back to top

Welcome to our Festival, President's Address

back to top

Clearwater and Sierra Opposed to Proposed Coal-Fired Power Plant

back to top

NJEF 24th Annual Conference

A contingent of Clearwater members participated in the NJ Environmental Federation's 24th Annual Conference at Rutgers, Newark. Clearwater is a founding member of that coalition that spans the diversity of all environmental groups in NJ from grass roots organizations like our and the Ironbound Community Corp. (a national leader in Environmental Justice) to the national organizations like Sierra Club and Clean Water Action. Of course Amy Goldsmith, NJEF Executive Director, is also a member of Clearwater and wife of Ben. Our members led or attended workshops that included: Power, Politics And The Environment (Ben Forest led); 21st Century Water; Toxic Substance Control Act Reform; Green Economy And Green Jobs; Healthy Schools/Healthy Towns; Climate Change; How To Develop While Protecting The Environment And Economy; Sustainability And The Green Movement;  and Growing the Green Generation on youth education and activism (Ed Dlugosz).

back to top

NJFC's April Earth Month Activities

Earth Day and the month that surrounded it were busy times for Clearwater. In addition to the RAB meeting and the MMS hearing mentioned above, Clearwater led or participated in:

• April 7: Wakefern Sustainability Fair, 11:30 AM - 1:30 PM, Wakefern Food Corp., Plaza 7 Facility, 33 Northfield Avenue, Edison, NJ  08837
• April 17: NJ Environmental Federation (NJEF) Conference, 9 am - 5 pm) at Rutgers University Center for Law and Justice, 123 Washington Street, Newark, NJ
• April 18: St Mary's Environmental Expo, 8:45 am to 1 pm in the Parish Hall of St. Mary's RCC, Phalanx Rd & Rt 34, Colts Neck, NJ
• April 20: Wakefern Sustainability Fair, 11:30 - 1:30 PM, Wakefern Food Corp., General Merchandise Facility, Jamesburg, NJ,
• pril 24: EARTH DAY OPEN HOUSE, Saturday,12:00 PM - 5:00 PM, Manasquan Reservoir Environmental Center, 331 Georgia Tavern Road, Howell
• April 24: Highlands Earth Day, Highland Community Center, 10am – 2pm
• April 30: Four sessions of TEF at Anastasia Elementary School, Long Branch.

Here are some details of a few of those events:

Clearwater a Major Player at Wakefern/ShopRite Sustainability Fairs
Wakefern, the parent company of ShopRite Supermarkets, organized a series of Sustainability Fairs for their employees with three primary purposes.  They wanted employees to discover sustainable solutions being employed by their suppliers; find out about sustainable technologies potentially applicable to ShopRite; and learn how to take action at home and at work 

Because of our special long-term relationship – ShopRite has been a major supporter of our Clearwater Festival – we were invited to participate and had displays, literature and information at their headquarters in Edison (4/7) and also at a major distribution facility in Jamesburg (4/20). Wakefern/ShopRite deserves kudos for having the imagination, concern, and commitment to conduct these excellent events. Special thanks also go to Tim Johnson, Barbara and Jack Charlton (pictured at left),  and Andrea Spinelli  for the Clearwater effort.

St. Mary's Environmental Expo
Tim and Marylin Johnson, Chrissie and Susan Goedkoop have kept our perfect attendance alive at the Environmental Expo at St. Mary's RCC. Once again our wheel of fortune environmental quiz game was one of the most visited displays at the Expo. Our biggest competition was across the aisle at the 4H display of cuddly rabbits of all species including a Netherlands Dwarf and American Lop-Eared rabbits.

Earth Day Events at Highlands and Manasquan Reservoir
As always, April 24th was a busy day for Clearwater. We had to choose from many offers and we'd already attended several events that same week. We chose two that allowed us to keep with this year's annual theme, Watershed Protection. Highland NJ is one of the most scenic venues being on the Bay facing Sandy Hook between which the largest watershed in Monmouth County, i.e., the combined Shrewsbury and Navesink Rivers,  enters the bay on its way to the Atlantic Ocean. Members Lynn Humphrey and Chic Roemmele provided the avid crowd with information about Clearwater's initiatives and membership benefits. We thank Highlands Councilwomen Rebecca Kane for inviting us.

The second event of the day was Earth Day Open House at the Environmental Center at beautiful Manasquan Reservoir County Park. Located in Howell at 331 Georgia Tavern Road on the west side of the 40B gallon Reservoir, the EC is an amazing destination all year round. With its displays of every aspect of the local flora, fauna, and geological environment the EC and the Park is a treasure trove for all ages including the live video feed from a Bald Eagle nest with a 2 month old fledgling. Susan Goedkoop and Ed Dlugosz set up our interactive watershed model directly below an active, illuminated representation of the Manasquan Watershed from the furthest west reaches of Monmouth County to the Atlantic. It provided the perfect setting for hands-on teaching children of all ages that they could help prevent runoff (or Non-Point Source) pollution. We again thank Chris Lanza, Senior Park Naturalist, for hosting us and informing us that over 1000 visitors attended the displays at the Open House event.

back to top

Quarterly Fort Monmouth RAB Meeting April 8 2010:  Time to Ask Hard Questions

As reported last month, the Army signed the bogus Finding of No Significant Impact (FNSI) document on 5 February 2010. Contrary to previous denials that the FNSI was a RAB matter, it has magically been placed and discussed oddly at the April 8th RAB meeting. By oddly I mean that it was a one-way reading of the regulations by Ms Wanda Green regarding the National regulations called NEPA. The most important lesson that the RAB members and the public learned was the meaning of "Significant". Like Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland-Through the Looking Glass where Humpty Dumpty tutors Alice on the usage of words*, Ms Green explained that the rules say that "significant" means whatever the Army wants it to mean. Unfortunately some RAB members defended this absurdity.

I was thrilled to see a good turnout which showed the Government/Army representatives our disapproval of their FNSI.  Two areas of major concern remain that have not been addressed in any of the preceding Army assessments are 1.) health concerns to Fort Monmouth workers exposed to the contamination during the past 90+ years, and 2.) the need for thorough downstream testing for contaminated sediment affecting human and marine life of the Shrewsbury watershed.

Among the other topics that were presented and discussed at the RAB meeting are:

• The ongoing issues with the Work Plan scope and delay of the execution of Baseline Ecological Evaluation and remediation was discussed. Shaw Engineering presented a high level outline of the Plan but was very evasive when it came to the scope of the sediment testing. Councilmen from Shrewsbury and Oceanport concurred with the need for comprehensive downstream sediment testing.
• We expected but did not receive a report on the progress of a new groundwater migration modeling effort by Brinkerhoff Environmental. The environmental community is skeptical about its rationale so soon after the 2004 modeling effort
• A presentation by in-house DPW staff showed the progress of the Underground Storage Tank (UST) remediation effort. The count has grown from 24 to now over 60 with no real end in sight. All tanks reported were full of oil and/or water where the ratio was between 80-100% of the contents were oil.
• Landfill Streambank Stabilization is almost complete with the exception of the worst landfill which needs stabilzation on both sides of the Wampum. There was no progress in the landfill capping [as Ms Green calls it "landfill covering" in the Carroll tradition] was reported.  Again the community believes in the need for impervious capping.
  
• The second round of ECP2 Vapor Intrusion detection results has either not occurred or reported yet.  When attempting to correct another lapse in Minutes of the last RAB meeting which should have reported a conversation on a vapor intrusion topic between Ms Green and me. My recollection and recording of the conversation indicated that Ms Green had said that a vapor intrusion test was not required at the height of the contaminated TCE/PCE readings in the late 1990s in the Myers Center courtyard because the DPW tested soil gas not groundwater-induced vapor. When I cited EPA guidance that identified groundwater was the major cause of soil gas and that it was standard operating procedure to test where high levels of groundwater VOCs are present, she insisted that her only statement was that Vapor Intrusion Detection testing was not done at that time. 
  

back to top

Henry Hudson Trail Cleanup

New Jersey Friends of Clearwater picked a beautiful day on Saturday, March 20th to conduct its first environmental cleanup for 2010.  The weather was sunny and pleasantly warm when members of the New Jersey Friends of Clearwater showed up in Keansburg, New Jersey, to clean up a portion of the Henry Hudson Trail.  Starting from Main Street, our team first worked the trail going west.  There was no shortage of garbage to pick up and our crew did a good job separating the recyclables from the rest of the garbage.

We switched to cleaning up the trail east of Main Street so that both sides of the trail would look clean when viewed from Main Street.  Special thanks to our crew, Ray, Joellen, Mike, Tim, and Marilyn for making this clean-up successful and for giving up part of a beautiful weekend to make this happen.  Another "thank you" to Ray for making arrangements for the clean up, for treating our crew to breakfast after the clean up and for bringing the recyclables to the Recycling Center.

back to top

NJFC Friends Speak Out at Quarterly RAB Meeting

The FM Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) held its quarterly public meeting at FM Gibbs Hall on January 14, 2010. Besides Mr Dlugosz, a RAB member, friends of NJFC made up the majority of the audience and made their voices heard during the public comment period. Among the attendees were: Eatontown Environmental Commission (EC), Shrewbury EC, Oceanport EC, Tinton Falls EC, Little Silver EC, Clean Ocean Action, Sierra Club, Fort Monmouth Earth Renaissance Peace Alliance, Eatontown Borough Council, Oceanport Borough Council, and Shrewbury Borough Council.

The agenda was full and contained the topics of old business; the status of the BEE, Landfill Streambank Stabilization, Indoor Air Quality/Vapor Intrusion, and Landfill Capping. Also on the agenda were presentations on the progress of the Underground Storage Tanks (UST), Contaminated Groundwater Modeling, and status of the Installation Restoration Program, i.e., progress of contaminated site remediation.

Old Business addressed Mr. Dlugosz's comments on the July's RAB minutes which were tabled since October. Basically the comments addressed the Army's position and ridiculous rationale for not discussing the EA/FNSI at the July's RAB meeting and the intentional exclusion of the Eatontown EC representatives' verbal response to several issues in July's minutes. [details discussed in November 2009 Newsletter]. The outcome of the Old Business discussion was that the FM DPW representatives will revise the minutes to satisfy the comments.

The BEE status was that itsWorkplan was reviewed by NJDEP and DPW was to revise it to accommodate the action items. When asked by our RAB and COA representatives whether the plan would contain extensive downstream sediment testing, we were told that the testing would only take place a couple of feet from the landfill streambank and none would be done downstream unless evidence from those sample indicated more needed to be done. Our contention all along has been that 60 years of landfill, lab chemical outflow, and groundwater migration have left 60 years of contaminated sediment downstream which has affected the plant, animal, and human biosystems.

The landfill streambank stabilization project is almost completed. Landfill M-2, the biggest and most contaminated, is the last of the sites to be stabilized. Most observers feel that the rock access roads are an eyesore and installing the riprap before the newly proposed capping [they now refer to it as landfill "cover"] was poor engineering. The "cover" project still has not moved forward for lack of funds and without a schedule divulged.  Lastly, the vapor intrusion retest did not detect vapors above DEP criteria. When asked how high the readings were at the height of the groundwater plume [>7840 ppm] at the Hex, we were told only soil gases were measured not the natural and air-sparged fumes escaping VOCs from GW.

The UST presentation showed progress but the UST removed/remediated statistics provided by the DPW at the RAB were smaller than those of the contractors on site during the UST/Stabilization tour in November. The IRP status still didn't give a clear definition of what still needed to be done although claims of petitions to NJDEP for additional No Further Action (NFA) status were presented. What makes this important and improbable is that the DPW has contracted for a new groundwater migration modeling effort to be done. This is more than curious because, as reported in November, the previous modeling was done and summarized in a report available on their website [Classification Exception Area Information for Various Sites] was done in 2004 as shown in the chart below. When asked why so soon, the answer was that the new modeling will be done with more accurate modeling tools.  Sounds suspiciously like they want new and more optimistic results.

back to top

Clearwater Urges U.S. Senators and Congressmen to Act

NJ Friends of Clearwater with its friends Clean Ocean Action, NJ Environmental Federation, and the Fort Monmouth Earth Renaissance Peace Alliance have urged NJ's US Senators Frank Lautenberg and Robert Menendez and US Congressmen Rush Holt and Frank Pallone to act on our behalf to demand that Fort Monmouth (FM) provide an accurate, truthful Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Clearwater has been battling FM's draft Finding of No Significant Impact (FNSI) and its supporting document Environmental Assessment (EA) since spring of 2009 and the whole gamut of FM issues since 2006. You can find detail of the fight in the News webpage or in copies of our previous newsletters hosted on the NJFC Newsletter page of our NJFC Website.

In our letter to our legislators we delineated the deficiencies of the EA and FNSI and the lack of positive progress for addressing the new contamination highlighted in the Phase 2 Environmental Condition of the Property (ECP). Chief among our stated issues are downstream marine pollution of streams and rivers; worker health issues related to the pollution, and legacy impact of the property on the health and cost to the public in the host towns and surrounding area.

We urged our congressional leaders, to ensure that the following actions occur in a timely manner prior to property transfer:
1.    Assessment of all impacts that Fort Monmouth has had on the area and waterways through an EIS, which would include further investigation that will:
a.    assess the extent and depth of sediment contamination (a sediment core sampling survey is necessary), as well as their existing and potential effects on marine life.
b.    complete the Baseline Ecological Evaluations (BEE), including more aggressive investigation of continued high levels of contamination,
c.    determine the full extent of radioactive contamination,
d.    identify and determine the extent of leaks in the wastewater system to the environment,
e.    examine the stormwater system as planned,
f.    identify areas with residential soil standards exceedances

2.    Remediation of the landfills, including the possible need for excavation of contents based on the results from groundwater testing, the Baseline Ecological Evaluations, and surveys for underground tanks or drums

3.    Full public disclosure of contamination and infrastructure conditions, deed restriction requirements, as well as expected remediation requirements with specific timeframes.

The full text of the letter will be posted on the aforementioned NJFC Newsletter webpage at: http://www.mcclearwater.org/newsletter.php

back to top

Bowing to Developers, Legislators Threaten Drinking Water

Three-quarters of NJ's fresh waters are too polluted to swim in or fish from --- let alone drink -- but our state legislature is making matters worse by allowing developers to build on land now regulated to buffer our water supplies.

A bill (A4345/S2985) passed both houses this month to delay for two years Department of Environmental Protection regulations to protect 300,000 acres of lands that are critical to buffer our lakes, streams and reservoirs from further pollution. This "gift" to developers (a misnomer, I admit, since developers contribute very generously for the "gifts" they receive) allows them to build new sewer lines – and the buildings that connect to them -- in critical buffer zones.

Another shameful bill (S3004) would restrict public notices about contaminated sites only to property owners within 200 feet of the contamination. Ignoring gravity, our legislators believe toxic pollutants can't spread out or flow downstream – despite, as just one example, the toxic plumes flowing from Fort Monmouth's many dumps into the Shrewsbury River and into groundwater supplies. Gov. Corzine vetoed both bills, but Gov. Christie's preferences aren't clear yet and developers never quit.

A third bill (A4347/S3137) that is law extends – yet again – all pending and expired state and county building permits for 2.5 more years. This "gift," wrapped in the duplicitous banner of "economic stimulus," originally passed two years ago presumably to thwart the world-wide "Great Recession." Our legislators apparently still think the recession was caused by DEP's approval processes.

These bills are part of a systematic assault on our environment, even though everyone knows that New Jersey's open space and water supplies are seriously threatened by over-development. Open spaces, which buffer many of these supplies, need more protection from over-development, not less. Consider this: Several years ago, legislators fell all over themselves to promote a cleverly named bit of mischief, a "Fast Track" bill that would have required the deliberately understaffed and underfunded DEP to act on building applications within a very tight time period – or automatically grant the permits. I suppose the state's traffic-congestion and overdevelopment wasn't proceeding quickly enough. Mercifully, that giveaway was shelved.

Another recent "gift," promoted under the oxymoron "Smart Growth" when "Dumb Growth" is more accurate, gave developers up to $50 million in tax credits for projects generating 250 permanent jobs within a mile of a railroad station. The bill was designed to give legislators' patrons a $1.5 billion taxpayers' subsidy while pretending to promote mass transit.

Today, about half of New Jersey's land is impermeable, which means roads, parking lots, roof tops and even our compacted suburban lawns prevent rain from soaking into the soil and recharging underground water supplies. Instead, rain runoff – and the pollutants, garbage and erosion that come along for the ride – land in our lakes, streams, and reservoirs. To make matters worse, more than half the open spaces lost in New Jersey in the past 13 years were the very forests and other natural areas needed to help buffer this runoff. 

Sadly, the votes reducing protections for our waters supplies prove one thing -- developers' campaign contributions rank higher in Trenton than protecting our drinking water.

back to top

Remembering Dery Bennett

New Jersey Environmentalists were saddened to hear that Derrickson W. (Dery) Bennett died last December. He was 79. An icon in the environmental movement, he became the first director of the American Littoral Society in 1968 and retired in 2003. Still, he came to the Littoral Society office at Sandy Hook every day in his beat-up pickup truck, acknowledging to me once that "Now I can do just what I want to do." And what he wanted to do was represented by stacks of papers cluttering his office but never lost to Dery. He'd find whatever he was looking for within five minutes. "They're here somewhere," he'd mumble.

His tenure at the Littoral Society predated the Earth Day movement. He was there "before the Creation." He once told me "the Society represents the fish," but he never missed an opportunity to go crabbing or hit the beach when the blues were running. And he relished cooking seafood snacks at the Society's office.

I make no claim to being an intimate of Dery's. My first contact with him was back in the early 1970s when I was bored with my job and wrote to him, asking if he needed any help at the Society. He said he didn't, the bum, a decision that I believe set the marine environmental movement back about 10 years. Coincidentally, he got the director's job the same way about 10 years before, by writing to the Littoral Society cold turkey. Timing, timing, it's all about timing.

Later, I finally met him when I was doing a newspaper story about beach access -- his favorite issue. We irritated a few beach club managers as we trudged along the federally constructed seawall through their properties. In Monmouth Beach, we met a man who said he spent $40,000 to build his own seawall, and we spent a pleasant time discussing the very scary hazards of living on the edge of the ocean. My series on beach access had absolutely no impact in Trenton, but at least I spelled Dery's name correctly.
I bumped into Dery off and on after that, and I remained a member of the Littoral Society whenever I remembered to send in my check.

A few years ago, I wrote a bunch of marine tutorials for the Society's website. Dery was to edit them, but apparently I wrote faster than Dery read. Only a few made it to the website. Whenever I'd try to push him along, he'd look up sheepishly and mumble, "They're here somewhere." In recompense for the delays, he made me a lifetime Society member.

Occasionally his trademark optimism had limits. At the close of the Bush years, he asked me as we over-looked Raritan Bay, "Do you sometimes think it's only getting worse?"  Without Dery, it would have been.

A memorial for this remarkably effective yet gentle servant of the fish will be held Saturday, Feb.27, 2- 4 pm at the Fort Hancock Chapel at Sandy Hook. There we can tell lies, darned lies and even the truth about Dery. The latter will be the most interesting. And my tutorials? It will take a hazmat team to find them, but "They're here somewhere."

back to top

Father Time Organization Awards Clearwater

The Keansburg, New Jersey, organization known as Father Time is devoted to helping fathers develop strong relationships with their children. Every year, Father Time holds a fishing and environmental expo and, since its inception 6 years ago, Clearwater has supported this worthy event. Ray Cann, Tim Johnson, and Barbara and Jack Charlton carried the Clearwater banner to the Bolger school with information and displays which featured the Clearwater Quiz and a hands-on exhibit of plankton. This year Father Time surprised us with the presentation of a beautiful trophy in recognition of our support and our dedication to environmental causes.

Clearwater Shed Finds a New Home
by Jack Charlton
The Clearwater shed, which is essential for the storage of items used in our education program, is finally resting safely at its new location in Holmdel. Many thanks to board member Jim Franchi for providing space in his back yard to accommodate it and to Pat McGrath, Art SanFilippo and Jack Charlton for helping with the tricky move. Particular thanks to Ray Cann and Bill Pamplin for being the prime movers.

back to top

Environmental Justice Roundtable

Environmental Justice Milestones—2000s:

• 2000 - Indigenous Environmental Network starts the Mining Campaign Project to address unsustainable mining and oil development on native lands.
• 2000 - The North Carolina state assembly releases $7 million to begin detoxification of Warren County's PCB landfill.
• 2000 - Macon County Citizens for a Clean Environment stages a successful campaign to prevent construction of a large landfill near campus of historic Tuskegee University.
• 2001 - Native American activists and their allies succeed in preventing siting of a nuclear waste dump in Ward Valley, California, after 10 years of struggle.
• 2001 - Residents of toxics-contaminated areas of Anniston, Alabama, win a $42.8 settlement against Monsanto, as well as relocation of their community due to PCB contamination.
• 2001 - U.N. Commission on Human Rights lists living free of pollution as a basic human right.
• 2002 - Second People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit held in Washington, D.C.
• 2002 - Shell agrees to buy out and relocate residents of the Diamond community of Norco, Louisiana, due to contamination.
• 2003 - New York State Department of Environmental Conservation adopts a new policy requiring environmental justice reviews before the issuance of permits.
• 2005 - Congress passes an amendment to the EPA's appropriations bill directing the agency not to spend any congressionally appropriated funds in a manner that contravenes Executive Order 12898 or delays its implementation.
• 2005 - More than 45 environmental justice and mainstream environmental groups, including NRDC, oppose the EPA's attempt to eliminate "race" and "income" as a focus of its environmental justice efforts in its strategic plan.
• 2005 - Twenty-five Democrats in the Senate and House send a letter to the EPA for its failure to apply Executive Order 12898 in its flawed strategic plan for environmental justice.
• 2005 - At the request of Congresswoman Hilda Solis (D-CA), the General Accounting Office releases a report finding that the EPA generally devoted little attention to environmental justice issues while drafting three significant clean air rules on gasoline, diesel and ozone between fiscal years 2000 and 2004.
• 2008 – Lois Marie Gibbs is keynote speaker emphasizing the Precautionary Principle theme of the 33rd Annual Clearwater Festival at Asbury Park, NJ. Clearwater holds first "Environmental Roundtable" with Ed Dlugosz organizing and Kerry Butch moderating a panel of important EJ activists from throughout NJ.
• 2008 – NJEF, of which NJFC is a member, and Clean Water Fund launched the Urban Environmental Institute (UEI), a leadership initiative project in Newark, NJ. The institute was established to create the next generation of urban environmental advocates and build a more sustainable, greener, and economically stable Newark, NJ
• 2009 – NJEF and a coalition of other groups launched "Kids Clean Air Zones" and "Coalition for Healthy Ports" to combat air pollution and other hazards in urban areas.
• 2009 – NJ Friends of Clearwater holds the 2nd Annual Environmental Roundtable at the 34th Annual Clearwater Festival.

back to top

Fort Monmouth Contamination Battle Moves Forward

Fort Monmouth Contamination Battle Moves Forward
Clearwater has been battling FM's draft Finding of No Significant Impact (FNSI) and its supporting document Environmental Assessment (EA) since last spring. "I don't feel that the town can afford to go forward without understanding all of the environmental impacts, all of the remedies and the time frames and the cost that will be involved," said NJFC VP and Eatontown Environment (EEC) Chairman Ed Dlugosz. He presented the facts and issues to a Eatontown Borough Council Workshop on November 4, 2009 and was successful in persuading the Council to pass a formal resolution opposing the FM finding and calling for an full-fledged public Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). [See full Atlanticville/ Hub Workshop report, "Army's Findings On Fort Contamination Criticized" by Daniel Howley.]

This followed a stand taken—at the October 2009 FMERPA Environmental Advisory Committee meeting—by EAC members from Eatontown, Oceanport, and Tinton Falls and other members of the public who were unanimous in their rejection of the EA/FNSI and in favor of the EIS and an open meeting to discuss the issues. These two events preceded the release of formal critical comments on the EA/FNSI by Clearwater, Clean Ocean Action, EEC and Birdsall Engineering, Tinton Falls, Monmouth County Board of Health, NJDEP, and numerous members of the public sent to the Army Installation Command at Fort Monmouth in May 2009. For a look at Clearwater's and other formal comments, click:  http://www.monmouth.army.mil/C4ISR/brac/ea/ea.shtml

On another battlefront, two Clearwater members Ben Forest and Ed Dlugosz participated in walking and riding tour of the Landfill Streambank Stabilization project and the Underground Storage Tank (UST) removal project carried out by Fort Monmouth and Army Corps of Engineers (ACoE) contractors. In previous NJFC Newsletters, we've detailed our support for the need to stop the leaching of the landfill contaminants (e.g., arsenic, lead, VOCs, PCBs, PAHs, and other oil derivatives) into our watersheds by excavating contamination and capping the landfills, and stabilizing the banks. The Army has finally, after almost 10 years of erosion and 3 years of our campaigning, to capitulate but has reversed the logical process. We can report that the stabilization is almost done while the Army still dithers on the capping design and awaits funding. As reported in the Atlanticville and our earlier reports, several of the landfills are Classification Exception Areas (CEA) and/or Declaration of Environmental Restriction (DER)—meaning that the groundwater or soil is so polluted that nothing can built upon them. A recent RAB-website posting of the Army's 5-year old source report, Classification Exception Area Information For Various Sites, indicates that their computer modeling of those pollutants' lifecycle at 5 sites can take up to 4500 years to meet NJDEP non-residential criteria without aggressive remediation. Their natural attenuation approach that is their norm is not aggressive. Click:  http://www.monmouth.army.mil/C4ISR/brac/oed/CEAVarioussites.pdf

The UST project is going well. After initially following the decision of their lawyers to NOT REMOVE/REMEDIATE the ECP2-identified 24 USTs, the local DPW was convinced by Clearwater and a host of other critics to proceed. The count of leaking USTs has now topped 50 and they're still discovering new tanks. The local DPW contractors, who are doing a conscientious job, showed us one of their newest finds, a leaking 1000 gallon tank filled with oil and water which had stained an area of greater than 60 square feet. They were still excavating the downgradient area leading to Parker Creek when we left.

When asked whether the unfunded, future Baseline Ecological Evaluation (BEE) would assess the sediment of the Parker, Oceanport, and other streams, Ms. Wanda Green, spokesperson for the RAB, said that it would. When further questioned regarding the extent of the assessment, she said that FM and NJDEP would document it in the BEE Work Plan that is being finalized. Asked if a draft copy would be available to RAB members (Mr. Dlugosz is a RAB member) she maintained that not until finalized. Same old story!

back to top

Criticized

Army's findings on fort contamination criticized
The Eatontown Environmental Commission is calling on the Department of the Army to conduct an in-depth study of environmental contamination at Fort Monmouth before turning property over to the fort's three host towns. "I feel that we need more information to make a better decision on what's going on [at Fort Monmouth]," Environmental Commission Chairman Edward Dlugosz said at the Nov. 4 council workshop meeting. Dlugosz, a member of the fort's Restoration Advisory Board (RAB), made the request after the Army released a draft of a Finding of No Significant Impact (FNSI) report. "I don't feel that the town can afford to go forward without understanding all of the [environmental] impacts, all of the remedies and the time frames and the cost that will be involved," he said. Dlugosz said the Army should produce a more thorough Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) instead.

In the FNSI the Army claims that the three host municipalities of Eatontown, Oceanport and Tinton Falls would be left with no significant environmental impacts to deal with as a result of the Army's mission at the fort when the fort closes in 2011. The draft FNSI follows the completion of an Environmental Assessment (EA) at the fort to determine whether the Army would be required to perform a more extensive EIS or prepare a FNSI, according to Tim Rider, a spokesman for the fort. Rider pointed out that the FNSI is still in draft form and that the Army is reviewing any comments received.
In preparing the EA, Dlugosz explained, the Army looked into the impact that turning over the fort would have on the region's local environment, cultural environment, economic climate, as well as a number of other issues.

While he does not have a problem with the majority of the items in the report, Dlugosz said at the Nov. 4 meeting that he and members of several other environmental groups take issue with the actual assessment of the land, water and air pollution at the fort. "Basically what this report said was that everything was fine and that there was nothing that needed to be done once the [Army] left other than the things that were under way already," Dlugosz said, adding that the Army will continue work on sites that have already been identified as being in need of remediation.

However, Dlugosz said, the EA was not complete because it left out key information. "What I found was that they didn't tell the whole story," he said. According to Dlugosz, the Army conducted what is known as a Phase I Environmental Condition of the Property (ECP) in 2005, which resulted in the discovery of some 43 contaminated sites on the fort property. Of those 43 sites, Dlugosz explained, 27 are still being remediated and have not yet been declared as in need of No Further Action (NFA), while some sites have already been declared Classification Exception Areas (CEA) or Declaration of Environmental Restriction (DER) areas. Such classifications amount to a "virtual no-flyzone forever designation," Dlugosz explained. [editor's note: As noted in the Army's source document CEA Information For Various Sites, 5 of the sites that were considered for the CEA designation, computer modeling of the contaminants estimated that it would take 4500 years for the lead to dissipate at M-12 Landfill, over a 1000 years for the Arsenic and heavy metals Cadmium, Chromium and Lead to dissipate at M-18, etc.]

"Those mean that there is too much pollution of the groundwater or the soil [that the sites] are too bad to put anything on," Dlugosz said. "In fact, on those areas with those designations- and there is at least five of those - you can't do anything forever on those properties." Some of those contaminated sites, Dlugosz said, are the same properties that are destined for use as open space under the Fort Monmouth Economic Revitalization Planning Authority's (FMERPA) Fort Monmouth reuse plan.

In addition to the identification and classification of the 43 contaminated sites, the Phase I ECP also resulted in the capping and stabilization of nine landfills located along various streams throughout the fort property, which Dlugosz has also been critical of. "The stabilization was done in the reverse order that Birdsall Engineering [the borough's engineering firm] and all good practices tell you to do," Dlugosz said. "That is to cap the property, cap the land, then do the stabilization." According to Dlugosz, the Army is performing the process in reverse order. Instead, he said, the landfills should be capped with the stream banks being stabilized immediately afterward.

Following the Phase I ECP, the Army conducted a second ECP known as the Phase II ECP. The Phase II ECP turned up an additional 27 contaminated parcels, which in some cases overlap with the 43 sites already identified, Dlugosz explained. "What they found in that second Environmental Condition of the Property were something on the order of 40 underground storage tanks that were filled with ... gasoline and other oil products. They found that there were additional contaminants and frequently more of the same that we found before," Dlugosz said. The 27 new sites, he explained, require what is known as a Baseline Ecological Evaluation (BEE) study, in order to determine whether they should be subject to more rigorous analysis. Because the Army's initial EA does not take into account the Phase II ECP and its results, Dlugosz said he believes the EA "does not provide sufficient evidence to call for a [FNSI]." In questioning the completion of the initial EA, Dlugosz points to the Army's classification of some sites. "How can the Army declare [no significant impact] when you have sites that will remain CEA and/or DER?" Dlugosz further questions how the Army can move forward with the EA without including the results of the Phase II ECP, in addition to not having performed a BEE for the sites.

Rider refuted Dlugosz's claims that the Army is not performing the baseline evaluation, saying instead that the Army is in the process of preparing the proper work plan to perform the BEE. "The baseline ecological evaluation will provide data that will assist in our ongoing environmental programs. It includes soil, sediment and surface water sampling to augment the massive amount of environmental data we've gathered over 16 years," Rider explained. "It will help the Army and New Jersey to determine if any future actions are necessary in order to obtain a No Further Action letter from the NJDEP," Rider said. "If the data reveals that further ecological investigation or risk assessments may be required ... that fits with our environmental program's goals. According to Rider the BEE is currently in the administrative planning stages. "The work plan has to be approved by the state. Once that is approved, the Army will be able to perform samplings for the BEE," he said.

For more information regarding the environmental evaluation of Fort Monmouth, visit the fort's website at www2.monmouth.army.mil/usagfmima/sites/local/brac.asp.

back to top

TEF Update

The Traveling Environmental Festival (TEF) has gotten off to an early start this school year, when we visited two Long Branch schools in November. Meanwhile, other Monmouth and Ocean County schools are being lined up for Spring '10. About 1,300 grammar school students participated in the interactive program during the Fall '08-Spring '09 school year. Children love the program and teachers praise it's academically solid, hands-on approach.  

The most recent schools were Clark School and Anastasia School, both in Long Branch. A total of about 240 students attended the presentations, including a presentation tailored for special education students. We've been invited back to both schools this Spring to reach other classes, and one visiting science teacher who saw the program wants us at her school, as well. TEF continues its informal relationship with Brookdale Community College's Science Field Station at Sandy Hook, where eight science students have signed on this semester as TEF instructors. This Spring, we expect several more students to join the instructors' list. In all about 24 BCC science students have been trained for TEF, using our 110-page TEF Instructors' Manual that has been praised by science teachers.  

Funds to provide the student instructors with stipends come from municipal environmental commission grants, plus two generous grants from Whole Foods and from Wachovia Bank (now Wells Fargo) and the Lakewood Blue Claws. At the current level of about 10 schools per school year, we can run TEF for at least three more years. We also are seeking additional grants and looking at ways to expand our informal relationship with Brookdale.  

We are concentrating on bringing the in-school, one-hour program to urban schools, where funding for environmental field trips is tight, and where many children have little knowledge of pollution problems.  We've presented to up to five classes in a school day, involving as many as 150 students. In order to maximize the impact of our grant funds, we require that we present to at least three classes at a school, which guarantees that we reach a minimum of 90 to 100 students.  

Our program begins with a 10-minute overview of pollution problems affecting the land, sea, and air. This portion includes the water cycle, food chain, scarcity of fresh water, and our dependence on the sea for food, oxygen and fresh water. The children then rotate through three hands-on, interactive stations, each taking 15 minutes. The stations include:      

• Food chain - Students use eye-droppers and wet slides to capture and study live zooplankton and other micro-marine creatures - all part of the food chain, which they then view with a microscope projector (a tip of the hat to Jack Charlton, who grows the plankton);
  
• Raritan Bay - Students identify the marine life in a salt water fish tank, learn about the importance of dissolved oxygen, review local marine species through our extensive collection of shells and skeletons, discover how vertebrates and invertebrates evolve and grow, and learn why we must protect our local and ocean waters (some of the critters are supplied by BCC); and    
• Littering Your Town - Students litter a three-dimensional topographical watershed model of a generic community to learn how non-point (or multi-source) pollution affects watersheds and water supplies. NPS includes overfertilizing, pesticides, oil spillage, and littering. The students love to litter. We conclude the presentation by emphasizing the importance of recycling and how we all can prevent littering.  

back to top

Clearwater Continues Fort Monmouth Contamination Fight

The quarterly meeting of Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) was held October 7, 2009 at Gibbs Hall, Fort Monmouth. The presentation by Princeton Hydro engineer marked the progress of the Landfill Stabilization Project along the 1.5 miles streambanks on Fort Monmouth. Also presented was the progress of the excavation of water- and oil-filled Underground Storage Tanks (UST) and remediation of soil surrounding them. Both remediations were reluctantly started only after the relentless two-year campaigning by Clearwater. The proper capping of the 9 landfills is a campaign in which we are still engaged.

The latest campaign, which was started in May 2009, is the fight to ensure that the Army tells the whole truth in the Environmental Assessment (EA) about the burden the communities, county, and state will bear when and if, the Army abandons Fort Monmouth for Aberdeen Proving Ground, which itself has actually six times the number of contaminated sites. Our review opens with "After an extensive scientific review of the 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."

When Clearwater tried to discuss this issue at that July RAB meeting, we were told that the EA and the FNSI were not topics for discussion at the RAB.  This was stupefying at the time and more so once the formal minutes of that meeting were reviewed afterwards.  In a letter to Ms Wanda Greene, Army co-chair of the meeting, and the rest of the RAB I wrote as a RAB member and Clearwater:
"Wanda, After reviewing the RAB minutes for July 2009, I have several important corrections to, clarifications of, and comments to the July minutes:
1. Please make the minutes more clear and to the point by illuminating the references to the CFRs in the minutes by including the answers that you provided the RAB to my questions about the reasons you wouldn't discuss the EA/FNSI issues, which I attempted to paraphrase below.   As you know, I submitted our comments to those EA/FNSI issues under the auspices of the Eatontown ECC and the NJ Friends of Clearwater.  The paraphrases of your verbal answers to my questions [summarized in the minutes as, "... when will the Army finish reviewing the Environmental Assessment (EA) public comments and how will the decision of a FNSI or EIS be presented?"] follow in items a. & b.
a. The Environmental Assessment (EA) and the Finding of No Significant Impact (FNSI) are not RAB documents but are Army-issued documents, therefore they won't be discussed at the RAB meeting.
b. There will be no public hearing on the EA/FNSI because that is not allowed/permitted under the CFRs  40 CFR 1500-1508 and 32 CFR 651.  Please provide the exact section/paragraph number that you are using as your guidance
c. Rationale:  These answers are hard to fathom since the information and restoration work cited in the EA/FNSI were done IAW the laws which established the RAB; RAB member Joe Fallon was cited as a primary author of the EA; Colonel Christianson signed it; and the Information Officer sent out the notice to each of the RAB members as well as providing notice to the general public.
2. There is no mention of the discussion in the minutes regarding the deletion of the Birdsall agenda topic in the final Princeton Hydro's landfill stabilization briefing while it was in the handouts provided.  The Birdsall comments are actually official Eatontown Borough documented comments on the Federal Consistency for Freshwater Wetlands General Permit #4 Application Compliance Statements submitted by US Army, Fort Monmouth, Dec 4, 2008.
3. The title of the Princeton Hydro's [PH] briefing refers to FM Streambank Stabilization rather than FM Landfill Bank Stabilization as had been present in its draft and earlier versions of the briefings, including the January 09 PH briefing. This seems to highlight the fact that although the Army submitted a Flood Hazard Area Individual Permit Application and a Freshwater General Permit #4 Application, it did not apply for a permit for disturbance of a landfill, as Birdsall Engineering's comments indicate.
4. There is no mention of the questions posed by John Schiels, Eatontown Borough President, and the answers provided by the Army in the open public comment period regarding the issues above.  This is a major omission of a substantive dialog as contrasted to the presence in the minutes of the early morning noise issue raised by the officials and public of Shrewsbury Borough.
5. To avoid future need for clarifications or omissions it may make sense to have the public RAB meeting minutes transcribed verbatim by a professional court reporter or by a secretary off recordings that can/have been made of the sessions through the professional sound system that is always present."

At that last RAB on October 7th, discussion of the above letter was tabled until the January 2010 meeting.  These issues were again brought up at the FMERPA Environmental Advisory Committee meeting on October 20, 2009. This time, in a more open forum despite Army representation, the EAC members from Eatontown, Oceanport, and Tinton Falls and other members of the public were unanimous in their rejection of the EA/FNSI and in favor of the EIS and an open meeting to discuss the issues.  On November 4, 2009 the Eatontown Borough Council passed a resolution to support Clearwater' and its EEC's demand that the Army produce an EIS

back to top

Save Sandy Hook Ultimately Triumphs With a Little Help From Its Friends

After 10 years of frustration with the National Park Service and its chosen developer Sandy Hook Partners (SHP), NJ Friends of Clearwater rejoices in the bittersweet knowledge that SHP's plan to commercialize the Fort Hancock area of Sandy Hook has ultimately failed. That failure comes at a cost of 10 years of destructive neglect by the NPS of the homes and buildings it originally sought in its RFP to historically preserve. For sixteen years, NJFC leased and lovingly maintained Building 11, the "Clearwater House" before it was "evicted" after the choice of SHP. While we understood that it would be advantageous to the NPS to have a single historical restoration contractor of all the buildings, we could not foresee or understand that NPS would choose to commercialize rather than restore the property and then purposely abandon any semblance of maintenance for 10 years to ensure that public opinion would demand that their plan be executed.

Watching NPS grant concession after concession to SHP including of a 60-year lease that was forbidden during source selection, Clearwater was powerless to act alone to challenge NPS/SHP cabal. It turned out that we were not alone and in late 2003 and 2004 we found like-minded people in Judith Stanley, Judge James M. Coleman, and others. Together we formed the nonprofit group Save Sandy Hook (SSH). Ms Coleman became President; Judge Coleman became Secretary; and our own Ben Forest was its first Vice President. George Moffatt and I were also part of the team. Shortly after the purported lease was "signed" between SHP and NPS without the exchange of the required money, SSH took bold step and leveled a federal lawsuit against the NPS, SHP, the Department of the Interior, and the NPS Regional Directors.

In that initial lawsuit, Clearwater and Judge Coleman became co-plaintiffs with SSH. Each of the Clearwater's members continued to play important roles in the SSH organization: Ben as VP; George as author of many op-ed pieces. As project manager and author of Clearwater's proposal to turn the Clearwater House into an environmental conference/environmental education center, Ed was the historical resource and a named witness in the lawsuits. Eventually Ed succeeded Ben as SSH VP. NJ Friends of Clearwater members fully supported our efforts

That lawsuit charged that the commercialization was not in keeping with the mission of the NPS nor was it in accordance with the law that created the Gateway National Recreation Area-Sandy Hook. Additionally, the complaints cited the concessions and irregularities of the procurement process and SHP inability to name/gain reputable financial backers, emblemized in 2006 by the naming of "vulture capitalist" Palisades Financial as a backer. In 2008, SSH's appeal to the Circuit Court of Appeals eventually proved unsuccessful not on its merits but in a technicality that purported that we as citizens did not have "Standing" to bring a complaint against the Government.

It is poetic, if not legal, justice that after we decided not to go to the Supreme Court that one of our key reasons for issuing the lawsuit, inability to pay, would be deem the reason to void the non-existent lease.  In two separate reviews—one by the NPS and PriceWaterhouseCoopers and one by SHP's binding arbitrator, Maurice Robinson and Associates (a California-based, hospitality and real estate consulting firm)--reached the same conclusion, i.e., SHP's financing plan was inadequate. [Judge] Coleman looked back, observing, "It's too bad they [NPS] didn't see back in '99 that he [Wassel and Sandy Hook Partners] didn't have the money. It would have saved us all this travail."  Save Sandy Hook ultimately triumphed with a little help from its Friends.

back to top

Environmental Justice Roundtable

Note: For the past 2 Clearwater Festivals we've engaged national and statewide activists, including Lois Marie Gibbs—heroine of the Love Canal, in an important dialogue about what Environmental Justice is/isn't, how to recognize it, and how we as individuals and a organization can help. Clearwater campaigned against eminent domain abuse in Long Branch is an example. Each month I will highlight a bit of history and current efforts in our communities, state, and nation.  If you have a contribution, please send it to Newsletter@mcclearwater.org and we will try to publish it in the newsletter and online.

The Environmental Justice Movement
It's a statistical fact: The poor and people of color are more likely to live in America's most-polluted neighborhoods. Poor communities are routinely targeted to host facilities with negative environmental impacts, such as landfills, dirty factories, truck depots and more. For decades, a community-based movement known as environmental justice has been battling these inequities and struggling to improve the environmental health of these neighborhoods. There are now laws, NJDEP- and EPA-based Advisory Councils, and of course, grassroot organizations like Ms. Gibbs' Center for Health, Environment & Justice, the NJ Environmental Justice Alliance, and the Ironbound Community Corporation.

back to top

Our COAlition:  NJ Friends of Clearwater

New Jersey Friends of Clearwater (NJFC), formerly Monmouth County Friends of Clearwater is a grass roots nonprofit, volunteer-run and staffed organization. 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 stewards of their environment. NJFC focuses their efforts to the estuaries of Hudson, the Raritan, Delaware, and other NJ Rivers, the Jersey Shore coastline, its inland waterways, and the land of New Jersey.

NJFC is one of the founding members of the COAlition and has been an active participating organization throughout COA's 25 years. In fact, NJFC chose to focus their 34th Annual Clearwater Festival on the Clean Ocean Zone and anti-LNG campaign. The annual festival features the finest music, dance, and art with environmental activism to celebrate New Jersey's waterways. COA would like to extend our gratitude for including COA and our issues in their successful event.

Clearwater volunteers conduct environmental education, celebration and advocacy activities to protect New Jersey waterways and coast environment. Besides festivals and other music events, programs include clean-ups, environmental watches, political action, and education programs. "Ultimately, Clearwater's mission is to bring as many people under the environmental tent as possible," says NJFC and COA Board of Trustee, Ben Forest.

back to top

Guy Davis heads to Clearwater; Bluesman talks activism, new album

August 11, 2009

If you think being green is a new concept, think again.

40 years ago, folksinger and American icon Pete Seeger started the Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, a nonprofit corporation created to preserve and protect the Hudson River and its related bodies of water -- and it didn't take long for the Clearwater concept to travel.

Since 1974, the New Jersey Friends of Clearwater -- formerly known as the Monmouth County Friends of Clearwater -- has been fighting pollution in the Garden State, and on Saturday (Aug. 15) NJFC will host its 34th annual Clearwater Festival from 11 a.m. to 7 p.m. in Asbury Park's Sunset Park.

Topping the bill on Saturday will be Guy Davis, a bluesman who has known Seeger and his family for the past several decades and toured with Seeger last summer. Davis recently spoke with Metromix Jersey Shore.

"I'm privileged to have know Pete from the early '60s by way of my parents (actors Ruby Dee and the late Ossie Davis); he was close to my folks and still close with my mom and we're still close with he and (Seeger's wife) Toshi, and I actually got a chance to do opening sets for Pete back in about 1977 or so.

"He had me going around in the New England area primarily, and I'd meet folks like Fred Hellerman and Ronnie Gilbert (of the Weavers) and oh gosh, so many folks who were in the folk scene from the early days and between that, being part of sort of the Sloop crowd from the mid-70s; I guess that gave me a little step up in being part of this tour that he did last year, and that was the icing on the cake."

Davis, whose association with Clearwater dates back the mid-70s, said there is still room for improvement when it comes to folks in the musical community following Seeger's example when it comes to environmental issues.

"There's always room for more, but I think that there were some great folks who were around in that crowd in the '70s who are really stepping up. Now me, I can say that I'm an environmentalist, but not anywhere near the level that Pete is or near the level of the folks who are part of the Sloop clubs that are up and down the Jersey Shore and also in New York state along the Hudson River," Davis said. "But yes, there is always room for improvement, and Pete will be the first one to tell you, so yeah, there's more room for membership and innovation of ideas about keeping the river and the environment clean."

These days, Davis is on the road in support of his latest release, this year's "Sweetheart Like You." Davis discussed the album's title track, an elegant and moving cover of a song originally written and recorded by Bob Dylan for the 1983 album "Infidels."

"The song itself, I guess, indicates my fascination with the personality of Bob Dylan," Davis said. "It's a clear fact that the man is a genius as a songwriter and people will never be able to get past that, that's just a fact. But, this song, I think, is sort of like some sort of code that explains a lot about Bob, because we all know that Bob essentially tries to hide himself in the media. The college word is 'obfuscates,' he puts up a little smokescreen about who he really is, he protects that zealously, and he puts out just who he wants us to think he is.

"Now, that's his business, and that's OK, but in this song it sounds like a young man standing sort of just outside the gates to hell and there's a woman coming in and he's trying to save her and seduce her at the same time. That's what the words make me think of, his relationship with women in particular, in this song. And he talks about, I guess, capitalism, corrupt government, but it's also about men and women and you'll hear those themes on and off throughout Bob's work."

Along with Dylan, the works of bluesmen such as Muddy Waters ("Can't Be Satisfied") and Leadbelly ("Follow Me Down") appear on "Sweetheart Like You." When asked what the blues has to say to the society we're living in today, Davis explained that "the blues, in and of itself, is the music of survivors, people who have survived very hard times.

"They're still having hard times behind the plow or behind the eight-ball or stuck on a plantation that won't let them off and is ripping them off for money or stuck in a job that has a low ceiling, so the blues transcends time, the ethics that brought about the blues. I think the blues just has to say that, like the music, the people got to keep surviving.

"Now, the earliest blues, you almost wouldn't recognize it now because it was before a lot of the kind of style of blues that people are used to, which is the Chicago-sounding kind of blues. The blues had earlier origins, and if you listen back to people like Blind Lemon Jefferson and Henry Thomas and people even older than that you can hear something, Leadbelly, you'll hear some stuff. But, if you listen to the words you can hear the stuff that came from the field hollers, and that is the music of survivors. The lesson here is keep plugging, don't give up, survive."

back to top

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

Seeger 90th Birthday Bash a Great Success

Pete was joined by over 50 admirers on stage and over 17,000 in the seats of Madison Square Garden on the evening of May 3rd 2009.  The event featuring Bruce Springsteen, Dave Matthews, John Mellancamp, Joan Baez, Emmylou Harris, Arlo Guthrie, and more than 50 legendary friends was a legacy fundraising event for our mother ship Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, Inc. and to announce the theme of "Creating the Next Generation of Environmental Leaders".  All performers including musicians, labor and civil rights activists, and celebrities donated their talents.
Pete, who usually avoids birthday parties despite admirers' attempts, embraced this 90th as a way to ensure continuation of his legacy of the Sloop and the Clearwater organization.  With tickets selling from $19.19 to $1250, two-thirds of the enormous revenues will be put into an untouchable account to ensure Pete's legacy and the remaining will be used to pay off the debt and to establish our new headquarters in Beacon, NY.

back to top

Clearwater Urges Close Scrutiny & Comment on Fort Monmouth-Issued EA and FONSI

The Fort Monmouth Public Affairs Office (PAO) issued a press release that announces the publication of two important environmental documents for public review—Final Environmental Assessment and the Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI)—which  claim that Fort Monmouth will be ready to hand over the 1126 acre property and that it will need no further action to make it environmentally acceptable to the three inclusive local towns, Monmouth County, and the state of NJ when the Fort's mission transitions to Aberdeen MD in September 2011.  To quote them directly, "According to the documents, the closure of Fort Monmouth will not result in significant adverse environmental effects; therefore, in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required."  Based on the recent review of their permit for Landfill Stabilization and other outstanding environmental issues detected during two years of RAB participation, Clearwater doubts that the Fort can substantiate those claims.

The review and comment period lasts for 30 days—April 27 to May 27.  Clearwater and the Eatontown Environmental Commission (EEC) plan to fully review the documents as does the Tinton Falls EC.  Clearwater calls on all concerned citizens to access and review these important documents at: www.hqda.army.mil/acsim/brac/env_ea_review.htm.  Clearwater suggests that citizens provide comments to us at info@mcclearwater.org for consolidation by May 20, 2009 since all must be postmarked by May 27.  Citizens can also provide comments directly to the PAO at their snail mail address: PAO—EA Comments, IMNE-MON-PA, Bldg 1207, Room G-07, Fort Monmouth NJ 07703.  For further guidance on how best to provide the comments, "A Citizen's Guide to the NEPA -- Having Your Voice Heard"  provides guidance on sending comments and is a concise guide to NEPA-related processes at: www.nepa.gov/nepa/Citizens_Guide_Dec07.pdf

back to top

Clearwater & Partners Call for Rejection Fort Monmouth Landfill Streambank Stabilization Permits

New Jersey Friends of Clearwater was joined by Clean Ocean Action (COA) and the Borough of Eatontown in providing comments critical of Fort Monmouth's plans and design for stabilizing the streambed stabilization plans for five landfills in the Shrewsbury Watershed contained in their Wetlands Permit Application  to the NJDEP .  As reported here for the past two months, the plans and designs:

• don't provide stream protection from contamination as a result of the sites' preparation;
• don't provide sufficient individual site stabilization designs associated with the hydrologic and hydraulic characteristics of the streams in question;
• don't provide a holistic, total design approach:  i.e., taking aggressive remediation actions, stronger capping, and the stabilization together rather than the phased, less-than-optimal process FM cited.

back to top

Fort Monmouth Landfill Stabilization Follow-Up

back to top

Water Quality Analysis Training

back to top

Global Warming Polluters Are Backed By Big Bucks

• 0 retractions or corrections were published by the Washington Post, Will's employer, after running his demonstrably false claims about global warming.
• $450 million was spent on lobbying and political contributions by opponents of global warming action in 2008. Money talks, that's for sure.
• $45 million was spent on advertising denying global warming by the coal industry in 2008. Instead, they promote the oxymoron, "clean coal."
• 2,340 lobbyists were paid fulltime to work in Washington on convincing Congress and regulators that global warming isn't a problem, a 300 percent increase in the past few years. K Street's lobbyists never had it so good.
• 52 public spokespersons – talking heads – are being paid by polluters and their ideological friends to spread disinformation about global warming online, on radio and TV talk shows, in op-eds, and on the "rubber chicken" dinner circuit. You can expect bumper sticker slogans, not thoughtful discussion, from this crowd.
• 7 of 8 climate lobbyists in Washington are arguing against taking any action on global warming, while just 1 in 8 are arguing for the environment. They hope their money will drown out our facts.

back to top

TEF Continues Success Story

The NJFC Traveling Environmental Festival (TEF) continues to delight students and educators in our area.  According to TEF Director, George Moffatt, NJFC had two successful TEF events, one at the Oak Street School on March 19 and another Lakewood school on March 26.  TEF has continued its partnership with college students and staff from Brookdale Community College (BCC) from the Sand Hook extension.  BCC students Alex Broszeit and Billy Goldberg joined George to provide hands-on learning of the importance of clean water, and the effects of pollution on the food chain starting at the plankton and on up the chain to the humans.  The plankton station, where the students choose and observe live plankton, illustrates how even small amounts of contaminants can have dire consequences for these microscopic animals and plants.  The watershed station illustrates how those contaminants reach the members of the food chain and how the students and their parents can reduce pollution. As always, teachers and staff of the schools were full of praise for TEF and its fine instructors. 

Upcoming TEF events include Asbury Park, Hazlet, and Atlantic Highlands Elementary Schools, environmental events like Earth Day in various locales, and Ocean Days at Sandy Hook.  If you would like to book an event at your school or learn more, please go to www.mcclearwater.org/tef.php or contact us by emailing us at info@mcclearwater.org.

back to top

Garvey Adam Hyler Spring 2009 Fit Out

That's right, spring is here and it is time for our annual Garvey Spring Fit Out for another season of sailing for fun and the environment!  We will be meeting every Saturday from 11am to 3pm through the first Saturday of June. A special note for April 4th as being the boat flip day.

We are getting the boat ready for removal from the trailer and flipping it over on Saturday April the 4th between 11am and 2pm. We can use extra help that day as it greatly reduces the work to have a lot of people involved in the actual flip. We could also use a truck with a hitch earlier in the work party, as close to 11am as possible.

We had an excellent turnout on Saturday, March 14, 2009 and actually got done everything listed as a goal for the 1st, which was quite a bit more than I actually expected to get done. John, Keith, Matthew, Shannon, Tom, Eve and myself were the members working:
•    We removed the Center Board and Centerboard lifts.
•    We disassembled all of the spars and sticks and got them on the sawhorses.
•    We made a new boat cover to replace the one shredded by the windstorm this winter.
•    Tom, Shannon and John did a thorough inspection of the boat and found one small section of rots that should be easy to repair.
•    We completed a thorough supply inventory and appear to be in good shape.

This year's work:
The big jobs:
•    Flip the boat to replace one of the cedar planks.
•    Build a new and improved centerboard lift that integrates and boom holder. Paint White.
•    Trunk needs a West Systems patch.
•    Drill out and preserve the thole pin holders for the new loose thole pins. (The old style wooden oars locks)
•    Repair the port side plywood that has some rot by cutting out about 6"-8" and replacing.
•    Redo the caulk seams around the top decks.

The annual jobs:
•    Scrape the barnacles once the boat is flips.
•    Primer all bare spots and apply Blue Bottom paint where needed.
•    Scrape white sides where needed and paint.
•    Touch up the Cetol as needed on sticks and boards.
•    Pick on or two sticks (Mizzen Mast and maybe another) to be wooded down and Cetol'd
•    Scrape and Varnish the remaining sticks
•    Linseed Oil the Oars, inside of the Centerboard Lifts and the interior hull and deck.
•    Trailer check for tires, brakes, and winch and test the new light board.
•    Ensure we have the new registration.

The smaller or non-vital jobs:
•    Cut out one or two oars blanks for shaping during the fit-out and at festivals.
•    Fix the Groups Name on the side of the boat to reflect the change in the group's name.

Most Vital Aspect:  Sail, Educate, and have FUN!

back to top

Fort Monmouth Landfill Stabilization Victory for NJFC

Based on over two years of hard and often criticized work on our part on the Fort Monmouth Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) and FMERPA EAC, New Jersey Friends of Clearwater (formerly MCFC) has won a great victory in the fight to make Fort Monmouth (FM) cleaner environmentally.  Fort Monmouth has finally agreed to stabilize the stream banks of 5 landfills in anticipation of "capping" all 9 existing landfills at the military base.

"Our insistence on independently  determining costs for more complete sediment testing, stabilizing the stream banks with riprap, and landfill capping came after a series of requested contaminated site visits starting in early 2007, I feel that the increased NJDEP invigoration and the Fort's change of heart are the direct result of our efforts.  Previous to that, the Fort denied that they needed the additional stabilization and capping", according to NJFC Vice President Ed Dlugosz, who is also Chairman of the Eatontown Environmental Commission (EEC) and had served as Community Co-chairman of the FM RAB.

These landfills have polluted the sub-watersheds of the Shrewsbury River for over 60 years. The landfills contain many chemical and biological contaminants that continue to exceed the NJDEP industrial standards for pollutants, including heavy metals lead, mercury, cadmium, the solvent VOCs TCE, PCE, oil derivatives, benzenes, PAH, PCB, the poisons arsenic and cyanide, among others.  While the Fort has done much to bring the contamination under control, the extensive stabilization and capping were among the missing elements.

Although it was announced at the recent RAB Open House, this long-awaited, verifiable-action news came through a relatively low-key source, the EEC received a notice that stabilization permits and plans from the Fort were available for review. The comments are due to the NJDEP on several construction and wetlands permits that were required for reinforcement of the stream banks with engineered riprap on over 1¼ miles along the Wampum and Husky Brooks, and Lefetra and Parker Creeks to prevent future erosion of the landfills.  As Ingrid Heldt noted in last month's article, funding is still problematic.

I've been reviewing both the design and the design's consistency with local, state, and Federal regulations for the protection of the environment and habitat.  In an answer to one of the permits' consistency questions, I was heartened by the Fort's admission to what we've been saying all along, and I quote, "placement of the riprap...providing long-term stability for these landfills in preventing their waste deposits from becoming exposed which would ADVERSELY IMPACT NOT ONLY THE STREAMS ON [FM] BASE, BUT ALSO DOWNSTREAM."  Previous soft solutions, "biologs had previously been attempted, but TOTALLY FAILED shortly after installation" in the late '90s.

While I've not completed the review and have informed the borough EEC and engineer, I am somewhat pleased by the design of the stabilization but concerned with the Fort's less than robust capping plans.  I'd like to see excavation of the sources of pollution to the extent possible and thicker, more impermeable capping materials to reduce leaching.

The costs have been unavailable due to competitive bidding reasons, but they will be substantial and bolster my contention—confirmed by the GAO—that the original costs for remediation of the Fort's environmental woes were vastly underestimated. As always, there are more environmental issues to be corrected, but this is a great first step and victory for us.

back to top

Climate Change (Global Warming) Deniers Never Quit

On Sunday, February 15, the Asbury Park Press carried an Op Ed by George Will, which was basically a denial of global warming. We are accustomed to reading items from individuals with an ideological agenda who cherry pick their references to present only that which supports their beliefs. But this Op Ed is so replete with factual errors that it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that they are not simply errors but deliberate lies.

For example, Mr. Will stated that "According to the University of Illinois' Arctic Climate Research Center, global sea ice levels now equal those of 1979". Within hours of Will's publication the Arctic Climate Research Center posted a reply saying, "We do not know where George Will is getting his information", but between February 1979 and February 2009 global sea ice has shrunk by 1.34 million square kilometers (over half a million square miles, or approximately the area of Texas, California, and Oklahoma combined). Mr. Will's office was contacted regarding this discrepancy, but he has not responded.

Considerable space in the Op Ed was devoted to the issue of predictions made during the 70's of future global cooling. Will argues that if scientists were wrong then, why should we believe them now? He provided brief quotes from eight different publications all suggesting that there was general scientific agreement that we could be heading for another ice age. The problem is that there never was such scientific agreement.

By the 70's it was well established that human-generated airborne particulates blocked the sun's rays contributing to cooling, while, simultaneously, carbon dioxide from the combustion of fossil fuel trapped the sun's heat causing global warming. No one really knew which would dominate. A few scientists did predict the former, and speculate on the possibility of a new ice age. As is not unusual, the popular press was quick to pick up and sensationalize such predictions, leading, for example, to a cover story in Newsweek on April 28, 1975.

Was cooling truly a dominant scientific opinion at the time as quoted in many of the referenced popular-press articles? The publication New Scientist surveyed relevant scientific literature between 1965 and 1979. They found 44 scientific papers predicted warming, 20 were neutral and just 7 predicted cooling. The situation is better represented by the National Academy of Sciences. Its report for 1975 read, "we do not have a good quantitative understanding of our climate machine and what determines its course. Without the fundamental understanding, it does not seem possible to predict climate." By contrast, in 2008 the NAS issued a report finding that "the scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to begin taking steps to prepare for climate change and to slow it. Human actions over the next few decades will have a major influence on the magnitude and rate of future warming."  Mr. Will did not see fit to include any such information. In addition, the one publication on his list, which has strong credentials as a voice for science, was seriously misquoted.

In another major misrepresentation, Will wrote, "According to the World Meteorological Organization, there has been no recorded global warming for more than a decade." This information apparently comes from a year-old (and since corrected) BBC story. It derives from a comparison of current world temperatures with the global temperatures in 1998, a particularly hot year. (This is about as logical as looking at Monmouth County's temperature for Sunday, February 8 (60 degrees) and Friday, February 20 (34 degrees) and predicting that spring is not going to come this year because the closer we get to the Vernal Equinox the colder it is.) Will did not inform his readers that the World Meteorological Organization has emphatically confirmed its view that global warming is continuing, and that gauging climate change by looking at only one year is essentially useless.

Finally, Will has dragged out an old canard regard climate change. He wrote, "An unstated premise of eco-pessimism is that environmental conditions are, or recently were, optimal" and "These optimal conditions can and must be preserved". This totally misses the point of much of the climate change concern. Most scientists would agree that either a warmer or cooler earth would probably host an abundance of life (though not necessarily human life). But all flora and fauna on earth (including humans) are adapted to conditions as they have existed with little change for over 10,000 years. Any relatively abrupt change will inevitably introduce extreme trauma and hardship for earth's inhabits. To give a specific example, it is generally conceded that rising sea levels associated with global warming may displace many farmers in low-lying countries such as Bangladesh. On the other hand, increased warming may open to agriculture land in the sub-arctic not now farmable. It is possible that these losses and gains may balance each other. But does anyone really believe that hordes of displace Bangladeshis could flow seamlessly into northern Canada to continue their agricultural life?

People tend to believe what they want to believe. No one really wants to believe that earth is in peril and that we must make changes in the way we do a number of things. Hence one error-filled and misleading article by a respected writer such as George Will can do tremendous damage to our ability to come together and confront a serious and rapidly growing problem. Perhaps more damage than 100 technically sound and well-documented scientific papers can overcome.

back to top

UCI Guest Speaker touts Sustainable/Resilient Coastal Communities

Guest Speaker Jennifer DiLorenzo, Monmouth University Urban Coastal Institute's (UCI) Sustainable Coastal Communities Liaison made a presentation on "Sustainable/Resilient Coastal Communities" to the members of NJ Friends of Clearwater at the February 1, 2009 Membership Meeting.  Ms. DiLorenzo was the latest in the series of guest speakers at our monthly meetings held at the Eatontown Community Center, 72 Broad St., Eatontown on the first Sunday of every month.

Ms DiLorenzo related that Monmouth's UCI mission is to serve the public interest as forum for research, education, and collaboration that fosters the application of the best available science and policy to support healthy and productive coastal ecosystems and a sustainable and economically  vibrant future for coastal communities.  UCI's core programs are:  Coastal Law And Policy; Coastal Watershed Management; Coastal Communities And Economics; and Regional Ecosystem Management.  UCI's Sustainable/Resilient Communities Projects seek to:
•    Promote ecosystem-based management for coastal communities to maintain natural resources for citizens to enjoy
•    Promote sound planning initiatives to preserve natural resources, reduce environmental degradation and improve water quality
•    Promote projects to increase resiliency—reduce flooding and impacts from coastal storms, erosion, and sea level rise

One of these projects that is ongoing is the modeling of coastal sustainable/ resilient community under funding from NOAA.  To gather data for this effort, UCI is performing remote water quality monitoring from 8 stations in key coastal locations throughout Monmouth and Ocean Counties.  For more info, please click: Urban Coastal Institute

back to top

LNG Terminal Opposition

NJ Friends of Clearwater again showed its opposition to the placement of Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) terminals off the coast of NJ at a public meeting held on January 27, 2009 at the Sheraton Hotel in Eatontown.  The hearing followed an 90 minute Open House displaying plans for the project. 

back to top

Fort Monmouth Restoration Advisory Board Open House

On January 10, 2009, Lynn Humphrey, Tom Mahedy, Tim Johnson, George Moffatt and I had a unique chance to attend the Open House at Fort Monmouth and see first-hand some of the tireless work our former President Ed Dlugosz has been involved in for many hours and many years.  He has been a prominent member of a group called RAB (Restoration Advisory Board) at Fort Monmouth.  Your first reaction may be the same as mine:  What is there to be cleaned up when former barracks and laboratories are turned into private land?

The answer is "plenty" when those buildings served as a Research and Development facility for many items such as batteries and electronics, and when, as it used to be the fashion in those days, no one considered the people and the wildlife in the area when disposing of wastes right then and there.  Among the contaminants found in a preliminary study are PCBs, DDT, Radon, Lead, Chromium, Lithium, Cadmium, Zinc, Beryllium, and Benzene.  Various cleanup methods were discussed, none of them ideal:

• Capping entire areas with a permeable layer and then turning them into parks.  That may prevent direct contact with contaminants, but it will not prevent further leaching into the streams and the groundwater.
• Using enzymes that feast on the very things that would kill us if we tried to do the same.  This method is slow and will require subsequent testing.  However, it is easy to start, and this has been done in some areas.
• Using chemicals to neutralize acids and alkaline materials into harmless salts.  This method would be faster, but the heat developed in the processes would kill every plant and living being now there, including the useful enzymes.

back to top

AWL Guest Speaker at January General Membership Meeting

back to top

MCFC Becomes "New Jersey Friends of Clearwater"

Monmouth County Friends of Clearwater, Inc. (MCFC) has formally changed its name to "New Jersey Friends of Clearwater" (NJFC) to better reflect our outreach domain and membership demographics.  We feel that the change is justified and important to make all members feel inclusive and to show our commitment to the whole state. The name-change idea has been percolating for a long time.  The real impetus came during our membership sail on the Sloop Clearwater in September between Andrea and I while we discussed membership and fundraising, the dual banes of all nonprofits.  Over the next few weeks we talked and Andrea enumerated the benefits in a very cogent way.  Among the benefits are:  

• It announces and confirms to the public that our scope and outreach includes the whole state and that we are NOT a small, local organization, unlikely to care about or have an impact on anything outside of Monmouth County.
• It forever removes the limits on our ability to attract statewide members and volunteers because it announces that we are NOT exclusive to only one of the 21 counties of New Jersey.
• It UNLIMITS our vision for and of ourselves, and therefore, our mission. It allows our existing members that live throughout NJ and surrounding states—from upstate NY to Washington DC to Sarasota FL—to see Clearwater of NJ as an stronger asset to help with their environmental issues.
• It eliminates the reluctance that non-local corporations have to provide funds to a perceived local, Monmouth County organization

back to top

Clearwater Opposes Offshore LNG Terminals

At a recent press conference and an accompanying letter to Governor Corzine, Clearwater of New Jersey, [formerly Monmouth County Friends of Clearwater] presented their opposition to offshore LNG terminals in a statement that read:

Monmouth County Friends of Clearwater opposes the importing of Liquefied Natural Gas and the siting of any LNG terminals off the seacoast of the United States, especially in the New Jersey/New York Bight.  Clearwater has fought for over 40 years to keep the rivers and the seas clean and clear.  The siting of these islands off our coast  pose a contradiction to common, economic, environmental, and political sense.  Clearwater as a founding organization of the COA coalition, have helped author the Clean Ocean Zone legislation that is now pending in Congress.

In an era of Global Warming/Climate Change, we need to reduce our greenhouse gas footprint and our dependence on fossil fuel, especially from the unstable foreign producers not increase it.  The same team that has brought us exorbitantly high fuel prices and worldwide pollution such as the Exxon Valdez disaster wants us to trust them.  NO!

Clearwater joins with the signatories of the letter to Governor Corzine and NJ to urge that we halt all LNG facilities off the coast and instead:
•    Conserve
•    Employ Alternative Energy including Offshore
     Windpower, Solar, Geothermal, & Wavepower

back to top