For Immediate Release
Media Contact: Jackie.Greger@sierraclub.org
Ciba Geigy: Sierra Club Calls For Comment Extension & Updated Risk Assessment
Toms River: The Sierra Club, New Jersey Chapter joined residents of Toms River at NJDEP’s Public Hearing on the proposed Ciba Geigy settlement. On Dec. 5, 2022, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection proposed a settlement with BASF Corporation to resolve claims regarding natural resources injured by the discharge of hazardous substances, contaminants, or other pollutants at the Ciba-Geigy Superfund Site in Toms River. Even though the settlement calls to preserve 1,000 acres, the NJ Chapter has major concerns with the future cleanup of the site, the lack of public participation in the process, and the lack of accountability for BASF.
Jackie Greger, Communications Outreach Coordinator for the Sierra Club, New Jersey Chapter, and lifetime resident on Toms River, released the following statement:
“I have lived in Toms River my entire life. My family has lived here for generations, and several family members including my grandfather and 3 uncles worked at the Ciba Geigy Chemical plant and felt its impacts years later through severe health impacts such as brain cancer. One of my uncle’s would commonly say when asked, it was because he worked in what was referred to as “the bad building.” This should never have happened.
I grew up attending Manchester Township Schools, where my Environmental Science class went out to the Superfund Site to monitor the deer population. When students asked any questions relating to the history and current status of the site, our questions were avoided. In fact, we were told not to ask. This never should have happened either.
The proposed settlement has several elements, such as the park and nature center, that seem promising; however, we cannot greenwash the history of an environmental and public health disaster of national and historical significance. The NJDEP should ensure that the narrative at such a nature center does not misrepresent the history of the site and community impacted, and the science of the superfund site’s remediation should be explained as a lesson in environmental health for future generations to come. The story told at the nature center should reflect the full truth in order to best honor the affected families.
Also, there should be an opportunity for community input along every step of the way involving the superfund site. The NJDEP and BASF must provide transparency as to the current status of the site; is it truly safe enough for our children to play on? Since remediation efforts began, the size of the toxic plume of contaminated groundwater has decreased but has not been fully resolved, despite claims otherwise. A risk assessment for the site should be updated, looking at realistic exposure scenarios if it is going to be used as recreational, and there should be opportunity for public input. This information should be made easily accessible to ensure all voices are included.
There was a total lack of transparency and inclusion of the public when it came to this settlement, and although we have the opportunity to speak tonight, it only came after demanding it. However, the latest 5 year EPA review on the site was published in late February, but the new settlement deadline for comments is in April - the residents of Toms River should have ample time to review the most recent science and status of the report before the comment period closes, and the NJDEP should further extend the deadline to June at minimum to ensure time to fully review the report.
Additionally, BASF is only on the hook at this site for 10 years yet the scars upon our landscape and community have spanned generations; BASF should be accountable for at least 100 years in order for regeneration to occur and to ensure due process is taken throughout restoration efforts. Climate resilience should also be factored into the long-term planning for the site to make sure that this landscape and natural resource not only recovers from past scars but is able to withstand future ecological changes as well.”
###