EnviroPolitics Blog

NJ’s DEP needs radical change–yes or no?

A transition team deputized by New Jersey’s new governor to review operations at the state’s Department of Environmental Protection has produced a report with recommendations that have businesses shouting ‘Yes indeed’ and at least one environmental group muttering ‘Oh, no you don’t.’

The first two sentences in the report’s opening paragraph signals that this is not your typical bureaucratic exercise.

” When the Department of Environmental Protection Transition Subcommittee began its intensive investigation five weeks ago into how the Department operates, based on our collective experiences we were skeptical if it could possibly be reinvented and survive. The Department has created cumbersome, confusing and often conflicting regulations that in some cases go beyond legislative intent, and in other, have no enabling legislation at all.”

In an overview section addressing DEP performance, the report unsparingly notes:

” … there is a widely held view that DEP’s mismanagement and ineffectual leadership both compromises the Department’s ability to protect the environment and hinders economic growth. This stems from a variety of factors including the failure to adhere to the Rule of Law, the misuse of science, the lack of real economic impact analysis, and the lack of transparency in the rulemaking process.”

The 21-page document goes on to make specific recommendations under the general categories of : Leadership and Management; Regulatory Reform; Land Use Management; Site Remediation and Natural Resource Stewardship.

Some of the recommendations include:

* Eliminate the Office of Policy Planning and Science
* Establish an advisory panel of external experts
* Reinstate the Alternative Dispute Resolution program
* Review all existing guidance documents
* Create a business/project ombudsman in Governor’s Office
* Allow for expanded use of Permits-By-Rule
* Establish electronic permitting
* Create a single Land Use Permit
* Eliminate duplicative reviews
* Suspend use of Landscape Project for species habits
* Revise Public Access rules
* Rescind Administrative Orders for 300-foot stream buffers

The Sierra Club responded with swift condemnation, calling the report “an outright attack on environmental protections and regulations ” and declaring that the document was written, “for the most part” (another environmental organization participated on the subcommittee) “by special interests for special interests.”

The recommendations are just that, recommendations, but they’ll no doubt play a big role in the questions that Bob Martin, the governor’s pick to lead the DEP, will encounter when his nomination is considered in the state Legislature.Have you read the report? What do you think?

Use the comment box below to share your views. If you don’t see one, click on the tiny ‘comment’ link.

Related environmental news:

Transition team’s harsh words about environmental department
NJDEP under fire in Christie Administration report

Transition team calls Highlands Council ‘a disaster’

Christie may ‘rethink’ Highlands Act

Our most recent posts:
Enviro-Events in NJ & PA – February 2010
Recycled tires: Where the rubber is the road
Could a revised State Plan save NJ money?
EPA setting new Nitrogen Dioxide air limit
Bad news for PSE&G power line foes in NJ
Environmental Events in NJ and PA

Like this post? You’ll love our daily newsletter,
EnviroPolitics Try it free for 30 days

NJ’s DEP needs radical change–yes or no? Read More »

Enviro-Events in NJ & PA – February 2010

Lots of environmental business meetings, seminars, forums and nature events on
our February Enviro-Events Calendar

February Events
Feb 3 – Environmental Business Council Roundtable
Feb 4 – The Environmental Business Council of CIANJ
Feb 8-12 – AESP 20th National Conference & Expo

Feb – LEED Core Concepts & Strategies
Feb 12 –IMAGINE a Sustainable World

Feb 13 –Survival: Gimme Shelter

Feb 18 – Penn State Marcellus Shale Webinar
Feb 18 – Crisis in New Jersey’s Forests
Feb 20 – Holding on to Nature: The Art of Natural Specimens
Feb 23 – Transitioning to Green – A Forum
Feb 23-25 – Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo
Feb 23 – Developing in New Jersey’s Urban Centers
Feb 26 – NJ Future’s Fifth Annual Redevelopment Forum
Feb 27 – Winter Wilderness Survival

Feb 27 – New Jersey Bicycle Summit
Feb 27 – Animal Tracking – The Basics

Get full details on all events at Enviro-Events Calendar

Don’t miss new events.
Get free email alerts.
Just send a blank email to:
enviro-calendar@aweber.com

Add your own event for free.
Send your information to: Editor@EnviroPolitics.com
——————————————————-
Like this post? You’ll love our daily newsletter, EnviroPolitics
Try it now, without cost or obligation for 30 full days

Enviro-Events in NJ & PA – February 2010 Read More »

Recycled tires: Where the rubber is the road

These days, the chances are your car’s not only driving on rubber tires but over them as well.

Some 18 million vehicle tires are now being recycled in American each year for use as A-R (Asphalt Rubber) in road paving applications.

Proponents of using old automobile tires to make A-R claim that the practice is better than landfilling, and cleaner than burning the tires as a fuel. Roads resurfaced with A-R also are noticeably quieter to drive over.

In its February issue, American Recycler contains an interesting report on rubberized roads which cites the New Jersey Department of Transportation’s (NJDOT) experiences with the material.

“A few years ago, we did a project that was a 7-mile section on Interstate 95 near our Ewing offices. We received dozens calls from drivers asking what is that stuff? It’s great, the noise is less. People driving on it can tell the difference over regular asphalt and they say, ‘Wow! What a big difference.’ It’s very unusual for us to get that kind of positive public reaction,” said Eileen Sheehy, manager of New Jersey’s DOT Bureau of Materials.

“With rubberized asphalt, we were getting about a three decibel reduction in noise over conventional asphalt, but over concrete you may get up to a ten decibel reduction. And, that’s really significant,” said Sheehy. According to NJDOT, tires on concrete pavement generate between 100 and 110 decibels of sound, depending on the age and surface texture. On conventional asphalt the noise is in the high 90s to low 100s. Rubberized open-graded friction courses are in the 95 to 97 decibel range. “What we are really trying to do is cut the noise at the source,” said Sheehy.

The article notes that New Jersey has completed most of the sound walls and barriers mandated by federal requirements to mitigate noise pollution. Sound walls and other types of barriers are expensive, costing between $200 to $400 dollars per linear foot. In many urban areas there is not enough space to build them.

“Now we are dealing with what we consider nuisance noise – noise not high enough for mandated sound barriers, but nevertheless bothersome to residents. That’s why we put rubberized asphalt on Route 280, because of noise complaints. It’s also useful in areas where it’s very hilly, because we can’t always build sound barriers tall enough,” Sheehy said.

Our most recent posts:

Could a revised State Plan save NJ money?

EPA setting new Nitrogen Dioxide air limit

Bad news for PSE&G power line foes in NJ

Environmental Events in NJ and PA

TV’s spooky spotlight on environmental engineers

———————————————————

Like this? You’ll love our daily newsletter, EnviroPolitics

Try EnviroPolitics free for 30 days

Recycled tires: Where the rubber is the road Read More »

Could a revised State Plan save NJ money?

As if Gov. Chris Christie’s new administration didn’t already have enough to deal with, along comes a revision to the State Plan–some six years overdue at that.

But rather than shuffle it to the bottom of the “to do” pile, the governor’s staff might want to give the document careful study–and, perhaps, implementation.

Why? Because it could save the state and municipalities a ton of money, according to the planning advocacy organization
New Jersey Future.

The organization’s director, Jay Corbalis, says that a new Impact Assessment finds that, by following the State Plan, New Jersey would:

reduce water and sewer infrastructure costs by $500 million
save municipalities and school districts more than $100 million a year, and
save 60,000 acres of land that would otherwise be developed from 2008 to 2028

The plan requires Governor Christie’s approval, but Corbalis notes:

“one of the administration’s key transition teams has recommended strengthening the authority of the (State Planning) Commission, allowing it to update the State Plan in a manner that coordinates the capital investment priorities and regulatory regimes of state agencies.”

For more, check out NJ Future’s new blog post on the subject.

Our most recent posts:
EPA setting new Nitrogen Dioxide air limit
Bad news for PSE&G power line foes in NJ
Environmental Events in NJ and PA
TV’s spooky spotlight on environmental engineers
Inaugural address of NJ Gov. Christopher Christie

———————————————————
Like this? You’ll love our daily newsletter, EnviroPolitics
Try EnviroPolitics free for 30 days

Could a revised State Plan save NJ money? Read More »

EPA setting new Nitrogen Dioxide air limit

The agency says its proposed new one-hour standard–the first in 35 years–will protect millions of Americans from peak short-term exposures, which primarily occur near major roads. Short-term exposures to NO2 have been linked to impaired lung function and increased respiratory infections, especially in people with asthma. “This new one-hour standard is designed to protect the air we breathe and reduce health threats for millions of Americans. For the first time ever, we are working to prevent short-term exposures in high risk NO2 zones like urban communities and areas near roadways,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “Improving air quality is a top priority for this EPA. We’re moving into the clean, sustainable economy of the 21st century, defined by expanded innovation, stronger pollution standards, and healthier communities.”The agency set the new one-hour standard for NO2 at a level of 100 parts per billion (ppb). EPA also is retaining the existing annual average standard of 53 ppb. NO2 is formed from vehicle, power plant, and other industrial emissions, and contributes to the formation of fine particle pollution and smog. EPA is establishing new monitoring requirements in urban areas that will measure NO2 levels around major roads and across the community. Monitors must be located near roadways in cities with at least 500,000 residents. Larger cities and areas with major roadways will have additional monitors. Community-wide monitoring will continue in cities with at least 1 million residents. Working with the states, EPA will site at least 40 monitors in locations to help protect communities that are susceptible and vulnerable to elevated levels of NO2. EPA expects to identify or designate areas not meeting the new standard, based on the existing community-wide monitoring network, by January 2012. New monitors must begin operating no later than Jan. 1, 2013. When three years of air quality data are available from the new monitoring network, EPA intends to redesignate areas as appropriate.
More about Nitrogen Dioxide

Our most recent posts:
Bad news for PSE&G power line foes in NJ
Environmental Events in NJ and PA
TV’s spooky spotlight on environmental engineers
Inaugural address of NJ Gov. Christopher Christie
Note to NJ-DEP commissioner nominee–buckle up!
———————————————————
Like this post? You’ll love our daily newsletter, EnviroPolitics

Try EnviroPolitics free for 30 days

EPA setting new Nitrogen Dioxide air limit Read More »

Bad news for PSE&G power line foes in NJ

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie’s transition team has released a report backing a major Public Service Electric & Gas Co. power line project through Northwest Jersey, The Daily Record reports today.

The newspaper said that the 19-page report calls for “more robust transmission network across the Delaware River and within New Jersey,” claiming it is necessary to “eliminate constraints that prevent New Jersey residents and businesses from buying cheaper power.”

PSEG’s plan for the 45-mile, $750 million high-voltage Susquehanna-Roseland power line is currently being reviewed by the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities which recently postponed its decision in order to obtain more information about the reasons for the termination of a similar power line proposal in Virginia.

PSEG is seeking to erect new, higher towers to carry more voltage along an existing tower route through Warren, Sussex, Morris and Essex counties.

A number of residents along the proposed route say they fear potential negative health effects and also believe the line will depress property values.

Environmentalists argue that the line would would damage natural areas and that the energy it’s designed to carry would be generated in coal-burning power plants. They also claim that much of the power would go to places outside of New Jersey.

Try EnviroPolitics free for 30 days

Bad news for PSE&G power line foes in NJ Read More »