WolfeNotes.com

[Update: Intro warning: If it is not obvious, this is snark! That’s why the original piece closed with reference to Yesmen!)

Washington – Harkening back to President Roosevelt’s New Deal, the Obama administration today announced a new federal agency, the CCC – Carbon Control Corporation.

The new CCC was modeled on FDR’s Civilian Conservation Corps and the Tennessee Valley Authority, depression era agencies that spurred employment, conservation of the nation’s natural resources, and brought affordable electric power to millions of homes.

Obama, joined by Treasury Secretary Geithner and Energy Czar Carol Browner, said the CCC would manage and finance energy and global warming policy goals, while spurring employment.

Headed jointly by internationally recognized Princeton Professors Cornel West, and Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman, the $250 billion per year CCC program will make massive federal infrastructure investments and be funded by three major sources:

1) a surcharge on carbon intensive fuels – domestic coal and oil imports;

2) full refund of the $700 billion Wall Street bailout money; and

3) savings from phase out of the AfPak and Iraq wars and redeployment of 250,000 US troops stationed at over 725 foreign military bases in 120 countries, including Germany, Japan, and North Korea.

“Today, we take the first large step on the sustainable energy path, and call an end to US military empire” said Obama. “The CCC will restore US manufacturing sector jobs and jump-start a socially just and equitable jobs based economic recovery. The era of deindustrialization, deregulation, privatization, and finance based taxpayer subsidized speculative global trade schemes is over.”

“I have directed CCC head Cornel West to begin immediately with an expanded “cash for clunkers” program for refrigerators, hot water heaters, and furnaces and energy efficiency in America’s homes.

We will channel $30 billion to US consumers in the next 30 days. We will have 10,000 wind, solar, and mass transportation projects underway before the snow falls.

At the upcoming Copenhagen global warming conference, I will present a detailed plan to phase out the nation’s coal power plants over the next 10 years and construct a world class national inter-city rail and urban mass transit system.” he said.

Governor Corzine applauded the CCC, saying “Obama’s leadership will assure that NJ meets my global warming and energy efficiency and conservation goals, as well as avoid the need to finance implementation via a securitized gas tax revenue stream and expanded privatization initiatives,”the NJ Governor said, referring to his prior controversial proposals to increase tolls, privatize the NJ Turnpike, and failed plan to fully fund the Transportation Trust Fund .

“These are crucial positive developments in light of the upcoming election – I am so glad that we finally we can deploy NJ’s National Guard to serve our communities here at home, instead of killing innocent civilians in foreign lands” he concluded.

Corzine was joined by a PSEG spokesman, who announced that PSEG would immediately develop plans to close all 4 NJ coal plants; cancel midwestern coal power energy importation contracts; end export of power to the NY City market; abandon controversial new power lines through the NJ Highlands, and south jersey; increase commercial rates and decrease shareholder profits; and provide rebates to low and moderate income families.

“However, because of the ongoing environmental impacts of our power line operations and the way we corrupted and undermined trust in government, PSEG will continue the $18.6 million payment to the Highlands Council.” PSEG spokesman concluded.

In a statement, other major NJ energy providers echoed PSEG, and pledged to shutdown the aging Oyster Creek plant, and cancel a controversial Linden coal plant and offshore LNG. “We will redouble our wind, solar, and conservation efforts” the energy industry said.

Conservative Republican challenger Christie blasted the Obama CCC as a government takeover, and opposed the thousands of new jobs that would be created as “more bureaucracy“.

Independent challenger Daggettt urged Corzine to be “realistic” and repeated his claim that renewable energy is more expensive than coal.

The Obama move was applauded by NJ Environmental Czar Bill Wolfe, recently named to revitalize NJ’s hapless ENGO community. “Health, Beauty , Permanence, Jobs, Peace, and Social Justice are now guiding our government policies and programs, as well as our personal aspirations” said Wolfe.”Like we’ve been saying for 40 years: “Small is Beautiful” and there really are “Limits to Growth“.

This post was brought to you in the spirit of The Yesmen

[Update: 10/07/09 – ANOTHER Tragedy: New tests show elevated chemical vapor levels in Middlesex Borough preschool what did DEP know and when did they know it? ~~~ end update]

Children attending Atlantic Highlands Elementary School are being exposed to toxic chemicals from a contaminated site across the street. Polluted groundwater from the site has migrated under the school building and toxic chemical vapors are seeping into the building. Levels detected in the school exceed DEP’s own safety levels. Science suggests that DEP’s levels may not be tough enough to protect young children.

DEP has known about the problem for over 3 YEARS and failed to enforce cleanup laws by mandating that the polluter install a cost effective and demonstrated technology called a sub slab depressurization system recommended by a national expert who has worked on similar cases across the country.

Amazingly, state officials have failed to learn the lesson of Kiddie Kollege, reported by the New York Times:

Memo Shows Agency Knew of Danger in Child Care Building

By TINA KELLEY

Published: September 1, 2006

The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection knew in 1994 that a building that later housed a Gloucester County day care center was so dangerous that state inspectors were instructed to use respirators when entering the building, according to an internal memo obtained by The New York Times yesterday.

But the site remained contaminated, and as far as the department knew, unoccupied, until inspectors visited it in April and found that Kiddie Kollege, a day care center serving children as young as 8 months old, was operating in the building. Yet the center, which is in Franklin Township, was allowed to remain open for more than three months, until state environmental investigators determined in late July that the site was still contaminated.” (read the complete story here)

The legislature quickly reponded to this tragedy by passing a law to protect children in day care centers and schools (read it here).

The new law directed the DEP to require complete cleanups at these sites, and mandated that the state Department of Health and Senior Services adopt indoor air standards to protect children, based on children’s higher sensitivity to chemicals. Governor Corzine signed the bill into law in January 2007 and issued a press release that said:

TRENTON – Governor Jon S. Corzine today signed legislation to help ensure that child care and educational facilities are environmentally safe for the children attending them.

“This bill will help identify and remediate educational facilities and child care centers located on environmentally high risk sites,” Governor Corzine said. “This puts New Jersey at the forefront of states nationally in protecting children from environmental contaminants while at child care facilities and schools.” (full release here)

The Department of Health has failed to comply with the Kiddie Kollege law and adopt mandated indoor air standards, which were required to be promulgated by July 2008, 18 months after the law’s passage.

Equally amazing is that the DHSS also has been aware of the situation in Atlantic Highlands and has advised – literally – to open the windows and prepare to abandon the school (read the DHSS 9/30/08 recommendations here)

• continue to ventilate the areas that were monitored to reduce the levels of  volatile compounds identified; 
• develop and implement a contingency plan to limit occupancy if conditions within the building change and levels increase in the sampled areas

Local school officials and a group of parents have been working for months on a solution. But they need the power of state law and DEP enforcement to back them up.

Yesterday, I wrote DEP Commissioner Mark Mauriello the following letter – let’s hope this gets resolved immediately. We will keep you posted.

Dear Commissioner:

For many months, the Department has known that children in the Atlantic Highlands elementary school (AHES) are being exposed to unsafe indoor toxic air pollutants that exceed DEP’s vapor intrusion (VI) guidance levels. 

As you know, the Department’s VI guidance levels for indoor air exposure are not based on children’s health risks, pharmacokinetics, and metabolism, as required by P.L. 2007, c.1 (AKA, the “Kiddie Kollege” law, which mandated that DHSS adopt such standards by July 2008), and therefore may not be adequately protective.

The AHES indoor air levels exceed levels that have triggered active indoor vapor mitigation systems in other NJ schools, such as the EPA Pohatcong Valley Superfund site in Franklin Township. The AHES levels also exceed those found in DEP’s oversight of vapor intrusion into homes from Dupont’s Pompton Lakes site (note health based screening level for TCE is 1 ug/m3), where active vapor recovery systems have been installed. They exceed protective science based risk levels by 30 to 3,000 times for TCE. The AHES subslab levels also exceed DEP VI groundwater and soil gas screening criteria.

A plume has migrated under the school building from a site across the street that is the suspected source of the problem. Groundwater standards and soil cleanup criteria are exceeded as well. While indoor air has been monitored, the Department approved remedial action at the site is not designed to reduce indoor air levels or protect children’s health.

Indoor air exceedences are for multiple parameters, but cumulative risks to children have not been quantified or considered as a basis for taking action to prevent needless ongoing toxic exposures of children while at school.

For several months now, an organized group of parents has chosen to work quietly and cooperatively with the DEP case manger and local schools officials  – they were led to believe that a sub-slab depressurization system would be installed BEFORE the start of this school year.

Unfortunately, DEP has not enforced cleanup laws and mandated that this system be installed.

As a result, parents are considering drastic action, including mounting an aggressive public campaign focused on the Department’s failure to protect their children and enforce cleanup laws (something, frankly, I’ve urged them to do many months ago. But they have chosen to work with the Department. But their patience is exhausted and they are feeling betrayed.)

I am giving you this heads up in hopes of preventing a train wreck and to try to secure what should be a fairly simple and cost effective remedy installed immediately.

Please direct your staff to issue a Spill Act Directive to the Responsible Party (with a compliance schedule and stipulated penalties). The Directive should order the revision of the remedial action workplan for the site to mandate that a sub-slab depressurization system needed to protect the health of children at AHES is installed immediately. In the event that the RP does not timely comply, the Department should be prepared to take emergency action and install the system.

Thank you.

Bill Wolfe, Director

NJ PEER (Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility)

The Bush administration was widely known – and denounced – for manipulation of science. Examples abound:

• The Union of Concerned Scientists issued a major report “Scientific Integrity in Policymaking – An Investigation into the Bush Administration’s Misuse of Science“,
• numerous examples were documented and criticized by major political figures, and
• entire books were written on the topic, like NY Times bestseller “The Republican War on Science“.

Perhaps the most visible and egregious example was Bush White House PR flacks rewriting EPA global warming reports and suppressing the work of Jim Hansen of NOAA, one of the world’s leading global warming scientists – so over the top, it got a CBS TV “60 Minutes” expose.

The NJ press corps press must think that such evil deeds occur only in Washington DC under a conservative Republican administration, because virtually the same thing goes on unreported right here in NJ under liberal democratic administrations.

NJ’s politicization of science is in some ways worse than the Bush administration’s. 

The Bush people were at least smart enough to do their dirty work under cover and behind the scenes. They were implemented by low level and very expendable flacks. They required whistleblowers, or leaks, or investigative journalism to discover them.

But here in NJ, high level State officials – not flacks – act with impunity. They openly act brazenly  and are stupid enough to put in writing exactly the same perverse Bush practices into formal DEP policy!

I have issued numerous press releases that document both the policies and specific examples of abuse (see links below), so the intrepid NJ press corps doesn’t even have to pick up the phone or crack a file over at DEP to document the abuses.

Let me repeat the text of these policies in one spot here:

1. Press Office Review and control over science

Under DEP regulations (NJAC 7:1-1 et seq; 37 NJR 3336), the DEP press office is the “single point of contact” with “all media“.

Scientists can not talk to media before clearance with the press office, including press office control over the content of what they say. A press office flack is in the room during any press interview or on the phone line to make sure the scientist tows the company line.

Under DEP regulations, the Press Office’s role is not to provide factual, objective, complete, responsive, and scientifically sound information. Instead, DEP regulations define the role of the press, which is to provide information  that ensures “that all Department communications with the press reflect the current policies and priorities of the commissioner“.

Any communication with media or release of any science or fact that conflicts with the views of the Commissioner are verboten (DEP employeees have been fired for this). Information and science are spun as a matter of policy – could it be any clearer?  See this link for details and all documents:

2. Policy Review and control over science

DEP has an internal review policy that governs public release of all science and data. The procedure requires:

• The material has undergone a seven-stage review process, including approval by DEP political appointees and press officers. The DEP Commissioner must also be notified in advance of any scientific report on an undefined “Hot Issue”;
• Even completed studies may not be “available for public distribution via print or online sources (i.e., journal and magazine articles)” until okayed by DEP management; and
• Technical updates of the “online Environmental Trends Report” will also require management sign-off including the personal approval of Ms. Herb.

DEP political appointees, the press office, the Commissioner, and perhaps the Governor’s Office must review and approve all science before it becomes public. We have documented cases where the science has been manipulated by these reviews. How could overt politicization of science get any worse?

3. Gag Orders on scientists

Stung by a string of embarrassing disclosures and breakdowns in toxic protections that prompted Legislative oversight hearings, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection ordered its employees to keep any “potentially sensitive information confidential” and to refrain from disclosing agency data to any outside parties”until it is ready for public distribution” according to an Agency email released by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).

4. Retaliation against whistleblowers or independent scientists

I was forced out of DEP as a whislelblower in 1995 for disclosing widespread mercury contamination of freshwater fish and a plan by Govneror Whitman to supress that science.

Since then, I’ve known of several retaliations by DEP managers.

DEP demoted and transferred its Chief Nuclear Engineer for raising concerns about industry influence on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission during the relicensing process for Oyster Creek nuclear plant, the oldest in the nation. According to a National Public Radio interview:

YOUNG: Ruch points to the case of whistleblower Dennis Zannoni. Zannoni was the agency’s top nuclear energy official. When he raised concerns about the safety of the Oyster Creek facility ”the oldest nuclear power plant in the country”he soon found himself off the nuclear beat.

ZANNONI: One day, January 30, 2007, I was removed without reason from my position as chief nuclear engineer and pretty much put in a broom closet in the department. And it’s been like that for two years. [link]

DEP retaliated against chemical engineer Zoe Kelman for writing and publicly releasing a dissenting report on the health risks of toxic chromium in Jersey City. 

A comprehensive PEER survey of over 3,500 DEP employees found (read survey & responses here):

*More than half agree that “scientific evaluations are influenced by political considerations at DEP.”

*One quarter of employees reported that they have received direct orders “to ignore an environmental rule or regulation” during the past three years.

*Sixty percent of employees fear “job-related retaliation for disclosing improper activity within DEP.”

5. Secrecy and lack of Transparency

The conduct of science requires openess and tranparency. Yet DEP prohibits public release of scientific data and communications within the Department.

DEP  claims that these data and communications are “deliberative” and exempt from public  records laws.

DEP also meets with industry scientists in secret, and allows those industry scientists  and lawyers and DEP political appointees to impact their scientific work  and to eliminate findings and recommendations opposed by industry.

There is a wealth of documented abuse and manipulation of science. Yet, none of it has been reported by the anemic NJ press corps. The public – the victim of this fraud and abuse – is left in the dark by NJ media.

6. Scientific Fraud

Let me close by noting it has gotten so bad that even the  Wall Street Journal – in  December 23, 2005 page one story “Study Tied Pollutant to Cancer; Then Consultants Got Hold of It” – quoted a polluters’ consultant (you know, the guys that  DEP takes “”at their word“) bragging that his scientific fraud had saved polluters “hundreds of millions of dollars” in NJ on reduced cleanup costs.

The fraudulent research was retracted by the journal that published it (but not the DEP regulatory standard that considered it). The people of NJ are paying for that fraud with our health and environmental integrity.

Read this letter to DEP Commissioner Jackson putting her on notice of this scientific fraud – Jackson ignored the science and this letter.

As my grandfather used to say – how about them apples?

Hey, maybe this is why Lisa Jackson eliminated the DEP Division of Science and Research and replaced it with a private external Science Advisory Board. More to follow on that soon.

Senator Sweeney (center) consults with Senate President Codey (right) on Senate floor

First I will lay out the general contours of the issue, and then I will provide the explosive goods. The goods will perfectly illustrate the problem. So bear with me.

It is no secret that Senator Stephen Sweeney (D-Gloucester), Senate Democratic Majority Leader, is a powerful force in South Jersey politics, the Legislature, and the democratic party. Sweeney knows how to wield that power.

It also no secret that Brad Campbell, former DEP Commissioner and one of the brightest environmental lawyers around, is no stranger to how the DEP makes decisions. Campbell has access to and knows how to influence DEP.

Former DEP Commissioner Bradley Campbell

What is a secret (to the public) and known among only a handful of insiders, is that Sweeney and Campbell have teamed up to pressure DEP to reverse a recent major pro-environmental decision (this link is only a teaser, read on).

Typically, when pro-environment DEP decisions have a major economic impact on a politically powerful interest, those interests work behind the scenes to pressure DEP managers to reverse the decision.  All too often, the DEP Commissioner caves in to the pressure and directly reverses the staff level decision. In other cases, the deal is not so obvious because the data, science and/or regulatory interpretations that formed the basis of the original decision are revised in a way to undermine the original decision (without leaving fingerprints of political intervention). These changes then force DEP to abandon the original decision and the result is that the the corporate interest prevails (some call this “Agency capture”).

Corporate interests and political DEP managers are enabled to do this under cover of secrecy. Deals are made behind closed doors. The public, the press, and environmental groups don’t even know good decisions were made by staff, never mind that they were reversed by high level managers due to political intervention. There is no transparency and accountability in the system. (Even without special political influence, DEP data show that over 95% of permits are approved by DEP. See latest DEP permit Report here.

The lobbyists, DEP managers and political appointees, and political dealmakers like things just fine this way.

Anti-environmental economic interests also benefit from a DEP staff that is intimidated and reluctant to blow the whistle, because DEP staff know that DEP managers retaliate and that whistleblower laws are weak. Few are willing to risk destroying their career and livelihood.

That’s why transparency at DEP is so important – and why we are working to enhance transparency at DEP.

That’s why whistleblower protections are so important – and why we are working to strengthen them.

That’s why ethical restrictions to limit political abuses are so important – and why we file ethics complaints and seek to strengthen ethics laws and their enforcement.

This is why we are fighting to stop the revolving door and influence peddling at DEP.

That’s why independent public science and scientific integrity are so important – and why we fight to defend them.

Well, every once in a while, this dynamic is reversed and the bright lights of media and public scrutiny make it very difficult if not impossible for the DEP Commissioner to cave in to political pressure.

I have a perfect example of how this all works:

In an August 20, 2009 letter to former DEP Commissioner Brad Campbell, DEP Assistant Commissioner Scott Brubaker made a scientific finding and determined that:

“[the Delaware Bay] is not appropriate for a large-scale wind turbine project due to “impacts to migratory and other bird populations.” and

“the Department has determined that we have, over many years of study and evaluation, developed sufficient information regarding the diversity, scope, and importance of avian resources in and around the Delaware Bay.  Based on these data, we conclude that, at this time, this area is not appropriate for a large-scale wind turbine project.” 

This is a fabulous decision. The Atlantic Flyway Council also opposed the project (see 7/28/09 letter) and the State of Delaware raised significant concerns (see letter)

Brad Campbell represents Delsea Energy, who are seeking DEP approval to put more than 100 wind turbines to produce more than 380 megawatts in the state waters of Delaware Bay.

The DEP rejection letter had been preceded by a closed door June 11, 2009 meeting with Senator Sweeney and DEP Commissioner Mauriello. Clearly, Campbell thought he had DEP support, in the wake of the June 11, 2009 meeting with Senator Sweeney and DEP Commisisoner Mauriello. After that meeting, Mauriello and Campbell had a private conversation that led Campbell to believe that he had DEP support for the project, or that DEP objections were minor or technical in nature.

DEP Commissioner Mark Mauriello

Instead, the DEP August 20 rejection letter clearly took Campbell by surprise because in an August 25, 2009 personal email to DEP Commissioner Mark Mauriello, Campbell complained:

“When you and I spoke, you said to expect a letter from land use suggesting a meeting to review technical concerns about the Delsea monitoring application”.Did I misunderstand, or has the Department’s position changed from what you described?…Is it really the Department’s view that private parties will not have the opportunity to collect data that might modify, rebut, or qualify F&W’s broad conclusions about the entire Bay?  I don’t want to protract a debate or impose unduly on your time, but the [August 20] letter is quite different from what I expected based on our conversation.”

So, there it is: a powerful Senator calls DEP on the carpet at his State House office in a private off the record meeting with the DEP Commissioner, the former DEP Commissioner and Delsea Energy.

But DEP scientists are not a party to the deal and object.

Campbell then objects to the DEP decision off the record in an email to the Commissioner.

Typically,  with this high powered political pressure brought to bear, such a decision would be reversed.

But now that folks are watching, let’s see what happens!

Oh, BTW – no way DEP Commissioner Mauriello would meet with Sweeney without the knowledge and approval of the front office – so Governor Corzine’s position on this project needs to be established. Will he back DEP scientists?

DEP Headquarters – Trenton, NJ

Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) broke the story that a recent EPA audit of NJ DEP environmental programs ripped DEP’s continuing poor performance and lack of effective oversight of polluters. We thank our friends in DEP for outing this bad news, that both EPA and DEP would have swept under the rug – you never  see this stuff in the avalanche of EPA and DEP press releases.

Perhaps the most shockingly unacceptable finding is that DEP takes polluters “at their word“, without conducting field inspections, sampling, or audits to verify their work:

Finding 8: None of the Site Remediation Program’s bureaus interviewed do any project assessment and/or process improvement beyond data validation, (i.e. no field audits, no split samples, no internal assessments, etc). The EPA assessment team was told that Responsible Party contractors and/or NJDEP contractors are “certified professionals and taken at their word.” (link to report here)

Here’s some of the press coverage:

EPA scolds N.J.’s DEP  – (click for complete article)

Friday, August 28, 2009

By MICHAEL SYMONS
Gannett State Bureau

An audit by the federal Environmental Protection Agency found the state Department of Environmental Protection still hasn’t made fixes promised since 2006 and detailed extensive shortfalls in New Jersey’s toxic-site cleanup [Note: and wetlands and other] program.

In a sense, the report means the EPA — headed by former DEP Commissioner Lisa Jackson — is criticizing the management of the DEP during the years Jackson was in charge. …

Bill Wolfe, a former DEP analyst who is now director of the New Jersey chapter of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, said the DEP is failing to meet minimum federal quality and performance standards.

“This audit is an indictment of DEP management for failing fundamental tests of competence,” Wolfe said. “Without basic procedures for assuring the accuracy and quality of performance data a public agency cannot even be sure that its shoes are tied.”

EPA Criticizes NJ’s Monitoring of Contaminated Sites (listen to mp3 here)

NEW YORK, NY August 28, 2009 – The US Environmental Protection Agency is citing problems with how New Jersey’s Department of Environmental Protection monitors thousands of contaminated sites. WNYC’s Bob Hennelly has more.

REPORTER: The EPA Region two audit of New Jersey’s DEP says the state lacks basic quality controls to ensure the accuracy of its testing and monitoring. As a result the EPA found “potentially significant vulnerabilities in how the DEP collected data to back up its own decision making“. Bill Wolfe, is a former career DEP analyst, with the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility.

WOLFE: The point of the audit is that the state has no basis to tell the public that they have the confidence that the decisions that they are making are really sound scientifically and actually protect the public health.

REPORTER: A DEP spokesperson says the agency is still reviewing the EPA findings. The federal review covers the time that current EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson was in charge of the New Jersey’s DEP. Her office had no comment. For WNYC I’m Bob Hennelly.

Report: ‘Significant shortcomings’ in state environmental agency

Thursday, August 27, 2009

BY JAMES M. O’NEILL

The Record

STAFF WRITER

A federal audit of New Jersey’s Department of Environmental Protection identified what it called “significant shortcomings” in how the DEP operates, especially in the division that handles contaminated site cleanups.

The DEP’s site remediation program doesn’t provide proper oversight of contaminated site cleanups because program officers don’t follow up with field audits or internal assessments, according to the federal Environmental Protection Agency report, released Thursday.

The EPA faulted the DEP officials for failing to verify what the private contractors of polluters told them about site cleanups. The DEP officials even told the EPA during interviews that the contractors were “certified professionals and taken at their word”, the report said. (link) 

NJ DEP Commissioner Mark Mauriello – on the hot seat

 

This latest EPA audit follows a scathing 2008 EPA Inspector General’s Report that prompted EPA to take over a number of toxics site cleanups due to years of failure by DEP – see EPA IG Report here.

Will DEP Commissioner Mauriello announce reforms? Will EPA have the balls to strictly oversee DEP and enforce federal laws? Will the Governor or the legislature conduct oversight? Will Chris Daggett, that alleged champion of reform and former DEP Commissioner, speak out? Will the press do additional followup stories to inform the public about the impacts of this failed oversight on public health and the environrment? Will NJ environmental community engage?

More shoes to drop in this story – we will keep you posted.