PEER Progress Report

April 1 through June 30, 2014

Spring Action

This quarter, the Obama administration unveiled its long-awaited proposed carbon controls for

power plants. Like many of the Obama eco-initiatives, it represents a mix of weak and strong

elements. The central tension, however is seeking to cut greenhouse gases (GHG) while

maintaining an “All-of-the-Above” energy strategy, which may or may not include Canadian oil

sands and the proposed XL pipeline. The plan also –

Does not cover oil and gas production – a significant source of GHG emissions, especially

in a place like Alaska;

Extends extraordinary “flexibility” to states, including authority for open-market trading

among pollution sources. Fifteen years ago, backed by EPA specialists, PEER defeated an

OMT (open market emission trading) plan because it lacked

Quantification protocols – the means for creating a common, verifiable trading

currency to ensure that a trade is an "apples-to-apples" exchange;

Enforceability. OMT is utterly dependent upon an enforcement role that EPA

cannot fulfill. The agency has no capacity to police new, intricate and time

spanning arrangements entailed in OMT; and

A mechanism to adjust for Environmental Justice impacts. OMT schemes largely

affect urban “nonattainment areas” – disproportionately comprised of poor and

minority populations suffering health consequences of smog.

None of these defects has been cured in the ensuing years; and

Will not be finished before Obama leaves office, even setting aside other delays possibly

caused by litigation. Thus, a successor President hostile to the plan could scuttle it before

it truly takes effect.

Nonetheless, the plan is cause for cautious optimism and will require a lot of hard work inside the

implementing agencies – the places where PEER works.

Special Profile: Resurgent Sagebrush Rebellion

When PEER was founded in the early 1990s one of the major issues we worked on was termed the

Sagebrush Rebellion sparked by an anti-federal “Wise Use” movement. During those years, we

filed assault suits on behalf of federal resource employees who were beaten or threatened and

pressured the Justice Department to prosecute resource crimes by ranchers and others who claimed

to recognize no legitimate federal authority.

Now, it is déjà vu all over again. Even as renegade rancher Cliven Bundy’s political allies run for

cover in the fallout from his appalling racist rants, the movement he has helped rekindle has not

imploded but is expanding. Throughout the West, we see –

Federal employees threatened by firearms-brandishing militias. Oath Keepers on Bundy’s

ranch boast on Facebook that they put a “bead on” Federal agents with the intent to kill;

2

Meanwhile, “Open Carry” rallies send crowds of armed men to surround Bureau of Land

Management (BLM) offices; and

A group of rifle-bearing men pulled up to a BLM employee and waved a crudely lettered

sign reading “You Need to Die.”

Each week seems to bring a new hyper-publicized standoff, such as a Utah county commissioner

leading an armed posse in off-road vehicles into a closed BLM parcel shuttered to recover from

past ORV damage. Fanning these flames are growing ranks of politicians catering to Tea Party

interests. They are calling for surrender of federal lands, preemption of federal law and

nullification of national sovereignty.

Thus far, BLM has backed down from enforcing court orders for fear of sparking violence. Yet

each act of restraint seems to stimulate more threats. As one BLM ranger wrote PEER, “Retreating

sets an ominous precedent for any extremist groups wishing to take the law into their own hands.”

In reaction, BLM is stripping agency logos from vehicles, directing employees to stop wearing

uniforms or insignia and advising against traveling alone. As a result, federal employees on the

front-lines are facing mounting tensions but without clear support or direction from their chains of

command. BLM employees are asking PEER for help.

As we did in the 1990s when the Sagebrush Rebellion last flared, PEER is organizing a counter-

movement. Without a concerted counter, there is a real danger events will continue to escalate into

a cataclysmic climax, as in the 1990s with the Oklahoma City bombing. Here is what we are

doing:

Pressing Justice. U.S. Attorneys are presidentially-appointed lawyers whose political

instincts are often more acute than their legal acumen. Most intend to return to local

business or politics, and they seek to avoid controversy or actions that could make political

enemies.

We are obtaining records reflecting criminal and civil referrals made to the U.S. Attorneys

from agencies such as BLM and the Forest Service, and the outcomes they produced.

Publicly showing that urgent agency requests for civil or criminal action were largely

rebuffed both applies pressure to prosecute the next referral, and empowers frustrated land

managers whose calls for prosecution have been ignored.

Legal SWAT Teams. PEER is reconnecting a network of personal injury attorneys to sue

for assault and/or battery any person who menaces or molests federal workers lawfully

doing their jobs. Those threatening any federal employee should be made to pay a personal

price for treating a public servant as a punching bag. We provide this legal representation

on a pro bono basis as we assemble teams of lawyers willing to haul individual militia

members into court.

Consistent Enforcement. BLM has been so notoriously lax in its grazing program that

Bundy’s ability to operate without a permit for years comes as no surprise. The agency’s

3

sporadic enforcement actions are rarely taken seriously and often reversed as a result of

pressure from congressional delegations.

PEER is in the final stages of compiling a complete, consistent and up-to-date profile of

range allotment records across 150 million acres of BLM lands. Using BLM data overlaid

with high-resolution satellite imagery to “ground truth” actual conditions, we will press

BLM to address degraded land – allotment by allotment.

Finally, after BLM stonewalled on our Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for documents

about the Bundy standoff as well as statistics on assaults against its employees, we filed a federal

lawsuit against the agency. This suit will force BLM to produce documents about what led up to

and what followed the cattle seizure and subsequent standoff on the Bundy ranch, including –

Whether the U.S. Attorney declined to criminally prosecute Bundy, making seizure of his

cattle the only avenue left to BLM for proceeding against Bundy--whose cattle had been

illegally grazing on 160,000 BLM and National Park Service acres for more than a decade;

Any BLM advisories for handling similar incidents of armed resistance or livestock

trespass; and

Steps taken to bolster the safety of BLM employees. Media reports indicate that BLM

staff have received death threats or have been targeted by armed militias.

In addition, BLM has refused to release its annual tabulation of threats and attacks against its

employees. BLM has released this annual summary describing the nature and location of such

incidents to PEER every year since 1996, when we started collecting a database of these assaults

following the Oklahoma City bombing.

BLM’s secretiveness appears to be stoking various right-wing conspiracy theories. Not knowing

the agency’s limits invites violent ideologues to miscalculate with potentially tragic results. To

tamp down the rumor mill fueling these high-profile incidents, the BLM should be communicating

more with the public not less. This information we seek in this suit is important not only to BLM

staff but also to members of the public visiting these federal lands.

Tensions Rising over Public Land Use in Utah, the West (Salt Lake Tribune)

BLM Sued for Documents on Bundy Standoff (Las Vegas Review Journal)

Public Workers’ Group Files Federal Lawsuit Seeking Answers On Bundy Ranch Standoff

(Raw Story)

Group Suing BLM for Records about Nevada Standoff (Seattle PI)

Editorial: Secret Agency (Las Vegas Review-Journal)

I. Federal Beat A brief recap of some of our other work inside federal agencies includes:

Bureau of Land Management Oil & Gas Myopia

4

A little more than a year ago, PEER broadcast the retirement farewell message of an outgoing

career BLM biologist based in Utah. His major point was that BLM has lost sight of its mission in

a quest to maximize fossil energy and other resource exploitation on public wild lands. Stan

Olmstead started his career in natural resource management inside public agencies 44 years ago,

with stints in the National Park Service, U.S. Forest Service and Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service. For the past 20 years he had been a Natural Resource Specialist and an

Environmental Scientist in BLM’s Vernal Field Office in eastern Utah, near the Colorado border.

On his final day of federal service, he sent a memo entitled “Last Formal Comment” to all BLM

employees throughout Utah in which decried the singular “focus on commodities and economics

as opposed to environmental health.” He elaborated by writing “At the Vernal Office little concern

has been shown to care for sensitive species … We promote energy development without stop and

continue to measure natural resources by dollar value….” Olmstead offered these pointed

examples:

BLM fails to protect sensitive wildlife and as a result “lost the mountain plover; the only

known population in Utah…. Little effort to prevent this loss was implemented.” He called

this dereliction “a serious mission departure.”

“Plugging and abandonment of well sites have not been a priority. Numerous oil & gas

wells have not produced for more than 15 years and yet these sites remain un-reclaimed.”

Cumulative impacts from oil and gas drilling. For example, “we disturb large percentages

of our [grazing] allotments located in oil & gas fields and AUMs [Animal Unit Months]

remain the same. If you lose 30% of the forage in a specific allotment it is logical to reduce

the AUMs by 30%.”

Olmstead also cited poor land reclamation, unmonitored water depletion for endangered fish of the

Colorado River watershed, and mounting air pollution, all due to divergence from BLM’s mission

“to sustain the health, diversity and productivity of public lands for the use and enjoyment of

present and future generations.”

His message inspired an ambitious investigation by the Associated Press which was published this

quarter. The AP found that what Stan said was true in spades. AP found that more than two-

thirds of the wells BLM approved had never been inspected. The lack of inspection meant not just

problems like unreported spills. It also meant that conditions imposed by BLM to protect wildlife

and lands were never enforced.

Utah “High Risk” Oil Wells among those Left Uninspected (Salt Lake Tribune)

Desert Tortoise Neglect

The battle over BLM plans for off-road vehicle use on millions of acres of public land in the

California desert reached a new stage. More than three years after a federal judge ordered BLM to

rewrite its plan as a result of a lawsuit brought by PEER and allied groups, the agency unveiled a

new plan with many of the same flaws.

The key issue is how much off-road vehicle traffic to allow while still protecting sensitive desert

resources, including endangered species, particularly the desert tortoise, and archeological sites.

5

One key failure of the new West Mojave Plan is the failure of BLM to actually monitor conditions

on the ground.

“Without accurate monitoring results and reporting, there is no way to evaluate the harm to

endangered species that is occurring and therefore no way to modify activities to decrease harm,”

said California PEER Director Karen Schambach. The groups have filed a formal notice to yet

again sue BLM on the issue.

Group Plans to Sue BLM over Species Protection (The Desert Sun)

Groups Plan to Sue over Agency Negligence on Desert Tortoise, Other Wildlife (KCET)

ENDANGERED SPECIES: Greens plan to sue BLM over species management in Calif. Deserts

(Greenwire – subscription required)

Environmental Protection Agency Enforcement Out of Fashion

The new Strategic Plan for EPA declares that traditional enforcement has become passé. Instead,

it embraces something called “Next Generation Compliance” which consists largely of industry

electronically self-reporting pollution discharges. The stated rationale for this shift is that pollution

prosecutions “can have the inadvertent effect of discouraging innovative approaches that could

improve compliance” (an assertion for which no support is offered). The plan then projects even

lower levels of anti-pollution enforcement, even though current rates are already below those in

the 1990s.

Since EPA rarely enforces industry monitoring requirements, reliance on self-reporting is

delusional. Consequently, many critical environmental measures are moving backward. For

example, EPA has estimated that more than half of rivers and streams assessed are impaired, as are

three-quarters of our coastal waters and two-thirds of our lakes and reservoirs. Yet, these EPA

numbers are likely dramatic underestimates because:

The EPA figures are based on “assessed” waters, but only 27% of rivers and streams have

been assessed, as have only 1% of wetlands;

States often skew assessments to mask pollution (which EPA ignores); and

Figures do not include many of the new, emerging chemicals, many of which are very

damaging to aquatic life, but for which there are no pollution standards.

In short, forty years after its enactment, we are not close to achieving the goals of the Clean Water

Act – and in many ways are moving further away.

PEER is one of the few groups focused on the question: What good are environmental laws if they

are not enforced? Not surprisingly, some of our most effective work is with cops – rangers,

special agents, inspectors and prosecutors. Many of these professionals are decidedly old

fashioned rather than “Next Generation,” but their work and careers are dedicated to benefitting

not just the next but many generations to come.

EPA: Enforcement chief defends scaled-back efforts (Greenwire – subscription required)

Shaky Science Policies

6

In 2009 when President Obama directed all science-based agencies to develop policies to protect

against political interference and manipulation of science, EPA was at the center of the debate.

Under Bush, EPA work on climate change, oil and gas impacts and other topics was notoriously

altered.

EPA was one of the last agencies to finally adopt a partial policy, and this policy is one of the

weakest. For example, the agency still –

Has no process for investigating complaints that scientific work is suppressed or altered for

political reasons;

Lacks written “EPA clearance procedures” that all employees must follow before

releasing information to the public or the press; and

Does not specify what if any promised whistleblower protections have been extended to

EPA scientists.

Earlier this year, EPA hired its first Science Integrity Officer to figure out how to fill in these

blanks and then implement them. Shortly thereafter, her boss, the EPA Science Advisor, was

abruptly let go. This development throws an already murky policy into limbo.

PEER is drafting a series of rule-making petitions to remedy the deficient EPA policy. This is part

of a project where we have conducted detailed analyses of all the agency scientific policies, and

are formally urging agencies to adopt the best practices of their sister agencies.

There is no reason why scientists in one agency should be free to submit work for peer review

publication without agency pre-review while scientists in another agency cannot. Nor should

whistleblower protections vary by agency. In addition, there should be uniform procedures for

documenting alteration of technical texts for political reasons.

However imperfect, these new policies are the foundations of an emerging “law of science” and

give us an opportunity to nurture and grow safeguards for both scientists and their work products.

EPA: Science adviser shakeup spurs questions (Greenwire – subscription required)

Clueless Earth Day

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s idea to jet its Administrator on a multi-city Earth

Day-themed tour to “ask Americans to act on climate change through simple actions to reduce

carbon pollution in their daily lives” was unclear on the concept. Some events on EPA

Administrator McCarthy’s itinerary had a somewhat tenuous tie-in to promoting climate action.

For example, McCarthy and Energy Secretary Moniz threw out the ceremonial first pitch at the

Red Sox vs. Yankees baseball game at Boston’s Fenway Park.

Air travel, however, is one of the most carbon-intensive activities. A cross-country plane trip can

create a warming effect equivalent to 2 or 3 tons of carbon dioxide per person. To put this into

perspective, the average American generates about 19 tons of carbon dioxide a year; the average

European, only 10. Though air travel emissions now account for only about 5% of total carbon

pollution, that is projected to rise sharply as air traffic is growing much faster than gains in air-

fleet fuel efficiency. To address this rising source of carbon pollution, the European Union is

7

trying to bring aviation into its carbon emissions control plan. By contrast, reducing air travel

emissions does not appear to be on EPA’s radar.

EPA: McCarthy kicks off new climate tour with Jon Stewart interview (Greenwire – subscription

required)

Environmental Group Slams EPA's Jet-Fueled 'Earth Day'-Themed Tour (Fox News)

Eco-Activists: EPA’s ‘Earth Week’ Tour Will Harm the Planet through Airline C02 Emissions

(The Daily Caller)

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Another Scientific Fraud Case Verified

Senior federal officials improperly obstructed scientists’ attempts to document pollution damage

to aquatic wildlife, according to an internal investigative report obtained under threat of a lawsuit

by PEER. Despite these findings, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) has yet to reverse

retaliatory suspensions imposed on the whistleblowing scientists who reported this scientific

misconduct by their own chain of command.

The March 2013 report concerns effluent from a pharmaceutical manufacturer (Kelco, Inc.) into

Oklahoma’s Deep Fork River, one-half mile upstream of a national wildlife refuge. In September

2011, FWS scientists discovered a mussel kill near the company’s discharge pipe, the site of an

even larger mussel kill six years earlier which resulted in a state prosecution and a pollution

control consent order. To document whether a new violation had occurred, FWS scientists and

state officials operating under the national Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration

program placed live mussels in monitoring cages at distances of 5, 100 and 150 feet from Kelco’s

outflow pipe.

Once Kelco learned of the monitoring cages, the company protested to Dixie Porter, supervisor of

the FWS Tulsa field office. Acting contrary to her own scientists’ advice and explicit requests of

state officials, Porter ordered the monitoring cage moved from 5 feet to 30 feet away from the

outflow. An internal complaint resulted in an investigation by the FWS Scientific Integrity

Officer who found that Porter –

Committed scientific misconduct by “intentional actions [that] were a significant departure

from the acceptable practices”;

Compromised an anti-pollution enforcement investigation; and

Lied that her order to move the cage was based upon the advice of an Interior Department

solicitor.

The report depicts a political atmosphere inside the Service where it is professionally preferable to

sacrifice wildlife rather than stand up to a corporate polluter, and the largest impediment facing

Fish & Wildlife Service scientists seeking to protect wildlife is often their own management.

As reported in our last update, Porter was also found guilty of scientific misconduct in a separate

matter later that same month. That case involved the adoption of an inaccurate map significantly

shrinking the range of an endangered species, the American burying beetle, in the proposed path

of the controversial Keystone XL oil pipeline and then rushing a bogus scientific journal article

into publication to cover her tracks.

8

Despite public statements by FWS Director Dan Ashe that Porter would be punished, she still

occupies her supervisor position and was detailed to a more prestigious region-wide science

coordinating position. By contrast, three scientists who made or supported the complaints have

been subjected to a series of retaliatory suspensions engineered by Porter and upheld by regional

officials – a situation PEER is trying to reverse.

These are the first two cases of misconduct substantiated under Interior’s relatively new Scientific

Integrity policy. However, they highlight a gap in the system in that once scientific integrity

violations are found no one is charged with fixing them.

INTERIOR: FWS finds ‘loss of scientific integrity’ in Okla. pollution case (Greenwire –

subscription required)

FWS Managers Violated Scientific Integrity Standards, Internal Report Says (Endangered Species

and Wetlands Report)

Refuge Oil & Gas Safeguard Delays

Two years ago, we were pleasantly surprised when the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service announced

that it would adopt a PEER proposal for protective rules to prevent spills, leaks and other

contamination from oil and gas drilling operations on National Wildlife Refuge lands. Our simple

idea that FWS enact safeguards similar to those that exist on national park lands, unfortunately,

has gotten mired in political opposition from industry, compounded by the Obama

administration’s timidity.

The network of 562 wildlife refuges is already suffering “significant damages” from oil and gas

operations, in the words of FWS. Besides spills, oil and gas operations have many indirect ill

effects on wildlife, including habitat fragmentation, introduction of invasive species along roads

and pipelines, increased predation on declining species and heightened exposure to disease. With

development of fracking techniques, recoverable oil or gas deposits now exist on nearly half of all

refuges.

For months after announcing it would adopt the PEER proposal, there was no public activity until

a Federal Register notice earlier this year. That notice, however, indicates that FWS has not

advanced from where it was two years earlier in that:

“The Service is not currently proposing any specific approach for managing non-Federal

oil and gas operations,” including the level of financial assurances; and

Without any discussion, FWS limited the scope of its consideration to private subsurface

holdings, allowing federal holdings on Alaskan refuges to be left without any refuge-

specific protections.

Historically, a major federal regulation averages less than 18 months from proposal to

promulgation – a timeline which should have had the refuge drilling rules already on the books.

At this rate, the Obama presidential library will be built by the time these regulations are ready to

be adopted.

Refuges Living without Genetically Engineered Crops

9

Over the past few years, PEER has brought a series of lawsuits that have caused the removal of

genetically engineered (GE) crops from 75 national wildlife refuges across 30 states. In the

Northeast, agriculture of any kind ended as a result of our litigation. In the Southeast region,

farmers are planting nearly the same acreage in refuges as before our successful suit – but without

GE seeds. We are currently suing to end GE agriculture in all Midwest refuges.

One result is that farmers engaged in refuge programs are having to learn to live without GE crops.

While there were some initial bumps, that road appears to be smoothing out, such that with each

passing season it will become harder and harder to reintroduce GE strains onto refuges.

Lawsuit Asks Court to Stop GM Crops, Pesticide Use In Wildlife Refuges (Smallcap Network)

Farmers Slowly Being Pushed from Refuge (Delta Farm Press)

U.S. Forest Service: Law Enforcement Meltdown A coalition of retired Forest Service special agents and law enforcement officers sees their former

program “in a state of crisis” that can be cured only by reassigning the current director. The

group, representing more than a millennium of Federal law enforcement service, is imploring

Agriculture Secretary Thomas Vilsack to intervene to end a “culture of negative leadership”

afflicting the agency’s Law Enforcement and Investigations (LE&I) program.

Signed by 52 LE&I veterans organized by PEER, the letter focuses on “the incompetence of its

current Director, David L. Ferrell” and includes a detailed analysis of how Mr. Ferrell lacks every

one of the Executive Core Qualifications required by Office of Personnel Management to remain

in his current Senior Executive Service position.

This year under Ferrell, the LE&I program suffered a sudden unexplained 15% budget cut while

other Forest Service sectors’ budgets grew. He has also been embroiled in a series of morale-

killing fiascos ranging from assigning ticket quotas to giving top managers raises while officers

were hit with wage freezes and furloughs. In March, PEER released results from an all-employee

LE&I survey in which he received appallingly low ratings for effectiveness, honesty and respect.

“Director David Ferrell has lost the confidence and respect of 80% of the officers he is supposed

to be leading--a colossal failure of motivating your workforce,” said Jack Gregory, PEER’s newest

board member and the retired Special Agent-in-Charge for the Southeastern Region who first

hired Ferrell into LE&I. “We could no longer simply stand by and watch the program to which we

dedicated our professional lives slowly be destroyed.”

The retirees turned to Secretary Vilsack when it became clear that Forest Service Chief Thomas

Tidwell would not address the problems. Tidwell is trying to quell an epidemic of frustration in

his law enforcement program but is offering little of substance to redress mounting grievances.

In an extraordinary set of memos distributed on June 6, 2014, Chief Tidwell described actions his

office is taking following a volcanic all-hands web-based “LiveMeeting” with LE&I line staff on

April 11th. Among the documents distributed was a “Content Analysis” of the comments made

by law enforcement personnel to the Chief. The analysis broke down more than a thousand

comments, expressing dismay about LE&I leadership, toxic morale, inadequate support, a hostile

work environment, lack of resources and other concerns. The analysis pointed to an

10

overwhelming dissatisfaction with Ferrell’s leadership:

“Participants expressed a strong lack of trust and a desired [sic] for a change in leadership;

particularly executive and senior leadership. [Cited comments include]

‘We will not solve our issues with more discussions. The field has lost faith

and confidence. We need a change in leadership.’

‘How can we respect leadership when they do things that we get hung out to

dry for?’

‘The use of the word leadership within LEI is completely inappropriate.’”

This Content Analysis tracks the extremely negative results of the PEER survey. Yet in his latest

memo to LE&I staff, Chief Tidwell does not even mention Ferrell.

By avoiding the leadership question, Chief Tidwell is ignoring the elephant rampaging in the

room. PEER has called out Chief Tidwell for stalling for time, hoping that yet another consultant

report will save him from having to make a hard decision. Unfortunately at this moment, the

Forest Service is circling the wagons rather than driving forward. As a result, its best people will

continue to abandon careers in Forest Service law enforcement in droves.

FOREST SERVICE: Chief vows effort to boost sagging morale in law enforcement division

FOREST SERVICE: Chief pledges better communication, probe of problems with law

enforcement (Greenwire – subscription required)

FOREST SERVICE: Retired employees urge Vilsak to oust law enforcement director (Greenwire

– subscription required)

FOREST SERVICE: Agency vows to review law enforcement problems but defends director

(Greenwire – subscription required)

Ex-Employees Want ‘Incompetent’ Forest Service Executive Fired (Government Executive)

FOREST SERVICE: Watchdog sues, accusing agency of blocking data on threats to employees

(Greenwire – subscription required)

General Services Administration: Disserving a Border Community The crucial official assessment allowing a major expansion of the Peace Bridge international

border crossing to escape full environmental scrutiny took wildly improper liberties with the facts

and must be withdrawn, according to a complaint filed by PEER. Information that showed

substantially increased traffic and serious adverse health effects on an already asthma-stricken

community from the expansion was deliberately excluded from the official record.

The Peace Bridge complex is one of the busiest passenger and commercial vehicle crossings

between the U.S. (at Buffalo) and Canada (at Fort Erie, Ontario). In late 2012, the U.S. General

Services Administration (GSA) green-lighted a major expansion of the Peace Bridge complex by

issuing an environmental report known as a “Categorical Exclusion.” This report concluded that

“there would be no significant impacts, either individually or cumulatively, to the local

environment or quality of life associated with implementation of Proposed Project.” That finding

is utterly false but politically valuable because it excused the project from any further review.

11

In its complaint, PEER details how this finding violated federal law as well as GSA’s own rules

by relying upon false, misleading and unsubstantiated information. Most notably, GSA knowingly

ignored ample evidence that the expansion would be expected to increase traffic. Due to the high

volumes of diesel exhaust from commercial trucks, residents living near the Peace Bridge are

already vulnerable to life-threatening conditions, such as leukemia, lung, breast and other cancers,

heart disease and neurological disorders. The community’s asthma rate is four times the national

average. Indeed, the entire economic argument for the project was that more traffic would mean

more jobs.

“Peace Bridge is a classic case of political pressure leading an agency to fictionalize an official

record – and that is against the law,” stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch, noting that

through a similar Data Quality Act complaint PEER recently forced EPA to disclaim its

endorsement for the safety of synthetic turf. “We simply seek to correct an obviously flawed

record. To do so requires that this Categorical Exclusion is rescinded and a new peer-reviewed

assessment of project impacts takes place.”

Whistleblowers Group Says Approval Of Peace Bridge Project Was Illegal (The Buffalo News)

National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration: Half-Baked Observer Reforms For the past three years, PEER, in partnership with the Association for Professional Observers

(APO), has pushed for reforms protecting both the safety and integrity of fishing observers, the

only independent monitors of U.S. commercial fishing fleets.

Fisheries Observers accompany commercial fleets working 47 different fisheries in U.S. and

international waters. However, these observers are not federal employees but work for companies

under contract to the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). These companies

do not provide guaranteed on-the-job protections.

A complaint we jointly filed back in 2011 documented how observers are discouraged from

reporting violations, subjected to unsafe conditions, pressured about the integrity of data they

collect and vulnerable to reprisal through blackballing assignments to arduous “punishment trips.”

Using a system set up by the fishing fleets can compromise verification of catch-limits, by-catch

of protected species and violations such as shark-finning and marine pollution.

“These measures are little consolation for observers who live in fear of losing their jobs,” said

Elizabeth Mitchell, President of the Association for Professional Observers. “While we are

relieved NOAA is finally admitting problems, we wish it was better at crafting solutions.”

In response, NOAA undertook a review and in early 2013 pledged to adopt nine reforms,

including a “uniform, transparent and consistent procedure for collecting and reporting all

potential marine resource violations,” stronger safety procedures, and a process for observers to

file complaints. Although promised for last fall, they were belatedly unveiled this spring. While

these steps represent progress, they fall short in that they –

12

Provide little uniformity, letting each of seven major observer programs operate

autonomously without firm timelines;

Continue to allow fleets to make observer accommodations so intolerable or unsafe that

they can avoid observer coverage altogether; and

Lack a clear list of responsibilities for NOAA staff and contract managers.

PEER recently had to sue NOAA to force release of observer corporate contracts. Once produced,

it was apparent that contracts for observer services contain no standards, guidelines or protocols –

they are merely open-ended money transfers. This results in arms-length unaccountable

administration of a critical resource protection program already suffering from malign neglect. It

also means that we still have a lot of work left to do.

Vessel Observers endure myriad hardships- report (Greenwire – subscription required)

National Park Service Mass Desecrations at Effigy Mounds

National parks are supposed to preserve our precious natural and cultural heritage for future

generations. Sometimes, however, the biggest detractor of what is called “America’s best idea” is

the National Park Service (NPS) itself.

An excellent example is Effigy Mounds National Monument, a jewel located in northeast Iowa on

the Mississippi’s banks. It contains more than 200 prehistoric burial mounds up to 2,500 years

old, each in the shape of a stylized animal or symbol.

Yet these irreplaceable artifacts have been beset by their own custodian. From 2001 until her

voluntary transfer in 2011, Superintendent Phyllis Ewing presided over a construction binge in

violation of the National Historic Preservation Act and other statutes. An internal NPS

investigation uncovered by PEER found that –

Ewing oversaw a more than $3 million “empire building” with some 78 illegal structures,

including boardwalks, ORV trails and other structures doing “significant adverse damage”

to irreplaceable archaeological assets;

Some of the projects sunk post holes into the feet of the prehistoric mounds; but

Ewing was not fired or even moved. The Regional Director explained he took no

disciplinary action because she had “no design to do anything devious.” Instead, he left her

in place for more than a year to help “the park recover.” Eventually she was allowed to

transfer to a museum curator position at the same pay.

In short, Effigy Mounds witnessed the largest official mass desecrations of Indian prehistoric

burial sites in modern history. Multiple whistleblower reports were ignored. Finally, one

employee went to Interior’s Inspector General, which asked NPS to do a self-investigation. The

resulting 723-page internal investigation report was damning but kept secret. As a result –

No one was disciplined after this cascade of violations documented in 2012. It was only in

2014, as PEER pressed for the report’s release, that NPS finally fired Ewing – a move she

is contesting and may win due to five years of NPS dithering;

Virtually all of the illegal, intrusive structures remain with no plans for removal, despite

tribal complaints that their ancient cemeteries have been remade into “places to walk your

13

dog”; and

No policies have been changed to prevent this from happening elsewhere.

When this all hit the press this spring, NPS Director Jon Jarvis’ office issued a no comment. The

Regional Office defended itself by saying, contrary to fact, that the responsible parties are no

longer employed by NPS. Director Jarvis was personally briefed about Effigy Mounds back in

2010 and did nothing. Meanwhile, we still seek to disinter the full dimensions of the debacle

buried at Effigy Mounds.

Illegal Park Service Projects Damage Sacred Site (The Washington Post)

Effigy Mounds Report To Be Released Monday (The Gazette)

Investigation: National Park Service Long Ignored Preservation Laws In Desecrating Sacred

Ground At Effigy Mounds National Monument (National Parks Traveler)

Lack of Charges in Sacred Site Damage Upsets Some (The Washington Post)

Effigy Mounds Documents Released, Group Calls For Removal of Illegal Structures

(The Clayton County Register)

Effigy Mounds Travesties Discovered From 10-Year Period Of 1999-2009 Are Finally Being

Addressed (Allamakkee County Standard)

Other View: Greater Care Required For Effigy Mounds (LaCrosse Tribune)

Yellowstone Clings to Bottles

More than a score of national parks have now banned sales of plastic water bottles with more on

the way, according to a tally assembled by PEER. For most parks, documents indicate that

disposable plastic water bottles represent the biggest source of trash that parks must pay to haul

away, averaging nearly one-third of all solid waste in parks surveyed.

Ending sales of plastic bottles in national parks has gotten off to a slow start due to the influence

of Coca-Cola, whose Dasani bottled water is one of the top sellers, on top NPS officials. In 2010,

just days before a long-planned plastic bottle ban at Grand Canyon National Park was to take

effect, NPS Director Jon Jarvis blocked it at the company’s behest. Even more significantly, NPS

abandoned its plan to end disposable water product sales in 75% of all visitor facilities by 2016.

After PEER exposed the role of Coca-Cola contributions in these actions, Jarvis allowed the

Grand Canyon ban to proceed but instituted a new policy, effective December 2011, requiring

regional review for future park plastic bottle sale bans. Perhaps due to the controversy, only a

handful of national parks adopted bans under the new policy in 2012, its first full year. In 2013,

records obtained by PEER indicate that no park that sought a bottle sale ban was turned down and

another six parks went bottle-free.

Beyond the 23 parks in 10 states that already do not sell plastic water bottles, California’s Golden

Gate National Recreational Area, the most heavily visited national park, and Florida’s Biscayne

Bay National Park are both installing water “filling stations” to provide free water to visitors. In

addition, Washington’s Mount Rainier National Park indicates it is working on a ban.

Meanwhile at Yellowstone, the heavy hand of Coca-Cola appears to still be in play. Documents

obtained by PEER show that this “crown jewel” park, without announcement, has decided to

14

forego a ban in plastic bottle sales. Instead, it is installing free water “filling stations,” handing

out reusable beverage containers and launching a public education campaign in hope of reversing

the steady increase in plastic wastes. Coca-Cola is a major donor to both the Yellowstone

Foundation and the park’s Trails Fund.

At Yellowstone, documents indicate that the park decided sometime in 2013 to not pursue a bottle

sale ban citing unspecified “significant negative financial impacts and potential for negative visitor

experience.” However, growing volumes of plastics (principally bottles since sales of plastic bags

are banned in the park) threaten to prevent the park from reaching its goal of diverting much of its

solid wastes from expensive landfill disposal. Today, plastics –

Represent 50% of Yellowstone’s solid waste load;

Are the only park waste stream increasing on both a percentage basis and in absolute

terms; and

Increasingly end up in park trash even as plastic bottle recycling rates also rise and total

trash per visitor day is on the decline.

“Yellowstone’s superintendent regards disposable plastic bottles as a necessary evil for reasons of

office politics not responsible resource management,” stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch,

noting its own Plastic Bottle Survey showing key concessionaires open to a bottle ban and

pointing to other parks which have banned bottle sales without adverse visitor reaction. “If even

desert parks like Grand Canyon and Zion can ban plastic bottles without ill effect, why is it

beyond consideration at Yellowstone?”

As a voluntary alternative, Yellowstone has launched a “Single Use Plastic Reduction Initiative”

Building free water filling stations throughout the park at visitor centers, comfort stations,

campgrounds, general stores, food outlets and gas stations;

Making inexpensive reusable containers available to visitors and free to each employee;

and

Conducting a public education campaign involving signs and various messaging to

encourage use of the local tap water and refillable containers.

“While this effort is laudable, it is rooted in the mixed message that plastic bottles are bad for the

park and environment but Yellowstone feels consumer convenience is a higher value,” Ruch

added, questioning why plastic bottles are needed to enhance the visitor experience at a

magnificent place like Yellowstone. “The last time I checked ensuring consumer choice was not

part of the Park Service mission.”

II State Beat Much of our work is done at the state level and much of this work is done by our network of field

offices. Here is a sample:

Alaska 25 Years Later, Exxon Is Still In Court Over Spill (The Cordova Times)

15

California Cal-OSHA Funds Diverted

In the last update, we described the complaint PEER filed with the U.S. Occupational Safety &

Health Administration (OSHA) seeking sanction against Cal/OSHA because it has fallen below

federal minimum worker protection standards that are a condition of it receiving federal funding.

The complaint detailed how workers in California have less protection on the job now than at any

other time in a generation due to the implosion of its Division of Occupational Safety & Health.

Now it turns out that funds intended for Cal/OSHA were diverted for other unrelated purposes

according to a whistleblower working with PEER. This new evidence is being channeled into a

widening investigation into the most populous state’s job health and safety program.

Former Top Cal/OSHA Official Claims Agency Funds Misspent or Unspent (Southern California

Public Radio)

Is California Keeping People Safe At Work? Labor Advocates Say No (Science Blogs)

Malibu Schools’ Toxic Throes Teachers working in contaminated Malibu public schools are strongly protesting the district’s

initial cleanup plan as both illegal and unsafe, according to a letter filed by PEER on behalf of 29

staff from the Malibu Middle and High Schools and Juan Cabrillo Elementary School. The

campuses have been roiled since this fall, when several seriously ill teachers raised concerns and it

was revealed that high levels of an array of toxic contaminants had been found on campus but

teachers, students and parents were never notified.

The new controversy concerns the proposed plan by the latest remediation consultant hired by the

Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District. The plan by Environ International would only

address one aspect of contamination on the campuses and is entitled “Comprehensive PCB-

Related Building Materials Inspection, Management and Removal.” Polychlorinated biphenyls

(PCBs) are highly toxic persistent pollutants banned in the U.S. since 1979. Once widely used in

appliances and construction, they are classified as human carcinogens and linked to damage to the

immune, reproductive, nervous, and endocrine systems. The federal Toxic Substances Control

Act requires PCBs to be removed from schools when found in concentrations of 50 parts per

million (ppm) or higher.

The Environ plan, however, calls for leaving PCBs in classrooms and other school buildings even

above the 50 ppm federal limit until the rooms are either demolished or renovated at some

uncertain time in the future. In the meantime, the plan calls for “Best Management Practices”

which are indistinguishable from ordinary cleaning.

“It is simply unacceptable that the teachers and students of these schools will remain continuously

exposed to PCB-containing materials,” stated PEER Senior Counsel Paula Dinerstein who sent the

letter on behalf of teachers urging that the U.S. EPA reject the Environ plan. “This consultant has

it backwards, using ‘Best Management Practices’ which are only supposed to be an interim step

until the contaminated material is removed – not the long-term solution.”

The effort surrounding PCBs in school buildings is only the first part of the district’s promised

action to address toxic contamination on the campuses. Back in 2010, more than 1,000 tons of

16

soil containing chlordane and DDT at “unacceptable” health levels as well as other toxic

chemicals (lead, arsenic, cadmium, benzene and toluene) had been removed from one small area

of the campus. The next installment of the plan concerning soil testing and remediation is set to

be unveiled in July when it will be harder for teachers and parents to review. Meanwhile, the

controversy in Malibu continues to grow.

Malibu Teachers Protest School PCB Cleanup Plan (Environment News Service)

Teacher Group Objects to Cleanup Plan (The Malibu Times)

EPA Official to Tour Malibu high over health concerns (ABC 7 Eyewitness News)

Two ORV Victories

PEER won two legal victories to curb off-road vehicle abuse of public lands in California. In

Stanislaus National Forest we secured closure of more than 100 miles of ORV trails that damage

streams and habitat for rare species, such as spotted owls, northern goshawks, and western pond

turtles, the only turtle native to California. The Forest Service closures followed a federal court

ruling that the agency’s approval of these new trails violated several laws.

Stanislaus National Forest Announces Travel Management Agreement Reached (Sierra Sun

Times)

OHV Trails Get Downsized in Stanislaus National Forest (Calaveras Enterprise)

At Ocotillo Wells State Vehicular Recreation Area, a superior court rejected the state’s argument

that it had no obligation to protect natural and cultural resources endangered by that park’s “open-

riding” (off-trail) policy. Our suit contends that public recreational activities cannot be allowed to

destroy the very assets parks are supposed to safeguard for future generations. Now the case

moves to trial.

“The court's decision vindicates the courageous Ocotillo Wells environmental scientists who have,

for years, decried the destruction wreaked by this open-riding policy,” said California PEER

Director Karen Schambach, noting extensive efforts to avoid litigation failed because State Parks

leadership would not commit to management changes. “We hope that the State Parks leadership

will now step up do their jobs in order to avoid handing park management over to a court.”

Off-road groups team up to oppose Ocotillo Wells lawsuit (Power Sports Business)

District of Columbia: Sewage Runoff Scam The District of Columbia’s new plan for preventing combined sewage overflows into the Potomac

avoids taking steps needed to cure the problem. As a result, millions of gallons of sewage and

dirty storm water will continue to be discharged into the Potomac River and Rock Creek, exposing

District residents to harmful microbial pathogens, such as fecal coliform, E. coli, enterococci,

giardia, and shigella, according to public comments filed by PEER.

The D.C. sewage system is one of the oldest in the U.S. Every time it rains, combined storm

water and sewage foul the Potomac and its local tributaries, the Anacostia River and Rock Creek.

In 2001, environmentalists sued D.C. and won a consent decree requiring construction of three

massive tunnels and a system of diversion sewers to capture storm water to prevent sewage

17

overflows. As the time to begin paying the full $2.6 billion cost approached, the City balked.

Instead, D.C. has proposed to conduct a “Green Infrastructure Demonstration” over the next eight

years in lieu of building two (the Potomac and Rock Creek) of the three tunnels with only the

Anacostia River Tunnel moving forward. Today ends the public comment period on the District’s

proposed modifications.

Green infrastructure, such as permeable sidewalks, rain gardens and green roofs, is laudable but

will provide nowhere near the pollution relief of the tunnels. Buried in the plan appendix, D.C.

admits that it cannot meet EPA mandated pollution limits for the Potomac and Chesapeake. In

short, green infrastructure should supplement not substitute for the tunnels.

In its comments, PEER points out that the plan presented by D.C. Water –

Lacks any analysis of the public health effects associated with deferring additional tunnels

even though the delayed reductions affect some of D.C.’s most heavily used aquatic

recreation areas;

Does not even specify who will maintain the green infrastructure, from what source of

funds or how its effectiveness will be measured;

Has yet to develop a plan to finance needed improvements or to mitigate and spread out

potential water rate increases, especially for more vulnerable residents.

In 2012, the head of the District’s own Department of the Environment (DDOE), Christophe

Tulou voiced some of these same concerns when asked for an assessment by the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency Mid-Atlantic Regional Office. Although Director Toulou had

copied his chain-of-command on his analysis, Mayor Vincent Gray summarily fired Toulou and

his deputy. His press office then issued a statement explaining that the Mayor felt “upstaged” by

anything less than uncritical support.

It is telling that the District’s own environmental agency had no role in preparing this plan

purporting to tackle the City’s major source of water pollution. PEER and these now former

employees maintain that this plan represents a form of public corruption that puts the health of

District residents at risk.

Florida Beach Projects Imperil Reefs

A new round of mega beach “renourishment” projects in Broward County will bury and destroy

hundreds of acres of reef and essential fish habitats, according to a complaint filed by PEER and

the reef-protection group Cry of the Water. To make matters worse, the new permits remove

safeguards designed to minimize direct damage to nearshore reefs and other hardbottom habitats

as well as secondary impacts from clouds of silt, sediment and turbidity suffocating the reefs.

The Broward projects would dredge and deposit 1.2 million cubic yards of sand – 10 times the

volume of past projects. The new permits would also dramatically increase the risks to nearshore

marine habitats by –

Eliminating biological monitoring requirements and weakening other protections afforded

reefs and other hardbottom habitats;

Using the same modeling proven to significantly under-predict reef burial; and

18

Slating projects for sections of Ft. Lauderdale that have never had a prior beach project. As

a result, the best reefs in Florida would be jeopardized.

“Many of the beaches slated for sand supplementation are privately owned and not open to the

public,” stated Florida PEER Director Jerry Phillips, who is trying to force a new review of

impacts before the projects are finally approved. “Florida seems hell-bent on a course to wipe out

its reefs in a misguided and fruitless attempt to prop up beachfront condo values threatened by sea-

level rise.”

Groups Say Beach Restoration Could Harm Reef (Sun Sentinel)

Comical Compliance Claims

Florida Governor Rick Scott has said some strange things, but this spring his Department of

Environmental Protection (DEP) asserted that due to Scott’s pro-business policies “significant

compliance with [environmental] rules and regulations rose to 96 percent, a two percent increase

from 2012.”

DEP alleged that this steady climb began in 2009 (Scott’s first year in office) when regulatory

compliance was an oddly specific “89.7%.” The next day, Florida PEER Director Jerry Phillips, a

former DEP enforcement attorney, submitted a public records request for the numbers behind

these claims. Two months later, DEP produced an undated set of tables which –

Reflect much higher significant noncompliance rates than DEP had claimed, including

figures showing significant non-compliance in inspected facilities higher than what DEP

said was the historical norm;

Completely discount recordkeeping violations without explaining how DEP knows a

facility is in compliance if its monitoring data is not submitted. If these “paperwork”

violations are included, noncompliance rates spike as high as two thirds of all facilities

inspected; and

Indicate a severe drop-off in the number of inspections DEP is conducting, down by more

than a third in just the past two years.

“Like Soviet-era election results, Governor Scott’s absurdly high numbers are products of crude

attempts to rig the system to mask reality,” Phillips stated, noting that DEP does not even maintain

a roster of regulated facilities, so the percentage inspected remains unknown. “In the business

world if the books given to investors were cooked like this it would be called securities fraud.”

Because of this supposed near-universal compliance, DEP brags that, “As a result, the number of

legal actions filed and monetary fines levied in 2013 has dropped to a record low” – a dubious

achievement PEER has confirmed, pointing to several changes inside DEP making it very hard for

staff to pursue violations or even issue letters of warning.

“It used to be that pollution penalties were an accepted cost of doing business in Florida but now

Gov. Scott offers to ‘comp’ even major violations without so much as a token penalty,” added

Phillips, arguing that pollution in Florida has become a corporate freebie. “Under Scott’s

19

approach, corporations have absolutely every incentive to foul our air, water and soil, knowing

that in the unlikely event they are caught the only punishment is attending a self-help seminar.”

Boca Drinking Water Whistleblower Case Settles

The City of Boca Raton has perpetrated long-standing safe drinking water violations, such as –

Regular pressure violations in water lines;

Cross-contamination of waste and drinking water; and

An illegal chemical injection system hooked up to city water lines and inadequate

monitoring for lead and total coliform in the city’s drinking water.

These drinking water violations were also at the center of a whistleblower lawsuit against Boca

Raton from Christine Ferrigan, who served as its Utility Coordinator for 23 years. With PEER’s

help, her whistleblower case recently settled. In addition, several of the top managers in the city’s

utility department have been replaced.

Former Boca Employee's Whistleblower Status Goes On Trial (Sun Sentinel)

Boca Whistle-Blower Case Settled Before Going To Trial (Palm Beach Post)

New Jersey Christie’s Other Deficit – $40 Billion Water Infrastructure Gap

Not only is New Jersey facing a massive and growing financial gap in its ability to protect water

supplies and infrastructure, but it has no plan to pay for needed improvements or prevent coming

water emergencies, according to documents obtained by PEER. A water infrastructure deficit

pegged at nearly $13 billion several years ago has now ballooned as a result of impacts and

implications of Super-Storm Sandy, sea level rise and expected extreme weather events.

“Our water infrastructure deficit is a yawning fiscal sinkhole which the Christie administration

wants to treat like it is merely a decorative koi pond,” stated New Jersey PEER Director Bill

Wolfe, a former long-time state Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) analyst. “The

post-Sandy factors now in play make our already huge water infrastructure needs both more

expensive and urgent – they will not go away.”

Compounding the problem, the state has failed to enforce “resilience” and “asset management”

requirements in DEP permits to prevent future water infrastructure damage. This failure is not

merely academic – it could jeopardize federal Clean Water Act funding tied to these same

requirements. PEER is pressing U.S. EPA Regional Administrator Judith Enck to invoke these

federal resilience and asset management requirements for water infrastructure.

Critics: State’s Disaster-Risk Assessment Lacks Specific Course of Action (NJ Spotlight)

Sandy Funny Money

In releasing the interview summaries from his internal investigation of the George Washington

Bridge scandal, Governor Chris Christie confirmed how intertwined his environmental agencies

were in his political operations, according to an analysis produced by PEER. Of the 75 persons

interviewed by the law firm retained by Christie, eleven were from environmental agencies,

principally, the DEP.

20

One major topic of the interviews conducted by Randy Mastro of the law firm engaged by Christie

was pressures put on Hoboken Mayor Dawn Zimmer to approve a controversial development

project by the Rockefeller Group. Documents also detail how the Governor’s Office of

Intergovernmental Affairs (IGA), then run by Bridget Kelly, was in charge of the political roll-out

for every supposedly objective official act, such as the distribution of post-Sandy aid.

“Nixon had his CREEP – the Committee to Reelect the President – and Christie has his IGA,”

remarked New Jersey PEER Director Bill Wolfe. “Agencies like DEP which are supposed to

promote the environment have been subverted into promoting Christie’s political agenda.”

This widely ridiculed internal investigation did not delve deeply into related topics such as how

Christie’s office politicized award of grants to municipalities to rebuild power infrastructure.

Running up to his reelection, IGA made sure grants to favored municipalities received media

attention and political plaudits.

After an analysis by PEER showed that grant awards violated the state’s own criteria and seemed

designed to reward friends and punish perceived enemies, Christie’s office backtracked. Initially

they blamed a contractor and then claimed there were data entry errors. Now they say they are

starting calculations again from scratch by hand. Meanwhile, delays in Sandy relief lengthen

principally due to these shenanigans.

State Probe Confirms Sandy Energy Grant Program Fraught with Errors (NJ Spotlight)

Pinelands Long Knife Emerges

Earlier this year, Gov. Christie suffered a rare reversal when his own appointees on the New

Jersey Pinelands Commission rejected his proposal to approve a controversial high-pressure gas

pipeline cutting through the heart of its namesake preserve. Following that defeat, Christie is

moving to stack the Commission even further.

PEER led the opposition to the proposed Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) for approving a

pipeline bringing shale gas to repower the B.L. England Electric Generation Plant. Besides the

truncated public review process, closed door meetings between the pipeline sponsor, South Jersey

Gas Co., and Pineland Commission representatives to pre-negotiate an MOA, the agreement itself

is illegal. The Pinelands Commission may not accept private payments to compensate for

damaging the Pinelands, which the Commission is chartered to protect.

Nonetheless, it appears clear that Gov. Christie will try again to carve up the 1.1 million acre

Pinelands which cover nearly a quarter of New Jersey's land area, the largest open space left on

the Mid-Atlantic seaboard.

Christie Vetoes Minutes of Pinelands Commission, Slams 5 Percent Raise For Staff (NJ Spotlight)

Christie Moves to Replace Pinelands Commissioners (Asbury Park Press) The Record: Pinelands’ politics (Bergen Record)

Fenimore Landfill –the Gift That Keeps on Giving

A Christie administration attempted eco-win-win of converting an abandoned landfill into a solar

panel farm has spectacularly blown apart into a toxic lose-lose due to official incompetence and

21

duplicity. With only itself to blame, the New Jersey DEP has been hiding its own report showing

that the landfill should never have been a candidate for reuse, let alone reopened for operation.

The long abandoned Fenimore Landfill in Roxbury was purchased by the company Strategic

Environmental Partners (SEP), Inc. to transform the site into a solar facility. But what neither the

residents of Roxbury nor SEP knew was that state DEP biological monitoring data showed that the

two streams running around the landfill were impaired. This Stressor Indicator report is based on

sampling studies from 2009-2010 showing the deleterious impacts on aquatic life in the Drakes

Brook watershed from Fenimore.

In response to a PEER Open Public Records Act request for this long-finished report, DEP

initially claimed to have found it but on May 22nd

(nearly a month after the request) declared that it

was still in “draft” form and not yet “approved for release.” This denial adds that DEP “expects

the review of this report to be finalized and available to the public in 1 to 2-weeks” – a period that

has passed without its release.

“This report featuring monitoring data from 2010 is not a draft – it is being withheld because its

findings are deeply embarrassing to the Christie people,” stated New Jersey PEER Director Bill

Wolfe, noting that the agency now politically screens its scientific reports. “DEP’s reopening of

the Fenimore Landfill can only be characterized as gross environmental malpractice.”

The awful stench from the landfill caused DEP to take over site management, displacing SEP.

Now, instead of a feel-good story of turning toxic lemons into solar-powered lemonade, there is a

nasty public legal standoff with no clear resolution in sight.

New Jersey Landfill Mire in Turmoil (Engineering News-Record)

Corporate Drinking Water

Without public announcement, New Jersey has released a report urging that the assessment of

emerging chemical contaminants in drinking water be handled by a system developed by the

state’s largest chemical manufacturer. This latest development caps a corporate campaign to kill a

multi-year effort to address rising levels of unregulated chemicals in New Jersey drinking water.

The report is a product of the 16-member Science Advisory Board filled by Christie

administration appointees to address the state’s entire portfolio of eco-science. Despite its broad

charge, the Board has produced only a few fragmentary work products. The Board posted a report

on “Contaminants of Emerging Concern” which thanks a DuPont corporate executive serving on

the Board for his “significant input” and concludes –

“It is recommended that the hazard assessment be conducted using a platform called

METIS (Metanomics Information System) developed by DuPont. METIS is a chemical

informatics platform that provides a screening level view of potential environmental fate

and effects, human health concerns, and societal perception concerns.”

“Under this plan DuPont would be in charge of determining the public health impacts of its own

chemicals polluting our waters,” stated New Jersey PEER Director Bill Wolfe, a former DEP

22

analyst. “New Jersey now conducts its environmental science so that the fox not only guards the

henhouse but also weighs the chickens and sizes the eggs.”

A decade ago, New Jersey was a national leader in identifying a growing number of new

chemicals and compounds in drinking water supplies. The DEP even developed a plan to filter

many of these chemicals out of drinking water. Meanwhile, its 30-year old Drinking Water

Quality Institute was working to set new or tighter standards for a number of these emerging

compounds of concern.

Under Governor Christie, however, all that prior work ground to a halt or went into reverse:

His administration rejected a PEER rule-making petition to enact the state’s own plan

to filter harmful chemicals out of drinking water;

The Drinking Water Quality Institute was disrupted and did not meet for more than

three years. Its proposed chemical drinking water standards were all abandoned; and

State environmental scientific work on virtually every topic has either been dismantled

or channeled through this industry-dominated Science Advisory Board.

“New Jersey’s drinking water is steadily becoming more contaminated and the only solution being

offered is ‘let’s go ask DuPont,’” added Wolfe, pointing out that the newly released report offers

no solutions on what to do about the growing flow of unregulated pollutants once they are

quantified. “We should all be embarrassed that this report is now what passes for environmental

science in New Jersey.”

N.J. Water Quality Panel Ends Long Hiatus (Philly.Com)

Tennessee: Yes Net Loss For more than a generation, America’s wetlands protection policy has been rooted in a doctrine

called “No Net Loss” in which permits authorizing destruction of wetlands are coupled with

requirements that the developer agree to restore or create wetlands of at least equal size. A recent

review by EPA’s Inspector General confirms what we at PEER have long known – much of this

required mitigation is never done or done poorly. The result is that the ecological function of the

destroyed wetlands is not replaced – a result we call “Yes, Net Loss.” Led by Tennessee PEER

Director Barry Sulkin, PEER has been bringing a series of federal suits to enforce these broken

mitigation promises.

III. In Underview: Wildlife Management by Eradication – Double-

Crested Cormorant Get Both Barrels

The predominant form of wildlife management in the U.S. has become eradication of what are

deemed nuisance species. Each year, millions of animals are dispatched under tax-supported

operations euphemistically called “Wildlife Services.” A classic example is the double-crested

cormorant, a fish-eating bird targeted for removal by commercial catfish farms.

To accommodate industry demands, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service has been issuing multi-state

“depredation” orders that result in elimination of an estimated 50,000 double-crested cormorants

23

per year. These orders are so broad that they authorize killing up to half of the entire double-

crested cormorant population in any one year. The orders allow removal of birds “committing or

about to commit predation” on fish – the cormorant’s primary diet.

The amazing thing is that the Service keeps renewing these depredation orders without analyzing

their biological effects or even whether they enhance fish populations. Nor does the agency bother

to consider non-lethal alternatives, such as putting nets over catfish hatcheries. Executing these

orders introduces tons of lead-based ammunition into fragile aquatic environments and harms

untold numbers of co-nesting birds.

Catfish farming has declined precipitously in the past decade independently of heavy cormorant

“culling,” yet the Service has not adjusted the depredation orders accordingly. Instead, it is blindly

Xeroxing forward open-ended eradication authorizations.

The nation’s leading experts on the bird came to PEER for help in blocking the five-year renewal

of these eradication orders. We have agreed to spearhead this legal challenge.

Sand Island Slaughter PEER is also trying to block a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers plan to wipe out nearly one-third of

the entire population of double-crested cormorants in Western North America. The Corps has

eschewed non-lethal alternatives, in part due to bureaucratic impatience, and in part because it is

unknown where displaced cormorants would relocate. Rather than engage scientists to manage

these conflicts, the Corps wants to hire snipers.

This cormorant eradication plan is a function of unintended consequences from prior human

interventions. Dams along the Columbia-Snake River system operated by the Corps block the

natural migration of fish. So, large hatchery populations of otherwise endangered salmon and

steelhead are released into the lower reaches of the Columbia. This piscine smorgasbord has

drawn growing populations of fish-eating birds, such as the Caspian tern, brown pelicans and

cormorants to Sand Island, in the Columbia Estuary five miles from the Pacific. To reduce loss of

juvenile salmon and steelhead as they venture to sea, the Corps wants to slash the 15,000 nesting

pairs of double-crested cormorants on Sand Island by nearly two-thirds.

To kill this jaw-dropping number of birds, the Corps will engage teams of shooters from Wildlife

Services, an arm of the U.S. Department of Agriculture responsible for dispatching wildlife

deemed economic nuisances. Wildlife Services will convert blinds and tunnels used for many

years by scientists to monitor the largest rookery of its kind in North America into killing

platforms. But the plan –

Requires marksmen shooting with silencers and night-vision scopes to kill several hundred

birds each night during the two weeks between when the cormorants arrive on the Island

and when they start laying eggs.

Does not explain how marksmen would exact this heavy toll without disturbing other fish-

eating birds nesting on the Island, such as Brant’s cormorant, whose nests are intermingled

with their double-crested cousins, or the world’s largest colony of endangered California

brown pelicans; and

Offers no clear plan for how to dispose of thousands of carcasses on the low-lying 50-acre

24

tract.

“Frankly, this is a crazy, crude and needlessly cruel plan that should go right back to the drawing

board,” stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch, noting that this would be the largest “culling”

operation of its type ever undertaken. “This operation represents an extreme militarization of

wildlife management.”

Army Corps of Engineers to Kill 16,000 Cormorants On East Sand Island In Columbia River

Estuary (The Oregonian)

16,000 Cormorants Of East Sand Island To Be Shot Dead To Save Endangered Salmon (French

Tribune)

Draft EIS Proposes Culling Thousands Of Cormorants To Reduce Salmonid Predation (The

Columbia Basin)

###