But the DEP, which had no representative at the meeting disagreed. Later in the day, the agency said the site already was properly cleaned up and capped. "There's no problem at the site," said DEP spokesman Larry Ragonese, adding the agency "has nothing before us" to re-open that finding.

If the site were as contaminated as the developers say, they should bring in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to investigate and "maybe it should be added to the Superfund" chemical clean-up list, said Robert Spiegel, executive director of the Edison Wetlands Association.

He described the scope of the application as "overkill," paving the way for the material recycling facility to continue after its projected five-year life. During that time, Soil Safe projects it will bring in one to two million tons of soil, including some containing construction debris and petroleum-contaminated materials, to provide a new layer about eight-to10-feet high on that portion of the property.

In doing that, the company expects to wind up with soil concentrations of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons — commonly found in fossil fuels and some considered carcinogens — at levels 15 tons higher than the residential standard, said Debbie Mans of the New York/New Jersey Baykeeper. That is not necessarily a disqualification for an industrial site, but does raise questions about the effects on nearby areas, including the wildlife area.

"It's means the levels you're starting with are much higher," Mans said.

For that reason, environmental groups pressed for more details about how the company would process material on the site. But county solid waste planner Carol Tolmachewich advised the council that such matters are beyond its jurisdiction. She added that neither the county nor the borough are able to collect a host community fee from the facility, whose revenues were estimated at $50 million over the five years.

Wayne DeFeo, representing the Construction Materials Recycling Association, said the facility would be potentially big enough to recycle soil waste from throughout New Jersey and New York City. He complained the application lacks basic details about the relationship between the owners and operators and their future plans. But Tolmachewich said it met Middlesex County requirements.

The two sides sparred over conditions at Soil Safe's two South Jersey facilities, in Salem City and Logan Township. Six of seven violations have been for administrative matters, a record "actually better than anyone else in our industry," Roberts said.

But the environmental groups released DEP records showing small fines of the company for bringing in arsenic, cadmium and other hazardous materials, as well as exceeding permitted levels in the first three quarters of 2007, then failing to report an extra 148,528 tons dumped in the fourth quarter.

Joe Tyrrell may be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it or followed on Twitter @ jtyrrell87.