WolfeNotes.com

[Update: Star Ledger covers this story:  N.J. environment group claims DEP denial of records request violated state law ]

We recently warned of a Hostile Takeover of DEP Science – Industry Seeks to Stack Board with Cronies , the latest in an orchestrated  War on Science by politically powerful polluters and developers in NJ. The Star Ledger reported on that in a September 20, 2009 story: Scientists line up to join DEP’s controversial new advisory panel.

Since then, we received additional leaked DEP documents and emails which show that the NJ Chemistry Council (the trade group and lobbyist for NJ’s chemical industries) is seeking to have Dupont and Merck scientists appointed members of a controversial new DEP Science Advisory Board. Similar industry efforts to stack federal Science Advisory Boards during the Bush administration were repudiated by scientists. A Science magazine editorial “Advice without Dissent” hit the nail on the head:

The Bush administration has made some unwise recent moves that undermine the process by which scientists provide advice to the U.S. government. The applicable current law (the Federal Advisory Committee Act), which requires these advisory bodies to “. . . be fairly balanced in terms of the points of view represented and . . . not be inappropriately influenced by the appointing authority or by any special interest,” is more than empty boilerplate….

Instead of grappling with scientific ambiguity and shaping public policy using the best available evidence (the fundamental principle underlying public health and environmental regulation), we can now expect these committees to emphasize the uncertainties of health and environmental risks, supporting the administration’s antiregulatory views. And in those areas where there are deeply held conflicts in values, we can expect only silence. Regulatory paralysis appears to be the goal here, rather than the application of honest balanced science.

In fact, DEP Commissioner Mark Mauriello is meeting with the Chemistry Council this Thursday  to discus SAB appointments. Commissioner Mauriello, in contrast to federal law that mandates balance and prohibits inappropriate influence by special interests, has virtually unbounded discretion to appoint SAB members.

So, with some of the documents already in hand, I filed an OPRA request to obtain all of them. But in an attempt to keep this chemical industry campaign a covert war, DEP denied the OPRA request.

In response, today, PEER filed a lawsuit against DEP seeking all the documents. We are confident that we will prevail in this lawsuit and that the documents will disclose industry pressure to politicize science at DEP and protect polluters from DEP regulations.

This industry effort must be derailed. Formal industry control over DEP science would have profoundly detrimental impacts on the health of residents and the natural environment.

See below press release for details.

For Immediate Release: Monday, September 28, 2009

Contact: Bill Wolfe (609) 397-4861; Kirsten Stade (202) 265-7337

Industry Moves to Take Over Jersey Eco-Science Board

DEP Sued to Force Release of Lobbying Messages for Industry-Backed Scientists 

Trenton  – Industry wants to pack a new state environmental Science Advisory Board with its own scientists, according to Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) which today filed a lawsuit to obtain public records regarding the industry lobbing effort. Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) Commissioner Mark Mauriello is reportedly making final picks for the 12-member board this week after meeting with the Chemistry Industry Council this Thursday.

The suit challenges the denial by DEP of an Open Public Records Act (OPRA) request filed by PEER seeking public records related to industry nominees and political lobbying for the Science Advisory Board (SAB) appointments. The DEP broadly claimed that practically all the requested documents are exempt from OPRA on the grounds that the pending appointments will be treated like candidates for employment, and thus confidential. Board members, however, are not DEP employees, nor would they be paid.

“DEP cannot make public records secret on the basis of an analogy,” stated New Jersey PEER Director Bill Wolfe who filed the document request. “Industry has a huge stake in getting friendly scientists on the board that will make the final recommendation on public health regulation.”

In late 2008, former DEP Commissioner Lisa Jackson abolished the Division of Science and Research, based in part on a recommendation of her Permit Efficiency Task Force, chaired by Chris Daggett, now an independent candidate for Governor. The Science Advisory Board is supposed to substitute for the work formerly done by DEP scientists.

Thus far, more than 100 nominations have been submitted. Industry associations have put forward scientists from major manufacturers such as DuPont and Merck as well as from engineers and technical specialists from industry-oriented consultant firms. This Thursday, October 1^st, Commissioner Mauriello, who chooses the board members, will meet behind closed doors with the Chemistry Industry Council of New Jersey, the primary lobby group representing state-based manufacturers.

In recent months, DEP scientific studies have been the subject of intense industry lobbying pressure to amend or suppress, on public health topics ranging from the effects of chemicals, such as PFOAs made by DuPont, to cement dust blowing through Camden neighborhoods. The Administrative Order creating the SAB specifies a conflict of interest review of board nominees but it is not clear what specific rules will be applied, except that members are not supposed to act on matters in which they have a “financial or personal interest“ terms left undefined.

“It appears that industry will soon be providing the final edits on all scientific work done at DEP,” added Wolfe. “Without transparency in the selection process, there will always be the doubt that this board will more concerned with political science than environmental science.”

The OPRA lawsuit was filed today on behalf of PEER by Michael Pisauro of the Princeton-based firm of Frascella & Pisauro, LLC.

 ###

Read the PEER lawsuit

View DEP denial of record release under OPRA

Review the Science Advisory Board charter

Look at the ongoing war by industry against DEP science

Examine the tactics of DuPont

shotgun bearing troops in riot gear disrupt a Thomas Merton Center G 20 peaceful rally & march (9/25/09)

[Update 1 – I was 1 of the 50 who filed complaints w/CPRB – see: Protesters blast police response, Oakland arrests ]

[Update 2 – just learned that this was a National Special Security Event

[Update 3: 10/2/09  watch Democracy Now! segment

[Update 4: 11/1/11 – I just came across this video of the G 20 in Toronto in June 2010. Looks really bad. One police tactic I saw also used in Pittsburgh was when police (in full riot gear) marched in lockstep, aggressively towards protesters, while pounding their shields as they walked. It sickened me. I thought of Nazi Germany and Rome. – end updates]

My kids go to school in Pittsburgh, so on Thursday I headed out to see them and witness and participate in the G 20 Summit protests.

Because the G 20 Summit provides a world stage, I was there to warm of “climate destruction ahead” and to advocate for a substantive global warming agenda for the upcoming December Copenhagen Climate Conference negotiations.

But there are other major pressing economic policy  issues related to the need to regulate global finance in light of economic collapse, as well as to re-conceptualize global “free trade” and economic development frameworks to protect labor and promote economic and social justice.

riot gear clad troops push through crowd at a peaceful permitted G 20 protest rally

I was appalled by what I saw – and I’m obviously not talking about my kids. It sure looked different than the welcoming Pittsburgh I visited, photographed and posted here.

I’ve never been on the wrong end of a shotgun before. Face to face – it is not a good feeling.

Downtown Pittsburgh in military lockdown.

But that’s not nearly all I saw. There were the dogs, Humvee roadblocks, no pedestrian zones, downtown lockdown, fenced off areas, designated protest zone, hundreds (thousands?) of military troops, helicopters, constant overhead military aircraft (F-16’s?), chemical gases, and even – the first time ever deployed in the US – ear splitting sonic crowd control technology.

There were a handful of anarchists – some possibly prone to violence – among a few thousand peaceful protesters. Dozens of college students, observers, media, and everyday local people were included in the crowds that police indiscriminately controlled and managed as violent. (listen to this for police state tactics)

Overwhelmingly peaceful people were met by a massive show of militarized police force. Riot gear armored police and military troops significantly outnumbered protestors.

I personally witnessed provocative, intimidating and repressive military tactics I had imagined were limited to third world countries, not the freedom loving USA. I directly experienced this when a group of 15 or so military troops – in full riot gear – marched aggressively and directly through a crowd at the Merton Center Rally. The crowd was attending a peaceful permitted rally before a march.

University of Pittsburgh student has ideas

Small groups of anarchists - do these kids look scary to you?

I talked to several people, all of whom described similar examples of where police and military units initiated violence, precipitated violence, or severely over reacted to minor threats associated with overwhelmingly non-violent protests.

After I got home I viewed several YouTube videos of events that confirmed this overreaction – just do the Google and see for yourself. The tear gassing of University of Pittsburgh students looked particularly egregious.

This level of militarized intimidation is un-American and raises serious questions about constitutionally guaranteed rights of dissent and protest – free speech, association, and opportunity to petition government for redress of grievances.

These are not mere words to me – I believe strongly in them. I watched videos where the protestors appealed to military units to respect their constitutional rights, only to have the troops ignore them while arbitrarily declaring peaceful protest illegal assembly. The scenes were redolent of a police state.

Protestors were not allowed anywhere near where the G 20 Summit was held, so President Obama and world leaders were totally isolated and could not hear their voices or see their signs.

Iraq Veterans Against the War join peaceful protestors

And – of course – the media focus on police over-reaction and scattered minor property damage by a handful of anarchists totally obscures any public discussion of the policy agenda before the G 20 and world leaders – important issues are being ignored – watch “G 20 Summit in Pittsburgh Highlights Economic Decline of Former Steel Capital“.

shotgun toting riot control police confronts college student

In this time of economic collapse, accelerating global warming, and war, citizens engagement and protest needs to be valued and encouraged.

But when police state tactics intimidate protest and dissent and  media diversion squelches informed public discussion of critical issues, our Constitutional values are assaulted and necessary democratic pressure for reform is derailed.

As Frederick Douglass famously said: “Power concedes nothing without a fight – it never has and never will.”

military unit defends port-a-potties from peaceful protestors

canine unit troops and motorcycle cops intimidate peaceful protestors

Protestor reads from militasry and police training manuals to advise troops of non-violent and effective crowd control tactics.

Pitt students face off against armed troops

Military choppers monitor Pitt students - at least 3 copters continuously hovered over the city

Some police presence was respectful and appropriate - Pa. State Police (R) and City of Pittsburgh officer (L)

THIS is a REAL RIOT - Steeler Fans riot after Superbowl (Penguins Stanley Cup too)

[Update below]

Unless you closely follow the technical discussion on the NJ Highlands email listserve, you probably don’t know that DEP abandoned a key regulatory tool to protect critical habitat of the State threatened species, Wood Turtle.

There were no press conferences, action alerts, sign on letters or other forms of protest by environmental groups. Yes, if one knew where to look, one could find some mention opposing this rollback by reading the fine print of written comments formally submitted to DEP on the rule proposal by a few conservation groups with biological expertise. But no major political or media opposition was mounted.

As a result, there was no press coverage to alert the public and no accountability for the DEP politicians who did this vile deed.

Earth Day, 2007 – environmentalist applaud DEP rollbacks

In fact, you might have  just the opposite impression, because the DEP rule proposal that abandoned protections for the wood turtle – and countless other species – was SUPPORTED by environmental groups. It received VERY FAVORABLE press coverage.

This occurred, despite a January 2007 warning letter signed by numerous groups, strongly urging DEP Commissioner NOT to make the regulatory change to current regulations that can be used to protect wood turtle habitat. Here is the intro – read the whole letter:

Dear Commissioner Jackson:

In a late December meeting attended by many of our groups, the Department outlined its plan for a new process to guide the designation of Category One waterways. The meeting afforded only a cursory overview of what would represent a very fundamental change to clean water protections in New Jersey, but did provide an outline of the narrow set of water quality indicators that might serve as the basis for deciding future C1 upgrades. We have serious objections to the proposed designation process and fear that its implementation would strip New Jersey of the ability to adequately protect and maintain its high quality waterways. If enacted, this method would reverse tremendous advances in clean water protection in the state, contradict the commitments made by Governor Corzine, and leave New Jersey without the ability to adequately protect and maintain many of its most deserving waterways.

Signed: Jeff Tittel, Sierra Club, NJEF, ANJEC, Environment NJ, et al

Say What? Here’s that sad tale:

According to DEP:

Wood turtles are semi-aquatic turtles preferring clear, well-oxygenated streams surrounded by a mosaic of woodlands, scrub-shrub/herbaceous wetlands, and successional meadows. In New Jersey, the wood turtle is commonly associated with water-quality sensitive fish such as native brook trout and brown trout.

While once ubiquitous throughout northern New Jersey, most of the viable wood turtle populations remain in rural portions of Sussex and Warren counties.

Degraded water quality, habitat fragmentation, road mortality, and predation are the primary factors behind its extirpation from developed portions of the State. Observational evidence from the Passaic River suggests that siltation of streams, as a result of storm water discharge and urbanization of the surrounding land, can lead to a decline in turtle populations. (p. 19-20)

In order to protect the wood turtle and its critical habitat – as well as habitat for numerous aquatic or aquatic dependent species – in 2002, DEP strengthened and greatly expanded water quality regulations – known as “Category One” (C1) waters – to implement the “antidegradation policy” mandated by the federal Clean Water Act. Federal law requires states to adopt antidegradation policies and implementation procedures.

Anti-degradation policy seeks to assure that exceptional high quality waters are not degraded by pollution. For the first time, using anti-degradation legal tools, DEP gave these exceptional waters real regulatory protections, by providing 300 foot wide stream buffers (on each side), where soil and vegetation may not be disturbed by major development.

Starting in early 2002, DEP began to classify C1 streams and rivers based upon “exceptional value” ecosystems. DEP also began designating streams and rivers that drained to reservoirs to protect water supply.

Previously, this C1 classification was limited to a few hundred stream miles that supported naturally reproducing trout populations.

Yet, even despite the C1 designation, historically, those streams were unprotected by DEP regulations.

The result of the new DEP C1 policy was a huge expansion of over 2,000 designated C1 stream miles and – at 75 acres of stream buffer per mile – thousands of acres of riparian land in new protected C1 stream corridors.  

These DEP regulatory moves were strongly opposed by the NJ Builders Association, pro-development industries, and property owners. Builders particularly opposed the new DEP policy of linking water quality and habitat, and using the “exceptional ecological significance” Clean Water Act policy tool to regulate development and land use to protect water quality.

The wood turtle became a poster child in this debate, because thousands of acres of land were classified as wood turtle critical habitat. Therefore, thousands of acres of such land located in stream corridors could be regulated and made off limits for development via DEP designation of C1 waters.

One key factor in determining “exceptional ecological significance”, was the presence of wood turtle or critical habitat. According to DEP’s new C1 designation methodology:

The stream’s ability to support water-dependent endangered and threatened species, such as bog turtle, wood turtle, long-tailed salamander and dwarf wedgemussel was a significant factor in determining whether a stream qualifies as a waterbody of “exceptional ecological significance”. (page 9) (link here)

Between 2002-2003, the following exceptional streams were designated C1 protected on the basis of the presence of wood turtles and/or critical habitat – each designation protected lands in stream buffers. These regulatory moves by DEP triggered major battles with the builders because they blocked large development projects:

• In November 18, 2002: Assiscunk Creek; Beaver Brook; Flat Brook; Sidney Brook;  South Branch Rockaway Creek; 
• In January 6, 2003: Paulins Kill; 
• In November 3, 2003: Harihokake Creek; Nishisakawick Creek; Pohatcong Creek; Wickecheoke Creek; Plum Brook;

(I really wish DEP would stop killing these links! Just restored- the links 4/13/16 to above 3 C1 proposals).

Under the new pro-economic development Corzine/Jackson DEP, the legal ability of DEP to designate C1 streams on the basis of wood turtle – and numerous other threatened and endangered species – was lost by DEP in a May 21, 2007 rule proposal where DEP revised the C1 designation methodology.

The revisions greatly narrowed DEP’s ability to designate C1 waters and eliminated wood turtle as a basis for doing so.

The Lisa Jackson DEP found that a new method was required as a result of “experience” – read the code for “due to strong oppostion by the powerful development community“:

Based upon the experience gained in the review and analysis of waterbodies for potential Category One designation, the Department is proposing to establish new definitions. These new definitions better define the data and criteria utilized to identify waterbodies that qualify for consideration for upgrade to Category One designation. These definitions are data driven and will better serve to identify waters that are truly exceptional. The Department is proposing amendments to the definition of “category one waters” and introducing new definitions for “Exceptional Ecological Significance”, “Exceptional Fisheries Resource(s)”, “Exceptional Water Supply Significance”, and “HUC 14″. (page 5) (link) 

The new DEP C1 designation method limited exceptional ecological value to a short list of specific species – if a species was not listed, it was not protected. The list did NOT include wood turtle.

Exceptional Ecological Significance – Endangered or Threatened Species (E&T) 

The Department is now proposing that a waterbody with the presence of suitable habitat verified by the Department to support Bog Turtle, Dwarf Wedgemussel, Brook Floater, Triangle Floater, Green Floater, Eastern Pondmussel, or Eastern Lampmussel, with a documented occurrence(s) of at least one of these species verified by the Department are eligible for consideration for Category One antidegradation designation upgrade. To qualify for consideration for Category One status as a waterbody of exceptional ecological significance, requires that the waterbody have suitable habitat verified by the Department to support on of these aquatic dependent E&T species and documented occurrence(s) verified by the Department. These species include several freshwater mussels and Bog Turtle. … (page 7)

For a detailed description of each species and its habitat see this link: 

 

For the wood turtle, the fight for riparian habitat protections is over – DEP unilaterally surrendered.

The only protections remaining are case by case, site specific  mitigation in individual land use permits – a formula for extirpation.

End of story.

[10/4/09 Update – Brian Murray of the Star Ledger picked up on the pine snake story today: Frustrated developers are hissing back at a snake

A colleague advised that the NJ Builders Association recently filed a petition for rulemaking urging DEP to delist pine snake and eliminate certain site specific regulatory protections for its habitat. 

This reminded me of the sorry tale of loss of DEP protections for the wood turtle – and countless other species.  Old news.  ~~~ end update]

Tabloid Tells Truth About Climate Change and How It Will Affect City, World

The Yesmen hit New York City today with a major stunt – here’s their press release, links at bottom:

Early this morning, nearly a million New Yorkers were stunned by the appearance of
a “special edition” New York Post blaring headlines that their city could face
deadly heat waves, extreme flooding, and other lethal effects of global warming
within the next few decades. The most alarming thing about it: the news came from
an official City report.

Distributed by over 2000 volunteers throughout New York City, the paper has been
created by The Yes Men and a coalition of activists as a wake-up call to action on
climate change. It appears one day before a UN summit where Secretary-General Ban
Ki-Moon will push 100 world leaders to make serious commitments to reduce carbon
emissions in the lead-up to the Copenhagen climate conference in December. Ban has
said that the world has “less than 10 years to halt (the) global rise in
greenhouse gas emissions if we are to avoid catastrophic consequences for people
and the planet,” adding that Copenhagen is a “once-in-a-generation opportunity.”

Although the 32-page New York Post is a fake, everything in it is 100% true, with
all facts carefully checked by a team of editors and climate change experts.Â

“This could be, and should be, a real New York Post,” said Andy Bichlbaum of the
Yes Men. “Climate change is the biggest threat civilization has ever faced, and it
should be in the headlines of every paper, every day until we solve the problem.”

The fake Post’s cover story (“We’re Screwed”) reports the frightening conclusions
of a blue-ribbon panel of scientists commissioned by the mayor’s office to
determine the potential effects of climate change on the City. That report was
released in February of this year, but received very little press at the time.
Other lead articles describe the Pentagon’s alarmed response to global warming
(“Clear & Present Disaster”), the U.S. government’s sadly minuscule response to
the crisis (“Congress Cops Out on Climate”), China’s alternative energy program
(“China�s Green Leap Forward Overtakes U.S.”), and how if the US doesn’t quickly
pass a strong climate bill, the crucial Copenhagen climate talks this December
could be a “Flopenhagen.”

The paper includes original investigative reporting as well. One article (“Carbon
counter counts New Yorkers as fools”) reveals that Deutsche Bank – which erected a
seven-story “carbon counter” in central Manhattan – not only invests heavily in
coal-mining companies worldwide, but has recently entered the business of coal
trading itself.

The paper has the world’s gloomiest weather page, covering the next 70 years
rather than just 7 days. The “Around the World” section describes the
disproportionate effects of climate change on poorer parts of the world, including
extreme droughts, floods, famines, water shortages, mass migrations and conflicts.
Developing countries will bear the brunt of climate change effects even though
they have done very little to cause the problem.

But the paper isn’t all doom and gloom. An article called “New York Fights Back”
notes that the carbon emissions of Big Apple residents are only one third the
national average, and that the city is building 1800 miles of bike paths, planting
one million trees, and replacing its fleet of police cars with hybrids. There’s
also a page of black-humor cartoons (in one, Charlie Brown finds Snoopy drowned),
a gossip section that takes no prisoners, and a number of truly cheerful ads – for
sex (“Awesome. No carbon emissions.”), tote bags, bicycles, and tap water
(“Literally comes right out of your faucet!”).

Another ad promotes civil disobedience, encouraging readers to visit
http://BeyondTalk.net and pledge to risk arrest in a planned global action
November 30, just before the conference in Copenhagen.

“We need strong action on climate change,” said David Solnit of Mobilization for
Climate Justice West, one of the partners in BeyondTalk.net. “But history shows
that leaders act only when people take to the streets to demand it. That’s what
needs to happen now.”

This paper is one of 2500 initiatives taking place in more than 130 countries as a
response to the “Global Wake-up Call” on climate change. For more information,
visit www.tcktcktck.org/wakeup

 Contact: The Yes Men <mailto:tabloid@theyesmen.org>, 347-254-7054, 646-220-4137
Fake New York Post: http://www.nypost-se.com/
Video News Release: http://www.nypost-se.com/video
City report on climate change: http://www.nyc.gov/html/om/pdf/2009/NPCC_CRI.pdf
Wake-up call: http://www.tcktcktck.org/wakeup 

I woke up with wood turtles on my mind and was going to write this morning about DEP’s abandonment of wood turtle habitat protections, but that story will have to wait.

A huge shot was fired today in what has been a dirty and expanding covert war on science at DEP – today’s Star Ledger reports:

 Scientists line up to join DEP’s controversial new advisory panel (click for complete story)

Sunday, September 20, 2009

More than 100 scientists have applied to join the Science Advisory Board, a panel being created by the state Department of Environmental Protection to provide expert opinions on several environmental questions. ….

Faced with ongoing budget cuts and staff reductions, [DEP Commissioner] Mauriello contends the advisory board is a natural fit for lean times. …But critics claim the board will be a tool for pro-development and industry forces that want to roll back tough pollution standards and circumvent the DEP’s own scientific staff.

DEP Commissioner, Mark Mauriello

“This thing was created because the science and research people inside the DEP are perceived at top levels as out of control because they did not let politics and the wishes of the administration get in their way of recommending such things as a tougher chromium clean-up standard in Jersey City,” said Bill Wolfe of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, or PEER….

“For 20 years this has been the goal of business and industry: to dismantle the DEP’s Division of Science and the extensive research they have done to protect the public health and environment from developers and polluters,” said Jeff Tittel of the Sierra Club.

Behind the scenes, powerful chemical and pharmaceutical lobbyists are aggressively pushing for their own industry scientists to take over control of environmental and public health science at DEP.

This move mirrors a discredited tactic of the Bush Administration, to stack EPA and FDA Science Advisory Boards with industry flacks to promote industry’s economic interest over the best science and public health protection.

There are direct consequences to protections we now enjoy, because independent science is required to establish those protections and to monitor and enforce them.

Questions of science and regulatory policy are inextricably linked. Every day, DEP makes decisions based on scientific standards and protocols, from managing fish and wildlife, wetlands and endangered species protections, enforcing air and water pollution permits, to warning residents about contaminated unsafe drinking water. Science and technical issues can not be isolated from policy and implementation of programs legally put in place to protect the public and regulate harmful actions of  industry. Yet, DEP Commissioner Maurielleo misleads the public by pretending that they are:

Mauriello said he tried to defuse such suspicions through the wording of the May directive he issued to create the board. The work of the panel, according to the directive, would be “limited to specific scientific and technical issues” that the commissioner pitches its way, “not policy or regulatory matters.” Mauriello also said the board will report to the DEP’s staff of scientists, who are helping to select its membership.

Mauriello’s May 2009 Order is riddled with loopholes, but does mention the need to limit scientific bias, but falls far short of a absolute ban on conflicts of interest. This failure invites and opens the door to industry control.

Hal Bozarth, Chemistry Council lobbyist is pushing industry flacks.

To provide a sense of just how dirty the covert science war has become, consider the fact that the NJ Chemistry Council is pushing employees of Dupont and Merck pharmaceuticals, some of the largest toxic polluters in NJ. How convenient to have a Dupont employee in control of the scientific health risk assessment of PFOA, a toxic chemical that is manufactured by his employer, Dupont. Risk assessments form the basis of regulations. Control the science and you control the regulations. These industry scientists are NOT independent, they have scientific biases and economic conflicts of interest. They MUST be excluded. Yet again, DEP Commissioner Mauriello misleads the public by saying:

“I respect the fears of the environmentalists,” Mauriello said. “But it can only be a good thing to have an independent group of scientists to look at what we do. The days of thinking we don’t need outside assistance are over.”

In order to reveal this covert war to the public, I filed an Open Public Records Act (OPRA) request . It was denied by DEP. DEP is protecting the chemical industry, NJ Builders Association and Business and Industry Association who are working behind the scenes. DEP is trying hard to keep the public from even knowing about this important debate. It is not just industry that won’t release the names of individual scientists – DEP won’t even reveal documents that show the existence behind the scenes industry lobbying! This DEP secrecy is especially troubling, because the industry’s agenda is made clear:

At least 2 Dupont employed scientists are being considered by DEP Commissioner Mauriello for appointment to the Science Advisory Board

Business and industry advocates have long wanted an advisory panel, although one with more official power to alter regulations. They have endorsed some candidates for the new board but have not released names.

“Too often the New Jersey Department of Environment Protection has set standards which have not been reflective of scientifically, peer-reviewed studies, said Hal Bozarth, executive director of the Chemistry Council of New Jersey. “This has led to the cost of compliance for New Jersey’s manufacturers to become far higher than in other states, Likewise, remediation of sites is far more expensive and often more time-consuming than in other states, while providing little or no extra protection. Therefore, a scientific advisory board comprised of scientific experts will provide many benefits to New Jersey in how it deals with its environmental issues.” 

Former DEP Commissioner Lisa Jackson caved to political pressure and abolshed DEP’s Division of Science and Research, and promoted a private Science Advisory Board.

I was pleased to read that the Star Ledger identified former DEP Commisioner Lisa Jackson as the person responsible for this sell out of scientific integrity to political pressure by powerful polluters. According to the Star Ledger:

Mauriello’s directive came five months after the DEP reorganized its Division of Science, Research and Technology into an Office of Science under a director of policy and planning. That change was put in place by DEP commissioner Lisa Jackson before she left in November to head the federal Environmental Protection Agency.

Dave Brogan, NJBIA lobbyists, misleads the public about DEP science and regulatory practices

But even though this story has been smoked out in the media, the  industry lobbyists and hacks continue to lie. David Brogan, an NJBIA lobbyist KNOWS that DEP considers a broad array of scientific sources – not just in house DEP scientists – and that DEP routinely conducts external peer review of scientific research sponsored or conducted by DEP. Yet he lies nonetheless:

“David Brogan of the New Jersey Business and Industry Association said it is time the DEP heard from scientists outside a state laboratory. …

But even in an advisory capacity, the new board will offer “cutting-edge” information that may otherwise not be available to the state or public, said Elizabeth George-Cheniara of the New Jersey Builders Association,

The only thing “cutting edge” these industry flacks will offer is the company line – which of course – “is not otherwise available to the public“!