As I wrote in prior posts (here and here) the State is pushing a complete revamp of our site remediation bill. On February 2nd, I and other environmentalists testified before the Senate Environment Committee in opposition to the bill. Our written comments can be found here: Enviro’s comments on s1897.
Tomorrow both the Assembly Environment and Solid Waste Committee and the Senate Environment Committee will consider S1897 at a joint hearing. I expect the bill will be passed out of the committee in short order tomorrow and then make it to a vote in both Houses. The bill has gone through many changes since the Feb. 2nd hearing and almost none of the changes have been for the better.
For example the latest version of the bill removes any DEP oversight of the cleanup by the worst offenders until the responsible party violates the cleanup regulations at least twice. The worst offenders are going to be given at least two more bites at the rotten apple before DEP may take over even if they already have a long history of non-compliance up to now.
Another example is that DEP’s is only required to “audit” 10% of the documents submitted during a year. Given that a cleanup could involve hundreds of documents and multiple that by all of the cleanups going on during a year, 10% of all of the documents submitted in a year is grossly inadequate to fully protection people and the environment. The DEP cannot audit LSPs but must ask that the LSP board undertake an audit. There is no requirement that the LSP act on the DEP’s request. There is also no requirement that a LSP board member step aside if an audit is against one of the board member’s co-workers.
Another example is the bill will do little to protect those who need protection the most, our children. While the bill provides that cleanups on properties that will be residences, schools and day care should be cleanup to an unrestricted standard, those properties can also be cleaned up to a presumptive remedies (a standard to be developed by DEP) or using engineering or institutional controls. This means that contamination will remain on the property under a layer of concrete, pavement or additional dirt. Children whose bodies, including their hearts, lungs, brains and nervous systems, are developing are more susceptible to the effects of toxins. If the Mass. model is any indication of how cleanups are going to occur in NJ less than a third of the cleanups will be to an unrestricted level. This is not acceptable. It is also unacceptable that the legislature has repeatedly refused to provide enhanced protection to recreational fields in addition to residences, schools and daycare centers.
In short, fast cleanups are not necessary good cleanups especially if they have to be redone at a later date after people have been exposed to hazardous levels of pollutants.