WolfeNotes.com

Officials in two towns closed parks after dead geese tested positive

(caption: Black Death – Bosch (1450 – 1516)

[Update: 3/6/25 – At the close of this post, we warned:

And no one is talking about risks from pets, backyard bird feeders and other human – wildlife interactions that could spread the virus.

A week later, today NJ Spotlight confirms our concerns:

• Cats at high risk as bird flu cases rise

Is that egg I see on Larry Niles’ face? ~~~ end update]

[Update: 3/5/25 – This NY Times piece gets it right (and validates our criticism):

The goal should be to develop response plans that can be modified for a range of pathogens, rather than responding to one disease in one species at a time. This means building better surveillance programs for emerging diseases, making big investments in rapid diagnostics and funding the research that could forecast where disease threats might surface next. ~~~ We’re Running Out Of Chances To Stop Bird Flu

The above headline is from a NJ Spotlight story today.

Gee, now where did I hear THAT headline before?

How about last July 1, 2024, right here, see:

In Light Of Growing Concern With Spread of Bird Flu, Murphy DEP And Department Of Agriculture Must Act

• Farmers Not Participating In Voluntarily Sampling Program
• Extent Of Spread Of Virus To NJ Farms, Wildlife And People Unknown

I suspect that the Murphy Administration is replicating the federal government’s failed reliance on voluntary participation by NJ farmers.

I suspect that the NJ Department of Agriculture lacks reliable and adequate data on NJ farms.

I suspect that the Murphy Department of Environmental Protection has similarly stuck its head in the sand and has not developed a credible sampling program to determine the extent of the spread of the virus to wildlife.

And, although I did not file an OPRA for this data, I suspect that the Murphy Department of Health has even less data than the federal CDC and has no human sampling program in place.

Contrary to their recent press releases, the State DEP and Department of Agriculture knew of the presence of bird flu in NJ wildlife and chicken and dairy farms and markets long before they publicly disclosed that data. The State is downplaying risks. The State is not being open and transparent with the data, see:

• Murphy Department of Agriculture Denies Public Record Request For Data On Extent Of Bird Flu Virus At NJ Farms

A recent National Institute of Health (NIH) research study shows the risks of pandemic:

• Single mutation in H5N1 influenza surface protein could enable easier human infection

And the NJ problems go back long before then – in August 2022 we blasted the DEP’s mismanagement of dead vultures.

We blasted DEP for allowing dead vultures to rot in the woods along a portion of the Sussex Branch Trail in Lafayette, NJ, warning that such practices could lead to an epidemic of bird flu., see:

• Dead Vultures Coming Home To Roost – DEP Spun The Science, Downplayed Risks, And Misled The Public

• Dead Vultures In The Woods Of Jersey Reveal Dark Secrets – The Letter Z Is For Zoonotic

I tried several times to get NJ officials and media engaged, but failed. I sent them DEP and Dept. of Ag data. Still nothing.

And here we are.

I exposed very similar mismanagement at the outset of COVID pandemic, in March of 2020:

NJ State Officials Knew For Years That A Pandemic Could Cause Healthcare System To Collapse And 50,000 Residents Could Die

• State Officials Were Ill-Prepared And Delayed Appropriate Response

• NJ Hazard Mitigation Plan And Pandemic Influenza Plan Largely Ignored

• Plan Calls Pandemic A “Looming Threat” & “Inevitable”, Yet Little Real Preparation

We saw the same fatal abdication in the response to Superstorm Sandy, which was exacerbated by Gov. Christie’s “unfunded mandates” “State Mandate/State Pay” policy under Executive Order #4. Gov. Murphy has not repealed Ex. Order #4 and has retained the same State abdication.

[read full post, which provides the receipts]

How can one retired old man run circles around professional media and government officials with thousands of paid staff?

End Note: Retired DEP wildlife biologist Larry Niles is quoted in NJ Spotlight’s story. He has zero expertise on virus’ or in pandemic epidemiology or public health. His quote about NJ’s surveillance system is highly misleading. And he makes it obvious why he and other State DEP wildlife officials are both downplaying the risks and not disclosing the data: they have a manipulative and patronizing attitude towards the public and fear that public reaction (fear) will harm their pet projects (no pun):

Many bird species migrate through New Jersey along the Atlantic Flyway. Migrating birds make rest stops at places like the Delaware Bay, where they can easily share all kinds of viruses, including avian flu which is spread by body fluids, said wildlife biologist Larry Niles.

“I don’t want everybody to get all scared and then start taking it out on wildlife, because there’s no need,” said Niles. “We have a good surveillance system, and I think … people in New Jersey will be among the first to know if there’s a serious problem.”

Hey Larry and NJ Spotlight – A Retired Department of Health senior manager wrote an Op-Ed in NJ Spotlight and urged the State to do more.

And no one is talking about risks from pets, backyard bird feeders and other human – wildlife interactions that could spread the virus.

Less Than A Slap On The Wrist And A Gross Insult To The Camden Community

DEP Must Revoke Permits, Pursue Criminal Enforcement, And Shut Down Scrap Metal Recycler For Repeat And Knowing Major Violations

“Woke” DEP Permit Promotes “Climate Resilience”, “Environmental Justice”, And “Renewable Energy” Mandates

As Trump Seeks To Claw Back $20 Billion In Clean Energy Funds, Millions Of Federal Dollars Are Allocated To Build A Power Plant That DEP Permit Prohibits From Operating

DEP Permit Conflicts With Multiple Trump Executive Orders, A Federal Court Decision, And Is Red Meat For The Trump Crowd

I can guarantee that if the Trump political people are made aware of the recent NJ DEP Clean Air Act Title V permit issued to the Passaic Valley Sewerage Commission (PVSC) to build a $200 million federally funded back up fossil power plant, that they will kill it.

DOA, for sure.

Let me explain.

I wrote about that permit two weeks ago, see:

• Murphy DEP Issues PVSC Air Permit For Major New Polluter In Newark

The DEP permit is issued under the federal Clean Air Act. Accordingly, the US EPA must review and approve it.

Trump’s EPA Region 2 Office is currently reviewing the DEP permit. That review is now underway under a 45 day clock.

EPA Region 2 approval of this permit would establish national precedents under the Clean Air Act for several highly controversial issues, all of which conflict with Trump Executive Orders.

These controversial national precedents include:

• State imposed requirements for an “environmental justice” impact review procedure and inclusion of permit conditions to mitigate EJ impacts;

• State imposed mandatory permit conditions that require installation of renewable energy technology (solar and battery storage) in a federal permit based upon State imposed environmental justice permit review procedures and permit conditions;

• State violations of due process requirements protected under federal and State Administrative Procedure Acts (i.e. State imposed regulatory mandates based upon a unilateral State agency Administrative Order by the DEP Commissioner, an Order issued AFTER permit submission and DEP determination of completeness).

The NJ DEP imposed the permit conditions based on an “Administrative Order” issued by the NJ DEP Commissioner. The State regulations do NOT authorize this environmental review or permit conditions. The AO was issued because the permit is exempt from the State environmental justice law and regulations because it was submitted prior to the effective date of the law and regulations.

1. Commissioner LaTourette issued an Administrative Order (AO) AFTER the permit application had been deemed complete.

2. The DEP then relied on the AO to mandate both additional procedural and substantive permit requirements, broader in scope and stringency than current federal EPA and State DEP permit regulations.

• State imposed permit conditions that severely limit the operating time of a $200 million federally funded power plant. The restrictions are so severe as to effectively preclude the plant from operating to produce power;

• Federal infrastructure funding of a State “climate resilience” project to provide back up power at a sewage treatment plant (this would include EPA sign off and approval of the State’s climate impact risk analysis).

EPA approval would provide an EPA imprimatur on this EPA delegated State Clean Air Act permit for all these issues.

The Trump EPA Region 2 review is constrained by Trump’s Executive Orders on energy policy, climate, DEI, and renewable energy.

The Trump EPA Region 2 review is also constrained by a federal District Court decision in Louisiana that found that Congress did not authorize EPA to implement an environmental justice program under the Clean Air Act, see: U.S. District Court Judge Cain, Judgment pursuant to the ruling in State of Louisiana v. EPA, No. 2:23-cv-00692, W.D. La. Jan. 23, 2024, Aug. 22, 2024.

So, given the multiple controversial and precedent setting legal, policy, financial and ideological issues involved in EPA Region 2 review and approval of this DEP permit, it is highly likely that EPA Region 2 will kill the permit outright or refer it to EPA Washington DC Headquarters for review (where it certainly will be killed).

The NJ climate and environmental justice organizations who strongly opposed this DEP permit are unable and unwilling to make these arguments to EPA. These arguments contradict their long held positions. Making these arguments would force them to admit that their highly touted environmental justice law and DEP regulations are based on magical thinking.

(and why aren’t EJ advocates making the case that the $200 million would be better used on energy efficiency insulating and electrification of thousands of Newark homes?)

They are more concerned with preserving their virtue and rhetoric, than actually winning (and the victory would not be pyrrhic because Trump EPA is already gone).

I am not so constrained.

So, now if the Internets would do their job and the MAGA’s get a hold of this …..

Murphy DEP Proposes To Deregulate Contaminated Soil And Allow Disposal Under Parking Lots And Roads

• “Pave And Wave” On Steroids
• “Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap”

It’s bad enough that it took the Murphy DEP over 5 years to propose new regulations to implement the “Dirty Dirt” law, passed back in 2019 (the DEP proposal is now open for public comment).

That 2019 Dirty Dirt law was enacted in response to a series of illegal dumping schemes of highly contaminated toxic soils, dubbed “dirty dirt” by my good friend and former colleague Jeff Tittel. Dirty Dirt is contaminated soil excavated from toxic waste sites, or soil that is blended with hazardous industrial wastes and fobbed off as clean fill to avoid high disposal costs.

In one of the most notorious cases, contaminated soil was used as “clean fill” during construction of the Martin Luther King, Jr. school in Trenton.

That fiasco forced demolition of the partially built school, millions of dollars in demolition and cleanup costs, and escalating construction costs:

Construction on the school was suspended in May 2005, after officials discovered that the contractor, Turner Construction, had used dirt contaminated petroleum products as fill under the school’s foundation. To date, state records show, more than $17 million has been spent on the project. (NJ.Com)

The situation got so bad that 10 years later, in 2017 the State Commission On Investigation (SCI) issued a scathing Report that documented lax DEP regulations, inadequate oversight, and little enforcement. The SCI Report exposed corruption and a broken DEP program, but demanded limited reforms:

• DIRTY DIRT – The Corrupt Recycling of ContaminatedSoil and Debris

So, after decades of illegal disposal of “dirty dirt” and poisoning of land and water across the State, the Legislature finally enacted limited reforms in 2019 to require registration and criminal background checks for companies that manage contaminated soils.

To give you a sense of what caused decades of delay in responding to a gross Statewide pattern of illegal dirty dirt disposal, check out recent comments by the NJ Senate President (which prompted this scathing Asbury Park Press editorial:”As the SCI scandal swirls, Scutari says NJ needs fewer watchdogs. Is he serious?”

“I think what we have is a lot of watchdogs, a lot of them. We have ELEC, SCI, we have comptroller, the Attorney General’s Office, we have county prosecutors,” he said. “One of these days we’re going to have to look at consolidation of those efforts.”

Really, Mr. Senate President?

So, that is the context and history. I’m reminded of the AC/DC song “Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap”.

In just now reading the DEP Dirty Dirt proposal, before I got to page 20, I was shocked to find that the Murphy DEP is actually proposing to deregulate dirty dirt and allow it to be disposed of under roads and parking lots as clean fill.

In what can only be described as an Orwellian rationale, the DEP proposed to deregulate dirty dirt in limited situations, assuming that a cap (parking lot or road) would protect the environment. DEP described the new rules as:

a new category of approval, for which no further approval or authorization is required

What kind of DEP “approval” requires “no further approval or authorization”? Pave and wave! One and done!

In doing this, DEP took a terrible policy from the toxic site cleanup program – “caps” or “engineering controls” that are better known as “Pave and Wave” – and used it to deregulate toxic dirty dirt. Here’s just one of hundreds of abuses of that (NJ Spotlight)

Critics claim the settlement lets Exxon “pave and wave” — basically cap the contamination and leave — instead of restoring the site back to life.

The DEP proposal on dirty dirt disposal under roads and parking lots invites abuse.

It is extremely short sided and bad public policy and has no basis in science.

Toxic chemicals under the cap will eventually migrate to nearby surface and/or ground water. That practice will lead to scores more contaminated sites and other abuses at some point in the future.

(and the public and DEP will never know about it, because once the toxic soil is buried under the “cap”, there is “no further approval or authorization” required, which include monitoring and inspections and reporting.)

I fired off this letter to the Senate Environment Committee demanding legislative oversight:

Dear Chairman Smith –

As you know, I’ve long been a critic of current NJ remedial laws and DEP regulations that allow “caps” over contaminated soils, as non-permanent remedies.

Similarly, I’ve long been involved in exposing lax DEP regulatory oversight of “Dirty Dirt” and advocating for stricter regulation.

Accordingly, I feel compelled to bring an important DEP regulatory proposal to your attention, as this proposal would effectively dramatically expand the number of “caps” and contaminated soil sites.

Over 5 years after passage of the law, the DEP proposed rules would implement the 2019 “Dirty Dirt” legislation, which was based on a 2017 Report by the State Commission On Investigation (SCI).

Incredibly, in that rule proposal the DEP has managed to combine features of current lax remedial cap regulations with new loopholes in “Dirty Dirt” regulations.

DEP describes this deregulatory move as a “new category of approval, for which no further approval or authorization is required.”

I call that deregulation.

Specifically, buried in the DEP’s “Dirty Dirt” rule proposal, which is currently open for public comment, the DEP proposed to deregulate the disposal of contaminated soil under “caps”: (Page 18 – 19):

https://dep.nj.gov/wp-content/uploads/rules/proposals/proposal-20250121a.pdf

“Proposed new N.J.A.C. 7:26-1.7(g)2vi is a new category of approval, for which no further approval or authorization is required. Falling within this new category is contaminated soil and/or fill material that is being used as a subbase for roadway construction or a parking lot if the contaminated soil and fill materials meet the criteria established in the proposed rule. The Department has determined that if contaminated soil and/or fill materials are used as provided in the proposed rule, they are, in effect, capped, and have little likelihood of harming public health, safety, or the environment.”

It is completely unacceptable to allow and deregulate the disposal of contaminated soils under caps in roadway construction and parking lots.

What was DEP thinking?

The SCI Report documented the need for STRICTER regulation of contaminated soils, not deregulation and disposal under parking lots and roads.

I urge you to contact DEP and oppose this irresponsible move.

Bill Wolfe

Weak Regulations – No Enforcement

Another Example Of Loopholes In NJ’s Environmental Justice Law

… the record reflects that much of the focus during legislative hearings in the spring of 1985 was on the need for various incentives, including tax breaks and regulatory relief, to encourage private investment in the diversion and recovery of recyclable materials from the conventional solid waste stream. (State Commission Of Investigation Report, (March, 2017, @ p. 5)

Despite the many Murphy DEP issued press releases touting their “commitment to environmental justice”, once again, a major incident reveals they are failing to strictly regulate and enforce NJ’s environmental laws, particularly in “environmental justice” communities.

Surprisingly, the headline writer at NJ Spotlight got the tone, risks, and the repeated abuse right, but the reporting fails to hold the Murphy DEP accountable, see:

• Massive fire at notorious Camden junkyard raises health concerns – Multiple fires have broken out at the waterfront site in recent years

The so called EMR “recycling” facility is regulated by DEP.

The toxic air pollution from the fire is regulated by DEP.

The fire and emergency response planning, community notification, and evacuation are regulated by the DEP.

The outrageous environmental justice risks and public health and environmental impacts are regulated by the DEP.

The DEP recycling center regulations are weak and largely defer to local government. Example with respect to fire:

i. Each owner or operator shall have a contingency plan for the facility. The contingency plan shall be designed to minimize hazards to human health or the environment from fires, explosions, or any unplanned sudden or non-sudden release of recyclable materials to air, soil, or surface water.

ii. The provisions of the plan shall be carried out immediately whenever there is a fire, explosion, or release of recyclable materials which could threaten human health or the environment;

So, where the hell is the Murphy DEP?

Why is no one holding DEP accountable for the massive regulatory failures exposed by repeated massive fires in Camden NJ, ground zero for environmental injustice.

NJ Spotlight reported on a major fire and community complaint to DEP filed back in August 2022:

Complaint filed with DEP over controversial Camden recycling center

What happened to the complaint? Why didn’t DEP prevent another major fire? Did DEP take enforcement action? Did the community EJ group file a lawsuit?

I found that Eastern Environmental Law clinic threatened to sue back in 2022, but once again, DEP ducked accountability, see:

• Recycling center burdened residents for years, needs stricter N.J. DEP oversight, non-profit says

Camden-based non-profit Center for Environmental Transformation says EMR should be more heavily-regulated and should be required to register with the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection as a “solid waste facility,” according to a notice of intent sent to EMR and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, which was obtained by NJ Advance Media on Tuesday.

A spokeswoman with the NJDEP said the agency “does not comment on matters of possible or pending litigation.”

“We received the notice letter on Friday, August 5, and will comment when we have completed investigating the allegations therein. We look forward to responding in full at that time,” Michael Gross, general counsel for EMR, said in a statement.

The Aug. 4 Environmental Rights Act notice, a legal action submitted before filing a lawsuit, was sent via email and mail on behalf of the non-profit by the Eastern Environmental Law Center, based in Newark. It specifically points to the Camden facilities at 1531 Ferry Avenue and 1251 South Front Street. EMR facilities in South Camden have been the scene of two major fires since January 2021.

EMR’s ability to skirt the designation of solid waste facility has meant less stringent oversight by the NJDEP, which locals want to see change, the non-profit alleges in the letter also addressed to Attorney General Matt Platkin, DEP Commissioner Shawn LaTourette and Camden City council members.

“In essence, EMR has been a terrible neighbor to South Camden residents. EMR’s operations have negatively impacted the South Camden community in numerous ways, from fires and air pollution to noise and odors,” the Center for Environmental Transformation says in the notice. “Following the fires, EMR community liaisons exhibited an abysmal lack of transparency with impacted residents; they failed to communicate the causes of the fires, were combative when speaking to residents, have not taken community concerns seriously, and consistently failed to take meaningful steps and appropriate precautions to safeguard their workers and the community.”

If the Camden non-profit was to be successful in its appeal to state officials, EMR would be required to expand its record-keeping, have additional permits to operate and adhere to the Solid Waste Management Act, the Eastern Environmental Law Center said.

Under the regulations, EMR would also have to ensure all processing, shorting, storage, and compaction of materials on-site take place in an enclosed building. Material recovery facilities and solid waste transfer stations at the center would also need to comply with federal OSHA requirements and the New Jersey Worker and Community Right to Know Act.

People want to know what the hell is going on at DEP!

But instead of reporting these critical facts and holding DEP accountable, NJ Spotlight interviewed a longtime solid waste industry hack, Wayne DeFeo. I’ve known Wayne since the late 1980’s as part of my work with the DEP Solid Waste and recycling program. I think he worked as a Trenton lobbyist for solid waste industry giant BFI back in those days. So, he’s hardly credible as a source.

The so called “recycling” facilities are under-regulated by the DEP. They handle millions of pounds of highly toxic and flammable materials, including lead, mercury, PCB’s, and various toxic chemicals from vehicles and industrial scrap.

Toxic air emissions, dust and stormwater runoff, odors, noise, and truck traffic create significant environmental and public health risks and impacts to the community and people living nearby.

Back in the 1980’s, the DEP and the Legislature intentionally created a weak regulatory framework in order to reduce the costs and “regulatory burdens” to promote “green industries” like recycling. Those weak DEP regulations are given lax enforcement by the DEP.

Even though I was personally involved, no need to take my word for that. The NJ State Commission On Investigation documented all that jive:

… the record reflects that much of the focus during legislative hearings in the spring of 1985 was on the need for various incentives, including tax breaks and regulatory relief, to encourage private investment in the diversion and recovery of recyclable materials from the conventional solid waste stream. (State Commission Of Investigation Report, (March, 2017, @ p. 5)

Yet there have been scores of fires, illegal waste disposal, laundering of toxic waste (e.g. Google “Dirty Dirt”) and major air and water pollution events at so called “green” recycling facilities across the state.

These dirty facilities also are almost always located in poor and minority disproportionately impacted “environmental justice” communities. Camden NJ is ground zero for environmental injustice.

It’s way past time to properly regulate them!

I found a DEP public notice on an air pollution permit application filed back in November of 2023.

The facility also has a DEP issued “recycling center” permit. The DEP recycling center regulations require, among other things, fire prevention and control plans.

Repeated major fires are not business asa usual, as Mr. DeFeo claimed.

Such chronic gross disregard for the community and the environment are more than adequate grounds for major DEP enforcement action, including revocation of permits.

Someone must make DEP Commissioner LaTourette walk the talk on environmental justice.