Enviros want NJ Gov. to shake up Pinelands Commission


T
om Johnson reports for NJ Spotlight:

Many members of the body charged with protecting the million-acre preserve in South Jersey are holdovers from Christie administration

Jaclyn Rhoda

Jaclyn Rhoads, assistant executive director of the Pinelands Preservation Alliance, calls on governor to “fix and depoliticize” Pinelands Commission.
Top environmental organizations in the state yesterday pressed Gov. Phil Murphy to overhaul the Pinelands Commission, an agency they say fell short in protecting the preserve the past eight years.
The groups, in a rare show of solidarity, called on the governor to recast the commission, where many holdovers from the administration of former Gov. Chris Christie, all serving expired terms, remain in place 10 months after Murphy took office.
The 1-million-acre preserve, the largest intact coastal ecosystem between New Hampshire and Virginia, is widely viewed as a national treasure by conservationists. Home to rare plants and species found nowhere else, trillions of gallons of pristine water lie underneath the Pinelands.

Its future, however, has come under scrutiny as decisions have undermined protections to preserve the forests and habitat there, environmentalists say. Critics, including four former governors, have railed about proposed gas pipelines through core preservation areas.
“Inherently, the Pinelands are New Jersey’s wilderness,’’ said Alison Mitchell, policy director of the New Jersey Conservation Foundation. “They are still a wild place.’’

Whittling away at preserve

pinelands
Recent decisions by the commission are not only whittling away at the edges of the Pinelands, but also at its core, according to Mitchell.

“We call on Gov. Murphy to fix and depoliticize the Pinelands Commission now,’’ said Jaclyn Rhoads, assistant executive director of the Pinelands Preservation Alliance. “Swift action is crucial; as long as the current leadership continues, we will see further poor decision making, assaults on rational, open processes, and violations of the Comprehensive Management Plan.’’ (The plan details where and what developments are suitable for the Pinelands.)
The governor appoints seven of the 15 members on the commission; seven others are named by county freeholders from within the Pinelands region. One is a federal appointment by the U.S. Secretary of the Interior.
Murphy has yet to make any Pinelands Commission appointments. Some of the holdover gubernatorial appointments are backed by environmentalists, although a few are looking to get off the commission after serving many years.
Rhoads said the groups have submitted names to the governor’s office, suggesting potential nominees. Murphy responded to the recommendations, saying his team is working on the issue, according to Rhoads.
The governor’s office did not respond to multiple emails requesting comment.
His lack of action on the Pinelands contrasts with other appointments Murphy has made on the New Jersey Highlands Council, where he replaced the executive director with a choice applauded by environmentalists.

Enviros want NJ Gov. to shake up Pinelands Commission Read More »

PFAS Task Force looks for ‘concrete’ actions in Pa.

Chris Ullery reports for the Bucks Courier Times:

The congressional task force, convened earlier this year by U.S. Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, R-8, of Middletown, consists of approximately a dozen people representing communities that have had their drinking water contaminated by toxic perfluorinated compounds, also known as PFAS, in recent years
The newly organized PFAS Task Force met for the first time in Newtown Township on Friday to discuss initial steps to advance remediation efforts stalled by bureaucratic gridlock between the Navy and Air National Guard.
The congressional task force, convened earlier this year by U.S. Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, R-8, of Middletown, consists of approximately a dozen people representing communities that have had their drinking water contaminated by toxic perfluorinated compounds, also known as PFAS, in recent years.
Local officials from Warminster, Horsham, East Rockhill and West Rockhill attended Friday’s meeting, including Tim Hagey, manager of the Warminster Municipal Authority, and East Rockhill Supervisor Chairman Gary Volovnik.
State Rep. Todd Stephens, R-151, of Horsham, and staff from the offices of state Reps. Kathy Watson, R-144, of Warrington, and Bernie O’Neill, R-29, of Warminster, also were in attendance Friday.
The contamination has been linked to the use of firefighting foam at former military installations in and around Horsham, Warminster, and Warrington, where contamination levels are at some of the highest concentrations in the country.

Friday’s meeting was primarily an opportunity for Fitzpatrick and his staff to speak directly to local representatives, but the congressman said multiple times the ultimate goal of the task force is “concrete” legislative solutions.

A common frustration brought up by nearly everyone at Friday’s meeting is the slow remediation process, which Fitzpatrick, Hagey, Stephens, and others referred to as “finger-pointing” between the Navy and Air National Guard.
Remediation efforts for residents whose water supply is above an Environmental Protection Agency health advisory level for PFAS of 70 parts per trillion seems to be a more straightforward process than for those under that level.
Hagey said Friday residents don’t feel safe drinking water with any detectable PFAS contamination, but can’t get federal government assistance because they are under the advisory level. The township has made a commitment to remove PFAS from its water supply to nondetectable levels. 
“70 (ppt) is their magic number, and anything below that they will not pay for,” Hagey said.

PFAS Task Force looks for ‘concrete’ actions in Pa. Read More »

NJ bill would let mayors pull the plug on some utilities

Two New Jersey legislators from Bergen County say towns should be able to pull the plug on utilities that fail to provide safe and adequate service.

An Assembly panel voted 8 to 0 today to advance a bill sponsored by Assemblymen Christopher DePhillips and Kevin J. Rooney, permitting municipalities to switch providers.

Several nor’easters earlier this year left hundreds of thousands of Orange and Rockland and JCP&L customers in North Jersey without power, some for weeks. Local officials and residents were furious with the utilities’ lack of preparation and communication.

“There’s no excuse for chronic incompetence,” said DePhillips (R-Bergen). “Keeping the lights on isn’t rocket science. People should be confident they’ll have heat or AC regardless of the weather. We’re putting utilities on notice. Mayors will be able to look elsewhere for more responsive, efficient service.”

“This bill will inject much-needed competition into the utility industry,” continued DePhillips. “Towns should not be stuck with the same utility forever against their will.”

The measure (A3736) allows towns to revoke a utility’s franchise for poor service, limits franchise contracts to seven years, and increases penalties from $100 up to $25,000 per day for violating BPU rules and regulations.

“The poor dissemination of accurate information was and continues to be unacceptable during power outages,” said Rooney (R-Bergen). “Elected officials and their customers rely on accurate information, when not given there’s a perception that their power utility is an uncaring corporation, interested in profit rather than in customers.”

Orange and Rockland has 300,000 electric customers in northern New Jersey and New York. JCP&L serves 1.1 million customers Burlington, Essex, Hunterdon, Mercer, Middlesex, Monmouth, Morris, Ocean, Passaic, Somerset, Sussex, Union and Warren counties.


Like this? Click to receive free updates


NJ bill would let mayors pull the plug on some utilities Read More »

Many support big tax credit bill for historic rehabilitation

Credit: Woodblaster.com
Homeowners and developers would be eligible for the incentive that could be worth up to 25 percent of the cost of a qualified project
John Reitmeyer reports for NJ Spotlight:
A new tax credit for the rehabilitation of historic properties that state lawmakers have been trying to establish in New Jersey for nearly a decade is a step closer to becoming a reality.
A proposed historic-preservation tax incentive for both homeowners and developers was approved on a bipartisan basis by members of a key state Senate panel yesterday.
A tax credit for the rehabilitation of historic properties has the strong backing of Gov. Phil Murphy, who highlighted the role that the revival of such properties, particularly in urban communities, could play in a broader reinvention of the state economy during a recent economic-development policy speech. The proposed tax break also has full backing from the state’s historic preservation community.
“Nationally, there are many examples where the renovation of an eyesore has become a catalyst for new redevelopment,” said Katherine Ng, a trustee for the New Jersey Historic Trust.
Under the version of the bill that was approved unanimously yesterday by the Senate State Government, Wagering and Historic Preservation Committee, the historic-rehabilitation tax credit could be worth up to 25 percent of the cost of a qualified project. The bill lists several criteria for a property to be eligible for the tax credit, including those “individually listed, or located in” the National Register of Historic Places or the New Jersey Register of Historic Places.

$25,000 over ten years for residents

But also permitted to qualify for the tax incentives would be those “individually identified or registered, or located in a district composed of properties identified or registered, for protection as significant historic resources in accordance with criteria established by a municipality.” The bill goes on to say any properties “located within a district, certified by the (historic preservation) officer as contributing to the historic significance of the district” would also qualify.

Many support big tax credit bill for historic rehabilitation Read More »

The mayor’s plan to save Boston from rising seas

Boston on the water

Philip Marcelo reports for the Associated Press:

BOSTON (AP) — Boston Mayor Marty Walsh unveiled a plan Wednesday to transform the city’s waterfront to protect the low-lying, extensively landfilled city from climate change and rising sea levels.
The Democratic mayor’s “Resilient Boston Harbor” plan calls for the creation of 67 acres (27 hectares) of new open space and the restoration of 122 acres (49 hectares) of tidal areas and parklands to serve as natural buffers during major floods.
The plan also proposes elevating flood-prone areas along the city’s 47-miles (75-kilometers) of shoreline, such as Main Street in historic Charlestown and downtown’s popular Harborwalk.
Walsh said the potential damage from rising sea levels would far outweigh the cost of the proposed investments, which The Boston Globe reports could approach $1 billion over the next decades.
A 2016 city report projected sea levels around Boston could rise 36 inches (91 centimeters) by 2070, affecting some 90,000 residents, 12,000 buildings and potentially causing more than $14 billion in economic losses.Like this?
Walsh urged the local business community to step up as he unveiled the plan at a Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce meeting.
“Wherever you are in Boston, the ability of your employees to get to work and the ability of your suppliers to make deliveries are at risk,” Walsh said in his prepared remarks.
Local environmental group the Charles River Watershed Association said Walsh’s proposal was “commendable” but that other steps need to be considered, such as more stringent requirements on developers to design their buildings with climate change and rising seas in mind.
The Trustees of Reservations, another local conservation group, applauded the mayor’s promise to devote 10 percent of the city’s annual capital budget to climate change projects.

The mayor’s plan to save Boston from rising seas Read More »

Role of landfills is key as NJ considers food-waste recycling

Between an overdue reduction plan and a unique proposed diversion mandate, the state is on a different path than many of its Northeast neighbors


Cole Rosengren reports for Waste Dive:

Interest around tackling food waste is on the rise in New Jersey, more so than it has been in years, yet the state’s path toward progress is still uncertain.
Inspired by ongoing action throughout the Northeast, and intrigued by the environmental and economic opportunities, many see a chance to make meaningful progress. Yet a state plan on how to potentially do this is months overdue, and legislation that would establish a commercial diversion mandate still hasn’t passed after years of attempts.

In the meantime, options for managing any material that can’t be prevented or recovered for rescue upstream are limited. A 2006 BioCycle article once described New Jersey as a state that “seemed poised for a revolution in food residuals recycling,” but that transition never came to pass and the list of failed projects is long. Today, the state only has one commercial composting operation, Ag Choice, operating at full scale. 


As is often the case with waste, the issues at hand are locally unique, though they’re also emblematic of two core questions currently running through the national food waste dialogue. Can the issue be solved by focusing primarily on upstream reduction alone? And, if it can’t, are landfills with gas capture systems an appropriate final destination for organic material, as many of the industry’s largest companies often claim?

 

Credit: Gage Skidmore

Planning to have a plan

The overarching force behind this current moment is a law signed by former Gov. Chris Christie in July 2017 that sets a state target of 50% food waste reduction by 2030, effectively aligning New Jersey with existing U.N. and U.S. goals. The Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) was directed to work with the Department of Agriculture to “develop and commence implementation of a plan” within one year. This plan must also include “at least three public hearings during the development of the plan to seek public input thereon.”
To date, the DEP still hasn’t released a plan or held a meeting. In September, the agency told Waste Dive its plan was going through final approval, with public meetings to come soon after, and offered an overview of what to expect.
“It’s focusing on source reduction, raising awareness, elevating the issue of food waste among the public. That’s sort of how we look at this bill and this plan,” said Fredrik Khayati, an environmental specialist in DEP’s solid waste division. “It doesn’t give us a mandate to do anything really.”
Khayati cited the EPA, Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), ReFED and other state governments as inspirations, and described this initial draft as a combination of those best practices.
“We don’t want to reinvent the wheel. So if someone’s already doing something good we can help them promote it.”
The agency does hope to play a role in establishing better baseline data for how much food is getting disposed of in the state each year — the latest estimate was 1.37 million tons as of 2010 — but currently doesn’t have any intention of making policy recommendations beyond those upstream solutions.
Downstream solutions, such as composting or anaerobic digestion, will not formally be part of the plan, and that hasn’t sat well with a local branch of the U.S. Composting Council formed in August.
“The NJ Composting Committee is very interested in the planning process that’s going on right now. We think that it’s a great opportunity to address organics recycling and composting, and a lot of the hurdles,” said Matthew Karmel, a committee member and environmental attorney with Riker Danzig. “We’re concerned and we want to make sure that it’s done appropriately.”
Yet the track record of site challenges — and a unique county-driven system — has made any discussions about downstream processing extra sensitive. Besides, the DEP is waiting to see what happens with a quietly controversial bill that has been working its way through the state Senate off and on for years.

A question of compliance

First introduced in 2015 by state Sen. Bob Smith, this bill is currently on its third iteration as S1206. Smith is known for his environmental record — including the bill that set the state’s 2030 goal — and the language largely follows commercial organics diversion mandates in other Northeast states.
Starting in 2020, any business or institution generating two tons or more of food waste per week would be required to source separate that material and send it to an authorized recycling facility. That would expand to generators of one ton per week by 2023. Compliance would only be required if an available facility was located within 25 road miles. Plus, waivers could be requested from the DEP if costs exceeded 10% more than traditional disposal fees and transportation. On-site processing would also be allowed.
Yet the key difference is a line that would also allow the material to go to a “sanitary landfill facility that delivers the landfill gas to a gas-to-energy facility as fuel for the generation of electricity.” Sources indicate there has been some discussion about potentially phasing out this language as new infrastructure comes online, but its status remains unclear.
No formal action has been taken since the bill passed out of committee in February and a fiscal estimate was released in June. Multiple attempts to coordinate an interview with Smith’s office were unsuccessful.
A review of comments submitted to the Senate environment committee over this bill, and its predecessor S771, provide a more detailed look at where the complexity lies. Since 14 of New Jersey’s 21 counties have some form of flow control in place, and many own their own landfills, they aren’t happy with the prospect of losing that tonnage. Their concern influenced multiple amendments to create the bill in its current form.
The New Jersey Association of Counties, which is credited with helping to organize this opposition, did not respond to a request for comment. Earlier this year, one county official helped clarify the position.
“We’re not against food waste recycling,” said Gary Conover, solid waste director for the Atlantic County Utilities Authority (ACUA), in an April interview. Instead, Conover said the main issue was that many counties have invested big money in their gas capture systems and don’t want to see that jeopardized. “If you start diverting organics, mandating it from certain facilities, it has the potential down the road to affect the gas curve.”
Conover said he personally preferred a system that would allow counties to opt in or out. When asked whether ACUA could potentially profit from constructing its own organics processing facility, he said it wouldn’t be that simple under the proposed mandate because flow control isn’t expected to apply. For example, local material from Atlantic City could just as easily go to an ACUA facility or another one across the county line. Plus, capital costs and siting are viewed as additional barriers.
“It might be the right thing to do, but there’s economic impacts and consequences,” said Conover.
Yet the addition of this landfill-friendly language has attracted opposition from other corners. As written, S1206 would make waste-to-energy facilities among the few places not considered a compliant destination. Covanta, which operates multiple facilities in the state, submitted joint comments with two organics processing companies last year asking for the landfill exemption to be removed — among other recommendations.
“As written, the legislation favors landfills over WTE and runs counter to the waste hierarchy of the U.S. EPA. We are hopeful that the legislature will amend the bill to at a minimum treat WTE the same as landfills,” wrote James Regan, Covanta’s director of corporate communications, via an email that also referred to research showing WTE may create fewer greenhouse gas emissions than landfills with gas capture systems.
The Association of New Jersey Recyclers, which has been working on this legislation for years, is still in discussions about the landfill exemption but remains hopeful that the bill can help kickstart new investment in processing infrastructure.
“We knew it wouldn’t be perfect, but it’s a first step,” said Executive Director Marie Kruzan.
In a sign of potential missed opportunity, Kruzan said some grocery stores are already separating their material to facilities in other states such as Pennsylvania. Some schools such as Princeton University also have their own on-site capabilities. Though New Jersey still has many generators that aren’t currently doing anything with their material, and this would be a way to start changing that.
“This bill will help everything,” said Kruzan. “This is a jump start.”

 

Curing a finished product

While discussions seem to have been dragging on for years, those involved do see promising signs. On the infrastructure side, Waste Management now has a CORe pre-processing facility in Rahway and the start-up Industrial/Organic is also operating Newark. Plus, media interest has picked up over the summer with multiple stories and the DEP plan, regardless of what’s in it, will generate further attention.
If the right factors can align, one estimate has indicated the state could handle as many as 10 anaerobic digesters with individual capacity for 100 tons per day. Though Karmel, the attorney, described the current permitting process as cumbersome and restrictive and said more will need to be done to help this local industry grow even if S1206 does pass.

Role of landfills is key as NJ considers food-waste recycling Read More »