Council Evades Specific Questions, Says Water Quality Is “Not Our Job”
Murphy DEP Doing Nothing With Respect To Water Quality Risks Of Drought
The NJ Water Supply Advisory Council held their regular monthly meeting today remotely. They play an important role in developing the Water Supply Plan and the Council is involved in DEP’s drought management:
P.L. 1981, Chapter 262, also known as the Water Supply Management Act was enacted by the Senate and General Assembly concerning the management of water in New Jersey and ensuring an adequate water supply for its residents. Also established by this Act was the Water Supply Advisory Council (WSAC), which advises the Department concerning the next iteration of the New Jersey State Water Supply Plan (NJSWSP) and other related water supply resource issues. At this time, the WSAC is consists of eleven members who are appointed by the Governor with the consent of the Senate. The eleven representatives include the agricultural community, industrial and commercial water users, residential waters users, private watershed protection associations, academic community, golf course superintendents of NJ, and two members each from investor-owned water companies and municipal or county water companies along with a representative of the nursery/landscapers/irrigation contractors industry
The only “environmental” or public interest member is Jennifer Coffey, the Executive Director of ANJEC (as the Private Watershed Protection Associations rep – in an Acting capacity.)
I attended remotely and posed the same questions to the Water Supply Advisory Council that I posed last week to the NJ Drinking Water Quality Institute regarding water quality issues related to the drought and NJ’s water supply system. The DWQI referred me to the WSAC for response to the following questions (specifically expressed based on text from DEP’s own documents):
- water quality monitoring upstream of drinking water intakes
- water transfers and concerns with water chemistry (like the Flint, Michigan scandal)
- status of a “Treatment Based Approach” for hundreds of unregulated chemicals
The NJ drinking water system is heavily reliant on re-use of industrial and sewage treatment plant wastewater discharges, who provide the large majority of the flow of rivers used for water supplies.
The existence of pollution discharges directly upstream of drinking water intakes raises OBVIOUS concerns, particularly during drought when river flows are dominated by wastewater discharge and particularly given the presence of hundreds of unregulated chemicals, euphemistically referred to as “emergent contaminants”.
For context: the chemical that caused the notorious childhood cancer cluster in Toms River NJ was an unregulated emergent contaminant, just like the current “forever chemicals” getting so much attention and microplastics (this link is a teaser for upcoming posts).
The Chairman of the Council simply refused to respond to my questions, by claiming (falsely) that the questions were beyond the scope of the Council. DEP experts who staff the Council sat mum, as they practically hid under their desks.
But the “environmental” and “public” member, Ms. Coffey, felt the need to respond and interjected to attempt to rebut my questions, dismiss my concerns, tout the DEP, and defend the Council and the Water Supply Plan!
As Joe Biden likes to say: Let me be clear. Ms. Coffey is an ill informed, ignorant, and dangerous hack.
I attempted to respond to her misstatements, but was prohibited from speaking by the Chairman. So much for public dialogue!
Here is my immediate email reply to Ms. Coffey after the meeting ended (with a copy to DEP Commissioner LaTourette):
Jenn: Your attempt to rebut reveals that you don’t know what I was saying or what you are talking about.
1) NJ Water Supply Plan – source water chemistry concerns, Flint Michigan redux:
Specifically, the Water Supply Plan revealed disturbing conditions during the 2016-2017 drought, at page 204 – 205 of Chapter 7
“as part of the 2016 Drought Warning, water transfers were ordered between several systems in order to preserve storage for those systems at highest risk. As a result, an estimated 1.8 billion gallons of water was preserved in critical reservoirs as a result of water transfers ordered between 2016 and 2017.
However, one finding from the 2016-2017 drought was reluctance from many water suppliers to make the complete transfers as ordered due to concerns around water chemistry. Following the 2015 re-emphasis within DWSG on the implementation of the Lead and Copper Rule, many water suppliers became more aware of the potential for chemical interactions between different treated waters and how that could impact corrosion of lead in domestic plumbing or lead service lines. Since then, water suppliers, particularly in the Northeast region have improved their understanding of the chemical interactions of their waters. However, the concern of water quality impacts as a consequence of transferring water in ways beyond typical flows remains. Reversing flows at interconnections or distribution and transmission mains can disturb biofilms and mineral deposits within distribution infrastructure and can create poor water quality conditions for customers.While in acute emergency conditions transient water quality issues like this may be overlooked by some customers, it may still have overall damaging effects on public trust in the quality of their tap water. Regular maintenance and proactive efforts to enhance distribution water quality remain essential to minimize these disturbances when they do occur.” (end quote)
2. The DWQI Recommended A “Treatment Based Approach” for “Emergent contaminants” – PFAS, PFNA, PFOA, et al are not the only ones – READ DEP’s REPLY TO MY PETITION FOR RULEMAKING in the December 4, 2023 edition of the NJ Register (see: 55 NJR 2430(a)
3. A fundamental of Climate science says the historical data and trends are no longer valid. DEP climate science report and recent regulations recognize that with respect to rainfall and flood elevations.
But the WS Plan is still based on old data and invalid statistical methods.
4. Source Water Sampling – Read the WS Plan – response to public comments document:
DEP’s “Response to [Public] Comment Document” on the draft plan:
“Currently, the Department currently has limited authority to require individual and untreated source water quality data. Future water supply plans are anticipated to take this work further and these comments will be considered as that occurs. Recommendations in the Final Plan are made to require raw water/pre-treatment water quality data for many public supply sources.” (end quote)
You obviously are clueless about all this and are an embarrassment.
Wolfe
Gov. Murphy needs to replace this unqualified cheerleader.