WolfeNotes.com

Looks at Mines in Hopewell, Lambertville, Pennington, Kingston

Hopewell – If folks ever think about mining, I bet you probably think of West Virginia coal mines or strip mines out west in Wyoming. But NJ has many mines – although they are generally kept fairly well out of sight – that have devastating impacts on the landscape and water resources. The pictures below really can’t convey the huge scale of the destruction occurring right here in our own back yards (central Jersey) – Warning: don’t try this at home. The photographer makes no representations regarding trespassing – which is strictly prohibited: READ THE SIGNS – And THINK SAFETY!!

Lambertville – A couple of miles north on Route 29, you come to the Trap Rock Lambertville mine. The lagoon visible from the road was a bright green – the DEP NJPDES permit for water pollution discharge is posted on the fence – perhaps some intrepid reporter or environmental activist can file an OPRA records request with DEP and research whether the permit protects water quality and the mine is in compliance with all terms of the permit.

Kingston – By this time, the coffee was kicking in and I had a jones for Trap Rock. So I headed northeast up Route 518, across Rt. 206 over to Kingston to check out that Trap Rock pit. Company has been in business since 1860 – says so right on the sign. Kingston folks win the prize for the coolest sign – really. But they also win the creepiest award – reminded me of Deliverance. Walking to the rim of the mine took me along an old state road (Rt. 603, still posted) that must have been purchased by Traprock, as it was surrounded and ended at the rim of the mine. How was Traprock able to purchase a state road? Anyone know that story?

Pennington! Imagine that – quaint Pennington Borough has a mine! I bet the folks in Pennington didn’t even know that. This site was the most fun – it was a good hike in. Saw several red tail hawks up top. Got harassed by turkey vultures. Access is via Trap Rock ball field just off Route 31 across from the gas station. Head under the fence and up the hill – fast! – but DO NOT TRESPASS.

The Assembly Environment Committee today was scheduled to hear two bills related to the controversial issue of children’s exposure to toxic chemicals while in school. Wisely avoiding opening a huge can of worms, the Committee took no testimony and decided to table the bills for further consideration by the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). See:”The Chemical Schools Cleanout Pilot Program
(A1313(McKeon/Stender)http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2008/Bills/A1500/1319_I1.HTM – a bill to establish a “school chemical management program” (A 1769 (WatsonColeman/Scalera)http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2008/Bills/A2000/1769_I1.HTM
As demonstrated by a series of fiasco’s across the state, NJ has major problems with potential exposure of children to toxic chemicals while at school. Had these bills been heard, they would have been panned as avoiding the real problems (See:A Tale of Two Toxic Schools – What are we telling our kids when we put them in these environments? http://blog.nj.com/njv_bill_wolfe/2008/02/a_tale_of_two_toxic_schools_ho.html
The problems stem from NJ’s flawed DEP toxic site cleanup program. Under the “urban brownfields” logic, laws that previously sought to cleanup sites to protect human health now are focused almost exclusively on promoting economic redevelopment. Lax DEP oversight provides Incentives to cut corners – often at the cost of proper cleanup. Due to a large number of toxic sites (over 16,000) and a scarcity of develop-able clean land, reckless urban brownfields redevelopment laws are now impacting school sites and children as well. For an absolutely mind numbing expose’ of the problem, see: New Jersey Program Bought Polluted Lands for Low-income Schools –

“In what critics consider one of the more blatant examples of environmental racism, a fund supposedly intended to give a leg up to impoverished pupils of color was used to put them at risk while favoring private developers” http://newstandardnews.net/content/index.cfm/items/3800
Here are illustrations of the just some of the problems yet to be addressed by state officials:

1. No Parental Notification Parents are typically the last to know if there are toxic problems at school. In Paramus – an upscale Bergen County community – the discovery of a small pile of pesticide contaminated soil caused a huge furor, and forced the resignation of the Superintendent, who had failed to disclose and then covered up the problem. A bill has been introduced to mandate parental notification of toxic problems at schools S480(Gordon – D/Bergen)http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2008/Bills/S0500/480_I1.HTM
Yet, at a controversial school site in Allentown, contrary to the community’s demands, DEP approved of capping and “blending” highly contaminated pesticide soils at the school site. There are scores of schools with far greater risks than Paramus where information intentionally has been withheld from parents -including the fact that schools are located on or nearby partially cleaned up toxic sites. Parents in nearby Garfield didn’t know their kids were going to a school where a cleanup was not yet complete, or that the school foundation itself served as a “cap” in the DEP approved cleanup plan (imagine that: sending your child to a building that technically and legally was part of a toxic site cleanup.)
2. Lax oversight/shoddy school construction.

NJ State Inspector General Cooper issued a scathing report to former Governor Codey regarding mismanagement of the Schools Construction Corporation(SCC).http://www.state.nj.us/oig/pdf/njscc_preliminary_report.pdf
Among the mismanagement, IG Cooper found that over $330 million had been spent on purchase of sites “patently unsuitable” for schools – this does not include millions in resulting toxic cleanup costs for contaminated sites that never should have been bought.See:RADIOACTIVE SCHOOL SITE IS TIP OF NEW JERSEY TOXIC ICEBERG — Over 100 School Site approvals expedited under Secret Deal http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=679
The SCC has reckless judgment as well as deep pockets, while DEP looks the other way and refuses to tighten cleanup standards at school sites. DEP even signed off on an SCC plan to build a school at a contaminated former Manhattan Project site in Union City. In blowing the whistle on that site, NJ PEER disclosed a secret Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the SCC and the DEP. http://www.peer.org/docs/nj/06_24_4_dep_moa.pdf
To implement the State’s effort to expedite school construction, the MOA explicitly relaxed safeguards and expedited DEP environmental review of toxic school sites (see: NEW JERSEY SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION REFORM GETS FAILING MARKS — No Environmental Reviews Prior to Building More Schools on Toxic Sites http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=899
As a result of this disclosure and the Union City fiasco, the MOA was revoked. Since then, the Legislature has abolished the SCC and replaced it with the Schools Development Authority (SDA). But many underlying problems remain. See: TOXIC SCHOOL SCANDAL SPOTLIGHTS WEAK NEW JERSEY LAW — Parents Get No Notice of Child’s Exposure in Deregulated State Clean-Up Program http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=864
3. Poor School Siting, reckless land acquisition, lax environmental oversight

4. Toxic chemical vapors seeping into schools
There are several examples of where schools have been impacted by toxic vapors seeping into the school – a Franklin (Warren Co.) school was impacted by solvents from a federal Superfund site. Parents and children in schools and day care facilities in Gloucester, Middlesex and Ocean Counties have been affected as well. Thousands of homes are at unknown risks.

5. Partial cleanup, caps & engineering controls

6. Environmental Injustice

Scores of schools built on toxic waste sites are in poor, black, and disadvantaged “Abbott District” communities. For example, th Early Childhood Development Center (ECDC) in Camden is located on a former dump. Toxic chemicals in soils and groundwater exceed DEP toxic cleanup standards and DEP is not taking enforcement action against the original polluters. I was told by workers at the site that construction had unearthed old garbage, debris, tires and contaminated soils. This is a racist policy that puts children at risk and diverts scarce educational dollars..

7. Pollution sources nearby poisoning kids
The health risks of toxic exposure to kids are not limited to urban areas or toxic waste sites. Air pollution sources nearby schools – such as chemical facilities or truck stops – poison kids too:

8. Real estate deals and developers rule – Flawed Brownfields Policy
State toxic site cleanup laws promote redevelopment at the expense of public health.The DEP needs to regain control of the construction industry and the movement of toxic contaminated soils, Under current law, DEP has very little oversight – an industrial construction site is treated no differently than a school yard. This is crazy.

What are we telling our kids when we put them in these environments?

Take a look

*** Apologies – NJ.Com took down the photos, which were originally published on my “NJ Voices” column at NJ.Com. I was able to save the text, but not the photos. What assholes.

 

The issue of children’s exposure to toxic chemicals while at schools and day care centers has exploded as a political issue in New Jersey, as a result of several high profile cases reported by media. A series of tragedies across the state have exposed major flaws and breakdowns in DEP’s toxic site cleanup program (see:–

TOXIC SCHOOL SCANDAL SPOTLIGHTS WEAK NEW JERSEY LAW — Parents Get No Notice of Child’s Exposure in Deregulated State Clean-Up Program

In the most recent reaction – which again dodges the underlying toxic site cleanup issues – the Senate Environment Committee will hear a bill today (S 480) sponsored by Senator Robert Gordon (D/Bergen) http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2008/Bills/S0500/480_I1.HTM

The bill is in response to last year’s extraordinary fiasco in Paramus’ West Brook Middle School. In a case that received national attention, in late May of 2007, the Bergen Record broke a story in which Paramus Public School officials knowingly failed to report the presence of the banned pesticides aldrin, dieldrin, and chlordane on the campus of Westbrook.

In response to outraged parents, the Mayor ordered the school closed, the Superintendent was fired for failing to notify parents and covering up the problem, and a Bergen Record reporter was arrested for taking soil samples at the site. http://centerforinvestigativereporting.org/blogs&start=120

Parents and day care operators are still reeling since the August 2006 “Kiddie Kollege” episode where 60 toddlers were exposed to poisonous toxic mercury vapors in a day care center located in a converted former mercury thermometer factory. The factory had failed to comply with a DEP cleanup order for over 12 years (see:

MERCURY-LADEN DAY-CARE CENTER IN NEW JERSEY IS NO ANOMALY — Lax State Brownfield Laws Make Tragedy an “Accident Waiting to Happen”

The Legislature and Governor were forced to respond – last January, Corzine signed a law, and issued a press release touting his reforms. See : Jan-11-07 Governor Corzine Signs Legislation to Improve Environmental Safety at Schools and Child Care Centers http://www.nj.gov/governor/news/news/approved/20070111.html

The Corzine law was a band aid on a gaping wound and failed to resolve the underlying flawed DEP toxic cleanup program – see:

CORZINE URGED TO CLOSE LOOPHOLES IN TOXIC School & DAY-CARE BILL — Conditional Veto CouldStrike Out Exemptions and Strengthen Safeguards

Soon thereafter, dozens of schools and more that 400 day care centers located on toxic sites – even Superfund sites – were disclosed in Paramus, Garfield, Union City, Trenton, Gloucester City, Allentown, Clifton, Camden, and scores of towns as a result a of major flaws in DEP toxic site remediation and NJ Schools Construction Corporation programs (See:

RADIOACTIVE SCHOOL SITE IS TIP OF NEW JERSEY TOXIC ICEBERG — Over 100 School Site approvals expedited under Secret Deal

The Garfield school was built on a toxic waste site and was undergoing active remediation of toxic chemicals in soils and groundwater when the school open last year. Vapor intrusion sampling had not been conducted – all without the knowledge of working class parents.

To prepare for the hearing, I thought I’d take a ride up to Bergen County and check out the West Brook Middle School, as well as another far more toxic contaminated school site in nearby Garfield.

The Garfield case was far worse than Paramus. Garfield, a disadvantaged “Abbott” district, had a middle school built on a toxic waste site. Amazingly, chemical vapors were still being extracted from soils when the school was opened last year – all without the knowledge of working class parents (See:

New Jersey Lacks Policy to Protect Public From Chemical Intrusion (Herald News) http://www.childproofing.org/news/archives/2007/09/september_24_-.htm

The Paramus and Garfield cases provide a strong contrast in toxic health risks to children in a wealthy suburban (Paramus) versus a working class disadvantaged community .

Take a look at the photo’s and compare the two schools, with respect to several attributes: including the surrounding neighborhood, the school facilities, the natural features, the overall ambiance.

Think about what the kids see and experience at these two school settings: What do the kids see? What are we telling them?

Toxic chemical vapors are being vacuumed out of soil to avoid migration directly into school building.

 

Compare what the Garfield kids experience to what the Paramus kids enjoy – I won’t even comment – let the pictures tell the story:

   Abundant nature to enjoy and explore at the schoolyard – not toxic industrial sites and polluted streams.

As Lincoln said:

“A house divided against itself can not stand”

Why can’t similar resources be found to monitor massive demolition and toxic site cleanup next to Garfield Middle School?

   Kids can enjoy a place for quite contemplation or moments of young love – but where does one find solace and privacy amidst the pavement of Garfield??

If you’ve gotten this far and are not ashamed, you’re not alive.

*** Apologies – NJ.Com took down the photos, which were originally published on my “NJ Voices” column at NJ.Com. I was able to save the text, but not the photos. What assholes.

Tomorrow (Monday, January 28, 2008) Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) Commissioner Lisa P. Jackson will present her priorities for 2008 to the Senate Environment Committee.

In an ideal world, that presentation would have been preceded by a statewide series of public hearings – along the lines of the Governor’s toll plan – to solicit the public’s preferences regarding clean air, clean water, global warming, toxic site cleanup, stopping the loss of forests and farms, reversing declines in ocean health, and a host of serious challenges DEP faces in protecting public health and the environment.

The opportunity for public input exists.

The new Senate Environment Committee will meet at 10:00 am in Committee Room 10, Third Floor, State House Annex, Trenton. The Committee invited the public and theCommissioner to discuss environmental issues for 2008. http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/BillsForAgendaView.asp

The Committee has new membership and a new Vice-Chair, Jeff VanDrew (D/Cape May) http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/committees/senate.asp

It will be interesting to see if this hearing is covered by the press and if so what they choose to emphasize and write about. It will also be interesting to see how Jackson puts her cards on the table – will she duck and do the typical dog and pony show; or will she engage substantive issues and generate some controversy at a time when the Governor is struggling to defend his toll refinance plan? How will the new Committee choose to conduct oversight?

What will be the priorities of the new members and new Vice Chair?

So, with that in mind, here’s my list and challenge to Commissioner Jackson – what’s yours?

I will report Jackson’s testimony tomorrow.

1. Implement the Global Warming Response Act

The legislature directed DEP to submit a Plan – by June 2008 – for meeting Governor Corzine’s much touted aggressive green house gas emissions reduction goals. A package of new laws, regulations, investment, incentives, and programs will be required. The Commissioner should lay out a detailed programmatic vision, which includes a binding commitment to re-negotiate the goals of the RGGI bill just enacted; to provide a deadline for the new Energy Master Plan being developed by BPU; and to present policies towards decisions on various controversial major energy projects, such as Oyster Creek nuclear plant cooling towers, Exxon ocean LNG, and off shore wind.

I would hope that some inquiring Senator would conduct oversight and ask questions about how the Governor’s toll plan will comply with federal Clean Air Act ground level ozone standards and achieve the emission reduction goals just adopted in the GWRA.

2. Adopt and fund a long over due Water Supply Management Plan

Water supply deficits currently exist and more are projected in light of expected growth.

Global warming will impact rainfall, with more severe and prolonged droughts likely. Existing infrastructure is very old, often in need of billions of dollars of investments in repair or upgrade to meet ever tightening health standards, as needed to respond to NJ’s toxic legacy. DEP is years behind in revising the current plan which is over a decade old and out of date in light of new science. DEP must commit to a plan that assures a sustainable and healthy water supply, with strict limits on new development and mandatory water conservation for all users.

3. Strengthen the Highlands Regional Master Plan

The current plan about to be adopted would allow far too much development in the region, which is why many environmental groups oppose it and why three Highlands Council members voted against their own plan. Governor Corzine has final say on all actions of the Council – so the buck stops with the Governor. Jackson needs to weigh in with Corzine to counter pro-growth and parochial local interests on the Council to protect the water supply for half the state..

4. Adopt mandatory chemical plant safety measures

Corzine – as US Senator and Gubernatorial candidate – pledged to enact mandatory chemical
plant safety laws. He has failed to do so. Current regulations are voluntary and allow the chemical industry to control decisions to adopt critical public safety protections. The Legislature needs to mandate current voluntary guidelines, especially requirements to adopt technologically feasible “inherently safer technologies”. Current rules allow the chemical industry to reject them based on cost, which puts communities needlessly at risk.

5. Protect urban communities from air toxics

The entire state of NJ fails EPA cancer risk health benchmarks for air toxics. Urban and disadvantaged communities are disproportionately impacted due to concentrated nearby polluting industries and loads of trucks and car emissions. Newark kids have the highest asthma rates in the world. Admissions at urban hospital emergency rooms soar on bad air days, leading to premature death and disease. This is a compelling moral and environmental justice issue. Jackson must speak out.

6. Repair broken toxic site cleanup program

NJ’s toxic cleanup program is broken. Polluters have been allowed to walk away and leave toxic pollution behind under “caps” – again mostly in urban, poor or black communities. The laws were weakened to cut costs and stimulate development. That approach has failed. Its now time to restore prior protections and reorient the program back toward protecting communities, not developers. –

7. Adopt standards for schools and daycare standards to protect children

The legislature mandated that DEP approve the cleanup plans for sites where schools and daycares are built. Will DEP mandate complete cleanup??The law also mandated the new rules be proposed by January 2008 to set safe indoor standards at schools and daycare centers – at low levels that will protect children. This law was enacted in response to the “Kiddie Kollege” fiasco – where 60 children were poisoned by mercury vapors in a daycare center. The daycare was located in a converted industrial thermometer manufacturing facility that ignored a 12 year old unenforced DEP cleanup order. Jackson should brief the committee on this children’s health program for schools and day cares.

8. Show me the money – Restore DEP Budget and invest in critical green infrastructure –

Governor Corzine has spoken a lot lately on the need to invest billions in roads. But DEP still has not recovered from the Whitman Administration’s staff and budget cuts. The Corzine budget cuts and hiring freeze have made historical resource problems worse. They have led to attrition and vacancies in key staff positions. DEP receives the large majority of its budget from polluters fees and federal grants, only a very small percentage is the burden of NJ taxpayers – less than 1/2 o 1% of the $34 billion total state budget. Any further cuts at DEP help polluters and developers, not taxpayers. Jackson must draw the line on budget and investment issues..

9. Transparency, open government, and ethics reforms

DEP must disclose publicly – on their website – all meetings with industry lobbyists and all pre-application permit meetings. The public right to know is paramount and DEP must operate as an open public agency, and not a consulting firm for the polluters and developers. DEP must not hire private contractors that have conflicts of interests. The public confidence and trust is jeopardized by current practices.

10. Fix & adopt proposals in the pipeline – honor prior commitments

DEP has several important regulatory proposals in the hopper that have yet to be adopted, including the “water quality management planning rules (sewer rules) and the stream encroachment rules (flood prevention) [*correction: SE rules were adopted by DEP in November 2007 – I meant to refer to proposed rules to upgrade 910 miles of streams to “Category One”]. DEP recently has begun to solicit input on how to strengthen current coastal management and storm water rules. DEP has long promised to enact rules to protect the disappearing habitat of threaten and endangered species, and criteria to protect wildlife from bio-accumulative toxic water pollutants, like mercury, PCBs, and pesticides. DEP has proposed a controversial cleanup plan on the Passaic River (TMDL) and needs to develop one for Barnegat Bay and hundreds of other polluted waters that fail Clean Water Act standards. Jackson needs to speak clearly and fight for the resources and political support to make these long overdue stronger protections happen.

Would you send your child to this school?

*** Apologies – NJ.Com took down the photos, which were originally published on my “NJ Voices” column at NJ.Com. I was able to save the text, but not the photos. What assholes.

(Paulsboro High School in the shadow of the Valero refinery. The plant emits tons of toxic air pollutants and has a record of upsets that have coated the community in oily residues.)

[Update: 11/30/12:   Toxic Chemicals Released In South Jersey Train Accident Force Evacuation – end update]

I stole my headline from the Houston Chronicle’s award winning investigative series “In Harm’s Way” – here’s a taste of what that was all about:

“The results of the Chronicle’s investigation show that the region’s refining and petrochemical industries are in some places contributing to what leading experts on toxic air pollution would consider a risky load of “air toxics,” substances that can cause cancer, kidney and liver damage, or other serious health effects in places where people live and work, and where children play.”.

The NJ DEP does not require chemical plants that emit tons of cancer causing hazardous air pollutants to monitor actual ambient concentrations at the fence line of the plant.

This data is required to understand the health impacts of those emissions on surrounding homes, schools and people. DEP does not require health risk assessment before granting air pollution permits that allow industries to release these toxic chemicals to our air.

Current DEP air permit rules make risk assessment and air modeling voluntary – of course no chemical company has volunteered to study the health impacts of its pollution on the surrounding neighborhood kids. Impacted communities are kept in the dark and DEP is flying blind – no data, no health effects monitoring, and no science.

THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS- where is NJ’s Houston Chronicle?

We sure have Texas sized pollution problems here. NJ is the most densely populated place on earth where schools and residential neighborhoods are virtually right on top of chemical plants and refineries.

Would you want your kids to play hockey right next to chemical plants?

(Youth hockey rink directly adjacent and downwind of chemical plant. Kids literally were hyper-ventilating and inhaling hydrocarbons at unknown exposure and safety levels.)

(Athletic fields and a school are adjacent to and directly downwind of chemical plant. DEP regulations do not set ambient health standards or require that the plant monitor “fence-line” emissions impacts.)

How would you like to live here? Would you sleep at night?

(House and residential neighborhood within feet of chlorine rail tanker cars. Tanker cars were easily accessible and unprotected. Chlorine gas release would be deadly.)

Would you like to drop off your child at this day care center in the morning?

This location injects new meaning to parental fear of their children’s “exposure (my kids went to day care and this risk sure transcends pink eye, strep throat, and flu I worried about as a parent).

(Day care center shoe horned within feet of deadly chlorine rail tanker cars (pictured above) and chemical facility (below)

(Entrance gates to Dupont chemical plant. Photo shot from in front of day care center (left) and approximately 300 feet from homes and chlorine tanker cars (above))

Most homes near chemical plants are occupied by poor, black, or working class residents. Would you like a plant in your neighborhood? Shouldn’t the plants do more to eliminate or reduce toxic chemical emissions and monitor to assure protection of health and the environment?

(Homes across the street from the Dupont Chambers Works chemical plant (below), one of the largest in the world. The plant emits tons of chemicals to air and water that have unknown human health and environmental impacts.)

(Entrance to the Dupont Chambers Works plant – note house in background. Dupont discharges tons of toxic pollutants is not required to monitor ambient conditions in adjacent residential neighborhoods or track community health.)