Since pipe was open when it should have been shut, can DEC require Conifer to inspect the pipes (all 3) for any sediments, and require samples at the outfall points?

As discussed, all culverts were isolated from the remedial excavation. (name redacted)'s own photograph (attached) shows that no water is entering or in contact with the bottom of the lowest culvert pipe. As such, there is no need to request inspection nor sampling of the culvert outfalls.

As well, we would request that Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) take a field visit and photograph the pitfalls of all 3 pipes to look for evidence of recent discharges from pipes (wash out, sediment deposit, etc).

The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC's) inspector has been present during all intrusive remedial activities at the site and has not noted any discharge of site water into the culverts. A sediment deposit would be expected at the culvert outfalls based on their prior use as drainage conveyance structures, and the presence of such deposits would not be an indication of an excavation-related impact.

Show All Answers

1. Does the open culvert support a violation being issued?
2. Since pipe was open when it should have been shut, can DEC require Conifer to inspect the pipes (all 3) for any sediments, and require samples at the outfall points?
3. Do we know if Conifer encountered more contamination than anticipated and if the scope of remediation (depth and linear extent) should be expanded?
4. Is Conifer taking endpoint samples to confirm the soils are clean at the edges where the excavation ceases?
5. Lastly, will the occupants of the building will receive notification of 1. that they are living on top of a brownfield and 2, copies of testing performed at the site while they occupy it?