Proposed approach would fail to reduce the 1 billion gallons of raw sewage entering the creek each year, threaten aquatic life, and introduce new chemical risks
Riverkeeper, Save the Sound, and Guardians of Flushing Bay have filed a lawsuit against the New York City Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) challenging the City’s plan to construct chlorination facilities to treat sewage pollution in Flushing Creek. The groups argue that the proposal is an inadequate, risky, and ultimately harmful response to one of Queens’ most severe and persistent water pollution problems.
Each year, roughly 1 billion gallons of raw sewage and trash-filled stormwater flow into the creek through the City’s combined sewer system, which discharges directly into local waterways when it rains as little as one tenth of an inch.
The DEP intends to chlorinate the sewage with the goal of reducing bacteria levels, and then dechlorinate the sewage before it enters the creek. But even with dechlorination, some level of chlorine—as well as toxic byproduct chemicals—is likely to enter the creek, threatening fish and other aquatic life. Further, there is limited evidence that chlorination effectively reduces bacteria in wastewater, and this approach would not cut down the amount of sewage and trash that ends up in the water.
The suit aims to require the City to comply with the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) and complete a comprehensive Environmental Impact Statement that gives due consideration to the potential harms of relying on chlorination to treat CSO discharges, and evaluates alternatives that could more effectively address wastewater pollution, protect public health, and restore Flushing Creek. These alternatives include pursuing long-term solutions that actually reduce sewage entering the waterway, like expanding green infrastructure such as roofs with vegetation that absorbs rain and routing sewage to a new wastewater treatment facility at Rikers Island.
Flushing Creek has endured decades of neglect, and New Yorkers deserve solutions that don’t simply treat some of the symptoms of pollution, but that truly clean the water, protect wildlife, and respect the communities that live, work, and recreate along the water.
“The State Environmental Quality Review Act requires DEP to address the potential significant adverse environmental impacts of this project. Yet DEP disregarded the risks to water quality and aquatic life from residual chlorine and disinfection byproducts that will be discharged into Flushing Creek under its proposed plan,” said Dara Illowsky, New York staff attorney for Save the Sound. “DEP must complete an Environmental Impact Statement to examine these and other potential impacts, and also to consider alternatives that actually reduce CSOs in Flushing Creek. Additionally, an EIS would create an opportunity for the public to participate in the process.”
“New York City cannot solve a billion-gallon sewage problem by simply adding chlorine to it,” said Mike Dulong, Riverkeeper Legal Program Director. “This plan does nothing to reduce the actual volume of sewage and trash entering Flushing Creek, and it introduces new chemical risks to an already overburdened waterway. The law requires the City to take a hard look at better, more effective solutions — and that’s exactly what we’re asking the court to enforce.”
“Queens deserves clean water solutions that actually clean our water”, said Rebecca Pryor, Executive Director of the Guardians of Flushing Bay, “Instead, the City’s plan creates new risks without reducing the volume of sewage and trash pollution pouring into Flushing Creek. The plan fails New Yorkers of all stripes—from local Queens residents to migrating birds to native wetland grasses. We call on the City to do the right thing: conduct a robust study of the impacts of this project and assess discharge reduction solutions.”