Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.

Dismiss

GARDEN STATE ENVIRONEWS 040721

1 view

Skip to first unread message

GSENet

unread,

Jul 21, 2004, 1:35:24 AM7/21/04

040721

GARDEN STATE ENVIRONEWS

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

TABLE OF CONTENTS
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
{*} COUNTIES CONSIDER FILING HIGHLANDS BILL LAWSUIT
{*} ANTI-SPRAWL EFFORT IS ALL OVER THE MAP
{*} PROMOTING GROWTH IN THE GROWTH AREAS
{*} COURT SIDES WITH STATE IN PINELANDS FARMING DISPUTE
{*} EIGHT STATES, NY CITY SUE POWER COMPANIES OVER POLLUTION
{*} BURNT FLY BOG CLEANUP AND RESTORATION COMPLETE
{*} DRAFT SOIL CLEANUP STANDARDS RELEASED FOR PUBLIC COMMENT
{*} TORRICELLI PUTS CLEANUP OF TOXINS ON FAST TRACK
{*} OP/ED: NEW STORMWATER RULES - NO SURPRISE
{*} RAIN, RAIN, GROW AWAY
{*} DEP CHIEF SAYS HE'LL BLOCK NEW BEAR HUNT
{*} THE SOONER WE GET SERIOUS, THE BETTER
{*} SEC TO IMPROVE TRACKING OF ENVIRONMENTAL COSTS
{*} HORTICULTURAL PROGRAM SPECIALIST - MORRIS COUNTY PARKS

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

COUNTIES CONSIDER FILING HIGHLANDS BILL LAWSUIT

Date: 040721
From: http://www.injersey.com/

By Larry Higgs, Courier News, July 20, 2004

Flemington - While Hunterdon and Warren County freeholders continue
talking about a lawsuit to challenge the constitutionality of the
Highlands Act, the papers probably won't be filed until Gov. James E.
McGreevey signs the legislation into law.

Representatives from both counties and officials from up to 25
municipalities have been meeting periodically to discuss a possible
lawsuit. The most recent meeting occurred Sunday.

"There was some discussion about if and when the bill is signed into
law, that we'll take legal action," said John DiMaio, deputy Warren
County freeholder director. "Our counsel and Hunterdon County's
counsel will discuss these things and pick the issues which make the
strongest case."

Most of the grounds discussed have centered around pressure on towns
to adopt provisions of the Highlands master plan into their own zoning
and development documents. State officials have countered that the
legislation would not make that a requirement. But Hunterdon officials
said some of the pressure will come from denial of state grants to
towns that don't cooperate.

Marcia Karrow, Hunterdon County freeholder director, cited efforts by
the state Agriculture Secretary Charles M. Kuperus to pass rules that
would deny farmland preservation money to counties such as Hunterdon
that decline to spend local money to save farms in the Highlands
preservation area.

Local officials are also concerned that towns surrounding the
preservation area will have to accept more development than they want.
They're also questioning how well a 15-member Highlands council will
represent them.

"There are so many things that haven't been answered. To take control
away from the folks who understand (local issues) doesn't make sense,"
DiMaio said. "A 15-member (Highlands) board won't be as well-versed
about a town or community than the local board is."

Karrow cautioned officials in towns that haven't studied the issue to
have their attorneys read the fine print of the bill.

"Municipalities not on board better get their attorney to read this
stuff and see the impact of ceding their power and their constituents'
future to 15 hacks," Karrow said.

* * *

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

ANTI-SPRAWL EFFORT IS ALL OVER THE MAP

Date: 20 Jul 2004
From: "Steven Sacks-Wilner" {ste...@sacks-wilner.com}

NEW RULES TO SPEED DEVELOPMENT HAVE
SOME TOWNS RECONSIDERING GROWTH PLANS

By Steve Chambers, Star-Ledger Staff, July 20, 2004

Recent moves designed to make it easier to build in designated growth
areas - even as the state is stepping up efforts to rein in sprawl
elsewhere - have some towns worried.

Seven towns in Hunterdon County have banded together in an effort to
have a growth corridor along routes 78 and 22 eliminated or reduced in
size. Environmentalists and the League of Municipalities, meanwhile,
are asking all towns in growth areas to make sure they understand the
implications and get involved in the process.

"It's good that people are taking the State Plan more seriously now,
but they are doing it under the gun," said Michelle Byers, who heads
the New Jersey Conservation Foundation and serves as vice chair of the
state Planning Commission. "All of a sudden, there is a greater sense
of urgency."

A bill signed earlier this month by Gov. James E. McGreevey will
streamline permit consideration for projects in growth areas, and a
reform introduced by the Council on Affordable Housing would require
certain towns to zone for growth if they want protection from builder
lawsuits.

The changes come, coincidentally, as the state is shopping around
possible changes to the State Plan map, a blueprint for channeling
growth into cities, suburbs and newly identified centers.

Roughly 30 percent of the state is identified on the map as growth
areas, and McGreevey has vowed to focus state spending for roads,
sewers and other infrastructure on those regions.

William Dressel of the state League of Municipalities said he sent an
alert to his members advising them to get involved in the map
evaluation.

"Here's an opportunity to help yourself in planning your own
destiny," Dressel said, noting that courts are increasingly looking to
the State Plan as a guide for evaluating the constitutionality of
local zoning changes. "This isn't just an exercise. This is a very
important policy process that you must avail yourself of."

All this is being viewed as good news by sprawl watchdogs like New
Jersey Future.

"I love the fact that towns are taking the State Plan seriously and
what planning area they belong in seriously," said Barbara Lawrence,
the nonprofit group's director. "That is long overdue."

Lawrence said she expected the streamlining bill to get the attention
of town officials, and she said the timing couldn't be better. She
said there was nothing wrong with some towns reconsidering their
growth designation, as long as the changes were justified on
environmental grounds and the practice doesn't become too widespread.

Builders have long been concerned, however, that not enough of the
state growth areas actually can be developed.

Patrick O'Keefe, chief executive officer of the New Jersey Builders
Association, said environmentalists and state officials have used the
map discussions to "overtly encourage municipalities to revise their
maps and to reduce the amount of development potential in their
jurisdiction. That is very consistent with what the administration has
held out as its philosophy."

Community Affairs Commissioner Susan Bass Levin, who was named last
week by McGreevey to be the state's first Smart Growth Ombudsman, said
the map changes being proposed cut both ways.

Environmentalists have long complained that the State Plan failed to
take into account the water supply, often designating growth in areas
where development could pollute reservoirs or important feeder
streams. Bass Levin said the process is designed to eliminate those
mistakes, while adding growth areas that probably weren't as
environmentally sensitive as once thought.

"The changes have been, quite literally, all over the map," said Bass
Levin, whose department provides staff to the state Planning
Commission. "The purpose of this exercise is to have a very open,
public discussion."

She said a revised map will be shared with local officials sometime
this winter, with the commission voting on the changes by the spring
of next year.

But environmentalists and some local officials are concerned that
with the streamlining bill expected to take effect within months,
large-scale projects could be coming down the pike more rapid fashion.

In Hunterdon County, Clinton Township and six of its neighbors -
Clinton, Franklin, High Bridge, Lebanon, Readington and Union - are
discussing a map change with state officials that would take much of
the highway corridor out of the growth area.

Although most, if not all, those towns originally asked for the
growth designation, increasing concern about development and some
local power shifts have changed things. Some officials said the fast-
track bill also has them so worried they want a rapid response to
their request to change the map.

"Is it smart or legitimate for us to sit here like sitting ducks?"
said Tom Corcodilos, a Clinton Township resident who is spearheading
the effort to change the map.

* * *

Steve Chambers covers land-use issues. He can be reached at
scha...@starledger.com or (973) 392-1674.
Copyright 2004 The Star-Ledger.

# # #

Steven L. Sacks-Wilner, Esq.
489 Dutchtown-Zion Rd
Skillman, NJ 08558-1307
ste...@sacks-wilner.com
Tel. & Voice Mail: 908.359.8884
Fax: 908.359.5550

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

PROMOTING GROWTH IN THE GROWTH AREAS

Date: 040720
From: g...@gckenvlaw.com

IN A POLITICAL COMPROMISE TO SECURE PASSAGE OF THE HIGHLANDS ACT,
THE NEW JERSEY LEGISLATURE ENACTS A PRO-DEVELOPMENT LAW

By Lewis Goldshore and Marsha Wolf, NJ Law Journal, July 12, 2004

The adoption of the Highlands Water Protection and Planning Act was
not as easy as some had hoped.1 A number of political accommodations
had to be made to secure its passage. One of those concessions was an
agreement to promptly enact other legislation that would actually
promote development, referred to as smart growth, in the areas
targeted for growth by the State Development and Redevelopment Plan
(State Plan), and other state polices. A-3008, Assembly Committee
Substitute, sponsored by Albio Sires (D-Hudson) and John F. McKeon (D-
Essex).

The growth area law resulted in a firestorm of protest from the
environmental community fresh from the Highlands Law victory and
unaccustomed to the concept of compromise. But these objections were
unavailing. While the Legislature was willing to make adjustments to
the smart growth measure to soften its impact, it was unwilling to
turn its back on the commitment to facilitate growth in the growth
areas. On June 17, 2004, the Legislature passed the growth areas law -
seven days after passing the Highlands Law. Both bills now await the
governor's expected approval.2

SMART GROWTH EXPERIENCE

Smart growth principles have been state policy since the early 1970s.
They include encouraging growth in urban and older suburban areas and
centers, while discouraging it in environmentally sensitive and
agricultural areas. But experience has shown that the state has been
more successful in achieving the discouragement, rather than the
encouragement, portion of the smart growth agenda.

There are a number of reasons why it has been easier to talk about
than to make progress on the smart growth front. Part of the
difficulty may be attributed to inconsistent state policy over time -
on the one hand favoring investment in the state's older areas, but
taking a number of actions that seriously undercut the attainment of
that objective. The private market interpreted these confusing signals
to mean that the rules of the game concerning growth and development
had not really changed.

Unlike some of his predecessors, Gov. James McGreevey has not been
lukewarm about smart growth. He made it one of his campaign themes
and, following election, one of his Administration's signature issues.

Smart growth is, after all, good politics sounding a responsive chord
with a broad range of the electorate. Those in the older areas tend to
believe that they will reap the benefits. Those in the developing
areas see smart growth as a way to put an end to the evils associated
with sprawl and to maintain a measure of exclusivity.

The disconnect between smart growth talk and smart growth action has
not been lost on those in the business of moving dirt around -
developers and builders. In the outlying areas of the state, they have
found that securing governmental, permits and approvals, particularly
environmental permits, was a lengthy, expensive and uncertain process.
But obtaining these clearances has not been a cakewalk in the state's
growth areas either.

GROWTH AREAS LAW

The growth areas law was designed to realize the State Plan's
objectives by two principal means. The first was to make it easier to
obtain development-related permits for growth area projects from the
state Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), Department of
Transportation (DOT) and Department of Community Affairs (DCA). The
second was to make it more difficult for state agencies, principally
the DEP, to adopt new rules that constrained growth area development.

SMART GROWTH OMBUDSMAN (SGO)

To implement its objectives, the growth areas law establishes a Smart
Growth Ombudsman (SGO) in DCA. In recognition of the importance of
this new function, the SGO is appointed by and will report directly to
the governor rather than to the DCA commissioner. One possibility
might be that the DCA commissioner, or someone very close to the
commissioner, is designated as the SGO.

The SGO's efforts will be focused in the broadly defined smart growth
areas. These include areas designated in the State Plan as Planning
Area 1 (Metropolitan) and Planning Area 2 (Suburban), as well as
designated centers, a designated growth center in an endorsed plan,
areas identified for growth by the Hackensack Meadowlands Commission
or the Pinelands Commission, urban enterprise zones, and areas in need
of redevelopment.

In the targeted areas, the SGO will coordinate with the directors of
the Divisions of Smart Growth (DSG) to be established in DEP, DOT and
DCA, to assure that permits will be expeditiously processed through
permits-by-rule, general permits or prequalification of professionals.
The Ombudsman will also maintain an informational Web site and assist
applicants with specific permit applications.

But the SGO's most significant role is likely to be its review and
approval of proposed state agency rules that impact development in the
growth areas. The new law vests the SGO with veto power over those
proposed rules, with the exception of rules proposed by the Pinelands
Commission, Highlands Council, Meadowlands Commission, or any
independent authority or commission, that it determines will be
inconsistent with the State Plan. This seemingly innocuous provision
has the potential to result in serious interdepartmental policy
disputes, especially since State Plan consistency does not establish
an objective standard of review.

However, it is important to note that the SGO's review authority will
not extend to the broad array of regulations that are already in place
and its reach is limited to the smart growth areas. Additionally, any
disagreements between DEP and DCA regarding the impact of a new
proposed regulation that cannot be resolved between the two
commissioners can be resolved by the governor's office.

DIVISIONS OF SMART GROWTH (DSG)

The governor will appoint the three DSG directors. By far, the
busiest of the three divisions will be the one at DEP.

The divisions, upon request from an applicant within a smart growth
area, are authorized to provide for expedited review of their
respective agency's permits. The requests for expedited review must
include the necessary documentation, the permit fees and a
certification of completeness and compliance by a professional
qualified in accordance with rules to be adopted within 120 days.

The permit fees will be designed to defray all of the costs
associated with the program and can be expected to be significantly
higher than the usual fees. If these fees are set at too high a level,
this may serve as an economic disincentive for some who might
otherwise seek the benefits of expedited review.

The pre-qualification, self-certification program builds on and
expands the DEP's Cleanup Star Program that was designed to expedite
contaminated site remediation. See
http://www.nj.gov/dep/srp/cleanupstar/ .

Professionals will be held strictly accountable and will be subject
to serious sanctions for violations of the program, including
potential loss of licensure and debarment. In light of the sanctions,
which can be imposed even for negligent violations, those opting to
participate in the program will need to be extremely cautious.

The expedited review process provides an accelerated time period for
determining administrative completeness (20 days), technical
completeness (generally 45 days) and action on the application
(generally 45 days, subject to a 30 day extension by mutual consent).
In the event that the agency fails to act within the prescribed time
period, the application is to be deemed complete or approved, as the
case may be.

Thus, while the expedited review process may be helpful in obtaining
quicker responses, the result may be a prompt denial. It should also
be noted that the courts have taken a generally negative view of
automatic approval provisions in other statutes. See, e.g., King v.
New Jersey Racing Comm'n, 103 NJ 412, 422 (1986) (where the Court
observed that statutory automatic approval provisions should be
applied with caution); Eastampton Center LLC v. Planning Bd. of
Township of Eastampton, 354 NJ Super. 171, 193 (App. Div. 2002) (the
Municipal Land Use Law's automatic approval provision should not be
applied where the failure to act within the deadline was technical or
inadvertent).

PERMITS-BY-RULE; GENERAL PERMITS

The growth area law designates six categories of permits or approvals
as permits-by-rule in smart growth areas. This technique is ordinarily
reserved for minor activities. It refers to a form of authorization
that may be undertaken without the need for the submission of an
application.

Six of the categories pertain to DEP-administered permits and
authorize certification by prequalified professionals of limited and
defined types of treatment works approvals, water quality management
plan amendments, water main extension permits, well drilling permits
and waterfront development area general permits. The one category of
DOT-administered permits included in the permit-by-rule program are
highway occupancy permits for drainage, utility openings and utility
poles.

The growth areas law also requires the expeditious processing of
specified classes of freshwater wetlands general permits. It directs
the DEP to approve or deny these permits within 45 days upon
certification of compliance by a prequalified and registered
professional.

EXPEDITED ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS

The statute provides for the establishment of a Smart Growth Unit in
the Office of Administrative Law (OAL). The Administrative Law Judges
(ALJ) assigned to the Unit will have expertise in the matters covered
by the growth areas law.

The ALJs shall hear and decide three types of smart growth related
disputes on an expedited basis. The first concerns application
completion disputes between the applicant and the regulatory agency.
The second concerns substantive disputes where a proposed project in a
smart growth area is denied. The third concerns disputes involving the
terms or conditions of a permit issued in a smart growth area. In
these instances, the ALJ's decision shall be a final, rather than a
preliminary, decision.

- - -

FOOTNOTE

1. For a discussion of the evolution of the highlands legislation see
L. Goldshore and M. Wolf, Something is Stirring in the New Jersey
Highlands, 175 NJL.J. 200 (Jan. 19, 2004), and Highlands Preservation
Bill a Priority, 176 NJL.J. 549 (May 17, 2004).

2. In an effort to address some of the objections, a proposal was
introduced that would reduce the types of projects that could qualify
for fast tracking. See A3195.

* * *

Goldshore is a partner at Goldshore, Cash & Kalac of Lawrenceville.
His practice is devoted to environmental, land use and municipal law.
Goldshore and Wolf are co-authors of New Jersey Environmental Law
(ICLE 2003), and Goldshore is a co-author of New Jersey Brownfields
Law, published by New Jersey Law Journal Law Books. Their column
appears regularly in the Law Journal.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

COURT SIDES WITH STATE IN PINELANDS FARMING DISPUTE

Date: 040720
From: http://www.nj.com/

NJ SUPREME COURT SIDES WITH STATE IN PINELANDS FARMING DISPUTE

By Angela Delli Santi, Associated Press, 7/20/2004

Trenton - The state Supreme Court on Tuesday cleared the way for
limited expansion by commercial cranberry growers in the Pinelands
National Reserve, over the objections of environmentalists.

The state's highest court unanimously upheld a 2002 Appellate Court
ruling that allows up to 300 more acres of cranberry bogs in the
nature preserve area.

Under the rules, cranberry farmers are allowed to expand their bogs
in freshwater wetlands by 10 acres a year for five consecutive years.

The state Department of Environmental Protection had capped overall
growth of cranberry operations at 300 acres.

A coalition of environmentalists sued to block the expansion,
claiming the rules violate wetlands and water protection laws.

Jeff Tittel, director of the state chapter of the Sierra Club, called
the ruling a partial victory because environmentalists prevailed on
what he called a key provision of the law.

The court ruled that New Jersey's Freshwater Wetlands Protection Act
applies to the entire Pinelands region, Tittel said, meaning that more
stringent state standards will trump weaker federal rules.

"Had we lost on that part, it would have meant that weaker (federal)
permits could have been granted," Tittel said. "It would have been
open season on wetlands in the Pinelands."

Environmentalists had challenged the permitting process put in place
by the DEP to expedite approvals for activities they deem minimally
intrusive to wetlands, such as growing cranberries.

"Given the favored status accorded agriculture generally by the Water
Pollution Control Act, and cranberry agriculture in particular by the
Pinelands Protection Act, DEP's broad interpretation of the (statute)
exemption is reasonable," the ruling said.

The high water table and sandy, acidic soil of the Pinelands is ideal
for growing cranberries, and farmers have been harvesting the fruit in
the environmentally fragile region for two centuries.

Despite a decline in the number of cranberry farms in recent years,
47 commercial operations produced more than $7 million in fruit in
1999, the year expedited permits became available.

Despite the ability to expand their growing operations, no Pinelands
farmer has done so, Tittel said, in part because a cranberry glut is
causing growers to cut back production.

* * *

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

EIGHT STATES, NY CITY SUE POWER COMPANIES OVER POLLUTION

Date: 040720
From: http://www.nj.com/

By Mark Johnson, Associated Press, 7/20/2004

Albany - Eight states and New York City will announce a lawsuit
Wednesday that seeks to force five of the country's largest power
producers to cut carbon dioxide emissions and curb global warming,
according to a draft statement obtained by the Associated Press.
Attorneys general from California, Connecticut, Iowa, New Jersey, New
York, Rhode Island, Vermont, Wisconsin, along with New York City's
corporation counsel, are filing the public nuisance suit in federal
district court in Manhattan, the statement said.

American Electric Power Co., Southern Co., Xcel Energy Inc., Cinergy
Corp. and the federal Tennessee Valley Authority are named in the
suit. The companies own 174 fossil fuel-burning power plants that
produce 646 million tons of carbon dioxide annually, about 10 percent
of the nation's total, according to the July 16 document.

Carbon dioxide is believed to be one of the main culprits of global
warming. Greenhouse gases come from carbon dioxide generated by
burning coal, gasoline and other fossil fuels. If nothing is done,
climatologists forecast continued temperature increases that will
cause rising tides, droughts, climate disruptions and other problems.

Marc Violette, a spokesman for New York Attorney General Eliot
Spitzer, declined to comment on details but said the lawsuit would,
"for the first time, put global warming on the litigation map."

"This is a precedent-setting, first-of-its-kind lawsuit," he said.

Scott Segal, director of the Washington, D.C.-based Electric
Reliability Coordinating Council, a group that includes Southern, said
the lawsuit is frivolous.

"If you gave the facts of global climate change to a first-year law
student, and they recommended a public nuisance case, they would get
an 'F," Segal said. "The idea that any one company's emissions are
responsible for global climate change is more political science than
environmental science."

Jeffrey Marks, with the National Association of Manufacturers, which
represents AEP, Cinergy and Southern, said in an email that regulating
carbon dioxide emissions would severely depress the U.S. economy,
limit the use of fossil fuels, and hinder environmental improvements.

AEP spokesman Pat Hemlepp said his company has been an industry
leader on climate change issues.

"We have voluntarily accepted a cap on carbon emissions and are
moving toward a 10 percent reduction by 2006," he said. "A lawsuit is
not a constructive way to deal with climate change. There is nothing
one company, five companies, or one country can do to resolve global
warming. It will require a global commitment including developing
nations."

* * *

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

BURNT FLY BOG CLEANUP AND RESTORATION COMPLETE

Date: 20 Jul 2004
From: "Jennifer Tomko" {Jennife...@dep.state.nj.us}

BURNT FLY BOG SOIL CLEANUP AND WETLANDS RESTORATION COMPLETE

MARKS FINAL ACTION FOR MARLBORO SUPERFUND SITE

7/20/04

Trenton - Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) Commissioner
Bradley M. Campbell today announced completion of a $14 million
cleanup at Burnt Fly Bog Superfund site in Marlboro where more than
55,000 tons of PCB and lead contaminated soil were removed and seven
acres of wetlands restored with vegetation.

"The completion of this cleanup is important not only for the
restoration of the wetlands that connect to the nearby Deep Run and
Lower Raritan watershed, but also for the Marlboro community that has
waited too long for this polluted site to no longer pose the serious
health threat it once did," said Commissioner Campbell. "The oaks,
sour gums and ferns we planted soon will thrive to reclaim this
Superfund site as a natural habitat."

DEP contractors conducted the soil work at the Northerly Wetlands and
Tar Patch areas of the site from May 2003 to May 2004. Since then, the
excavated wetland areas have been restored with clean soil and
approximately 9,500 bushes, small trees and groundcover. The wetland
area is expected to reestablish itself within 10 to 15 years.

This action is the third and final major cleanup project completed by
DEP at the Burnt Fly Bog site that comprises 1,700 acres, of which
approximately 60 were contaminated. DEP now will conduct long-term
monitoring of the entire site including ground water and stream
sampling to ensure past cleanup work remains protective of public
health and the environment. Annual costs for this work will average
about $55,000, which will be paid for with state Corporate Business
Tax funds dedicated for cleanups.

"While this is a major victory for Marlboro, we need federal
leadership to reinstate the Superfund tax on oil and chemical
companies to finance toxic cleanups," said Commissioner Campbell. "A
strong federal hazardous waste cleanup program is essential to effect
timely cleanups that ensure a safe and healthy environment."

Federal and state funds already spent for investigation and cleanup
work at this site total $52.5 million from the Superfund Trust and
$7.1 million from state cleanup funds. DEP is pursuing recovery of its
costs associated with cleaning up this site with support from the
Division of Law in the Attorney General's office through litigation
against potential responsible parties. DEP also filed a natural
resource damage claim against these parties.

SITE BACKGROUND

The Burnt Fly Bog site is located on a ground water discharge area of
the Englishtown aquifer, where ground water flows to the surface and
drains into Deep Run. During the 1950s and 1960s, waste oil was stored
in several unlined lagoons encompassing 10 acres of the property. The
lagoon area became known as the Uplands. Waste oil from the Uplands
eventually contaminated other areas, which became known as the
Northerly Wetlands, Tar Patch, Westerly Wetlands and Downstream Area.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency added Burnt Fly Bog to the
National Priorities List of Superfund sites in 1983. Between 1985 and
1989, DEP conducted several remedial actions in the Uplands including
the removal and off-site disposal of approximately 85,000 tons of
contaminated soil, stabilization of sludge and installation of a clay
cap over the area. Remediation of the Uplands area was completed in
1992 after DEP removed about 700 tons of stockpiled PCB-contaminated
soil and transported it off site for incineration.

In 1996, DEP completed excavation and off-site disposal of
approximately 12,000 tons of contaminated soil and sediments from the
Downstream Area and construction of a sedimentation basin to prevent
contaminated sediments from the Westerly Wetlands and other areas from
migrating off site. The Westerly Wetlands were left intact to be
followed by long-term biological sampling to monitor the impact of
contaminants on wildlife.

* * *

Contact: Fred Mumford, (609)984-1795

NJ Department of Environmental Protection

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

DRAFT SOIL CLEANUP STANDARDS RELEASED FOR PUBLIC COMMENT

Date: 20 Jul 2004
From: "Jennifer Tomko" {Jennife...@dep.state.nj.us}

DEP ASKING FOR PUBLIC INPUT BEFORE MAKING A FORMAL PROPOSAL

7/20/04

Trenton - Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) Commissioner
Bradley M. Campbell announced the start of a public comment period on
soil cleanup standards for use at contaminated site remediation
projects across the state.

"We are seeking public input early in the process to help us develop
a formal proposal of soil cleanup standards that will ensure the
protection of public health," said Commissioner Bradley M. Campbell.
"Our goal is to have clear standards, incorporating the latest health
risk data, for developers reviving brownfield sites, companies
cleaning contamination from past industrial operations and even
homeowners working to replace leaking fuel tanks."

DEP's proposal includes soil cleanup standards for 140 contaminants.
The draft soil standards take into account the risk of exposure to
contamination from ingestion, skin contact and inhalation based on
residential and nonresidential settings. DEP also is proposing to
apply residential standards to children's day-care and school
properties.

The draft soil standards also measure how soil contamination impacts
ground water quality based on the protection of aquifers suitable for
use as a drinking water source. Impact to ground water soil standards
for aquifers of special ecological significance and aquifers not
suitable as a drinking water source (low yield and saline aquifers)
will continue to be developed on a site-by-site basis.

When adopted, the soil standards will replace DEP's soil cleanup
criteria guidance. The soil standards will be used in concert with
DEP's Technical Requirements for Site Remediation that outline
specific actions necessary to investigate and clean up a contaminated
site.

Also, DEP can develop interim soil cleanup standards for contaminants
not included in this proposal on a case specific basis. A recently
formed DEP workgroup will develop chromium soil cleanup standards as
part of a separate process to incorporate at a later date.

The draft soil standards and how to provide comments to DEP on or
before September 17, 2004 are available on DEP's Web site at
http://www.nj.gov/dep/srp/regs/srs/ .

* * *

Contact: Fred Mumford, (609)984-1795

NJ Department of Environmental Protection

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

TORRICELLI PUTS CLEANUP OF TOXINS ON FAST TRACK

Date: 040721
From: http://www.nj.com/

FORMER SENATOR AND CONTRACTORS GAIN $1.1M
FOR WORK ON JERSEY CITY CHROMIUM PROBLEM

By Alexander Lane, Star-Ledger Staff, July 20, 2004

A year into his supervision of one of the largest toxic-waste
cleanups in the nation's history, former Sen. Robert Torricelli has
sped up the long-stalled Jersey City project, bringing in $1.1 million
for himself and his contractors in the process.

Honeywell International must start digging up 1.5 million tons of
chromium waste from the Hackensack River site by next spring under a
schedule Torricelli has set up. That's lightening speed for a cleanup
that the state had allowed to drag on for decades, said Honeywell's
legal opponents, the Interfaith Community Organization.

U.S. District Judge Dennis Cavanaugh appointed Torricelli last May to
serve as special master of the complex job. Cavanaugh had found that
the chromium site - one of nearly 200 in Hudson and Essex counties -
was an immediate hazard to the residents and wildlife in Jersey City.

So far work on the site has consisted mainly of testing and planning.
But Torricelli has set next April as the date to begin the
excavation - which could prove larger even than the job of cleaning up
Ground Zero - and to be ramped up to full speed by next October.

"He's setting deadlines and seeing that they're met," said Kathy
Millian, Interfaith's attorney, lauding Torricelli's work.

Meanwhile, Honeywell continues to fight Cavanaugh's order to excavate
the site.

In June, the company appealed to the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of
Appeals, arguing that the DEP was overseeing the cleanup just fine
until Cavanaugh "shunted it aside."

Interfaith has not filed its reply, but is likely to cite trial
testimony from a DEP case manager who testified that Honeywell had
dragged out the process by proposing one inadequate cleanup technique
after another, Interfaith lawyers said.

On another front, Honeywell has supported a developer's effort to
persuade Jersey City to declare the area - squeezed between a busy
commercial section of Route 440 and the Hackensack River - a
redevelopment zone. That could lead to the city taking ownership of
the land and turning it over to the developer, possibly giving
Honeywell more of a say over what type of cleanup it must perform.

Interfaith called that another in a 20-year series of evasive tactics
by Honeywell.

Torricelli, who quit his re-election campaign in 2002 after an
admonishment from the Senate ethics committee over large gifts from a
contributor, is earning $375 per hour as special master.

As of April, his 12th month on the job, he and a few assistants had
billed Honeywell $232,280, with the law firm he hired, Connell Foley,
billing another $383,870 and his environmental consultant, the Louis
Berger Group, billing $505,252, court records show.

His appointment from Cavanaugh was seen in some political circles as
payback of sorts - Torricelli recommended Cavanaugh for his District
Court judgeship to President Bill Clinton in 2000 and lauded the judge
before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Cavanaugh's wife contributed to
Torricelli's campaigns and served as finance director for Sen. Jon
Corzine (D-NJ).

Further complicating matters, Honeywell was a supporter of
Torricelli, contributing $15,000 to his political action committee
between 1998 and 2002. But Torricelli has not appeared to show
Honeywell any favoritism, Interfaith said.

* * *

Alexander Lane covers the environment. He can be reached at
al...@starledger.com or (973) 392-1790.
Copyright 2004 The Star-Ledger.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

OP/ED: NEW STORMWATER RULES - NO SURPRISE

Date: 040721
From: http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/

Press of Atlantic City, July 20, 2004

Brace yourself. New Jersey's 566 municipalities must comply with new
stormwater-management rules - and that's going to cost some money.

Some municipal officials have put the cost at $1 million over the
next 10 years. We suspect it could be even more in some towns. The
Tuckerton administrator called the cost devastating to his small
town's budget. More criticism from municipal officials is sure to
follow as state Department of Environmental Protection deadlines come
up.

So brace yourself. But hold your outrage. And municipal officials
should hold down their whining.

A. The new rules are important.

B. This process began in 1999 - no responsible municipal official can
claim surprise at the new requirements.

The rules are important because stormwater runoff - the
petrochemicals, the pet waste, the fertilizers that wash into oceans,
bays, rivers and streams - is the major cause of today's pollution,
including the pollution that leads to beach closings.

Controlling municipal stormwater runoff has always been seen as a
massive undertaking, which is why serious measures to address it have
taken so long to come to fruition. But in 1999, the federal government
told the states to get to working on the problem, and the state's new
Municipal Stormwater Regulation Program is now kicking in.

Municipalities will be required to have a stormwater-management plan
and will have to comply with a host of new rules regarding street
cleaning, sewer-line maintenance and the appointment of a stormwater
coordinator. One of the first requirements was that towns map their
stormwater systems; in the past, some towns did not even know where
the stormwater lines drained.

And it's all going to cost money, which means taxes will be affected,
which means municipal officials will be complaining about "unfair,
burdensome state rules."

But all this new regulation of a long-ignored environmental issue
isn't needless bureaucracy. It isn't a money grab by the state. It's
an overdue attempt to stem the pollution that fouls the state's
waterways.

And know this when your municipal officials complain about the cost:
If they had acted more responsibly in previous years, the cost would
be much lower. Perhaps even zero. Stafford Township, for example,
doesn't expect a significant impact on the town's budget. Why? Because
Stafford, which has been nationally recognized for its modern approach
to stormwater-management, has already implemented many of the new
stormwater-management techniques.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

RAIN, RAIN, GROW AWAY

Date: 17 Jul 2004
From: "Steven Sacks-Wilner" {ste...@sacks-wilner.com}

LET THE WATER FROM A DOWNPOUR DO WHAT COMES NATURALLY,
NURTURING PLANTS IN A RAIN GARDEN

By Denise Cowie, Inquirer Columnist, Jul. 16, 2004

So you looked out the window after a thunderstorm and saw water
pooling in your lawn, not running off into the gutter.

Did you tsk-tsk and resolve to fill the depression with topsoil first
chance you got? Or did you see it as an invitation to install a rain
garden?

If you opted for the rain garden, take a bow. Not only will you have
an attractive landscape feature, you'll be doing your bit to cut down
on water pollution, slow the rate of stream flooding in developed
areas, and replenish groundwater.

Although the concept is as old as nature itself, rain gardens are
shaping up as one of the newest trends.

"I think this is something that is hot, something that definitely is
capturing a lot of interest," says Nancy Beaubaire of Bucks County's
Bowman's Hill Wildflower Preserve, which has held a workshop on rain
gardening.

"It is fairly new to gardeners...but it has been gaining increased
recognition in the last few years," says Dan Welker, an environmental
protection specialist in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's
regional office in Philadelphia.

Just what is a rain garden?

"To me, it is simply gardening in a natural or man-made depression,"
says Welker, who has created a Web site on green landscaping
(www.epa.gov/reg3esd1/garden). "It can be any shape, and as formal or
as naturalistic as you like, but the purpose is to slow down and trap
runoff after rain," so less storm water is channeled into streams ill-
equipped to handle it. Rain gardens could be called the home version
of the bio-retention basins that municipal storm-water experts install
in many communities.

Instead of running off driveways and other impervious surfaces into
gutters and storm drains, rain is captured in shallow depressions, or
a series of them, planted with groundcovers, perennials, shrubs, even
trees. As the rainwater slowly seeps through mulch and soil layers,
Welker says, pollutants are filtered out, broken down through chemical
processes, or absorbed by plants, so that what percolates down to
recharge underground wells, springs, and feeder streams is cleaner.

Welker knows the benefits firsthand: He has turned the backyard of
his Chestnut Hill home, just a block and a half off Germantown Avenue,
into a lushly planted rain garden that is a magnet for songbirds,
frogs, toads, and other wildlife. Even the deck is designed to allow
rainfall to drain through into the garden.

"I created the rain garden even before I was really aware of this
whole [runoff] issue," he says. "It has been a fun education process,"
but it has made him increasingly aware of the impact residential
landscapes have on the natural world.

Historically, we've tended to look at storm water as a negative,
Welker says. "The idea was to get it off your property as quickly as
possible. We even graded lots to get rid of it."

Trouble is, rapid runoff sweeps everything along with it - pesticides
and fertilizers from our gardens and lawns, animal waste and oils and
other toxins from streets and gutters. The volume of water can rip out
stream banks, cause water levels to rise and fall rapidly, and stir up
sediment, which can not only smother stream creatures but cause water
to heat up.

"It kind of goes on and on, a vicious cycle," Welker says. "And we
can attribute some of that to the way we cover the land around our
houses. We don't think much about it - if it's a new house, we cover
most of it with grass. We don't think in terms of trying to re-create
a forest, or a wildflower meadow, or many of these more natural
environments that would mimic nature...and be much better at slowing
the water down."

More than half the surface in any suburban area is turf, he adds.
"Turf is better than being paved over, but compared to a richer
gardening style, it also speeds up the runoff, because the roots for
lawns are very shallow, and the soil is compacted, so it doesn't soak
in much."

There's not a blade of grass in Welker's yard. Right after he bought
the house in 1987, he removed the lawn that covered most of the
backyard. To create the peaceful urban oasis he envisioned in its
place, he first transformed the uninspiring rear of the house by
adding a light-filled sitting room with French doors opening onto a
large, low deck.

Within a year, he installed a pond, now home to a hardy water lily
and a few goldfish for color, as well as some small native fish
rescued years ago from a drought-stricken stream.

Later, he added a naturalistic little waterfall, and a bog garden
adjacent to the pond, to accommodate sundews, pitcher plants,
horsetail rush, and bog iris, and recontoured the rest of the yard
into large, shallow bowls divided by a ridge.

More than 100 species of plants grow in his garden, which is less
than 40 feet wide and about 50 feet deep. About two-thirds are native
plants.

Native honeysuckles growing up a trellis on the side fence attract
hummingbirds; a recent addition, a pagoda dogwood, is now one of his
favorite plants.

Winding pathways, all mulched, and unobtrusive wooden bridges over
some of the water features give him access to every part of the
garden, whether a sunny pond-side bed (where even a couple of tomato
plants thrive among the buttonbush and coneflowers) or his created
woodland, which boasts plants from trees and shrubs such as sugar
maple, dogwoods, rhododendron, inkberry holly and sourwood to
perennials and groundcovers such as ferns, bleeding heart, hosta,
woodland poppies, Solomon's seal, May apples, Virginia bluebells, and
native pachysandra.

The bowls are so thickly planted that a visitor would have a tough
time knowing they were there. Yet they do the job they were designed
to do. The rain gauge in his garden registered 6 inches after Monday's
downpour, and the pond and bog garden had almost become one, Welker
says, but by Tuesday morning the water had seeped away and the pond
and bog were back to normal.

Any homeowner could build a similar rain garden, he says, by
following a few rules (though you might want to check to make sure you
aren't breaking any municipal regulations).

"It should be at least 10 feet from buildings, so you don't get damp
basements," he says, and ideally located downslope from paved areas or
downspouts to capture the runoff. "Excavations should be shallow - a
depth of six inches or so is fine, so you don't have safety concerns
for toddlers."

Since the garden's purpose is to drain, make holes in any hard clay
layers you might have, and amend heavy clay soils with sand and
compost. You might want to monitor your depression through a storm or
two, to make sure it's draining properly, before you plant it.

"The only problem would be if water sat for more than three days,"
Welker says, "because then mosquitoes would be able to breed. But they
cannot breed in less time," and most rain gardens drain within a few
hours.

Choose plants suitable for the conditions in your rain garden, and
then mulch with a layer of shredded hardwood. The palette may be a
little different from the one in your other borders, because the
plants have to be tolerant of periodic flooding.

Welker's garden has been certified through the National Wildlife
Habitat program. In 2000, Philadelphia native Holly Shimizu, now
director of the U.S. Botanic Garden in Washington, did a segment on it
for public television's Victory Garden, and last summer it was
featured in Better Homes & Gardens.

"It's always changing," Welker says. "You have the spring ephemerals,
and it's spectacular, but come back two weeks later and something else
is in bloom. It's so different from month to month. There's a lot more
excitement in a naturalistic garden."

"My Backyard" appears Fridays in The Inquirer. Contact gardening
writer Denise Cowie at 215-854-2719 or dco...@phillynews.com. Read her
recent work at http://go.philly.com/denisecowie.

* * *

# # #

Steven L. Sacks-Wilner, Esq.
489 Dutchtown-Zion Rd
Skillman, NJ 08558-1307
ste...@sacks-wilner.com
Tel. & Voice Mail: 908.359.8884
Fax: 908.359.5550

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

DEP CHIEF SAYS HE'LL BLOCK NEW BEAR HUNT

Date: 040721
From: http://www.northjersey.com/

By Rod Allee, Record Staff Writer, July 20, 2004

The state will not issue any permits for black bear hunting this
fall.

That declaration was made Monday by Bradley M. Campbell, the state's
commissioner of environmental protection, on the eve of the state Fish
and Game Council's vote to set dates for New Jersey's second
consecutive bear hunt.

Campbell said he would direct Martin McHugh, head of the Division of
Fish and Wildlife, to withhold all bear-hunting permits.

The Fish and Game Council is to meet today at the Assunpink Wildlife
Management Area's conservation center and is expected to give final
approval to the bear hunt dates. It has already approved such a hunt
on first reading, by an 8-3 vote. Copying last year's format, each
hunter would be allowed to kill one bear.

But Campbell's directive against permits would render those plans
moot.

Governor McGreevey and Campbell have made widely known their
opposition to a bear hunt this year. They had agreed to let New
Jersey's first bear hunt in 33 years last December, based on safety
concerns posed by increasing bear encounters in residential
neighborhoods.

Out of an estimated bear population of some 3,200, hunters killed
328, mostly females and mostly in rural Sussex County.

The hunt was attended by public demonstrations for and against the
hunt, and the issue has remained extremely controversial. Hunt
proponents contend the population of the free-roaming bears has
reached a dangerous level given the state's built-up conditions.
Opponents counter that the official bear population figures are wildly
overstated and that the problem can be lessened through measures such
as bear immuno-contraception and educating the public to keep trash
from the ever-hungry animals.

Campbell said Monday evening in a telephone interview that "during
last year's hunt the data said that maybe the bear population was
stabilizing at a lower level than before."

He reminded that he was a proponent of a bear hunt last year, but
said that was contingent on developing non-lethal alternatives for
this year. "I was clear to the council," said Campbell, "that I
strongly supported the hunt but to develop alternatives and to get
better data for this year."

Not only did Campbell say he would shut down the bear hunt by
prohibiting permits, he said the Fish and Game Council's action would
bring more attention to a bill in the Legislature to reconstitute the
council's membership by adding several animal rights advocates.

The Fish and Game Council sets hunting and fishing seasons for all
game species in New Jersey. Its chairman, W. Scott Ellis, a farmer
from Hamilton Township, said Monday evening that Campbell's
obstructionism "is nothing new. He's already supporting the bill in
the Legislature."

Adding animal rights advocates to the council, Ellis continued,
"would be absurd, ridiculous, in my opinion. The animal rights people
don't believe in managing wildlife. They just want everyone to leave
it alone."

The bill, as Ellis sees it, "is merely to take autonomous authority
away from the council and make everything subject to the DEP
commissioner. It is just a disguise to give full power to the DEP
commissioner."

Technically, the council is not voting today on a bear hunt, since
last year's vote already placed that on the books. Instead, the vote
is limited to setting the dates for the hunt, which would be Dec. 6-
11, timed to coincide with the shotgun deer hunt.

Ellis said he expected the full council to approve the new dates,
though he did not predict a margin. This second vote is the final step
in the process of authorizing a bear hunt.

Campbell himself can not grant or deny hunting, permits, but he
supervises the man who can.

McHugh, who runs the Fish and Wildlife Division of the Department of
Environmental Commission, is charged with signing the hunting permits.
He refused to comment Monday night.

Micah Rasmussen, spokesman for Governor McGreevey, would not respond
specifically to Campbell's position, but said the governor would
support Campbell.

"The governor's position has always been clear, he has always had
personal reservations," said Rasmussen. "But the governor has always
relied on Mr. Campbell's analysis and recommendations as to what's
necessary to protect public safety. That's what he did last year when
the hunt was necessary.

A bill introduced on May 3 by Assemblyman Reed Gusciora, D-Mercer,
and co-sponsored by Assemblywoman Loretta Weinberg, D-Teaneck, would
expand the council's membership from 11 to 15. The DEP commissioner or
that post's representative would fill one of the new seats. The others
would go to persons directly chosen by the governor who have
experience in environmental protection and are from different parts of
the state.

That provision is seen as opening a door for animal rights and anti-
hunt activists to be seated on the council. The bill includes greater
say for the environmental commissioner over council decisions. It has
been referred to the assembly's Agriculture and Natural Resources
Committee.

On Monday, Gusciora said a council move today to set the hunt, and a
move by Campbell to deny hunt permits, "would encourage me to move
forward, and I'd be very supportive of Commissioner Campbell's
actions." He said he and Campbell have not been in touch "in the last
month or so" but in past discussions, "we've shared the same concerns
and want a reflection of many points of view" on the council.

Gusciora questioned the Fish and Game staff's original bear
population estimates, adding, "Until we get an independent count,
there's some question as to whether they are valid or not."

The assemblyman summarized the intent of his bill as to "bring some
balance and have the council more reflective of the state."

Asked whether he agreed with arguments that his bill might open to
door to those against any hunting in the state, Gusciora emphasized,
"I'm not for ending hunting in the state or taking away anybody's
guns."

* * *

Staff Writer Claude Deltieure contributed to this report.
Copyright (c) 2004 North Jersey Media Group Inc.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

THE SOONER WE GET SERIOUS, THE BETTER

Date: 20 Jul 2004
From: "Peter Montague" {Pe...@rachel.org}

Statement of Denis Hayes
American Solar Energy Society Conference
Portland, OR
11 July 2004

In recent years, a consensus has emerged in the geophysical and
meteorological fields that human emissions of greenhouse gases have
begun to change the earth's climate. While major uncertainties remain
about the details, there is widespread agreement that the impacts of
this change will be mostly harmful, and that it is in the human
interest to limit future emissions of CO2 from burning coal, oil, and
natural gas as much as possible.

No one has yet produced a credible blueprint for achieving the
necessary reductions in greenhouse gases in which solar energy does
not play a very large role. In my personal view, it would be desirable
to produce more than half the world's commercial energy from solar
sources within the next few decades.

The solar electric cell was invented at Bell labs fifty years ago.
Most of the major technical advances of the last five decades have
similarly been made in the United States. Many of them have been
underwritten with US tax dollars.

As recently as 1998, the United States still produced more solar
photovoltaic modules than any other country. Given the incredibly
small volumes produced, this is more an indictment of the world than a
credit to us.

Then, within a year, Japan leapt into a commanding lead, and it has
since widened the gap every year. Last year, Japan produced 3-1/2
times as many solar cells as the United States.

About the same time, Germany, Holland, and several other European
countries began putting in place policies to promote solar
electricity. Last year, Europe produced 80 percent more cells than the
United States.

At some point in the very near future, solar cells are poised to
become a classic disruptive technology. As prices fall with economies
of mass production, demand will skyrocket around the world.

The policy question facing the United States is whether we will be
exporting solar cells to the world or instead be importing solar cells
from Japan while we desperately play catch-up - much as we are
currently doing with efficient hybrid automobiles.

The Bush Administration, and the Republican leadership of the House
and Senate, are committed to an energy policy designed by the Vice
President that is dismissive of any important role for solar energy.
This is a prescription for economic catastrophe. It hitches American
prosperity to a fuel concentrated in mostly in a handful of unstable
Middle Eastern countries that, when burned, changes the climate.

What America needs instead are:

* A $30 billion, five-year federal procurement of solar modules,
structured to reward falling prices. Solar arrays should be on the
roofs and south-facing walls of every army barracks, every post
office, every school, and every library in the country, starting in
the sun belt and moving north.

* The United States should adopt the highly-successful German buyback
model that overcomes the resistance of ordinary consumers who don't
want to buy this year because they believe prices will fall next
year.

* At least a ten year extension of the federal production tax credit
for renewable energy. Long-term predictability is of enormous
importance to companies that we are asking to make major
investments in new manufacturing facilities. The on-again, off-
again nature of American tax credits has destroyed many good
companies.

In the event that there is no political change or policy change in
the federal government, then America's best hope lies in efforts to
aggregate similar initiatives at the state and local levels. A wide
variety of these are currently underway and will be discussed at this
conference.

Twenty-five years ago, in calling for much the same program, I argued
that a solar transition, phased in over the next half century, need be
neither painful nor very expensive. We - and, frankly, the rest of the
world - have largely wasted the last quarter century. Total global
photovoltaic production last year was a paltry 742 megawatts.

I no longer offer any hope that such a transition can be painless or
cheap. However, I continue to believe it might at least still be
possible to achieve this huge transformation of the world's basic
energy system in time to avoid an irreversible climatic catastrophe.

But with each passing year, each passing month, each passing week,
the odds grow slimmer. At some point - perhaps sometime soon - it will
simply be too late, even with a mobilization of resources akin to that
which followed Pearl Harbor. The sooner we get serious, the better.

- - -

Denis Hayes founded the first Earth Day celebration in 1970. He was
the director of the federal Solar Energy Research Institute (now
renamed the National Renewable Energy Laboratory) during the Carter
Administration. He is currently President of the Bullitt Foundation in
Seattle, WA.

* * *

: t r u t h o u t 2004

# # #

Rachel's Environment & Health News
Environmental Research Foundation
POB 160
New Brunswick NJ 08903-0160
T: 732-828-9995
F: 732-791-4603
E: e...@rachel.org
W: http://www.rachel.org

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

SEC TO IMPROVE TRACKING OF ENVIRONMENTAL COSTS

Date: 040720
From: http://www.planetark.org/

By David Brinkerhoff, Reuters, 20/7/2004

New York - U.S. financial regulators have agreed to improve the way
they track disclosure of corporate environmental costs, according to a
report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO).

In the 74-page report, the GAO recommended and the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission (SEC) agreed to creation of a searchable
database at its Web site so investors and analysts can track
environmental liabilities like clean-up costs, fines, and potential
risks from pollution and hazardous materials.

The changes would also help the SEC assess how well it enforces
environmental disclosure and adjust its reporting requirements, said
the GAO, the investigative arm of the U.S. Congress.

The GAO made the recommendations after finding that the agency, which
regulates the securities markets, does not systematically track
environmental liabilities in company filings.

"It does not have the information it needs to analyze the frequency
of problems involving environmental disclosure, compared with other
types of disclosure problems," it concluded.

Environmentalists and some investors say many corporations hide or
downplay clean-up costs, fines, and other environmental liabilities
that shareholders should know about.

The critics have said hidden liabilities could range from tens to
hundreds of billions of dollars.

Industrial companies ranging from Dow Chemical Co. (DOW.N: Quote,
Profile, Research) , to Halliburton Co. (HAL.N: Quote, Profile,
Research) have faced billions in liabilities over issues like asbestos
exposure and plant pollution.

WORK WITH EPA

The report also recommended the SEC work more closely with the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to use information that could
help track down environmental liabilities at companies.

The agency said it also has addressed the problem with earlier
actions, such as posting comment letters on its Web site, a policy
scheduled to begin in August. Comment letters go back and forth
between the SEC and companies addressing revisions and disclosures.

Democratic Sens. Jon Corzine of New Jersey and Joseph Lieberman of
Connecticut and Independent Sen. James Jeffords of Vermont had
requested the report from the GAO. The senators wanted to determine
how effective the SEC's reporting rules work for environmental costs
and to make recommendations to the agency.

"Environmental risks and liabilities are among the conditions that,
if undisclosed, could impair the public's ability to make sound
investment decisions," the GAO reported.

The study - conducted from Feb. 2003 and June 2004 - surveyed 30
experts who use SEC filings, including investors and financial
analysts. It also looked at 15 earlier studies on the extent to which
companies report environmental liabilities in SEC filings.

HOW CLEAR?

It found that investors disagree about how clear the SEC's reporting
requirements are when it comes to environmental disclosures.

Critics claim the SEC's reporting requirements have not been specific
enough, the report said. For example, rules are vague about disclosing
environmental liabilities when their exact cost is uncertain, or when
costs don't need to be paid in the near future. As a result, companies
refuse to add these potential costs to their books, critics charge.

Companies feel the requirements are adequate and argue that they need
flexibility to fit their circumstances, the report's survey found.

* * *

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

HORTICULTURAL PROGRAM SPECIALIST - MORRIS COUNTY PARKS

Date: 20 Jul 2004
From: "Parness, Lesley" {lpar...@morrisparks.net

The Morris County Park System located in Morris County, New Jersey,
seeks an enthusiastic and organized individual to coordinate adult
programming, teach horticultural classes, lead tours and train tour
guides and manage a community garden program at The Frelinghuysen
Arboretum, New Jersey's premier public garden.

Qualifications include a BS in horticulture, botany or related field
plus proven teaching and writing skills. Valid NJ driver's license is
required and valid NJ pesticide applicator's license or ability to
obtain one is highly desired.

Must be able to work a flexible schedule including weekends, holidays
and evenings. This is a Tuesday - Saturday, 40 hour per week position,
which includes a full benefits package.

The successful candidate will be a team player, with a commitment to
customer service and experience working in a volunteer environment.

Please send resume or c.v. with three references to:

Lesley Parness
Superintendent of Horticultural Education
Frelinghuysen Arboretum
POB 1295
Morristown NJ 07962

lpar...@morrisparks.net

M/F EOE

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Many thanks to our Volunteers:
Michele Cooklin, Jerry Cullins, Peter Montague, Paul
Neuman, Mary Paist, Penny Pollock-Barnes, Phil Reynolds,
Pat Rolston, and to all you folks out there who
contribute in so many ways. If you have a couple hours
a week, and would like to help out, please email us at:
mai...@gsenet.org

George-Therese Dickenson - Editor - dick...@gsemail.org
Scott Olson - Executive Director - ol...@gsemail.org

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Back issues of the Garden State EnviroNews are available at
http://www.gsenet.org/library/11gsn/11gsn.php

EnviroNews mailing lists:
TOC - subscribe-en...@gselist.org
TEXT - subscribe-en...@gselist.org
HTML - subscribe-en...@gselist.org

Garden State EnviroNet, Inc.
19 Boonton Ave, Boonton NJ 07005
Tel: 973-394-1313 - Fax: 973-394-9513
mai...@gsenet.org - http://www.gsenet.org/

0 new messages