public today seems off and misleading; that the math doesn’t work out for the metric tons per year.

 

Ken Cully, 21 Nanuet Avenue, Nanuet, testified that he lives north of the plant; that he was at the first meeting; that the answers and details from Anellotech keep changing; that the president stated that he has two lofty goals and left out his third goal to make a lot of  . money; that a smoke stack inside a building is still a smoke stack; that the man that spoke in support of the project that lives in Chester New York doesn’t have to worry if the plant blows up and there are carcinogens being produced, stored and transported next to the residential neighbors.

 

Christi Thompson, 87 Turner Road, Pearl River, testified that she has several questions and asked what air testing emissions will be done and how often?; what testing of actual emissions will be done? And will the board look at the cumulative effect from other companies as they enter the campus?

 

Wendy O’Reilly, 8 Turner Road, Pearl River, testified that she has several questions and asked where are the drums of materials being stored?; how much is stored on site at one time?; what is the containment for storage of the drums if they leak?; if the catalytic oxidizer fails does the production shut down?; if there is an explosion with benzene, will the volunteer fire department respond?; how will the explosion effect the community? and how will the community be notified if there is an emergency?

 

At this time the applicant requested a break to get together all of the pertinent information to answer the questions posed by the public.

 

 

30t.:4:JO  S’>t~310 NMOl

ti-~! \Jd   9. t!Um2

 

N~Ol3nN’1HO .:10  NMOl

 

 

Libby Bowen,  Senior Scientist,  Amack  Foster Wheeler  consultant  to Anellotech,  testified that the first set of questions  had to do with safety,  storage  and volume  of materials;  that there is 300 gallons  of materials  on site at a time, in six 55gallon  drums; that the drums

are stored in the building  and inside a secondary  containment,  which be a berm of another

container  around the drum; that the building  is completely  sprinklered;  that there is specific  emergency  protocol  to follow  and then they would  call the local Fire & Police as needed; that the biomass details have been provided to the Town; that there are no

manure or bio waste used and only com stoveer and wood dust would be used; that there are no pesticides and if there were they would be destroyed by the high temperatures before they made it to the catalytic oxidizer; that the quantities of materials stored on site at one time would be under 10,000 pounds; that monitoring is built in and testing would be done during start up would be an actual analysis of samples collected before and after; that as suggested but not required by the DEC, records will be kept in case the DEC

wants to see them; that she doesn’t really understand the question a burning home being compared to a fire in the lab.

 

Charles Sorensen testified that the question is quite complicated to answer and it would take analysis to figure out the comparison of a single-family house fore to a fire in the lab; that there are two inventories of benzene in the building; that a small amount would be present in the processing equipment itself, and it would be below regulating limits would be available to burn in a fire but the six drums are kept in a different section if the building to prevent that type of occurrence; that the benzene would be a sealed double drum with a fire protection system around them; that the site has an automatic shutdown

system that monitors the emissions treated constantly monitoring the temperatures across

the catalyst bed in EPA regulations following the exact same protocol; that this would be followed by back up with U.P.S.; that they have protocol shutdown and shut down sequences; that the facility is always staffed with several operators and engineers and that the computer system would take over and shut down.

 

David Sudolsky testified that the corn stoveer that they would be using is currently used as feed stock and it is approved to be fed to food animals; that it is the part of the corn that is left from below the ear of the corn; that it is ground up an dried; that the unit that they are proposing to use has not been built yet; that the catalytic oxidizer has been used successfully since 1995; that the DEC letter states that “The emissions of air pollutants from the facility will be controlled using a catalytic oxidizer which is the same kind of technology used to treat car and truck mobile emission sources. This technology is proven to be very reliable since its introduction in 1975. They propose to monitor the performance of the converter by continuous monitoring of the delta T across the unit. They propose to continuously monitor the signal from the oxidizer’s air blower. These two measurements will tell if the oxidizer is mechanically working and that hydrocarbon

oxidation reaction is occurring. The facility will commence shutdown procedures if these measurements show the oxidizer is not properly working.”

 

a  ~ a

Donald Brenner, Attorney, testified that the applicant has answered over and above the requests from the Zoning Board that they have gone far and beyond what is required for a research laboratory facility; that they are not manufacturing and selling; that they are a    ……., research and development facility; and they hope to be successful.

 

~    ·~·~ The Board members made personal inspections of the premises the week before both:z: ·       ~      0 meetings and found them to be properly posted and as generally described on the     ~              -n

application.                                                                                                                   ~     a:>    g

z

~        l>

(V)          ,,

=::

A satisfactory statement in accordance with the provisions of Section 809 of the General ::3     ~

Municipal Law of New York was received.                                                                 ~              (j

 

Mr. Sullivan made a motion to close the Public Hearing which motion was seconded~y’ •·      ~ Ms. Castelli and carried unanimously.

 

 

Pape   10  of  11

 

 

 

FINDINGS  OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS:

After personal  observation  of the property,  hearing  all the testimony  and reviewing  all of the documents  submitted,  the Board  found and concluded  that:

 

 

Based upon the information  contained  in the applicant’s   Resume  of Operations and Equipment  and the Fire Prevention  Supplement;  the report dated October  8,

2014 from Joseph  J. Moran,  P.E., Commissioner   of the Orangetown  Department

of Environmental   Management  and Engineering  (D.E.M.E.);  the report dated November  17, 2014 from Michael  Bettmann,  Chief Fire Inspector,  Town of Orangetown  Bureau  of Fire Prevention  (B.F.P.);  the 01/15/2015  report from Joseph  R. Murray,  Environmental   Analyst,  of the New York  State Department  of

Environmental   Conservation.;    the 01/21/2015  report  from Richard  Foote,  P.E., of Triumvirate  Environmental;   and the 01/21/2015  report from Elizabeth  Gorman  of Trinity  Consultants;    the other documents  submitted  to the Board and the

testimony  of Applicant’s   representatives,   the Board finds and concludes  that the application  conforms  with the Performance  Standards  set forth in Zoning   Code Section 4.1, subject to compliance  with the orders,  rules and regulations  of the Orangetown  Office of Building,  Zoning  & Planning Administration & Enforcement, D.E.M.E., and Orangetown B.F.P., and all other departments having jurisdiction of the premises.

 

 

 

DECISION: In view of the foregoing and the testimony and documents submitted, the Board: RESOLVED, that the Application for Performance Standards Conformance, pursuant to Zoning Code § 4.1, is APPROVED with the following SPECIFIC CONDITIONS: (1) that the Applicant adhere to all of the requirements set forth in the report by Chief Fire Inspector Bettmann, Town of Orangetown B.F.P., dated November J 7, 2014; and (2) that the Applicant adhere to all of the requirements set forth by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation report dated 01/15/2015

signed by Joseph R. Murray, Environmental Analyst, Division of Environmental Permits;

AND FURTHER RESOLVED, that  such decision and the vote thereon shall become effective and be deemed rendered on the date of adoption by the Board of the minutes of which they are a part.

 

 

 

General Conditions:

(i}The approval of any variance, Performance Standards, or Special Permit is granted by the Board in accordance with and subject to those facts shown on the plans submitted and, if applicable, as amended at or prior to this hearing, as hereinabove recited or set

forth.

 

 

 

(ii) Any approval of a variance, performance Standards, or Special Permit by the Board is limited to the specific variance or Special Permit requested but only to the extent such approval is granted herein and subject to those conditions, if any, upon which such approval was conditioned which are hereinbefore set forth.

 

 

 

(iii) The Board gives no approval of any building plans, including, without limitation, the accuracy and structural integrity thereof, of the applicant, but same have been submitted to the Board solely for informational and verification purposes relative to any variances being requested.

 

 

 

30l:!.:IO  S)f’H310  NM01

–

Zl El.fild    9    Bll 5llJZ

 

NM0!3t)NVHO :JO  NM-0!

 

 

ZBA#l4-81

Page   11          of   11

 

 

(iv) A building   permit as well as any other necessary  permits  must be obtained   within   a reasonable  period   of time following  the filing of this  decision   and prior to undertaking any  construction    contemplated   in  this decision.   To the extent any variance,   Performance Standards,  or Special   Permit granted herein is subject  to any conditions,    the building department  shall not be obligated  to issue  any necessary  permits  where any such condition  imposed  should,   in the sole judgment  of the building   department,   be first

complied  with as contemplated  hereunder.  Occupancy  will  not be made until,  and unless, a Certificate  of Occupancy  is issued   by the Office of Building,   Zoning  and Pl aiming Administration   and Enforcement   which  legally  permits   such occupancy.

 

 

 

(v) Any foregoing  variance,   Performance  Standards,  or Special   Permit   will lapse  if  any contemplated   construction   of the project or any use for which  the variance  or Special Permit   is granted is  not substantially    implemented   within one year of the date of filing of this decision   or that of any other board of the Town  of Orangetown  granting  any  required final  approval   to such project,  whichever  is later,  but in any event within  two years of the filing of this  decision.     Merely  obtaining  a Building    Permit   with  respect  to construction

or a Certificate  of Occupancy  with  respect to use does not constitute  “substantial implementation”   for the purposes  hereof.

 

The foregoing   Resolution    to approve,  with the aforesaid  Conditions,    the Application    for Zoning  Code § 4.1   Performance   Standards  Conformance  was presented  and moved by Mr. Sullivan,   seconded  by Mr.  Quinn  and carried   as follows:    Ms.  Castelli,   aye;  Ms.

Salomon,   aye; Mr. Quinn,   aye;  Mr. Bosco; aye;  and Mr. Sullivan,    aye.

 

 

 

The Administrative  Aide to the Board is  hereby  authorized,    directed  and empowered  to sign  this   decision   and file  a certified   copy thereof in  the office of the Town  Cleric

 

DATED:    January  21,   2015

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

 

DISTRIBUTION: APPLICANT

ZBA MEMBERS

SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY

OBZPAE

BU1LDfNG fNSPECTOR-N.A.

 

Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN CLERK

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT

ASSESSOR

DEPT. ofENVIRONMENTAL

MGMT. and ENGINEERING FlLE,ZBA, PB

CHAIRMAN,  ZBA,  PB, ACABOR