DOCSLIB.ORG

Before the Public Service Commission the BROOKLYN UNION GAS

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Before the Public Service Commission the BROOKLYN UNION GAS Before the Public Service Commission THE BROOKLYN UNION GAS COMPANY d/b/a NATIONAL GRID NY Direct Testimony Of Charles F. Willard Dated: April 2019 Testimony of Charles F. Willard Table of Contents I. Introduction and Qualifications .............................................................. 1 II. SIR Program Overview ............................................................................ 5 III. SIR Program Costs ................................................................................... 9 IV. SIR Cost Control Efforts ........................................................................ 25 V. Compliance with Rate Case Filing Requirements ............................... 26 Testimony of Charles F. Willard 1 I. Introduction and Qualifications 2 Q. Please state your name and business address. 3 A. My name is Charles F. Willard. My business address is 300 Erie 4 Boulevard West, Syracuse, New York 13202. 5 6 Q. By whom are you employed and in what capacity? 7 A. I am employed by National Grid USA Service Company, Inc., a subsidiary 8 of National Grid USA (“National Grid”), and currently hold the position of 9 Director, Environmental Management. My responsibilities include 10 overseeing the environmental and site investigation and remediation 11 (“SIR”) programs for National Grid’s operating companies, including The 12 Brooklyn Union Gas Company d/b/a National Grid NY (“KEDNY” or 13 “Company”) and KeySpan Gas East Corporation d/b/a National Grid 14 (“KEDLI”). 15 16 Q. Please describe your educational background and business experience. 17 A. I am a graduate of the State University of New York at Geneseo with a 18 Bachelor of Arts degree in Geology. In addition, I hold a Masters in 19 Engineering Geology with a concentration in Environmental Engineering 20 from Drexel University and a Masters in Business Administration from 21 LeMoyne University. Page 1 of 28 Testimony of Charles F. Willard 1 I have been with National Grid since 1996. Prior to my appointment as 2 Director, Environmental Management in 2014, I held the positions of Lead 3 Environmental Engineer, Manager of New York SIR, and Director of SIR. 4 Before joining National Grid, I held various management level positions in 5 the field of environmental engineering and worked on projects such as 6 environmental investigations, feasibility studies, remedial designs, and 7 construction at large Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) Superfund, 8 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and New York State Superfund 9 sites. 10 11 Q. Have you previously testified before the New York State Public Service 12 Commission (the “Commission”)? 13 A. Yes. I testified on behalf of KEDLI and KEDNY in Cases 16-G-0058 and 14 16-G-0059 (collectively, the “2016 KEDNY and KEDLI Rate Cases”), and 15 on behalf of Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation d/b/a National Grid in 16 Cases 17-E-0238 and 17-G-0239. 17 18 Q. What is the purpose of your testimony? 19 A. The purpose of my testimony is to support the SIR costs included in 20 KEDNY’s revenue requirement. Specifically, I will: 21 (i) provide an overview of KEDNY’s SIR program; Page 2 of 28 Testimony of Charles F. Willard 1 (ii) discuss the historic level of SIR costs incurred by KEDNY, 2 including those incurred during the twelve months ended December 3 31, 2018 (“Historic Test Year”), as well as the forecast costs for the 4 twelve months ending March 31, 2021 (“Rate Year”) and the twelve 5 months ending March 31, 2022 (“Data Year 1”), March 31, 2023 6 (“Data Year 2”), and March 31, 2024 (“Data Year 3”) (collectively, 7 the “Data Years”); 8 (iii) present KEDNY’s proposal for recovery of SIR costs in the Rate 9 Year and Data Years, including its proposal to address the 10 significant level of projected SIR costs at the Newtown Creek and 11 Gowanus Canal Superfund sites; and 12 (iv) discuss KEDNY’s cost control procedures. 13 14 I will also address KEDNY’s compliance with the rate case filing 15 requirements adopted by the Commission in its November 28, 2012 Order 16 in Case 11-M-0034 (“SIR Generic Order”). 17 18 Q. Do you sponsor any exhibits as part of your testimony? 19 A. Yes. Attached to my testimony are the following exhibits and appendix 20 that were prepared under my direction and supervision: 21 (i) Exhibit __ (CFW-1) provides details on work progress at KEDNY’s Page 3 of 28 Testimony of Charles F. Willard 1 manufactured gas plant (“MGP”) and Superfund sites; 2 (ii) Exhibit __ (CFW-2) is an example of a New York State Department 3 of Environmental Conservation (“DEC”) Order on Consent; 4 (iii) Exhibit __ (CFW-3) is the Unilateral Administrative Order for the 5 remedial design of the Gowanus Canal Superfund Site; 6 (iv) Exhibit __ (CFW-4) is the Administrative Settlement Agreement 7 and Order on Consent for the remedial investigation and feasibility 8 study of the Newtown Creek Superfund Site; 9 (v) Exhibit __ (CFW-5) provides examples of changes to DEC remedy 10 decisions following discussions with KEDNY; 11 (vi) Exhibit __ (CFW-6) is a copy of the DEC work schedules for fiscal 12 years 2018, 2019, and 2020; 13 (vii) Exhibit __ (CFW-7) sets forth KEDNY’s compliance with existing 14 timetables and DEC requirements; 15 (viii) Exhibit __ (CFW-8) provides KEDNY’s past SIR program spend on 16 an annual basis for 2016 and 2017; 17 (ix) Exhibit __ (CFW-9) sets forth KEDNY’s SIR program spend in the 18 Historic Test Year; 19 (x) Exhibit __ (CFW-10) sets forth KEDNY’s forecast SIR program 20 spend in the Rate Year and Data Years; and 21 (xi) Appendix 1 sets forth the Company’s cost control efforts. Page 4 of 28 Testimony of Charles F. Willard 1 II. SIR Program Overview 2 Q. Please provide a brief overview of KEDNY’s SIR program. 3 A. KEDNY’s SIR program includes activities in connection with the 4 management, investigation, and remediation of MGP and Superfund sites 5 that have been contaminated by the past release of substances from property 6 owned or formerly owned by KEDNY or its predecessors. KEDNY has 7 responsibility for 27 MGP and two federal Superfund sites associated with 8 waterways (Gowanus Canal and Newtown Creek) adjacent to former MGP 9 sites. Both Superfund sites are in the remedial planning process. Of the 10 27 MGP sites, seven sites are in site characterization or remedial 11 investigation, five sites are in remedial planning, one site is in remedial 12 action and nine sites are have been either remediated but are subject to 13 future monitoring and/or are subject to site management obligations. Five 14 sites have received a “No Further Action” determination following site 15 characterization and/or remediation, with four of the five no longer reported 16 to DEC. As I will discuss later in my testimony, remediation and 17 investigation activities at the Gowanus Canal and Newtown Creek 18 Superfund sites are projected to cause KEDNY to incur significant SIR 19 costs in the Rate Year, Data Years, and beyond. 20 21 Exhibit __ (CFW-1) describes the sites currently being managed by Page 5 of 28 Testimony of Charles F. Willard 1 KEDNY. The exhibit includes the background of each site, and details the 2 investigation and remediation activities that have taken place over the last 3 three years from January 2016 through the end of the Historic Test Year. 4 5 Q. What types of costs does KEDNY incur under its SIR program? 6 A. Costs under KEDNY’s SIR program include consultant and contractor 7 costs, remediation activities aimed at reducing the volume, toxicity, or 8 mobility of pre-existing contamination, and incremental external costs 9 (including insurance and legal costs) incurred to seek recovery from third 10 parties or to otherwise mitigate the Company’s SIR costs or liabilities. 11 12 Q. What roles do the DEC and other regulatory agencies play with regard 13 to the scope and timing of investigation and remediation work 14 conducted at MGP and Superfund sites? 15 A. The DEC and EPA control the scope and timing of work at MGP and 16 Superfund sites. The scope of KEDNY’s site investigations, work plans, 17 clean-up, and field work decisions are reviewed, approved, and/or expanded 18 by the DEC and/or the EPA pursuant to various orders. An example Order 19 on Consent for 23 of KEDNY’s MGP sites is provided in Exhibit __ (CFW- 20 2). The Unilateral Administrative Order for the remedial design of the 21 Gowanus Canal Superfund site and the Administrative Settlement Page 6 of 28 Testimony of Charles F. Willard 1 Agreement and Order on Consent for the remedial investigation and 2 feasibility study of the Newtown Creek Superfund site are provided in 3 Exhibit __ (CFW-3) and Exhibit __ (CFW-4), respectively. Although the 4 Company has limited control over the scope and timing of SIR activities, 5 KEDNY challenges the DEC and EPA when a more cost effective and 6 equally protective remedy is available and, as described later in my 7 testimony, manages costs in the areas it can control, such as contracting 8 procedures. Exhibit __ (CFW-5) provides examples of changes to DEC 9 remedy decisions and value engineering related modifications following 10 discussions with KEDNY that resulted in cost savings to customers. 11 12 Q. How is the schedule for work at MGP sites determined? 13 A. Prior to the beginning of each New York State fiscal year (April 1 through 14 March 31), KEDNY and the DEC meet to discuss the upcoming work 15 schedule. The DEC approves the work schedule for the upcoming fiscal 16 year only. As a result, the amount of spending in a given year is highly 17 dependent upon the DEC and other third parties, including private property 18 owners, permitting authorities, et cetera.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Site Name: National Grid: Greenpoint Energy Center
    Greenpoint Energy Center Site This Upland Site Summary was authored by National Grid. The opinions, statements, and conclusions herein are solely those of National Grid. They are not adopted by and should not be attributed to any other Person. SITE NAME: NATIONAL GRID: GREENPOINT ENERGY CENTER Address: 287 Maspeth Avenue, Brooklyn, New York, 11211 Tax Lot Parcel(s): Brooklyn, Block 2837, Lot 1 Latitude: 40.720500 - 40° 43’ 5.30’’ Longitude: 73.931800 - 73° 55’ 51.24’’ Regulatory Programs/Numbers/Codes: NYSDEC Codes 224052, V00631, 610000X6OG - Division of Air Resources ID, (NYSDEC)00157 - Compliance Data System ID, (USEPA)NYD986871077 - Facility Index Database System ID, (USEPA)NYD006978795 - Resource Conservation Recovery Act ID , (USEPA) Plant ID 110002337784, Spill No. 9009058, 9111530, 9211562, 9301329, 9305107, 9606233, 9714234, 0004653, 0104143, 0106270, 0202908, 0303442, 0310061, 0413650, 0506134, 0908424, 0908872, 1006581, and 1012824. Analytical Data Status: Electronic Data Available Hardcopies Only No Data Available 1 SUMMARY OF CONSTITUENTS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN (COPCs) TRANSPORT PATHWAYS TO THE CREEK The current understanding of the transport mechanisms of contaminants from the upland portions of the Greenpoint Energy Center (Site) to Newtown Creek is summarized in this section and Table 1. Overland Transport: No specific evidence of overland transport was identified in the available site records. The pathway has not been evaluated for completeness but will be under investigation in the near future. Bank Erosion: A relieving platform (bulkhead) adjacent to Newtown Creek extends along the eastern part of the Site. No specific evidence of bank erosion was identified in the available Draft Upland Site Summary May 2012 Newtown Creek RI/FS 1 110782-01.01 Greenpoint Energy Center Site site records.
    [Show full text]
  • Revised Draft Remedial Investigation Report
    Geotechnical Environmental Water Resources Ecological Final Remedial Investigation Report Fulton Municipal Works Former Manufactured Gas Plant (MGP) Site Brooklyn, New York Order on Consent Site No. 224051 Index No. A2-0552-0606 Submitted to: Submitted by: National Grid GEI Consultants, Inc. One MetroTech Center 455 Winding Brook Drive Brooklyn, NY 11201 Glastonbury, CT 06033 860-368-5300 July 2012 Project 093020-1-1110 _____________________ David B. Terry, P.G., LEP Vice President FINAL REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT NATIONAL GRID FULTON MUNICIPAL WORKS FORMER MGP SITE JULY 2012 Qualified Environmental Professional’s Certification I, David B. Terry, certify that I am currently a Qualified Environmental Professional as defined in 6 NYCRR Part 375 and that this Report was prepared in accordance with applicable statues and regulations and in substantial conformance with the DER Technical Guidance for Site Investigation and Remediation (DER-10) and that all activities were performed in accordance with the DER-approved work plans and DER-approved work plan modifications as discussed in this Report. Date: July 6, 2012 _____________________________ David B. Terry, P.G., LEP GEI Consultants, Inc. i FINAL REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT NATIONAL GRID FULTON MUNICIPAL WORKS FORMER MGP SITE JULY 2012 Table of Contents Abbreviations and Acronyms viii Executive Summary xi 1. Introduction 1 1.1 Remedial Investigation Objectives and Scope 2 1.2 Site Description 5 1.2.1 Fulton MGP and RI Study Area History 5 1.2.1.1 Pre-MGP History 5 1.2.1.2 MGP History
    [Show full text]
  • Brooklyn-Queens Greenway Guide
    TABLE OF CONTENTS The Brooklyn-Queens Greenway Guide INTRODUCTION . .2 1 CONEY ISLAND . .3 2 OCEAN PARKWAY . .11 3 PROSPECT PARK . .16 4 EASTERN PARKWAY . .22 5 HIGHLAND PARK/RIDGEWOOD RESERVOIR . .29 6 FOREST PARK . .36 7 FLUSHING MEADOWS CORONA PARK . .42 8 KISSENA-CUNNINGHAM CORRIDOR . .54 9 ALLEY POND PARK TO FORT TOTTEN . .61 CONCLUSION . .70 GREENWAY SIGNAGE . .71 BIKE SHOPS . .73 2 The Brooklyn-Queens Greenway System ntroduction New York City Department of Parks & Recreation (Parks) works closely with The Brooklyn-Queens the Departments of Transportation Greenway (BQG) is a 40- and City Planning on the planning mile, continuous pedestrian and implementation of the City’s and cyclist route from Greenway Network. Parks has juris- Coney Island in Brooklyn to diction and maintains over 100 miles Fort Totten, on the Long of greenways for commuting and Island Sound, in Queens. recreational use, and continues to I plan, design, and construct additional The Brooklyn-Queens Greenway pro- greenway segments in each borough, vides an active and engaging way of utilizing City capital funds and a exploring these two lively and diverse number of federal transportation boroughs. The BQG presents the grants. cyclist or pedestrian with a wide range of amenities, cultural offerings, In 1987, the Neighborhood Open and urban experiences—linking 13 Space Coalition spearheaded the parks, two botanical gardens, the New concept of the Brooklyn-Queens York Aquarium, the Brooklyn Greenway, building on the work of Museum, the New York Hall of Frederick Law Olmsted, Calvert Vaux, Science, two environmental education and Robert Moses in their creations of centers, four lakes, and numerous the great parkways and parks of ethnic and historic neighborhoods.
    [Show full text]
  • Brooklyn: Economic Development and the State of Its Economy
    Brooklyn: Economic Development And the State of Its Economy February 2004 New York State Office of the State Comptroller Alan G. Hevesi Office of the State Deputy Comptroller for the City of New York Kenneth B. Bleiwas, Deputy Comptroller Report 12-2004 Additional copies of this report may be obtained from: Office of the State Comptroller New York City Public Information Office 633 Third Avenue New York, NY 10017 Telephone: (212) 681-4824 Or through the Comptroller’s Web site at: www.osc.state.ny.us To help reduce printing costs, please notify the Office of the State Deputy Comptroller at (212) 383-3916 if you wish to have your name removed from our mailing list or if your address has changed. Contents I. Executive Summary..................................................................................................1 II. An Overview of the Brooklyn Economy .................................................................. 3 III. Economic Development in Brooklyn ...................................................................... 7 Major Issues Affecting Economic Development...............................................................................................................7 Waterfront Development and Zoning ................................................................................................................................8 Retail Expansion: Big Box Stores.....................................................................................................................................10 Tourism..........................................................................................................................................................................11
    [Show full text]
  • National Grid US Operations – Credit Information Pack US Operations Long-Term Debt Issuing Companies
    National Grid US Operations – Credit Information Pack US Operations Long-term Debt Issuing Companies National Grid plc ■ National Grid’s US companies have several Moody’s / S&P / Fitch Baa1 / BBB+ / BBB+ rated issuing entities. The large number is for regulatory transparency. National Grid USA ■ The operating companies typically issue in USD Baa1 / BBB+ / - 144A or private placement format Niagara Mohawk Power KeySpan Corporation Corporation Baa1 / A - / BBB + ■ KeySpan Corporation is a legacy holding A2 / A - / - company that will not issue new debt Massachusetts Electric The Brooklyn Union Gas Company Company (KEDNY) ■ National Grid USA (NGUSA) has no long-term A3 / A - / - A2 / A - / A - debt but does have active commercial paper New England Power Company KeySpan Gas East Corporation programmes A3 / A - / - (KEDLI) A2 / A - / A - The Narragansett Electric Colonial Gas Company Company A3 / A - / - A3 / A - / - Boston Gas Company A3 / A - / - National Grid Generation LLC Baa1 / A - / - * Ratings shown are senior unsecured long-term ratings, or issuer/corporate ratings where there is no senior unsecured rating. Our US Operations Our Network ■ We both own and operate electricity transmission facilities across upstate New York, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Vermont ■ We own and operate electricity distribution networks in upstate New York, Massachusetts and Rhode Island, serving approximately 3.4 million customers ■ We own and operate gas distribution networks across the northeastern US, located in upstate New York, New
    [Show full text]
  • Keyspan Corporation Securities Litigation 01-CV-05852-Amended
    Case 1:01-cv-05852-ARR-MDG Document 64 Filed 04/07/2003 Page 1 of 97 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ------------------------------------------------------X In re: KEYSPAN CORPORATION CV 2001-5852 (ARR) (MDG) SECURITIES LITIGATION ------------------------------------------------------X AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT 1. Lead Plaintiffs Donald Kassan and Peter E. Hubbard (“Lead Plaintiffs”), for their amended complaint against defendants, allege the following based upon the investigation of counsel, which included, inter alia, a review of U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) filings, press releases and other public statements issued by KeySpan Corporation (“KeySpan” or the “Company”), securities analysts' reports and advisories by or about the Company, media and third party reports about the Company, and a review of the case file and certain discovery in the litigation styled KeySpan Services Inc. et al. v. LeRoy Kay et al., Docket No. MON-C-95-01, pending in the Chancery Court Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey, Monmouth County (the “Monmouth County litigation”). Lead Plaintiffs in good faith believe that substantial additional evidentiary support will exist for the allegations set forth herein after a reasonable opportunity for discovery. 2. This amendment addresses the deficiencies found by the Court in its Opinion and Order dated March 18, 2003. Plaintiffs expressly reserve their right to appeal said Order. INTRODUCTION 3. This is a federal class action under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act” or “1934 Act”) on behalf of purchasers of KeySpan securities between March 24, 2000, and July 17, 2001 inclusive (the “Class Period”). As more fully set forth herein, the defendants have admitted that financial and operational improprieties had not been disclosed.
    [Show full text]
  • The New York Independent System Operator: a Ten-Year Review
    The New York Independent System Operator: A Ten-Year Review Susan F. Tierney, Ph.D. Analysis Group Boston, Massachusetts April 12, 2010 This White Paper was prepared at the request of the New York Independent System Operator. The paper reflects the views of the author, and not necessarily the views of the NYISO, or its members. www.analysisgroup.com Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................................................. 2 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY .......................................................................................................................................................... 6 BACKGROUND: The Goals Underlying Changes in New York’s Electric Industry in the 1990s ...................................... 7 Overview ................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 New York’s Electric Industry Before the Establishment of NYISO .................................................................................... 9 Impetus for Change: The Pressure of High Electricity Prices ........................................................................................... 10 Planning for NYISO ............................................................................................................................................................... 12 Establishing NYISO ...............................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Keyspan Corporation and Subsidiaries Consolidated Financial Statements for the Years Ended March 31, 2016 and 2015
    KeySpan Corporation and Subsidiaries Consolidated Financial Statements For the years ended March 31, 2016 and 2015 KEYSPAN CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES TABLE OF CONTENTS Independent Auditor's Report………………………………...………………..…………………..…………………….………………………………………..3 Consolidated Statements of Income………………...…………………..……………..……………………………………………………………………………………………4 Years Ended March 31, 2016 and 2015 Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income……………………………..…………………………………………………………………………………………….5 Years Ended March 31, 2016 and 2015 Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows…………….……………………………………..…………………………………………………………………………………………6 Years Ended March 31, 2016 and 2015 Consolidated Balance Sheets…………………………………………………………………..……………………………………………………………………………………………7 March 31, 2016 and 2015 Consolidated Statements of Capitalization…………………………………………………..…….…………………………………………………………………………………9 March 31, 2016 and 2015 Consolidated Statement of Changes in Shareholders' Equity ………………………………………………………………………………………………….10 Years Ended March 31, 2016 and 2015 Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….11 1 - Nature of Operations and Basis of Presentation………………………………….………………………………………………11 2 - Summary of Significant Accounting Policies …………………………………………………………………………………………13 3 - Regulatory Assets and Liabilities ………………………..……………………...………………………………………………………22 4 - Rate Matters …………...……………………………….…………………………………………………………………………………………24 5 - Property, Plant and Equipment …………………………………………………….……...………………………..………………………27 6 - Derivative Instruments
    [Show full text]
  • Gowanus Canal
    Public Health Assessment Final Release GOWANUS CANAL CITY OF NEW YORK BOROUGH OF BROOKLYN KINGS COUNTY, NEW YORK EPA FACILITY ID: NYN000206222 Prepared by New York State Department of Health JANUARY 11, 2017 Prepared under a Cooperative Agreement with the U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Division of Community Health Investigations Atlanta, Georgia 30333 THE ATSDR PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT: A NOTE OF EXPLANATION This Public Health Assessment was prepared by ATSDR’s Cooperative Agreement Partner pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund) section 104 (i)(6) (42 U.S.C. 9604 (i)(6)), and in accordance with our implementing regulations (42 C.F.R. Part 90). In preparing this document, ATSDR’s Cooperative Agreement Partner has collected relevant health data, environmental data, and community health concerns from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), state and local health and environmental agencies, the community, and potentially responsible parties, where appropriate. In addition, this document has previously been provided to EPA and the affected states in an initial release, as required by CERCLA section 104 (i)(6)(H) for their information and review. The revised document was released for a 30-day public comment period. Subsequent to the public comment period, ATSDR’s Cooperative Agreement Partner addressed all public comments and revised or appended the document as appropriate. The public health assessment has now been reissued. This concludes the public health assessment process for this site, unless additional information is obtained by ATSDR’s Cooperative Agreement Partner which, in the agency’s opinion, indicates a need to revise or append the conclusions previously issued.
    [Show full text]
  • Site Characterization Phase Iv Data Summary Report
    SITE CHARACTERIZATION PHASE IV DATA SUMMARY REPORT WORK ASSIGNMENT D004433-22 MEEKER AVENUE PLUME TRACKDOWN SITE NO. 2-24-121 GREENPOINT/EAST WILLIAMSBURG INDUSTRIAL AREA KINGS (C), NY Prepared for: NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION 625 Broadway, Albany, New York Alexander B. Grannis, Commissioner DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION REMEDIAL BUREAU B URS Corporation 77 Goodell Street Buffalo, New York 14203 Final G3359U May 2009 PHASE IV DATA SUMMARY REPORT SITE CHARACTERIZATION MEEKER AVENUE PLUME TRACKDOWN SITE ID NO. 2-24-121 GREENPOINT/EAST WILLIAMSBURG INDUSTRIAL AREA BROOKLYN, NEW YORK PREPARED FOR: NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION REMEDIAL BUREAU B WORK ASSIGNMENT NO. D004433-22A PREPARED BY: URS CORPORATION 77 GOODELL STREET BUFFALO, NEW YORK 14203 FINAL MAY 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS .........................................................................v 1.0 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Site Background ................................................................................................. 1-1 1.1.1 Site Location and Description ............................................................... 1-1 1.1.2 Previous Investigations.......................................................................... 1-3 1.2 Findings of Previous Phases of Site Investigation Fieldwork ............................ 1-7
    [Show full text]
  • * Nationalgrid
    -* nationalgrid The Honorable Jaclyn A. Brilling Secretary, New York Public Service Commission 3 Empire State Plaza Albany, NY 12223-1350 RE: CASE 06-M-0878 -Joint Petition of National Grid PLC and KeySpan Corporation for Approval of Stock Acquisition and other Regulatory Authorizations. CASE 06-G-1185 -Proceeding on Motion of the Commission as to the Rates, Charges, Rules and Regulations of The Brooklyn Union Gas Company d/b/a KeySpan Energy Delivery New York for Gas Service. CASE 06-G-1186 -Proceeding on Motion of the Commission as Charges, Rules and Regulations of KeySpan Gas East Energy Delivery Long Island for Gas Service. Statement of National Grid plc and KeySpan Corporation in Support of the Merger & Gas Revenue Reauirement Joint Provosal Dear Secretary Brilling: Enclosed for filing pursuant to Judge's Lynch's Ruling of July 5,2007 in the above-captioned proceedings please find enclosed an original and fifteen copies of the Statement of National Grid plc and KeySpan Corporation in Support of Merger Joint Proposal. We have also enclosed a copy of this cover letter and would please ask that you date stamp the service copy and return it to me in the enclosed prepaid, pre-addressed envelope. Respectfully s mitte OA,&~L, STATE OF NEW YORK PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION Case 06-M-0878 Joint Petition of National Grid plc and KeySpan Corporation for Approval of Stock Acquisition and Other Regulatory Authorizations. Case 06-6-1185 Proceeding on Motion of the Commission as to the Rates, Charges, Rules and Regulations of The Brooklyn Union Gas Company for Gas Sewice Case 06-G-1186 Proceeding on Motion of the Commission as to the Rates, Charges, Rules and Regulations of KeySpan Gas East Corp.
    [Show full text]
  • Queens East River & North Shore Greenway Master Plan
    Queens East River & North Shore Greenway Master Plan NYC Department of City Planning • 2006 Queens East River & North Shore Greenway Master Plan Queens East River and North Shore Greenway Master Plan New York City Department of City Planning New York City Department of Parks & Recreation 2006 2006 • NYC Department of Parks & Recreation Queens East River & North Shore Greenway Master Plan Project PIN X500.97 The preparation of this report was fi nanced in part through funds from the U.S.Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The contents of this report refl ect the views of the author, who is responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented within. The contents do not necessarily refl ect the offi cial views or policies of the Federal Highway Administration. This report does not constitute a standard, specifi cation, or regulation. NYC Department of City Planning • 2006 Queens East River & North Shore Greenway Master Plan Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................................................1 Project Description ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 1 Study Area
    [Show full text]