WolfeNotes.com

DEP Denies Public Records Request For Enforcement Documents

DEP Denial Makes A Mockery Of OPRA & Transparency

On June 16, the Murphy DEP and Attorney General jointly issued a press release touting their lawsuit against Ford Motor Company.

(I wrote about that lawsuit here. DEP has delayed response to my request for public records on the private lawyers representing DEP).

One highly unusual demand in DEP’s lawsuit against Ford Motor Company seeking unquantified compensation for damages to natural resources at the Ringwood Superfund site included a demand that the Court impose the statutory maximum civil penalties against Ford (i.e. $50,000 per day) for violations of two NJ environmental laws, for a period of over 45 years.

The total civil penalties alone would amount to over $1.6 billion (and that’s before considering the economic value of the natural resources damaged).

In my 35 year experience, I could not recall any case where DEP itself sought or successfully imposed $50,000 per day civil penalties over such a lengthy period. So, I thought a request that a Judge impose them somewhat over the top.

This prompted me to wonder if DEP had even taken any enforcement action against Ford for egregious crimes, which I believe warrant criminal penalties.

So, on June 27, 2022, I filed an NJ Open Public Records Act (OPRA) request for DEP enforcement documents:

I request the following public records:

1) DEP compliance and enforcement actions (Notices of Violation, penalty assessments, settlement agreements, fines collected, etc) issued to Ford Motor Company for violations of the NJ Spill Compensation and Control Act, the NJ Solid Waste Management Act, NJ Water Pollution Control Act and other applicable NJ laws and DEP regulations for activities at the Ringwood Mines Superfund site;

2) Written communications between Ford Motor Company and the NJ DEP regarding compliance and enforcement activities for activities at the Ringwood Mines Superfund site.

I received a reply from DEP today, which denied the request as follows:

Request Item # 1 & # 2 has been denied, being overbroad and improper as it does not define specific records. Government agencies are required to disclose identifiable government records that are specifically described in the OPRA request. See N.J.S.A. 47:1A-1 and -1.1. OPRA does not permit open- ended searches of agency files, nor does the law allow a request for every document an agency has on file on a specific subject matter. OPRA also does not require government agencies to conduct research in order to respond to a request for records. See, for e.g., MAG Entertainment LLC v Div. of Alcoholic Bev Control, 375 NJ Super 534, 549 (App Div. 2005); Bent v Twp Of Stafford, 381 NJ Super 30, 37 (App Div. 2005); Gannett NJ Partners v Middlesex, 379 NJ Super 205, 212 (App Div. 2005), 07/06/2022 which address the principles stated above. Additionally, requests for correspondence must identify the individuals or accounts to be searched and be confined to a discrete and limited subject matter. Burke v. Brandes, 429 N.J. Super. 169, 76-78 (App. Div. 2012); see also Elcavage v. West Milford Twp. (Passaic), GRC Complaint No. 2009-08  (Apr. 8, 2010) (stating that a proper request for email correspondence must contain “(1) the content and/or subject of the e-mail, (2) the specific date or range of dates during which the e-mail was transmitted or the emails were transmitted, and (3) a valid email Custodian Signature Date request must identify the sender and/or the recipient thereof”). In response to the interest of your Request, the NJDEP will email you, within 3 busines (sic) days executed Enforcement documents (e.g. Directives, Orders).

My OPRA request was very specific and narrowly tailored to specific enforcement actions and the communications between Ford and DEP regarding those enforcement actions.

Those documents would reveal, among other things: 1) if DEP were aggressive in taking enforcement actions against Ford (e.g. number of fines, amounts of penalties issued versus penalties collected, etc), 2) the response by Ford to DEP enforcement, 3) the negotiations between Ford and DEP, and 4) the final settlements and fines and penalties collected.

Notice that after denying the most important documents, that DEP only agreed to provide “executed Enforcement documents (e.g. Directives, Orders).” – DEP explicitly omitted the specific records I requested, which included fines and penalties assessed and actually collected.

The DEP denial raises serious concerns and prompts troubling questions.

I can only assume that the DEP does not want the public to know how they enforced environmental laws against Ford

I can only assume that they would be embarrassed by all that.

What is DEP hiding? Why are they hiding these documents? Who are they protecting?

Their denial of these public records makes a mockery of OPRA and all notions and expectations of transparency and accountability.

DEP only wants the public to know of the spin they issue in press releases.

Will a NJ legislator conduct oversight and demand that DEP produce these records?

Will a NJ legislator seek amendments to OPRA to prevent continuing abuses of the loopholes in the law and the absurd requirements established by opinions of NJ Courts?

Don’t hold your breath –

The Legislature is bought and paid for by the same corporate interests that want these DEP records kept secret and that have their way with former corporate lawyer DEP Commissioner LaTourette.

[End Note: I just sent this note to our favorite reporters and editors, who so favorably parroted DEP’s press release:

Gee, I wonder why DEP would deny an OPRA public records request for enforcement documents at Ford Ringwood, especially after they just issued a press release touting their lawsuit, which, among other things, demands over $1.6 billion in civil penalties alone?

Wouldn’t it be relevant to DEP’s credibility to know if they had used their own administrative enforcement powers to impose penalties, before asking a judge to do so?