NJ Assemblyman sues to stop proposed state buildings

There’s a lawsuit to block a new government office building that’s about to go up in Trenton. Opponents don’t like the design or location. But what they really don’t like is the financing: $215 million in new debt from a bond issue pushed through without voter approval. One of the plaintiffs, Assemblyman Reed Gusciora, joins NJTV News Senior Correspondent David Cruz.

Like this? Use form in upper right to receive free updates
See popular posts from the last 30 days in right column —
>>




NJ Assemblyman sues to stop proposed state buildings Read More »

Lancaster, Pa. agrees to curb sewage discharges to river



News release from the Environmental Protection Agency:

PHILADELPHIA (December 20, 2017) The city of Lancaster, Pennsylvania has agreed to comprehensive measures to end discharges of untreated sewage and other pollutants to local waterways from the City’s combined storm and sewage system, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Department of Justice and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) announced today. 

The settlement, which was filed in federal district court in Philadelphia resolves a simultaneously filed complaint brought by the Department of Justice on behalf of the EPA and PADEP, alleging the discharge of untreated sewage into the Conestoga River in violation of the Clean Water Act.

Under the settlement, the City of Lancaster has agreed to implement measures to significantly reduce combined sewer overflows, or CSOs.  These include improving pump stations and reduction of flow through a comprehensive long-term plan to improve the ability of the entire system to handle flow.

“We are proud of the close collaboration between EPA and PADEP over the course of these investigations and negotiations,” said EPA Regional Administrator Cosmo Servidio.  “This settlement, which will improve local water quality and protect human health, was achieved in large part because of the strong cooperation between our two agencies.”

“This outcome is good for the people of Lancaster and everyone that uses the Conestoga River,” said DEP Secretary Patrick McDonnell. “Reducing sewer overflows makes our streams and rivers cleaner and better places for fish, wildlife, and people.”

The Clean Water Act complaint, filed with the proposed consent decree, alleged unlawful pollution discharges caused by numerous overflows of untreated wastewater from Lancaster’s combined sewer system.  This system carries rainwater runoff, domestic sewage, and industrial wastewater in the same sewer pipes to a wastewater treatment plant, where it is treated before discharge to a water body. 

During periods of heavy rainfall or snowmelt, the water volume exceeds the system’s capacity – causing combined sewer overflows.  The City has five CSO outfalls, which overflowed at least 392 times in the past five years, discharging nearly 3.8 billion gallons of untreated, polluted water into the Conestoga River, a tributary of the Susquehanna River and the Chesapeake Bay. These CSOs contain not only stormwater but also untreated human and industrial waste, toxic materials, and debris. 

The settlement between the Department of Justice and the city of Lancaster resulted from several years of investigation of alleged violations by EPA and PADEP, followed by extensive federal-state negotiations with city officials.

The city of Lancaster will pay a $135,000 civil penalty, split equally between the U.S. and Pennsylvania, and implement a $1.8 million supplemental environmental project.  This project involves the restoration of a 1,350-foot segment of a local waterway called Groff’s Run that will reconnect wetlands to the Conestoga River, protecting water quality and reducing localized flooding. 

For more information on CSOs, visit http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/home.cfm?program_id=5.
          
The consent decree is subject to a 30-day public comment period and court approval.  The consent decree is available for review at www.justice.gov/enrd/Consent_Decrees.html.

Like this? Use form in upper right to receive free updates
See popular posts from the last 30 days in right column —
>>

Lancaster, Pa. agrees to curb sewage discharges to river Read More »

As vote nears on PSEG nuke subsidy, opponents fume


Some foes accuse PSEG of jiggering subsidy to reach the $300M – $350M it wanted in first place

salem nuclear plant


Tom Johnson reports for
NJ Spotlight:
With a weekend to digest a bill to prop up New Jersey nuclear plants, foes were left fuming with many objections and one key question: how did advocates come up with the surcharge on customers’ bills?
The levy appears tiny ($0.004 per kilowatt hour), but has huge implications for ratepayers. It could provide anywhere from $300 million to $350 million a year to Public Service Enterprise Group, or at least $1.2 billion in subsidies over an initial four-year period.
“Was that number plucked out of thin air?’’ asked Ev Liebman, associate director of AARP of New Jersey. “We don’t know where that number comes from and there is no justification for it in the bill.’’
The legislation (S-3560), introduced late Thursday evening after a long year of intense lobbying by PSEG, is up for a vote in two legislative committees tomorrow. Unless it obtains financial help for its nuclear units in South Jersey, the company says it will shutter them.


Secret surcharge

The surcharge provision, tucked into a single paragraph in an eight-page bill, reflects a rare legislative intrusion into setting prices in a competitive energy market the state joined nearly two decades ago. Handing out subsidies to a big player in that market is a step that rankles rivals in the energy sector and the customers who will foot the bill.

Read the full story

Like this? Use form in upper right to receive free updates
See popular posts from the last 30 days in right column —
>>

As vote nears on PSEG nuke subsidy, opponents fume Read More »

Interactive map shows who recycles most in New Jersey

Colleen O’Dea reports for NJ Spotlight:

(Interactive map of recycling activity)

Thirty years after New Jersey became the first state in the nation to mandate recycling, it still has not reached the goal of throwing away no more than half the waste generated by residents and businesses.
In fact, after getting off to a good start, and achieving a 45 percent recycling rate in 1995, eight years into the new law, the percentage of recycled municipal solid waste began dropping. The rate bottomed out in 2003 at 33 percent of paper, glass, plastic, batteries, tires, motor oil, food waste, grass, leaves, and some other items generated by homes, schools, and businesses. After remaining low for years, the rate has begun creeping back up this decade, reaching a level of 43 percent in 2015, the most recent year for which data is available from the state Department of Environmental Protection.
Still, New Jersey’s recycling rate exceeds that of the nation as a whole — 41 percent of municipal waste recycled in the state in 2014, compared with 35 percent nationally that year (2015 U.S. data are not yet available).
Critics say Gov. Chris Christie’s nearly annual diversion of funds from the state’s Clean Energy Fund to plug holes in the budget is at least partly to blame for New Jersey’s inability to reach its 50 percent recycling goal.
“Christie is stealing the recycling money,” said Jeff Tittel, director of the New Jersey chapter of the Sierra Club. “That money could be used for education.”
The governor, with legislative approval, diverted $236 million from the fund — about 60 percent of its total — to subsidize other spending in last year’s budget. During Christie’s tenure, more than $1.5 billion has been diverted from the fund, which is financed by a surcharge on customers’ gas and electric bills.

Interactive map shows who recycles most in New Jersey Read More »

Electric vehicles see as key to eco-economic future in NJ


Lower energy costs just one potential benefit offered by EVs, according to experts at NJ Spotlight roundtable

miller and appleton

(On left:) Kevin George Miller, Chargepoint, and Jim Appleton, NJ Coalition of Automotive Retailers
Tom Johnson reports
for NJ Spotlight:


If the state taps an untapped opportunity in the electric vehicle market, New Jersey could reap significant economic and environmental benefits, including lower energy costs for everyone, according to a new analysis.
“The state has an awful lot to gain if we get this right,’’ said Pam Frank, CEO of ChargEVC, a coalition of car dealers, electric utilities, and manufacturers of charging stations. “The question is: ‘How the heck do we do this?’’’
The benefits, hurdles, and steps facing the state were debated Friday as experts from the energy sector discussed the ramifications of transforming the transportation sector by electrifying it at a NJ Spotlight roundtable in Hamilton. The issue, a top priority of the incoming administration of Gov.-elect Phil Murphy, should lead to cleaner air, lower energy costs, and a vastly changed energy market, panelists said.


EV analysis

According to an analysis, the emerging EV market in New Jersey could result in more than $2 billion in net economic benefits 2035, even when including the cost of installing the infrastructure and enhancing the electric power grid, according to Mark Warner, a vice president of Gabel Associates, which conducted the study.
“It changes the electric market in a really profound way,’’ Warner said of widespread adoption of plug-in vehicles. EVs are going to flatten out the energy load of the entire grid, largely because most people will charge their cars at night, when the demand drops dramatically. “When you change the load curve, you change the cost of energy,’’ he said.
“Everybody’s cost of power is going to come down because of the change of that load curve,’’ Warner said. “And it adds up to a lot.’’ The analysis is expected to be released to the public early in January.
During the discussion, there was little disagreement about the consensus argument made by many clean-energy advocates that plug-in vehicles are critical to the state’s efforts to reduce its carbon footprint. Transportation accounts for about 40 percent of the state’s greenhouse gas emissions.


Read the full story

Like this? Use form in upper right to receive free updates
See popular posts from the last 30 days in right column —
>>

Electric vehicles see as key to eco-economic future in NJ Read More »

Verified by MonsterInsights