Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this hearing today.  

I hope that this hearing will expose the dishonesty of the officials in this Administration that are supposedly responsible for protecting the health and safety of our constituents against toxic pollution.

The EPA and its officials ought to be ashamed of themselves.  Their action in approving the Castle Astoria permit are no different than the PRP’s (Potentially Responsible Party’s) at a Superfund site or the electric utility that fouls the air.  They are the purveyors of sickness and disease.  And worse, they are playing politics with the lives of the people I represent.

The Jersey Shore is my home.  My children swim in the waters where you want to place this toxic waste.  I will not rest until you withdraw the Castle Astoria permit and set up an honest standard for determining what is clean dredged material.

I think you know that the Castle Astoria material is unsafe for ocean disposal.  But, the EPA has made a political decision to approve ocean dumping off the Jersey Shore to placate the corporate polluters and special interests in New York.

Since the implementation of the 1996 agreement, EPA and the Corps have only allowed material in the ocean that would truly remediate the toxic stain off our coast.  Since that time, we have enjoyed a sense of security – albeit a false one.  The Jersey Shore was suspicious of your intentions from the beginning.  We feared that dirty muck would be used to “cover up” the toxic stain off our coast, and that it would merely result in ocean dumping in disguise.  We wanted “beach quality” material to cap the Mud Dump Site.  We wanted true remediation, and we didn’t trust that that’s what we would get.  But we acquiesced under the auspices that the EPA would develop new criteria – remediation, NOT ocean dumping – criteria.  In other words, common sense told us that remediation meant that we would make the Mud Dump Site better, to facilitate the site’s cleanup, and we trusted that this was EPA and the Corps’ intention.

I deeply disappointed that the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey is supportive of Castle Astoria’s proposal.  At the time that the agreement was signed, dredging at the Port was at a virtual stand-still because we refused to allow muck to be dumped in our ocean.  Without our agreement, the Port could not move forward with critical dredging projects.  Now the Port is supporting a private, unaffiliated company’s proposal to trash the Jersey Shore.  Furthermore, the Port could be playing a constructive role in this process by forcing New York to allocate a portion of its currently uncommitted $45 million in Port Authority funding to find an alternative disposal solution for Castle Astoria’s material.  So the Port has stabbed me in the back too.

When the Historic Area Remediation Site (HARS) was designated, the EPA identified two contaminants, among others, that were at elevated “levels of concern” at the HARS – polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) – which needed to be reduced.  Yet these contaminants are found within Castle Astoria’s material at levels equal to or greater than levels at the HARS.  How can material with PAH levels of 751 parts per billion help cleanup a site with an average of 530 parts per billion?  And how can material with PCB levels of 170 parts help cleanup a site with an equal level of PCBs?  I hope EPA will explain this ill-conceived logic to the Subcommittee.

Castle Astoria’s mud will harm fisheries, shellfisheries, and the region’s entire marine ecosystem.  The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has requested that the Corps conduct an Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) assessment because the project will place aquatic species at risk and degrade fish habitats. I am interested in hearing today from the NMFS about its rationale for requiring the Army Corps to conduct an EFH assessment for this permit request.  I know that NMFS does not request this for all applications.  If this material is really appropriate for HARS remediation, why did NMFS ask for an EFH assessment?  Why did NMFS ask the Army Corps to consult on the Endangered Species Act (ESA) implications of this permit?

The absurdity of this proposal is further exacerbated by the fact that technology exists to treat the material to make it suitable for environmentally sound, land based disposal alternatives.  I have worked with my colleagues in the New Jersey delegation to secure millions of dollars in Federal funding to facilitate the development and implementation of technology to decontaminate dredged materials for beneficial disposal projects.  The State of New Jersey and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey have been successful in implementing these technologies.  Unfortunately, the State of New York has not followed this lead, and that is a significant cause of why we are in this situation today.  Castle Astoria is seeking this permit as a result of New York’s inaction and lack of disposal alternatives.

A Sunday, October 17, 1999, New York Times article focused on New Jersey’s use of decontaminated dredged materials to cleanup brownfields.  These efforts have been so successful that brownfields redevelopment in New Jersey is among the highest in the nation.  Contaminated material dredged from the New York-New Jersey harbor is being used beneficially to facilitate the rebirth of abandoned properties that blight the landscape.  In fact, according to the article, there is actually a shortage of dredged material for use in these projects.

If New York does not take steps to develop alternatives I will introduce legislation to force it to do so.   This legislation will altogether prohibit any material from being disposed of at the HARS that is dredged from States without demonstrated decontamination projects online.  New York must increase its efforts to develop options for beneficial reuse of dredged materials.  It must not be allowed to continue to use the Jersey Shore as its dump site.

Again, I appreciate the Chairman’s willingness to look into these issues, and I urge the Administration to once again stand up for our way of life at the Jersey Shore.