FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: MARCH 31, 2008

Contact:

Riverkeeper Renee Cho (914) 478-4501 x 239
Senator Suzi Oppenheimer Chief of Staff and Counsel Steve Otis, 914-934-5250
Assemblyman Adam Bradley 518-455-5397 (Albany)
Assemblyman George Latimer 518-455-4897 (Albany)
Westchester Co. Legislature Betsy DeSoye, Dir. of Communications, 914-995-3277
Rockland Co. Legislator Connie Coker 914-522-6128
Tarrytown Mayor Drew Fixell 914-631-1885
South Nyack Mayor Patricia Dubow 845-358-0287

RIVERKEEPER TO CHALLENGE NEW TAPPAN ZEE BRIDGE REVIEW PROCESS
Governor Paterson Asked to Step In

(Tarrytown, NY) Today Riverkeeper joined a group of local and state elected officials in calling on Governor David Paterson to support Hudson Valley communities by restoring a comprehensive, regionally- oriented environmental review process for the Tappan Zee Bridge/I-287 Corridor proposal. The coalition is seeking the Governor’s assistance to ensure that the review process is both thorough and legally valid before final decisions on any aspect of the bridge and Thruway expansion are made. The current process, as revised in February 2008 by the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) along with other state and federal agencies, has been redesigned to include a “tiered” analysis of critical decisions, relying on a recently enacted federal transportation law (the Safe, Accountable, Flexible Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users), to shorten the Statute of Limitations time period to appeal agency decisions from 6 years to 180 days.

“Riverkeeper calls on Governor Paterson to reverse the State’s decision to shortcut its environmental review of this massive transportation project,” stated Riverkeeper president Alex Matthiessen. “It is another example of state and federal agencies weakening the environmental laws of the land to circumvent public participation and avoid environmental scrutiny. We call on Governor Paterson to undo this perversion of environmental due process.”

Riverkeeper’s concerns are echoed by New York state and regional elected officials, whose constituents will be impacted by the project.

State Senator Suzi Oppenheimer (D-Mamaroneck) has asked the Department of Transportation to review the process they are using to insure “that the public has access to the range of choices and their implications timed to allow comment on the mass transit and bridge options with full knowledge” of all aspects of each choice.

Assemblyman Adam T. Bradley (89th A.D.) said, “It is important that the environmental review process be revised so that concerned individuals and entities maintain the right to challenge all aspects of this important decision."

Assemblyman George Latimer (91st A.D.) noted, “Local communities - their governments and their residents - along the I-287 corridor must be an integral part of any future plans for the Tappan Zee Bridge and the I-287 corridor. It would be foolish to establish 'Tier 1' and 'Tier 2' decisions, lock them in place, and expend money to implement them before local communities learn what is in store for them in 'Tier 3': placement of stations, storage facilities, etc. which may dramatically impact those communities. It is moments like these when strict adherence to our SEQRA procedures is most needed, not to be cast aside as an inconvenience when it suits our fancy.”

Chair Connie Coker of the Rockland County Legislature’s Environmental Committee said, “All possible risks to the public health from the Tappan Zee Bridge/I 287 corridor project must be fully evaluated. There must not be a time limit on the environmental review process.”

Environment & Energy Committee Chair Thomas Abinanti (D-I-WF, Greenburgh) noted, “All environmental concerns should be heard before any permanent decisions are made. There should be no delay in hearing any environmental issues which later might show these decisions to be bad for the environment.”

Majority Leader Martin Rogowsky (D, Harrison) said, “I join with my colleagues in their concerns over segmentation of the EIS analysis. I believe the public would be better served if all of the information was presented at the same time.”

Tarrytown Mayor Drew Fixell said, “Tarrytown shares the concerns expressed by Riverkeeper and I urge the Governor and the State to revisit the decision to proceed with the so-called tiered approach to this massive project.”

Mayor of South Nyack Patricia Dubow noted, “The small towns and villages have been frustrated by the difficulty of understanding the language and details of this environmental review. We certainly don’t have the expertise or the resources to properly evaluate a draft environmental impact statement or the impacts of its decisions. All of us, particularly the small villages, need to be able to depend on the integrity of the review process and we support Riverkeeper’s challenge.”

Most notably, the project’s Environmental Review Process will:

• Postpone full evaluation of the direct, site-specific impacts (including decisions regarding station locations, vehicle types, storage facilities) and mitigation measures affecting the communities along the corridor until after final agency decisions regarding transit mode and bridge and highway analysis will have already been made;
• Hinder full public review, participation and comment and preclude the public’s right to appeal the completed, final decision (encompassing all tiers) at the conclusion of the process;
• Lead to an uninformed choice and approval of the “Preferred Alternative”.

Riverkeeper argues that this “streamlined” process denies the public the opportunity to thoroughly review a given project by incorporating “impermissible segmentation” into the process, an approach generally prohibited by New York’s State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA). Segmentation is impermissible because it minimizes the impacts of a large project, by breaking up the review into different, isolated segments. As it now stands, the unique three-tiered approach chosen by the NYSDOT cuts off the public at each turn, allowing for final decisions to be made at the end of each tiering review. A transit system can thus be approved prior to siting stations, identifying properties to condemn, analyzing traffic impacts, and developing a thorough understanding of possible environmental impacts on the Hudson River and the region.

“The current plan calls for a final decision on a preferred transit option that cannot be revisited before its impacts are assessed,” explains Robert Goldstein, Riverkeeper’s general counsel. “No one will know where the stations will be, whose property will be condemned for parking lots, where traffic will be impacted, and any of the details of the impacts, but that won’t stop the decision from being final – and unchallengeable. The very size of this proposal dictates a valid, legal process that ensures full public participation and a comprehensive review of all impacts before any final decisions are made. If the process isn’t reversed, Riverkeeper will consider legal action to ensure that all impacts of the proposed project are considered before the final transit option is finalized.”

The DOT’s race toward speedy approval is underway, despite the failure of the various agencies to identify funding for a bridge and transit system that is estimated to exceed $14 billion dollars. “No one seems to know where the funding will come from,” added Goldstein. “It seems as if paying for the project was one detail that no one has focused on.”

To read Riverkeeper’s comments on the current Tappan Zee Scoping document, visit: Riverkeeper's Scoping Comments

Background:

Under state and federal law, the Tappan Zee Bridge/I-287 Corridor project must be in compliance with both the federal National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and New York’s State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA). In February 2008, the NYSDOT elected to conduct the environmental review process in conjunction with the Safe, Accountable, Flexible Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), a 2005 federal highway bill. Section 6002 of SAFETEA-LU shortens the Statute of Limitations period for which final agency actions can be appealed from six years to a 180-day period. This shortened Statute of Limitations period, in conjunction with the tiering analysis as specified by the NYSDOT, may ultimately preclude the rights of the public to appeal a completed, final decision encompassing direct impacts to their communities. The Governor can direct the State agency in its determination. The law requires a full assessment of adverse impacts and findings on mitigation measures prior to any final agency decision and generally prohibits the type of segmentation of projects. The proposed project’s failure to meet the guidelines set forth under NEPA or SEQRA will open the floodgates of litigation, delaying the project even further and potentially requiring a whole new environmental review process.

ABOUT RIVERKEEPER: Riverkeeper is an independent member-supported environmental organization that has led the campaign to retire the Indian Point nuclear power plant. Riverkeeper’s mission is to protect the Hudson River, the New York City drinking water supply, and the public’s right to clean water and healthy communities. For more information, please visit www.riverkeeper.org.

###