“Dumped on and lied to”

“We’re a community that’s been dumped on and lied to – my community has lost any confidence in what they’re told by experts or officials because of this. And I can’t blame them.”
Hamilton, NJ Mayor Glen Gilmore

Bill Wolfe

Wow. Why would a Mayor say that? Maybe because of this?
“Last month, town officials were told that crushed concrete used as a roadbed at a planned housing development was tainted with cancer-causing PCBs. The concrete came from the demolition of the old Ford assembly plant in Edison. Adding to the insult, the state [DEP] had known about the pollution since September but failed to notify locals for six months“
See: Bergen Record. “Cleaning up the Cleanup Process in New Jersey“. http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/456127/cleaning_up_the_cleanup_process_in_new_jersey/
Prior to this Ford PCB scandal, in the spring of 2004, the Star Ledger wrote several front-page investigative articles on DEP’s performance in cleaning up dozens of highly contaminated chromium sites in Hudson and Essex counties. Those reports disclosed improper behind the scenes influence by industry lobbyists and consultants in weakening DEP’s chromium cleanup standards.
The Wall Street Journal – hardly a paper with a reputation for environmental advocacy – documented gross scientific fraud in the scientific literature used to develop risk assessments and DEP regulatory standards for chromium in NJ [see 12/23/05.Page 1].
All this prompted the Trenton Times to report that “Confidence in DEP Power on Shaky Ground” [March 5, 2006] followed by an editorial titled: “The Watchdog Fails Again” [March 6, 2006].
Without even a mention of this tortured history (and I’m leaving out several other high profile DEP scandals, including the infamous “Kiddie Kollege” daycare mercury poisoning), yesterday, DEP issued a press release touting the adoption of new DEP regulations that mandate either written notice to neighbors within 200 feet or posting of signs on toxic waste sites.
These rules are a long overdue first step in reforming the broken DEP toxic site cleanup program. To say they are too little too late would be way too generous.

Bill WolfeThere are sterner warnings and far more public involvement in EPA cleanup decisions at federal Superfund sites than in NJ DEP cases

According to the DEP press release, the history and origin of the rule is:
“In 2005, a DEP task force launched a series of discussions among groups that included environmental justice advocates, environmental and civic organizations, local health officers and officials, and business and industry leaders. The task force concluded that early dialogue and proactive communications are essential to achieve swift and successful site cleanups.”
According to DEP, the objective of the rule is:
“This public outreach significantly improves how neighbors are kept informed about cleanups and will become an invaluable tool for everyone involved in those cleanups by eliminating misperceptions and speculation that can create conflict and unnecessary delays,” Commissioner Jackson said
[Full text here: http://www.nj.gov/dep/newsrel/2008/08_0044.htm
This is deeply misleading on multiple counts. DEP left very important historical facts and legislative history out of that chronology and justification for the new rules.
I am offended by this press release. DEP misleads the public and belittles their legitimate concerns as “misperceptions and speculation“. That sure sounds like blaming the public, exactly the approach Mayor Gilmore rejected in the statement quoted above.
And while inventing some history to make the DEP look good, they also disrespect and fail to recognize the leadership of Assemblywoman Linda Greenstein, who sponsored the law that mandated that DEP adopt the new notification regulations!
As George Orwell noted in the classic “1984”:
“The alteration of the past is necessary for two reasons. … by far the most important reason for the readjustment of the past is the need to safeguard the infallibility of the party.”

First of all, DEP did not initiate things – and to claim that DEP somehow promoted “early dialogue and proactive communications” is absurd. DEP was directed by the Legislature to fix multiple gross communication failures, including covering up information.
This new notification rule was prompted by scandals at the WR Grace site in 2005 and the Ford PCB fiasco in 2006. WR Grace is located in Hamilton Township – this debacle is what prompted Mayor Gilmore to say he his community was “dumped on and lied to“. The WR Grace and Ford cases led to legislative hearings in June 2005 and June 2006, criminal investigations, and passage of new laws.
Second, DEP distorts the justification for the new notification rule to imply that the purpose of the rule is to address public “misperceptions and speculation”. This DEP claim is simply outrageous, Orwellian and unacceptable.
Third, long delays in cleanups are not caused by public “misconceptions and speculation” but by DEP’s own mismanagement. A recent US EPA Inspector General’s Report found major management problems at DEP. See: EPA REPORT BLASTS NEW JERSEY TOXIC CLEAN-UPS
http://blog.nj.com/njv_bill_wolfe/2008/06/epa_report_blasts_new_jersey_t.html
Before the dust had settled on that WR Grace scandal, three more major toxic cleanup fiasco’s erupted with repeated massive failures by DEP at the center of the controversy: Ford; American Standard; and Martin Luther King Jr. school. All are located in or nearby Hamilton, and in the Legislative District of Assemblywoman Linda Greenstein, then Chair of the Judiciary Committee.
In the Ford case, toxic PCB contaminated soils and debris was disposed of as “clean fill” under new homes, including a day care center. DEP knew about and covered up the problem for over 6 months. Frustrated and angry Hamilton residents were shut out of DEP cleanup decisions at the American Standard site. DEP failed to stop and then covered up the fact that toxic soils had been imported as “clean fill” for the new Martin Luther King, Jr. school. Parents and residents were outraged.

site of demolished Martin Luther King, Jr. school in Trenton, NJ. Imported toxic soils led to the demolition of the partially built school, as a $25 million loss.

This outrage at DEP failures prompted Assemblywoman Greenstein to again hold DEP oversight hearings in June 2006. Based on these hearings, Greenstein then sponsored the notification laws that REQUIRED DEP to issue the regulations DEP touted in yesterday’s press release.
For those intersted in the ugly details and legislative history:
1. From the Bergen Record:
“W.R. Grace & Co. closed its insulation factory in the heart of Hamilton Township 12 years ago and gave the site a clean bill of health.
Under new environmental cleanup rules designed to speed the reuse of industrial sites, state [DEP] regulators took the company’s word, never testing an ounce of the property outside of Trenton.
But there was contamination — lots of it. Last year, town officials learned Grace had left behind 15,000 tons of soil riddled with extraordinarily high levels of asbestos.
[…]
“The new poster child for the system’s failings is Hamilton, where asbestos isn’t the only problem.
Last month, town officials were told that crushed concrete used as a roadbed at a planned housing development was tainted with cancer-causing PCBs. The concrete came from the demolition of the old Ford assembly plant in Edison. Adding to the insult, the state [DEP] had known about the pollution since September but failed to notify locals for six months.
State and federal officials have opened criminal probes of both the asbestos and PCB incidents.”
2. From my legislative testimony on June 1, 2006:
“the public, which is perceived as hysterical and a barrier to economic development, was intentionally cut out of the process. All right? So I wanted to talk to the Assemblyman about some of the notification issues that he has. If you put an awning at a gas station, you have more public participation — you get a notice, the property owners; you have a planning board review. If you’re cleaning up hundreds of thousands of gallons of contaminated benzene that’s flowing into somebody’s basement and well, there is no public review — none whatsoever. People need to know that. You have to remedy that statutorily. You cannot rely on DEP.
ASSEMBLYWOMAN GREENSTEIN: Thank you.
And I do want to say, Bill, that I appreciate the information
that you provide, and I think there’s a lot of good information there.
MR. WOLFE: I’d like to be a resource. I can work with the
OLS staff, and I’d love to.
ASSEMBLYWOMAN GREENSTEIN: Actually, I think we
had a question.
ASSEMBLYWOMAN ASSEMBLYMAN GORDON: No, not a
question. I just wanted to thank you for your comments. I think you’ve
raised some really important issues. I, for one, would hope that this
Committee undertakes a comprehensive review of these programs. We
appreciate your input and we look forward to working with you. (page 75)
http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/legislativepub/pubhear/ajuaen060106.pdf
3. From my written testimony on June 1, 2006:
“In order to repair these legislative flaws and gaps, the Committee should consider expand the pending McKeon/Greenstein legislative package to:
• Require meaningful public participation in cleanup and redevelopment decisions at large or moderate to high risk sites. Had a public hearing been held on the Ford cleanup plan before decisions were made, perhaps someone would have asked where the contaminated material was being disposed of and this whole costly fiasco would have been prevented;” http://www.peer.org/docs/nj/06_1_6_peer_testimony.pdf