New Jersey Friends of Clearwater

New Jersey Friends of Clearwater (NJFC), formerly Monmouth County Friends of Clearwater is a grass roots organization, fully non-profit, volunteer-run and staffed.  Since 1974, this organization has been actively trying to educate children and adults on the importance of clean clear water and to urge citizens to be responsible custodians of our domain:  the estuaries of Hudson, the Raritan, Delaware, and other NJ Rivers, the Jersey Shore coastline, its inland waterways, and the land of New Jersey.

Almost 40 years ago, Pete Seeger realized a dream by getting the 106' Sloop Clearwater launched and spreading the word for a cleaner environment by word, music and action.  A seed from that endeavor took root in the form of Monmouth County Friends of Clearwater when popular folksinger Bob Killian brought the idea to Monmouth County over 35 years ago. NJFC will continue its close affiliation with Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, Inc., as a Clearwater Sloop Club.  Our new name NJFC reflects our goals, growth and outreach in this new Millennium. 

Our credo:  It is the aim of New Jersey Friends of Clearwater that each member in their own way touch the people immediately surrounding them and in their community, and by word or deed convey the importance of conservation and reparation of the earth.

back to top

Latest News

Clearwater Rejects Fort Monmouth-Issued EA and FNSI and Urges Creation of Environmental Impact State

After an extensive scientific review of the Environmental Assessment (EA) Clearwater rejects the EA and cites that it does not provide sufficient evidence to call for a Finding of No Significant Impact (FNSI).  A forthright Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is therefore a necessary addition to the evidence to assure that the receiving communities—Eatontown, Tinton Falls, and Oceanport, the county, and the state have a true, whole picture of the property that will become their citizens responsibility and liability in 2011. The EA's lack of complete disclosure calls into question the claims of short-term, minor impact in almost all areas.
The Army chose to include only the Phase I ECP report which minimized the impacts of:
•    43 contaminated sites were found originally in the Phase 1 ECP of which 27 are still under remediation and not declared as NFA yet.
•    Several of the contamination sites have been declared Classification Exception Area (CEA) and/or Declaration of Environmental Restriction (DER), a virtual no-fly zone forever designation.
•    A poorly conceived, two-stage landfill stabilization process and design that followed 2.5 years of denial of its need after failure of previous remedies. 
However, the Army chose to not include the most recent Phase II ECP from mention when addressing hazardous or toxic materials:
•    27 additional contaminated "parcels" were found in the Phase II ECP which recommended a Baseline Ecological Evaluation (BEE) which is also required by NJAC 7:26E-3.11, Requirements for Site Remediation. The BEE is needed to determine which parcels/subparcels should go through more rigorous analysis and remediation and which parcels should be ruled out. 
•    The BEE had not been funded until early spring and hasn't yet been executed.  Only after the BEE determinations are made can the Army enter into the 7-step process that identifies the problem more scientifically and lays out a plan for design and execution of the remediation. 
These facts beg the questions:
•    How can the Army declare FNSI when you have sites that will remain CEA and/or DER of no significant impact?
•    How can the Army go forward and not take into account 27 parcels of land in which Phase II ECP itemized new contaminated sites that have yet to be fully assessed, much less have the Contaminants of Concern (COCs) remediated.
Additionally, the Army's EA and other documentation have never identified their pollution's impacts to food chain and environment downstream in the Shrewsbury. Sandy Hook Bay, and the Ocean.  The Army has never acknowledged the impacts of the COCs to past and present workers—the computer scientists, logisticians, technicians and military in the Myers Center (and other labs)—who were never notified of the high levels of carcinogens such as PCEs and TCEs that rose as high as 7820 μg/l level within 100 feet of their workplace.  Although detected vapor intrusion in Phase II was relatively negligible, the same could not have been said in the years 1955 to 2001 when the levels were sky high.
We call for a full-fledged Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) of the property.  For the reasons above, the EIS should address not only the current state of the property and its impacts but also the significant impacts already delivered to those two major areas.  Again we were assisted by the Eatontown Environmental Commission and Clean Ocean Action.

back to top