Politics & Government
Assemblyman Herb Conaway Expresses Concern About Regulations During Moorestown Water Meeting
Conaway, who proposed legislation to regulate TCP 1,2,3 in 2014, attended the group's meeting Wednesday night.

Moorestown, NJ -- State Assemblyman Herb Conaway (D-7) is concerned about the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection’s ability to regulate local water authorities after attending a meeting of the Moorestown Water Group this week.
He said he believes the regulatory authority needs more teeth over local water companies. He also said he would look into the issue more in the coming days.
Conaway is not a complete stranger to Moorestown's water issues.
Find out what's happening in Moorestownfor free with the latest updates from Patch.
In 2014, Conaway and Troy Singleton proposed legislation that would establish safe maximum contaminant levels of Trichloropropane (TCP 1, 2, 3)
This came after residents began to express concern over levels of an unregulated contaminant that was reported in the township’s drinking water in its 2013 Water Quality Report.
Find out what's happening in Moorestownfor free with the latest updates from Patch.
In fact, he and Singleton announced their intention to introduce the legislation at press conference in Moorestown.
That bill was approved by both the State Assembly and the Senate, but vetoed by Gov. Chris Christie.
Conaway attended the Moorestown Water Group's meeting as a member of the audience on Wednesday night, and provided some of his thoughts.
He suggested that when speaking about the issue, anyone who is concerned should present not just the possible dangers, but also the proposed costs of fixing the problem.
He said the cost shouldn’t be overlooked because it can play a factor in how the issue is handled, particularly when it comes to the impact on taxes.
He said he would investigate the issue further and see what actions he could take in his role as an Assemblyman.
TCP 1, 2, 3 is a completely man made element that has no official federal regulations.
In October of 2014, just before Conaway and Singleton introduced the proposed legislation, residents began to express their concerns.
In the wake of this concern and a recommendation from the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP), the township shut down two of its wells at the North Church Street water treatment plant, where the contaminant was detected.
Last summer, one of those wells (Well 7) was reopened and subjected to testing after samples taken in June showed there was no TCP 1,2,3 in the water.
The NJDEP never rescinded its recommendation, but the township did notify it that the well would be reopened.
The other well (Well 9) was subject to testing for the next two years. The pilot testing for that well was completed in December, officials said Wednesday night.
A group of concerned citizens has been pushing the issue, and formed the Moorestown Water Group last year.
This group includes Kati Angelini, who filed her petition to run in the Nov. 8 general elections for Moorestown Council as a Democrat.
The group began attending council meetings, including a special meeting in which the township announced a temporary plan to remove TCP 1,2,3 and Trichlorethylene (TCE) while a permanent fix is found.
It also hosts its own meetings periodically at the Moorestown Friends Meetinghouse. As of Thursday afternoon, the group’s Facebook page had over 500 followers.
Well 7 has been closed once again, and will remain closed until the temporary solution, which consists of installing carbon tanks at the North Church Street Water Treatment Plant, is put in place.
The temporary solution doesn’t address the presence of radiological elements that have been identified in the water supply, but the permanent solution does.
However, the Moorestown Water Group is concerned that the township will delay implementation of its permanent solution, and expressed that concern during group’s most recent meeting, Wednesday night.
They suggested residents attend Monday night's meeting and let the township know it doesn't want the well reopened until the water is completely clean.
What is your opinion? Would you pay higher taxes to ensure a higher quality of drinking water? Do you think regulations need to be tightened? Let us know in the comments section.
Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.