Public relation

profileabdl.h
final_report_new_2.docx

The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey

Proposal for Performing an Environmental Impact Statement and Alternatives Analysis for Modifying or Replacing the Lincoln Tunnel Helix

http://2evolveconsulting.com/images/panynj.jpg

Proposal for Performance of an Environmental

Impact Statement and Alternative Analysis

For Modifying or Replacing the

Lincoln Tunnel Helix

Prepared by:

Greenfield Environmental Consulting

Issued: April 21st, 2015

The Port Authority of

New York and New Jersey

http://www.moodiereport.com/images/port_authority_ny_nj_logo.jpg

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mTNSCy1b-GY/U4vc1JT3tWI/AAAAAAAARvU/SIrYyhaVsdQ/s1600/Lincoln-Tunnel-Helix.jpg

Table of Contents:

Section A – Firm Qualifications and Experience ……………………………………....3

A.1 – Governmental Regulations and Laws …………………………………………………. 4

A.2 – Guideline Documents …………………………………………………………………. 7

A.3 – Environmental Permits ……………………………………………………………….. 12

A.4 – NEPA Lead Agency ………………………………………………………………….. 13

A.5 – Environmental Documentation ……………………………………………………….. 14

Section B – Staff Qualifications and Experience ……………………………………..16

B.1 – Organizational Chart ………………………………………………………………….. 17

B.2 – Personal Profiles and Individual Experience …………………………………………. 18

Caulfield, Christopher ……………………………………………………………………….. 18

Greenleaf, Luke ……………………………………………………………………………… 23

Anderson, David …………………………………………………………………………….. 25

Zyndorf, Oren ……………………………………………………………………………….. 27

Schroeder, Alison …………………………………………………………………………… 30

Lombardi, John …………………………………………………………………………….... 32

Mahmud, Anna …………………………………………………………………………….... 34

Martin, Jonathan …………………………………………………………………………….. 37

Mugabel, Abdul ……………………………………………………………………………... 38

Section C – Technical Approach ……………………………………………………..40

C.1 – Preparation of Environmental Impact Statement ……………………………………... 41

C.2 – No-Action Alternative ………………………………………………………………... 43

C.3 – List of Alternatives to be Reviewed ………………………………………………….. 44

C.4 – Environmental Impact Statement Table of Contents …………………………………. 48

C.5 – Data Analysis Sources ………………………………………………………………... 54

C.6 – Safety Measures ……………………………………………………………………..... 56

C.7 – Public Participation …………………………………………………………………… 59

Section D – Cost and Timetable ……………………………………………………...60

D.1 – Project Schedule ……………………………………………………………………… 61

D.2 – Cost Estimate and Budget …………………………………………………………..... 62

Firm Qualifications and Experience

A

Section

A.1

Governmental Regulations and Laws

Law is defined as the principles and regulations established in a community by some authority and applicable to its people, whether in the form of legislation or of custom and policies recognized and enforced by judicial decision. Laws are actually rules and guidelines that are set up by the social institutions to govern behavior. Laws are made by government officials. Laws must be obeyed by all, including private citizens, groups and companies as well as public figures, organizations and institutions. Laws set out standards, procedures and principles that must be followed. Regulations can be used to define two things; a process of monitoring and enforcing legislations and a written instrument containing rules that have law on them. Even though laws are passed by the government, it falls up to regulations to ensure and enforce the law. It has the ability to maintain and regulate the laws that govern the people. All the listed laws and regulations are applicable to every alternative provided.

Environmental Laws and Regulations:-

Clean Air Act – The Clean Air Act is a United States federal law designed to control air pollution on a nationwide level. It entails the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to develop and implement regulations to protect the public from airborne contaminants known to be hazardous to human health. The Act accomplished this by establishing a federal program within the U.S. Public Health Service and authorized research into techniques for monitoring and controlling air pollution. It also enabled the federal government to escalate its activities to consider enforcing interstate air pollution transport, and, for the first time, to perform far-reaching ambient monitoring studies and stationary source inspections. The Act also authorized expanded studies of air pollutant emission inventories, ambient monitoring techniques, and control techniques. With the construction on the Helix Rehabilitation project and the work done in the tunnel, there needs to be a suitable approach for not perturbing the air quality.

Clean Water Act – The Clean Water Act exists to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters by avoiding point and nonpoint pollution sources, providing aid to publicly owned treatment works for the improvement of wastewater treatment, and maintaining the integrity of wetlands. It establishes the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into the waters of the United States and regulating quality standards for surface waters. All the waste produced from the construction for the Helix Rehabilitation Project can leak into the Hudson River if regulations are not followed.

Safe Drinking Water Act – The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) is the principal federal law in the United States intended to guarantee safe drinking water for the public. Following the act, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is obligated to set standards for drinking water quality and oversee all states, localities, and water suppliers who implement these standards. SDWA applies to every public water system (PWS) in the United States except for private

wells.  As a consultant, we need to check for groundwater spots where will be doing the construction so it does not interfere with drinking water.

Endangered Species Act – The Endangered Species Act was devised to protect vital imperiled species from extinction as a "consequence of economic growth and development untempered by adequate concern and conservation." The U.S. Supreme Court found that "the plain intent of Congress in enacting" the ESA "was to halt and reverse the trend toward species extinction, whatever the cost." The Act is administered by two federal agencies, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Any endangered species and their habitat cannot be disturbed while doing any construction.

Noise Control Act – The Noise Pollution and Abatement Act is a statute of the United States initiating a federal program of regulating noise pollution with the intent of protecting human health and minimizing annoyance of noise to the general public. The Act founded means of setting emission standards for virtually every source of noise, including motor vehicles, aircraft, certain types of heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC) equipment and major appliances. It also put local governments on notice as to their responsibilities in land-use planning to address noise mitigation. This noise regulation framework encompassed a broad database detailing the extent of noise health effects.

Rivers and Harbors Act – The Rivers and Harbors Act makes it a violation to discharge refuse matter of any kind into the navigable waters, or tributaries thereof, of the United States without a permit. This Act also makes it a misdemeanor to excavate, fill, or alter the course, condition, or capacity of any port, harbor, channel, or other areas within the reach of the Act without a permit. It also made it illegal to dam navigable streams without a license (or permit) from Congress; this included for the purposes of hydroelectric generation, at a time when the electric utility industry was expanding rapidly.

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act – The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) gives EPA the authority to control hazardous waste from the "cradle-to-grave." This includes the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste. RCRA also set forth an outline for the management of non-hazardous solid wastes. The amendments to RCRA enabled EPA to address environmental problems that could result from underground tanks storing petroleum and other hazardous substances.

Coastal Zone Management Act – The Coastal Zone Management Act is an Act of Congress which encourages coastal states to develop and implement coastal zone management plans. This act was established as a United States National policy to preserve, protect, develop, and where possible, restore or enhance, the resources of the Nation's coastal zone for this and succeeding generations.

Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations – Its purpose is to focus federal attention on the environmental and human health effects of federal actions on minority and low-income populations with the goal of achieving environmental protection for all communities. The E.O. directs federal agencies to identify and address the inexplicably high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their actions on minority and low-income populations, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law. The order also guides each agency to develop a strategy for implementing environmental justice. The order is also intended to encourage non-discrimination in federal programs that affect human health and the environment, as well as offer minority and low-income communities access to public information and public participation. The Helix Rehabilitation project has to be sensitive to the issue of minority populations and make sure that it does not deteriorate their environment.

Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks – The order applies to economically significant rules under Executive Order 12866 that concern an environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may excessively affect children. Environmental health risks or safety risks refer to risks to health or to safety that are traceable to products or substances that the child is likely to come in contact with or ingest (such as the air we breathe, the food we eat, the water we drink or use for recreation, the soil we live on, and the products we use or are exposed to). When publicizing a rule of this description, EPA must evaluate the effects of the planned regulation on children and explain why the regulation is preferable to potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives.

Occupational Safety and Health Act – Congress passed the Occupational and Safety Health Act to ensure worker and workplace safety. Their goal was to make sure employers provide their workers a place of employment free from recognized hazards to safety and health, such as exposure to toxic chemicals, excessive noise levels, mechanical dangers, heat or cold stress, or unsanitary conditions. All workers have to have the OSHA training to work on the Helix Rehabilitation Project.

Pollution Prevention Act – The Pollution Prevention Act focused industry, government, and public attention on reducing the amount of pollution through cost-effective changes in production, operation, and raw materials use. Opportunities for source reduction are often not realized because of existing regulations, and the industrial resources required for compliance, focus on treatment and disposal. Source reduction is fundamentally different and more desirable than waste management or pollution control. Source reduction refers to practices that reduce hazardous substances from being released into the environment prior to recycling, treatment or disposal. The term includes equipment or technology modifications, process or procedure modifications, reformulation or redesign of products, substitution of raw materials, and improvements in housekeeping, maintenance, training, or inventory control.

A.2

Guideline Documents

There are many documents available through public records or on the internet that could be useful in preparing the Environmental Impact Statement. For use as guidelines regarding the format or content of other environmental documents, the following resources could be invaluable. Guideline documents dealing with design are denoted in italics.

1. Alternative and Clean Fill Guidance for Site Remediation Program Sites

This document has been used to assist the working relationship between a construction company and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. Specifically, the person who is in charge of complying with the NJDEP is responsible for understanding the contents of this Guidance Statement to ensure both parties are content with the outcome of the construction.

Relevance Of This Document – The N JDEP is highly concerned with construction because of the multiple threats it presents to the environment. By understanding this guidance document, the construction can run smoothly without the NJDEP concerning over the project.

2. Data Quality Assessment and Data Usability Evaluation Technical Guidance

This document has been used to reference during construction for the Technical Requirements for Site Remediation. The objective is to facilitate a prospective review of the analytical data used to identify a discharge of a contamination due to the aforementioned construction.

Relevance Of This Document – To further define exactly what technical requirements are needed for this project, this document lays out the data for the Department more specifically. This allows the NJDEP to thoroughly understand exactly what effects the project will have on the environment.

3. Quality Assurance Project Plan Technical Guidance

This document has been used to identify the materials that will be used during construction and the quality that these materials offer. Clearly, reconstruction requires a certain way about reconstructing and these ways require materials. By identifying the quality of the material, the construction firm can extrapolate which materials to use.

Relevance of this Document – By reading and understanding this document, the negative effects done by the construction can be minimized. Therefore, putting forth this Guidance Document can mediate the construction and make it to last longevity.

4. Technical Guidance for the Attainment of Remediation Standards and Site-Specific Criteria

This document has been used to help the person responsible for obtaining important documents and permits. It may be difficult to find these certain criteria for such a big project that is affecting a whole lot of people. Essentially, there is a general idea of how to access this type of material and this document sets the guidelines for doing so.

Relevance of this Document – For a huge project like this, time is money. By hastening the process of paperwork, work can get done faster and therefore money is not wasted. This document is crucial for the project going smoothly.

5. Technical Guidance on the Capping of Sites Undergoing Remediation

This document defines what caps are. Caps are components of engineering controls used for remedial actions, and must comply with certain administrative requirements. With any engineering project, caps will be a topic to consider. Using the caps can aid an investigator with important information needed about the project. There are different types of caps and each particular cap is selected for a particular type of project.

Relevance of this Document – Caps are crucial for facing remedial issues. By utilizing them properly, red tape can be eliminated. They remove the barrier between the receptor and the media.

6. Technical Guidance for Preparation and Submission of a Conceptual Site Model

This document is used to assist in developing proper paperwork for those who are requesting it. It alleviates the process by implementing a specific framework to be used. It defines what a conceptual site model is and how it should represent the conditions of the physical, biological, and chemical effects of the contamination.

Relevance of this Document – Without this guidance document, the understanding of what the effects of this project are become very ambiguous. The NJDEP requires multiple documents describing which effects a project will have on the environment. This outlines how they should be done.

7. Ecological Evaluation Technical Guidance

This document is used to understand how to conduct an Ecological Evaluation and an Ecological Risk Assessment. It also provides the information on how to interpret a risk of ecological factors in a specific area.

Relevance of this Document – Those who are Licensed Site Remediation Professional ought to use this document to help them express the ecological effects of the project. When dealing with construction, there are always risks of endangering the wildlife around the area. This document provides a proper way to go about describing those effects.

8. Ground Water Technical Guidance

This document provides guidance on performing and achieving compliance with the requirement of the NJDEP with regard to remediation of ground water. It also provides a list of specific water-related effects that a construction project could possibly have. Lastly it describes how to evaluate the effectiveness of the ground water remedial actions.

Relevance of this Document – This document will help in understanding whether or not remediation is necessary because of contaminants. Usually, wetlands around a construction site are going to be affected. This document will provide any guidance needed on reporting such effects. This document also provides a list of previously submitted documents that were sufficient for the NJDEP. With this document, the design can be bettered.

9. Historic Fill Material Technical Guidance

This document provides guidance on how to deal with the soil around the construction area. Specifically, this document will enable the use of investigators and therefore analyze the historical content of the soil and how it has been changing over time and how construction projects such as this one will change it.

Relevance of this Document – This document will help in understanding how to treat the soil around the construction site area. There is a specific model of how to determine whether the soil will be greatly affected or not. These documents will alieve the process of making that determination.

10. Immediate Environmental Concern Technical Guide

The purpose of this document is to provide technical guidance on the investigation of landfills. This document is used to address immediate environment concerns when on site for the construction project. Should there ever be a time when the effects on the environment are not going as planned, this document will explain what the steps are to remediating the process.

Relevance of this Document – Without this document, a project could completely fail to meet the NJDEP requirements and result in a disaster not only for the environment but for the company as well. In order to completely abide by the rules for the duration of the project, the company must have a good understanding of this document.

11. Landfills Investigation Guidance

The purpose of this document is to provide guidance in regard to the investigation of landfills used during construction. These investigations include a background on the landfills that need investigation. The document also offers different approaches to achieve compliance with the landfill investigation requirement. After this investigation is done, there are specific protocols for how to utilize the landfill, whether it should or shouldn’t be used.

Relevance of this Document – This document is specifically used for understanding which landfills to use for the project. Obviously if construction is being done, things are being taken down. The debris from the construction needs to go somewhere, and the properties of the

landfills to which it goes are very important. Therefore this is crucial for the Licensed Site Remediation Professional to understand.

12. Linear Construction Technical Guide

This technical guidance is designed to help the person conducting a linear construction project to ensure that contamination encountered during the project is handled in a manner that is protective of human health, safety, and the environment. This is the most important document when considering the possible different alternatives to construct.

Relevance of this Document – When thinking of construction plans, the alternative with the least amount of effect on the environment should be the one chosen, before cost analysis comes into play. Using this document will assist in choosing which plan to coordinate.

13. Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid (LNAPL) Initial Recovery and Interim Remedial Measures Technical Guide

This document is used for the understanding of changes within the NJDEP. In fact, the Site Remediation Reform Act requires that the NJDEP update its environmental policies upon new findings of environmental impact. The Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid is definitely the main topic of this article. Understanding the LNAPLs is crucial.

Relevance of this Document – By defining what LNAPLs are, construction sites can be more aware of them and their use during construction. Examples of LNAPLs include gasoline, benzene, toluene, xylene and other hydrocarbons. Any amount of LNAPL exceeding a thickness in 0.01 feet must be revised. This document introduces how to deal with them and how to report the accumulation of them. With these LNAPLs, the design of the project will surely be altered to befit ideal conditions.

14. Monitored Natural Attenuation Technical Guidance

This document is used to understand that the remediation of the contamination sites is constantly changing. This document provides detailed information on the monitored natural attenuation as remedial action for contaminated ground. Natural attenuation processes include a variety of physical, chemical, or biological processes that, under favorable conditions, act without human intervention to reduce the mass, toxicity, mobility, volume, or concentration of contaminants in ground water.

Relevance of this Document – The ability to comprehend how the chemistry and biology of the ecosystem function is important in understanding the effects that will come from these construction projects. Basically, this document provides information and statistics on what effects construction has had on prior projects.

15. Preliminary Assessment Technical Guide

This document is used to assist the person assigned to assess the soil before the project is started. To figure out how much damage is done after the project is completed, there needs to be an initial value for the company to compare. Additionally, the preliminary assessment is made to determine whether or not this soil is safe to construct over.

Relevance of this Document – The NJDEP is committed to keeping the environment safe in addition to keeping the aspiring participating companies safe. They need to make sure the soil is safe for the company to work on and they need to make sure that after the construction is done, that the soil is still safe for close parties afterward.

16. Presumptive and Alternative Remedy Technical Guide

This document is used assist investigators in implementing presumptive remedies and alternative remedies. Essentially, this document is used by the being doing the actual investigation of the project and the remedies that come with working with the NJDEP

Relevance of this Document – There is always a person who is required to keep an eye on the project to make sure all is running smoothly. This document is used to mediate that process. By adhering to the NJDEP, projects can be completely safely and finding the best remedies between the two parties is required.

17. Guidance for Characterization of Concrete and Clean Material Certification for Recycling

This document is used to present the best type of materials for a project such as the helix reformation. It goes into great depth about the strength of concrete and the consistency of the material itself. It provides information on how to use such materials for the ideal design of the project.

Relevance of this Document – Very similarly to the Quality Assurance Project Plan Technical Guidance, this document actually delves into the strength of materials that should be used and materials that have been used during projects such as this one.

18. Technical Guidance for Site Investigation of Soil, Remedial Investigation of Soil, and Remedial Action Verification Sampling for Soil

This document provides the investigator with the technical guidance to conduct soil sampling and analysis in order to complete as site remediation. Analysis of soil is a crucial part of building. The design of the helix starts with a good foundation. Soil is the beginning to a good foundation.

Relevance of this Document – Our structural engineering takes into account all things including that of soil and the resulting design will greatly depend on such factors. Knowing how a material like cement, let’s say, reacts with this specific ground site solid will surely decide the overall design of the new alternative.

A.3

Environmental Permits

As with any environmental project, there are myriad permits which must be acquired in order to perform any work. This project is no different, and will require many, if not all of the following permits. All Permits required for the alternatives fall into one of the following categories:

Clean Air Act Permits: Most large sources and some smaller sources of air pollution are required to obtain operating permits. The major permit is Air Pollution Control Permit.

Clean Water Act Permits: The Division of Water regulates sewage/waste discharge into river waters, withdrawal of water exceeding 10,000 gallons per day from surface, spring, or groundwater sources, construction and physical disturbance activities along streams or wild rivers, and other water related activities.

Endangered Species: The Endangered Species Act, with some exceptions, prohibits activities affecting threatened and endangered species unless authorized by a permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Marine Fisheries Service. Some activities may also require a state permit. Major permit is Habitat Conservation Permit.

Wetlands: Any work conducted in or near wetlands, federal, state, and local governments may all have specific permit requirements. At the federal level, the Army Corps of Engineers regulates the discharge of dredged or fill materials into U.S. waters, including wetlands, under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act; and for those states without EPA permit authorization authority, the EPA issues permits for the discharge of pollutants, including wastewater and storm-water, from a point source pursuant to Section 402 of the Clean Water Act. State environmental agencies regulate wetlands under various laws such as those pertaining to water pollution, shoreline management and forest practices. Local governments regulate wetlands primarily through zoning and similar ordinances. This includes coastal zone and bridge permits.

RCRA Permits: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Permits are designed to help ensure the safe treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous wastes. Permits are issued by authorized states or by EPA Regional Offices. This includes hazardous waste permits and minor waste management permits.

A.4

NEPA Lead Agency

As stipulated by the NEPA statute, every environmental project is required to have a lead agency which is ultimately responsible for any and all actions taken for the project.

The Lincoln Tunnel, as well as any of its approaches – including the Weehawken Helix – resides under the jurisdiction of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ). Their auspices extend to all infrastructure which links New York and New Jersey – including the bridges and tunnels that span the Hudson River, the major air and sea ports of the New York metropolitan area – including LaGuardia, JFK, and Newark airports, as well as the Port of Newark and the Port of New York City. Because the Helix falls within this prescribed jurisdiction, the PANYNJ would be the NEPA Lead Agency on this project.  Regardless of the implemented alternative, the Port Authority would remain the Lead Agency throughout. However, this project is not occurring in a vacuum, removed from outside influences or assistance, and it is certainly not being implemented outside the regulatory jurisdiction of agencies besides the Port Authority. Therefore, there would be, by necessity, other Cooperating Agencies which would participate in this project. The specifics of this project will determine which agencies will be involved; the proximity to the Hudson River, as well as the possibility of bringing in materials and/or equipment on barges will necessitate the involvement of the Coast Guard; the obvious environmental impacts will bring in the Environmental Protection Agency, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, and potentially other, private environmentally active entities; the New Jersey Department of Transportation will be involved because this project is related to the roadway infrastructure of the state of New Jersey in terms of highway 495, the NJ Turnpike, and others; and finally, the municipal governments of Weehawken, Hoboken, Jersey City, and any other towns who have a stake in the project will also have input because their citizens and infrastructures will be impacted profoundly.

A.5

Environmental Documentation

The following are examples of projects that are similar to the Helix project. They could be useful as illustrations of how to go about preparing an Environmental Impact Statement, as well as in other areas of environmental project logistics.

A. Valley Highway Project- Logan to US 6

Final Environmental Impact Statement Colorado Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration November 2006

"I-25 Valley Highway Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and ROD."Colorado Department of Transportation. N.p., 2006. Web. 14 Apr. 2015.

Summary:

The Valley Highway Project was proposed in 2006 to enhance I-25.  I-25 at the at the site of the project is near the South Platte River which is similar to the Helix project with its proximity to the Hudson River.  Also, just as the Helix is a vital link between New York and New Jersey, I-25 and US 6 are vital links in the freeway system serving Metro Denver and Colorado. The improvements to 1-25 between Logan and US 6 (in Colorado) were needed to Provide lane continuity and balance on I-25 from Logan to US 6, link with sections of I-25 to the north and south, optimize highway system operations while recognizing the constraints on highway expansion identified through the regional transportation planning process, improve connectivity between transportation modes, increase safety along and across the corridor for motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists, correct roadway deficiencies along I-25 and US 6 to meet current design standards to provide a safer, more efficient, and more reliable transportation system, and reduce congestion/delays related to the at-grade crossing of Santa Fe Drive / Kalamath Street and the Consolidated Main Line railroad

B. Vanderbilt Corridor and One Vanderbilt

Notice of Completion: Final Environmental Impact Statement by the Department of City Planning City of New York

Planning, Nyc Department Of City. "Vanderbilt Corridor and One Vanderbilt."NOTICE OF COMPLETION FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT(2015): n. pag. DEPARTMENT OF CITY PLANNING CITY OF NEW YORK. Web. 14 Apr. 2015.

Summary:

The Final Environmental Impact Statement considers the series of proposed discretionary actions proposed by the New York City Department of City Planning that would facilitate commercial development between Madison and Vanderbilt Avenues in East Midtown Manhattan, improve pedestrian circulation within Grand Central Terminal and its vicinity, and allow greater opportunity for area landmarks to transfer their unused development rights. This is similar to the Helix project because the both projects affect traffic in heavily congested areas. The area affected by the proposed actions is located in Manhattan’s Community District 5 and is in one of the highest-density commercial districts in New York City. It is centered on Grand Central Terminal, one of the City’s primary transportation hubs serving the Metro-North commuter rail system and several subway lines. Similarly, the Helix serves as a major connection to New York City and is the link between New Jersey and the Port Authority Bus Terminal.

Staff Qualifications and Experience

B

Section

B.1

Organizational Chart

Assoc. Vice President Financial Planning & Budgeting

David Anderson, CFA, CPA

Assoc. Vice President of Environmental Policy

John Lombardi, J.D.

Port Authority of NY & NJ

Lead Agency

Vice-President of Operations

Luke Greenleaf

President of Greenfield Consulting

Dr. Christopher Caulfield

Sr. Traffic Engineer

Alison Schroeder

Assoc. Vice President of Engineering

Oren Zyndorf

Sr. Environmental Analyst

Anna Mahmud

Assoc. Vice of President of Strategic Communications

Jonathan Martin

Sr. Communications Assoc.

Abdul Mugabel

B.2

Professional Profiles and Individual Experience

Christopher Caulfield, Ph.D.

Project Role:

Principle-in-Charge

Title: President

Home Office: New York City

Years of Experience: 30

Education:

Wharton School of Business, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA – 1992

MBA, Consultancy, 4.0

Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Columbia University, New York City, NY – 1985

PhD, Environmental Science, 4.0

Newark College of Engineering, New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, NJ – 1980

BS, Environmental Engineering, 3.93

Certifications and Skills:

· EPA 608, 609, IAQ, R-410A, and Green Certifications – Certified Summer 1990 by EPA

· Master Water Specialist – Certified April 1988 by Water Quality Association

· Leadership and teamwork skills developed extensively throughout a prodigious career

Employment History:

Greenfield Environmental Consulting

2003 – Present

Walden Consulting Associates

1995 – 2003

Environmental Protection Agency

1985 – 1995

Detailed Experience:

Greenfield Environmental Consulting, Inc., 2400 Eighth Avenue, New York City, NY

President October 2011 – Present

As President, is responsible for all activities of the firm; has no direct involvement in any one particular project. The position of President of the company does not come with field responsibilities. However, the President must be inherently knowledgeable about all projects that the company is working on, even if he/she does not directly consult on any of the jobs. Knowledge of business and economics are obviously extremely important for the President, but continued and updated knowledge in the areas of air quality, water quality, wildlife conservation, and sustainability are imperative as well.

Senior Project Manager April 2003 – September 2011

· Samuel Beckett Bridge Refurbishment Environmental Impact Assessment; Dublin Ireland

The Samuel Beckett Bridge, also colloquially known as the “Harp Bridge”, in Dublin, was in need of extensive refurbishment and repair. An environmental analysis was necessary, due to the potential issues of wildlife endangerment, disruption of the River Liffey, and environmental justice on both the north and south sides of the bridge. Greenfield was chosen as the environmental consulting company, and was tasked with compiling an Environmental Impact Statement (very similar in nature to its American counterpart required by NEPA) on the refurbishment work that was to be done. Water and air testing were both done, with the primary concerns in those areas being any dumping or runoff of repair materials into the river, and the emissions of the construction vehicles, respectively. The impact of the project upon the endangered cormorants which swim and eat in the Liffey, and nest along its shores, was a primary

concern of many environmental and conservationist groups headquartered in Dublin. Extensive research and tests were performed by Greenfield’s wildlife expert to ensure that the repair alternatives proposed would not adversely affect the cormorant population. Finally, polls of the neighborhoods directly bordering the north and south easement points of the bridge were done and demographic statistics of those areas analyzed, in addition to several public relations meetings being held between the major stakeholders in the repairs and the community. Overall, it was found that the air quality issues were not a problem, the water quality concerns would only become an issue if left unregulated and unmonitored – which was guaranteed to not be the case, the cormorant population would not be affected, and environmental justice in the areas affected by this project was only a slight concern. As a result, some of the staging areas and traffic deviations were altered. Following Greenfield’s environmental consultation, the actual repairs and refurbishments were completed successfully, and did not adversely affect the surrounding environment.

· Installation of New SEPTA Rail Line from Philadelphia, PA to Trenton, NJ Environmental Assessment

The Southeast Pennsylvania Transit Authority (SEPTA) decided to install a new rail line, connecting their 30th Street Station in Philadelphia to the NJ Transit Hub in Trenton, NJ in order to facilitate easier public transportation between the major cities of Philadelphia, Newark, and New York – the latter two already being served by NJ Transit trains out of Trenton. The proposed line would pass through several towns on its way to Trenton, and would also have to cross the Delaware River. Such an extensive project had not been attempted by SEPTA since the expansion of its Philadelphia subway system, and it required environmental consultation regarding the project. Much like the Yangtze Dam project, several environmental consulting firms were brought in, each specializing in one particular area. Focusing on one of its strengths, Greenfield was hired by SEPTA to assess the environmental justice issues that would stem from the railway’s passage through the communities between Philadelphia and Trenton. Greenfield’s public relations and environmental justice experts extensively assessed the reaction of the communities to the announcement of the proposed project, took several polls regarding public opinion of the project, and organized three ‘town hall’ meetings between SEPTA and members of the affected communities to discuss issues. It was found through these media that while there were many objections regarding the issues that the construction would cause, including traffic, noise, emissions, and some eminent domain disputes, the public was generally in favor of the proposal. No environmental justice issues were found; while some lower income families would be affected, the project did not place any undue stress upon these families, and certainly no more than any of the other affected citizens. Indeed, it was found that the public fully endorsed the project – provided their input was listened to often and well – because many of them worked in Philadelphia or Trenton, and this rail line would give them a much easier and cheaper way to get to work.

· Yangtze Three Gorges Dam Environmental Assessment; Sandouping, Hubei, China

This project was an enormous undertaking by the China Yangtze Power Company (CYP), aimed at building an expansive hydroelectric dam in the Yangtze River. Because of the scale of this project, more than one environmental consulting firm was hired; each focused on a specific portion of the proposed work. Greenfield was brought in exclusively to assess the impact that this project would have upon the air quality of the area directly surrounding the dam site. Air quality during construction was the primary concern, but long-term projections regarding the air quality during the future operation of the facility were also important to CYP. Other firms were hired to look at such issues as water quality control, wildlife impacts, and environmental justice, among others. The primary considerations when performing the air quality assessment were the current

air quality of the region, what types of emissions could be expected during construction, how those emissions would affect the air quality, and how the air quality would be affected by the long-term operation of the plant. It was determined that many different types of emissions would likely be expelled during the construction process; CO2, SO2, NO, CO, and particulate matter 2.5 were all listed in the EIS compiled by Greenfield as potential pollutants. As might have been expected in China, the parts per million (ppm) of all of these emissions were higher than is generally deemed safe or ‘clean’. It was concluded that the construction process would significantly increase these levels in the immediate area of the dam, but construction was approved anyway, as this was deemed a transient consequence. Indeed, long-term emissions by the finished plant were projected to be substantially lower and only mildly contribute to the pollution of the area. In addition, the generation of power by the dam would render the nearby coal-run electric plant obsolete (a facility which was found by Greenfield to be causing the majority of the area’s pollution). The emissions of the dam facility were much lower than those of the coal plant; CO2, SO2, NO, CO, and particulate matter 2.5 were projected to all be reduced by a minimum of 31 million tons/year, and some as much as 100 million tons/year. Overall, while the construction of the dam would greatly increase the ppm’s of many pollutants, the eventual outcome of the air quality in that area was found to be positive.

Walden Consulting Associates, Inc., 16 Spring Street, Oyster Bay, NY

Senior Air Quality Consultant August 1995 – April 2003

· Air Quality Assessment and Alternative Proposal, Los Angeles, CA

At the turn of the century, Mayor James Hahn of Los Angeles decided to take action regarding the extreme air quality issues that plagued his city. Walden was hired by his administration to assess the degree of the pollution and to propose any actions that could be taken by the Mayor or his staff to reduce it. Many air quality tests were performed, and it was found that the primary pollutants of the Los Angeles area were CO2, CO, and NO. After three more extensive studies performed by Walden, in and around the city, it was determined that the principal cause of these pollutants was vehicle emissions. The intense commuter traffic into and out of Los Angeles every day, intensified by an extreme population density, was causing a tremendous amount of emissions to be released into the atmosphere every day. In response to these findings, Walden proposed a few actions that the Mayor might make in an attempt to reduce the emissions. The proposal that was followed most closely was the public transportation initiative introduced by the Mayor in 2002. The initiative passed several edicts restricting the travel of commuter vehicles in the city, and granting the bus and regional rail systems greater exclusivity in and around Los Angeles. As a result, the air quality of that region was improved by 17% in the first six months, and was improved by an additional 24% throughout the next year.

· Metro Line Expansion Environmental Assessment, Stockholm, Sweden

The municipal government of Stockholm decided in the late 1990s to investigate the possibility of expanding its Metro system. A new strand, running from Gullmarsplan to Hagästra, was one of two proposed projects. The line would run beneath two blocks of buildings, as well as a municipal park. Walden was brought in to assess two things; the environmental impacts of the project as a whole, specifically air quality in the commercial district under which the Metro would pass, and the impact of the project upon any and all wildlife that lived in the affected park. The air quality issue was a concern in regards to the particulates and emissions that would be thrown into the air by the construction that could be inhaled by pedestrians or employees of that area. After performing several tests, Walden found that the air quality of that area was quite good; all levels of PM2.5, CO, NO, SO2, and CO2 were well within the Swedish equivalent of the United States’ “in attainment” designation. The project was found to potentially release up to 35% more of these pollutants into the surrounding air. However, because of the extraordinary

levels before the project, construction would only push the pollutant numbers slightly outside the “in attainment” levels. It was determined by Walden that the proposed Metro extension would not unduly affect the air quality of the surrounding area. However, Walden’s two wildlife experts performed tests of their own and determined that the noise, vibration, and particulate matter would affect the wildlife populations living in the park. While the municipal government did not stop the project, they did temporarily relocate the wildlife to a park on the other side of Stockholm, thus alleviating the issues.

Environmental Protection Agency – Region 2, 290 Broadway, New York City, NY

Director – Clean Air and Sustainability Division June 1992 – August 1995

The Direct of the Clean Air and Sustainability Division is responsible for all activities and projects within that area. As a governmental organization, the EPA has regulatory power to inspect and determine the compliance of any facilities within the governmental bounds of the United States. For Region 2, those bounds are restricted to New York, New Jersey, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands. In addition to regulation and inspection, the EPA officials for any of the Regions can be asked to perform tests to determine water and air quality within their Region, especially for governmental officials within that Region. Sustainability is obviously a large concern of this Division, and so the officials within it often visit facilities, not only to determine their water and air quality and other environmental impacts, but also the sustainability and footprint of their operations.

Air and Water Quality Assessor September 1985 – June 1992

· San Juan Bay Estuary Water Quality Assessment, San Juan, Puerto Rico

Pollution of the San Juan Bay Estuary threatened to destroy the urban wetlands in and around Puerto Rico’s capital. The cause of the pollution was fairly well-known; nearly thirty years of solid waste and medical waste had choked and polluted the waterway to an almost unrecognizable degree. Region 2 was asked to figure out just how bad the pollution was, the degree to which it could be reversed, whether any wildlife in the area had been permanently affected, and the future impacts of continued pollution. By testing many locations within the estuary, Region 2 determined that the water was fairly clean upstream of the city and that the vast majority of the pollution was coming from several locations within San Juan, as was expected. The degree of the contamination was found to be quite severe. The aerobic quality of the water had even begun to be affected, and the wildlife in the area was quite negatively affected. However, the damage was determined, at least by Walden, to be reversible. Fairly drastic measures of reform and restrictions regarding dumping into the estuary were suggested, and the government followed most. The future impacts were determined to be profound; if continued at the current rate, pollution would lead to a desolation of the wetlands, as well as irreversible detriment to the majority of the wildlife populations in the area.

· Port Newark Channel Deepening Environmental Impact Assessment; Newark, NJ

In conjunction with the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ), Region 2 was asked to complete a NEPA-required Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) regarding the PANYNJ’s project to deepen the channels leading into the Port of Newark in order to accommodate larger vessels. As might be expected, the water-related impacts of this project were the primary concerns of the EIS. Two distinct water fowl populations were found to be potentially prone to the effects of the project. In addition, there were extensive water pollution concerns generated by the nature of the project. For the EIS, Region 2 completed an extensive survey of the area, performed expansive tests upon the water quality and other aspects of the water in and around Port Newark, and projected the future impacts that the channel deepening project might have upon the affected waterways. It was found that the project was feasible, but tight restrictions

were eventually imposed upon the firm that completed the project regarding the import and export of materials and waste to and from the project area. In addition, Region 2 performed an extensive wildlife assessment, and determined that three of the five proposed alternatives were not allowable given their unduly high impact upon one or both of the waterfowl populations in the area. This project did not have environmental justice ramifications, seeing as how the project was completed entirely in the waterway, and only affected the traffic of other ships, which were relatively easily rerouted to neighboring channels and berths.

Environmental Sciences Intern May 1979 – August 1979

The EPA in Region 2 hosted a summer program for environmental engineering and environmental sciences undergraduates to expose them to the governmental – as opposed to industrial – opportunities open to them when they graduated. The 12-week program consisted of three rotations (four weeks each) in which the students were exposed to three different areas of the office’s projects – air quality, water quality, and sustainability.

Luke A. Greenleaf, Ph.D.

Project Role:

Operational Director

Title: Vice President

Home Office: New York City

Years of Experience: 5

Education:

Stanford University – 2009

PhD, Computer Science

California Institute of Technology – 2005

MS, Computer Science

Massachusetts Institute of Technology – 2003

BS, Computer Science

Certifications and Skills:

· Lead research initiatives in both academia and business

· Managed team of engineers and interfaced between business managers and engineers

· Experience as a system level architecture planner

· Big data and artificial intelligence algorithms

· Systems Integration

Employment History:

Greenfield Environmental Consulting

2013 – Present

International Business Machines (IBM)

Research Manager: 2011 – 2013

Researcher: 2010 – 2011

Detailed Experience:

IBM Researcher - Predictive Weather Senior System Engineer – Poughkeepsie, NY — 2010-2011

Started out as a senior engineer acting as the team lead for the data layer. I was responsible for storing and operating on the very large data sets that helped our system predict weather patterns.

Accomplishments

· Lead a small group of engineers that were working on the data layer

· Effectively communicated amongst team leaders to ensure resources were properly allocated at the right time

· Worked with the Engineering Manager to help distribute resources and build good resources to aid team communication and ensure teamwork

IBM Researcher - Predictive Weather Engineering Manager – Poughkeepsie, NY — 2011-2013

Continued working on the project as the engineering manager whom is responsible for distributing engineers to the different teams that make up the overall project. Was responsible for creating architecture diagrams and model system processes.

Accomplishments

· Brought the system’s accuracy from 63% to 72% through working closely with the data layer team

· Worked closely with the sales team to ensure they had appropriate material to sell to our respective customers

· Held team leader meetings to ensure that teams had proper level of resources

Vice President - Greenfield Environmental Consulting - Newark, NJ — 2014-Present

Responsible for interfacing with the Engineering, Legal, and HR to ensure company effectively utilizes resources. Work with the Engineering Staff and use my computer expertise to assist them in how to effectively solve our problems using the latest technologies.

Accomplishments

· Helped the company utilize newer technology in order to make our staff more productive at their respective jobs

· Worked with our engineers to create a cheaper air monitoring system that incorporates existent infrastructure

· Applied big data algorithms to assist in environmental planning

David Anderson, CFP, CPA

Project Role:

Financial Director

Title: Associate Vice President of Financial Planning and Budgeting

Home Office: New York City

Years of Experience: 19

Education:

Wharton School of Business – University of Pennsylvania – 2004

MBA, Finance and Business Administration, 4.0

New York University – 1996

BS, Financial Planning and Accounting, 3.97

Certifications and Skills:

· Certified Public Accountant (CPA), Certified Financial Planner (CFP)

· Beta Gamma Sigma, NYU Chapter

· NYU Deans List 1992-1996

· Fluent 4 languages

· Proficient in MS Word, C++, C, Fortran, Matlab, SAS, SPSS

· Employee of the Year – Greenfield; 2010, 2011

· Professional Beer Connoisseur

Employment History:

Greenfield Environmental Consulting

2006 – Present

Port Authority of New York and New Jersey

2002 – 2006

Arthur Andersen

1996 - 2002

Detailed Experience:

Greenfield Environmental Consulting —Newark, NJ July 2006– Present

President of Financial Planning & Budgeting

· As President of Financial Planning & Budgeting, I personally managed the funding and budgeting of all Greenfield Environmental Consulting Projects.

· Managed teams to estimate costs of projects accurately and effectively.

· Project Expertise:

· Installation of New SEPTA Rail Line from Philadelphia, PA to Trenton, NJ

When the Southeast Pennsylvania Transit Association (SEPTA) selected Greenfield Environmental Consulting to perform the Environmental Assessment of the expansion of the rail line from Philadelphia, PA to Trenton, a team to determine the budget was placed under my lead. As a team the budget was quickly and efficiently produced and presented to SEPTA. It succeeded in being well within their budget requirements and was readily accepted. Information gathering and production of the Environmental Impact Statement was performed within budgetary restrictions.

· Samuel Beckett Bridge Refurbishment Environmental Impact Assessment; Dublin, Ireland

Prepared budget for Samuel Beckett Bridge Refurbishment project in Dublin, Ireland. Insured that sufficient funds were available to carry out extensive research into wildlife, air, and water effects by Greenfield’s environmental experts. Also budgeted was

the cost of the poll to the neighborhood communities as well as salaries of Greenfield consultants and fees of EIS. The result was a well-funded project and was well within the constraints of the Irish Government.

Port Authority of NY & NJ—New York, NY May 2002-July 2006

Senior Financial Planner & Budgeter

· Planned budgets for multiple Port Authority projects and allocated funds for consultant expenses

· Allocated bonds necessary for construction and infrastructure projects

· Project Expertise:

· World Trade Center Budgeting Project

Post 9/11, Port Authority of NY & NJ reconstruction of World Trade Center, the World Trade Center transit station as well as other infrastructural replacements was necessary to be completed quickly and well-planned. As a financial planner for the Port Authority of NY & NJ, I personally led group of financial planners to determine number of government bonds necessary to fund WTC project. Included analysis of future interest payments and projected revenues from tolls and fees. Created budget for necessary consultant and construction firm stipends in all aspects of the project. Updated budget as it progressed in order to make sure needed changes were funded sufficiently

Arthur Andersen—Metro Park, NJ

Junior Accountant Rotational Program June 1996-September 2002

· Rotational Program Employee, experienced work with clients throughout many parts of the Ernst & Young Business including consulting, auditing, tax, and budgeting.

· Through Rotational Program, learned all parts of consultancy business and sparked an interest specifically in budgeting consultant business.

· Led budgeting consulting team for client projects especially in oil and gas sector, these included some major offshore oil rig construction budgeting.

J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.—New York, NY Summer 1994, Summer 1995

Private Investment Management Analyst Intern

· Evaluated government bonds for purchase, based on market interest rates, bond volatility, and bond interest rates.

· Developed a special method for hedging J.P. Morgan private investment risk using government bonds that maximized yield and minimized the risk associated with the bond.

Oren Zyndorf, Ph.D.

Project Role:

Lead Engineer

Title: Associate Vice President of Engineering

Home Office: New York City

Years of Experience: 24

Education:

Duke University – 1991

PhD, Environmental Engineering, 4.0

University of Oregon – 1986

MA, Environmental Studies, 4.0

University of Michigan – 1984

BS, Environmental Science, 3.75

Society Memberships:

· National Association of Environmental Professionals

· National Wildlife Federation

· Environmental Defense Fund

Employment History:

Greenfield Environmental Consulting

2014 – Present

Environmental Protection Agency

2008 – 2014

ESA Environmental Services

2001 – 2008

Aspen Environmental Group

1996 – 2001

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

1991 - 1995

Detailed Experience:

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection 1991-1995

· Environmental Tester/ Restoration Planner for Lower Passaic River Restoration Project

Hired by the NJDEP to help support the restoration of the Lower Passaic River. The Lower Passaic River is a 17-mile tidal stretch from Dundee Dam to the river mouth at Newark Bay. The river has a long history of industrialization, which has resulted in degraded water quality, sediment contamination, loss of wetlands and abandoned or underutilized properties along the shore. Helped tremendously in the development of the Focused Feasibility Study to evaluate the action needed to address the sediment within the river. Gathered data in order to characterize the nature and extent of contamination in the river along with planning future action to remove and transport the contaminants. Lastly, human health and ecological risks were calculated to further support the projected course of action of removal.

· Soil Remediation Update

The NJDEP adopted new remediation standards. Basically minimum standards for the remediation of contaminated ground water and surface water were created; I was involved in creating these new standards with the help of many other top experts in the field.

Aspen Environmental Group 1995-2001

Environmental Impact Researcher

· Alta-Oak Creek Mojave Wind Project

Assisted the Kern County Planning and Community Development Department with the California Environmental Quality Act to

process the Alta-Oak Mojave Project. Prepared an Environmental Impact Report for the project, which was approved by the Kern County Board of Supervisors in 2010. The project, owned by Alta Windpower development LLC is a wind energy generation company, which wanted to use land in Kern County to create an area for wind turbines. The EIR evaluated potential impacts of implementing a change in zone classification to incorporate the Wind Energy Combining District to the base district for approximately 2,772 acres of the project site. The EIR was approved by the Kern County board of Supervisors and the project has been completed.

· East Valley High School No. 1B

Under contract to the Los Angeles Unified School District, Helped prepared an EIR for the proposed East Valley High School No. 1B located in the east San Fernando Valley within the City of Los Angeles. The construction of the school required the vacation of the portion of Cumpston Street between Case Avenue and Vineland Avenue. The proposed school was planned to help alleviate overcrowding at Francis Polytechnic, Grant, and North Hollywood High Schools, and would allow students to attend school in their own neighborhood. The project was part of the LAUSD’s effort to provided needed school capacity to meet rising current and projected enrollment demands.

· City of Palmdale Hybrid Power Plant

The City of Palmdale proposed to construct, own, and operate the PHPP, which consists of a hybrid of natural gas-fired combined-cycle generating equipment integrated with solar thermal generating equipment on an approximately 377-acre site in the northern portions of the City of Palmdale. Assisted the California Energy Commission (CEC) with the Staff Assessment for the Palmdale Hybrid Power Project (PHPP). Prepared the analyses for the following issue areas:  Air Quality, Cultural Resources, Land Use, Geology and Paleontology, Waste Management, Hazardous Materials, Worker Safety, Public Health, and Alternatives. The project was approved by the CEC in 2011.

ESA Environmental Services 2001-2008

Restoration Engineer

The historic 127-acre tidal marsh and coastal lagoon at Crissy Field was filled nearly a century ago during construction of the Panama Pacific International Exposition and later used as an airfield. It has been transformed into a popular public waterfront park featuring 14 acres of restored coastal lagoon that serves as a focal point for visitors to San Francisco's Presidio. Help provide planning and design services to restore Crissy Field wetlands. The need to preserve historic cultural resources and public access limited the size of the restored wetland to 14

acres. Unlike previous tidal habitat restoration projects around San Francisco Bay, large amounts of wave-driven sands are naturally deposited along the site's shoreline. A key design consideration was whether the wetland produces enough tidal scour to maintain an open connection to the Bay, or if deposition of beach

sands at the mouth of the inlet would periodically close the entrance channel. ESA monitored Crissy Field's evolving beach-inlet-lagoon system for seven years following restoration. We used the monitoring data to develop a quantified conceptual model of inlet closure and breaching. This model was applied to predict how often the inlet would need to be excavated (breached) mechanically versus the reduction in breaching requirements with a larger wetland. These methods are being applied at other inlets to guide management actions.

Environmental Protective Agency 2008-2014

Air Quality Monitor

The nation's air quality monitoring networks, located across the country, are integral to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's efforts to protect public health and the environment. Provided day-to-day information on the welfare of the nation, region 1, air quality. Region 1 consists of CT, ME, MA, NH, RI, and VT. Moreover, performed research on the relationship between energy and air quality, climate change and air quality, health and air quality, ecosystems and air quality, etc. Published two papers on air monitoring and measuring capabilities.

Greenfield Environmental Consulting, Inc. 2014-Present

Recently hired as a science and technology expert due to my extensive background in the environmental sciences.

Alison L. Schroeder, MS, PE

Project Role:

Traffic Engineer

Title: Senior Traffic Engineer

Home Office: New York City

Years of Experience: 13

Education:

Georgia Institute of Technology – 2001

· MS, Civil Engineering – Transportation Engineering, 3.87

· BS, Civil Engineering, 3.92

· Minors: Business and Applied Mathematics

University of New South Wales – 1999

Study Abroad

Awards and Certifications:

· Professional Engineering License

· Distinguished Member – ASCE

· Tau Beta Pi Member

Skills:

· Leadership Abilities

· Teamwork Abilities

· Problem Solving

Employment History:

Greenfield Environmental Consulting

2014 – Present

Kaye Well Drilling, Inc.

2008 – 2014

Port Authority of New York and New Jersey

2002 – 2008

Detailed Experience:

Greenfield Environmental Consulting 2014 – Present

· Researching traffic patterns and emissions from major roadways in New Jersey

Working as a traffic and transportation engineer at Greenfield I have been given the freedom to design my own workday while working under the constraints of the companies objectives. Since being staffed at Greenfield I have helped the main engineering consultant evaluate the integrity of various major roadways in New Jersey while simultaneously doing my own data acquisition on traffic and emissions. By working under the main engineer and also being able to conduct my own research I have been able to provide the company with a more complete and accurate report on the roadways and potential projects.

Kaye Well Drilling Inc. 2008 – 2014

· Worked in an environment where my personal failures and accomplishments directly affected the company

I worked as a middle-man for companies situated near roadways that needed to drill new wells but needed to guarantee the integrity of the roadways in close proximity. I was responsible for doing the appropriate soil tests in order to determine the best location of the well that would minimize the cost of acquisition while also minimizing impact to the roadways. When I was able to gather sufficient data and place the well in the optimal location the company and I reaped the benefits but if I failed to gauge the soils correctly where we drilled the effects were felt by both the company and I.

· Increased annual revenue by 27%

This small, family-owned business was suffering from almost a decade of declining profit when they reached out to me for my help. I performed analysis on business practices to find the optimization of time of year compared to price point. By calculating peak months and not just peak season I was able to create a mathematical approach to increasing the chance of profit while managing to keep cost of operations relatively low. By figuring the payout of obtaining new machinery I was also able to guarantee them an increase in income after 7 years (the time it will take them to break even on new and more effective machinery).

Port Authority of New York and New Jersey 2002 – 2008

· Gained familiarity with research practices

For my first couple years I worked as an assistant to the project manager in charge of making headway on redesigning the bridges under the jurisdiction of the PANYNJ. Under him I was tasked with compiling structural archives of the bridges and also doing analysis on the current integrity of the structure.

· Headed the venture for designing the new bus depot as project manager

In 2005 I was named project manager for redesigning the bus depot located in Manhattan. I had a web of consultants, engineers, mathematicians, and scientists under my leadership that were each tasked with the appropriate responsibilities towards meeting our common goal: the finished design. This job helped me sharpen my leadership skills and also allowed me to thrive while trusting my own intuition. Under my direction the new bus depot was designed and completed in three years total.

Summer Research Intern at California Institute of Technology 2001

· Remained calm and patient under stressful and chaotic situations

· Interned for 10 weeks under Dr. Shoebits

The first two weeks of the internship were spent gathering data from local highways about peak hours of congestion and compiling all the information. In weeks three through nine, I conducted analysis on the collected data, including but not limited to statistical analysis, differential analysis, and environmental impact analysis. In week ten of my internship I presented my work to an advisory committee and was granted permission to showcase my findings at the universities showcase.

John T. Lombardi, J.D.

Project Role:

Environmental Director

Title: Associate Vice President of Environmental Policy

Home Office: New York City

Years of Experience: 27

Education:

McGill University – 1987

JD, Environmental Law

Stanford University – 1977

MS, Chemical Engineering

New Jersey Institute of Technology – 1975

BS, Chemical Engineering and Environmental Engineering

Certifications:

· First Aid

· CPR/AED

· Emergency Response

Skills:

· Proficient in:

· MATLAB

· Microsoft Office

Employment History:

Greenfield Environmental Consulting

1995 – Present

Environmental Protection Agency

1988 – 1995

G.C. Environmental Inc.

1977 – 1982

Long Beach Township Beach Patrol

1970 – 1973

Detailed Experience:

Greenfield Environment Consulting

Environmental Management Solutions Consultant 1995- Present

· Provide sustainable environmental solutions that meet specific customer needs

· Remain consistent with the long-term interests of the environment

· Maintain high standards of professional conduct and comply with local, state, and federal regulations

· Provide initial site evaluations and environmental assessments

· Provide intrusive investigations and remedial operations

Environmental Protection Agency, 1988-1995

· Make efforts to reduce environmental risk based on the best available scientific information

· Study federal laws for protecting human health and the environment

· Promote environmental protection concerning natural resources, human health, economic growth, energy, transportation, agriculture, industry, and international trade

G.C. Environmental Inc., 1977-1982

· Provide resources to help buildings convert to the cleanest heating fuels as soon as possible

· Production of full range of tank and boiler services

· Familiarize with all environmental regulations and inspections

· Assisting in all compliance efforts

· Helping install, maintain, repair, and decommission an entire range of heating, processing, and boiler system needs

Long Beach Township Beach Patrol, 1970-1973

· Ocean Lifeguard supervising the safety and rescue of beach patrons

Past Projects:

Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Began 1990 Environmental Protection Agency

· Chemical analysis of acid rain and its effect in the atmosphere from the tristate of the New York metropolitan area

Acid Rain Project, Began 1995 Environmental Protection Agency

· Efforts to reduction annual SO2 emissions

· Part of team to promote a restriction of fossil fuel burning

Bradley Landfill Project, Began 1979 G.C. Environmental Inc.

· Designed first landfill gas energy recovery for Bradley Landfill

· The plant was designed to process 5 million metric standard cubic feet per day

Anna Mahmud, Ph.D.

Project Role:

Environmental Analyst

Title: Senior Environmental Analyst

Home Office: New York City

Years of Experience: 6

Education:

University of Toronto – 2009

PhD, Environmental Engineering

McMaster University – 2005

BS, Ecology and Evolutionary Science Minor, Environmental Sciences

Skills:

· Proficient in Microsoft Office

· Multidisciplinary expertise and team-working ability

· Well organized

· Has carried out analysis on environmental issues and suggested the remedial measures

· Has worked on wetland mitigation strategies & documented the proofs of concept for concrete results

Employment History:

Greenfield Environmental Consulting

2013 – Present

SNC-Lavalin

2012 – 2013

Golder and Associates Corporation

2011 – 2012

Groundwater and Environmental Services

2010 – 2011

Maple Reindeers

2009 – 2010

Detailed Experience:

Greenfield Environmental Consulting 2013 – Present

New York City, New York

· Performed field collection of water pollution samples in the morning.

· Performed validation and archival of collected samples in the afternoon and prepared samples for the following day.

· Performed simple data processing.

· Performed basic equipment maintenance in field and laboratory.

· Determined effectiveness of corrective and control measures.

· Resolving problems encountered in industrial hygiene surveillance, community environmental evaluations, and radiological health activities.

· Provided assistance to other base activities on Bioenvironmental Engineering (BEE) programs.

· Conducted internal inspections of program activities, analyzed findings, and implemented corrective action or recommend solutions.

· Documented worker exposures and identified abatement procedures as necessary.

· Documented survey results and assessments in Water Force local Environmental Safety and Occupational Health (ESOH) databases.

· Prepared technical reports detailing findings and recommendations from assessments.

SNC-Lavalin 2012 - 2013

Mississauga, Ontario

· Perform ambient air quality data collection and data quality assurance, as well as dispersion modeling.

· Perform data management and technical report writing and proposals.

· Conduct air dispersion modeling analyses.

· Collect, validate, and report ambient air quality and meteorological data.

· Calculate air emissions and determine required control technologies.

· Assemble permit applications, understand existing regulations and continue to review new and proposed regulations as they relate to industrial clients.

· Maintain relationships with existing clients and cultivate new clients as appropriate.

· Preparation of planning document for a 0.75 MGD oxidation ditch sewage treatment plant expansion.

· Prepare and complete action plans; coordinate actions of various scientific discipline specialists.

· Resolve problems; complete audits; identify trends; determine system improvements; implement change.

· Meet environmental research financial objectives by forecasting project requirements; prepare an annual budget; schedule expenditures; analyze variances; initiate corrective actions.

Golder Associates Corp. 2011 – 2012

Mississauga, Ontario

· Prepared environmental determination reports, environmental overviews for minor projects, technical sections of Environmental Assessment, and portions of general planning and multi-use studies.

· Assisted in maintaining and updating project files properly and in a timely manner.

· Prepared project descriptions at close of project and updated professional resume quarterly.

· Performed specific tasks such as mapping land used jurisdiction and zoning as directed.

· Researched background information for use in planning and environmental projects.

· Performed a variety of routine tasks to provide experience and interaction with other technical professionals.

· Assisted in information management, such as library reference material.

· Assisted in organizing public involvement meetings and hearings.

· Maintained and updated project files properly and in a timely manner.

· Helped in coordinating tasking, forecasting, tracking and reporting of all related environmental schedule, budget and risk elements.

Groundwater and Environmental Services Inc. 2010 - 2011

Neptune, New Jersey

· Plan, direct, and coordinate soil and groundwater investigations and required remediation at company facilities and legacy sites

· Manage environmental due diligence actions for company acquisitions within a team-based environment

· Develop and implement sustainable strategies which are both cost-effective and minimize long-term environmental liabilities

· Deploy environmental procedures and standards that address regulatory requirement and Company policies and initiatives

Maple Reindeers 2009 - 2010

Mississauga, Ontario

· Worked as an intern under the senior environmental engineer

· Was present during inspections and at meetings and hearings before appropriate local, state, and national regulatory agencies, as well as various technical and civic committees relating to environmental matters

· Administered all monitoring and reporting as required by the environmental regulations and permits

· Established sampling and analysis procedures; compiling, analyzing, and evaluating the generated data, and preparing required reports

Jonathan Martin, Ph.D.

Project Role:

Public Relations Officer

Title: Associate Vice President of Strategic Communications

Home Office: New York City

Years of Experience: 8

Education:

New York University – 2006

PhD, Social Policy

New York University – 2002

BS, Sociology

Minor: Law and Society

Skills:

· Expert in demographics research

· Leadership and team-working abilities

· Effective communicator to project stakeholders from all socioeconomic classes.

Employment History:

Greenfield Environmental Consulting

2009 – Present

Hackmann Consulting Group

2008 – 2009

Hackmann Consulting Group, Intern

2007 – 2008

Detailed Experience:

Hackmann Consulting Group

Minneapolis: 2008 – 2009

Public Relations Officer

· Responsibilities included making sure local needs are considered, that low-income and minority communities are not disproportionately affected by proposed solutions, and insuring that all plans presented meet both the client’s needs but also those of the community.

Hackmann Consulting Group

Minneapolis: 2008 – 2009

Internship Position

· Responsibilities included aiding in the development of strategies for strategically important regional clients, preparing and delivering presentations, and working to identify client challenges and bring opportunities and ideas to senior Hackmann Consulting Group staff.

Abdulrahman Mugabel, Ph.D.

Project Role:

Public Relations Officer

Title: Senior Communication Associate

Home Office: New York City

Years of Experience: 31

Education:

Indiana University – 1983

PhD, Public Relations – Mass Media Specialization

Columbia University – 1977

MS, Environmental Science – Public Policy Specialization, 4.0

Florida International University – 1974

BS, Communications – Public Relations, 4.0

Minor: Journalism

Skills:

· Proficient in HTML, XML, SQL, and JavaScript

· Fluent in English and Arabic (native)

Employment History:

Greenfield Environmental Consulting

2009 – Present

Institute of Public Administration – Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

2003 – 2009

Saudi Ports Authority

1993 – 2003

Environmental Systems International

1984 – 1993

Detailed Experience:

Environmental Systems International LLC

Emirate of Sharjah United Arab Emirates, U.A.E

Public Relations Representative February 1984 – June 1993

· Managed all media, press and public relation issues.

· Developed corporate communication strategies and programs, including project timeline.

· Work with management to identify trends and developments that might influence PR strategies.

· Established long-range objectives and developed innovative strategies.

· Integrated public and analyst relation program with all the company’s departments.

· Confer with production, graphic design and web-design personnel to coordinate production of corporate communications materials.

Saudi Ports Authority

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Public Relations Coordinator November 1993 – February 2003

· Defined project and company vision, strategies and tactics.

· Researched, negotiated, implemented, and tracked advertising and public relations activities.

· Maintained co-operative relationships with representative of the community, employee, and public interest group.

· Coached client representative of effective communication with public and employee.

Institute of Public Administration

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Public Relations and Communications Assistant

August 2003-December 2009

· Wrote engage copy with attention-grabbing headlines for print and web use.

· Assisted with the integration of public relations campaigns across multiple media.

· Prepared, edited, and reviewed internal employee communications.

Technical Approach

C

Section

C.1

Preparation of Environmental Impact Statement

The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) process is necessary in this project as this project’s scope and impact are great in a number of areas; some that are hard to predict and must be monitored and watched closely. The purpose is to allow those with the power of making important decisions to properly weigh the pros and cons of the proposed solutions against its impact and the alternatives and their impacts and select the best option from among them. This is a time consuming process but it aids in the overall goal of NEPA gotten from its own preamble stating, “To declare national policy which will encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between man and his environment; ...”. This should be seen as the purpose of NEPA overall was to alert mankind as a whole that the earth is but one and man but many; our footprint is equally backwards with the earth taking so little and we taking all but scraps remaining. The overall process outlined by NEPA need be followed if project receives: 1) Federal Funding, 2) Project reviewed by Federal Employee requires analysis. This project will most assuredly need to have some level of federal funding as well as being reviewed by various government agencies that are bound by NEPA including the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The Act lays a framework for all projects undertaken by the government to adopt a least environmentally impactful per societal gained metric difficult and not thought to be important before by all. This act has served as a foundational document in numerous other countries in helping set up environmental laws that govern a society.

This project most likely will not qualify for either a Categorical Exclusion nor an Environmental Assessment with a Finding of No Significant Impact; thus leaving us to file the most rigorous of the three documents an Environmental Impact Statement. The EIS will contain our proposed action along with its thought to be environmental impacts and how we both quantify and alleviate said pressures. We will then discuss the possibility of alternatives to the proposed solution as well as their environmental impacts and qualify why they were not the proposed alternative essentially comparing and contrasting each alternative against the solution solidifying why it is the best of the solutions. These solutions then need to be given a resource allocation to weigh the cost of each solution with the proposed gain of the solution and perform risk management at a government level. This is an important point as the Federal Government only has a limited budget and has a lot of proposals for necessary projects and need some criteria to judge each based upon. NEPA helps this and the court cases that have happened have helped solidify as well as offer good precedent for others to use to aid in their cases. Finally as with all things in life there are pros and cons and to conclude we must discuss both the resources and the impacts that are irreversible and their detriment value to society. Actuarial science is concerned with this type of information and would greatly be of assistance in giving actual values to this different possible scenarios.  

Depending on the desired solution that is to be taken in order to repair the Helix various impacts to the environment will take place. The possibility of needing a barge would cause water, air, and sound

pollution. Large Machinery used in the construction of new structures would cause air pollution as well as sound pollution. These are just two of the many possible causes of added pollution caused by this project and for these reasons I believe that no matter what solution is chosen an EIS is going to be needed to be filed in order to accommodate the needs of this extensive project. The regulatory document that handles the difference between needing an EIS or an EA is [40 C.F.R. § 1508.9] or Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Chapter 5, Part 1508, Section 9.

The permits needed for this project will vary depending on which solution we are investigating. We will have to monitor air quality surrounding the site and in neighboring communities to ensure we remain in attainment or know we must gather permits for falling out of attainment. We also may need further permits for things such as having a barge on the worksite, or running onsite generators. This is something that is highly dependent on the solution that is being implemented.

The largest environmental issue that will be caused by the undertaking of the Helix project will be the overall impact to the surrounding air quality due to air pollution from the heavy machines to the extra trucking of materials and supplies into the job site. If a barge is needed there are huge emissions caused by the need of the barges heavy octane fuel in order to move this massive structures. In order to combat these problems the project will have to build special work tents to capture the emissions and deal with them through clever and emerging techniques rather than allowing them to dissipate through the ambient air. These techniques can range from storing them under water in pockets of air and gas to using plant life as a means of processing and filtering some of the negative compounds resulting from these emissions. Algae is a large research area and being used as an attachment to smokestacks for factories in order to process fumes; I do not see why this could not be broadened to work on a barges emissions and help in a similar fashion.

C.2

No-Action Alternative

To be in accordance with the NEPA statute, Greenfield Environmental Consulting, Inc. will propose a No Action alternative.  The Lincoln Tunnel Helix has been a steeple structure of the PANYNJ since its construction and has served 74 years of traffic entering and leaving New York City.  The PANYNJ has been working on The Helix Fix-The Lincoln Tunnel Helix Rehabilitation Project since its approval in late 2011.  Phase 1 of the rehabilitation project, the East-bound portion, was completed in 2013.  Phase 2 of the rehabilitation project, the West-bound portion, is set to be completed in mid-2015.  The refurbishing of the Lincoln Tunnel Helix will extend the life of the structure a sufficient amount and Greenfield Environmental Consulting, Inc. sees this as an adequate solution.  The No Action alternative minimizes construction time, environmental impact, community impact, and other similar aspects.

C.3

List of Alternatives to be Reviewed

In accordance with NEPA, a number of alternatives must be proposed as possible solutions to the problem. The following four alternatives are those which Greenfield will be considering.

Alternatives

1.  Circle Ramp

2.  Double Decker

3.  Dig in to Tunnel

4.  Bridge Development

· Alternative 1 consists of creating a 450 degree circle ramp inside the existing Helix. This would allow construction to not interfere with the traffic flow. The new circle ramp would connect to the lower Helix; the upper Helix would no longer be used. The NJ Transit bus parking lot would have to be utilized for this construction.

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/pmtZKO8e7cxhic8h5dam1imIkypuLoQcJgsqGIgqcA8KpbgL0wqPG-ExhN-zncbs3Lzk0-3kM-4CizrGIMK06a2CkdsqlU3ma-M_WrOx9V1lOkqB3mN8t94ia2sU2moLrVxezUo

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/jsgfOtriUwYa3P_y93hkEiFup0d6164CKSQzMxbHc47NP0ZVmxAx5cjkFGhhmZIXgVRtdwliZHRJnif27TD4LEqzCu1wz8EI7gsLhGB0DDQKmS9jrxk5gaSCmkovr0XL4DcAJvc

· Alternative 2 results in creating a Double Decker roadway system: the lower deck will be responsible for traffic to the city and the upper deck will contain traffic going away from the city. Construction for this alternative would be tricky to perform. The top deck of the Helix would be constructed first, while traffic would continue to flow through the original Helix. When the top deck is finished, traffic would be directed to the top deck. This would allow the old Helix to be demolished and begin the construction of the lower deck. After the lower deck is completed, traffic would flow on both decks. This would be a major construction project. The Double Decker Helix would have to have similar geometry as the old Helix. Each deck will have the same width as the original Helix. This would allow traffic to flow more smoothly and erase problems such as lack of shoulders and seismic capacity.

· Alternative 3 consists of digging a tunnel directly from Route 495 into the Lincoln Tunnel. The Helix (including both the lower and upper) or the space where the Helix existed would no longer be needed. This would be extremely effective but would result in eminent domain of private property to be utilized. Drilling underground will require soil studies to be performed along with air quality studies.

reorienttunnel.jpg

· Alternative 4 consists of creating a bridge directly from route 495 completely by passing the Lincoln Tunnel. The bridge would be used exclusively by passenger vehicles. The old Helix would then exclusively be used by mass transportation. The Helix would undergo a massive refurbishing initiative which would help raise the quality and extend its useful life. Due to the Helix only servicing mass transportation the stress that will be exerted on the Helix would be much less.

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/1Fx5lQOAIW1tPlxxJeWFKC_BXZczSur4HKeLXABgEG6xA7tvj-6G9bnG03KrKZ2N3mD4Y4Iaf1s9dlmI-IQmhm9rGRlaAJQBMdYKwcovu_k17V5v7OJcbGE3hMGbXgahpKhAFOk

Alternative

Long Term Solution

Safety after construction

Eminent Domain Required?

Difficulty

No Action

No

Low

No

Low/Medium

Alternative 1

Yes

Medium

Yes

Medium

Alternative 2

Yes

Medium

Yes

High

Alternative 3

Yes

High

Yes

High

Alternative 4

Yes

High

Yes

High

C.4

Environmental Impact Statement Table of Contents

The following is a rendering of the Table of Contents which would accompany the Environmental Impact Statement for this project.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT (EIA) LEGISLATIVE

1. PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

     1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

     1.2 Document Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

     1.3 Project Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.3.1 Screening . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.3.2 Scoping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

     1.5 Alternative EIS Formats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                   

           1.5.1 Direct Format Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

           1.5.2 Grouped Format Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2. PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

     2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

     2.2 Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

           2.2.1 Pursuing Preventative Action. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

     2.2.2 Informing the Decision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

     2.2.3 Public Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

      2.3 Roles of Participants in Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

          2.3.1 The Developer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

          2.3.2 Designers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

          

2.3.3 Environmental Specialists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

          2.3.4 Competent Authorities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

          2.3.5 Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

          2.3.6 Non-Governmental Organizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

      2.3.7 The Public. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

      2.4 EIA Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

          2.4.1 Impartiality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

          2.4.2 Health & Safety. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

          2.4.3 Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

          2.4.4 Screening . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

          2.4.5 Scoping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

          2.4.6 Availability of Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

          2.4.7 Appropriate Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3. TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS. . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    3.1 Existing Roadway and Traffic Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    3.2 Compatibility with Transportation Plans and Programmed Projects. . . . . . . . . . . . .

    3.3 Future Travel Demand . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    3.4 Freeway and Street Safety. . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    3.5 Transit / HOV Access. . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4. ALTERNATIVES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    4.2 Alternatives Considered in Detail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

      4.2.1 Preamble . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

      4.2.2 Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.2.2.1 Project need and alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.2.2.2 Project Justification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.2.2.3 State/National significance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.2.2.4 Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.2.2.5 Sustainable development leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.2.2.6 Regional significance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.2.2.7 Population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.2.2.8 Skills & Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.2.2.9 Improvements to Infrastructure & Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.2.2.10 Justification: Infrastructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.2.2.11 Justification: Location of development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.2.2.12 Taking no action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

      4.2.3 Description of the Proposed Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

      4.2.4 Description of the Existing Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

      4.2.5 Description of the Likely Significant Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

      4.2.6 Description of Mitigation Measures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

      4.2.7 Non-Technical Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    4.3 Comparison of Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    4.4 Greenfield Environmental Consulting, Inc. Preferred Alternative . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5. GLOSSARY OF IMPACTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    5.1 Aquatic Impact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    5.2 Air Quality. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    5.3 Private Land Inholding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    5.4 Recreation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    5.5 Scenery. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    5.6 Soil. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    

5.7 Water Resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    5.8 Wildlife. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

         5.8.1 General Wildlife. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

         5.8.2 Threatened or Endangered Species. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    5.9 Unavoidable Adverse Effects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    5.10 Socio-Economics and Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    5.11 Cumulative Effects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

6. GLOSSARY OF TERMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

In the firm’s opinion, the six most critically important sections of this Table of Contents - and the resulting EIS - are:

1. Section 2.2.3: Public Participation

This section is obviously quite important to any project. The involvement of the public is inherently essential for the success of any major infrastructure project in a populated area. The public can either make it very easy or very difficult to complete a project on time and on budget, depending on whether the project has their support or their opposition. Even despite these considerations, the public should still be given adequate notice of and information regarding the project because of the potential for them to cultivate good ideas. The citizens of the area(s) where the project will be occurring often have valuable insight into potential infrastructural or logistical problems that the project may face, as well as solutions to these which may not occur to the project planners. Finally, environmental justice is a key reason why public participation is important to any project. As an important aspect of gauging the public interest and acceptance of this project, it is necessary to ensure that no group - but particularly an economic or ethnic minority - is being unduly affected by the project. This is not only a stipulation of NEPA, but is a matter of public perception and public support - or lack thereof - which could truly harm a project. Indeed, the Bayonne Bridge project was nearly scrapped because of failing to account for environmental justice issues.

0. Section 2.4: EIA Issues

This section truly addresses some of the most vital portions of any project, including health and safety, impartiality, and the scope of the project, among others. The importance of this section is really ensuring that the project is in compliance with NEPA requirements in all aspects, as well

as verifying that the firm has the necessary skills and experience to complete the project in practice. This section ensures that the firm which is writing the Environmental Impact Statement actually has the experience and skills necessary to complete the document fully and accurately. In addition, it secures the professionalism of the firm; the section of ‘impartiality’ in particular is intended to ensure that the firm has no conflict of interest with the project or its outcomes.   

3. Sections 3.1 & 3.2: Existing Roadway and Traffic Conditions & Compatibility with Transportation Plans and Programmed Projects

These sections are also quite important to any infrastructure-dependent environmental project. Clearly, as the Helix is the principal entrance and exit to the New Jersey side of the Lincoln Tunnel, roadway considerations are a large part of this project. These include the physical condition of the road, the traffic patterns that exist upon the road, and of course the volume of traffic itself. Because the all of proposed alternatives impact the physical structure of the Helix – as well as the adjoining roadways – traffic considerations are very important. Not only is the traffic flow going into and coming out of the Tunnel an important concern, but the local traffic in Weehawken – as affected by the construction and possible diversions – is important as well. First of all, the Lincoln Tunnel is one of the major easements into New York City; therefore, the flow of traffic into the Tunnel on the Helix cannot be too adversely affected by construction. Because of this, the flow of traffic into the Tunnel needs to be taken into account during the planning and logistics of the alternatives. Moreover, the support of the government and citizens of Weehawken – and the other surrounding towns, including Hoboken – needs to be assured for this project to move forward successfully. Therefore, there cannot be an unreasonable burden placed upon the local roads by this project. Any diversions needed to move traffic around construction sites and any staging areas for the construction must therefore be planned and executed in such a way that accommodates the local traffic flow and patterns without unreasonably disrupting them. Because of these very important issues, this section of the EIS is one of the most paramount.

0. Section 4.2: Alternatives Considered in Detail

This section is absolutely vital to the successful completion of any project. It is required by NEPA to consider as many alternatives as are logistically and conceptually prudent, including a no-action alternative. The consideration of these alternatives is not only important because of this requirement. It behooves the environmental firm to consider all possible alternatives because this process increases the chances of finding a solution which is not only cost effective and accomplishes the intended goal, but is also as environmentally friendly as possible. The no-action alternative really forces the firm to examine the problem from all sides; just because certain stakeholders in the project have touted renovations or repairs does not mean that any action at all is even needed. But assuming that changes are needed, and a project is to be undertaken, carefully considering all alternatives, from an economic, infrastructural, and especially environmental perspectives is very important.

0. Section 4.3: Comparison of Alternatives

The careful comparison of the alternatives is as important as the acquisition of all the alternatives, if not more so. Comparing the alternatives is what enables the environmental consulting firm to decide which one is the best course of action. During such a comparison, the pros and cons of each alternative - be they environmental, logistical, political, economic, or otherwise - are clearly and concisely listed so as to make the choice between them that much easier. When comparing the alternatives side by side, it is inherently necessary to have all of the information related to each alternative; how much it will cost, what the environmental impacts will be, what the logistical concerns might be, how the alternative has been received by the relevant governments and citizenries, and how well the alternative actually solves the posed problem are items which can be compared across alternatives. These points, as well as any other relevant concepts, allow the comparison of alternatives to yield a truly balanced and effective solution from the pool of possible ones.

0. Sections 5.1, 5.2, & 5.8: Aquatic Impact, Air Quality, & Wildlife

These sections are obviously some of the most critical in the entire Environmental Impact Statement. Section 5 as a whole, is extremely important, as it summarizes and describes the impacts felt upon the various facets of the environment around the project. These three subsections were chosen as particularly vital because they are the three which will be most directly influenced by the Helix project. Because of the proximity to the Hudson River, there is obviously a need to assess the potential aquatic impacts of this project, particularly if materials and/or equipment will be barged up the River to the work sites. This will most likely be assessed through water testing, as well as evaluating the impacts of the shipping itself upon the waterway. Secondly, air quality is probably the impact of paramount importance to this project. The difference between air quality during static traffic and moving traffic, the emissions of construction vehicles and equipment, the particulate matter thrown into the air by construction, and the already existing “non-attainment” status of this region all conspire to make air quality a very serious concern. While the likely air contamination is probably not enough to cancel the project, it is something which will have to be monitored closely. Air quality tests before, during, and after construction are recommended. This way, it can be assessed whether or not the construction had a lasting or transient effect upon the ambient air quality. In addition, steps must needs be taken to ensure that the air quality during construction does not decrease to such a level that it is dangerous or harmful for the local population around the Helix. Finally, the impact that this project will have on wildlife must necessarily be taken into account. It is officially reported that there are no endangered or threatened species within the area of the project. However, a thorough investigation of the wildlife in that area will definitely be undertaken. Following this, an assessment of the impact that this project would have on those indigenous species will also be conducted.

C.5

Data Analysis Sources

Section 2.2.3: Public Participation

The NEPA framework outlines how, when, and why an agency must involve interested public persons into the process. Public participation should help draft the scoping of the project and will be started in the Notice of Intent and Scoping part of the NEPA process of an EIS. The framework itself describes public participation as a mutually beneficial relationship that allows the agency to get more alternatives and learn about impacts they may not have otherwise identified by the people who are most familiar with an area. This collaborative effort will improve support, and gather typically more acceptable alternatives.

Section 2.4: EIA Issues

Attached can be found each personnel’s resume as to establish qualification amongst the team and offer information as to their partiality to the case. For the environmental effects we have to look no further than the documents created by the EPA on topics such as: Air, Water, and Waste. This project will have an impact on the air quality of the surrounding areas and it will be crucial to ensure attainment or have the proper permits. There are laws and regulations that impact our ability to get these permits such as National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQs), Six Common Air Pollutants: Designations, and State Implementation Plan Status and Information. The Clean Air Act (CAA) is responsible for setting in place regulations and standards that must be adhered to on a federal level for air quality. These is but one area that must be assessed as there is a Clean Water Act (CWA) that similarly creates rules and standards over water, and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and its rules on hazardous waste disposal, conservation of energy and natural resources by recycling and recovery options.

Section 3.1 & 3.2: Existing Roadway and Traffic Conditions & Compatibility with Transportation Plans and Programmed Projects

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is the governmental agency that has stewardship over the construction, maintenance, and preservation of the Nation’s highways, bridges, and tunnels. This organization has policy and guidance documents that would assist our efforts in best understanding both the current conditions and how to best appropriate resources to ensure our future conditions are in attainment for a long period of time. The state also has their own organization being the Department of Transportation for the state of New Jersey. This body has their own rules and regulations that it would be best to consult their rules and regulations as they are to be a vital part of this project and need to have their support moving forward.

Section 4.2: Alternatives Considered in Detail

For this section, the proposed data sources for analysis are design of experiments and control charts. Design of experiments will be used to carry out carefully planned experiments on a process. Usually this process requires a series of experiments and starts looking broadly at many variables and then focusing in on a few critical ones. After that a control chart will be used to see how each alternative changes over time. Comparing current data to historical control limits leads to conclusion about whether the process variation is consistent (in control) or is unpredictable (out of control, affected by special causes of variation).  

Section 4.3: Comparison of Alternatives

For this section, the proposed data sources for analysis are design of experiments, control charts and ABC analysis. Design of experiments will be used to see how the planning, conducting, analyzing and interpreting controlled tests will evaluate the factors that control the value of a parameter or a group of parameters (in this case, the alternatives). This process will be used hand in hand with control charts for the purpose of figuring out possible mistakes and plan for correcting those problems. It is also needed to see whether or not an alternative is stable (in statistical control) and therefore plausible. The ABC analysis will be used for alternative idea evaluation. A is very important, B is relatively important and C is less important. This can be helpful in putting ideas on paper and seeing them laid out.

Sections 5.1, 5.2, & 5.8: Aquatic Impact, Air Quality, & Wildlife

For this section, the proposed data sources for analysis are Fishbone (Ishikawa) Diagram and Analytical Hierarchy Process approach. The Fishbone Diagram is needed for this section for figuring out how to minimize problems in aquatic, air and wildlife systems. With this method, it is easier to brainstorm all possible outcomes. The APH is designed to breakdown give hierarchy to the impacts and evaluate what needs to be a priority. All these issues cannot be perturbed by the project but if one of them has a bit of a leeway and/or can be modified for a short time and retracted back to what it has to be, the APH process can evaluate it.

C.6

Security Measures

Chief of Security

Having centralized control over crime prevention is key to site security. A Chief of Security  is the head of job site security, updating security procedures and staying in contact with local police in order to both keep them up to date on our activities, but also to stay abreast of any criminal activity near the job site that we may need to be aware of. The Chief of Security reports to Vice President of Operations with daily updates on the security status of the job site.

Security and Emergency Procedures

Before construction can begin, a plan is developed by the Chief of Security for the job site that addresses the key points of safety and security. This includes but is not limited to securing the site perimeter, where to place lights and video surveillance, location and number of equipment sheds, employee and equipment identification, and control of site access points. This plan will be formulated with assistance from relevant personnel, such as the head of construction, and anyone else who may have key knowledge needed for site security.

In the event of emergency, procedures must be place in order to make sure it is dealt with swiftly and effectively in order to insure the safety of all site personnel.  Contingency plans must be in place for a wide variety of scenarios such as injury, fire, leaked hazardous materials, unstable structures, dangerous weather, and other emergencies. Each of these plans by their nature will be unique for that site, but generally they should consider which agencies to contact for assistance (such as the police or a hospital), how to make sure assistance is able to safely and quickly reach those in need of aid, how to identify potential hazards before they cause an emergency, and how to evacuate site personnel if necessary.

Inventory of Equipment

Stolen or missing equipment can sometimes go unnoticed, which is why it’s important for an inventory of all site equipment be recorded and updated daily. The inventory includes the equipment, where it is stored, its identification number, and who has used it. This way, it will become immediately apparent if a piece of equipment goes missing, and it can be tracked down and reported missing as quickly as possible.

Secured Perimeter

In order to prevent unauthorized personnel from accessing the work site, fences are installed along the perimeter of the work site. These fences will be set in concrete to prevent them from being knocked over, and will be at a height of eight feet with barbed wire at the top to prevent

trespassers from scaling them. The fences will be made out of chain-link in order to allow for easy surveillance of the work site.

Video Surveillance

It is not possible for security personnel to monitor all areas of the work site at all times of the day in person. As a result, it is necessary to install video surveillance in key areas of the construction area. This allows for monitoring of those areas from a centralized location, and for recordings to be made of illegal activity which can be used to identify trespassers and other criminals who may have accessed the construction site.

Secure Storage Areas

When not in use, equipment will need to be stored in secure areas, such as sheds or fenced off areas for larger equipment. These would be locked with only select personnel having access. Special storage is needed for hazardous materials such as explosives, toxins, solvents, and other chemicals. When not in use, construction vehicles must have their keys accounted for and stored away from the vehicle in order to prevent theft.

Protection for Power Sources

Power sources for lighting and equipment is a necessity, both for safety and security. Due to the nature of the equipment being used, these power sources are high voltage, and accidental contact could result in damage to equipment, injury, or even death. Securing these sources of power is necessary for security as a loss in power could prevent use of lights and video surveillance as well as slow construction.

Lights

A properly lighted job site is an effective measure to prevent crime and increase the visibility of the workers. Since construction for the new Helix will take place during nights at some points, a properly lighted job site is imperative. In addition, well-lit areas should include offices, storage crates, and parking areas. Motion sensitive lighting should be as a security measure as well a power saver.

Security Personal

The site entrance and exit points will all be monitored by security personal. In addition to monitoring points, cameras will be set up around the job site. Video surveillance will be viewed by the security personal on a TV in each monitoring point. Each security personal will have personal hand held transceivers and quick dial options to local police and fire department services.

Control Access Points

Ideally a work site should have only one access point for the entrance and exit of the site. Each access point will have a security personal office with clear glass windows for easy visibility.

Identification of all construction and security Personal

Each employee will receive an access card with a specific bar code to allow access into the job site. The security personal must actively check off each employee entering the site with a device that scans a bar code on the access card. The device will only be available inside the access points which then can only be available to the security personal. Only the security personal will hold the key to the access points. The police will be notified of any after-hour construction.

Hotline for reporting suspicious activity

A hotline will be created for the construction site to report any suspicious activity or dangerous actions. The hotline will be available to the public and encouraged to be used by employees. A simple and easy to remember hotline such as 1800-55H-ELIX will be created. “No Trespassing” signs will be posted in conspicuous areas throughout the job site and on these signs the hotline will be displayed as well.

Employee parking is outside job site

Employee parking should be outside the construction fence or in a clearly designated area within the fence line. This will reduce any potential threats that a car may contain when entering to work site. This area will have motion-sensor lights present.

Train Employees in Crime Prevention Techniques

Each employee will receive comprehensive training on crime prevention techniques along with safety initiatives specific to the area. The Weehawken area is very crowded and workers must understand regulations specific to the area. In addition, clearly state policies regarding the prosecution of individuals who commit crimes and immediately report any criminal activity to security personal.  

C.7

Public Participation

In our filing of an Environmental Assessment and Environmental Impact Statement, public comment is an important and necessary action. Public comment will be obtained through hearings, which will be announced at least fifteen days in advance in various media except in cases where regulations call for a thirty day period. Newspaper announcements will be posted in are The Jersey Journal, The Star Ledger, The Hudson Reporter, The Hudson Dispatch Weekly, El Especialito, The River View Observer, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, Daily News, New York Post, and Newsday. Announcements of hearings will also be posted to the Weehawken town website (www.weehawken-nj.us) and the social media accounts (Facebook and Twitter) of the town of Weehawken and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. Residents of affected areas will have announcements and other relevant details mailed to them directly. Notice of hearings and relevant materials will also be posted at public buildings in Weehawken (such as the Municipal Court, Public Library, and the Port Authority office.) Where the public can access relevant materials and educational documents regarding the Helix project will also be made available in these media platforms.

Hearings will be held when the following conditions are met:

1. After preparing a draft statement (EA, FONSI, or EIS) but before releasing a final statement.

2. We require information from the public in order to proceed with our research.

3. There is significant controversy surrounding a proposed action relating to the Helix project.

4. An agency with some jurisdiction over the actions presented in this proposal requests that a hearing be held, with adequate reason provided for why a hearing would be beneficial.

5. There is substantial interest by the public in holding a hearing.

Beyond public comment, we will also be seeking out comment from relevant agencies. These agencies are discussed in Section 1.4. In some instances, it may be necessary to hold joint actions with these agencies, such as joint public hearings and joint research.

Cost and Timetable

D

Section

D.1

Project Schedule

D.2

Cost Estimate and Budget

Greenfield Environmental Consulting INC.

Labor Expenses

Name of Staff

Role

Total Hours

Rate

Total Cost

Caulfield, Christopher

President & CEO

665

243

$161,595

Greenleaf, Luke

Vice-President & COO

633

222

$140,526

Anderson, David

AVP of Budgeting & CFO

485

192

$93,120

Zyndorf, Oren

AVP of Engineering

535

195

$104,325

Lombardi, John

AVP of Environmental Policy

545

186

$101,370

Martin, Jonathan

AVP of Strategic Communications

468

180

$84,240

Schroeder, Alison

Sr. Traffic Engineer

450

171

$76,950

Mahmud, Anna

Sr. Environmental Analyst

484

174

$84,216

Mugabel, Abdul

Sr. Communications Associate

418

156

$65,208

Subtotal Labor:

$911,550

Analysis Expenses

Total Cost

Travel

 

 

 

$4,450

GIS Data

$1,000

Air Quality Analysis

$46,000

Water Quality Analysis

$62,000

Noise Quality Analysis

$32,440

Ecological Effects Analysis

$1,200

NEPA fees

 

 

 

4,500

Subtotal Expenses:

$151,590

Total Cost of Proposal:

 

 

 

$1,063,140

3

Issued: April 21st, 2015

Prepared by: Greenfield Environmental Consulting