Support Common Dreams Today
Journalism that is independent, non-profit, ad-free, and 100% reader-supported.
#
For Immediate Release
April, 06 2011, 12:45pm EDT
Contact:
Kate Slusark, 212-727-4592
700,000-Ton Cleanup Settlement Reached in Jersey City Toxic Chromium Case
fter 30 Years, Local Community Triumphs in Cancer-Causing Chemical Battle
NEWARK
PPG Industries has agreed to clean-up of one of the largest remaining sites contaminated with cancer-causing hexavalent chromium in New Jersey. The cleanup is estimated to cost PPG up to $600 million and remove an estimated 700,000 tons of chromium waste from a Jersey City neighborhood. The settlement stems from a 2009 citizen's lawsuit filed in federal court by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), Interfaith Community Organization (ICO), and GRACO Community Organization (GRACO) on behalf of Jersey City residents who have been fighting for a comprehensive clean-up since the early 1980s.
"After decades of foot dragging, we now know this cleanup is going to happen, and it's going to happen right," said Nancy Marks, NRDC senior attorney. "What could have been a Swiss cheese approach to the cleanup is now a comprehensive removal of the contamination - no holes to be found. This Jersey City community should never have been stuck living on top of someone else's toxic waste in the first place. They're finally receiving the justice they deserve and will be soon free from this poisonous legacy."
The settlement ensures PPG will clear a nearly 17-acre, densely populated area of Jersey City of 700,000 tons of cancer-causing toxic waste that has plagued it for over 50 years. PPG has agreed to finance the cleanup of the area, which includes the company's former Garfield Avenue chromium plant, surrounding sites and contaminated groundwater. Wherever possible, the cleanup will involve the excavation and removal of chromium wastes, and disposal in offsite hazardous waste landfills. Strict dust control measures will protect residents and workers during the cleanup.
Since the lawsuit's filing in 2009, PPG twice attempted to have the citizen's suit thrown out of federal court in order to move forward with a less stringent state settlement. Both attempts were denied by two different judges. Notably, the federal court settlement agreement ensures the cleanup will reduce chromium levels to 5 parts per million (ppm), which reflects the best available science about the health effects of exposure to the chemical and is much more stringent that the state's enforceable limit of 20 ppm. PPG will also test residential properties near the Garfield Avenue site upon request and clean up any contaminated properties to the 5ppm level. Since this agreement was reached in federal court, it also includes binding deadlines that cannot be delayed by state bureaucracy.
"This is a victory for environmental justice, for public health, and for the economic rebirth of an area that for half a century has been a toxic wasteland in the midst of a densely populated section of Jersey City," said Reverend Willard Ashley, co-chairperson of ICO and pastor of Abundant Joy Community Church in Jersey City. "It's a victory that will mean more jobs and less cancer."
Another key element of the settlement is a commitment to allow community monitoring of the cleanup process, empowering local citizens with a level of control over the cleanup of their own community. PPG will fund a community-hired expert, who will be provided full access to watch over the process.
"State chromium standards are insufficiently protective of public health," saaid Public Justice environmental attorney Richard Webster. "Through our lawsuit we sought and won better, higher standards."
The cleanup will begin this spring and will take approximately five years to complete. The settlement, submitted to the court today, will become final when signed by the federal judge. It does not prevent other pending legal claims against PPG, including a state court class action for individual damages, from moving forward. Public Justice helped represent NRDC and ICO in the case, and GRACO was represented by the firm of Lieberman & Blecher from Princeton, New Jersey.
"This settlement proves once again that environmental laws can produce effective results in New Jersey and that communities do not have to continue to be victimized by environmental dangers," said Stuart Lieberman of Lieberman & Blecher. "Communities can work together to secure a healthier environment for themselves and for their children. This settlement means cleaner soil, water and air for this community."
BACKGROUND:
PPG Industries, a Pittsburgh-based corporation, first began investigating the chromium contamination in 1982. The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) began enforcement efforts at the PPG complex soon thereafter, and in 1990 reached an agreement requiring PPG to clean up dozens of sites the DEP believed they had contaminated. Those clean-up efforts should have been completed by the late 1990s, but PPG did not move forward with the chromium removal project and the DEP failed to enforce a clean-up. After years of inaction by PPG and the state, NRDC and ICO filed their lawsuit in federal district court in Newark in 2009 under the citizens' suit provisions of the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). In June of 2009, GRACO was added as a third plaintiff in the lawsuit. GRACO is a community group comprised of individuals living in direct proximity to the main PPG chromium contaminated site.
A byproduct of the chromate chemical production facility housed on the site 50 years ago, hexavalent chromium - the real-life villain in the Erin Brockovich story - is toxic to humans and animals. PPG itself sampled soil and groundwater and reported elevated levels - some more than 2,500 times the state clean-up standard - of the toxic chemical throughout the site. Tests also reveal that chromium contamination has migrated off the site to surrounding areas, including inside homes and schools in the densely populated African American and Latino community. It will continue to spread until the site is cleaned up.
Exposure to this type of chromium has been found to cause cancer, respiratory problems, kidney and liver damage, chromium ulcers, and nasal septum perforations, as well as pregnancy and delivery complications for women. A study found that Jersey City residents living closer to contaminated sites have significantly higher incidence of lung cancer than those who live further away.
NRDC works to safeguard the earth--its people, its plants and animals, and the natural systems on which all life depends. We combine the power of more than three million members and online activists with the expertise of some 700 scientists, lawyers, and policy advocates across the globe to ensure the rights of all people to the air, the water, and the wild.
(212) 727-2700LATEST NEWS
American Exceptionalism in One Heartbreaking, Grotesque Tweet
A victim of the mass shooting in Half Moon Bay, California told Gov. Gavin Newsom that he wanted to leave the hospital as quickly as possible to avoid high medical costs.
Jan 25, 2023
An anecdote told by California Gov. Gavin Newsom at a press conference on the mass shooting in Half Moon Bay—the second such appearance he made in two days, following another deadly shooting in Monterey Park—encapsulated the United States' twin crises of economic injustice and rampant gun violence, said advocates on Monday.
The Democratic governor told the press that while visiting a man who'd been injured in the shooting at two farms in the Bay Area city, the victim said he was hoping to leave the hospital quickly to avoid high medical bills.
"He said, 'Hey, Governor, thanks for being here but when am I gonna get the hell out of here?'" Newsom said. "His leg was shattered by the gunfire. He goes, 'I can't afford to spend any more time here, I don't have the money."
"How many people are shot and then face massive medical debt? How much revenue and profit do hospitals generate via shootings? Perversity through and through."
The man's mother and son later arrived and told Newsom they were "worried he's going to lose his job at a warehouse the next day unless he can go back to work."
Politico reporter Lara Korte relayed the governor's comments on social media, eliciting numerous responses in which critics—including advocates for Medicare for All and strict gun control—said the post represented "the United States of America in one tweet."
\u201cThe United States of America in one tweet: Get shot in a mass shooting, go to hospital, try and leave early because the debt would kill you instead. Complete and utter perversity.\u201d— Christian Christensen (@Christian Christensen) 1674659567
"This is the most American tweet of all time," added progressive commentator Kyle Kulinski.
The shooting in Half Moon Bay was one of dozens of shootings since 2023 began just over three weeks ago. Along with the shooting in Monterey Park last Saturday and the shooting of a family in Enoch, Utah on January 4, it was one of the deadliest attacks so far.
Dr. Adam Gaffney, an intensive care unit doctor and former president of Physicians for a National Health Program, called Newsom's story "a gut-wrenching indictment of our healthcare system."
Dania Palanker, an assistant research professor at the Center on Health Insurance Reforms at Georgetown University's McCourt School of Public Policy, noted that the costs associated with being one of the millions of Americans who will survive gun violence in their lifetime are an often-overlooked consequence of the Republican Party's obstruction as the vast majority of Americans call for stricter gun control.
\u201cI can go on and on about various services or goods that aren\u2019t typically covered by insurance as well as those that are often inadequately covered (like mental health care & wheelchairs).\nhttps://t.co/sKrpOFto9v\u201d— Dania Palanker (@Dania Palanker) 1674611579
As CNNreported in December, one insured survivor of the mass shooting at Club Q in Colorado Springs received a bill for $130,000, while another person who was among the 27.5 million Americans who lack health insurance was billed $20,000 for spending a night in the emergency room where doctors stitched a bullet wound in his leg.
The Journal of the American Medical Associationpublished a study last May showing that the average initial hospital charge for mass shooting survivors between 2012 and 2019 was nearly $65,000 per person.
"How many people are shot and then face massive medical debt?" asked physician and anthropologist Eric Reinhart. "How much revenue and profit do hospitals generate via shootings? Perversity through and through."
Keep ReadingShow Less
While Blocking Paid Sick Leave, Union Pacific Spent More on Stock Buybacks Than Workers
"Instead of buying back their own stock, UP should be investing in their employees by offering paid sick leave, reasonable schedules, and a better quality of life for railroaders," said one union president.
Jan 25, 2023
Union Pacific, one of the largest rail corporations in the United States, said Tuesday that it brought in record revenue and profits last year as it successfully fought off workers' push for paid sick leave.
The company reported $7 billion in net income for 2022 as a whole and said it spent a whopping $6.3 billion repurchasing its own shares—significantly more than the $4.6 billion it spent on employee pay and benefits last year.
“Instead of buying back their own stock, UP should be investing in their employees by offering paid sick leave, reasonable schedules, and a better quality of life for railroaders," Ed Hall, the newly elected president of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, told CNN on Tuesday. "This is the only way the railroad will be able to solve their recruitment and retention problems and keep the trains running."
Union Pacific was one of the major rail carriers involved in White House-brokered contract talks late last year that produced an agreement without any guaranteed paid sick days, rejecting a central demand of rail workers.
Labor unions representing a majority of U.S. rail workers rejected the proposed agreement and threatened to strike, but Congress intervened in the long-simmering contract dispute in December to impose the White House-backed deal on employees, sparking furious backlash from rank-and-file union members and progressive allies.
"President Biden campaigned on a week of paid sick leave for all working people, and then he had the opportunity right here but didn't take action. He favored the corporations," Matt Weaver, a rail worker and member of the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes Division (BMWED) in Ohio, told In These Times contributor Jeff Schuhrke, who detailed rail workers' ongoing fight for paid leave and safety measures in a piece last week.
Facing continued pressure from employees and some activist investors, Union Pacific and other rail giants are "weighing offering paid sick days—or are already doing so—along with schedule changes and other steps to improve employees' work-life balance," Bloombergreported Monday.
"Costs will still be a key consideration for the railroads—and their investors," the business outlet added. "Voluntary paid sick leave and more flexible schedules would add to the expense of the labor agreement, which over five years raises salaries by 24%, pays bonuses totaling $5,000, and adds one day a year of personal leave. That could come at the expense of dividends and share buybacks, which have soared in recent years."
"Workers remain skeptical that they'll truly benefit from the tradeoff," Bloomberg continued. "Railroads historically have been quick to furlough staff during downturns, have required long hours with little flexibility, and have imposed strict attendance policies that allow the railroads to operate with fewer workers."
As Railroad Workers United put it in a Twitter post on Tuesday, "Never take the Union Pacific at face value."
Keep ReadingShow Less
US Poised to Follow Suit as Germany Approves Shipment of Tanks to Ukraine
"This is not the path to peace and marks a serious escalation," said the U.K.-based Stop the War Coalition. "Sending tanks is a step further away from negotiation."
Jan 25, 2023
The Biden administration is reportedly finalizing a plan to send dozens of Abrams tanks to Ukraine and Germany announced Wednesday that it has agreed to supply Kyiv's forces with 14 Leopard 2 battle tanks, moves that peace advocates said represent a dangerous escalation of the war.
Both the U.S. and Germany had previously hesitated to approve the delivery of tanks to Ukraine, which has been under assault from Russian forces for nearly a year. As CNNreported Wednesday, "German officials had openly stated that they would only send their Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine if the U.S. sent the M-1 Abrams tank, a system U.S. officials had repeatedly stated was overly complex and difficult to maintain."
"The U.S. decision to provide Abrams tanks to Ukraine is an abrupt about-face from its stated position, one that allows Germany to send its tanks and to clear the way for the approval of other European countries to send in more of the German-made Leopard 2 tanks as well," the outlet added.
The Biden administration is expected to announce its plan to send tanks to Ukraine later Wednesday. Citing a senior U.S. official with knowledge of the plan, The Washington Postreported that the U.S. tanks may not arrive in Ukraine "until at least the fall."
It will likely take months to train Ukrainian forces to use the tanks, analysts say.
Anti-war campaigners and commentators warned that the shipment of battle tanks into Ukraine will deepen the West's involvement in a devastating conflict that is at risk of becoming a direct—and potentially nuclear—confrontation between Russia and NATO.
"This is not the path to peace and marks a serious escalation," responded the U.K.-based Stop the War Coalition. "Arming Ukraine and sending tanks is a step further away from negotiation."
In a column for Responsible Statecraft on Monday, Branko Marcetic cautioned that "little by little, NATO and the United States are creeping closer to the catastrophic scenario President Joe Biden said 'we must strive to prevent'—direct conflict between the United States and Russia."
"When the United States involves itself militarily in a conflict, it often finds it hard to get itself out, let alone avoid deep entanglements that blow well past lines it had drawn at the start of the intervention," Marcetic wrote, citing Vietnam and Afghanistan as clear examples.
"Unless officials make a concerted effort to deescalate and pursue a diplomatic track—and prominent voices in media and politics create the political space for them to do it—Biden's vow to avoid World War Three will mean as much as President Johnson's 1964 promise not to 'send American boys nine or ten thousand miles away from home to do what Asian boys ought to be doing for themselves,'" Marcetic added.
"Little by little, NATO and the United States are creeping closer to the catastrophic scenario President Joe Biden said 'we must strive to prevent'—direct conflict between the United States and Russia."
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who faced significant pressure from Baltic nations to send tanks to Ukraine, said the agreement was reached after "intensive consultations that have taken place between Germany and its closest European and international partners."
Dietmar Bartsch, parliamentary leader of Germany's Left party, denounced Scholz's decision, warning that the "supply of Leopard battle tanks... potentially takes us closer to a third world war than in the direction of peace in Europe."
The U.S. and Germany's tanks will add to the supply already pledged by Poland, Spain, the U.K., the Netherlands, Finland, and Denmark.
"Together, we are accelerating our efforts to ensure Ukraine wins this war and secures a lasting peace," right-wing British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak tweeted Wednesday.
Dmytro Kuleba, Ukraine's foreign minister, wrote on social media that "the tank coalition is formed."
"Everyone who doubted this could ever happen sees now: for Ukraine and partners impossible is nothing," Kuleba added. "I call on all new partners that have Leopard 2 tanks in service to join the coalition and provide as many of them as possible."
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov, for his part, called the U.S. and German plans "disastrous" because of "technological aspects," an apparent reference to the complexities involved in training Ukrainian forces to use and maintain the tanks.
"I am convinced that many specialists understand the absurdity of this idea," said Peskov. "These tanks will burn down just like all the other ones... Except they cost a lot, and this will fall on the shoulders of European taxpayers."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular
SUPPORT OUR WORK.
We are independent, non-profit, advertising-free and 100%
reader supported.
reader supported.