EnvironmentalLawyer

Radon is second cause of lung cancer

2012-01-15T20:43:00.001-05:00

A Wisconsin community is the news recently. And not for reasons that make Town officials happy. Its in the news because many homes are reporting unacceptably high radon levels.

Radon needs to be taken seriously. After cigarette smoking it is the leading cause of lung cancer. And smokers in high radon environments have even higher chances of becoming sick.

What makes radon so menacing is that you can’t see it or smell it. It is completely invisible. And yet it can kill.

Some areas are more prone to radon than others. Radon comes from the ground and certain ground formations are more likely to produce radon.

Radon can also enter through drinking water. Hot showers are particularly dangerous.

Here in New Jersey certain communities are considered to be Tier I Communities. In these areas new home much have radon mitigation systems.

Radon is tested by leaving a canister in a room for a day. Doors and windows must be closed.

Here is a real problem without an easy solution. If a buyer leavers a canister in a sellers home – the buyer has no real way to know whether closed conditions were in place. And a seller who wants to cheat can do so easily by just airing out a house during testing. Be aware of this problem.

Radon can be addressed through a mitigation system. Use an experience company with a good reputation. And it might be better to have an independent company do the radon confirmatory test after the system is installed to avoid any possible conflicts.

When purchasing a home make sure that radon testing is done before title is transferred . If a problem exists use a very good mitigation company to fix it before you close on your new castle.

Lieberman & Blecher practices environmental law in New York and New Jersey. We have represented many people in toxic tort cases -- cases where people are injured by toxic substances such as radon, benzene, MTBE, lead, air pollutants, and pesticides. http://www.liebermanblecher.com/

New Septic Regulations proposed in NJ

2012-01-13T18:21:00.000-05:00

A year ago DEP here in NJ proposed an overhaul of the septic system rules. You can see the rule proposal by visiting the DEP's web site -- then go to proposed regulations.

The changes, if approved (and I think they will be) are sweeping. Outdated technologies such as cesspools will now have to be replaced. No more grandfathering.

Greater review by the health department will also be required. Which means homeowners with septics may see delays when they try to sell their homes. Plan for these delays.

The current regulations are decades old. These proposals may cost money.

But no doubt --they are needed. I hope they are approved.

Apartment Buildings and Contaminated Water

2011-11-20T20:46:00.000-05:00

Recently our law firm became involved in a case in which tenants in an apartment complex have been drinking dirty water for years.   And it appears the government knew about this.

We have filed a lawsuit for these victims.

Don't think that just because you live in an apartment building and not a single family home that you do not have to worry about drinking water from a contaminated well.

Here is the truth:   many apartment buildings obtain drinking water from on site wells.   And those wells are usually safe.   But not always.

Wells can be dirty for many reasons.   Often they are simply not deep enough. Shallow wells are more likely to have problems than deeper ones. People who live in these complexes do not know how deep their community well happens to be.

Also community wells may be located near toxic sources such as leaking gas stations or local polluting industries. In these cases, the pollution can be drawn into the wells and consumed by the tenants.

And not all wells are created equally. Some are not properly constructed and more likely to be polluted.

In every case, tenants have an absolute right to clean water.    If they have consumed dangerous chemicals the first stop is at a local Doctors office. Make sure you have not become ill and are not likely to become ill.

If some one has poisoned you with dirty drinking water that has or may make you sick, you may also have certain legal rights.   If you wish to explore available legal rights you need to do so quickly. Your legal rights will be lost by waiting too long because strict statutes of limitations can bar claims if they are not presented in time.

Lieberman & Blecher practices environmental law in New York and New Jersey.   http://www.liebermanblecher.com/

Power plant politics

2011-10-11T07:49:00.000-04:00

The huge multi billion dollar power industry is running ads right now trying to stop EPA's plan to adopt rules that will make the air much cleaner. Power plants have historically been the focus of enviro regulation.   You may have even heard claims regarding the "new" cleaner coal. Whatever that means.

Coal will be cleaner when the government is allowed to force industry to make it cleaner.   Not even a day before then. But the predictable guys and state and companies wearing black hats will not be deterred. Shamelessly they now make economic claims as to why they should not have to cleaner.

But seriously, they have known about these problems and deadlines for years. Like the Uncle who drinks too much, they are still in denial. But they can very well afford rehab.

How many more babies need to develop breathing illnesses.   How many more teens need to become sick. How many more adults need to die too early so that they can make more profit.

These rules are not designed to punish big business or even coal.   They are designed to make the air safer and all of us healthier.

EPA needs to be left alone so it can do its job and make us healthy.

Lieberman and Blecher practices environmental law in New York and New Jersey. www.liebermanblecher.com

See my free 1 hour video on NJ tank leaks

2011-09-01T19:26:00.001-04:00

If you have a leaking tank in New Jersey take a look at my one hour video entitled “Your client has a leaking tank — now what?”

The program was recorded for other attorneys to help them respond to this problem. It was produced by Lawline.

I cover a host of options that are available when a tank leak is discovered. Tank leaks have to be addressed under New Jersey law.

In my one hour free video, I suggest some available options.

You know the disclaimer: this is not legal advice. It is not meant to replace legal advice. Come and see me or another qualified attorney if you require legal guidance and assistance.

Lieberman & Blecher practices environmental law in NJ and NY. http://www.liebermanblecher.com/

EPA proposes power plant rules that will clear the air

2011-08-31T23:44:00.003-04:00

New EPA regulations are proposed that will remove toxins from power plant emissions. Many of these toxins are bad for the environment and make people ill. For this reasons, these proposals are a good thing.

But there are those that would like you to believe that such measures are a bad idea because they will make energy costs rise or they will further slow economic growth.

Does this really have to be a debate between safe air and economic recovery? Obviously both are not mutually exclusive.

http://www.liebermanblecher.com/

New Jersey Brownfield Fund is Broke

2011-06-07T12:39:00.000-04:00

Last month NJ municipalities were told by the state NJ DEP that its fund for leaking underground tanks ran out of money.
Now the state’s brownfields fund is broke as well.
Last week the DEP went public with the bad news. It says it cannot pay for 71 million dollars worth of projects already in the pipeline for review. And it also states it will not take any more applications until more money flows its way.

What to do:

If you have a leaking tank or a brownfields in need of cleaning, you need to be more creative.

Insurance policies are a good place to start. Tank policies and pre-1986 liability policies tend to be the most productive. But don’t ignore any policy that might respond. We have even secured payment from auto policies.

Indemnity agreement with prior owners and operators may also help out.

Note also that some investor groups have money for cleanups depending on location, property size, and kind of cleanup needed.

And litigation against polluters is always an option to fill in the blanks.

Remember, the fund moneys will likely come back. But there are measures you should undertake in the mean time.

Lieberman & Blecher practices environmental law in New Jersey and New York.

Jersey City Community Chromium 6 Case Against PPG Settled

2011-04-08T00:43:00.000-04:00

One of the largest chromium cases in the country was settled recently between the NRDC and community organizations and industrial giant PPG. The settlement is valued at millions of dollars.

At issue is a Jersey City community that contained hexavalent chromium in the soils and water. The residents believed that it would be removed following a 1990 agreement to do so. But that did not take place.
Under the agreement most of the chromium material in the soil will be excavated. Soil cleanup standards of 5 ppm have been set. And groundwater will also be remediated.
The settlement agreement was signed by the parties. Lieberman & Blecher proudly represented GRACO, one of the plaintiff community organizations. Its members live and work in the community near one of the largest concentrations of the chromium.
Hexavalent chromium is very dangerous and was the subject of the Erin Brochovich film. It can lead to cancer and other serious illness.
The parties have submitted the agreement to the Court. They are awaiting judicial review of the document.

Lieberman & Blecher represents New Jersey and New York residents in toxic exposure lawsuits. http://www.liebermanblecher.com/

DEP Loses Cost Recovery Action: Court imposes tougher standards

2011-04-03T23:38:00.000-04:00

The State DEP had something happen to it that is very uncommon. It lost a very big case in Bound Brook New Jersey concerning drinking water contamination.

Back in 1988 the local health department learned that drinking water wells had dry cleaning solvent and related chemicals. In all 365 acres of property was contaminated.

DEP started an investigation and determined that local dry cleaners and perhaps a gas station were the culprits. A lawsuit was filed and the State DEP lost at the trial level.

The trial court found that while contamination was present the DEP failed to establish that the contamination known to have been released by the specific dry cleaner defendant was the contamination that spoiled the ground water. On appeal this past month the Appeals Court upheld this ruling.

Why is this important? Because there are many instances where we know that companies have polluted, but we are not certain whose pollution caused whose damage.

Unless this can be proven by a "preponderance of the evidence," the state DEP may not be able to succeed in its enforcement case.

The case is called DEP v. Dimant. Call me if you would like a copy.

Lieberman & Blecher practices environmental law in New Jersey and New York.

http://www.liebermanblecher.com/ 732-355-1311

Happy New Year

2011-01-08T13:52:00.001-05:00

Happy New Year from Lieberman & Blecher. see our January 2011 newsletter. Up to date information on New Jersey environmental and community association issues.

Lieberman & Blecher is a New Jersey lawfirm with a statewide practice. http://www.liebermanblecher.com/

Cell phone dispute will not go away

2010-12-26T22:01:00.000-05:00

Can using cell phones give you cancer? A rather blunt question, but it is an important topic.

There does not seem to be a very clear answer. Industry says they are fine --no problem.
But scientists do not seem to be so convinced.
The problem is that a hand held cell phone needs a lot of energy to communicate with the nearest cell tower. For a cell phone to work, there must be a direct signal line between the cell phone and a tower and the signal must be strong enough to make that trip. Which means a lot of energy.

Can that give you cancer? Some say no, others say its not clear. Will this be one of those things that we will all feel badly about after 20 years of exposure.

Now a major US group with an interest in the subject is warning its employees to limit their cell phone use. The group says that while the science is unclear, there are enough indicators to warrant concern.

And frankly that in and of itself is a basis for concern.

See article.

Lieberman & Blecher represents persons injured by toxic substances through out New Jersey. www.liebermanblecher.com

Recycling plans nixed again -- a community prevails

2010-12-26T21:40:00.000-05:00

County Confirms Recycling Decision

Last week the Mercer County Freeholders took a second vote regarding a proposed recycling facility. And this time, just as it did the first time it voted, the Board decided to say “no” to a proposed facility.

At issue was a proposal to open up a second recycling facility within the same residential neighborhood in Trenton. The community opposed it on environmental justice grounds. They brought in experts to prove that the City had high asthma rates and many polluting facilities. The group argued that it would be unfair and unjust to add a new facility to this already toxic-burdened community.

Several months ago the Freeholders agreed with the community and agreed to keep the facility out of the community. After DEP rejected the decision because enough advanced notice to the community of the hearing was not provided, The Freeholders voted again. And the result was the same.

Environmental justice is a very important issue in New Jersey. The Freeholders made a great decision.

Lieberman & Blecher represented the Community in this case. Lieberman & Blecher practices environmental law through out New Jersey. www.liebermanblecher.com

The Nose Knows Odor

2010-12-19T11:32:00.000-05:00

Jersey City has just filed suit against a company that many people say smells. The company processes materials and according to many people bad odors come from the property. Many people live in the area and are upset.

The problem is that odor complaints are seldom respected. This company was already
cited by the State DEP and an agreement was apparently entered into between the company and the agency. But the odors continue and now Jersey City is in court.

Why did the state fail to stop this problem? Why did the County not issue enough penalties against this company?

The answer is that odor complaints are the ugly step child in the environmental world. They do not get the attention they need.

Odors usually will not kill you. They are usually just annoying. And in the world of enforcement, its hard to get any one to do too much in unless some one might die. Even then there is no guarantee.

Odor complaints need to be taken more seriously. Ongoing bad odors can seriously interfere with neighborhood use and enjoyment of property. They can also lower property values.
When lawsuits are filed, it is important that court actually visit the site and smell the problem. Testimony is one thing, but the nose knows best.

And inspections must be unannounced. Operators can cure odor problems temporarily if they are given notice.

Should Jersey City have had to sue when the DEP was already involved? Probably not. Especially if the problem is so bad that the City has actually decided to take the smelly company to court.

State and County regulators need to pay more attention to smell complaints. When agreements are reached, they need to be enforced with swift large penalties invoked when there is no compliance.

Lieberman & Blecher practices environmental law in New Jersey and has substantial experience in odor litigation. http://www.liebermanblecher.com/

New Jersey Bed Bugs and the Law

2010-11-27T22:30:00.001-05:00

Bed bug problems in New Jersey real estate are fairly new and the law usually follows developments such as these.

But bed bug grievances seem to fall into certain types of claims.

The first claim relates to personal injury. A person stays at a hotel or perhaps rents a room and gets bitten. He or she files suit claiming the landlord failed to provide habitable premises or was negligent.

A second kind of claim relates to a landlord or real estate seller who fails to disclose. Here the victim proves the landlord or seller knew or should have known of infestation and did not disclose the problem. This may be a fraud claim or a negligent representation claim.

A related claim may be under a law called the Consumer Fraud Act which prohibits unconscionable trade practices. The law specifically applies to certain real estate transactions, is easier to win than traditional fraud, and allows for triple damages which are called treble damages and attorneys fees. Sellers, brokers and other people may be exposed under this very powerful law.

Other claims may be filed against condominium or home owner association complexes on the theory that bed bugs entered through common elements, for which they have legal responsibility. Common elements may include space between walls, space under first floors, space under attics, and common law and hallway areas.

Bed bug claims may also be brought against extermination companies for negligent extermination services and against the property manager for negligent performance, negligent supervision, and negligent training. Here, some form of prior notice would likely be required.

In landlord/ tenant cases, some tenants are seeking either rent reductions or lease terminations based on bed bug infestation. Results in these areas seem to be very fact sensitive. Documentation on both sides is key --and the lease and other real estate documents must be carefully reviewed to determine rights and obligations.

Here is the bottom line. Bed bugs are at infestation levels and they are found all over the place. Litigation will continue, and will likely explode. The more people are exposed, the more they will seek relief from
the courts.

We are the very early stages of this from a legal standpoint. This means possible responsible parties must be pro-active, vigilant, and be able to document their reactions and concerns. Promises alone will not provide legal protection. Prompt effective, documented actions will likely be key.

Will the Law repealing NJ's Time of Decision Rule itself be Repealed?

2010-11-08T22:10:00.000-05:00

Earlier this year the NJ Governor signed into law a Bill that repealed the “Time of Decision” Rule.
I wrote about this several months back.

This land use doctrine had provided that land use approvals were subject to municipal ordinances in effect at the time of approval.

The new law passed in January changed this. Now whatever ordinances that were in effect when an application was deemed complete will apply after approval. That could be months or years before a project is eventually approved.

This was all very controversial. Many developers and builders groups sought enactment of the Bill, municipalities and environmental groups asked the Governor to veto it.

I wonder if this new law will survive a new Governor. Don’t get me wrong. I think the current Governor may be here for some time. Many are pleased with the manner in which he is handling our New Jersey problems.

However, the old Time of Decision Rule was one of those deeply entrenched rules. Courts uniformly endorsed it, and land use professors recited it as a sort of Mantra.

I suspect that some people are waiting for the right time to take another look at this repeal of the Time of Decision Rule. Maybe it will be repealed, maybe it will not be. But I cannot believe that this will be the last word.

Lieberman & Blecher practices environmental law and community association law in New Jersey.

The BedBug App is available for IPhone

2010-11-03T00:37:00.000-04:00

In the ever expanding world of Apps comes the ichiest — the bedbug App. This is available for the Iphone.

Going to a hotel tonite? You can use this App to find out if it is reported to be infested.

Of course, how about the false reports? And how about former infestations that have become bug-free? Will the App be updated enough to account for these changes.

Someone will end up suing someone.

But you have to admit. Its a cool App.

Click for more information

Lieberman & Blecher represents clients with environmental and toxic tort claims through out New Jersey. http://www.liebermanblecher.com/

Noise and Wind Turbines

2010-10-23T09:20:00.000-04:00

Wind turbines may very well provide reliable green energy. What can be bad?

The answer: they can destroy peace and tranquility in residential areas. As we start to learn more about wind turbines in the US, we are discovering that they can be very loud, making it hard to live next to them. See article discussing wind turbine noise.

There are 2 kinds of noise associate with them. The noise from the wind itself. And the noise associated with the internal turbine operations. Noise levels change throughout the day. Nights can be very difficult.

There are several reports of residential areas that have been badly affected by this. Let’s make sure that as we become introduced to wind turbines, we protect our existing residential communities.

Wind turbines need to be kept away from where people live and work. After they are built, it can be too late, and too costly to fight. Its simple, wind turmines are a good thing in concept; as long as they are kept away from where we live and work.

Lieberman & Blecher is a New Jersey environmental law firm with a statewide practice.

New Jersey law promotes solar development

2010-10-19T09:58:00.004-04:00

A recent law in New Jersey promotes the use of solar system technology. The statute, which was enacted in April, promotes the installation of solar systems by excluding solar panels from impervious cover calculations. Click here to read the law.

Impervious cover refers to development that encourages flooding by preventing storm water from being absorbed in the ground. Many of our development statutes limit impervious structures or require that alternative measures for addressing runoff be utilized when impervious development is approved. The purpose of these requirements is to stop flooding by encouraging on-site recharge of storm water.

Because solar panels tend to be large, they trigger many of these mitigation requirements and in certain instances have limited the approve ability of projects containing them. This new law reverses this effect by excluding these panels from impermeable calculations.

Lieberman & Blecher is a New Jersey law firm with offices in Princeton.

Toxic Day Care Centers

2010-10-16T00:46:00.000-04:00

We like to believe that all day care centers are clean and healthy. Most are.

But some day care centers are dangerous because they are located in former industrial establishments that were not properly cleaned before children were allowed to enter.

How many daycare facilities throughout the United States are constructed on locations that once had industrial uses? The answer is that we really do not know because nobody has been keeping that kind of information.

Now, in New Jersey there is a very good initiative underway to make sure that these kinds of tragedies don’t repeat themselves. Are they doing this in your town or county? If not, write some letters and point your legislators and regulators to New Jersey. Have them look up mercury and daycare centers on the internet and they will be able to see for themselves that this is indeed an important and worthwhile issue.

Before signing your child up for a new daycare center, find out what that daycare center was before it was a daycare center. If you are not satisfied with the answer, then either do more research or find another daycare center.

While the odds that your child will be in harms way are minimal, children are very often at most risk. This is the time that their brains and bodies are developing and this is the time in their lives that they are most prone to the negative impacts associated with these exposures.

Ask questions and don’t settle for less than satisfactory answers. If you do not get them, then maybe you need to go somewhere else.

Class Action Case Over Radon Systems Allowed, Judge Rules

2010-10-15T18:42:00.001-04:00

A NJ State Court Judge ruled this week that a class action case alleging problems with radon systems installed at a condominium complex may proceed. Lieberman & Blecher filed this case in 2009.

Click here to see a recent news article regarding this lawsuit.

Radon is a large cause of lung cancer in this country. The lawsuit alleges negligence, nusiance and trespass.

Lieberman & Blecher filed the lawsuit. The firm is located in Princeton, NJ.

Mold Problems, Mold Lawsuits, Mold Injuries

2010-10-09T14:06:00.004-04:00

Our firm has litigated numerous cases involving mold. There are 2 kinds of cases: property damage and personal injury. Property damage cases relate to either real property or personal property harmed by mold. Personal injury cases relate to injuries people suffer after mold exposure.

Illness can range from allergy-like symptoms, to severe respiratory problems. Some life threatening conditions may also result from exposure in some people.

1-800-got- mold? is a national mold detection company that has been doing this for years. The company wrote an article about black mold which was so interesting that I wanted to re-print it on my blog. HOWEVER --THE ARTICLE WAS WRITTEN BY "1-800 -GOT- MOLD?"

Read full story................................................

The Truth About 'Black Mold'

If you have gotten a glimpse of the internet conversation going on about indoor mold, you have seen the term “black mold,” or “toxic mold,” or “toxic black mold.” Perhaps you have even seen mold assessment companies or home mold test kits claim they can find and eliminate black mold from your home.Beware the black mold hype. It's a sales pitch based on fear, often accompanied by inferior abilities and practices on the part of the seller. Treat these hucksters the same as you would the character who knocks on your door and offers to seal your driveway or patch your roof.

So what is the truth about black mold? Is it as dangerous as it's made out to be? Well, that's a gray area. The type of mold most people refer to when they say “black mold” is Stachybotrys (Stak-ē-bot′ris) chartarum. It is blamed for many serious illnesses, but the science is still out on exactly what stachybotrys does or does not do.

There are other so-called black molds, so named because they appear black, as opposed to green, yellow, orange or white. The blackness is due to the fact that these molds produce melanin, the same pigment that protects human skin from sunburn and makes dark-skinned people dark. Because of this, black mold is more tolerant of light and more resistant to dehydration than other molds.

Along with this added toughness come some tough weapons, called mycotoxins, which give black molds their toxic reputation. More on mycotoxins below.

All mold is a problem

But should you check your house for black mold? In a word, no. You should check your house for moisture problems and for mold, period. It doesn't matter what kind. If mold is growing in your house, you have a problem, which will not correct itself.

The most important truth is: Indoor mold is bad for people. Mold growth left unchecked will get worse over time, and can make virtually anyone sick. How sick depends on the individual, and sometimes the types and extent of mold growth. Indoors, there is no good mold, except in beer, wine, bread and some cheeses.

Perhaps the most profane use of the “black mold” term to generate sales is in the realm of cheap home mold test kits. One such kit in particular, which uses “settling plates”, which look like Petri dishes, to collect airborne mold, claims it can detect “black mold.” The statement is utterly false, for several reasons.

1. Stachybotrys spores are large, heavy and often wet, compared to other molds. This means it's difficult for them to become airborne, so they're unlikely to fall into a settling plate and set up house there.

2. Stachybotrys is very slow to grow (we'll explain why below), so any spores that may find their way into the dish may not form a colony large enough to analyze before you throw the whole thing out.

3. The culture medium used in these kits will not grow Stachybotrys. You read that right. Even if you threw a fistful of Stachybotrys into the dish, the nutrient is the wrong stuff, and it won't breed.

4. Adding insult to injury, this company and others like it leave it up to you to analyze what sprouted in your dish, unless you pay extra.
5. The final insult is that the growth in the dish tells you exactly nothing about whether you have a mold problem. Mold is everywhere. Set out a moist meal for mold, and it will partake. A slice of bread, a piece of fruit, whatever, will grow mold in virtually any environment.

Three stages of mold growth
Molds such as Penicillium and Aspergillus are common first-stage molds that can begin to grow within 24 hours of the introduction of moisture to a nutrient base. Fungal nutrients are primarily cellulose, meaning plant material, such as paper, wood, fabric; pretty much everything humans use for clothing and shelter. Even things as simple as household dust can support a pretty wicked fungal infestation.

If moisture is sufficient, secondary molds are likely to appear, including Cladosporium, Alternaria and some varieties of Aspergillus.
Over time and with continued ample moisture, the tertiary molds develop: Stachybotrys, Chaetomium and others. The simple fact to draw from all this is: If you have stachybotrys indoors, you have a serious, long-standing moisture problem that may soon threaten the structure of the building if left unchecked and in areas where the wooden parts of the structure might be at risk. Moisture intrusion of this magnitude also leads to wood rot.

Finding real evidence of indoor mold growth

One of the few industry standard, consensus-accepted and scientifically valid approaches to testing indoor air for evidence of mold problems is to use air-sampling cassettes, each of which contains a small slide coated with a sticky adhesive, and which requires that a measured quantity of air be drawn past the slide. A minimum of three samples should be taken: One outdoors to establish a baseline, a second indoors in an area suspected of having a problem, and the third indoors in an area considered non-suspect. These samples are then compared with each other and with ambient mold levels outside.
(Editor's Note: You can do this yourself with the GOT MOLD? Test Kit, sold by our sister company, MycoLabUSA.)

The slides are then sent to a lab accredited by the American Industrial Hygiene Association and examined microscopically by a qualified lab technician. The fungal particles are identified and counted, to reach an estimated number of mold particles per cubic meter of air. If there is a higher concentration indoors than outdoors, or if the types of molds found indoors are not seen in the outdoor sample, it is a strong indication of an indoor mold problem.
If Stachybotrys is found on the indoor sample in quantities greater than outdoors, it is a near certainty that there is a serious indoor mold problem due to the reasons described earlier. Stachybotrys spores settle out of the air much faster than most other spores commonly found indoors where a mold problem exists.

Medical research moves slowly
While Stachybotrys is associated with some extreme cases of illness, the medical community has not done enough research to prove this type of mold is more toxic than others. It's only within the past decade or so that medical studies have dealt with mold at all. The landmark case was a 1999 study by the Mayo Clinic, which concluded that 96 percent of the 37 million cases of chronic sinusitis (persistent sinus infections) is caused by fungus in the nasal mucous.

But the Stachybotrys research has not been as clear. The Illinois Department of Public Health reports:

“In 1994, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) investigated whether exposure to stachybotrys might be related to pulmonary hemorrhage, also known as bleeding lungs, in infants in Cleveland, Ohio. While the CDC initially concluded that there was a possible link between exposure to the mold and the condition, stachybotrys was not found in the homes of seven children with bleeding lungs identified in the Chicago area between April 1992 and January 1995. A subsequent review of the Cleveland study by a group of CDC experts concluded that a link between exposure to stachybotrys and bleeding lungs in infants was not proven.”

Millions of people in moldy environments suffer a broad spectrum of symptoms, ranging from allergy-like sneezing, coughing and runny eyes all the way to brain fog, memory loss, chronic fatigue and bleeding lungs. In many cases, these symptoms disappear when mold is removed from their environment, or when they leave a mold-infested place.
What is unknown is precisely what causes these various ailments.

Mold, or fungi, produce three basic substances that can irritate people: Spores (microscopic “seeds”) and fragments of the organism (hyphae); microbial Volatile Organic Compounds (mVOCs); and mycotoxins, meaning poisons produced by fungi.

Spores and hyphae
Spores and hyphae can cause irritation, sneezing, itchy eyes and similar symptoms. It is these microscopic particles that are most commonly associated with mold, and most commonly assumed to be the only active ingredient with any impact on human health. Thus thousands of doctors and so-called health experts naively dismiss indoor mold as a serious health problem.
Fortunately for all of us, this cavalier attitude toward indoor mold is slowly fading, being supplanted by a growing awareness of the real dangers of living in a moldy environment.
Mycotoxins

It is the mycotoxins of stachybotrys that are believed to be the key to this mold's toxicity to humans, and the theory makes sense, though as we said it's unproven. Stachybotrys produces trichothecenes, which are suspected of being able to cause bleeding in the lungs. It also emits an enzyme which digests protein (a protease), which some research suggests may combine with trichothecenes to wreak even more lung havoc.

Mycotoxins are believed to be part of the coating on mold spores, meaning that in the case of stachybotrys the spores need to become airborne in the living space for people to inhale them, before they can be affected by the toxins.

Earlier we mentioned that stachybotrys is slow to grow. That's because it is what's known as a “tertiary” mold, meaning that it arrives as the third stage of mold growth in an ongoing infestation. It requires a stable, very moist environment with the right food in order to thrive.

Many molds produce mycotoxins, whose purpose is primarily self defense. Penicillin, for example, is a mycotoxin from the Penicillium chrysogenum fungus. It's a powerful antibiotic, because bacteria are molds' chief competitors for food. Take a Petri dish with a thriving bacteria culture in it, drop in the right species of Penicillium, and the bacterial culture will die off in a circle around the fungus.

Aflatoxin B1, a known carcinogen, is a product of Aspergillus flavus, which grows commonly on stored nuts, grains and peanut butter.

Microbial Volatile Organic Compounds

Another possible culprit is microbial Volatile Organic Compounds, or mVOCs. Molds produce a wide variety of gaseous chemicals, including acetones, alcohols, benzene, methyl chloride and so on. These are chemicals we typically associate with human industrial activity, and yet they are emitted by molds! It is this cocktail of chemicals that gives mold its musty smell, and which can cause burning, itchy eyes and skin, dizziness, headache and foggy thinking. Prolonged exposure, obviously, cannot be good for you.

As you might guess, mVOCs, because they are in gaseous form, are able to penetrate walls and ceilings, leak around switches and outlets, and are generally free to roam around your air supply and be inhaled. However, they cannot be detected by standard air sampling methods (there are tests for VOCs, but they are generally not used in pursuit of mold). Air sampling only captures airborne particles, certain types of bacteria, mold spores, skin cells, pet dander and pollen.

That is why air sampling often misses finding significant mold growth when it's hidden in closed cavities whose air doesn't circulate within the living space. Mold-detection dogs like those used by 1-800-GOT-MOLD?, however, can point quite accurately at hidden mold growths, because they can detect the tiny amounts (measured in parts per billion) of mVOCs in the air and trace them to their source. This gives their human partners the opportunity to investigate further with various electronic tools, and by boring holes and taking air samples inside such cavities.

Electronic moisture detection and infrared thermal imaging are excellent tools for finding pockets of hidden moisture, where mold is likely to reside. These tools are often used to further investigate a dog's findings, prior to hole-boring and sample collection.
'Menace to humanity'

So is black mold toxic? Is it dangerous? There is little doubt. Nicholas P. Money, in his highly entertaining yet densely informative book, “Carpet Monsters and Killer Spores,” on which this article relies heavily, acknowledges the black molds, which include molds other than the notorious stachybotrys, as a “menace to humanity.”

Why is the black-mold menace coming to light so recently? According to author Money, stachybotrys may be a foreign import. The earliest known record of this deadly fungus is in the Ukraine in the 1930s, when many horses died due to exposure to moldy hay. This was no small matter, since horses then were like cars and tractors now. The cited cause of death was stachybotryotoxicosis (sorry for the double mouthful), meaning essentially stachybotrys poisoning. A number of people also were afflicted, either by handling the moldy hay, or sleeping on moldy hay mattresses.

Money indicates Stachybotrys may have come here from eastern Europe via trade products during the mid-20th Century, and may still be in the process of spreading. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has this to say about toxic mold:

“Certain molds are toxigenic, meaning they can produce toxins (mycotoxins), but the molds themselves are not toxic, or poisonous. Hazards presented by molds that may produce mycotoxins should be considered the same as other common molds which can grow in your house or workplace. Contradicting research results exist regarding whether toxigenic mold found indoors causes unique or rare health conditions such as bleeding in the lungs. Research is ongoing in this area.

“Mold growing in buildings, whether it is Stachybotrys chartarum (Stachybotrys atra) or another mold, indicates that there is a problem with water or moisture. This is the first problem that needs to be addressed.”

Black mold is only part of the story

Black mold is most certainly to be avoided. But the lesson here is that it's not the first thing, or the only thing, to worry about. The thing to worry about is moisture problems indoors, because where you have these, you will inevitably have a whole assortment of uninvited guests making themselves at home in yours. All molds cans trigger asthma attacks and people die from asthma attacks every day. All molds can trigger allergic reactions and sinusitis. Mold is essential to the making of wine, beer, bread and some cheeses. It is decidedly undesirable in the making of a home.
If you think you may have a mold problem, or know that you have had any kind of water intrusion, a thorough investigation is in order. The best way to avoid black mold is to eliminate it before it germinates, which means preventing or eliminating moisture problems and removing mold-infested materials at the earliest possible time.

Prevention is the best defense against mold. This consists of thorough, regular maintenance of plumbing, siding, windows, roofing and drainage systems, semi-annual duct cleaning and HVAC maintenance, and constant vigilance for the slightest sign of excess moisture.
Maintaining relative humidity at or below 50% also is a key factor, especially in poorly ventilated areas such as attics, crawlspaces and basements. Ventilation, proper insulation and dehumidifiers are essential here.

Source: Habitat Quarterly Issue 3 http://www.1800gotmold.com/

Lieberman & Blecher September 2010 Newsletter available on-line

2010-09-01T22:57:00.000-04:00

Lieberman & Blecher's monthly email newsletter is now available for September 2010. Follow this link and sign up for our free newsletter, emailed to you each month. NO obligation whatsoever --its our pleasure. Go to September 2010 newsletter.

Lieberman & Blecher provides environmental legal services in New Jersey, statewide. http://www.liebermanblecher.com/

Graydon Pool In Ridgewood --Time For Ridgewood Council to Stand with Graydon

2010-08-29T18:44:00.000-04:00

Our law firm has the honor of representing a citizen group who successfully thwarted attempts to pave the Graydon pool, a very large, naturally fed beach attraction that has entertained this Ridgewood NJ community for generations.   Amazingly, plans to concrete this structure and make it smaller and unexceptional were given some weight. But the plans were, at a minimum, placed on hold. For now at least.

Which is a good start. But Ridgewood government should now take affirmative measures to kill any concrete plans and comit to upgrade and maintain this natural resource. Future generations should enjoy this beautiful place and Ridgewood needs to formally show through resolution and budgeting that this is what it will do.

Ridgewood residents used and enjoyed the Pool this year a great deal--and the year was quite successful and positive.   Much is on the internet about Graydon--and its important history as well its current importance.

We all had a scare last year when this horrible idea was advanced.   Even Preservation NJ came to the rescue when it identified Graydon has an important resource in current jeopardy.

Let the nightmare end now. Ridgewood should declare its preservation intentions. So we can spend time swiiming and enjoying, and not worrying over a really bad idea.

See more on Graydon.

Lieberman & Blecher practices environmental law through New Jersey. www.liebermanblecher.com

NJ Innocent Purchasers Must Prove Ownership

2010-08-13T20:35:00.001-04:00

In July the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that anyone applying for an innocent purchaser grant from the state of New Jersey must own the property throughout the entire the grant application process .   This decision, in TAC ASSOCIATES, Petitioner-Respondent, v. NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION and THE NEW JERSEY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, Respondents-Appellants, reversed an appeals court decision that had found that a regulation requiring ownership throughout the application process was invalid because it exceeded Legislative requirements.

Innocent purchasers must prove that they acquired property before 1983 and that they did not use the contaminants found on the property and are not otherwise responsible for the environmental contamination.   Owners who meet these requirements are eligible for innocent party grants to help defray cleanup costs.

The Supreme Court ruling makes clear that an applicant must own the property at the time a grant application is made and continue ownership through award  of the grant. Relinquishing title even a day before the award will end up in a forfeiture of the grant.

This is very important for parties to real estate transactions as they need to ensure that property is transferred at a time that will not void this grant --a mistake that can prove to be quite costly.

Illegal Pesticide Use Alleged in Newark, NJ, Other NJ Cities

2010-07-13T06:24:00.000-04:00

The Star Ledger reports that a Newark NJ based company has been charged with using illegal chemicals for pesticide applications in some of New Jersey's urban areas. This includes the Iron Bound Section of Newark.

According to the newspaper report, many applications allegedly took place in areas where victims may be afraid to speak out due to language barriers.

See the Star Ledger articled dated July 13, 2010 for more information. Please note that these are only allegations against this company. The company has not been convicted on anything to my knowlege.

However, if true this would constitute a serious violation. We all trust that companies retained to apply pesticides will only use chemicals that are legal and are intended for this purpose.
Pesticides have one purpose: to kill pests. If misused -even lawful pesticides can be dangerous. Unlawful pesticides may represent an even greater danger.

Anyone victimized by a company that has used illegal pesticides needs to seek medical advice if he or she becomes ill or if the illegal chemical is shown to have a dangerous potential.

Be sure to contact government officials --the Health Department and the State DEP. If you need legal guidance, consult with a lawyer promptly as legal rights will be lost if you wait too long.

Please post any experiences that you may have had with illegal pesticides. Thank you.

Lieberman & Blecher practices environmental law in New Jersey. http://www.liebermanblecher.com/

Enviro Grants for NJ Day Care Centers

2010-07-08T17:10:00.000-04:00

The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) and the New Jersey Economic Development Authority (NJEDA) provide Child Care Facility Grant money for eligible New Jersey day care facilities.

This program was started several years ago when contamination problems were identified at one day care center here in New Jersey.

The grant money is available to an existing or future owner or operator of a licensed child care facility, or to a facility that has applied for a license with the Department of Children and Families.

Grants are small, up to a to a maximum of $1500. In the environmental world that buys little. But something is better than nothing.

Grants are available to child care facilities that submit a complete Preliminary Assessment (PA) for the purpose of obtaining a “no further action letter” (NFA) –which means the site is clean.
Costs for actual remedial cleanup work, which is called Site Investigation (SI)/Remedial Investigation (RI), are not eligible for this grant. If you need for information, contact our office of the State DEP in Trenton.

Lieberman & Blecher practices environmental law in New Jersey. www.liebermanblecher.com

Court Rules: NJ Inverse Condemnation Cases Must Be Filed Within Six Years

2010-06-24T09:20:00.000-04:00

On June 22 the New Jersey Supreme Court issued a decision that limits the rights of property owners alleging that regulatory taking has occurred to only six years. The case is entitled Klumpp v. Borough of Avalon. Email our office for a courtesy copy if you would like one.

Notwithstanding the fact that for equitable reasons the Court did not bar the Klumpps from asserting their claim, the ramifications of this case are widespread. Any property owner in New Jersey who believes that its property has become over regulated to the point that it is now virtually worthless only has six years to file suit seeking relief.

These cases frequently arise in environmental contexts. Poperty owners believing that a wetlands designation, a dunes designation, a CAFRA designation, a Pinelands designation, etc, has “gone to far” are affected by this decision.

While private parties may have up to 60 years to bring analogous actions, when the government has taken property it is now just six years. Appellate courts New Jersey had ruled this way before, but this is the first time our Supreme Court has done so.

So, persons with over-regulated property in New Jersey beware – file suit in six years or you will likely be barred forever more from doing so.

Lieberman & Blecher practices environmental law throughout New Jersey and has litigated numerous "takings cases." www.liebermanblecher.com

Read our June 2010 Newsletter

2010-06-05T12:57:00.000-04:00

Our newsletter discusses current topics in New Jersey environmental law. Its designed to be informative and quick reading.

We invite you to take a look.

Thanks!

See our website at http://www.liebermanblecher.com/

Environmental Justice Win in Trenton

2010-05-28T08:10:00.000-04:00

Last night the Mercer County Freeholders adopted a resolution to block a recycling center from opening in a Trenton, thriving residential neighborhood. The decision was based on environmental justice concerns and may mark the first time in N.J. that a decision of this magnitude was made based on this criteria.

My law firm proudly represented the community group that opposed this facility. At a prior Board meeting we presented testimony from a PhD with expertise in environmental justice and its effects on communities. Another expert showed the location of numerous nearby noxious facilities, including another recycling facility 2 blocks from the proposed one. A traffic expert also explained the very detrimental impacts on the community's streets.

The Board decision was unanimous and marks precedent. One that will hopefully be followed many times again.

See a news article on this Freeholder decision.

Tenafly Cell Tower Approval Reversed by State Appeals Court

2010-05-26T00:07:00.000-04:00

A state appeals court has reversed a trial court approval authorizing the erection of a north jersey cell tower. Verizon constructed the cell tower even though neighbors advised it that an appeal would be taken.

Now the Verizon tower has been erected in Tenafly New Jersey, but the approval authorizing the tower has been reversed.

Lieberman & Blecher proudly represented the community in the fight. At issue was the community's position that the tower did not belong in this all residential neighborhood and that alternative, less damaging sites had not been explored.

Lieberman & Blecher practices environmental law throughout New Jersey and has appeared in many cell tower cases. www.liebermanblecher.com

Environmental Equality Rings Loudly in Trenton

2010-05-14T23:23:00.000-04:00

This past Thursday the Mercer County Freeholders did something that was truly magnificent. They introduced an ordinance that would amend the County Solid Waste Management Plan to take out a recycling facility that the State DEP approved.

The Freeholders alluded to the numerous toxic facilities already located within blocks of the site in question – and studies provided to the Freeholders about Diesel particulates already in Trenton’s air. A wonderful residential neighborhood is at the heart of this threat.

At issue was environmental justice. This is the idea that no one neighborhood should have to house a disproportionate share of toxic, unhealthy facilities.

A long hearing was conducted on this issue several weeks back. So many people from the community attended that the hearing had to be relocated to the City High School Auditorium.

A second vote will occur in two weeks. If that passes, the ordinance will become law and the issue will then go to the NJ DEP.

Democracy can work if you give it a chance. Here, the elected Freeholders made it clear that they will protect Trenton residents from this immoral burden.
Its not just a question of property values. Its their health and well being that is at issue. The Mercer County Freeholders heard this message and should be praised for acting upon it.

See a published letter from the Trenton Planning Board on this issue.

Read about the April 2010 public hearing at Trenton High school in which video and graphic evidence of environmental injustice relating to the proposed recycling operations was presented.

Lieberman & Blecher practices New Jersey environmental law statewide. www.liebermanblecher.com

Ridgewood Votes in 2 Environmental Preservationists to Municipal Council

2010-05-12T09:24:00.001-04:00

Yes, you can make a difference in local politics. If you don't believe that, see what just happened in Ridgewood (Bergen County) last night. Click here for local blog on the win.

In a hotly contested municipal election involving four candidates running to fill two Council seats, the winners were the community organization supported candidates --who among many other things both publicly supported preserving an important local landmark --the Graydon Pool.

The Pool --which is actually a three acre naturally fed water body surrounded by sand, was under attack when the Ridgewood administration raised the possibility of entombing the structure with concrete. The two candidates who were not elected apparently supported this plan --and at a minimum did not oppose it. That failure to oppose was heard very loudly by Ridgewood voters.

The two successful candidates openly (and we think quite correctly) opposed any effort to transform this natural, important landmark into a concrete pool. (The pool is really beautiful and has served the community for generations. Many local residents have strong memories attached to this landmark.)

Apparently, this issue meant a great deal to local voters - and in interviews some voters stated that the Graydon issue was an important one in deciding which way to vote.

Both successful candidates were supported by our client --the Preserve Graydon organization. Great Job Preserve Graydon! They were both supported by another local Ridgewood community organization.

If you were in doubt --people do care about local landmarks --about local features that are significant and distinguish their communities, and the environment. The two successful candidates won by a very nice margin.

Our hats go off to these two excellent candidates. And of course, to our amazing local community organization and other community organizations that dared to form and be heard.

Lieberman & Blecher practices environmental law throughout New Jersey. www.liebermanblecher.com

CMX Sued For Malpractice

2010-05-10T22:09:00.000-04:00

A Franklin Township community group filed a lawsuit today against the statewide engineering firm CMX, formerly known as Schoor DePalma.

The suit, filed by Franklin Residents Against Improper Development, or "FRAID," alleges that the engineering firm committed professional malpractice when it worked for Franklin Township on its affordable housing plan and designated a large private client for inclusion within the affordable housing plan.

The complaint alleges that the engineering firm should have, at a minimum, disclosed its relationship with this private developer. It also alleges that because the firm was working for a municipal government, the conflict was not waivable and the firm should not have performed the public work.

The conflict was uncovered in discovery after the community group filed suit challenging the designation of the private developer. Within days following the disclosure, the municipality reversed course and stripped the developer of the designation. The municipality asserted that it took this reason for environmental reasons.

Lieberman & Blecher represents the community group in the malpractice lawsuit. The company was served with the complaint earlier today.

New Law Cripples Time of Decision Rule

2010-05-10T00:34:00.000-04:00

The Governor has just signed a new law into effect that eliminates much of the time honored “time of the decision” rule here in New Jersey. That rule has been the law in this State for a long time. But with this new law, much of it is now history.

Until this law was signed, a developer would have to meet newer, more stringent zoning requirements if they became enacted before a project received land use approval. Thus, more stringent zoning requirements, environmental requirements, affordable housing requirements, open space requirements, all of them would apply to a project if adopted after a project was filed with local zoning authorities but before it received an approval.

Under this new law, which was Senate Bill Number 82, this time of the decision rule will generally be eliminated.

The law provides:

“Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, those development regulations which are in effect on the date of submission of an application for development shall govern the review of that application for development and any decision made with regard to that application for development. Any provisions of an ordinance, except those relating to health and public safety, that are adopted subsequent to the date of submission of an application for development, shall not be applicable to that application for development.”

The new law will not take effect for one year.

Read the Sierra Club's information regarding this law. Read the Builder's Association position regarding this law.

Lieberman & Blecher is a New Jersey statewide environmental law firm. www.liebermanblecher.com

Environmental Justice hearing in Trenton

2010-04-28T07:37:00.001-04:00

Witnesses appearing on behalf the the property owner gave a different picture. They claimed that they want to operate safely and not disturb the community.

We participated in an environmental justice hearing in Trenton last night. The issue is whether the County Freeholders should remove a proposed recycling project from the Solid Waste Plan in a residential community that already hosts a recycling plant, as well as numerous toxic operations. See more from the Trenton Times newspaper.

A hearing was held at the Trenton High School to accommodate the over 100 community members who attended.

Representatives from two statewide environmental organizations testified on behalf of our client, the Eyes of Trenton. The general consensus was the same: the neighborhood already hosts more than its share of operations that pollute and allowing this proposal would tip the scales of environmental justice and environmental racism.

Our first witnesses was Trenton Mayor Doug Palmer who offered riveting testimony in support of the community members. The Eyes of Trenton also presented a former DOT traffic professional with 25 years of State experience who explained the impacts that this operation would have on a local major arterial road ---one that already suffers from an "F" level of performance.

Witnesses appearing on behalf of the the property owner portrayed a different picture. They claimed that they want to operate safely and not disturb the community.

Environmental Justice is a very interesting concept. It describes the placement of society's toxic operations in its poorest or minority dominated neighborhoods. The concept is that these operations are often unhealthy and that it unfair that certain communities should shoulder a disproportionate share of these kinds of facilities.

Studies discuss higher levels of asthma and health problems, not to mention economic impacts associated with living near many noxious operations. As one expert witness pointed out, it is not a coincidence that many of these communities are largely minority. This expert explained that up until the 1960s, "red lining" encouraged realtors to sell minority members homes only in certain communities --such as Trenton.

See an Eyes of Trenton Press Conference and an excellent video entitled "Environmental Injustice in Trenton."

THERE IS NO BERRY LIKE THE BLUEBERRY

2010-04-19T23:39:00.001-04:00

Don't cry the blues, eat them. At least that is what blueberry growers are hoping you will do. And, quite possibly, we should all heed their advise. For it appears that blueberries may have some very nutritional and beneficial properties.

They have been talking about this for the past few years and I thought I would summarize what people are saying for you.

First, blueberries may help keep blood pressure in check. Finland's largest dairy group, Valio, recently began marketing a blueberry milk product called "Evolus," which they claim is the first blood-pressure lowering food product in
Europe.

According to Valio, the blue milk and has been the subject of two independent studies, including one study by the Finnish National Public Health Institute.

Test subjects who had slightly elevated blood pressure were given two doses of Evolus for eight weeks. According to the company, blood pressure was measured weekly and both diastolic and systolic blood pressure in those who
consumed the product fell further than the placebo groups. Here's to blue milk (but will American kids drink blue milk?)

Second, several researchers from various countries have come to believe that blueberries help protect cells from cell damage and protect our nervous systems. Recent published studies have found that animals fed a blueberry extract diet showed fewer age-related motor changes and outperformed their non-blueberry consuming peers on memory tests. The thought is that blueberries and other foods containing antioxidants may act to protect the body against damage from "oxidative stress," one of several biological processes associated with aging and neurological diseases.

Third, research on the health benefits of blueberries has also been conducted in Italy, France, Spain, Korea, U.S.A., and New Zealand. One recent Japanese study dealt specifically with the effects of blueberries on eyesight. The study took 26 people and divided them into two groups. One group ingested blueberry extract twice a day for 28 days; the other consumed a placebo. Using a variety of approaches to test vision enhancement, the results reportedly indicated that the group consuming the blueberry extract realized measurable vision gains.

Blueberry extract reportedly had a positive effect on tired eyes more than on any other symptom and there were no reported side effects. The study concluded that blueberry extract wards off certain eyesight problems but does not have much of an effect on cataracts or already weak eyes. More research is needed, but there may be promise.

Apparently, the same thing that makes blueberries blue, a pigment called anthocyanin, makes them an effective antioxidant. Antioxidants neutralize the effects of "free radicals," which are unstable compound molecules that can attack human cells and damage their DNA. So eating blueberries may help offset the effects of free radicals, thereby improving our health. At least, that is the theory.

There is a lot of information about the reported health benefits associated with blueberries on the internet. I personally have no way of knowing what is true and what is not, and obviously you should talk with your doctor about health concerns that you may have.

Even to the most cynical minded person, however, blueberries seem to show real promise. Who would have ever guessed?

Rain Gardens Good For Run Off

2010-04-12T09:06:00.001-04:00

Developer should build rain gardens in residential and commerical projects

Condos, commercial builders, homeowners and municipalities can all develop rain gardens. These are eye appealing gardens that manage or help manage stormwater runoff.

When runoff is not controlled it leads to flooding, surface water pollution and property damage. New developments may require intricate stormwater control, and this can be part it.

Rain gardens show that you and your organization care about the environment and your community.

Read more about rain gardens.

Lieberman & Blecher provides environmental legal representation throughout New Jersey. www.liebermanblecher.com

TCE and PCE Is Bad for Drinking Water and Property Values

2010-04-11T14:50:00.000-04:00

TCE and PCE are solvents. They are very close in chemical composition.   They are also give environmental lawyers and consultants gray hair.

PCE is best know for its relationship with dry cleaners. For many years its was essentially the only chemical found nationwide that dry cleaner operations used for cleaning clothes.  Many stores still use this today.

TCE is often associated with cleaning operations. Often you find it at industrial operations, auto shops, and metal shops.

Both can be dangerous and at various levels of concentration and for various lengths of exposure have been linked to some serious illnesses.

Both can harm people in largely two ways: they can get into drinking water and be consumed or they can become vapors and leak into your living or working space.

Also both can be hard to clean --especially if they make it into ground water.   They can take years to remove, and they can cost plenty to remove.

Operators of establishments with TCE or PCE leaks need to act quickly.   Here in NJ,  this means that the State needs to be notified and an appropriate remediation needs to begin.

Make sure that insurance carriers are promptly placed on notice. Also any other companies that may be legally responsible perhaps should be notified.

If you live near or work near an affected site you may have concerns. Certainly if these materials are getting into your drinking water or air --you have a problem.   If contaminated soils are on your property, you have a problem. And if the cleanup has reduced your property value or made the selling your home difficult, you have a problem.

Problems do not always mean that you should or want to sue anyone.   They just mean that an issue has surfaced that warrants your attention.

Some government funds may provide you with financial relief if you are victimized. There may be very short time periods in which to file claims --which does mean you need to see a lawyer promptly if you have this problem.   Perhaps you will have to pay a consultation fee alone, perhaps more, but you do need to know what your rights are and when you may lose those rights due to delay.

Lieberman & Blecher is a NJ environmental law firm founded in 2000. This information is provided for general information purposes and is not a replacement for one on one legal counsel. http://www.liebermanblecher.com/

Graydon Pool Project Seems Dead

2010-04-09T21:42:00.002-04:00

This law firm proudly represents a Ridgewood New Jersey community organization committed to preserving Graydon Pool. This is a natural water body that has faithfully served this community for generations. More about this groups and its missions is found here . Some community members wish to turn this natural water body into a large concrete pool — which will destroy much of this resources natural charm and attraction.

It appears that many people now agree that no further action should be taken to eliminate this important assert. One community leader has recently stated that this project is on hold. See the Ridgewood Blog article: “Pool Project is Dead For Now.”

This is very good news for the community. We are happy the municipal leaders understand that this is not the right time to discuss changing Graydon — a place that has served he community for generation and needs to do so for many more.

Founded in 2000, Lieberman & Blecher provides environmental , citizen group and homeowner association counsel throughout New Jersey. http://www.liebermanblecher.com/

2010-04-07T21:38:00.002-04:00

Sue Your Insurance Company If It Wrongly Denies Your Claim

2010-04-02T22:15:00.003-04:00

Home owners and businesses often ask their insurance companies to pay for environmental claims. This can include a tank leak, a hazardous spill, an air release, or a surface water discharge. While some claims may not be covered, some insurance companies do deny claims in cases where some coverage SHOULD be provided.

When insurance companies deny claims, they must do so for reasons that relate to the insurance policy. Insurance policies are written contracts between the insurance company, also known as the insurer, and the policyholder, also called the insured. If a claim occurs that is covered under the terms of the insurance policy, the carrier must provide coverage.

It is always wrong for an insurance company to deny coverage when no reason exists for denying coverage. When you feel that your insurance company has wrongfully denied your claim, you may have to sue your insurance company. This type of lawsuit is called a declaratory judgment action. You are asking the Court to declare that there is coverage and to order the carrier to pay all necessary costs.

In certain instances, if an insurance company really misbehaves, Courts will allow cases to proceed seeking punitive damages against the insurer even when it ultimately is determined that there is no right to coverage. In these cases, Courts have generally held that insurance companies have a duty to deal with their insureds fairly and in good faith.

This duty of good faith and fair dealing comes from a recognition that insurance companies have a special relationship with their policyholders. Policyholders purchase insurance so that they know that in a time of need, an insurance carrier will be standing next to them. When an insurance company intentionally avoids its obligations by acting in bad faith, this leaves the policyholder in an even worse situation then he/she should be in.

Not uncommonly, insurance issues arise in the context of environmental problems. Homeowners often have contamination from underground storage tanks, such as heating oil tanks. There may also be claims relating to lead from lead pipes, asbestos exposure, and even sink holes caused by subsurface movement of buried construction debris underneath a house.

Likewise, commercial property owners are frequently compelled to file insurance claims as a result of environmental problems. Many property owners have been targeted in Superfund lawsuits concerning shipped hazardous materials. And property owners are often alleged to either have polluted their own property, or to have polluted property owned by a third party. In each instance, there is a need to file an insurance claim and to be treated fairly.

It is incumbent upon the insurance carrier to act fairly and in good faith. The carrier must make a decision based on the language in the contract and the carrier needs to remember that it enjoys a special relationship with the policyholder, one based on trust, and sold on this notion of trust. We all know that we are told that we are in "good hands" with one insurance company and another acts like a "good neighbor.

In fact, many companies are responsible. But when policyholders are mistreated, they need to remember that a statute of limitations may require that litigation be filed by a certain date or the right will be lost. In such cases, policyholders should promptly seek out the services of experienced legal counsel.

Insurance companies have many lawyers who work for them and protect them. More often than not, they treat their policyholders fairly and with dignity. But in the rare instance when a carrier act badly, you should even the sides by retaining competent professional assistance.

Lieberman & Blecher April 2010 newsletter

2010-04-02T00:24:00.001-04:00

Sign up for our monthly newsletter, which is sent to your email address.

Every month we feature 3-4 short articles discussing a different areas of New Jersey environmental law or condomimium/HOA law.

The articles are quick bites -often with links or references if you need some more information.

There is no obligation –we enjoy sharing and look forward to your comments.

Click here for this months newsletter. You can sign up from this link. We would love to have you on-board.

Founded in 2000, Lieberman & Blecher is a New Jersey environmental law firm serving all of New Jersey in state and federal court. http://www.liebermanblecher.com/

Jersey City Chromium Case May Go Forward Against PPG

2010-03-30T20:37:00.001-04:00

A federal court ruled today that two Jersey City community groups, along with the Natural Resources Defense Council may proceed with their lawsuit against industrial giant PPG. The case alleges that PPG has created an imminent threat to the community by not remediating chromium waste at various Hudson County locations.

This kind of waste, referred to as Chromium 6, was made popular in the movie Erin Brochovich. Some studies link it to serious health problems.

The suit was filed under a federal law called “RCRA,” and seeks a court order requiring PPG to address this problem. PPG asserted that the federal court case should have been dismissed or put on hold because it entered into a cleanup agreement with the state and city to clean the site.

However, the federal court agreed with the plaintiffs’ position that under federal law, the case could go forward notwithstanding the settlement. Under RCRA, upon proof of imminent harm, a federal judge has very broad authority to determine the proper remedy –regardless of state cleanup standards.

Lieberman & Blecher proudly represents GRACO, one of the community groups in the federal court litigation. http://www.liebermanblecher.com/

See a news article regarding this decision.

April 22 --40th Birthday of Earth Day!

2010-03-22T23:15:00.000-04:00

"Earth Day" will be 40 years old on April 22, 2010. Happy Birthday Earth Day.   It is widely recognized as the birth of modern environmentalism -- including the NJDEP.

Since America's first official Earth Day on April 22, 1970, New Jersey has become one of the leaders in recognizing environmental problems and developing creative solutions. New Jersey was the third in the country to consolidate existing past programs into a unified major state agency to administer aggressive environmental and conservation efforts.

Established by law on that initial Earth Day, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) assummed responsibility for permitting and enforcement as well as cleanup of hazardous substances. Historically, DEP has been viewed as a a leading environmental agency.

Earth Day is celebrated in a variety of ways by schools, communities, parks and nature centers, organizations, companies, businesses, municipalities, families, volunteers, youth groups, and individuals. This year, many communities will showcase events and school and youth programs and engage citizens in weekend community service efforts, all designed to inform the public about their natural world.

According to the DEP website, "Earth Day efforts in New Jersey will explore a variety of important areas of focus in the state, including water conservation, climate change, watershed management, air and water quality, waste reduction, open space conservation and habitat protection. Local Earth Day programs, projects and events may highlight these topics, and explore local environmental priorities in addition to hosting community service initiatives, such as waterway, beach and park cleanups."
Whether or not you support the NJ DEP or the federal EPA, also born following the first Earth Day --you need to admit that Earth Day started something important in this country. It made us all more aware of the need to conserve and protect our world.

How will you celebrate Earth day?

Founded in 2000, Lieberman & Blecher is a New Jersey environmental law firm serving all of New Jersey in state and federal court.  www.liebermanblecher.com

Visit the NJDEP Earth Day website.

Leaking Oil Tanks Do Not Have to Ruin Your Life

2010-03-20T14:18:00.000-04:00

As an environmental lawyer, leaking underground storage tanks are not new phenomenon to me, by any means. But if you're the home owner that this happens to, the odds are that it will be the first time that you've encountered this. And you might be overwhelmed by what it all entails.

I'm here to tell you that you can survive a leaking underground storage tank. It might seem scary at first, but with proper guidance and the correct professional approach, you will survive.

How do you know when your underground storage tank is leaking? There are various ways. Often, clients come to us because their furnace or heater stopped working. Once that happens, one of the first questions that has to be asked is whether or not there is a hole in the underground storage tank that contains the oil. If there is a hole, you might be losing the oil into the environment and therefore nothing is left to feed the furnace.

Other clients learn that they have leaking tanks when they try to sell their homes. It is now commonplace as part of transactions involving underground storage tanks for purchasers to insist that sellers prove that the tanks are in good working order. Often, some kind of test is involved and when necessary the seller is required to remove the tank before the sale can proceed.

Oil leaking into the environment violates state and federal laws. It is certainly no laughing matter and knowledge that your tank is leaking oil requires immediate action.

Under many state and federal laws, there is a requirement that the tank leak be reported to the government. Often, this will result in the leak being assigned a case number and a case manager will be assigned to oversee the cleanup of the spill.

If you find out that your tank is leaking, here are some measures that you may want to consider:

•Reach out for an environmental consultant as soon as possible to stop the discharge and minimize any environmental problems that might have resulted. As the owner of the tank, you are responsible for the discharge and if any third party, including persons with drinking water wells who are downgrade from your well are affected, that will be your responsibility. So the first thing is to address the emergent conditions.
•The second thing is to place any applicable insurance carriers on notice. Many people do not understand that their insurance may respond to a leak. Homeowners and renters policies should be examined as well as any other applicable policies.
•Very often, legal assistance is required in order to insure that the cleanup is being undertaken properly and that all possible sources of funding have been tapped. Legal counsel can also interface with carriers, neighbors and the regulators. Counsel will also ensure that you are being protected from possible civil and perhaps (not usually) criminal exposure.
•The fourth thing to do is to work with your environmental consultant and attorney to develop a cleanup plan that is satisfactory to the regulatory agency in charge of the cleanup. This involves an understanding of the extent of contamination, an understanding of the cleanup options that are available, and the preparation of a submission of any necessary reports required by the agency.
•The fifth thing to do is to determine whether any other individuals may have legal responsibility for the tank leak. Of course, if the tank leak is minor and not expensive to address, this might be irrelevant. But if the problem looks like it will be prolonged, it might be important to determine whether any third parties are responsible. This can include the former owner of the tank, the tank manufacturer, the tank installer, the maintenance company that serviced the tank, and in certain instances perhaps even the oil company may have liability. Do not forget any fraud claims and negligent remediation claims that might exist.
•The sixth thing to do is to determine whether any other sources of funding might exist. For example, many governments have local funding available for tank removals. There might be loans and grants from other sources that are available. Every resource must be evaluated to insure that there exists a funding source.

Often insurance companies will initially deny these types of claims. If that occurs, it is important for your attorney to evaluate the claim denial and determine whether an appeal should be filed. There might be an administrative appeal available and there might also be a need to resort to the Courts.

But here's a word of warning. If you need to file suit there is usually a very short time period allowed for such a suit to be filed. If you miss it, you may lose you right forever.

Tank cleanups can often involve groundwater contamination. If groundwater contamination is involved, there are varieties of technical methods available for addressing the contamination. It is up to you, your consultant, your lawyer, and regulatory agency to determine which method makes the most sense under the circumstances. And it will be important for everyone to agree on a single approach.

You should know that oil tank leaks also result in injury to third parties, specifically neighbors and anyone else with drinking water wells that may be impacted. Sometimes, those neighbors commence suit or file a notice of claim against the owner of the leaking tank. Should that happen, it is important that you provide the notice of claim or the lawsuit to your lawyer and insurer as soon as possible. Your lawyer will want to defend you properly and may very well tender the defense of the claim to your insurance company.

Lieberman & Blecher is a New Jersey environmental law firm with years of leaking tank experience. We are located in Princeton, NJ, and our phone number is 732-355-1311. www.liebermanblecher.com

Loud Noise May Be a Legal Nuisance

2010-03-15T00:17:00.000-04:00

When is noise so irritating that a Court will Order it be stopped? The answer is sometimes -but not often. I think not often enough.

This issue recently arose in a Mahwah New Jersey case involving a fire siren that sounded day and night. The decibel levels were agreed to be very high. And according to the police chief, other means of notifying fire fighters such as pagers may have been equally effective.

However the appeals court found that the plaintiff homeowners had not demonstrated that the noise was sufficiently unreasonable to be a legal nuisance. The court explained that a noise must interfere with the use and enjoyment of a neighboring property and it must be unreasonable to be considered a legal nuisance.

In this case, even though experts addressed the possible alternative means of notifying firefighters other than noisy sirens, the court was not convinced that the sirens were unreasonable.

The court noted that another ranking police officer was less certain that the sirens could be eliminated and observed that the hilly terrain made cellular and pager technology less reliable.

The court considered a similar New Jersey case form Atlantic County which concluded that the affected property owners would have to suffer the siren noises so that the entire community could be safe.

Noise problems can be debilitating. Studies have demonstrated what persistent, loud noises can do to people.

If your family is exposed to loud noises, see if less formal fixes are available. If not, you may have to go to court.

In that case, do so as soon as possible so as to avoid statute of limitations problems. And find a lawyer that will address each of the components of a nuisance case with substantial testimony and proof.

The burden of proof is high in these cases. Which means the cases must be very carefully tailored and presented.

Senate Environmental Justice Bill Should Be Passed

2010-03-12T01:14:00.001-05:00

Last month New Jersey State SenatorWeinberg introduced S 1209, which addresses the often ignored issue of environmental racism. DEP has rules that cover this subject, but there is little reason to believe these DEP rules are followed or even remembered.

Environmental justice, also called environmental racisim, gained more recent notice about 15 years ago when some proclamations and federal rules were adopted. The concept is that noxious and toxic businesses, such as garbage dumps, incinerators, waste treatment facilities, should not be concentrated in poor, often minority communities. Rather they should be more evenly distributed.

The rules sounded good, but I believe have done little.   A federal court rendered some of them valueless several years back in a Camden County case.

And a recent DEP decision to permit a recycling center in a minority community in Trenton, which has a thriving residential base, as well as two already in place recycling facilities and a drug treatmant facilty all within easy walking distance, suggests that DEP is not following its own rules on this issues. (Disclosure: we represent the community in this case.)

So I am happy to see this Bill and I hope it passes.    State laws have more power than DEP rules.   Its harder to ignore a state law than an agency rule (although some will try).

The Bill requires environmental impact reports and public hearings when these issues arise. Which all makes sense, as the total enviro impact needs to be understood when these communities are repeatedly budened with noxious proposals.

I hope that people write their representatives and support this good Bill. Even in difficult financial times we need to share the noxous with the good.

Judge Rules Elizabeth Must Release Over $350,000 to L&B Client

2010-03-03T18:58:00.001-05:00

The City of Elizabeth was recently ordered by New Jersey Superior Court Judge Kathryn A. Brock to permit the release of more than $350,000 to the former owner of a motel seized under eminent domain. The monies had been held in a Superior Court escrow account to provide funding for environmental cleanup of the property.

Lieberman & Blecher proudly represented the succesful proprerty owner in the matter. The case was referred to us by the firm of McKirdy & Riskin, one of New Jersey's most respected eminent domain law firms.

The City acquired the Saxony Motel, a 35-room, family-owned business on Atlantic Street in Elizabeth for more than 50 years, by filing an eminent domain action in January, 2008. The City offered $1.8 million for the property, but claimed that approximately $800,000 of the monies offered needed to remain in the court escrow account to provide monies to pay for the cleanup of the property, which the City claimed was contaminated by leaking oil tanks or spillage from a gas station next door.

Read more about this decision in an article by Julie O’Connor from The Star-Ledger.

Suit Filed Over Local "Great Wall"

2010-02-24T07:40:00.002-05:00

Lieberman & Blecher have filed suit against a local property owner, hauler and Princeton University relating to an over 800 foot long berm constructed on our client's property in Mercer County.

The suit alleges that the material in question was generated at the university and transported to the property when it was owned by the prior owner, also a Defendant in the lawsuit.

The suit alleges violations of the New Jersey Solid Waste Management Act and other common law claims.

Local officials have cooperated and on freezing enforcement actions against our client at the current time --which is greatly appreciated.

The suit has been filed in the Mercer County Superior Court.

The berm in question approaches 20 feet in width and many feet high. It has the appearance of a road and is quite remarkable in appearance.

Septic System Inspection Law Should Be Passed

2010-02-22T18:02:00.004-05:00

A proposed Flordia law will require government inspections of septic tanks. It is a very good idea and I hope this is followed nationwide.

Septic systems do no last forever. They all eventually fail.

And a failing system means human waste impacting the groundwater --often drinking water.  Human waste has bacteria and viruses and can make people very will.

Many people having failing systems and are not even aware that they are failing.   This means they may be polluting the local water supply and not even know it.

Many people know they have failing systems and ignore the problem as long as they can.   Often the soil become constantly wet --and odors develop. But people look the other way to avoid what can be costly repairs.

I like the idea of a septic system district.   This is a local organization with inspection and enforcement powers. It is paid for by annual fees placed on septic system users.

It has worked well in certain locales and I think it is even preferable to state inspections.

Essex Fells Cell Tower Litigation

2010-02-19T17:42:00.000-05:00

We are involved in a cell tower opposition in North Jersey. See also Caldwell Progress article. This matter is currently in litigation.

But it provides insight into some of the issues raised in these cases:

Issue # 1 –Was the local cell tower ordinance followed?

Many municipalities have ordinances that specify how cell towers are to be located within the community. Essex Fells has such a law –we say it was not followed by he applicant and the applicant disagrees.

Issue #2- Alternative Technology
The local ordinance requires that alternative technologies be considered rather than only the old standby: an ugly cell tower. In this case the applicant seemed to only address the issue of alternative technologies in an effort to rebut testimony from the community groups. The applicant had no direct testimony on this issue.

DAS Systems May be The Future

It is worth noting that many other technologies exist including one called “DAS.” Under DAS, instead of having one large cell tower, many smaller antennas are installed on already existing telephone poles. And Federal laws allow this to take place.

DAS has worked very well at many US locations and it is proven to work. DAS should be considered in areas where cell towers are not desirable or welcomed.

Sustainability Counseling

2010-02-19T17:38:00.000-05:00

Today, top tier companies recognize that a focus on the environment yields significant competitive advantage. The most obvious benefits include: cost savings, reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, improved brand reputation, and increased customer loyalty.

Savvy corporations recognize that credible environmental sustainability programs are also an effective tool to recruit, retain, inspire, and motivate a values-driven workforce. According to a survey done by American Banker, 92% of young workers would choose working for an environmentally friendly company. Even more impressively, 77% of MBA students today are willingly to earn a lower wage in order to work for a company with a credible sustainability strategy.

To learn more about the people side of successful corporate sustainability initiatives, I met with Karen K. Nathan, Principal Consultant at Olivine LLC (www.olivineconsulting.com). According to Ms. Nathan “corporate sustainability efforts can only come to full blossom when management skillfully engages their workforce.” Ms. Nathan has a decade’s experience in the field of Organizational Development and she advises companies how to achieve bottom line results by developing effective human resource strategies to support an organizational culture of sustainability.

The key, as Ms. Nathan puts it, “is to make sustainability a part of your company’s DNA.” Some best practices to help accomplish this goal include:

Establishing and communicating a clear vision and mission as it relates to sustainability,

Involving the whole organization, starting with the executive level,

Encouraging passion in the workforce and allowing employees the freedom to run with and implement their ideas,

Leveraging the diversity of your company and allowing for different ways to engage in sustainability initiatives,

Making sustainability a part of every employees job description,

Tying variable compensation to meeting sustainability metrics.

According to Ms. Nathan, putting your business on the path to sustainability does not have to be an expensive or prolonged endeavor. Initially, the most important area of focus should be your very own workforce and organizational culture. The best ideas often come from within. And, it will be easier to implement the plan when you build internal support.

May I suggest that you consider Karen for your corporate clients who would benefit from sustainability counseling. And candidly, this is the future and just about every company could use the help.

RLUIPA IS A BAD LAW

2010-02-05T18:59:00.000-05:00

There is a horrible federal law out there that people need to know about. It is called RLUIPA, which stands for Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act.

It should be called, "if a house of worship cries enough, you have to give them whatever they want." The law is ruining neighborhoods everywhere and Congress simply needs to eliminate this bad law. It also allows houses of worship to all but ignore environmental laws and zoning laws. The law is garbage.

Let's say you live near a church and everything is fine. The church decides that it wants to become one of these new super churches, and wants to triple in size, build broadcast facilities, a store, a billion classrooms, a state of the art recreation facility, and an overly lit parking lot that is three times in size what is there now.

The problem is that this proposed super church doesn't fit on the existing property. The new structure will destroy six acres of wetlands, will pollute an adjacent stream, and technically cannot support the septic system needed for a structure of this size.

Traffic will now become a nightmare, not to mention the fact that the structure will change from one used mostly on Sundays to one that will be intensely used seven days a week, from 8 am until 10pm (on early nights).

The new proposed church will ruin the residential neighborhood if it is allowed. Because of this the local planning agency denies the application. The congregation responds with orchestrated vigils and protests, and then files a lawsuit in federal court claiming its rights to practice its religious beliefs are being burdened by this bad decision to deny the development application.

The church relies on RLUIPA in federal court. While the federal court should tell these people to go out and find a piece of property that is suitable for this development, it may not do so. Instead, relying on this dangerous law called RLUIPA, it may actually rule in favor of the church � thereby destroying the community and as far as I am concerned, any true separation of church and state.

Houses of worship have been abusing RLUIPA all over the country. When they are properly denied by local planning agencies, they cry their way to court waiving the RLUIPA banner. And they always allege the same thing: that their rights to practice their religious beliefs are being unfairly burdened by the land use agency denial.

Under RLUIPA, if a house of worship wins in court, the court can order the municipality to pay all lawyer's fees. And since municipalities are always cash strapped, this scares the heck out of them; so they settle these cases, ignoring the lawful rights of the people who live within the neighborhood.

RLUIPA needs to be elimated. I have seen it in action. It is a very dangerous, bad law.

New Governor's Transition Report for the DEP

2010-01-24T22:07:00.001-05:00

Whenever a new Governor takes office, a transition team evaluates what is good and bad about state government to inform the Governor-elect of the state of affairs.   This is done to allow the Governor to evaluate changes and implement policy.

The Transition Report dealing with the DEP is now public and I strongly suggest that you take a look at it.   Basically, the Transition Report reads that DEP is a bad, aimless agency, and is of little value. They take over 20 pages to say it, but this is not an unfair summary of their conclusions.

The transition committee suggests a major overhaul. New goals, new objectives, less programs, less penalties, easier land use management.

Sound familiar? We have been hearing this, more or less, since the DEP was created. Its eems that every new Governor know exactly what to do about DEP, only to find that the DEP issue is more complicated than envisioned.

We need less political involvement, less inter-meddling, with this agency. For years, Governors have allowed DEP to make sweetheart deals with whomever was in favor at that time, to the detriment of our environment. While we need common sense laws that are consistent, and smart leaders who care more about science than politics, the real answer at DEP is less Governor and Legislative involvement.

Those of us who know DEP staff and leaders know that they too want to be left alone so that they can do an honest, good job.

DEP has problems. But it does plenty very well. And many of its current problems were caused by former Governors that also had great ideas.    Less politics, more science and strong, politically resilient leadership is what DEP needs. Not another wasteful overhaul.

NJ Law Would Award Attorney Fees in Penalty Cases

2010-01-18T22:22:00.001-05:00

The Legislative session has started anew, and some old bills have been re-filed. One that I am fond of is Assembly 736, which awards attorneys fees and other costs to prevailing Defendants in DEP inititated enforcement cases. The fees would be paid by the State in instances where the State loses.

The current language applies to trial and appellate courts. It should be amended to included actions before the Office of Administrative Law, as many of these cases are heard there. Also municipal court cases prosecuted by a Board of Health on behalf of the DEP should be included.

The Bill could also be tightened to define a win and a loss. If DEP brings a Five Count complaint and loses four , are fees pro-rated, or lost all together. They should be pro-rated, but that's my view.

This kind of proposal has been around for some time and has never gone far in the law making process. Since it requires the State to pay money it does not currently have, it will likely die this term as well.

But taxpayers and business owners who are the subject of baseless enforcement actions can afford them even less than can the State. Which means it is more important now than ever to pass this law.

Please write and try to have this see the light of day. It is the only way to even the playing field and avoid abuse.

A736
Environment and Solid Waste

Last Session Bill Number: A610 S2611 DiMaio, John as Primary Sponsor


1/12/2010 Introduced, Referred to Assembly Environment and Solid Waste Committee Introduced - 5 pages PDF Format HTML Format

shall be awarded reasonable trial and appellate attorney fees and

Prehistoric Artifacts Found at Ohio Building Site

2010-01-05T22:43:00.002-05:00

This is a great article about prehistoric artifacts found while preparing an Ohio construction site. The artifacts may date back to 8000 BC.

Currently, many projects throughout the US are governed by the national Historic Preservation Act. This law applies to projects requiring either federal approval or state approval in the case of federal programs delegated to the states.

When the law is applicable, artifacts must be identified, decisions are made concerning how to best address the artifacts, and some measure of protection and preservation takes place. Often not enough, but at least its something.

The Historic Preservation Act is an important law and citizens must ensure that state and federal governments abide by it. We have a rich past in the country and it warrants the protection afforded by this federal law.

Note that many states and municipalities also have their own historic preservation laws as well.

League of Municipalities Opposes Stormwater Rules

2010-01-03T21:48:00.001-05:00

The New Jersey League of Municipalities is using the economy as an excuse for eviscerating our statewide storm water rules. See Op Ed Piece by the League.

The League needs to reconsider this dangerous, and ill-considered position.

Storm water management is required by the federal government. If the municipalities do not comply, they will face very costly fines and citizen suit lawsuits. Non-compliance is simply not even an option.

More importantly, the statewide storm water rules that the League now wants to ignore protect public water bodies and drinking water supplies.

These are public health issues. Issues that were ignored for decades. We simply cannot go back now.

The League is right about unfunded mandates.
But its wrong when it comes to not protecting New Jersey's water and our collective health and safety.

EDF Report on Dirty heating Oil in NYC

2010-01-01T23:10:00.001-05:00

The Environmental Defense Fund posted a report in late 2008 that blames Number 4 and Number 6 heating oil for much of the soot pumped into New York's air.   Presumably, the same problem exists in many older cities.

Most residences and many buildings use Number 2 heating oil --which is much cleaner and not blamed. But this Number 4 and 6 accounts for an overwhelming amount of the soot in the city air.

According to the report, several lankmark, well known City buildings still use this inferior grade of heating oil.

Since our air quality in the NY metro area is already poor, its clear this needs to be taken off the market.

Boilers using this inferior oil must be taken off line within a short time period and replaced or retrofitted to use gas or Number 2 heating oil.

The particulates make our air bad, and presumably add to asthma and other respiratory illnesses.

The government ought to take control of this issue at this time.

NJ Needs a Dry Cleaner Fund

2009-12-28T22:30:00.002-05:00

Attached is an article about Congressional funding for drinking water remediation to remove dry cleaning solvent that has contaminated the water supply.

This happens to be in Florida ---but the scene repeats itself all the time. Including here in NJ.

Funding for dry cleaning solvent cleanups is very hit or miss.
Most operators of these businesses have limited assets. These are usually family business with lower margins.

Some State loans and grants are available. But this takes forever and is not dependable. Especially now.

New Jersey NEEDS a revolving dry cleaner fund to pay for these enviro cleanups. Other states have them and they work. A few cents are added to every dry cleaning order. No one even feels it.

And it can fund these cleanups and remove this cancer causing chemical from our drinking water.

Every year for almost ever now, bills has been proposed in the Legislature. Illogically, the bill never gets voted on by the NJ Legislature and it dies.

If you know some one - call some one. We all need this fund now.

Cell Towers in Residential Areas

2009-12-25T01:24:00.002-05:00

I represent many New Jersey communities that have opposed celled towers in their residential areas. My clients feel that these towers are ugly, they are worried about health impacts, they are worried about property value impacts, and they are concerned about view shed limitations.

I wrote an article a few years ago on the correct way to locate these towers. If carriers took my advice, we could have less fights. So far, the carriers haven't asked me to lunch, though.

See my article here. It really goes over some of the common concerns and some ways to address them.

Bottom line is this. Cell carriers need to be concerned about their host communties and be sensitive to their needs. And carriers need to emphasize newer alternative technologies that can reduce the negative impact of these installations.

Or, the fights will be sure to continue. With no real winners.

Drugs in Our Drinking Water

2009-12-22T18:52:00.002-05:00

EPA may start to regulate the amount of regulated drug residue in our drinking water. This is a good thing. See story.

Prescribed drugs are ingested and then excreted. Some end up back in our drinking water. They have impacts on our bodies -- and the extent of impact is unknown.

At least now the government is looking at this issue. Recently the NJ DEP announced suggestions for safe disposal of unused Rx drugs. You can find them on the DEP website.

You will be hearing much more about this subject in coming years.

This need to be looked at. After all, drinking water should be nothing more, or less, than drinking water. Why has that become such a novel concept???

County May Reject Recycling Facility Proposal

2009-12-20T15:55:00.007-05:00

On December 18 the Appellate Division issued a ruling upholding the right of a Board of Freeholders to reject a plan for a new recycling facility.  The unpublished decision is in the case of Triple M Sanitation Services, Inc. v. Board of Chosen Freeholders.  It is a Middlesex County case. 

The case involved NY and NJ entities with effectively common ownership.  The application was

denied in part, because of strong opposition from the host municipality.  The evidence referred to noise, dust and traffic concerns.  The point here:  local opposition does count and is important.

This is an important case because Counties have been unclear about the extent of their review ability regarding Class A recycling facilities.   We now know that County Freeholders have the right to take these cases  and to deny applications when the record supports denial.  And the denial may only be reversed upon a showing of substantial evidence.

Lieberman & Blecher will supply a copy of this case to you if you would like to review it.

Why would the government fine the government?

2009-12-12T21:21:00.000-05:00

It makes no sense for one branch of government to fine another. EPA has just fined the Puerto Rico National Guard a hefty amount for leaking tanks.

Its really dumb for government to fine government because innocent taxpayers have to pay, not the wrongdoers. Fire the wrongdoer or discipline him or her. But dont fine the government. Its useless.

There is little deterrent value in fining a government. All it accomplishes is it raises our taxes. Perhaps that is idea, afterall.

By the way, you think a check will ever be written?

How can you tell a good consultant from a not so good one...

2009-12-11T00:07:00.000-05:00

I think references are the best way. Because if you are not in the business, you may not be able to tell. People in the business know. So, as with anything, ask for references from people you know and trust.

Regulatory agencies are not supposed to recommend anyone. But sometimes a case manager might give you a good "hint" about the good ones as contrasted with the not so good.

Credentials and experience also count. In New Jersey the newest credential is the Licensed Site Remediation Professional. However, not every really good consultant will seek this designation.

For a nice more in depth discussion, may I suggest this blog....

EPA Energy Star Building Program 10 years old

2009-12-09T12:24:00.000-05:00

I did not realize this program has been around this long.

Under the program, EPA establishes energy savings protocols for homes and commercial buildings.   Buildings are scored and buildings above a 75 score (out of 100) receive an energy star.

There are various competing rating schemes. They each have strengths and weaknesses.   Each program should be consulted.

There may be tax benefits for compliance. There are marketing benefits as well.

NJ Municipality Offers $10 Radon Kits

2009-12-08T01:06:00.000-05:00

Washington Township is offering $10 radon kits. This municipality is located in an area that has some high levels.

Radon is the second cause of lung cancer in the US. People don't take this threat as seriously as they should.

All homeowners, including condo owners and home association owners need to know if they are in an area with high radon.

If so, mitigation is not an option, but a necessity.

PA Now Considering Regulation of Wood Burning Stoves

2009-12-06T23:44:00.001-05:00

A recent article advises that Pennsylvania is considering regulating outdoor stoves. I think this is a good idea and that we need tighter control --especially in denser areas.

In the rural areas it matters little. But in communities with close development, the particulates and odors from a lot of these devices drives people crazy.

And local authorities do little to help.

State regulation of these furnaces is a good thing. Enforcement is even better.

Article Regarding Historic Preservation Attempts

2009-12-03T01:55:00.000-05:00

February 21 2008

Forney House future in hands of the court

Two lawsuits pending as citizens group appeals to save house

As the ongoing fight over the fate of the Forney House in Milltown headed to court last week, the group hoping to save the historic structure had a new, larger entity in its corner.

The Forney House, on North Main Street, Milltown, is slated to be demolished so that a bank branch can be built in its place. However, an appeal to reverse that decision is pending in state Superior Court.

Even if a judge rules to allow demolition of the approximately 150-year-old house to make way for a bank, members of the John C. Evans Project, which is working to save the North Main Street house, could realize success with the help of the federal Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP).

"They don't get involved all the time. In this particular case, I guess they deem this as something worthy of being considered. We are obviously cautiously optimistic," said Stuart Lieberman, the Princeton-based attorney working for the John C. Evans Project.

The group is appealing the March 2007 decision by the Milltown Zoning Board of Adjustment that would allow the Forney House building to be demolished to make way for a Valley National Bank branch.

On Friday, state Superior Court Judge Jessica Mayer, sitting in New Brunswick, reserved decision on whether to uphold the board's approval of the bank branch. While there is no word on when a decision will be issued, Lieberman said he thinks it could take a few weeks.

"This case is not just about saving an old house on Main Street. It goes beyond that," said Michael Shakarjian, a trustee of the John C. Evans Project.

A borough ordinance does not allow for drive-throughs in the town's B-1, or business, zone. As part of the approval, the zoning board granted Valley National Bank a variance to allow them to construct a drive-through at the proposed branch.

"We feel that if this was not challenged, it could open the doors for more drive-throughs in the B-1 zone," Shakarjian said. "We feel that weakening this prohibition could have a dramatic negative effect on our town."

Attorneys for Valley National Bank declined to comment on the case.

Even if the approval is upheld in court, members of the John C. Evans group may still have a chance to preserve the Forney House, as approval from the federal Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) is necessary before the bank can proceed with its plans.

Members of the John C. Evans group expressed dissatisfaction with the OCC in its handling of the matter, saying the agency was not following its own regulations, and was hasty in moving toward drafting a memorandum of agreement (MOA) with the bank late last year.

However, the MOA has yet to be drafted, and Shakarjian said the ACHP will now be involved in the necessary Section 106 review process, which appraises possible effects of actions taken on historic sites.

"That means the MOA process has been put on hold," Shakarjian said.

While the citizens' group was mobilizing to achieve its goals, others involved in the battle were doing the same.

In August, Valley National Bank filed a counterclaim against the John C. Evans Project, stating that the group has interfered with its economic advantage, as well as with its rights under the sale contract that the bank has with the current owner of the Forney House building, Dr. Bhudev Sharma.

"In my view, it's a merit less suit," Lieberman said. "You don't use the court as a club to intimidate and beat somebody down so they'll be afraid to participate in the process."

Lieberman characterized the counterclaim as a SLAPP, or strategic lawsuit against public participation, suit. Some suits are termed as such when they involve corporations or developers bringing litigation against citizens' groups that take an oppositional stance to their plans, according to Lieberman.
Valley National's counterclaim has yet to be heard in court.

And according to Lieberman, there is another new legal angle. He said Sharma has now filed a lawsuit against members of the group who are seeking to stop the sale of the house.
Sharma declined to comment on the matter.

Although Shakarjian had requested that the ACHP get involved in the matter in the past, the federal entity advised him to continue working with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and the OCC, he said. It was not until Sharma filed suit against two members of the citizens' group that Meghan Mac Williams Baratta of the SHPO reached out to ACHP to intervene, he said.

"When she heard that, that was finally the straw that broke the camel's back," Shakarjian said. "[The ACHP] has truly gotten involved, and that's a good thing."

The Forney House was built in the mid- to late-1800s by the Evans family, whose son served as Milltown's first mayor. It was converted into a medical facility by John C. Evans and operated as such from 1907 until the 1970s. During many of those years, it was run by Dr. Norman C. Forney Sr., the town's first surgeon.

While Sharma and representatives of Valley National have asserted that the house is in such a state of disrepair that it cannot be preserved, the John C. Evans Project aims to find a purchaser that would be interested in saving the structure.

Members of the John C. Evans Project have thus far covered the costs of their efforts by using their own funds, as well as donations from the community, they said. The group is requesting contributions from others who share their goal, in order to cover the anticipated additional $15,000 cost of the court process. The group can be e-mailed at evansforney@ aol.com.

BY JESSICA SMITH Staff Writer
c. The Home News Tribune

Save Graydon Pool

2009-12-03T00:03:00.005-05:00

Lieberman & Blecher proudly represents many Ridgewood New Jersey residents seeking to preserve the nearly 100 year old Graydon Pool. This truly natural resource is historic and beautiful.

Our group is challenging a draft Request For Proposal which seems to be biased and unfair. The Pool is very unique to Ridgewood and is nearly three acres in size. Opponents want to replace it with a mundane, much much smaller cement pool.

Fairness and reason need to prevail. We need to do what the Europeans do: preserve our rich natural resources. Everything isn't disposable. Quality and aesthetics do count and are appreciated.

We ask Ridgewood to stop any further efforts to detroy this important landmark. And we are confident that reason will prevail.

transcription of recent talk in Ridgewood about the importance of the pool

Too Many Phone Books

2009-12-01T01:32:00.002-05:00

What good are phone books any longer? With the internet, you can get any person's phone number and any business phone number that you want.

Clearly, many people don't need these books any longer. I guess that people under 30 almost never use a phone book. 30-40 a little bit. 40 to 50 just a little more. And 50 - 60 just a little more as well.

Over 60 must be the big market for these golden oldies as far as I can figure.     Yes, some people who don't have a computer or who are not inclined to use one may still want a phone book. But most of us don't seem to need one or use one any longer. At least that is my assumption.

I don't even know why people advertise in phone books any longer.   Why spend money advertising in a place people don't seem to look at much any longer?

Here's the problem:   phone books take up an amazing amount of limited landfill space every year. So, the long and short of it is this --- most of us don't seem to need phone books. And phone books take up too much land fill space.

Now the solution: States need to make it illegal to automatically distribute phone books.   If you want one, you just need to ask and you can have one.   But they can't automatically assume you want one and deliever one by your front door.

This will cut down on the amount of wasted books. And it will save a lot of landfill space. Not to mention a whole lot of trees as well.

N.Y. Community Atop Landfill Needs Help

2009-11-29T18:23:00.000-05:00

A New York State neighborhood is suffering from a problem that people experience throughout the U.S. —they liveatop an old landfill. The State has known about the problem for decades, but has done little. An article discussing recent updates is found at this link:

ttp://www.democratandchronicle.com/article/20091129/NEWS01/911290346/1002/NEWS/Irondequoit-residents-living-above-old-dump-sit-on-uneasy-ground

Improperly closed landfills often make for poor foundations because they are not properly compacted. This creates voids and sinkholes. Cars can get swallowed in these sinkholes and occasionally people die in them as well.

In addition, landfills often create toxic methane gas for many years. This methane needs to be properly vented. If this is not done, it may cause explosions and health hazards.

Also, toxic materials and gasses may leak into the living space. This concept, known as “vapor intrusion,” has gotten a lot of attention in the past 10 years.

Finally, hazardous substances in the trash can migrate into the groundwater, making the water dangerous to drink. This process is called “leaching.”

Many states require owners, operators and generators of the waste to clean these old dumps. And at least here in New Jersey, there is a duty to report this information when it becomes known. This can lead to a diminution in property value.

Unlike wine, many of these problems get worse with age. Property owners need to be ever vigilant and make sure their plight is not ignored.

Noise and Wood Burning Stove Complaints

2009-11-27T17:18:00.000-05:00

Noise and wood burning stoves. These two issues seem to bother neighbors the most.

One email writer reported to me that he lives in an apartment building, with a family upstairs that is impossibly noisy. The family members scream at each other day and night. The kids blast their music. It's an apparent ongoing nightmare. So how does he stop the noise?

Let's be clear, it does need to be stopped. Studies confirm that relentless noise can drive people crazy, literally, making them ill and psychologically debilitated.

If possible, the reader should speak with the neighbor. Without putting him on the defensive, the problem should be explained and relief should be requested. The neighbor may not realize how well the sound is traveling.

The key with noncombative confrontation is to remain calm. Do not accuse. Simply state the facts and make a genuine request.

But this can still be very frightening -- especially in today's world, where people are known to act irrationally and sometimes (rarely) violently. Thus, people should only engage in such discussions if they believe the neighbor is likely to be reasonable. And these discussions should take place at convenient times of the day (meaning not in the middle of the night).

If there is any question at all, then polite discourse may not be appropriate.

Next, the building super or management company may also be able to help. In some states, they may have a legal responsibility to ensure that you are using your apartment without undue interference from others. Lawyers refer to this as the right to peaceful occupancy.

Many municipalities have noise ordinances which may be helpful. The degree to which the local officials will help will depend on the language in the ordinance, the historic manner in which the ordinance has been locally applied, and the willingness of local officials to help in these kinds of cases. It may also depend on who the noise maker is.

Finally, moving may also be an appropriate option. While people hate to be "chased" from their homes, sometimes this response just makes sense. If this is the case, you may need to hire an attorney.

Also at the top of the list of annoyances: wood burning stoves. A reader informed me that they live immediately next to a home with a wood burning stove. The smoke bothers the reader, but the neighbor with the stove won't stop the burning.

Wood burning stove complaints are particularly difficult and require a plan. Since many stoves meet local legal requirements, the local authorities are often reluctant to become involved. This does not mean that the authorities should not be consulted, but know in advance that they may be unwilling or unable to help.

Again, speaking with the neighbor may be a good first step. That depends on you, the neighbor, and your common sense.

Consider offering a financial compromise, as the neighbor may be using a wood burning stove as a way to conserve cash.

Also if their house is older, maybe you can pay for the neighbor to change over to natural gas, or offer to help pay some of his or her gas bills for a specified period. This all depends on how much getting rid of your wood burning headache is worth to you.

Since civil disputes are often settled with an exchange of money, there is nothing inherently wrong about this approach. While readers often don't like to have to use money to "clear the air," if the victim's legal position is weak, this approach may make sense.

Legal relief in the courts may also be available if everything else fails. A lawsuit claiming public and private nuisance, as well as other appropriate claims, may be viable. In most cases, make sure that friends and neighbors witness the problem so that they can be called as witnesses. And all attempts to resolve the problem should be reduced to writing and copies should be saved.

Lawsuits are costly and litigation should always be a last resort. However, sometimes there is no alternative.

Insurance and Heating Oil Tank Leaks

2009-11-27T12:32:00.002-05:00

Homeowners insurance is supposed to provide protection from potentially crippling financial risks. Its good to know that if something happens to your home, that insurance is available to get you back on your feet.

Since this is what people expect, I find it curious that homeowner's policies often will not cover leaking oil tanks. And very often, homeowners are not aware of this coverage gap until a tank problem takes place.

Since a buried leaking oil tank can result in a very sizable oil spill that can potentially costs tens of thousands of dollars (or more) to address, homeowners must make sure that they protect themselves and their finances.

When a buried oil tank leaks, oil often is released into the soil that is underneath the tank. If a large amount of oil is released, the oil may travel beyond the tank area and impact substantial amounts of soil.

When this happens, many insurance policies will not pay to remove the tank and the contaminated soil. This is because many policies consider this to be harm to the policyholder's own property, and the insurance policy will expressly exclude these costs from coverage.

If the contamination travels through the soil into the groundwater, this is often both good and bad news.

It's good news because many homeowners policies will pay for damage to "third parties" from tank leaks, and the groundwater is often considered to be owned by a third party.

It's bad news because contaminated groundwater can be very costly to remediate, costing tens of thousands of dollars, or costing hundreds of thousands of dollars to clean. Which means cleanup costs may exceed insurance policy limits and the cleanup may take years to finish.

However, some homeowners policies are written in a manner that arguably excludes tank leaks affecting groundwater. They have carved this out by adding what is called a "pollution exclusion" provision to the policy.

If you are buying homeowners insurance for a house that contains an oil tank, be certain to ask your agent to provide a quote for a policy that will handle as much of a tank leak claim as possible. In my opinion, the agent has the responsibility to ask you whether you have an oil tank, and if so, to provide you with a variety of options for dealing with this risk -- to the extent such options are present.

With this in mind, investors also need to be aware that many commercial policies that an investor might purchase to cover rental properties also contain pollution exclusion clauses. Investors should ask their agents whether any insurance is available to address leaking tanks serving their investment properties.

Tank leaks are by no means rare. They happen all of the time and many people have either no or little coverage. The time to try to guard against being uninsured for this risk is when the insurance policy is being purchased.

Note that government loans and grants may also be available to pay for leaking tank cleanups. Also some fuel merchants may sell insurance -- kinds of products that can also offer some level of protection.

And if a forensic investigation proves that a tank leak started when a former homeowner was living at the residence, litigation may also be available to seek financial contribution from that former owner.

When purchasing your homeowners policy, don't just accept whatever your insurance agent proposes. Make sure that what is being sold to you will cover losses, including tank leak costs -- to the extent that such coverage is available in your state.

Leaking Oil Tanks Need Not Kill Real Estate Deals

2009-11-27T12:19:00.002-05:00

Someone once inquirered about a house that he wanted to purchase. The house was heated with natural gas. However, at one time the house had been heated with oil and there had been an underground oil storage tank. The problem is that nobody had any documents indicating whatever happened to the old tank. The question asked is whether that person should close on the house or take measures to protect himself.

This is a very common issue. Many houses have been converted from oil to natural gas. The conversions may have occurred recently, in which case documentation will likely not be a problem, or decades ago. Decades ago may be a problem because people did not then keep the kinds of records concerning tank removals.

Home purchasing is often premised more on emotions than legal or historical considerations. People simply love their new home-to-be, and do not want to hear about the "what ifs."

But everyone needs to understand that when they purchase a home, they not only purchase all of the desirable aspects of the home, but also all of the blemishes and liabilities. That means that any oil contamination which was not properly addressed and still remains onsite becomes the responsibility of the new owner.

And heaven forbid what happens if the oil contamination has leaked into the groundwater. That can really become an expensive proposition to cleanup.

I once represented a homeowner who had a leaking tank and spent nearly $200,000.00 just to remove the dirty soil. While that was unusual, and most cleanups seem to me to be much less, the point is that this can be costly.

So, you can love the home you want to buy. But, buy the home with your eyes wide opened. A purchaser of a home that once contained an underground storage tank wants to know with certainty that the tank was properly removed, that the tank was properly disposed of, and that all contamination was fully addressed in accordance with applicable laws.

Since tank issues can be important issues, legal advise in addressing this risk is appropriate. People may tell you that it is not necessary. If they do, ask them whether they will pay for the clean up if you end up making a bad call. The odds are that you will be fine. But, problems here can be costly. Skimping on legal advise doesn't make sense.

Absent strong documentation which satisfies your attorney that you have nothing to worry about, you might decide that some environmental testing is in order to determine whether any contamination is still present. In fact, you might very well discover that the tank itself is still present. Not long ago, the common practice was to abandon tanks in place by emptying them and filling them with cement or dirt.

It is possible that price may have to be renegotiated under the circumstances. It also possible that the walk away provision in your contract may have to be revisited. Or, money may have to be kept in escrow.

Sometimes, insurance can be purchased to address some of this risk.

In any event uncertainty about previous buried oil tanks should not kill any deal. Uncertainties require creative responses by motivated buyers, sellers and their lawyers. A lawyer who simply tells you to just walk away because an uncertainty arises is not doing his or her job. Insist on creative solutions. If everyone is result oriented, everyone can still get what they want and the oil tank issue can be properly and adequately resolved.

NJDEP Proposes Wind Turbine Permit by Rule

2009-11-27T02:46:00.000-05:00

The New Jersey DEP is proposing to amend their coastal regulations to permit wind turbines through a "permit by rule." This means that if the turbines satisfy the many requirements in the draft regulation, an individual coastal permit will not be required.

That is a significant step towards encouraging this form of energy development in NJ. Permit by rules are much easier to obtain than individual permits and this action will encourage the development of this form of energy generation.

The rule contains many detailed specifications regarding the number of allowable units in a given location, the size of the units, height limitations and the size of the blades.

Conditions to protect migratory birds may also be imposed at the DEP's discretion.

This is a very important draft regulation that needs to become final. These turbines have proven themselves throughout Europe and in this country as well.

Wind energy is perfectly renewable. It makes a lot of sense and we all need this to be promoted.

Comments may be submitted to the NJDEP through early December. I have included a link to the rule proposal. http://www.nj.gov/dep/rules/notices/090809a.html

Enviro Cleanup Contractor Fined For Fake Resporting

2009-11-26T15:51:00.000-05:00

http://www.centralvalleybusinesstimes.com/stories/001/?ID=13708

We need to have more of this.

While this was an extreme example, where an employee stole a date rape compound from a rememdiation site, false reporting happens often and little is done.

Consultants must be honest in their dealings. Fines must be hefty and swift.

DOT allows salt to poison family's drinking water ......

2009-11-25T00:01:00.000-05:00

http://www.shorenewstoday.com/news.php?id=5903

BUT DOES NOTHING.

They say that since the salt is below state action levels, they do not have to act.

Two Responses ---first, that is not true.   Maybe the DEP will not make them clean it up, but a state judge might make them clean it up for committing a private nuisance.

And second ---how can DOT take the position that we can salt a family's water and not have to dig a deeper well.

This is the state of NJ. not a private company.   How can NJ act this way????

Slapp Suits are for Stupid People

2009-11-23T22:30:00.000-05:00

Slapp Suits , or strategic litigation against public participation, are things that stupid people engage in.

They are lawsuits brought by the rich and powerful to try to scare everyone else from doing anything that might block their project.

Developers, large banks, and even some governments have engaged in these tactics.   They often target community groups who have the nerve to oppose their projects before local planning or zoning boards.

The cases are all frauds --claims for tortious interference with contract, sometime claims for libel. The plaintiffs use these suits not to win --but to intimidate. To stop these good citizens from particpating in the public review process.


New Jersey has recently made clear that these cases are most disfavored. Plaintiffs may have to pay the citizen groups' lawyers fees. In some cases, even the plaintiffs' lawyer may be liable for monetary damages as well.

Don't let these evil minded powerful plaintiffs get away with this kind of un-American activity. Be sure to fight back and fight hard. The law is on the side of innocent citizens, who want nothing more than a meaningful chance to participate. They ought not be terrorized for this.

The Jersey City Chromium Nightmare

2009-11-23T22:15:00.000-05:00

Jersey City has many chromium dump sites. This waste, made popular in the movie "Erin Brokovich," resulted from industrial processes that stopped in the middle of the 20th century. But the waste is still there today.

A New Jersey state health department finding that men were statistically more likely to contract cancer if they lived near one of these sites has been all but ignored by the state and the companies who put the stuff there.

Lets be 100% clear: this is a clear case of environmental injustice.

Lets say this was Upper Saddle River and not Jersey City. Do you honestly believe this problem would have lingered for decades anywhere in Bergen County?      From the moment they found it, the chromium would be trucked out, truck load by truck load, around the clock, until it was done.

But no such enthusiasm existed for the many African American and Latino residents of Jersey City. Some one decided that for them, 20 years was not too long to wait.

The state entered into an agreement with one company to clean this up 20 years ago.   The dominant discharge site was barely touched in all those years. So the state sued that company and reached a settlement ---which sounds a lot like the agreement from the 1990s all over again.

No time period for the cleanup.

No cleanup standards.

A lot of talk.

Oh, and yes, the City got a fat check also.

As a society we will never be any better than the manner in which we treat people who are the most vulnerable.
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://blog.nj.com/hudsoncountynow_impact/2009/06/large_Jersey-City-Chromium-Applause.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/2009/06/after_decades_jersey_city_coun.html&usg=__9W9b7WN3eF-wnDir9nOWeRRnm98=&h=301&w=453&sz=66&hl=en&start=1&sig2=E_1zeRpZlHxADIvyU1sCWg&tbnid=a0qjJ8HTeOpwVM:&tbnh=84&tbnw=127&prev=/images%3Fq%3Djersey%2Bcity%2Bchromium%26gbv%3D2%26hl%3Den&ei=Ck4LS_umC4zw8QanoZGJBA

Florida Selling Out On Water Quality

2009-11-23T08:43:00.000-05:00

Florida is now proposing to lower water some quality standards. The State asserts this will allow for better environmental protection. It seems to me that the opposite is true.

When development occurs, polluters must ensure that any resulting polution is addressed. Published water quality standards indicate the level of pollution that is acceptable.

For example, if you build a townshouse community you must ensure that the near by surface waters are not adversely impacted by the runoff. If the water quality in those water bodies falls below published standards, the polluter must provide water treatment. That makes sense.

Now Florida wants to let some polluters off the hook by lowering some water quality standards. The State apparently wants to switch the burden of cleaning the water, in some cases, to communities that are down stream of the pollution. Which means that some polluters get off the hook, and some innocent cities down hill --which is where the pollution flows, now have increased responsibility.

Any time any one talks about lowering water quality standards we all need to be concerned. For 100 years no one did anything about all of this pollution. In the 1970s we started to address these problems and some success has occurred.

Water pollution kills marine life and ultimately makes us and our world an unhealthy place. Florida is dead wrong to do anything that turns back the clock on this important issue. http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2009/nov/22/conservancy-urging-cities-oppose-reduced-state-wat/

Kelo Went Bust

2009-11-22T22:31:00.000-05:00

Media is now reporting that New London Conneticut has done little with the property it took through eminent domain so that a private developer could take their property.  In other words, a perfectly fine community was ousted for a new, more "desirable" community.

As a lawyer it shames me that our Supreme Court upheld this. New Jersey state courts are not as permissive and are protecting many property owners. More protection is need though.

Anyway --the best part.   The property they took --at great expense, is now barren. Apparently, no one wants it.   So they took it for no reason at all.

They displaced all of these people --why??? Because they could.

What arrogance!   I hope they pop in an ugly Box Store there and put the names of the mayor and elected officials who engaged in this immorality on the side of the Trash Depot.

Now, they want to move out a viable Brooklyn community for the Nets. This must be stopped. When will reason prevail?

New DEP cleanup regs are here. WATCH OUT

2009-11-22T20:42:00.000-05:00

http://www.state.nj.us/dep/srp/regs/arrcs/arrcs_rule.pdfThe NJ DEP has published temporary regulations for NJ cleanups. The rulkes have changed entirely. DEP is now out of the business of reviewing most cleanups. Now consultants will, in effect, review their own work. Sound kosher to you??? Welcome to the Garden State.

The consultants will be licensed. They will be subject to severe penalties if they are audited and lied.

For good consultants --my friends and the ones we hire for our clients, this is good. Good consultants will get the job done. They will protect their clients and the environment. It can be done and by most, it will be.

But we have a history of a few bad apple consultants in NJ who play with their submissions to suit their clients needs and fake out the DEP. Very few play this game. But they make it bad for all the good ones.

So what now? I think the reputable clients will hire the consultants with good reputations. The jobs will go well and the world will move on.

However polluters who want to do as little as possible will likely find their own consultants. I know the state may some day fine or "disbar" the bad consultants. But their record of taking action thus far in DEP's history has been spotty.

Welcome to my blog

2009-11-22T20:36:00.000-05:00

My name is Stuart Lieberman. I am an environmental lawyer from New Jersey. I have been practicing since 1986.

I represent businesses, governments and individuals in an array of enviro issues . They include litgation over property contamination, litigation for insurance coverage, litigation in cases where professionals have caused environmental harm and cases with the NJDEP and EPA.

I also represent many non profit groups in planning board and zoning board cases where important environmental issues are present. This includes construction in sensitive areas, wetlands destruction, and stormwater management failures.

I also represent groups opposing wrongful placement of cell towers by large cell providers.

I am very opinionated and look forward to this discussion. Let the fun begin. and lets not mix any words. I am, after all, from NJ.