House passes bill to prevent oil drilling in the Everglades

But not a single Republican voted for the larger spending bill of which the initiative was a part, making its passage in the Republican-controlled Senate uncertain.

House passes bill to prevent oil drilling in the Everglades
An airboat travels through the Everglades. (Susan Stocker / South Florida Sun-Sentinel )

By DAVID FLESHLER | SOUTH FLORIDA SUN-SENTINEL 

An initiative to thwart an oil drilling plan in the Everglades passed the U.S. House of Representatives Wednesday, putting a potential hurdle in front of a controversial project proposed for western Broward County.

But not a single Republican voted for the larger spending bill of which the initiative was a part, making its passage in the Republican-controlled Senate appear uncertain.

U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a Democrat whose district covers parts of Broward and Miami-Dade counties, proposed the initiative as an amendment to a spending bill for federal agencies involved in energy and water.

“We must do all we possibly can to protect our sensitive River of Grass,” Wasserman Schultz said in a statement Wednesday. “Drilling within the Everglades Protection Area is reckless, rapacious and symbolizes just how much those who advocate for the senseless pursuit of fossil fuels will risk, even if it destroys our most treasured ecosystems. It’s absurd it even has to be said, but we must fight any drilling in the Everglades.”

John Kanter, president of the company, declined comment.

The amendment would impose a one-year moratorium on the issuance of wetlands permits by the Army Corps of Engineers in the Broward portion of the Everglades. The moratorium would last from Oct. 1, 2019, to Sept. 30, 2020.

Kanter Real Estate LLC, which has won a series of court fights over its proposal for an exploratory well in western Broward County, needs a Corps permit to destroy wetlands on the site.

Read the full story

House passes bill to prevent oil drilling in the Everglades Read More »

‘I’m scared to death of what the Supreme Court might do’

A new case on the Supreme Court’s docket, Atlantic Richfield v. Christian, has experts on edge about potential consequences for environmental cleanups across the country.

Ellen M. Gilmer, E&E News reporter
Greenwire: Thursday, June 20, 2019

Anaconda Smelter. Photo credit: Butte Citizens’ Technical Environmental Committee
The Anaconda Smelter Stack and surrounding Superfund area in Montana. Butte Citizens’ Technical Environmental Committee

Justices last week agreed to review Atlantic Richfield v. Christian, a long-running dispute involving an old copper production area in Montana. The 300-square-mile Anaconda Co. Smelter site is one of the oldest and largest in the Superfund system.

Some 9,000 residents live within the Superfund site’s borders, many atop arsenic-laced soil and contaminated groundwater. With an EPA-approved cleanup process dragging on, dozens of landowners went to state court in 2008 to force smelter owner Atlantic Richfield Co. to do more for them.

State courts allowed the case to proceed, despite opposition from Atlantic Richfield, which then appealed the decision to the nation’s highest court.

Now the Supreme Court will determine whether the landowners can pursue a key legal claim that Atlantic Richfield must fund restoration work that goes beyond what EPA approved for the area (Greenwire, June 10).

The dispute is causing heartburn among Superfund experts, who caution the case could have unintended consequences.

“In a way, allowing these landowners to be able to question what EPA does here seems like a good environmental thing, but if we’re not careful, it could be open season on litigating EPA remedies in advance,” Lewis & Clark Law School professor Craig Johnston said.

“That certainly is not where we want to be at the end of the day.”

Atlantic Richfield and EPA likewise warn of legal chaos if the landowners prevail. They note that the federal Superfund law — the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, or CERCLA — was intended to give EPA the final say on remediation plans for contaminated sites.

“The [state court] decision also invites thousands more landowners across the State to sue to supplant EPA’s remedy or to implement remedial efforts themselves without EPA’s authorization,” lawyers for Atlantic Richfield told the Supreme Court.

“And the decision provides a road map for other states to bless similar theories of recovery that run roughshod over CERCLA’s calibrated scheme,” they said.

Read the full story

‘I’m scared to death of what the Supreme Court might do’ Read More »

Accusing the New York Times of ‘Treason,’ Trump Crosses a Line, says the Wall Street Journal

By A.G. Sulzberger, June 19, 2019, Wall Street Journal
6:59 pm ET

New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Trump, treason, freedom of the press, press freedom
President Trump speaks during a rally in Orlando, Fla., June 18. PHOTO: MANDEL NGAN/AFP/GETTY IMAGES

First it was “the failing New York Times.” Then “fake news.” Then “enemy of the people.” President Trump’s escalating attacks on the New York Times have paralleled his broader barrage on American media. He’s gone from misrepresenting our business, to assaulting our integrity, to demonizing our journalists with a phrase that’s been used by generations of demagogues.

Now the president has escalated his attacks even further, accusing the Times of a crime so grave it is punishable by death.

On Saturday, Mr. Trump said the Times had committed “a virtual act of treason.” The charge, levied on Twitter , was in response to an article about American cyber incursions into the Russian electrical grid that his own aides had assured our reporters raised no national-security concerns.

Few paid much attention. Many news organizations, including the Times, determined the accusation wasn’t even worth reporting, a sign of how inured we’ve grown to such rhetorical recklessness. But this new attack crosses a dangerous line in the president’s campaign against a free and independent press.

Treason is the only crime explicitly defined in the U.S. Constitution. The Founding Fathers knew the word’s history as a weapon wielded by tyrants to justify the persecution and execution of enemies. They made its definition immutable—Article III reads: “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort”—to ensure that it couldn’t be abused by politicians for self-serving attacks on rivals or critics. The crime is almost never prosecuted, but Mr. Trump has used the word dozens of times.

There is no more serious charge a commander in chief can make against an independent news organization. Which presents a troubling question: What would it look like for Mr. Trump to escalate his attacks on the press further? Having already reached for the most incendiary language available, what is left but putting his threats into action?

Read the full opinion piece

Accusing the New York Times of ‘Treason,’ Trump Crosses a Line, says the Wall Street Journal Read More »

Pa. mushroom farmer wonders why Trump’s immigration police are out to get him

Pa. mushroom farmer wonders why Trump’s immigration police are out to get him

Joseph N. DiStefano @PhillyJoeD | JoeD@inquirer.com

Pa. mushroom farmer wonders why Trump’s immigration police are out to get him
MICHAEL S. WIRTZ / STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER

During the week of June 24, the president tweeted recently, Immigration and Customs Enforcement “will begin the process of removing the millions of illegal aliens who have illicitly found their way into the United States.”

Three days before he made that promise, I drove uphill between the concrete and wood structures of a cluster of Chester County mushroom farms, pungent from composted manure and compressed sawdust, in an intensely farmed southern corner of the county, “America’s Mushroom Capital.”

It’s a place where workers are already scarce, foreigners take the hard jobs, and growers wonder why their government seems to be pushing them away from their family businesses of filling the produce aisles.

In one farm office, the manager showed me a new letter from the Department of Homeland Security, which runs ICE. The assistant special agent in charge wrote that ICE agents had stopped by recently to copy employment records. Over the next four weeks, they had checked those documents, and found that some of the workers “appear, at the present time, not to be authorized to work in the United States.”

Why? Some work documents appeared to “pertain to other individuals.” Others didn’t match official records, provide employment authorization, or had expired. For all those reasons and more, they failed to “satisfy the Form I-9 employment eligibility verification requirements of the INA,” the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952. As amended.

The letter listed the familiar Spanish names: Carlos, Jesus, Maria, Miguel. Gonzalez, Martinez, Zavala. In combinations and hyphenations. With hire dates, Social Security numbers, and the status of those numbers, marked “Invalid.” More than two dozen.

Unless they can come up with new, valid documents, “they are considered by [Homeland investigators] to be unauthorized to work in the United States.” If he keeps them on, the farmer may be subject to “civil penalties ranging from $548 to $4,384 per unauthorized alien for a first violation.” And more if ICE finds this has happened here before.

“This is a very serious matter that requires your immediate attention.”

Within 10 business days, the assistant special agent in charge concluded, the employer must either verify the workers’ status “or take other appropriate actions.” The penalties could include “civil” fines. Or worse: “Criminal charges may be brought against any person or entity that engages in a pattern or practice of knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized aliens.”

Most of the men and women on the list are already gone, the farm manager tells me. If the last seven from the list can’t find valid papers and also end up leaving the farm, some of their fully documented family members will go with them, reducing his workforce even more.

The owner had invited me so he could vent about the damage. The manager asked me not to name the farm. He says ICE people have been polite and professional. But why risk annoying the assistant special agent in charge?

The owner and the manager don’t want to lose these workers. They don’t know how they are going to replace them.

Read the full story

Pa. mushroom farmer wonders why Trump’s immigration police are out to get him Read More »

A big question: Who will get offshore wind energy to New Jersey customers?

As state BPU mulls three wind-farm projects, feds move to gauge industry interest in building a regional transmission system

Offshore wind
Photo credit Shaun Dakin/Unsplash

Tom Johnson reports for NJ Spotlight

The federal government wants to gauge the level of interest in developing a regional wind-power transmission system off the coasts of New Jersey and New York, a proposal kicked around in the past but never seriously pursued.

The U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management announced late Monday it will publish a “request for competitive interest’’ in building a transmission line after a company, Anbaric Development Partners, LLC, requested a right-of-way to build a 185-nautical mile submarine version of such a system offshore.

Like this? Click to receive free updates

The announcement comes as the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities is scheduled Friday to decide which of three developers, or a combination thereof, will build up to 1,100 megawatts — and possibly more — of wind farms off the Jersey coast.

The action by the state board is significant in that it would mark the first approval of any offshore-wind capacity in New Jersey, a top priority of the administration of Gov. Phil Murphy, which aims to develop 3,500 megawatts of offshore-wind energy by 2030. The BPU expects to award additional contracts of 1,200 megawatts of capacity in additional solicitations in 2020 and 2022.

The three developers vying to build offshore wind farms are: Ørsted North America, a Danish developer proposing a project 15 miles off of Atlantic City; EDF Renewables/Shell New Energies, a French company seeking to develop a wind farm about eight miles north of there; and Equinor, a Norwegian firm pushing to build wind turbines 20 miles off the coast of Monmouth County.

Interest in future of wind power grows

There is intense interest in the BPU’s decision for many reasons, including whether it signals a major step forward in the governor’s goal to establish New Jersey as the pioneering hub of an emerging offshore-wind sector as states along the eastern seaboard race to develop wind farms. Only one small project is currently operating off Block Island in Rhode Island.

In recent days, the anticipation over which projects will be selected has led to speculation among clean-energy advocates that the state may expand the solicitation beyond 1,100 megawatts — a move that would allow the agency to award projects to more than a single developer.

Read the full story

A big question: Who will get offshore wind energy to New Jersey customers? Read More »

Meadowlands dump that Trump once tried to make a golf course now seen as a future e-commerce mecca

The 718-acre site in the Meadowlands will be redeveloped into an e-commerce industrial park with six buildings.
The 718-acre site in the Meadowlands will be redeveloped into an e-commerce industrial park with six buildings.

By Allison Pries | NJ Advance Media for NJ.com

A big garbage dump in the Meadowlands is going to be developed into an e-commerce industrial park.

Companies, such as Amazon and other online retailers, use these specialized warehouses to move their goods out to the consumer. And strong internet sales are driving double-digit growth in this sector of the real estate market.

The 718-acre Kingsland Tract, a former landfill that stretches into Lyndhurst, Rutherford and North Arlington, was purchased for $42.5 million by Russo Development and Forsgate Industrial Partners.

The two buyers won a competitive bidding process in June 2015 to be able to buy the site. Their plan is to build Kingsland Meadowlands, a new logistics e-commerce development of up to six buildings totaling more than 3 million square feet of industrial space.

The property, which was owned by the New Jersey Sports and Exposition Authority, has been the subject of redevelopment for decades. It even had the attention of Donald Trump, who in November 2007 promised to build a world-class golf course there.

The property then was known as EnCap, and its redevelopment plan consisted of a mix of residences and the golf course. Trump stepped in to bail out EnCap after it became mired in financial troubles. But the project fell apart anyway in May 2008 when the NJSEA terminated its agreement with EnCap Golf Holdings because it missed clean-up targets.

Now, 11 years later, the site finally has another plan in place for redevelopment.

“Back when the EnCap project was proposed it was hard not to support a project that was transforming closed old landfills into golf courses with a resort style conference hotel,” said Jim Kirkos, president of the Meadowlands Chamber of Commerce.

“In order to make the economics of their investment work, the developer wanted to build a significant amount of residential housing which eventually was not approved because those units would be built on the landfills.”

“Fast forward to today where a very reputable partnership of developers…will build warehouse and logistics facilities on the Kingsland Property that are currently in very high demand for this region,” Kirkos said.

Russo and Forsgate are both already invested in the Meadowlands. Russo has completed more than 8 million square feet of industrial projects in the Meadowlands. And Forsgate owns and manages more than 3 million square feet of industrial buildings in the area.

Read the full story

Meadowlands dump that Trump once tried to make a golf course now seen as a future e-commerce mecca Read More »