WNYT-TV
"Poestenkill residents decry 'slow progress' in PFOA probe"
WNYT Staff
Updated: September 28, 2021 02:42 PM
POESTENKILL - With chemicals in their drinking water, the angst came bubbling to the surface during a standing room only meeting Monday night in Poestenkill.
"Go and do your own research, and you will see that these forever chemicals are a serious health risk," Judith Enck, former EPA Regional Director, and Poestenkill resident advised the crowd.
The meeting at the VFW Post comes on the heels of a PFOA discovery at the Algonquin Middle School earlier this year, followed by elevated levels of the toxic substance in two nearby homes.
"The biggest takeaway is that the folks in Poestenkill want testing," said Poestenkill Town Board Member Eric Wohlleber.
"They want it now."
Wohlleber says one of his disappointments is the amount of time it's taking DEC and the State Department of Health to test other wells in the community.
"Why did it take eight months to do ten tests?" Wohlleber asked rhetorically.
"I would like to see the state do more than those ten tests."
"I'd like to see the state do 30, 40, 50 tests."
Panelist Michele Baker, who lives in Hoosick Falls, advised the crowd she's still living the PFOA nightmare.
"I have to be really honest," Baker stressed, "when everything started in Hoosick Falls, this sucks the lifeblood out of you."
Unlike PFOA discoveries in Hoosick Falls and Petersburgh, which was linked to industrial sources, the origin in Poestenkill remains unknown.
"We should recognize that you're not always going to find an industrial source," said Gary Ginsburg of the state Department of Health.
"I hope many residents learned tonight the actual scientific process that we have underway here tonight," said Sean Mahar, chief of staff at the Department of Environmental Conservation.
"That was part of what we wanted to accomplish tonight, to give them an idea of how our experts are approaching this situation."
Wohlleber remains skeptical.
"I have zero confidence in DOH and DEC," he stated.
"I feel like they have not learned their lesson from Hoosick Falls."
At the end of the two-hour meeting, residents were promised they'd be kept in the loop, and more meetings would follow.
https://wnyt.com/troy-new-york-news/poe ... r/6251959/
THE PAUL PLANTE STORY
Re: THE PAUL PLANTE STORY
6 October 2021
To: Tom Russell for supervisor
Dear Mr. Russell:
As you will recall, on Saturday, 2 October 2021, you came to my home to introduce yourself, and to ask me for my vote for your bid to replace your fellow Poestenkill Businessmen's Protective Association member Keith Hammond as our next town supervisor.
As you will clearly recall, at the outset, I asked you about your views concerning RULE OF LAW in Poestenkill, asking you, "should we have it," to which question you demurred, as if in your opinion, RULE OF LAW was merely a fool's wish, and wasn't applicable to politics in the real world of Poestenkill, New York today, from the perspective of the Poestenkill Businessmen's Protective Association.
As you will clearly recall, I told you that if the town of Poestenkill were a person, it would be doing hard time in a prison as a habitual offender, three strikes and you're out, two of them being by the Planning Board of which, as a member of the Poestenkill Businessmen's Protective Association, a prerequisite to being a planning board member, you are also a member of, consistent with the "BUSINESS FRIENDLY" policy of the Poestenkill town board which has resulted in this contamination of our drinking water over here in what is considered the "WHITE TRASH" section of Poestenkill, and I told you that if this water contamination had stayed here on the wrong side of Rt. 66, you would have never heard a peep about it.
With respect to the CULTURE OF CORRUPTION in Poestenkill I asked you your feelings about, i.e., did you intend to put an end to it, or to continue to protect and nurture it as the next town supervisor, when you asked if I had proof that a CULTURE OF CORRUPTION actually existed in Poestenkill, I gave you a copy of an October 3, 2002 decision of Rensselaer County Supreme Court Justice James B. Canfield in the Matter of Paul R. Plante v. Planning Board of the Town of Poestenkill, Rensselaer County Index No. 204938, where Rensselaer County Supreme Court Justice James B. Canfield wrote as follows concerning the CULTURE OF CORRUPTION in Poestenkill we talked about in my driveway on 2 October 2021, to wit:
Poestenkill's extremely casual approach to determining environmental impact also bears notice.
end quotes
That is Poestenkill's "HARDLY LOOK" policy to which we owe this contamination in our drinking water.
Getting back to Judge Canfield and ENDEMIC CORRUPTION in Poestenkill, he continues thusly:
The administrative record here reflects Poestenkill's complicity with Showers and Valente in using the proposed subdivision as a means of avoiding SEQRA review by reducing the impact of the immediate proposal without inquiring into the possibility of further development at a later date.
end quotes
Since words used by a judge like Justice Canfield have real-word meanings in a court of criminal law, note the word "complicity," Mr. Russell, as used by Judge Canfield, a former Rensselaer County District Attorney, where "complicity" means "the state of being involved with others in an illegal activity or wrongdoing."
That is CORRUPTION, Mr. Russell, and you actually have come across as being much more its defender than something for corruption to be at all afraid of, which takes us back to Judge Canfield as follows:
Regardless of Showers and Valente's misinformation, Poestenkill's determination of no environmental impact would have to be rejected based on Poestenkill's failure to even give the appearance of complying with SEQRA.
end quote
And that all brings us forward to your recent statement to me as a town official that you disagree with my proposal that Eric Wohlleber thinks we townfolks are stupid, stating instead that you believe that Eric Wohlleber is trying to bring attention to the PFOA situation in an attempt to rapidly accelerate the testing and remediation process to assist impacted Town Residents, and you further believe former Obama-era EPA Administrator Judith Enck is a most valuable resource due to her Environmental experience and ability to get the attention of local media to bring pressure on the respective State & County Agencies to initiate action now, not somewhere in the future, and you realize that I & Bob Brunet have a long history based on my E/mails and articles in the Advertiser but that you talk with Bob approx twice a week to be constantly updated on activity by the RenssCo. DOH and now the State, and to continue to voice my thoughts and concerns because you will listen, leaving open the question of whether or not you will hear anything.
So, then talk about confusion reigning, misinformation flowing, and ignorance on display, that is how the "media circus" and political dog-and-pony show staged by Poestenkill Councilman Eric Wohlleber starring former Obama-era EPA administrator Judy Enck on 27 September 2021 in Poestenkill would have to be described, which is something I recall we both firmly agreed on, on 2 October 2021, when we talked about you dealing with the lies and corruption in this town as supervisor, which frankly, I think you are politically incapable of doing since you are also an active member of the Poestenkill Businessmen's Protective Association, which Protective sees corruption in this town as a matter of right, it has existed so long, nothing being more worthless in Poestenkill than a book of law and a Supreme Court decision outlining corruption in Poestenkill, as Judge Canfield did in Matter of Paul R. Plante v. Planning Board of the Town of Poestenkill, Rensselaer County Index No. 204938.
Going back to that farce on 27 September 2021, first off, as you will clearly recall, having been there yourself, we had Poestenkill water manager Bob Brunet telling us, in reference to the PFOA contamination in the groundwater in Poestenkill, "These problems are caused by wells," which has to be one of the most ridiculous statements ever to come out of what passes for "government" in Poestenkill.
Then we had Judy Enck, who was invited to speak by Poestenkill councilman Eric Wohlleber, and who you think very highly of, telling us "I think the state agencies have to be in the lead because they're far more experienced and have more resources than the county, I think they need to drive this process.”
And that was followed by Poestenkill councilman Eric Wohlleber himself undermining his own witness Judy Enck by stating "I have zero confidence in DOH and DEC, I feel like they have not learned their lesson from Hoosick Falls."
So tell us, Mr. Russell, who are we to believe?
Both of them?
And then we had Bob Brunet telling us, after blaming the problems on our wells, "connect to our water from Troy, I've done all sorts of elevation calculation of mileage calculators, fully feasible, can be done," this at the same time we are reading on the town propaganda site as follows: We now have full pressure through MOST of the water district.
Keeping in mind that the present water district only covers a portion of the town and would have to be extended, that is an admission by the Town that the present existing water district already has an inadequate public water supply, and I am hearing complaints from residents in the existing water district about pressure problems in the morning when everyone is up and getting ready for work.
So how does Bob Brunet think it is feasible to extend it?
To date, no answers!
WHY, Mr. Russell?
Which is simply another serious question for you to duck.
Respectfully,
Paul R. Plante, NYSPE, Assoc. P.H. Eng.
To: Tom Russell for supervisor
Dear Mr. Russell:
As you will recall, on Saturday, 2 October 2021, you came to my home to introduce yourself, and to ask me for my vote for your bid to replace your fellow Poestenkill Businessmen's Protective Association member Keith Hammond as our next town supervisor.
As you will clearly recall, at the outset, I asked you about your views concerning RULE OF LAW in Poestenkill, asking you, "should we have it," to which question you demurred, as if in your opinion, RULE OF LAW was merely a fool's wish, and wasn't applicable to politics in the real world of Poestenkill, New York today, from the perspective of the Poestenkill Businessmen's Protective Association.
As you will clearly recall, I told you that if the town of Poestenkill were a person, it would be doing hard time in a prison as a habitual offender, three strikes and you're out, two of them being by the Planning Board of which, as a member of the Poestenkill Businessmen's Protective Association, a prerequisite to being a planning board member, you are also a member of, consistent with the "BUSINESS FRIENDLY" policy of the Poestenkill town board which has resulted in this contamination of our drinking water over here in what is considered the "WHITE TRASH" section of Poestenkill, and I told you that if this water contamination had stayed here on the wrong side of Rt. 66, you would have never heard a peep about it.
With respect to the CULTURE OF CORRUPTION in Poestenkill I asked you your feelings about, i.e., did you intend to put an end to it, or to continue to protect and nurture it as the next town supervisor, when you asked if I had proof that a CULTURE OF CORRUPTION actually existed in Poestenkill, I gave you a copy of an October 3, 2002 decision of Rensselaer County Supreme Court Justice James B. Canfield in the Matter of Paul R. Plante v. Planning Board of the Town of Poestenkill, Rensselaer County Index No. 204938, where Rensselaer County Supreme Court Justice James B. Canfield wrote as follows concerning the CULTURE OF CORRUPTION in Poestenkill we talked about in my driveway on 2 October 2021, to wit:
Poestenkill's extremely casual approach to determining environmental impact also bears notice.
end quotes
That is Poestenkill's "HARDLY LOOK" policy to which we owe this contamination in our drinking water.
Getting back to Judge Canfield and ENDEMIC CORRUPTION in Poestenkill, he continues thusly:
The administrative record here reflects Poestenkill's complicity with Showers and Valente in using the proposed subdivision as a means of avoiding SEQRA review by reducing the impact of the immediate proposal without inquiring into the possibility of further development at a later date.
end quotes
Since words used by a judge like Justice Canfield have real-word meanings in a court of criminal law, note the word "complicity," Mr. Russell, as used by Judge Canfield, a former Rensselaer County District Attorney, where "complicity" means "the state of being involved with others in an illegal activity or wrongdoing."
That is CORRUPTION, Mr. Russell, and you actually have come across as being much more its defender than something for corruption to be at all afraid of, which takes us back to Judge Canfield as follows:
Regardless of Showers and Valente's misinformation, Poestenkill's determination of no environmental impact would have to be rejected based on Poestenkill's failure to even give the appearance of complying with SEQRA.
end quote
And that all brings us forward to your recent statement to me as a town official that you disagree with my proposal that Eric Wohlleber thinks we townfolks are stupid, stating instead that you believe that Eric Wohlleber is trying to bring attention to the PFOA situation in an attempt to rapidly accelerate the testing and remediation process to assist impacted Town Residents, and you further believe former Obama-era EPA Administrator Judith Enck is a most valuable resource due to her Environmental experience and ability to get the attention of local media to bring pressure on the respective State & County Agencies to initiate action now, not somewhere in the future, and you realize that I & Bob Brunet have a long history based on my E/mails and articles in the Advertiser but that you talk with Bob approx twice a week to be constantly updated on activity by the RenssCo. DOH and now the State, and to continue to voice my thoughts and concerns because you will listen, leaving open the question of whether or not you will hear anything.
So, then talk about confusion reigning, misinformation flowing, and ignorance on display, that is how the "media circus" and political dog-and-pony show staged by Poestenkill Councilman Eric Wohlleber starring former Obama-era EPA administrator Judy Enck on 27 September 2021 in Poestenkill would have to be described, which is something I recall we both firmly agreed on, on 2 October 2021, when we talked about you dealing with the lies and corruption in this town as supervisor, which frankly, I think you are politically incapable of doing since you are also an active member of the Poestenkill Businessmen's Protective Association, which Protective sees corruption in this town as a matter of right, it has existed so long, nothing being more worthless in Poestenkill than a book of law and a Supreme Court decision outlining corruption in Poestenkill, as Judge Canfield did in Matter of Paul R. Plante v. Planning Board of the Town of Poestenkill, Rensselaer County Index No. 204938.
Going back to that farce on 27 September 2021, first off, as you will clearly recall, having been there yourself, we had Poestenkill water manager Bob Brunet telling us, in reference to the PFOA contamination in the groundwater in Poestenkill, "These problems are caused by wells," which has to be one of the most ridiculous statements ever to come out of what passes for "government" in Poestenkill.
Then we had Judy Enck, who was invited to speak by Poestenkill councilman Eric Wohlleber, and who you think very highly of, telling us "I think the state agencies have to be in the lead because they're far more experienced and have more resources than the county, I think they need to drive this process.”
And that was followed by Poestenkill councilman Eric Wohlleber himself undermining his own witness Judy Enck by stating "I have zero confidence in DOH and DEC, I feel like they have not learned their lesson from Hoosick Falls."
So tell us, Mr. Russell, who are we to believe?
Both of them?
And then we had Bob Brunet telling us, after blaming the problems on our wells, "connect to our water from Troy, I've done all sorts of elevation calculation of mileage calculators, fully feasible, can be done," this at the same time we are reading on the town propaganda site as follows: We now have full pressure through MOST of the water district.
Keeping in mind that the present water district only covers a portion of the town and would have to be extended, that is an admission by the Town that the present existing water district already has an inadequate public water supply, and I am hearing complaints from residents in the existing water district about pressure problems in the morning when everyone is up and getting ready for work.
So how does Bob Brunet think it is feasible to extend it?
To date, no answers!
WHY, Mr. Russell?
Which is simply another serious question for you to duck.
Respectfully,
Paul R. Plante, NYSPE, Assoc. P.H. Eng.
Re: THE PAUL PLANTE STORY
WNYT NEWS AT FOUR
27 September 2021
SUBRINA DHAMMI: A meeting will soon get under way on PFOA found in drinking water in Rensselaer County.
JERRY GRETZINGER: The chemical was found in that water at wells in the Algonquin Middle School as well as some homes near there in Poestenkill.
Dan Levy joins us with a preview.
Dan!
DAN LEVY: Jerry, Subrina, good afternoon, I'm at the VFW Post in Poestenkill where later tonight there is a meeting scheduled at 7 o'clock and there is plenty to discuss at that meeting.
Here's why.
To begin with, there was mandatory testing done earlier this year at the Algonquin Middle School where levels of PFOA above 10 parts per trillion were discovered.
As a result, water fountains were shut down at the school and bottled water was brought in for drinking and cooking and dishwashing.
In addition, elevated PFOA levels were detected at two adjacent homes.
Unlike the widespread contamination in Hoosick Falls and Petersburgh, which was traced to industrial sources, the PFOA origin here in Poestenkill is so far unknown.
Rensselaer County Executive Steve McLaughlin did direct his county attorney to prepare legal action today against the manufacturers of PFOA in Rensselaer County.
McLaughlin says he wants to send a clear message that the county takes the PFOA matter seriously and will take strong sustained action to protect the residents.
Joining me now live is the former regional director of EPA, Judith Enck, who also happens to be a Poestenkill resident, and I suppose my first question for you, Judy, how do you sue when you don't know who is responsible for it?
JUDITH ENCK: Well, you can't.
We really need the county to do two things.
First, the county health department needs to offer free well sampling to anyone who wants it, and then, later down the road, after the source of the pollution is identified, it is appropriate to sue the polluters, but right now, no one in government is actually dropping monitoring wells and looking to identify where the contamination is coming from, so the immediate need is let's protect people's health and get everyone's well tested quicker.
DAN LEVY: Okay, so you live in Poestenkill, I'm sure you had discussions with your neighbors and friends.
What is the level of concern and how much concern is there that the contamination extends beyond the area of the middle school?
JUDITH ENCK: Well, I think there is significant concern, especially for parents who sent children to this public school.
My son went there years ago, but he could have been drinking PFOA because it wasn't until a state mandated test that we learned about this in January.
The other concern is the gap.
We learned that the school had contamination in January.
The county health department didn't start testing private wells until August.
So we really need the community to come together, let's get quicker testing, offer it to everyone in the affected area for free and pay special attention to the school.
I think the school is doing a good job.
They switched off that water as soon as they found out.
But they need a long term response.
DAN LEVY: And I know there was a gap also when they detected PFOA in the other communities between the time they discovered, and then they notified the community so hopefully we'll get some answers tonight.
I know you'll be here and several other people will be here and we will be here, as well.
We'll have full reports coming up later on at 9 and 11 o'clock.
Live in Poestenkill, Dan Levy.
SUBRINA DHAMMI: Dan, thank you very much.
27 September 2021
SUBRINA DHAMMI: A meeting will soon get under way on PFOA found in drinking water in Rensselaer County.
JERRY GRETZINGER: The chemical was found in that water at wells in the Algonquin Middle School as well as some homes near there in Poestenkill.
Dan Levy joins us with a preview.
Dan!
DAN LEVY: Jerry, Subrina, good afternoon, I'm at the VFW Post in Poestenkill where later tonight there is a meeting scheduled at 7 o'clock and there is plenty to discuss at that meeting.
Here's why.
To begin with, there was mandatory testing done earlier this year at the Algonquin Middle School where levels of PFOA above 10 parts per trillion were discovered.
As a result, water fountains were shut down at the school and bottled water was brought in for drinking and cooking and dishwashing.
In addition, elevated PFOA levels were detected at two adjacent homes.
Unlike the widespread contamination in Hoosick Falls and Petersburgh, which was traced to industrial sources, the PFOA origin here in Poestenkill is so far unknown.
Rensselaer County Executive Steve McLaughlin did direct his county attorney to prepare legal action today against the manufacturers of PFOA in Rensselaer County.
McLaughlin says he wants to send a clear message that the county takes the PFOA matter seriously and will take strong sustained action to protect the residents.
Joining me now live is the former regional director of EPA, Judith Enck, who also happens to be a Poestenkill resident, and I suppose my first question for you, Judy, how do you sue when you don't know who is responsible for it?
JUDITH ENCK: Well, you can't.
We really need the county to do two things.
First, the county health department needs to offer free well sampling to anyone who wants it, and then, later down the road, after the source of the pollution is identified, it is appropriate to sue the polluters, but right now, no one in government is actually dropping monitoring wells and looking to identify where the contamination is coming from, so the immediate need is let's protect people's health and get everyone's well tested quicker.
DAN LEVY: Okay, so you live in Poestenkill, I'm sure you had discussions with your neighbors and friends.
What is the level of concern and how much concern is there that the contamination extends beyond the area of the middle school?
JUDITH ENCK: Well, I think there is significant concern, especially for parents who sent children to this public school.
My son went there years ago, but he could have been drinking PFOA because it wasn't until a state mandated test that we learned about this in January.
The other concern is the gap.
We learned that the school had contamination in January.
The county health department didn't start testing private wells until August.
So we really need the community to come together, let's get quicker testing, offer it to everyone in the affected area for free and pay special attention to the school.
I think the school is doing a good job.
They switched off that water as soon as they found out.
But they need a long term response.
DAN LEVY: And I know there was a gap also when they detected PFOA in the other communities between the time they discovered, and then they notified the community so hopefully we'll get some answers tonight.
I know you'll be here and several other people will be here and we will be here, as well.
We'll have full reports coming up later on at 9 and 11 o'clock.
Live in Poestenkill, Dan Levy.
SUBRINA DHAMMI: Dan, thank you very much.
Re: THE PAUL PLANTE STORY
THE ADVERTISER Letters To The Editor
Poestenkill PFOA briefing raised questions
October 7, 2021
What did Poestenkill post on town website about PFOA?
Algonquin school’s water “does not pose a significant health risk” and “Your water continues to be acceptable for all uses.”
Are those true and factual statements supported by evidence?
No.
Are those established public health standards?
No, those are purely political slogans intended to mislead the public.
A public health professional would not tell people that water with chemical contamination in it does not pose a significant health risk, nor would a public health professional inform the public that water with PFOA in it continues to be acceptable for all uses.
To do otherwise would be reckless and irresponsible.
Are groundwater wells the cause of PFOA in Poestenkill?
The concept is ridiculous and absurd.
Is groundwater the cleanest water?
Unlike surface water collected in rivers and lakes, groundwater is often clean and ready to drink.
How long has Poestenkill known of groundwater problems in the Algonquin School area?
Since the mid-1970s.
Are there test wells in the area of the Algonquin School?
Yes, there is a test well on the south side of the east end of Liberty Lane and another just east of the transfer station.
How long has the RCHD known of groundwater problems in the affected area proximate to Algonquin School?
Since the 1970s.
How long has the DEC known of groundwater problems in the affected area proximate to Algonquin School?
Since the 1970s.
Are there records of prior chemical contamination in that area in the possession of Poestenkill and/or DEC?
Yes.
Was Richard Elder of the RCHD quoted as saying the RCHD was not looking for source of PFOA contamination in Poestenkill?
Yes.
Times Union
“Rensselaer County expands PFOA testing in Poestenkill”
Kenneth C. Crowe II
Sep. 22, 2021
Elder said the tests are to determine the potential exposure in drinking water rather than identifying a source of the PFOA contamination.
Paul Plante, Poestenkill
Poestenkill PFOA briefing raised questions
October 7, 2021
What did Poestenkill post on town website about PFOA?
Algonquin school’s water “does not pose a significant health risk” and “Your water continues to be acceptable for all uses.”
Are those true and factual statements supported by evidence?
No.
Are those established public health standards?
No, those are purely political slogans intended to mislead the public.
A public health professional would not tell people that water with chemical contamination in it does not pose a significant health risk, nor would a public health professional inform the public that water with PFOA in it continues to be acceptable for all uses.
To do otherwise would be reckless and irresponsible.
Are groundwater wells the cause of PFOA in Poestenkill?
The concept is ridiculous and absurd.
Is groundwater the cleanest water?
Unlike surface water collected in rivers and lakes, groundwater is often clean and ready to drink.
How long has Poestenkill known of groundwater problems in the Algonquin School area?
Since the mid-1970s.
Are there test wells in the area of the Algonquin School?
Yes, there is a test well on the south side of the east end of Liberty Lane and another just east of the transfer station.
How long has the RCHD known of groundwater problems in the affected area proximate to Algonquin School?
Since the 1970s.
How long has the DEC known of groundwater problems in the affected area proximate to Algonquin School?
Since the 1970s.
Are there records of prior chemical contamination in that area in the possession of Poestenkill and/or DEC?
Yes.
Was Richard Elder of the RCHD quoted as saying the RCHD was not looking for source of PFOA contamination in Poestenkill?
Yes.
Times Union
“Rensselaer County expands PFOA testing in Poestenkill”
Kenneth C. Crowe II
Sep. 22, 2021
Elder said the tests are to determine the potential exposure in drinking water rather than identifying a source of the PFOA contamination.
Paul Plante, Poestenkill
Re: THE PAUL PLANTE STORY
THE ADVERTISER Letters To The Editor
Fact-checking Judy Enck
October 7, 2021
With respect to the PFOA contamination in Poestenkill’s ground water, at her PFOA press conference on 27 September 2021, former Obama-era EPA administrator Judith Enck stated thusly: “The state agencies, the DEC and the health department seem to be deferring to the county health department.”
And that is because in 1946, and one would think an EPA administrator would already know this, the people of Rensselaer County voted to form a County Health District pursuant to the Public Health Law with a medical doctor as commissioner, a board of health, a county sanitary code, and an associate public health engineer responsible to the people of Rensselaer County for providing advice and guidance to local officials and the general public in regard to environmental health problems such as PFOA contamination and the measures necessary for improvement and compliance with legal requirements, as well as providing leadership in the health district in the promotion of public health through the application of environmental health practices, none of which are state secrets.
That is why in the Rensselaer County Health District, which includes Poestenkill, it is the county health department that has jurisdiction.
In her press conference, Ms. Enck further stated: “And so here’s what I think needs to happen.”
To which I reply all well and good, Judy, it’s America, and so you get to have your own opinion of things, and be sure to thank a veteran for that, but what you think needs to happen in this case and fifty cents buys coffee.
What really needs to happen in this case is that for once in this town, as foreign and radical idea as it may be, we restore the law and go by the book, that book being DEC’s own June 2021 technical guidance manual entitled “Sampling, Analysis, and Assessment of Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Under NYSDEC’s Part 375 Remedial Programs” to ensure consistency in sampling, analysis, reporting, and assessment of PFAS, which include PFOA.
Paul Plante, NYSPE, Assoc. P.H. Eng.
Fact-checking Judy Enck
October 7, 2021
With respect to the PFOA contamination in Poestenkill’s ground water, at her PFOA press conference on 27 September 2021, former Obama-era EPA administrator Judith Enck stated thusly: “The state agencies, the DEC and the health department seem to be deferring to the county health department.”
And that is because in 1946, and one would think an EPA administrator would already know this, the people of Rensselaer County voted to form a County Health District pursuant to the Public Health Law with a medical doctor as commissioner, a board of health, a county sanitary code, and an associate public health engineer responsible to the people of Rensselaer County for providing advice and guidance to local officials and the general public in regard to environmental health problems such as PFOA contamination and the measures necessary for improvement and compliance with legal requirements, as well as providing leadership in the health district in the promotion of public health through the application of environmental health practices, none of which are state secrets.
That is why in the Rensselaer County Health District, which includes Poestenkill, it is the county health department that has jurisdiction.
In her press conference, Ms. Enck further stated: “And so here’s what I think needs to happen.”
To which I reply all well and good, Judy, it’s America, and so you get to have your own opinion of things, and be sure to thank a veteran for that, but what you think needs to happen in this case and fifty cents buys coffee.
What really needs to happen in this case is that for once in this town, as foreign and radical idea as it may be, we restore the law and go by the book, that book being DEC’s own June 2021 technical guidance manual entitled “Sampling, Analysis, and Assessment of Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Under NYSDEC’s Part 375 Remedial Programs” to ensure consistency in sampling, analysis, reporting, and assessment of PFAS, which include PFOA.
Paul Plante, NYSPE, Assoc. P.H. Eng.
Re: THE PAUL PLANTE STORY
February 18, 1998
Hon. John Cahill
Commissioner
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
50 Wolf Road
Albany, New York 12233
RE: USA Waste/United Waste Facility at intersection of Rtes. 66 and 351, Town of Poestenkill, Rensselaer County
Dear Commissioner Cahill:
At about 11:15 A.M. on Wednesday, February 18, 1998, I arrived at the United Waste/USA Waste facility at the intersection of NYS Routes 66 and 351 in the Town of Poestenkill, Rensselaer County.
Once there, I requested an opportunity to speak with Mr. Steve Vallee, the facility manager.
On being advised that Mr. Vallee was not at the facility, I went to see Mr. Tom Nero, Mr. Vallee's deputy at the Poestenkill facility.
I informed Mr. Nero that I wished an opportunity to view what was being called "an in-place leachate collection system" by the Commissioner of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation.
With that said, Mr. Nero and myself walked in a northerly direction from his office to the upper level of the transfer station.
As we were walking to the transfer station, we were literally walking through a grey viscous pus that covered the ground.
Once at the transfer station, I was allowed an opportunity to walk inside the facility and inspect the working floor.
There are two bays in the upper level at the transfer station - a north bay and a south bay - with entry doors located in the westerly end of the building.
In what would be the south-west corner of the transfer station, I noticed that the floor of the facility was depressed or subsided so that there was a large pool of viscous, grey liquid collected there.
This pool of liquid was approximately four (4') feet in diameter and several inches in depth.
Each time that the large Mitsubishi loader employed by United Waste to move trash forward on the tipping floor would enter or exit the building in the south bay, which it did several times while I was there, its tires would displace this grey, viscous liquid and it would then flow out of the south bay door in the westerly end of the building, out onto the unpaved, untreated ground and into the environment.
Similarly, whenever trucks would enter the facility, they too would displace the liquid and it would flow out the westerly end of the building onto the unpaved, untreated ground and into the environment.
In the south bay, easterly of this depressed or subsided area, the floor of the facility was coated with a thick grey, viscous layer and on top of that was what appeared to be a layer of hydraulic fluid.
Each time that the large Mitsubishi loader would pass through the south bay, it would further emulsify this mixture, which was flowing westerly into the depressed or subsided area, and thence out the south bay door in the westerly end of the building and into the environment.
The floor in the north bay as similarly coated, and that floor was noted to tip from east to west so that there was an observable flow of liquid in a westerly direction, out of the north bay door, onto the unpaved, untreated ground and into the environment.
When I asked Mr. Nero about the functioning of the center drain which I had observed back in 1993 or 1994 when the facility was being constructed, Mr. Nero informed that the center drain was not working.
In fact, according to Mr. Nero, on Friday, February 13, 1998, and Saturday, February 14, 1998, United Waste had "dug up" the center portion to the floor where the floor drain was located in order to pour new concrete because the heavy equipment now employed by United Waste to ram 200 tons per day through this 30 ton per day facility had destroyed the floor in that area as well as the floor drain.
While I watched, Mr. Nero had the equipment operator in the facility move the pile of garbage covering over the area of the center floor drain so I could inspect it.
What I observed was an approximate four (4") inch diameter hole in the concrete floor of the facility that was plugged by debris and a "blue rag."
None of the considerable volume of grey, viscous liquid on the floor of the facility was making its way towards this four inch hole for several reasons, to wit:
a) with the subsidence of the floors in the north and south bays, and with the pouring of new concrete in the center of the facility, the floor in the center of the facility now appears to be higher than the floors around it, so that liquid flows away from the floor drain; and
b) the garbage mounded up in the center of the floor precludes the flow of liquid towards its center; rather, the liquid flows from the mounded-up garbage along the path of least resistance, which is out of the north and south bay doors and into the environment.
After discerning and confirming that there was no leachate collection system in place or working on the tipping floor at about 11:30 A.M. on Wednesday, February 18, 1998, Mr. Nero and myself than made our way down to the lower level where the transfer trailers are parked while being loaded from the tipping floor.
The lower level runs from south to north on the easterly end of the transfer station, and Mr. Nero and myself stood outside the south door, looking north, while a transfer trailer was filled from above.
The floor where the transfer trailer was parked was covered with standing water to a depth of several inches.
This large pool of water extended well out of the building on the south side where Mr. Nero and I were standing on unpaved, untreated ground, and the pool of water in the building was filled with garbage which was continually falling from above while the transfer trailer was being loaded.
When I asked Mr. Nero about any leachate collection system to handle this water, his reply was that there is none, which confirmed my recollections of the inspections I had done as a New York State licensed professional engineer when this facility was being constructed circa 1993-1994.
To be complete about my investigation, I asked Mr. Nero about any leachate collection system in place to handle the grey, viscous pus which covered the unpaved, untreated ground outside the transfer station and his answer was that there is no such system, despite assertions of the New York State Environmental Conservation Commissioner and his engineer Forgea to the contrary.
So, Mr. Commissioner, based on my inspection earlier today, it would seem that in the fourth paragraph on page one of your letter to me of February 6, 1998, you are willfully making false statements and misrepresenting facts when you tell me, a New York State licensed professional engineer who is quite knowledgeable of leachate collection systems and the Part 360 regulations, that there is a leachate collection system in place and operating at the facility, and it would further seem that your engineer Forgea is openly and willfully lying to the residents of the Town of Poestenkill when he tells them and me that "based on the design of the facility which includes leachate collection," the possibility of contamination of residential wells is "very remote."
Based upon the manner in which this transfer station is now being operated by United Waste/USA Waste under permit from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, the possibility of contamination of residential wells, most probably mine, is almost a guaranteed certainty, and I do not appreciate being lied to about this matter by your office as though I were some kind of simpleton.
Never have I seen such gross dereliction of duty and willful negligence on the part of New York State officials as I have seen in this case from yourself and your engineer Forgea, and I do not intend to stand for it.
With respect to this alleged "investigation" that the Department allegedly conducted with full cooperation of the property owner, I am herewith demanding immediate access to all documents, reports, lab tests, etc. pertaining to that alleged "investigation" including any and all tests of the grey viscous pus which covers the unpaved and untreated ground at this site.
Respectfully submitted,
Paul R. Plante, NYSPE
Hon. John Cahill
Commissioner
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
50 Wolf Road
Albany, New York 12233
RE: USA Waste/United Waste Facility at intersection of Rtes. 66 and 351, Town of Poestenkill, Rensselaer County
Dear Commissioner Cahill:
At about 11:15 A.M. on Wednesday, February 18, 1998, I arrived at the United Waste/USA Waste facility at the intersection of NYS Routes 66 and 351 in the Town of Poestenkill, Rensselaer County.
Once there, I requested an opportunity to speak with Mr. Steve Vallee, the facility manager.
On being advised that Mr. Vallee was not at the facility, I went to see Mr. Tom Nero, Mr. Vallee's deputy at the Poestenkill facility.
I informed Mr. Nero that I wished an opportunity to view what was being called "an in-place leachate collection system" by the Commissioner of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation.
With that said, Mr. Nero and myself walked in a northerly direction from his office to the upper level of the transfer station.
As we were walking to the transfer station, we were literally walking through a grey viscous pus that covered the ground.
Once at the transfer station, I was allowed an opportunity to walk inside the facility and inspect the working floor.
There are two bays in the upper level at the transfer station - a north bay and a south bay - with entry doors located in the westerly end of the building.
In what would be the south-west corner of the transfer station, I noticed that the floor of the facility was depressed or subsided so that there was a large pool of viscous, grey liquid collected there.
This pool of liquid was approximately four (4') feet in diameter and several inches in depth.
Each time that the large Mitsubishi loader employed by United Waste to move trash forward on the tipping floor would enter or exit the building in the south bay, which it did several times while I was there, its tires would displace this grey, viscous liquid and it would then flow out of the south bay door in the westerly end of the building, out onto the unpaved, untreated ground and into the environment.
Similarly, whenever trucks would enter the facility, they too would displace the liquid and it would flow out the westerly end of the building onto the unpaved, untreated ground and into the environment.
In the south bay, easterly of this depressed or subsided area, the floor of the facility was coated with a thick grey, viscous layer and on top of that was what appeared to be a layer of hydraulic fluid.
Each time that the large Mitsubishi loader would pass through the south bay, it would further emulsify this mixture, which was flowing westerly into the depressed or subsided area, and thence out the south bay door in the westerly end of the building and into the environment.
The floor in the north bay as similarly coated, and that floor was noted to tip from east to west so that there was an observable flow of liquid in a westerly direction, out of the north bay door, onto the unpaved, untreated ground and into the environment.
When I asked Mr. Nero about the functioning of the center drain which I had observed back in 1993 or 1994 when the facility was being constructed, Mr. Nero informed that the center drain was not working.
In fact, according to Mr. Nero, on Friday, February 13, 1998, and Saturday, February 14, 1998, United Waste had "dug up" the center portion to the floor where the floor drain was located in order to pour new concrete because the heavy equipment now employed by United Waste to ram 200 tons per day through this 30 ton per day facility had destroyed the floor in that area as well as the floor drain.
While I watched, Mr. Nero had the equipment operator in the facility move the pile of garbage covering over the area of the center floor drain so I could inspect it.
What I observed was an approximate four (4") inch diameter hole in the concrete floor of the facility that was plugged by debris and a "blue rag."
None of the considerable volume of grey, viscous liquid on the floor of the facility was making its way towards this four inch hole for several reasons, to wit:
a) with the subsidence of the floors in the north and south bays, and with the pouring of new concrete in the center of the facility, the floor in the center of the facility now appears to be higher than the floors around it, so that liquid flows away from the floor drain; and
b) the garbage mounded up in the center of the floor precludes the flow of liquid towards its center; rather, the liquid flows from the mounded-up garbage along the path of least resistance, which is out of the north and south bay doors and into the environment.
After discerning and confirming that there was no leachate collection system in place or working on the tipping floor at about 11:30 A.M. on Wednesday, February 18, 1998, Mr. Nero and myself than made our way down to the lower level where the transfer trailers are parked while being loaded from the tipping floor.
The lower level runs from south to north on the easterly end of the transfer station, and Mr. Nero and myself stood outside the south door, looking north, while a transfer trailer was filled from above.
The floor where the transfer trailer was parked was covered with standing water to a depth of several inches.
This large pool of water extended well out of the building on the south side where Mr. Nero and I were standing on unpaved, untreated ground, and the pool of water in the building was filled with garbage which was continually falling from above while the transfer trailer was being loaded.
When I asked Mr. Nero about any leachate collection system to handle this water, his reply was that there is none, which confirmed my recollections of the inspections I had done as a New York State licensed professional engineer when this facility was being constructed circa 1993-1994.
To be complete about my investigation, I asked Mr. Nero about any leachate collection system in place to handle the grey, viscous pus which covered the unpaved, untreated ground outside the transfer station and his answer was that there is no such system, despite assertions of the New York State Environmental Conservation Commissioner and his engineer Forgea to the contrary.
So, Mr. Commissioner, based on my inspection earlier today, it would seem that in the fourth paragraph on page one of your letter to me of February 6, 1998, you are willfully making false statements and misrepresenting facts when you tell me, a New York State licensed professional engineer who is quite knowledgeable of leachate collection systems and the Part 360 regulations, that there is a leachate collection system in place and operating at the facility, and it would further seem that your engineer Forgea is openly and willfully lying to the residents of the Town of Poestenkill when he tells them and me that "based on the design of the facility which includes leachate collection," the possibility of contamination of residential wells is "very remote."
Based upon the manner in which this transfer station is now being operated by United Waste/USA Waste under permit from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, the possibility of contamination of residential wells, most probably mine, is almost a guaranteed certainty, and I do not appreciate being lied to about this matter by your office as though I were some kind of simpleton.
Never have I seen such gross dereliction of duty and willful negligence on the part of New York State officials as I have seen in this case from yourself and your engineer Forgea, and I do not intend to stand for it.
With respect to this alleged "investigation" that the Department allegedly conducted with full cooperation of the property owner, I am herewith demanding immediate access to all documents, reports, lab tests, etc. pertaining to that alleged "investigation" including any and all tests of the grey viscous pus which covers the unpaved and untreated ground at this site.
Respectfully submitted,
Paul R. Plante, NYSPE
Re: THE PAUL PLANTE STORY
10 OCTOBER 2021
TO: CONCERNED POESTENKILL RESIDENTS
FROM: PAUL PLANTE, NYSPE
RE: SUPPRESSION OF EVIDENCE; DISCRIMINATION; DENIAL OF HONEST SERVICES
This morning I was notified by the Office of the Poestenkill Town Clerk that the Town of Poestenkill was suppressing the February 18, 1998 professional engineer's report of a site visit to the Poestenkill Regional Garbage Reception Center addressed to Hon. John Cahill, Commissioner, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, 50 Wolf Road, Albany, New York 12233 by not allowing it into the record as to the likely source of the PFOA contamination of Poestenkill's ground water, which constitutes a cover-up or whitewash.
I was further notified that because I am an adverse witness against PoestenkiIl and the RCHD in any future litigation concerning PFOA in our drinking water, and have been debunking the myriad of lies, half-truths and distortions we are being fed by town officials and the RCHD and DEC, to keep the truth and the facts from being communicated to the people of Poestenkill, I am now shut totally out of the process, and am barred from having any further communications with the following in connection with this PFOA issue, so you people are now entirely on your own:
Mary Fran Wachunas, RCHD mwachunas@rensco.com
Richard Elder, RCHD relder@rensco.com
Keith Hammond, Poestenkill supervisor khammond@poestenkillny.com
Eric Wohlleber, Poestenkill councilman ewohlleber@poestenkillny.com
David Hass, Poestenkill councilman dhass@poestenkillny.com
Harold Van Slyke, Poestenkill councilman hvanslyke@poestenkillny.com
Sue Horton, Poestenkill Town Clerk shorton@poestenkillny.com
Bob Brunet, Poestenkill water manager rbrunet@poestenkillny.com
TO: CONCERNED POESTENKILL RESIDENTS
FROM: PAUL PLANTE, NYSPE
RE: SUPPRESSION OF EVIDENCE; DISCRIMINATION; DENIAL OF HONEST SERVICES
This morning I was notified by the Office of the Poestenkill Town Clerk that the Town of Poestenkill was suppressing the February 18, 1998 professional engineer's report of a site visit to the Poestenkill Regional Garbage Reception Center addressed to Hon. John Cahill, Commissioner, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, 50 Wolf Road, Albany, New York 12233 by not allowing it into the record as to the likely source of the PFOA contamination of Poestenkill's ground water, which constitutes a cover-up or whitewash.
I was further notified that because I am an adverse witness against PoestenkiIl and the RCHD in any future litigation concerning PFOA in our drinking water, and have been debunking the myriad of lies, half-truths and distortions we are being fed by town officials and the RCHD and DEC, to keep the truth and the facts from being communicated to the people of Poestenkill, I am now shut totally out of the process, and am barred from having any further communications with the following in connection with this PFOA issue, so you people are now entirely on your own:
Mary Fran Wachunas, RCHD mwachunas@rensco.com
Richard Elder, RCHD relder@rensco.com
Keith Hammond, Poestenkill supervisor khammond@poestenkillny.com
Eric Wohlleber, Poestenkill councilman ewohlleber@poestenkillny.com
David Hass, Poestenkill councilman dhass@poestenkillny.com
Harold Van Slyke, Poestenkill councilman hvanslyke@poestenkillny.com
Sue Horton, Poestenkill Town Clerk shorton@poestenkillny.com
Bob Brunet, Poestenkill water manager rbrunet@poestenkillny.com
Re: THE PAUL PLANTE STORY
April 5, 1999
Hon. Patrick J. McGrath
Rensselaer County Court Judge
Rensselaer County Courthouse
Congress and Second Streets
Troy, New York 12180
RE: People v. Benson Brothers Disposal, Inc. et al
Index No. 196411
March 25, 1999 Times Union article
Your Honor:
In response to this Court's directive of April 2, 1999 in the above matter, please find annexed hereto as Exhibit A a copy of the Thursday, March 25, 1999 Times Union article ("Residents denounce DEC's trash deal" by Michelle Morgan Bolton) referenced in my March 26, 1999 letter to this Court.
Distraught as I was at the time by the alleged statements of ECO Jacoby in that article, I neglected to include a copy of the newspaper article with the March 26, 1999 letter, and for that I apologize to the Court.
The language to which I take exception begins at the bottom of the first xeroxed page annexed hereto as Exhibit A and carries over onto the next page, where midway down the page, New York State Environmental Conservation Officer Jacoby appears to be acting as a spokesperson for Waste Management of New York, Inc., to wit:
"This company wants to please the people out there and the DEC," Jacoby said.
"They're willing to do what it takes to satisfy any legitimate complaints."
* * *
Maybe the neighbors involved won't be satisfied until they see the place shut down, Jacoby said.
(Exhibit A) (emphasis added)
In the context of the history of this matter, which begins in 1993 with the entry into evidence in Rensselaer County Supreme Court by the Town of Poestenkill of a fraudulent DEC Part 360 permit to Benson Brothers Disposal, Inc. and proceeds forward to this time with complaints and allegations to the Office of DEC Commissioner John P. Cahill of false reports by DEC in this matter and prior intimidation attempts by Officer Jacoby, coupled with the fact that this matter comes before this Court as a result of an alleged Friday night telephone call where Officer Jacoby is alleged by Poestenkill Town Court Justice Marie Hoffman to have pulled back informations filed with the Court alleging violations of regulation and law where this complainant pro se was a witness, these comments on the part of Officer Jacoby are uncalled for.
So that this Court can perhaps better appreciate that context and my concerns which arise as a result of that context, annexed hereto as Exhibits B,C, and D and made parts hereof are copies of letters hand-delivered by myself to responsible New York State Department of Environmental Conservation officials concerning the March 19, 1999 Order on Consent which Officer Jacoby makes reference to in the March 25, 1999 Times Union article annexed hereto as Exhibit A, as well as intimidation by the DEC in this matter.
Exhibit B is a copy of a letter concerning the March 19, 1999 Order on Consent referenced in the March 25, 1999 Times Union article which was hand-delivered by myself to New York State Environmental Conservation Commissioner Joh P. Cahill on Wednesday, March 24, 1999, the day before the Times Union article was published.
That letter, which speaks for itself, informs Commissioner Cahill of my intent to seek redress of grievance in this matter through judicial intervention.
Exhibit C is a March 29, 1999 letter hand-delivered by myself to Mr. Charles E. Sullivan, Jr., the director of DEC's Division of Environmental Enforcement, and that letter speaks to the issue of where justice lies in the matter, beginning with the issuance of the original fraudulent permit back in 1993.
Exhibit D is a copy of a March 3, 1999 letter from myself to Chief Administrative Law Judge Daniel Louis concerning this matter, hand-delivered some twenty-two (22) days before Officer Jacoby's alleged statements in the March 25, 1999 Times Union article annexed hereto as Exhibit A.
At the top of page four (4) of that letter, I make reference to intimidation and Officer Jacoby by name.
I have also enclosed for the Court's convenience a copy of the Affidavit of Errors served on Poestenkill Town Court and all other parties in this matter.
Again apologizing to this Court for my oversight, I remain
Respectfully,
Paul R. Plante
Complainant Pro Se
CC: Kenneth R. Bruno, District Attorney
Eliot Spitzer, Esq.
ECO Matt Jacoby
Kevin G. Roe, Esq.
Hon. Marie Hoffman
Hon. Patrick J. McGrath
Rensselaer County Court Judge
Rensselaer County Courthouse
Congress and Second Streets
Troy, New York 12180
RE: People v. Benson Brothers Disposal, Inc. et al
Index No. 196411
March 25, 1999 Times Union article
Your Honor:
In response to this Court's directive of April 2, 1999 in the above matter, please find annexed hereto as Exhibit A a copy of the Thursday, March 25, 1999 Times Union article ("Residents denounce DEC's trash deal" by Michelle Morgan Bolton) referenced in my March 26, 1999 letter to this Court.
Distraught as I was at the time by the alleged statements of ECO Jacoby in that article, I neglected to include a copy of the newspaper article with the March 26, 1999 letter, and for that I apologize to the Court.
The language to which I take exception begins at the bottom of the first xeroxed page annexed hereto as Exhibit A and carries over onto the next page, where midway down the page, New York State Environmental Conservation Officer Jacoby appears to be acting as a spokesperson for Waste Management of New York, Inc., to wit:
"This company wants to please the people out there and the DEC," Jacoby said.
"They're willing to do what it takes to satisfy any legitimate complaints."
* * *
Maybe the neighbors involved won't be satisfied until they see the place shut down, Jacoby said.
(Exhibit A) (emphasis added)
In the context of the history of this matter, which begins in 1993 with the entry into evidence in Rensselaer County Supreme Court by the Town of Poestenkill of a fraudulent DEC Part 360 permit to Benson Brothers Disposal, Inc. and proceeds forward to this time with complaints and allegations to the Office of DEC Commissioner John P. Cahill of false reports by DEC in this matter and prior intimidation attempts by Officer Jacoby, coupled with the fact that this matter comes before this Court as a result of an alleged Friday night telephone call where Officer Jacoby is alleged by Poestenkill Town Court Justice Marie Hoffman to have pulled back informations filed with the Court alleging violations of regulation and law where this complainant pro se was a witness, these comments on the part of Officer Jacoby are uncalled for.
So that this Court can perhaps better appreciate that context and my concerns which arise as a result of that context, annexed hereto as Exhibits B,C, and D and made parts hereof are copies of letters hand-delivered by myself to responsible New York State Department of Environmental Conservation officials concerning the March 19, 1999 Order on Consent which Officer Jacoby makes reference to in the March 25, 1999 Times Union article annexed hereto as Exhibit A, as well as intimidation by the DEC in this matter.
Exhibit B is a copy of a letter concerning the March 19, 1999 Order on Consent referenced in the March 25, 1999 Times Union article which was hand-delivered by myself to New York State Environmental Conservation Commissioner Joh P. Cahill on Wednesday, March 24, 1999, the day before the Times Union article was published.
That letter, which speaks for itself, informs Commissioner Cahill of my intent to seek redress of grievance in this matter through judicial intervention.
Exhibit C is a March 29, 1999 letter hand-delivered by myself to Mr. Charles E. Sullivan, Jr., the director of DEC's Division of Environmental Enforcement, and that letter speaks to the issue of where justice lies in the matter, beginning with the issuance of the original fraudulent permit back in 1993.
Exhibit D is a copy of a March 3, 1999 letter from myself to Chief Administrative Law Judge Daniel Louis concerning this matter, hand-delivered some twenty-two (22) days before Officer Jacoby's alleged statements in the March 25, 1999 Times Union article annexed hereto as Exhibit A.
At the top of page four (4) of that letter, I make reference to intimidation and Officer Jacoby by name.
I have also enclosed for the Court's convenience a copy of the Affidavit of Errors served on Poestenkill Town Court and all other parties in this matter.
Again apologizing to this Court for my oversight, I remain
Respectfully,
Paul R. Plante
Complainant Pro Se
CC: Kenneth R. Bruno, District Attorney
Eliot Spitzer, Esq.
ECO Matt Jacoby
Kevin G. Roe, Esq.
Hon. Marie Hoffman
Re: THE PAUL PLANTE STORY
THE ADVERTISER Letters To The Editor
Confusion reigns in Poestenkill over PFOA
October 14, 2021
Talk about confusion reigning, misinformation flowing, and ignorance on display, that is how the “media circus” and political dog-and-pony show staged by Poestenkill Councilman Eric Wohlleber starring former Obama-era EPA administrator Judy Enck on 27 September 2021 in Poestenkill would have to be described.
First off, we had Poestenkill water manager Bob Brunet telling us, in reference to the PFOA contamination in the groundwater in Poestenkill, “These problems are caused by wells,” which has to be one of the most ridiculous statements ever to come out of what passes for “government” in Poestenkill.
Then we had Judy Enck, who was invited to speak by Poestenkill councilman Eric Wohlleber, telling us “I think the state agencies have to be in the lead because they’re far more experienced and have more resources than the county, I think they need to drive this process.”
And that was followed by Poestenkill councilman Eric Wohlleber himself undermining his own witness Judy Enck by stating “I have zero confidence in DOH and DEC, I feel like they have not learned their lesson from Hoosick Falls.”
So who are we to believe?
Both of them?
And we had Bob Brunet telling us, after blaming the problems on our wells, “connect to our water from Troy, I’ve done all sorts of elevation calculation of mileage calculators, fully feasible, can be done,” this at the same time we are reading on the town propaganda site as follows: We now have full pressure through MOST of the water district.
Keeping in mind that the present water district only covers a portion of the town and would have to be extended, that is an admission by the Town that the present existing water district already has an inadequate public water supply, and I am hearing complaints from residents in the existing water district about pressure problems in the morning when everyone is up and getting ready for work.
So how does Bob Brunet think it is feasible to extend it?
To date, no answers!
Paul Plante
Confusion reigns in Poestenkill over PFOA
October 14, 2021
Talk about confusion reigning, misinformation flowing, and ignorance on display, that is how the “media circus” and political dog-and-pony show staged by Poestenkill Councilman Eric Wohlleber starring former Obama-era EPA administrator Judy Enck on 27 September 2021 in Poestenkill would have to be described.
First off, we had Poestenkill water manager Bob Brunet telling us, in reference to the PFOA contamination in the groundwater in Poestenkill, “These problems are caused by wells,” which has to be one of the most ridiculous statements ever to come out of what passes for “government” in Poestenkill.
Then we had Judy Enck, who was invited to speak by Poestenkill councilman Eric Wohlleber, telling us “I think the state agencies have to be in the lead because they’re far more experienced and have more resources than the county, I think they need to drive this process.”
And that was followed by Poestenkill councilman Eric Wohlleber himself undermining his own witness Judy Enck by stating “I have zero confidence in DOH and DEC, I feel like they have not learned their lesson from Hoosick Falls.”
So who are we to believe?
Both of them?
And we had Bob Brunet telling us, after blaming the problems on our wells, “connect to our water from Troy, I’ve done all sorts of elevation calculation of mileage calculators, fully feasible, can be done,” this at the same time we are reading on the town propaganda site as follows: We now have full pressure through MOST of the water district.
Keeping in mind that the present water district only covers a portion of the town and would have to be extended, that is an admission by the Town that the present existing water district already has an inadequate public water supply, and I am hearing complaints from residents in the existing water district about pressure problems in the morning when everyone is up and getting ready for work.
So how does Bob Brunet think it is feasible to extend it?
To date, no answers!
Paul Plante
Re: THE PAUL PLANTE STORY
THE ADVERTISER Letters To The Editor
Important PFOA Facts
October 14, 2021
The following language is taken directly from a New York State Health Department “DO NOT DRINK” Notice that is normally sent out to schools with PFOA-related problems in the drinking water:
State and County Health Departments Issue “DO NOT DRINK” Water Advisories for Two Westchester County Schools
New York State Departments of Health and Environmental Conservation Launch Investigation to Identify Potential Sources of Contamination
Potential Health Effects of PFOA and PFOS
PFOA and PFOS are part of a group of man-made, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances found in a wide range of consumer products such as cookware, cleaning products, food packaging, stain repellants, and firefighting foam, among others.
(Note: also fracking fluids)
The available information on the health effects associated with PFOA and PFOS, like many chemicals, comes mostly from studies of high-level exposure in animals.
Less is known about the chances of health effects occurring from lower levels of exposure, such as from drinking the schools’ water.
As a result, finding lower levels of chemicals in drinking water prompts water suppliers and regulators to take precautions that include notifying consumers and taking steps to reduce exposure.
High dose studies in animals indicate that PFOA and PFOS can cause a wide range of health effects with the most consistent findings being effects on the liver and immune system and impaired fetal growth and development.
The United States Environmental Protection Agency considers PFOA and PFOS as having suggestive evidence for causing cancer based on studies of animals exposed to high levels of this chemical over their lifetimes.
The NYS MCLs for these chemicals are highly protective against these health effects, but at levels well above the MCLs it is prudent to take interim “Do Not Drink” measures to reduce exposure at these schools.
Do not be misled or deceived by those who tell you it is safe to drink.
Paul Plante
Important PFOA Facts
October 14, 2021
The following language is taken directly from a New York State Health Department “DO NOT DRINK” Notice that is normally sent out to schools with PFOA-related problems in the drinking water:
State and County Health Departments Issue “DO NOT DRINK” Water Advisories for Two Westchester County Schools
New York State Departments of Health and Environmental Conservation Launch Investigation to Identify Potential Sources of Contamination
Potential Health Effects of PFOA and PFOS
PFOA and PFOS are part of a group of man-made, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances found in a wide range of consumer products such as cookware, cleaning products, food packaging, stain repellants, and firefighting foam, among others.
(Note: also fracking fluids)
The available information on the health effects associated with PFOA and PFOS, like many chemicals, comes mostly from studies of high-level exposure in animals.
Less is known about the chances of health effects occurring from lower levels of exposure, such as from drinking the schools’ water.
As a result, finding lower levels of chemicals in drinking water prompts water suppliers and regulators to take precautions that include notifying consumers and taking steps to reduce exposure.
High dose studies in animals indicate that PFOA and PFOS can cause a wide range of health effects with the most consistent findings being effects on the liver and immune system and impaired fetal growth and development.
The United States Environmental Protection Agency considers PFOA and PFOS as having suggestive evidence for causing cancer based on studies of animals exposed to high levels of this chemical over their lifetimes.
The NYS MCLs for these chemicals are highly protective against these health effects, but at levels well above the MCLs it is prudent to take interim “Do Not Drink” measures to reduce exposure at these schools.
Do not be misled or deceived by those who tell you it is safe to drink.
Paul Plante