WolfeNotes.com

Jim Benton, standing in rear, head of NJ Petroleum Council, listens closely to DEP Commissioner Bob Martin speak on Gulf oil spill. Benton ruled the hearing (and will someone tell Martin that bottled water is extremely poor form).

This Was Not Kabuki – It was classic Dog & Pony

[Update #2 : 7/31/10 – news to me: according to today’s Atlantic City Press story about a meeting between DEP and LBI mayors:

The presentation also included an overview of the state’s inventory of oil spill containment boom and its effectiveness. We learned that the state has experience in this area and is basing its current efforts on responses to previous oil spills that occurred in the Delaware River and other areas off our coast.

Update #1:  June 15, 2010: today’s Washington Post story puts the focus where it belongs – corporate greed and regulatory failure. It is obvious that BP cut corners and took huge risks to maximize production and profits. BP chose to trade-off safety and environmental risks to reduce costs. Regulators were “captured” and looked the other way. NJ – home of a huge petro-chemical complex –  is highly vulnerable to the same problems and risks, which are greatly exacerbated by Christie environmental policy.

Wake up call to lame NJ legislators: THIS is oversight! Read the WaPo story:  Lawmakers accuse BP of ‘shortcuts’

To save time and drilling costs, BP took “shortcuts” that may have led to the oil rig explosion and the spill in the Gulf of Mexico, according to a letter released Monday by two House Democrats leading an investigation of the disaster.

The letter, sent in advance of congressional hearings with senior oil executives this week, paints a damning picture of five decisions the lawmakers said the oil firm took “to speed finishing the well,” which was running “significantly behind schedule.” Marshaling e-mails, interviews and documents, the lawmakers said: “In effect, it appears that BP repeatedly chose risky procedures in order to reduce costs and save time, and made minimal efforts to contain the added risk.” – end update

Back in the day, a January 1969 oil well blowout off the California Coast near Santa Barbara focused the attention of the nation.

For comparison to the current BP Gulf blowout, the Santa Barbara blowout lasted 10 days and involved about 80,000 – 100,000 barrels of oil. The press reported that:

It was an environmental disaster that President Richard Nixon said “touched the conscience of the American people” as he called for a better way to use resources while protecting our natural surroundings.

Santa Barbara was followed 6 months later in June by the Cuyahoga River fire in Cleveland Ohio.

Both events galvanized an exploding environmental movement and led to a moratorium on off shore drilling and to the passage of powerful anti-pollution laws, like the 1972 Clean Water Act.

Environmental activists knew how to translate disaster into reform.

Given that context, could you even imagine – DURING THE ONGOING EVENT – the head of  the California or Ohio EPA being allowed to provide un-challenged testimony at a Legislative hearing that focused exclusively on computer models and colorful maps of where the spill was likely to go? (one ditzy legislator said the map looked like a Monet painting!)

And imagine all this happening at a time when the California or Ohio Governor and Agency head were publicly calling for reduced industry oversight, rolling back envrionmental regulations, treating industrial polluters like “customers”, and slashing agency budgets?

Well that’s just what DEP Commissioner Bob Martin was allowed to do today– not only was he not grilled, he was thanked numerous times by legislators for his leadership!

Ah, don’t be naive – those are just corrupt politicians, you cynically reply.

But could anyone possibly imagine – in 1969 or now – numerous environmental lobbyists in suits, passively sitting by watching it all happen as they casually chatted with each other and fellow industry lobbyists?

Well, that happened today too – and it was painfully obvious by the “oversight” softball questions from Legislators on the Committee that the environmentalists had not even bothered to lobby – either that or Legislators had totally disregarded their concerns (if they even had any).

Pick you poison: lazy or ineffective.

You’ve come a long way Baby! Welcome to Chris Christie’s NJ!

In case anyone would like to examine DEP’s actual oil and chemical spill prevention and emergency response programs, see:

Prevention and Planning ( TCPA and DPCC programs)

Emergency Response

Coastal Management (and coastal vulnerability assessment)

Maybe Commissioner Martin will do more than just issue press releases and computer model the highly unlikely impacts of the Gulf oil on NJ’s shore.

Like maybe he might do some actual field tests of DEP’s emergency response plans and assure that they are fully resourced. Perhaps he might be asked to assure that prevention/TCPA & DPCC regulations are strictly enforced (or compare those plans and capabilities to the highly deficient BP and Coast Guard plans in the Gulf, so that lessons can be learned).

Or maybe someone will ask him questions about how DEP budget cuts, staff reductions, and lack of equipment have eroded capacity to prevent and respond to a spill – and off course, Martin needs to explain how expediting approvals and treating the petro-chemical industry as a “customer” – while rolling back oversight and weakening NJ State regulations will impact these DEP programs.

Assembly Environment Committee Chairman, John McKeon (D-Essex)

Not to worry, Chairman McKeon is “deepy concerned” and right on top of it (at least according to the press):

“If the oil spill were to reach the Jersey shoreline, it would put our state and coastal economy in peril,” McKeon said. “We are deeply concerned about such a possibility, however remote. Today, we will examine closely our state’s preparedness should the oil spill reach our coastline.”

If what I heard today was “close examination”, I got some landfills in the Meadowlands for you.

(oh, I forgot to mention that Senate bill (S466), a bill that provides subsidies to OIL HEATING, was released from Committee today too! – No Joke.)

[Update: Martin needs to make up his mind. First he issues a high profile over the top press release touting his “Gulf Spill Response Team” and then today emphasized the importance of NJ’s $40 billion/year tourism and fishing/seafood industry. But then scientists say there is virtually no risk to the NJ coast and DEP says they are spending no money and doing very little:

He said the department was spending “virtually no money” on the effort, using in-house staff and the help of scientists from Rutgers and the Center for Marine Systems at the Stevens Institute of Technology in Hoboken. (link to Philly Inquirer story)

From the get go, I have said Martin has exaggerated the threat and badly mismanaged the situation. His over the top press remarks may have had a negative impact on shore tourism and seafood industry. Martin postures and creates a false appearance of leadership, while masking erosion of DEP capabilities and the impacts of his won policies. Triple negative:

Imagine the public outrage, screaming headlines, political reaction, and excoriating editorials that would occur if it were discovered that THE DAY BEFORE the BP Gulf Oil Blowout the Obama Administration issued a Report that:

1) complained that the federal Minerals Management Service (MMS) and federal regulations were strangling oil production, impeding investment in deep off shore oil drilling,  and harming the economy of the Gulf Region; 

2) recommended that MMS oversight be scaled back and MMS become more friendly to the oil industry and treat them like customers; and

3) federal environmental regulation of off shore drilling are onerous and need to be scaled back to promote oil production.

Just think about that for a moment  (and I could add many other hyoptheticals, e.g. about mine regulations before the Massey Energy West Virginia coal mine explosion that killed 29 workers; or Wall Street financial oversight; or air port security regulations before 9/11; or food safety regulations before any number of recent high profile food poisoning episodes).

While Obama did support off shore drilling just weeks before the Gulf disaster and made major mistakes, he didn’t attack MMS and environmental regulations (see The Spill, The Scandal and the President).

But the Christie Administration effectively did just that – and one day before the Gulf blowout!

On April 19, 2010, the DAY BEFORE the BP Gulf Oil Blowout,  the Christie Administration issued the Red Tape Review Report.

That Report made virtually the same findings and recommendations outlined in 1-3 above regarding DEP, environmental regulations, and NJ’s economy  (for a copy of the full Report, click HERE or see this for DEP related recommendations).

Christie and his DEP Commissioner Bob Martin are inviting environmental catastrophes - as the BP Gulf Oil Blowout so spectacularly has illustrated – that happen when government regulatory oversight and strict enforcement of regulation of risky and profit driven industry are scaled back. 

And the Red Tape Report was no anomaly – the Report was preceded by the DEP Transition Reports (see this and this and this) and the Executive Orders (see this and this)

Yet, (aside from this) why has there been so little news coverage, just one editorial, and no legislative oversight?

Where are the Democrats? the media? the so called environmentalists? Some enviro’s are even defending the Christie onslaught – still!

The Asbury Park Press sure understood the implications -  in a strongly worded April 16 editorial; “Aiding economy not DEP’s job“, the Asbury Park Press blasted DEP Commissioner Martin for his views on DEP’s role in economic development and his plans for creating a new Assistant Commissioner for economic development:

Now and then, some public official will say things that make the attentive listener go, “Whoa! That doesn’t sound quite right. Does this guy understand his job?”

The most recent example to come out of the Christie administration is found in the musings of Bob Martin, the new commissioner of the state Department of Environmental Protection. …

The DEP’s job is to protect and preserve the environment, not to insert itself into questions of the economic issues involved. That’s for other state policymakers to address. It is much too early to form any judgments on how Martin will do on the job. But some of his statements thus far should give those who care about New Jersey’s environment real pause.

And so did the Bergen Record, in this scathing May 2, 2010 editorial, Cleaner Water: 

Martin’s new opinion came about after he was embarrassed publicly. The Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility released e-mails sent to Martin from the EPA that made clear that even if the agency imposed a limit, 6 1/2 years could elapse before the rule was in place, Staff Writer James O’Neill reported. Martin would have been playing Russian roulette with the public’s health.

Perchlorate is linked to thyroid dysfunction. In fetuses and infants (through formula or breast milk), high levels of perchlorate can cause developmental delays and learning disabilities. No parent would ever choose to give perchlorate-laced juice to a baby, and no pregnant woman would ever drink a caffeine-free beverage if she knew it included a rocket-fuel additive.

The previous commissioner had proposed a sensible perchlorate limit of 5 parts per billion, far below a possible federal limit. The state limit would leave it in a good position if later scientists find that even 15 parts per billion is too high.

Martin has not said what the perchlorate limit will be. We know what it should be: 5 parts per billion.

And again, the Asbury Park Press shows they get it. In a June 11, 2010 editorial, Don’t Undercut the environment, they corrrectly criticize the Legislature, but ignore the fact that the same federal consistency policy has already been adopted in Christie Executive Order #2:

The politicians in Trenton have been known to come up with some bone-headed pieces of legislation, but they’d have to go a long way to beat their latest foray into deregulation.

New Jersey lawmakers are considering prohibiting state agencies from mandating — or even proposing — any new environmental regulations or requirements that would exceed federal government standards unless every detail were approved first by the Legislature.

Incredibly, this monument to shortsighted selling out to special interests is actually moving through the Statehouse. S1986 has been referred to the State Government Committee, and the companion bill, A2486, awaits a vote by the full Assembly. That vote could come this month.

These bills need to be stopped cold. The opposition should be full-throated and bipartisan.

(for the record, we testified against and wrote about this bill over 3 months ago and included targeting the Governor, who is the source of the problem. We wrote:)

The bill, A2486 (Burzichelli) would prohibit state agencies from adopting any standards that were more stringent that federal requirements, unless each one were individually specifically authorized by the Legislature. It implements the “common sense principles” of Governor Christie’s Executive Order #2.

And people wonder why bad shit happens?

[Update: Asbury Park Press set up story: Shore plans to be ready for BP oil – let’s hope Kirk Moore and Todd Bates really dig into the substance before and after the hearing. They know the shore and did a good job on the shellfish/oyster closure  program story.]

On Monday, the Asssembly Environment Committee will conduct oversight of DEP Commissioner Martin’s Plan to protect NJ from any impacts from the Gulf oil blowout (see announcement for details).

It is vital that the Committee engage in substantive oversight, and not political kabuki (we note for the record that Martin was never asked to respond to these Ten Questions or make commitments to performance Metrics he touts as the cornerstone of his private sector management orientation).

The Committee’s focus needs to be on 3 issues – let’s take them one by one (please hit the links for important information):

I) Content of the DEP’s prevention and response plans – better than BP and MMS efforts?

There was little content to the BP plan – and lots of what was there was flat out wrong (see PEER’s analysis).

As Grist wrote:

Oil companies are supposed to have spill-response plans prepared before they begin drilling in American offshore waters. Minerals Management Service safety regulators are supposed to scrutinize those plans before signing off on them. But it’s looking more and more like no one bothered to read BP’s backup plan before the Deepwater Horizon rig began drilling 5,000 feet below the ocean’s surface.

The nearly 600 pages of the “plan” consist largely of lists, phone numbers and blank forms, according to PEER Board Member Rick Steiner, a marine professor and conservationist who tracked the Exxon Valdez spill.

“This response plan is not worth the paper it is written on,” Steiner said in a prepared statement. “Incredibly, this voluminous document never once discusses how to stop a deep water blowout even though BP has significant deep water operations in the Gulf.”

Even if BP tried to craft a decent plan, all such contingency plans are basically “fantasy documents,” according to Rutgers sociologist Lee Clarke, who studies disasters. “These documents let everybody get through the day,” he told Grist. “They provide comfort that risks are under control. The plans are based on assumptions that you can control the uncontrollable, and the truth is there’s nothing much that can be done.”

If you read just one thing about the Gulf, you must read Rolling Stone magazine’s killer article on the factors that led to the Gulf blowout (see The Spill, The Scandal and the President) – this excerpt absolutely nails it:

It’s tempting to believe that the Gulf spill, like so many disasters inherited by Obama, was the fault of the Texas oilman who preceded him in office. But, though George W. Bush paved the way for the catastrophe, it was Obama who gave BP the green light to drill. “Bush owns eight years of the mess,” says Rep. Darrell Issa, a Republican from California. “But after more than a year on the job, Salazar owns it too.” […]

“The oil companies were running MMS during those years,” Bobby Maxwell, a former top auditor with the agency, told Rolling Stone last year. “Whatever they wanted, they got. Nothing was being enforced across the board at MMS.”

Salazar took over Interior in January 2009, vowing to restore the department’s “respect for scientific integrity.” He immediately traveled to MMS headquarters outside Denver and delivered a beat-down to staffers for their “blatant and criminal conflicts of interest and self-dealing” that had “set one of the worst examples of corruption and abuse in government.” Promising to “set the standard for reform,” Salazar declared, “The American people will know the Minerals Management Service as a defender of the taxpayer. You are the ones who will make special interests play by the rules.” Dressed in his trademark Stetson and bolo tie, Salazar boldly proclaimed, “There’s a new sheriff in town.”

Salazar was far less aggressive, however, when it came to making good on his promise to fix MMS. Though he criticized the actions of “a few rotten apples” at the agency, he left long-serving lackeys of the oil industry in charge. “The people that are ethically challenged are the career managers, the people who come up through the ranks,” says a marine biologist who left the agency over the way science was tampered with by top officials. “In order to get promoted at MMS, you better get invested in this pro-development oil culture.” One of the Bush-era managers whom Salazar left in place was John Goll, the agency’s director for Alaska. Shortly after, the Interior secretary announced a reorganization of MMS in the wake of the Gulf disaster, Goll called a staff meeting and served cake decorated with the words “Drill, baby, drill.”

“Employees describe being in Interior, not just MMS, but the other agencies as “the third Bush term,” says Jeff Ruch, executive director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, which represents federal whistle-blowers. “They’re working for the same managers who are implementing the same policies. Why would you expect a different result?”

II) Parallels between the factors that led to BP’s gulf blowout and Christie regulatory policy.  

a) Lack of experience in leadership:

The New York Times reported that the head of MMS had no experience: Crisis Places Focus on Beleaguered Agency’s Chief

Before she took the job at the minerals agency , Ms. Birnbaum, 52, had virtually no experience with the oil and gas industry

We have written critically about the fact that Bob Martin has no environmental experience or acedemic or professional credentials (see: Burden on Christie DEP Nominee to Show Senate He’s Qualified).

b) Inadequate resources

DEP recently admitted they lacked adequate staff resources to protect shellfish beds. According to the June 7, 2010 Asbury Park Press: “DEP orders halt to oyster efforts”

The agency said its staffing problems are a big part of the issue” there are not enough conservation officers to adequately patrol the oyster sites. It’s a position that worries commercial shellfishermen too, because the federal Food and Drug Administration has already questioned if the DEP has adequate enforcement.

“The conservation groups and nonprofits have said, “We’ll put volunteers out there,’ but the FDA has basically said you need to have qualified, trained people,” said Lawrence Ragonese, a DEP spokesman. “The DEP is working to get more people and more patrols out there” just to keep the commercial industry covered, he said.

If DEP can’t monitor shellfish beds, how can they respond to a coast-wide disaster?

c) Culture of lax oversight and promotion of oil industry economics – “Agency Capture”

Commissioner Martin has repeatedly said DEP culture is “broken” and that DEP needs to embrace a less adversarial relationship with industry, promote economic development, and treat industry as “customers”. This can only lead to lax oversight and the same kind of cozy relationships that MMS had with BP. The pro-industry culture Martin seeks is deadly!

d) political pressures to expedite and waive environmental reviews – cutting corners to save industry money

e) weak regulations and enforcement

f) false perceptions that “red tape” environmental regulations impede economic development

For explanations of how the above factors d); e) and f) that led to the Gulf blowout are replicated right here in NJ under Governor Christie’s policies, read the Rolling Stone expose in light of the following:

1. Lessons of Gulf lost on Martin (May 25, 2010); Did Gulf Blowout Cloud Martin’s Vision? (June 3, 2010); and BP Got Environmental Waiver (May 6, 2010)

2. Executive Order #2 -“Common  Senese Principles” – specifically include new “waivers” to provide “regulatory relief“.

3. Red Tape Review Group Report (this Report was issued on April 29, ONE DAY before the Gulf blowout!).

4. DEP Transition Report: “DEP Must Do Less with Less” – less DEP oversight and more self monitoring by industry.

5. Martin Memo to DEP staff on the need to fix DEP’s “broken” culture (1/27/10)

At the same time, in the face of a collapsed economy, we need to play a key role in the economic growth of this State.

I want to empower decision making down through our chain of command and have all who come before us for service treated as valued customers.

6. Martin wants to create a “Customer” Culture (press release)

7. Martin’s emphasis of economics at DEP and a new DEP role to promote economic development

8. Christie budget slashed over $400 million of renewable energy funds (see this and this)

III) NJ’s risks and vulnerabilities from oil refineries and chemical plants.

NJ and surrounding NY Harbor and Delaware Bays have a large infrastructure of petrochemical facilities that present huge risks to the region’s dense population and sensitive environment. These facilities require strict regulatory oversight and credible response plans in the event of a catastrophic event – from fire, explosion, to terrorism. But, DEP oversight is eroding. For examples, see: The Fatal Fifteen.

Key components of chemical plant safety in NJ is voluntary (see NY Times coverage and this post).

The Legislature needs to conduct strict oversight of these serious threats to NJ’s environment, public safety, and economy.

Rigorous oversight is warranted, particularly in light of the lessons from the Gulf and the Christie deregulatory policy agenda.

DEP NOT using huge regulatory powers to protect public health from known risks

I just posted the below as an Update to my piece yesterday on the DEP’s new dry cleaner grant program, but now realize that the underlying public policy and journalism issues deserve individual attention.

I initially sought to clarify the original post based on a conversation that emerged in a discussion of this issue on a national TCE (perc) listserve. The listserve discussion was focused on vapor intrusion of chemicals into about 450 homes in Pompton Lakes NJ from the Dupont site.

We were involved at the outset in Pompton Lakes (see this) and have written extensively about the situation (see this and this). Jim O’Neill of the Bergen Record has written several outstanding killer storries, most recently this: Dupont’s Danger Was Hidden Away.

But then I read the Star Ledger coverage  of DEP’s dry cleaner grant program and my head exploded. So, here’s the story.

A national vapor intrusion expert replied to my post to note that dry cleaned clothes can “off gas” perc in homes, and resemble vapor intrusion. I agreed, and said that perc also can enter homes from nearby industrial air emission sources (e.g. dry cleaners, chemical plants, et al).

I then tried to explain why the perc indoor vapor intrusion risks and outdoor ambient air risks were related and why I was so disgusted by the DEP press release touting the dry cleaner grant program.

You see, the “new” NJ DEP leadership makes a lot of noise in the press, especially in the Pompton Lakes community, that they are aggressively acting to protect public health. They say that now that they are aware of what’s going on in Pompton Lakes, they have made protecting the community a priority (in contrast to 25 years of prior DEP administration’s, who apparently either didn’t know or care about Dupont PL)

I don’t know how they pull that off, because the current Deputy Commissioner – who some say is really running the DEP due to the Commissioner’s lack of qualifications and experience -was the former head of the “broken” Site Remediation Program, which had “oversight” of Dupont, Pompton Lakes. In fact, her first public appearance as Deputy Commissioner was in Pompton Lakes,  where she was almost tarred and feathered for her comments and arrogant demeanor that gravely insulted residents.

The key point is that DEP has huge regulatory power to protect public health from serious known risks that they are NOT using.

The abandonment of the dry cleaner perc phase our rule is just one example of that.

In addition to the sham Pompton Lakes claims, DEP engages in PR stunts like the $5 million dry cleaner grant program – aside from getting the situation backwards by saying that polluting dry cleaners make “sacrifices” (instead of recognizing the fact that people’s health is sacrificed for the profits of polluters), DEP even have the chutzpah to note this:

 “Priorities for the grant money are dry cleaners located in residential settings, such as apartment buildings or mixed commercial and residential strip malls, and those located within 50 feet of day care centers.”

While DEP may consider proximity and residential/day care location risk in the dry cleaner grant program, the larger reality is:

1) DEP has no statewide vapor intrusion (VI) program. What DEP does on VI risks is site specific and privatized. The pace and extent of any VI investigation and remedy is under the control of polluters, not based on public health. DEP is well aware of scores of volatile organic contaminant groundwater plumes under occupied buildings that cause VI risks, yet does nothing to warn or protect the people in those buildings;

2) DEP is well aware of the fact that the DHSS school and day care center VI risk standards are based on a 1 in 10,000 risk level. Instead of adopting protective regulations using a  more conservative  risk standard for this extremely sensitive sub-population (i.e. children), current NJ school and day care standards are 100 times WEAKER than other DEP soil, water, and VI standards, which are based on 1 in a million risk level (which is derived by risk assessments that assume a healthy adult male exposure, not a developing child’s as mandted by law!); (i.e. for easy confirmation, see page 40-43 of DHSS rule adoption document – which flat out contradicts the “Kiddie Kollege” law, which mandates adoption of children’s health based state-wide DHSS standards, not site specific judgements); and

3) DEP does not have air quality standards or enforceable permit regulations to address exactly the kind of risky and unacceptable situation they describe in their press release, e.g. when an industrial emission source is located very close to homes or schools, DEP does not consider those health risks in setting permit emission limits on that source!!!

DEP knows all this irresponsible abdication, yet they get away with writing Orwellian press releases – which amounts to lying to the public – and no one calls them on it! – reporters instead stenographhically praise DEP for it!

Unplug, unwind … and get your kids outdoors!June is Great Outdoors Month, a perfect time to launch kids on a lifetime of appreciation for New Jersey’s many natural wonders, such as this stream in Stokes State Forest in the Skylands region. Special programs introducing families to fishing, camping, natural history and much more will be held at state parks, forests and wildlife management areas through the month. Learn more.

While I am all for getting outdoors with the kids, what DEP fails to tell the public – and in the process misleads the public – is that wading in NJ streams like that depicted in the photo above would result in a high probability of being exposed to unsafe bacteria that could make kids sick.

While streams in Stokes State Forest are clean, most NJ streams are highly polluted.

In fact, according to DEP’s own data, only 19% of NJ streams, lakes, and rivers attained the DEP’s own recreational use standards, which are designed to protect public health. Attainment of those standards is measured by the presence of bacterial indicators of pathogens, like e. coli bacteria (see page 44, DEP Water Quality Assessment Report).

Attainment of the recreational use standards in the inland freshwater streams is actually far less than 19% because of relativley high rates of recreational use attainment in ocean waters.

Photography by a government agency should inform the public and depict truth – unfortunately, the very positive responses elicited by the DEP webpage photo are contradicted by DEP’s own science and data.

DEP should be reporting accurate data on water quality to the public – not withholding that data and presenting highly misleading positive images that contradict a rather negative reality.

That’s called propaganda.

Perhaps if NJ residents knew how polluted our waters are, they might do something about it.

[Update 1: 6/8/10 – is DEP press office reading WolfeNotes? Check this out: COMMISSIONER AIMS TO PROTECT PUBLIC HEALTH AND SHELLFISH INDUSTRY

[Update 2: 6/13/10 – Star Ledger ran a good story:  Environmentalists say shutdown of N.J. oyster beds could have detrimental effects about the shellfish monitoring and enforcemnent problems at DEP – in my view, Commissioner Martin again showed poor judgement (similar to Gulf Spill Reponse Team and Exelon Spill Act Directive press releases) and acted in a way to mask major problems at DEP and creating a miselading appearance that he is agressively protecting public health].