Search Results

Keyword: ‘mccabe’

Murphy DEP Commissioner McCabe Uses Industry Dominated Clean Air Council To Divert From Major DEP Failures to Regulate Air Pollution

July 29th, 2020 No comments

A Sickening Tale of Capture, Cooptation, and Diversion

WHEREAS, the cumulative impact of multiple sources of exposure to environmental hazards in low-income and people of color communities, and the roles of multiple agencies in addressing the causes and factors that compromise environmental health and quality of life in these communities require an interagency response; ~~~ Executive Order #96, Gov. McGreevey, 2/18/04

There is still much more to be done, and especially focusing on injustices to a lot of the communities that are overburdened by air pollution. ~~~ Christie DEP Commissioner Bob Martin, testimony to the Clean Air Council, 4/3/11 (Chaired by Nicky Sheats)

I just got a Google heads up from “Planet Princeton” that tomorrow – the same day that advocates are urging the Assembly to pass a controversial and seriously flawed environmental justice bill –  the DEP Commissioner McCabe will speak at a public hearing of the Clean Air Council on “strategies to improve air quality near ports and airports.”

The Clean Air Council meets annually to make recommendations to DEP. Typically, their annual public hearing is focused on a discrete topic.

Given the increasing urgency of the climate crisis and Gov. Murphy’s Executive Order directing DEP to adopt regulations to address greenhouse gas emissions (known as PACT), one would expect that the Clean Air Council would focus on strategies to regulate and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

One would be wrong – instead, just another diversion.

DEP has long neglected enforcing clean air requirements at Port Newark, so it might be interesting to monitor what’s said at that hearing (in fact, the Council held a public hearing way back in 2008 on that same topic!)

I’ve been away for awhile, but I was shocked by the fact that DEP has actually published a document of the “etiquette tips” the public should follow for the meeting.

Are you kidding me? DEP prescribed Etiquette for a public hearing? One just must be civil to the exalted ones from the Chamber of Commerce, Petroleum Council, and Chemical and Gas Industry – and elite DEP Commissioner McCabe! FUCK THAT!

Substantively, I note that the Agenda includes presentations by 3 environmental justice advocates – the same folks who constantly falsely praise the Murphy administration’s EJ and climate initiatives and are supporting a seriously flawed compromise EJ bill.

Maybe if those environmental justice warriors really believed that the EJ legislation was critical, they’d be over on the other side of State Street, lobbying legislators in the Assembly to pass their shitty bill, instead of serving as tokens at another DEP – industry sponsored diversion.

This is how co-optation works – it’s how the game is played. It”s how “advocates” are bought off and settle for symbolic gestures like being invited to speak at DEP events. Ego Uber Alles!

It’s disgusting.

Just take a look at the Council.

John Valeri- a lawyer and key advisor to Gov. Whitman in rolling back DEP regulations and on convincing the Christie administration to ram a gas pipeline through the Pinelands- is Chair of the Clean Air Council and is making an introductory statement on behalf of the Council.

The Vice Chair has a degree in economics.

One “public” member – “representing the public” – is lobbyist for major polluter South Jersey Industries (aka South Jersey Gas, the folks who build gas pipelines through the Pinelands, whose CEO has gross ethics violations as a result of his wife’s role in the Christie Gov.’s Office,  and get DEP permits and Pinelands Commission approvals expedited).

The other “public member” – “representing the public” – is a lawyer who represents the NJ Petroleum Council. Yup, petroleum, as in fossil fuel.

Mike Egenton, of the Chamber of Commerce is the Co-Chair of the Clean Air Council.

The only person with technical expertise on air pollution control regulatory matters represents industrial polluters and makes big money as a consultant to major polluters.

There are no environmental groups or “Mom’s for Clean Air” representatives on the Council.

You really can’t make this shit up.

I sent this note to the folks over at Planet Princeton:

Hi there – just read your public notice on tomorrow’s Clean Air Council hearing.

DEP Commissioner McCabe and that group, dominated by industry and their consultants, does NOT want to talk about controversial air quality issues (especially as an “environmental justice bill is up in the legislature tomorrow), including:

Murphy DEP Updates Air Pollution Cancer Risk Levels, Ignores Cumulative Impacts And Environmental Justice Considerations

Murphy DEP Urged To Close Regulatory Loopholes On Climate Change, Risk Assessment and Hazardous Air Pollutants

Murphy DEP Fails To Consider Climate Or Public Health Risks Of Multiple Toxic Air Emissions From Paulsboro Refinery

As He Touts Climate & Environmental Justice Policies, NJ Gov. Murphy’s DEP Proposes Renewal of Newark Garbage Incinerator Air Permit

18 Years After Scathing Criticism By Federal Judge For Ignoring “Environmental InJustice”, NOTHING HAS CHANGED AT NJ DEP

Just a few of the major air quality issues these guys get paid to divert the press and public and environmental groups from focusing on.

Perhaps you might want to cover these issues?

Bill Wolfe

  • former DEP policy analyst (13 years)
  • former Policy Director NJ Sierra Club (7 years)
  • former Director NJ Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (10 years)

End Note on Etiquette:

According to the DEP “etiquette tips”, the public is limited and may not ask questions of presenters:

Can I ask questions of the scheduled presenters?

No. Consistent with prior public hearings, presenters are selected by the Council to provide information and clarifying perspectives about the hearing topic. That information, as well as written comments submitted to the Council, form the basis of the Council’s hearing recommendations report, which is presented to the Department of Environmental Protection’s Commissioner for her consideration and use. While the Council members can ask questions of the presenters to better educate themselves before developing those recommendations, time constraints don’t allow for audience members to also question the presenters.

This is totally unacceptable and inconsistent with prior Clean Air Council hearings.

I’ve engaged in detailed questions and answers with presenters at Clean Air Council meetings.

There was never this prohibition on public questions. Shame on Murphy DEP.

And while I’m on the topic of the history of the Council, here is a real environmental justice advocate testifying to the Council, 22 years ago in 1998:

JOSEPH PARRISH – RECTOR ST. JOHN’S CHURCH, ELIZABETH

We are very involved in clean air issues because Elizabeth is the smoke shade capital of New Jersey. When the air in Elizabeth is filtered through a piece of filter paper and weighed, it weighs more that air anywhere else in New Jersey as measured by the NJDEP. Elizabeth has the highest concentration of airborne particulates in the state.

Since 1990 five incinerators have been installed within a radius of six miles or less of our church and the New Jersey Turnpike has been widened to 14 lanes. The Bayway Texaco refinery immediately upwind has had three life threatening incidents since 1990. Fishing has been banned at the Elizabeth Marina and in Newark Bay due to the toxicity of the waters.

The results of all this environmental degradation are staggering. Since 1990 forty percent of our Sunday School children have been hospitalized for asthma, eight times the national average. Asthma deaths in Elizabeth are 25 times the national average.

The State of New Jersey needs immediate and thorough remediation to stop the air, water and land pollution. Controls on cars and buses are essential. The development of rail links should be the highest priority. Waste incineration should be ended. Technologies for composting should be used. Refineries should be closed and fishing in polluted waters prohibited. Medical treatment should be made available to all community members suffering from the effects of pollution. New projects should be suspended until these environmental measures are undertaken.

Categories: Uncategorized Tags:

Murphy DEP Commissioner McCabe Asked To Re-Open Public Comment Period On Stealth Bear Hunt Secrecy Rule

March 8th, 2019 No comments

It is inconceivable that any of this could possibly be the intent of the legislature in passage of OPRA and NJ’s wildlife management laws.

I just submitted the below email request to DEP Commissioner McCabe.

[edit – criticism deleted. I sent to wrong McCabe email address]

I urge others to write similar letters and contact legislators to call out this latest DEP abuse.

Dear Commissioner McCabe:

I am writing to request that you re-open the public comment period on the Department’s proposed rules regarding OPRA exemptions for certain DEP records, including those related to black bear management.

The proposal was published in the December 17, 2018 NJ Register, during the holidays. A public hearing was held on January 31, 2019 and the public comment period closed on February 15, 2019.

As you know, there is no issue before the Department that has been more controversial, been subject to more media attention, public concern, and litigation, including numerous public protests and acts of non-violent civil disobedience than the issue of black bear management.

The people of NJ care deeply about how the bear population is managed by the Department.

Therefore I – and many others involved in the issue of black bear management – were shocked to learn of the proposal just yesterday.

I was not aware of any stakeholder outreach conducted by the Department in developing this proposal.

As you know, such pre-proposal stakeholder review (i.e. “advance notice of rules“) is mandated by Gov. Christie’s Executive Oder #2 – which has not been repealed by Gov. Murphy and therefore still legally applies to executive branch agencies – which provides in pertinent part (emphases mine):

https://nj.gov/infobank/circular/eocc2.pdf

1. […], State agencies shall:

a. Engage in the “advance notice of rules” by soliciting the advice and views of knowledgeable persons from outside of New Jersey State government, including the private sector and academia, in advance of any rulemaking to provide valuable insights on the proposed rules, and to prevent unworkable, overly-proscriptive or ill-advised rules from being adopted.

I was not aware of any press releases issued by the Department regarding this proposal.

I also am questioning the timing of the Department’s posting of the proposal on the DEP’s website – it seems that it was posted after the public comment period closed.

Finally, basic fairness and good government practices would discourage proposal of such a significant, novel, and controversial regulation, with so little public knowledge or involvement prior to the proposal. The Department’s public outreach in proposing this rule was totally deficient and completely undermines public trust and confidence in the Department.

In addition, contrary to the objectives of OPRA to maximize public access to and disclosure of public records, the proposal would create a novel interpretation of OPRA, one that severely limits the public’s access to important information regarding the Department’s policies, programs and practices, while at the same time, providing critical information to private landowners that could be used to assist hunters in locating, tracking, and killing bears and generating economic windfalls (e.g. sale of access privileges to private lands).

It is inconceivable that any of this could possibly be the intent of the legislature in passage of OPRA and NJ’s wildlife management laws.

Accordingly, I strongly urge you to file a public notice that extends the public comment period on the proposal an additional 60 days.

Sincerely,

Bill Wolfe

Categories: Uncategorized Tags:

NJ DEP Commissioner McCabe is Either Lying or Incompetent On DEP Powers To Regulate “Dirty Dirt”

February 15th, 2019 No comments

If allowed to stand, these radical reinterpretations and narrowing of DEP’s regulatory authority would seriously undermine and effectively gut DEP’s powers to protect public health and environment – including addressing climate change.

Yesterday, the Senate heard proposed legislation to address illegal disposal of “dirty dirt” (see S1683).

No reports on that from media.

But, NJ Spotlight did report that Murphy administration DEP Commissioner McCabe issued a press statement criticizing the Trump EPA for inaction in adopting regulations – known as “MCL’s” – for the class of toxic chemicals known as “PFAS” (hit the links for the details I will discuss in a future post on MCL’s).

The McCabe DEP press release was issued the same day that McCabe was personally slammed in a Newark Star Ledger editorial and harshly criticized again in testimony later that morning in a Senate legislative hearing on illegal disposal of “dirty dirt” (see S1683). That DEP press release was a blatant diversion to cover up McCabe’s own serious failures.

The Star Ledger editorial blasted McCabe personally on her response to illegal disposal of dirty dirt:

After months of effort, Gottheimer got DEP commissioner Catherine McCabe to visit the site in December, but he found that they spent most of that time haggling over the legal definitions of “solid waste” and “de minimus.”

Construction waste is in the eye of the beholder, but the DEP believes its definition is inviolable. The agency monitors the site, yet it claims it has no probable cause to physically inspect the property or collect testing samples.

Besides, violations of soil controls are enforced on a county and municipal level, DEP points out.

McCabe can haggle with this, from NJ DEP recycling regulations:

7:26A-1.5 Burden of proof

(a) In an enforcement action, or on specific request of the Department, persons claiming that they qualify for any exclusion or exemption in this chapter or that they are not otherwise subject to the rules in this chapter shall demonstrate and appropriately document that they satisfy all terms of the law releasing them from the requirements of this chapter.

and this:

7:26A-1.7 Right of entry and inspection

(a) The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection or an authorized representative acting pursuant to the County Environmental Health Act, N.J.S.A. 26:3A2-1 et seq., shall have the right to enter and inspect any building or other portion of a recycling center, recycling depot or any site at which an exempted activity is conducted pursuant to N.J.A.C. 7:26A-1.4(a), at any time in order to determine compliance with the provisions of all applicable laws or rules and regulations adopted pursuant thereto. This right to inspect includes, but is not limited to:

1. Sampling any materials on site; 

2. Photographing any portion of the recycling center;

3. Investigating an actual or suspected source of pollution of the environment; and

4. Ascertaining compliance or non-compliance with the statutes, rules or regulations of the Department, including conditions of the recycling center approval issued by the Department.

We have been working on exposing the abuses and DEP regulatory failures on “dirty dirt” for over a decade – including while I worked at DEP on developing enforcement policy in the late 1980’s – see this post, where I outline DEP regulations and Guidance documents governing this set of issues:

As I said in a February 8, 2012 Bergen Record story on soil contamination that closed Votee Park in Teaneck:

“This stuff happens again and again and again, and nobody is connecting the underlying dots,” Wolfe said. “Are there laws in place to do this, and who is responsible for enforcing them? The answer is there are laws in place, but the government is completely asleep at the wheel. And the towns are left holding the bag.”

In 2006 testimony to a special legislative investigation on illegal disposal, we called for the Legislature and/or DEP to:

  • Impose cradle-to-grave management requirements for contaminated soils and demolition waste

So, we must call out McCabe’s outrageous and totally unacceptable dissembling, diversions, falsehoods, and failures.

Because McCabe is a lawyer, her position regarding DEP’s jurisdiction and responsibility is so egregiously false and particularly troubling, so much so that she should be called to publicly testify before the Legislature to defend it.

DEP has broad authority and responsibility – repeatedly upheld by NJ Courts – under the NJ Spill Act, NJ Solid Waste Management Act, and NJ Water Pollution Control Act, to regulate both solid waste and recycling, from cradle to grave. DEP has lead authority. This is NOT a local issue. (See NJAC 7:26)

That authority includes DEP regulatory oversight of: the facilities and sites that generate the solid waste or recyclable material; the sampling, analytical chemistry, and regulatory classification of the material; the trucks that haul the material; and the places where the material is processed, treated, stored, recycled, or disposed of.

To address those DEP lies, I wrote the below letter to Chairman Smith:

Dear Chairman Smith:

I was deeply disturbed by the testimony during yesterday’s hearing on “dirty dirt”, particularly regarding statements about DEP’s jurisdiction, authority, and responsibility.

I have been involved in this set of issues for over 30 years, beginning with work as a DEP professional on developing a “waste flow” enforcement policy back in the late 1980’s and NJ’s recycling regulatory framework in the early 1990’s. I also met with Senator Greenstein during the 2006 illegal disposal scandals in her district, so have direct knowledge and experience to offer.

There is a pattern of radical reinterpretation and narrowing of DEP statutory powers and responsibility, including the recent episode at the Cumberland County landfill’s proposed disposal contract with the US Navy. When that story broke, DEP made this misleading statement:

Hazardous waste is defined by the federal government as that which presents an imminent danger because of qualities such as explosiveness or corrosiveness, said Larry Hajna, a spokesman for the DEP, which is not required to issue permits for the dumping of contaminated soil.

Hajna is just flat out wrong. While the federal EPA does define “hazardous waste” pursuant to Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation  and Recovery Act (RCRA) – and “solid waste” pursuant to Subtitle D of RCRA – NJ’s Solid Waste Manage Act State law and NJ DEP regulations define and regulate “hazardous waste” and “solid waste” far more broadly and strictly than federal RCRA. Hajna also is wrong in his “imminent danger” claim as the basis for EPA federal regulation.

Even after the Navy deal was nixed, DEP doubled down on this false position:

“Brendon Shank, communications director for the DEP, on Tuesday said no state permit is required to ship the soil.”

In fact, the DEP regulates the Cumberland County landfill and issues a permit for its operation, including the types of waste it is allowed to accept. DEP has authority to determine compliance with the landfill permit, and to sample incoming loads to assure compliance and prevent illegal disposal of wastes not authorized by the permit. DEP also regulates all waste haulers that transport and dispose of wastes at NJ solid waste facilities and can sample loads to assure that they are hauling solid waste and not illegal hazardous waste. Read the applicable DEP regulations, which include this:

7:26-2.10 General engineering design submission requirements

[…]

vii. A waste inspection plan, which shall include a program for detecting and preventing the disposal of all unauthorized waste types, including regulated hazardous wastes. This program shall include, at a minimum, but not be limited to, the following:

(1) Random inspections of incoming loads unless the owner or operator takes other steps to ensure that incoming loads do not contain unauthorized waste types, including regulated hazardous waste or TSCA waste;

The same false reinterpretation and radical narrowing of DEP’s authority also is occurring regarding DEP’s regulatory jurisdiction over emissions of greenhouse gases. As NJ Spotlight recently falsely reported:

“But the bigger issue for the state may be to regulate carbon dioxide, the most pervasive greenhouse gas pollutant. Sen. Bob Smith (D-Middlesex), the powerful chairman of the Senate Environment and Energy Committee, has urged the state agency to do just that, which would be a broad expansion of its authority.”

Contrary to that claim, there “would be no broad expansion of DEP’s authority”.  Greenhouse gases – not just CO2 – are already subject to DEP regulatory authority. See this 2005 DEP rule adoption document for support:

https://www.nj.gov/dep/rules/adoptions/2005_1121njac7_27.pdf

Getting back to the dirty dirt issue, I was stunned by the DEP claims regarding site access, sampling and DEP jurisdiction and denial of lead responsibility in the Vernon case.

FYI, contrary to testimony, here is DEP’s statutory authority, as set forth in DEP’s own Guidance document: (emphases mine)

https://www.nj.gov/dep/srp/guidance/fspm/pdf/fsmp2005.pdf

3.4 Statutory Authority to Conduct Searches

  • N.J.S.A. 13:1D-9 (General Department Authority)

[The department shall…have the power to:] Enter and inspect any building or place for the purpose of investigating an actual or suspected source of pollution of the environment and ascertaining compliance or noncompliance with any code, rules and regulations of the department.

  • N.J.S.A 58:10A-6 (Water Pollution Control Act)

g. The Commissioner and a local agency shall have a right of entry to all premises in which a discharge source is or might be located or in which monitoring equipment or records required by a permit are kept, for purposes of inspection, sampling, copying or photographing.

  • N.J.S.A. 58:10A-30 (Underground Storage of Hazardous Substances Act)

The Department shall have the authority to enter any property or place of business where under- ground storage tanks or non-operational storage tanks are or may be located; to inspect said tanks or photograph any records related to their operation; and to obtain samples or evidence of discharge from the surrounding air, soil, surface or groundwater.

  • N.J.S.A. 13:1E-42.1 (Solid Waste Management Act)

The Department of Environmental Protection and Energy shall conduct a complete inspection, at least weekly, of each major hazardous waste facility.

  • N.J.S.A 13:1E-65 (Major Hazardous Waste Facility Siting Act)

The Department and the local board of health or the county health department, as the case may be, shall have the right to enter any major hazardous waste facility at any time in order to determine compliance with the registration statement and engineering design, and with the provisions of all applicable laws or rules and regulations adopted pursuant thereto.

  • N.J.S.A. 26:2C-9b (Air Pollution Control Act)

[The department…shall have the power to -] (4) Enter and inspect any building or place, except private residences for the purpose of investigating an actual or suspected source of air pollution and ascertaining compliance or non-compliance with any code, rules and regulations of the department.

  • N.J.S.A. 26:2C-9.1 (Air Pollution Control Act)

No person shall obstruct, hinder or delay, or interfere with, by force or otherwise, the performance by the department or its personnel of any duty under the provisions of this act, or refuse to permit such personnel to perform their duties by refusing them, upon proper identification or presentation of a written order of the department, entrance to any premises at reasonable hours.

  • N.J.S.A 58:12A-4 (Safe Drinking Water Act)
(f) The Commissioner shall have the right to enter any premises upon presentation of appropriate credentials during regular business hours, in order to test, inspect or sample any feature of a public water system and in order to inspect, copy or photograph any monitoring equipment or records required to be kept under the provisions of this act.…
  • N.J.S.A 58:16A-9 (State Flood Control Facilities Act)

(4) Notwithstanding the provisions of any general, special, or local law, the Commissioner, his officers or agents, when engaged on flood control projects may enter upon property for the purpose of making surveys, test pits, test borings, or other investigations.

  • N.J.S.A. 26:2D-9 (Radiation Protection Act)

[The department shall:] (j) Enter and inspect radiation sources, their shielding and immediate surroundings and records concerning their operation for the determination of any possible radiation hazard.

  • N.J.S.A. 13:1F-9 (Pesticide Control Act of 1971)

[The department shall have power, in addition to those granted by any other law, to] c. Enter and inspect any building or place, except private residences, for the purpose of investigating an actual or suspected violation of law relating to pesticides and ascertaining compliance or noncompliance with any rules, regulations or order of the [D]epartment.

  • N.J.S.A. 58:10A-6 et. seq. (Clean Water Enforcement Act)

g. The Commissioner and a local agency shall have a right of entry to all premises in which a discharge source is or might be located or in which monitoring equipment or records required by a permit are kept, for purposes of inspection, sampling, copying or photographing.

In addition, as you know, NJ laws even delegate this broad authority to private individuals – so obviously DEP’s State police powers are far broader (see DEP website):

The Brownfield and Contaminated Site Remediation Act, N.J.S.A. 58:10B-16 , requires the person conducting the remediation to gain access to real or personal property that is not owned by that person for the purpose of conducting remediation: 58:10B-16. Access to property to conduct remediation

I could expand on additional false interpretations that were presented in testimony and media reports.

If allowed to stand, these radical reinterpretations would seriously undermine and effectively gut DEP’s powers to protect public health and environment – including addressing climate change..

I strongly urge you to contact the Attorney General and DEP Commissioner McCabe and request that they issue written opinions of these matters – as well as OLS attorney’s.

Bill Wolfe

Categories: Uncategorized Tags:

Murphy DEP Commissioner McCabe Reiterates Pledge To Revise Key Highlands Clean Water Protections

December 10th, 2018 No comments

The press is reporting, based only on a DEP press release, that the DEP revoked the Christie Highlands septic density rollback, creating the false impression that the Murphy administration is being aggressive in protecting clean water – DON’T BE FOOLED. Here’s the real story.

Back in May, were were appalled by Murphy DEP Commissioner McCabe’s Senate confirmation testimony regarding, among many other things, the Highlands and the Christie DEP’s rollback of a key clean water protections known as the “septic density standard”. see:

III)  Highlands

Senator Smith, Chairman of the Environment Committee, led the charge to oppose the Christie DEP rollback of the Highlands Septic Density Standard, which resulted in a rare legislative veto of that rollback as “inconsistent with legislative intent” to prevent the degradation of high quality Highlands waters.

Smith asked McCabe about the status of the Christie Septic Density rule.

Remarkably, McCabe defended the Christie DEP rule, challenged Smith’s premises, downplayed the impact of the rollback, and pledged to re-propose another septic density rule!

Senator Smith:

In the old administration, there was an effort to change the Highlands septic density rules. The legislature .. invalidated those rules. ..Is there any plan to do anything?

McCabe replied:

I don’t think we need to do anything…. We’re back at the drawing board. I’ve taken a look at the science myself.

Frankly, I think what happened was failure to communicate between our scientists and the legislature.

So, we were not surprised that on Friday, DEP issued a misleading press release that purported to revoke the Christie DEP rollbacks, but which basically reiterated that prior testimony pledging to revise the pre-Christie Highlands Septic Density Standard and propose an unnecessary “new standard”.

The DEP press release stated:

The DEP is committed to carrying out the intent of the Highlands Water Protection and Planning Act, and to using the best available science to establish new septic density standards at a level that prevents the degradation of water quality, requires the restoration of water quality and protects ecological uses.

There is no reason to propose a new standard – the existing standard the Christie DEP sought to rollback is based on best available science, has been upheld by the Courts and strongly supported by the Legislature, and enjoys widespread public support.

Based on the Murphy Highlands record so far (Lisa Plevin as Ex. Director of Highlands Council, focus on voluntary local initiatives, no policy change at DEP, etc), it is highly unlikely that any new septic density standard McCabe proposed would be stricter than the original standard she just reinstated.

Not surprisingly, the naive incompetent hacks at the Highlands Coalition got it wrong, and praised this DEP manipulation.

In turn, that led NJ Spotlight to falsely praise the Murphy DEP is a misleading story today with a partially true headline:

Thankfully, Jeff Tittel got it right:

Jeff Tittel, director of the New Jersey Sierra Club, agreed. “If they’re still looking for a compromise, we’re still going to fight,’’ he said. “The legislation was very clear — they must maintain water quality.’’

Still, Ruga noted the revocation of the Christie regulation is significant because it was done before any new permits allowing for more expansive development were issued under the weaker standards.

And what the hell has gotten into Doug O’Malley? He’s lost his edge, and is closer to Ruga’s praise that Tittel’s correct analysis:

Doug O’Malley, director of Environment New Jersey, called the reversal “a long time coming to turn the page from the Christie era … and the final nail in his attempt to usurp legislative intent’’ of the 2004 law.

Perhaps even worse, the story missed the key to this whole story:

As we wrote, (way back in 2011) – a fact remarkably has gone un-reported by the media – the Christie DEP rollback was driven by a lawsuit by the Farm Bureau:

That [septic density] standard is under litigation by the NJ Farm Bureau. The DEP has filed a request that the Court postpone hearing of the case. The DEP Commissioner has signaled his intent to revisit that standard, which has survived an Administrative appeal and  been upheld by an Administrative Law Judge opinion and is the law of the land and duly promulgated regulation.

The Christie DEP sought to settle that lawsuit by agreeing to rollback the septic density standard.

What has become of that litigation? Is the Christie Martin DEP settlement still driving the change in regulations?

Will someone ASK DEP or shoot me an email and I’ll write about it.

No time to do that research now, from the incredible views of Big Sur from Los Padres National Forest.

bs6

Categories: Uncategorized Tags:

Is Murphy DEP Commissioner Catherine McCabe On The Way Out The Door?

September 9th, 2018 No comments

Friday Night Massacre At DEP? – “there is a lot of weird here”

Gov.s’ Office Installs Interim Commissioner Over DEP Deputy Deb Mans

Gov. Murphy Further Politicized a DEP Already Deeply In Disarray

[Update below]

According to a press report, Gov. Murphy has made a highly unusual Saturday announcement – via twitter – that DEP Commissioner McCabe is traveling out of State for the month of September and will be replaced by a Gov. Office staffer, not DEP Deputy Commissioner Debbie Mans. Follow.

From the beginning, we have been highly critical of NJ Gov. Murphy’s choice for DEP Commissioner, Catherine McCabe, and written many posts on her ineffective leadership of DEP, particularly on addressing climate change (most recently, see:

McCabe – who was not confirmed by the Senate until late June and has allowed Senate President Sweeney and Assemblyman McKeon to install their former staffers and political operatives in DEP policy positions – has charted a course of “continuity with many controversial Christie DEP policies.

She has blind sided and embarrassed the Governor in the press, lacked any media message or policy agenda, and been an ineffective leader of DEP and proven incapable of reforming the status quo (see:

McCabe has been humiliated and cut out of the policy loop on climate change, allowing DEP leadership to be usurped by BPU and the Energy Master Plan. Similarly, McCabe was cut out of Natural Resource Damage policy by the Attorney General. Former political operatives in the Legislature that were installed as Chief of Staff and Director of Government Relations appear to be working behind her back with Democrats in the legislature, again, undermining DEP leadership and credibility by politicizing decisions.

Similarly, we have pointed out that McCabe’s selection of  so called “environmental leader” Debbie Mans as Deputy Commissioner was a purely symbolic gesture and cynical political appointment. Mans is no leader and lacks qualifications for the job, see:

We’ve predicted that McCabe would suffer a very short tenure, much like Gov. Florio’s initial pick for DEP Commissioner, Judy Yaskin, who served for several months before being replaced by Scott Weiner. We wrote:

While Acting Commissioner McCabe seems to be hiding under her desk in Trenton – is she trying to avoid Judy Yaskin’s fate? – Gov. Murphy has not rescinded Gov. Christie’s anti-regulatory and privatization Executive Orders (#1-#4; #17), but instead has shown a disturbing continuity with some of the worst Christie environmental policies, including: (read entire post for list)

But, while McCabe is floundering and failing to lead, at least Judy Yaskin was forced out because she took strong pro-environmental positions, as we noted:

I could be wrong – perhaps McCabe has done her homework and just doesn’t want to step out of the corporate Democrat line and become another deposed DEP Commissioner like her only female predecessor, Judy Yaskin, see: this old NJ Spotlight story:

“In the case of the Salem nuclear power plants, the controversy stretches back nearly three decades to the days of former Gov. Jim Florio’s administration. Then-Department of Environmental Protection Commissioner Judith Yaskin ordered cooling towers to installed at Salem — at a cost at that time estimated to be $2 billion –– citing a study that found the plant killed more fish each year than commercial fishermen harvested from Delaware Bay. …

Scott Weiner, who succeeded Yaskin as DEP commissioner, reversed the Salem cooling-tower decision. Instead, PSEG agreed to undertake a massive restoration program of more than 20,000 acres of tidal wetlands along the shores of the Delaware Bay. After he left state government, Weiner worked briefly as a consultant to PSEG.

So, we were not surprised that Bergen Record environmental reporter Scott Fallon, who seems to have broken a very interesting story that suggests McCabe’s imminent demise, tweeted this:

Saturday morning press release from @GovMurphy: DEP Commish will be traveling out of state “for the month of September”. No other details given. Kathleen Frangione from Govs (sic) office will be acting commish, (sic) not DEP no. 2 Debbie Mans.

There is a lot of weird here.

(I can’t provide the original tweet because Fallon has blocked me for criticizing his reporting).

Curiously, I went to @GovMurphy twitter feed and could not find the Saturday morning tweet Fallon refers to, so I assume that its been taken down. That only thickens the plot.

So I agree with Fallon that “there is a lot of weird here”.

My sense is that McCabe is “traveling” and will make a graceful exit by resigning when she returns for “family” or “personal” reasons.

The installation of Chief Policy Advisor Kathleen Frangione from the Gov.’s Office as interim DEP Commissioner instead of Deputy Commissioner Debbie Mans is not only a vote of no confidence in an a humiliating blow to Mans, it also validates what we’ve long said: that Mans was not qualified, not a leader, and always just a symbolic and totally cynical political appointment.

And it further politicized a DEP that is already deeply in disarray – although Frangione is said to be a climate policy expert. (but as a DC beltway lobbyist and Congressional staffer, not an expert or advocate)

[OMG, I just watched that Princeton talk. Frangione spoke more like a press agent than a policy expert. Jeanne Fox hovered over her to make sure she said nothing about policy decisions or political controversies. Frangione’s presentation was absent substantive content and data, it misrepresented current law (e.g. re: authorized uses of RGGI funds, the non-binding effect of Executive Orders, and with mis-statements about “DEP regulations”, etc) and loaded with slogans. If that’s what passes as a policy expert from Harvard and Yale, we’re doomed.]

We’ll keep you posted as we learn more.

In the meantime, DEP folks or anyone with valid information about all this can shoot me an email at:  bill_wolfe@comcast.net

[Update: A knowledgeable reader sent me the following note, suggesting that I exaggerate:

She has vacation house in Ocean City near some friends. 

He said going to Australia for month to visit for birth of granddaughter

So, if McCabe is going to Australia for a month, that could shine a light on Murphy’s lack of paid family leave policy.

It must be nice to just take off for a month. But can all NJ workers take a paid month for the birth of a child? Can they afford to do that? Is Murphy helping?

Similarly, is McCabe being paid during her travels? Does taking a month of from a leadership position damage her management credibility and commitment to DEP?

Is even raising these kinds of questions somehow taboo in the new #metoo world of women’s issues?

Categories: Uncategorized Tags: