Open Letter To Somerset, Owner of Bell Works

Dear Mr. Zucker, Somerset:

Your open letter and FAQ ask residents to rely on facts (archive.org/details/open-letter-from-somerset;bell.works/lp/holmdel-data-center-faq/).

Subscribe

We agree.

However, several claims in your open letter and the FAQs remain unsupported or in conflict with the application. We urge you to clarify and provide supporting information with the application.

1. Water and cooling. The FAQ says cooling requires only an initial fill and no further cooling water. Yet the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) allocates about 300 gallons per day to sanitary use and closed-loop cooling while projecting the same amount as sewer flow. The plans provide no cooling design, no mention of a water balance, fill volume, equipment schedule, and heat-rejection calculation for the 26-MW load. Please supplement the application with the equipment schedule, heat-rejection calculations, water balance and agree to an enforceable prohibition on evaporative or adiabatic cooling.

2. Electricity. The FAQ says JCP&L confirmed sufficient capacity, no new poles and only wire replacement. The filed letter from JCP&L does not confirm 40 MW; it leaves the service method unresolved and says a substation, upgrades and payment may be required. At continuous full load, the facility could use 350.4 million kWh annually—about twice Holmdel's 2023 community-wide purchased electricity. Please submit JCP&L's capacity study and point-of-delivery, feeder, substation, upgrade and reliability determinations.

3. Noise. The FAQ states that operating noise will comply with limits, but the EIR addresses construction noise—not continuous operation. There was no operational acoustic study submitted with the application that covered the 'closed-loop' cooling equipment, transformers, generators, worst-case operation, and more importantly low-frequency noise especially at night. We simply cannot rely on FAQs.

4. Groundwater. The stormwater report predicts increased recharge and proposes three under drained basins. The project Licensed Site Remediation Professional (LSRP) states that groundwater at the property is impacted by constituents—including PFAS—at concentrations exceeding New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Ground Water Quality Standards, and that additional recharge could move contaminant plumes downward and toward surface waters and interfere with existing remedial strategies. The LSRP recommends that induced artificial recharge not occur. The application does not show recharge calculations, basin infiltration or liner details, the LSRP's review of this design, and a monitoring and contingency plan.

5. Steep slopes. Plans show 9,424 square feet of disturbance on slopes over 25 percent, permitted only if necessary and no better location exists. The EIR assumes the reviewing authority will agree, while the calculation excludes the northwest berm. Please submit an alternatives analysis demonstrating necessity and no better location and disclose the excluded berm disturbance.

6. Missing approvals and conflicting claims. The application seeks to defer outside-agency submissions and remaining utility letters; formal water and sewer letters are missing. The FAQ also says the project will add no traffic, while the applicant's report predicts 126 daily trips. Please complete the record and reconcile that statement with the filed study.

We welcome Bell Works' willingness to engage with residents and value your significant contribution to our community. However, these are not minor technical details: the requested data is necessary for the Planning Board and the public to make an informed decision and to understand the project's true impacts on Holmdel. We respectfully ask that the record be completed before the Board considers final approval.

Prakash Santhana

Former Holmdel Deputy Mayor