OP-ED: Fracking Poisons Water..Govt. Lets Gas Co. Off Hook for Clean Water

We are all from Dimock
Published – New York Amsterdam News 12-16-2011
By PAUL GALLAY Hudson Riverkeeper

Last week, I joined dozens of other grassroots activists on a relief mission to a small town called Dimock, Pa., where a dozen families on Carter Road no longer have access to safe water for drinking, bathing and other household needs. They made the mistake of allowing a company named Cabot Oil & Gas to drill their properties for natural gas using the technique known as “fracking.” Now, if you open the taps at Craig and Julie Sautner’s house, what comes out is a witch’s brew of lead, toluene, naphthalene and over a dozen other poisons that Cabot executives would never let their kids go within a country mile of.

But wait, it gets worse. After ordering Cabot to provide a steady supply of clean water to the families on Carter Road, the state of Pennsylvania reversed itself this year and said Cabot could cut these families off. Deliveries stopped on Nov. 30 and Cabot’s victims got down to their last few gallons of clean water. Even their own town officials, who are deep in Cabot’s pocket, betrayed these families by blocking an offer from the nearby city of Binghamton, N.Y., to give them some of its water.

This is no isolated horror story. The EPA found a connection between fracking and poisoned water supplies in Wyoming, while Duke University scientists proved that wells within a half-mile of fracking operations are contaminated with methane levels an average of 17 times higher than before fracking began.

In Texas, fracking communities have three times as many cases of childhood asthma as the rest of the state. Meanwhile, in Dimock, Stacy Haney of Amwell Township let the drillers onto her property and then had to abandon her house because her kids got sick from all the arsenic, benzene and toluene that fracking left in their blood.

When I joined activists from around the region to bring an emergency shipment of water to Dimock last week, the families involved told us that groups like ours were all they had left. I’m proud of what we did, but when nonprofit groups like mine are all these families have because the government has completely abandoned them, it’s just criminal.

Think it can’t happen here? It can and will if we don’t stop it. Without considering the impact on our families’ health, on our quality of life, on our roads-each of the 48,000 wells now planned for New York will bring with it about 4,000 truck trips-or on other industries like farming and tourism, New York State is getting ready to issue fracking permits as soon as this spring. Public opposition to fracking is growing, but is government listening?

Here in New York, we have enough problems already. We don’t need to put our water at risk from fracking, as city officials have testified that the state’s plan would do. How many more poisoned families will it take for New York State politicians to get the message: The fracking business isn’t safe and the companies don’t make good when they screw up.

President Barack Obama faced a similar situation with the proposed Keystone XL pipeline from Canada to Texas. When he saw how big the risks were, he sent the project back for a new safety study.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo needs to do the same thing here, because fracking will not only hurt important job engines like farming and tourism, it’s also seriously bad for your health. Just ask the Sautners, 20 miles over the state line in Dimock, Pa.
—————-

Historic Indian Point Hearings

Hearings Focus on the Indian Point Plant’s Devastating Toll on Wildlife

For 40 years, Riverkeeper has been fighting to stop Indian Point and other industrial facilities from killing wildlife while using our river water for free. They are continuing that David-and-Goliath fight in Albany, as Riverkeeper argues that that Entergy’s hot-water discharges, its radioactive leaks, and its annual slaughter of 1 billion fish and other river life is flat-out illegal, and that the water permit it needs to continue operating should be denied.

Riverkeeper’s attorneys are outnumbered, and its resources and expert witnesses are stretched thin responding to roughly 100,000 pages of evidence submitted so far by Entergy—but they continue to point out serious flaws in the company’s case.

Entergy, in keeping with a tradition of running its plant on the cheap, playing games with science and using our river to subsidize its profits, wants to install massive cage-like structures throughout the Hudson in an unproven effort to reduce its massive fish kills, rather than invest in proven closed-cycle cooling technology to stop the slaughter.

• Get Informed: Read Riverkeeper attorney Mark Lucas’s statements in the Albany hearings by going to Riverkeeper.org
• Do Your Part! Support Riverkeeper’s legal team by making a donation to their Close Indian Point campaign.

---

EPA Finds Hydrofracking Chemicals DO Contaminate Drinking Water

According to Tom Kenworthy, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress the oil and gas industry claim that the practice of hydraulic fracturing has never polluted a drinking water well is just not true. On Thursday, the Environmental Protection Agency officially threw that claim in the waste pit.  Go to the following link to read the whole story.
http://thinkprogress.org/green/2011/12/08/385706/epa-finds-hydrofracking-chemicals-contaminate-drinking-water/

The Riverkeeper Releases Fracking Details and Facts

10 Major Flaws With New York’s Fracking Plan

The Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) is responsible for fully evaluating fracking’s potential impacts to public health and the environment, but its draft
environmental impact statement and proposed regulations do not protect New Yorker’s environment, health, and drinking water. DEC recently extended the comment period
and the public now has until Jan. 11 to comment on DEC’s fracking plans, which will
determine how this industrial activity will proceed in New York. The plans have a
numberof major flaws, including the DEC’s failure to:

Fully protect the New York City Watershed. The New York City Watershed plus
a 4,000 feet buffer around it is protected on the surface, but the DEC’s proposal still
leaves the watershed vulnerable to drilling underneath watershed lands. The DEC
proposal is also mute on issues relating to wastewater disposal, truck traffic and water
withdrawals that could affect the watershed.

Fully protect the tunnels, dams and aqueducts that deliver New York City’s water.
While New York City requested a seven-mile buffer around the infrastructure (tunnels,
dams, and aqueducts) outside the watershed that supplies drinking water to 9 million
New Yorkers, the DEC has only proposed a heightened review for surface wells
proposed within 1,000 feet, leaving New York’s water supply vulnerable to damaging
vibrations and contamination.

Protect principle aquifers and private wells. The DEC proposal would potentially
allow fracking in principal drinking water aquifers after additional environmental
review. It could allow fracking near private wells if property owners waive their
right to preserve a 500-foot buffer.

Prohibit open pits. In Pennsylvania, open pits have been a major source of
concern for nearby residents, who complain of foul odors, air pollution, leakage
and potential health problems associated with the pools of hazardous fracking
waste. Further, these pools may present a danger to birds and other wildlife.
DEC’s proposal would allow open pits in some cases after a heightened review.

Plan for wastewater disposal. There is no wastewater treatment plant in
New York designed to treat fracking wastes. In Pennsylvania, fracking
wastewater has at times been sent to wastewater treatment plants that weren’t
equipped to handle the waste, resulting in discharges to rivers of untreated wastes
upstream from drinking water intakes. Now, most Pennsylvania wastewater is trucked
to Ohio, where it is injected deep underground.

Consider health impacts. The DEC omitted potential health impacts from its draft
environmental review, and has so far ignored a letter signed by 250 doctors and
health care professionals calling for an independent health impact analysis. In
Pennsylvania, some residents living near fracking sites have complained about the
deaths of horses and dogs, and about a range of illnesses they fear were caused by
the industrial activity nearby.

Analyze cost to communities for social and emergency services, schools and
infrastructure, including road maintenance. The DEC analysis contains hundreds
of pages about the possible economic benefits of fracking, but neglects to seriously
consider potential negative economic impacts, which could be severe. Increased
heavy truck traffic, with 4,000 truck trips per active well, could cost hundreds of
millions of dollars in annual road maintenance.

Analyze potential negative economic effects on other industries, like agriculture
and tourism. Farming and tourism are the two top economic drivers in much of
the Catskills, Southern Tier and Finger Lakes region; heavy industrial activity
could seriously disrupt both industries, but the DEC has failed to account for
this possibility.

Consider private property impacts. The DEC has not considered potential
impacts to private property owners, such as decreased property values (and property
tax revenues for local governments and schools), liability for damage due to gas drilling
and difficulties getting bank loans for properties encumbered by gas leases. There is
also concern that set-backs from private property are inadequate to protect homes.

Study the potential for fracking to trigger earthquakes. There is a strong correlation
between fracking and quakes. The U.S. Geological Survey has confirmed that
earthquakes have been caused by the injection of fluids into deep wells for waste disposal
or oil recovery. And a gas driller in England found it “highly probable” that its operations
had triggered earthquakes there. Despite this and other evidence, the DEC has discounted
any connection between fracking and earthquakes.

Source:  The Riverkeeper Organization
Go To:  Riverkeeper.org

BAN OF AERIAL SPRAYING OF ALUMINUM IN SUFFOLK TO BE HEARD by LEGISLATURE

    Look up in the sky, its a bird its a plane...yes it is a plane, dozens of them spraying poison over our land, water and citizens.  Who is doing this and how are they getting away with it?  These "chemtrails" as they are called are made by drone aircraft spraying pulverized aluminum, barium and strontium.  Perhaps this is so in the future the only seeds that will grow are the Genetically Modified seeds created by Monsanto that are curiously and conveniently aluminum resistant.  This is a global threat as they are "seeding" the clouds not only all across North America, but also in Europe and Asia.

Please pass this along, plan to attend and write your Suffolk County Legislature. Dec. 6th The hearing will be held at the Riverhead Legislative Auditorium, Evans K. Griffing Building, 300 Center Drive in Riverhead, NY at 2:30 pm.

We need to mobilize public support and interest in this vital situation. Just look up in the sky you will see the chemtrails or "stratospheric engineering" as the government likes to call it. . To ward off global warming these metals are being sprayed in the sky to create denser clouds. They are contaminating water, soil and rain water, even snow.

Help Stop the Secret Farm Bill | Environmental Working Group

Help Stop the Secret Farm Bill | Environmental Working Group

Groups Rally to Push “Don’t Drill the Delaware”

Moratorium Holds on Gas Drilling and Fracking
As Delaware River Basin Commission Cancels Vote to Allow Drilling

West Trenton, New Jersey – When the Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC) cancelled its meeting set for Monday November 21 – about whether to open the Delaware River Watershed to gas drilling and fracking – a loud cheer was heard throughout the Delaware River Watershed.  Then those who are determined to keep the Delaware River from being drilled rolled up their sleeves and put their collective shoulder against the wheel to make certain that the DRBC stalemate is turned into a permanent victory for the River and its communities.

A Rally for 11:00 am, Monday, November 21 has been called to bring together the community of voices
that has led to this moment and reaffirmed the hope that drilling and fracking can be kept out of this sensitive Watershed, water supply for over 15 million people.

The Rally will feature writer and director Josh Fox www.gaslandthemovie from HBO and
www.savethedelawareriver.org   Mark Ruffalo; and actress and activist Debra Winger.  Representatives of constituency groups that have worked to convince the DRBC voting members to vote against drilling and fracking, activists and leaders will rally for the next steps that need to be taken.

On the site where the DRBC would have cast the vote that will define the Delaware River Watershed today and into the future - the War Memorial in Trenton, NJ –community, environmental, and
constituency groups will gather.  They will join the most famous faces of this struggle to drive home the message “Don’t Drill the Delaware” to the remaining members of the DRBC – New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, President Barack Obama, represented by the Army Corps of Engineers, and Gov. Tom
Corbett of PA who have not come out opposing the plan to allow gas drilling and fracking here, endangering our community health and water supply.

The Rally will conclude with a March to the New Jersey State House that houses Governor Christie’s office.  The marchers will be greeted by New Jersey Legislators who have championed a Frack Ban Bill through the NJ Legislature this year.

Several hundred people are expected to come out to express their resolve to work together until the Delaware River Watershed is safe from the intrinsically polluting practices required for natural gas drilling and fracking and to stand as protectors of the treasured Delaware River and its irreplaceable Watershed.

Berks Gas Truth * Catskill Citizens for Safe Energy Catskill Mountainkeeper * Damascus Citizens for
Sustainability * Delaware Riverkeeper Network * Environment New Jersey * Food and Water Watch
Frack Action * Josh Fox/“Gasland” * Hudson Riverkeeper * New Jersey Sierra Club * NYH2O * New
Jersey Environmental Federation * PA Clean Water Action * Protecting our Waters Sustainable Energy Solutions Statewide United for Action

Contacts: Maya van Rossum, the Delaware Riverkeeper 215-369-1188x102
Tracy Carluccio Deputy Director, Delaware Riverkeeper Ntwrk 215-369-1188x104

Wes Gillingham, Program Director, Catskill Mountainkeeper 845-901-1029
Jeff Tittel, Director, New Jersey Sierra Club 609-558-9100
Tina Posterli for Hudson Riverkeeper 516-526-9371
Doug O’Malley for Environment New Jersey 917-449-6812
Barbara Arrindell, Director, Damascus Citizens for Sustainability 570-729-8687
Karen Feridun for Berks Gas Truth, 610-678-7726
Dave Pringle, NJ Environmental Federation 732-996-4288
Joe Levine, NYH2O, (212) 219-1038 x1
Jim Walsh, Eastern Region Director, Food and Water Watch 732.979.6883
David Braun, United for Action, 917-514-0700
Nathan Sooy, PA Clean Water Action, nsooy@cleanwater.org
Michael Lebron, NY’ers for Sustainable Energy Solutions Stwide 917-743-7568
Ana Tinsly, Frack Action Communications Director 646-331-4765
Josh Fox, writer and director, “Gasland”, orifox@aol.com
Steve Kent for Josh Fox, skent@kentcom.com 914-589-5988
Iris Marie Bloom, Protecting our Waters, 215-840-6489

Act Now | Delaware Riverkeeper Network | Urgent Help Needed

Act Now | Delaware Riverkeeper Network | Urgent Help Needed

The Demise of the Carmans River?

Environmentalists Petition DEC to Classify the Carmans as Polluted  

Peconic Baykeeper (PBK) and the Art Flick Chapter of Trout Unlimited (AFTU) have petitioned the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYS DEC) to include the Carmans River to the 2012 NYS “Impaired Waters” list pursuant to Section 303(d) of the Federal Clean Water Act.  PBK & AFTU assert that the current nutrient levels exceed state established water quality standards, precluded the assigned “best usages” and are above the levels deemed acceptable to prevent harm to the Carmans River ecosystem.  Moreover, due to the magnitude of the nutrient caused impairment(s), the Carmans River warrants the implementation of watershed-based pollutant nutrients) reduction strategy without delay.  Pursuant to Clean Water Act regulations, this approach is referred to as a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) and can be mandated by New York State. 

Currently, New York State has a narrative water quality standard for nitrogen and phosphorus that sets forth limits for these nutrients as follows:  “None in amounts that will result in growths of algae, weeds and slimes that will impair the waters for their best usages.”  Pursuant to Title 6 of New York Codes, rules and Regulations, Part 701, the freshwater portion of the Carmans River is classified as C(T).  In accordance with this classification, the “best usages” for these waters shall be suitable for fish, shellfish and wildlife survival and propagation and primary and secondary contact recreation.  The latter use refers to immersion in the water and indirect contact during on-water activities in various watercrafts.  In addition, the Carmans River is classified as trout waters, which require superior water quality to support resident populations.   

Water quality studies carried out by NYS DEC and others have already documented the high levels of nutrients in the river. The Yaphank impoundments (Willow and Lilly Lakes), created by the presence of two small dams on the river, are dominated annually by aquatic invasive plants that thrive on these excessive nutrients.  This condition is a result of nutrient loadings from multiple  sources,  the most 

predominant of which is sewage wastewater seeping into the river.  To effectively reverse the degradation, it’s imperative that the Carmans River be classified as Impaired Waters.  Obtaining the 303(d) status with a TMDL is a crucial first step in an effective pollution reduction strategy.  The Brookhaven Town's proposed Carmans River Watershed Protections and Management Plan (CRWPMP) has not addressed the issue of reducing the current nutrient loading in the river.  

Doug Swesty stated,  “The current nitrate level in the waters of Carmans River is above the threshold established by the CRWPMP.  However the CRWPMP doesn't include  actions to reduce the current level of nutrients in the river.  Allowing additional development in the watershed will only further exacerbate the problem.   If we wish to protect the Carmans ecosystem from further harm we need to 

have a TMDL set by the State.”  

"Nutrient enriched groundwater from sanitary wastewater discharges is yet another emerging threat to surface water quality in our region.  Our fishing interests, real estate values and use and enjoyment of our aquatic environment all depend on clean water.  With so much at stake, let's ensure that the Carmans River is a testament to our resolve and not indicative of our indifference," said McAllister. 

 For more information contact:   

 Kevin McAllister, Peconic Baykeeper  (631) 875-8976 

 Doug Swesty, Trout Unlimited (Art Flick Chapter) (631) 495-0513 

  

OPINION: Selective Enforcement of Town Code by Islip Town?

       Last week Newsday's Rick Brand wrote an "Our Towns" piece about Republican Legislator, Tom Cilmi of Bay Shore complaining that his campaign signs in Islip were being removed by Town of Islip DPW workers at the behest of Supervisor Phil Nolan and George Hoffman, Mr. Nolan's top aide.  The quotes from the Town representatives pointed to the fact that it is a violation of Town Code to put signs on poles or public rights of way. (Newsday October 13, 2011)

Mr. Nolan said "The Town took action in response to civic associations upset by the proliferation of illegal signs on poles."  Mr. Hoffman claimed in the Newsday story to have piles of the illegal signs from all political parties...in a heap at the three Department of Public Works (yards).  "The option is to ignore the law or enforce it fairly.", Hoffman noted.

             Selective Enforcement?

   Why then did they not remove the illegal- 'No-Parking' signs that Islip Town Commissioner Lawrence (Larry) O'Leary allegedly had workers put up in the middle of the night?

'No-Parking' signs which were never authorized by the Town Board, were allegedly placed illegally on telephone poles by the same Town workers who Mr. Cilmi says removed the political signs.  An Inter-office memo from the Town proves that over two years in a row, the Town distributed more than a hundred forged and illegal parking permits to the residents who lived in the two block radius by the Town marina.  Read the article and see the documents in the story below:

                               Town Employee Voted onto  Islip  Board of Ethics

ISLIP TOWN EMPLOYEE VOTED onto BOARD of ETHICS

GOP MEMBERS VOTE AGAINST NOLAN'S CHOICE

At an Islip Town Board meeting Wednesday Sept 22, 2011 Lawrence (Larry) O’Leary, Commissioner of Public Safety and Code Enforcement, was appointed as a member of the Town’s Board of Ethics by a partisan vote of 3-2.  GOP board members Steven Flotteron and Trish Bergin-Weichbrodt voted against.

For a Town employee to be a member of the Board of Ethics, according to Mr. Flotteron,   "Is just wrong."

"He's not going to be able to be unbiased",  Mr. Flotteron said in a recent interview with Freelance Investigations.  "His position, with his $103,000 dollar salary, was created by his friend and boss Phil Nolan.  Nolan controls his salary and his job and for the first time you'll have a Town employee sitting in on details of ethical concern."

Mr. O'Leary had to get a special waiver to work for the Town because he receives a pension from New York State as a retired police officer. As such, the law states he can only make up to $30,000 dollars as a part time worker and he cannot work in a government position, unless he gets the waiver.  Islip Town Supervisor Phil Nolan, signed the request for the waiver stating Mr. O'Leary's extensive police experience, prior to his retirement, was a big advantage and a main reason for his recommending the special waiver from the State of New York.

According to a July 27, 2009 letter from Richard Ciprioni, Director of Commission Operations ; Municipal Assistance for the Civil Service Commission of New York to Mr. Robert Finnegan, Director of Labor Relations for the Town of Islip:

Limited approval through October 31, 2009 was granted with the stipulation that the Town review whether the qualifications of 20 years of law enforcement experience for the position is appropriate, and to expand recruitment efforts beyond police agencies to determine if there are any qualified non-retirees available for appointment...Approvals under this section of law are considered to be of a temporary nature.  The Commission's determination is for the finite period indicated and cannot be extended without the Commission approval.

Before the original waiver was expired however, another waiver was granted for November 1, 2009  through October 31,  2011.  Then, before the second waiver could expire in 2011, another waiver request was submitted to cover the time frame of May 1, 2010 through April 30,  2012. It was also granted.

Longtime Islip resident, Patricia Montanino, took issue with Mr. O’Leary being appointed to anything with the word ethics attached. She attended the Town Board meeting prior to the vote being taken, to ask Supervisor Nolan if he intended to vote Mr. O’Leary onto the Board of Ethics.

“How can you set an example or judge anyone’s ethical standards, if you do the wrong thing yourself?  Ms. Montanino asked.  "Mr. O’Leary seems to think he is above it all.  He is not able to lead by example, because his own behavior violates the rules.”

At the Town Board meeting Ms. Montanino  referred  to a package of documents she believes supports her allegations regarding Mr. O'Leary.

Ms. Montanino  stated that over a year ago, she handed the same documentation to all the Town Board members.  The package of documents allegedly contained proof of offenses committed by Mr. O’Leary and his Code Enforcement team.  “If you are making fake permits and parking signs and building an illegal office in your own code enforcement building, how can you be on an ethics board?”  she asked.

The package included the following issues, items and documents:

1.) According to documents submitted, Mr. O’Leary allegedly issued over 100 falsified parking permits in 2010 and 2011 to persons living within two blocks of the Islip Town water park.  The permits  appeared official as they had a bar code and the Town seal and allegedly Mr. O’Leary’s signature on them.

The problem is, the bar code was from a book ISBN number.   Islip Town never made a resolution authorizing either the permits or the parking signs. Public Safety officers allegedly put the signs up in the middle of the night on telephone poles and trees within a two block radius of the water park.  This would force most people to pay the $10 parking fee in the Town owned marina lot.  Putting signs on telephone poles is against Town ordinances and LIPA rules.  If the signature is not Mr. O'Leary's, or if it was not forged and was used with his knowledge and/or permission as a memo Mr. O'Leary sent through Susan Pontillo, would indicate, the permits would still be illegal, because there was no resolution by the Town Board authorizing them.

O'Leary memo regarding second set of permits, (now they had book ISBN number added)
the first set had no bar code and didn't appear official enough, according to sources.

Emails to Kevin Bonner, Town of Islip, Public Information Officer, regarding all of these issues were not returned at time of publication.

Parking permit on dashboard of local resident's car

Sample of Permit with Bar Code ISBN # 978091889-428X

Book from ISBN Bar Code # on Parking Permits Issued by Code Enforcement in Islip Town 

No Parking Signs on Telephone Poles

"Currently, under Islip Town Code
(Article 29), it is illegal to post signs of
all types on trees and telephone poles."
according to town of Islip spokeswoman
Catherine Green, in an article from the Islip Bulletin dated December 11, 2008.

2.) An office was constructed on the third floor (attic) of the Town of Islip Code Enforcement building at 28 Nassau Avenue in Islip, even though no permits for the construction were ever obtained.  The office was newly constructed allegedly for Jason Mistretta, a code enforcement officer, but the office was ordered to be demolished by the Fire Department, after a complaint was made to the Department of Health, about the office and it’s location on the third floor, as a serious safety and fire hazard.

Pictures of a Town dump truck backed up to the building while the contents of the office were thrown out the attic window, were also given to the Town Board members.  There allegedly was no attempt to save, store or recycle the new office furniture. Building materials such as brand new doors, desk, chair, carpeting, sheetrock, molding and other items were tossed into the dump truck and discarded.  Witnesses claim the brand new doors were purposely damaged with sledge hammers as the workers were disassembling the office and its' contents.

3rd Floor Illegal Office in Code Enforcement Building

28 Nassau Avenue 3rd Floor Office

Attic windows open...items tossed into truck

Weight of truck buckles sidewalk

3.) Lacrosse balls were purchased with Town funds, yet curiously the Town has no lacrosse team.  Mr. O’Leary’s phone records on the Town cell phone show dozens of calls on Town work time, to his son’s lacrosse coach at St. Anthony’s High School in Huntington.  Many other calls were also made to Southhampton, on the Town cell phone, during work hours, to the number where the coach lives.

Six Dozen Lacrosse Balls $90 Dollars

Invoice For Lacrosse Balls for Islip Town

4.) Fifty two embroidered jackets paid for by the taxpayers were ordered for Mr. O’Leary’s Public Safety Enforcement staff.  Inquiries into the purchase however resulted in the jackets never actually being distributed. The cost for the jackets allegedly no one ever received was $1, 464.00 on June 17, 2010.

5.) Mr. O’Leary received three  special waivers from New York State to be hired at his $103,000 salary, even though he is a retired New York City Police Officer receiving a pension. That waiver application along with the approval of Alan Schneider, Director of the Town’s Civil Service Division was the reason Mr. O’Leary could make his $103,000 salary.  Mr. Schneider’s son, Robert also works for Islip Town-at McArthur airport.  Mr. Nolan stated in the papers he submitted to the State requesting the waiver, that Mr. O’Leary’s extensive police background and experience was key to his reason for hiring him and needing the waiver.  Mr. Nolan said at the time his search produced no one more qualified for the position than Mr. O’Leary.

First of three waivers:  This one dated March 2009 through March 2011

Page one of second application to State for Mr. O'Leary's Waiver
Period covered November 1, 2009 through October 31, 2011

Page two of Waiver Application

Waiver Application: Page Three
Mr. O'Leary's and Mr. Nolan's Signatures

Mr. O'Leary's Responsibilities for Islip Town

Justification for Renewal of Retiree Waiver for Mr. O'Leary

Civil Service Commission Letter to Islip Director of Labor Relations

Ms. Montanino asked with all the special training and police experience Mr. O'Leary has, something Mr. Nolan stressed when asking for the waiver, "Why then did Mr. O’Leary not get involved or even bother to show up when he received a phone call from the Public Safety Officers in Islip, regarding information they had just received from the police department warning of a credible threat of alleged gang activity with weapons for later that day?".

According to the phone message with Mr. O'Leary, the potential violence with weapons was slated to occur that night at Brookwood Hall, where a senior citizen center, a daycare facility and GOP Town Board member Trish Bergin-Weichbrodt’s office are all located.

According to an official audiotape of the call made on April 1, 2011 obtained by Freelance Investigations, Mr. O’Leary, when notified by telephone during regular business hours, that gang related violence- with weapons- was planned for later that day, his 30 second on the record response consisted of asking one question; who was working- then telling them to check it out and if there was a problem, to call the police.  End of call.

Ms. Montanino wants to know why Mr. O’Leary, for all his ex-FBI and police training and specialized experience in law enforcement- before his retirement, declined to go to the sight directly himself, instead, asking his lone, unarmed Public Safety officer to handle the situation.  The gangs did show up and were chased away, by the police, but not before a noose was hung from the branch of a tree behind the building, according to both police and Town Public Safety reports about the incident.

Ms. Montanino also asked why in all three cases, an extension of the waiver was applied for, many months before the waivers had even expired.  For example, the first waiver listed the duration from 3/09 to 3/11. Yet the second waiver was applied for and obtained for the period 11/09 to 10/31/11.  The third waiver was granted for the period May 2011 through April 30, 2012.

"These appointments are supposed to be temporary, why is this going on for years now?"
Ms. Montanino asked. "They don't even wait for the waivers to expire, they just reapply.  Why? Does any one really believe that in this time of record unemployment there are no other experienced persons who could do this job, that are not already receiving a State pension?"

Ms. Montanino asked.  "Are they still looking for a non-pensioned replacement ?  I think not, if they are applying for new O'Leary waivers before they even expire."

No Board member responded to the information contained in the package of documents Ms. Montanino gave to the Board members at a Town Board meeting over a year ago in August, 2010.  Ms. Montanino wants to know why nothing has been done about alleged forged instruments, unauthorized permits and other anomalies and asks how Mr. O'Leary could be on any Board related to ethics.  The documents are all here...you can decide for yourself.

An E-mail to Board Member, Trish Bergin-Weichbrodt, for comment was not returned at time of publication.

TOXIC DUST ON 9/11 LEADS TO CHRONIC BERYLLIUM DISEASE

WERE THOUSANDS OF WORLD TRADE CENTER RESPONDERS MISDIAGNOSED? 

 IS SARCOIDOSIS DIAGNOSIS REALLY CHRONIC BERYLLIUM DISEASE?

Thousands of firemen, policemen and other first responders who worked on “the pile” or "the pit" at the World Trade Center after 9/11 even for short amounts of time were potentially exposed to toxic levels of Beryllium which could result in a fatal disease known as Chronic Beryllium Disease.


Hundreds, maybe thousands of World Trade Center First Responders have been diagnosed with Sarcoidosis disease, according to John Feal the founder and president of the non-profit Fealgood Foundation, an organization dedicated to the health and well being of 9/11 First Responders.             


According to the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) anyone who has been diagnosed with Sarcoidosis who had ever been exposed to Beryllium is automatically presumed to have Chronic Beryllium Disease.

According to The American Lung Association: Sarcoidosis is a disease caused by small areas of inflammation. It can affect any part of the body but is most common in the lungs—called pulmonary sarcoidosis. In pulmonary sarcoidosis, small patches of inflamed cells can appear on the lungs' small air sacs (alveoli), breathing tubes (bronchioles) or lymph nodes. The lungs can become stiff and may not be able to hold as much air as healthy lungs. In serious cases, sarcoidosis can cause scar tissue in the lungs, which can affect the lungs' ability to move oxygen into the bloodstream.No one knows what causes sarcoidosis. The good news is that is it usually temporary. In half the cases, sarcoidosis heals naturally—without any treatment. In serious cases, health care providers may treat a patient's symptoms to help improve how well the lungs and other organs are working. 


The statement from NIOSH to Congress in unequivocal. According to the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) anyone who has been diagnosed with Sarcoidosis who had ever been exposed to Beryllium is automatically presumed to have Chronic Beryllium Disease.

On September 4, 2008, DEEOIC issued Circular No. 08-07 which states:A diagnosis of sarcoidosis is not medically appropriate if there is a documented history of Beryllium exposure. Rather, in these situations, the claims examiner is to consider the diagnosis of Sarcoidosis to be a diagnosis of Chronic Beryllium Disease.                                                                  (EEOICPA OmbudsmenReport to Congress 2008)
The American Lung Association's Website's "List of Lung Diseases"  does not have any information or listing for Chronic Beryllium Disease.

Beryllium is the most toxic metal known to man. Beryllium was in the American Airlines-Boeing made planes that were flown into the buildings that day.  When the firemen added water to the pit, a deadly toxic vapor was created that can cause  Chronic Beryllium Disease. The disease can take many years to present its’ symptoms, lying dormant sometimes for decades, but when it does present, it can be deadly as the scar tissue shuts down the lungs and there is no cure.

The fires at The World Trade Center should never have been fought with water and everyone who breathed in the vapor, dust and smoke that day and for months to follow were potentially exposed to toxic Beryllium and could be in danger of getting the fatal disease.  Even regular airplane fires should not be fought with water.


                                THE PREMATURE DEATH OF HEROES
According to John Feal who spoke with Freelance Investigations today, there is no question that Beryllium was in the pit.  "Everyone knows that Beryllium was there.  I've got eight and a half years of 9/11 "U" behind me and I consider myself intelligent enough to know that this has led to the premature death of heroes who risked their lives without prejudice a few years ago."  Mr. Feal spoke of the "toxic soup" in the pit:  "I believe the Beryllium added with all the other toxins like the Jet Fuel, Benzene, Mercury, pulverized cement and other contaminants all led to a toxic soup that we inhaled.  No one can deny that these toxins have caused serious injury and death.  When mixed all together, no one can say what the exposure could do."

In a video on the Fealgood Foundation website, John Fealgood said "The government has let us down... If we have money to kill we should have money to save lives."

Mr. Feal has a vested interest in the issues of 9/11 first responders and works tirelessly on their behalf.
On September 17, 2001 8,000 lbs. of steel fell on Mr. Feal's foot while he was working at the pit causing him to spend 10-11 weeks in the hospital with gangrene and sepsis. Eventually he underwent dozens of surgeries.  Despite his own physical issues- on August 14, 2007 John Feal donated a kidney to a perfect stranger.  Mr. Feal said he did it "To show America that people that basically have nothing can still help others.  People who have seen the bottom can rise to the top and continue to help others."


  HOW MUCH BERYLLIUM WAS IN “THE PIT”AT THE WORLD TRADE CENTER?
It is difficult to ascertain the amount of Beryllium that was contained in the pit at the World Trade Center.  Mr. Feal said this issue of Beryllium at the site needs to be investigated further, "Because this is human life we are talking about right now."

Calls to Boeing by Freelance Investigations to determine the total amount of Beryllium contained in both the plane and the jet fuel were never returned.
The media representative for American Airlines who refused to give their name gave this quote when asked how much Beryllium was in the 757 and 767 planes that flew into the towers and ended up in the pit:  " We don't respond to 9/11 requests for information." 
Beryllium is used for the airline seats, luggage, clothing, golf clubs, cell phones, computers, landing gear, radar, brakes, the shell of the body of the plane, the turbine blades of the jet engines, electronics and also in the jet fuel and engine oil.   When Beryllium burns and water is poured onto the fire, it creates a toxic brew of dust, particles and Beryllium vapor that even when inhaled in small amounts can be deadly toxic. 
Pictures of the firemen fighting the fire at the Pentagon, show they were all wearing protective SCBA (Self Contained Breathing Apparatus) and Haz-Mat suits while fighting the fire.  Perhaps this was because the military has known for decades that you do not pour water on a Beryllium Fire and you wear proper equipment when fighting one.
According to a study published recently in the New England Journal of Medicine, a seven year study with members of the New York City Fire Department;  rescuers who had significant declines in lung function a year after the attack had still not recovered, and the recorded drop in lung function was about 12 times the rate seen in normal aging. Since Sarcoidosis usually can heal and Chronic Beryllium Disease gets worse, why aren't World Trade Center responders and clean up crews being tested for Chronic Beryllium Disease?
Since Beryllium is now being used in so many non-military or civilian applications shouldn’t all fires be treated as if the possibility of Beryllium is being burned and shouldn't all firefighters have the proper equipment (SCBA gear and Haz-Mat suits) to keep themselves safe from toxic Beryllium vapors?
According to the National Jewish Health Reference Laboratories (NJHCRL) it can sometimes be difficult to diagnose Chronic Beryllium Disease (CBD).  A normal blood test result (where all values are equal or below the cutoff value of 2.5 in response to antigens) still does not exclude the diagnosis of Chronic Beryllium Disease.  They recommend a Beryllium lymphocyte transformation test using bronchoalveolar lavage lymphocytes.  Other doctors interviewed said that a tissue sample from the lung is the only real definitive test for Chronic Beryllium Disease.  Exposure to even a small amount of Beryllium in a vapor dust or particle form can be deadly toxic depending on the individual, according to the National Jewish Health website.
When misdiagnosed as Sarcoidosis and treated for that disease in error, irreparable harm can be done if the person really has Chronic Beryllium Disease.  
Freelance Investigations spoke to the law clerk in the chambers of Judge Alvin Hellerstein to ask if any of the attorneys or doctors trying to hash out a settlement had ever considered beryllium exposure to explain many unexplained symptoms that the workers have exhibited.  The law clerk declined to comment.  No one at the WTC site has been tested for the disease even though the symptoms match some of the sick workers.

Chronic Beryllium Disease and Beryllium Sensitivity Disease symptoms include but are not limited to:  rashes, dermatitis, conjunctivitis and eye ulcers, enlarged heart, kidney problems and chronic sinusitis.  If Beryllium in dust, vapor or particle form is introduced through the skin by a cut or puncture, non-healing ulcers may develop with target organs being; lungs, mucous membranes eyes and skin .                                                     ( Genium Publishing Corporation-Beryllium Metal/Powder)
Beryllium production was halted by Brush Wellman, the nation’s largest producer of Beryllium, in 2000 primarily due to economic and occupational and health reasons according to William Greenwalt, the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Industrial Policy) for the United States.
Beryllium use in Europe is strictly limited and regulated by CERN, their nuclear regulatory agency which was already limiting future use and production for safety and health reasons as far back as 1985.
Beryllium production in the United States will continue unimpeded however.  Thanks to the need by the Department of Defense for the military and aerospace applications, a brand new facility was scheduled to open in Elmore, Ohio last month.
In testimony before the U.S.- China Economic and Security Review Commission regarding China’s Proliferation and the Impact of Trade Policy on Defense Industries in the United States and China dated July 13, 2007,  Greenwalt noted:
When absolutely necessary, the Department of Defense can intervene directly in the marketplace to create or expand domestic production capabilities as necessary to meet military requirements.  The department is doing so now to ensure it will continue to have access to high purity Beryllium metal.  Because of its’ unique properties (including high stiffness and strength to weight ratios, thermal conductivity and reflectivity to infrared wavelength) high purity Beryllium metal and its primary high Beryllium content alloy (Aluminum-Beryllium metal matrix composite or AlBeMet) have wide ranging defense applications including in sensors, structures and components in missiles, satellites, fighter and rotary aircraft and nuclear weapons.  Brush Wellman is the only Beryllium metal producer worldwide that can meet the Beryllium quality requirements of the highest purity defense and essential civilian applications. However, Brush Wellman mothballed its 40 year-old primary Beryllium metal production facility in October 2000 for economic and occupational health reasons.   Since then, Brush Wellman has relied on Beryllium cast ingot from the inventories of the National Defense Stockpile at the Defense Logistics Agency for the highest purity Beryllium material applications; and on less pure Beryllium metal acquired from Kazakhstan for production of AlBeMet.  To rectify this situation, the Department initiated a Defense Production Act Title III project jointly funded with Brush Wellman the design and construction of a new Beryllium metal production facility, scheduled for completion in 2010.
People who worked at Department of Energy facilities from the 1940’s to the present who were exposed to Beryllium, like Brookhaven National Laboratory and the former Hicksville-Sylvania Corning Plant are eligible for free medical care, testing and possible compensation (up to $400 thousand dollars per person) under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act. (EEOICPA)
           
                     DOE EMPLOYEES COVERED:  DOD EMPLOYEES ARE NOT...WHY NOT?


One big problem is that a person who stood next to the DOE employee at the same job, who was actually a Department of Defense worker, that person is not covered by the EEOICPA.  Why does the same level of toxic exposure have different levels of help for American workers?  Why are DOE workers covered for toxic exposure to Beryllium and not DOD workers at the same spot doing the same job?  One answer might be the astronomical costs associated with covering everyone.  So far the EEOICPA has paid out over 5.5 Billion dollars to EEOICPA claimants since 2001 when the law was enacted by President Clinton, that despite that fact that the Department of Labor has done a limited job of notification to DOE employees.  The Department of Labor claims they notified the employers and depended upon them to provide lists of employees to notify of benefits available to those exposed.  Many companies refused to supply the lists and to this day thousands of workers who could and should receive medical testing and care don’t have any idea it is available for them.
Sean Riordan, the attorney for the Fealgood Foundation declined to answer when asked if the first responders may have been misdiagnosed with Sarcoidosis noting he does not  have medical credentials.   He did say "I really want the bottom line truth and if Beryllium is the cause, then we should treat them for what it is. I want all the elements investigated and if it is Beryllium exposure then lets find out and not treat them for Sarcoidosis if that is not the cause."

If the World Trade Center first responders were exposed to Beryllium then shouldn't they be eligible under NIOSH for free screenings and medical treatment?  If the World Trade Center is considered a Department of Energy Facility or a subcontractor of a DOE Facility, then wouldn't any and all first responders fall under this federal financial umbrella?   This remains to be seen.