Skip to main content
Affordable Employee Training Exclusively for NJBIA Members LEARN MORE
Chrissy Buteas

Christine Buteas, Chief Government Affairs Officer

BPU Joins National Offshore Wind Research and Development Consortium

On June 21, the state of New Jersey announced its intention to join the National Offshore Wind Research and Development Consortium as a board member and public sponsor. The $18.5 million consortium is administered by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority.

BPU Begins Process to Close Current SREC Market

On June 22, the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities (BPU) approved a rule beginning the process of closing the current Solar Renewable Energy Credit program, and developing a new sustainable program that will grow solar generation in the state.

BPU Approves OSW Selection; Comments Due July 26

On June 29, the BPU approved the selection of a leading firm to provide strategic planning and analysis to the Offshore Wind Strategic Plan. The Department of the Treasury will review and approve a winning bidder. The approved consultant will help to set standards needed to achieve the initial goal of 1,100 megawatts of offshore wind energy capacity.

A public hearing is scheduled for July 19 and public comments are due by July 26.  The following topics are included for comment.  Please send your feedback to me at cbuteas@njbia.org.

  • How should BPU stagger/phase in New Jersey’s offshore wind procurements to realize the state’s goal of 3,500 megawatts. Should this schedule be announced before any solicitations are released?
  • How should the BPU structure the initial solicitation for 1,100 megawatts of offshore wind capacity as called for under EO8?
  • Should the BPU request proposals scaled at 1,100 megawatts, or should the BPU request proposals in smaller blocks of capacity (i.e. 400 megawatts)?
  • How may a solicitation be structured to ensure strong competition from multiple OSW developers?
  • What conditions should be included to ensure maximum competition in terms of OREC Price?
  • OWEDA requires the OREC Price to be an all-in price that includes the full cost of the construction, operation and decommissioning of the project with all revenues being refunded to ratepayers. What measures can be included in project proposals to optimize all revenues over the life of the project?
  • OWEDA requires that offshore wind developers demonstrate a net economic benefit for the state. How should the BPU ensure net economic benefits in order to be able to compare applications?
  • What other elements should BPU consider including in the 1,100 megawatt offshore wind solicitation called for under EO8 (e.g. storage, other adjunct technologies)?
  • Should the BPU request bids for expandable, nondiscriminatory, open-access offshore transmission facilities for the efficient delivery of power to the onshore transmission system?

Water Tax Legislation Introduced; Feedback Requested

On June 27, Senator Bob Smith (D-17) introduced the Water Resources Protection Trust Fund Act (S-2805). This bill would establish a Water Resource Protection Trust Fund, funded by a water consumption user fee imposed on every public community water system ($0.40 per 1,000 gallons of water delivered), and a water diversion user fee imposed on every person required by law to obtain a diversion permit or a water use registration ($0.40 per 1,000 gallons of water diverted). The fund would be used for water quality, supply, and infrastructure projects.

Your feedback on this bill would be greatly appreciated by July 15. For this, or any other questions regarding these recent updates, please contact me at cbuteas@njbia.org.

Seeking Your Feedback on Natural Resource Damages  

This summer, I will also be working with other stakeholders in a workgroup assembled by Senate Environment Committee Chairman Senator Bob Smith (D-17) to make recommendations concerning possible legislation related to natural resources damages (NRD) in New Jersey. I am seeking your feedback on any and all of the issues that I anticipate will be discussed during this process in July.
NRD are damages the state seeks to collect through litigation when a business or corporation has caused natural resources to be harmed, typically via the release of hazardous substances. These damages are supposed to be used for repairing damaged sites, but have historically been diverted to the general fund for other purposes. A constitutional amendment approved by voters in 2017 requires that NRD collections now be dedicated to a separate fund from the general fund where they can only be used for restoring contaminated properties.
In the coming weeks, the workgroup is expected to consider the following questions related to NRD:

  • How should groundwater contamination be addressed?
  • Should there be a preference for restoration of natural resources (or an assessment of monetary damages equal to the cost of restoration) or damages that put a monetary value on the resource that has been harmed?
  • Will the policy choices provide incentives to recalcitrant parties to clean up?  Will the policy choices promote behavior or precautions to prevent environmental injuries or the performance of prompt cleanups?
  • Should liability for natural resource damages be imposed for discharges that
    occurred before the “Spill Compensation and Control Act” or other relevant state laws were passed?  Should damages be imposed when the activity, such as filling wetlands with clean fill, was legal and, in fact, encouraged?
  • Should there be a preference for the use of outside counsel or the Attorney General’s Office to bring the state’s natural resource damage cases.  If an outside counsel is used, what is fair compensation for that counsel?
  • How are other states addressing natural resource damages?
  • How should the state use constitutionally dedicated moneys from natural resource damage settlements?

Your feedback on any or all of these questions would be greatly appreciated by Monday, July 9, 2018.  Please contact me at cbuteas@njbia.org.

 

5 responses to “NJ Lawmaker Proposes Water Tax”

  1. Donald Wicklund says:

    The water bill for my home has tripled in the 25 years that I live here. I don’t think it’s a good idea to add another tax to water. Next it will be air and then hair! But seriously where does it stop. They still run out of water in dry months and development requires more water for more people. Why don’t they do some expansion of the water system.

  2. Harold says:

    No more Taxes – Period!!!

  3. Jim says:

    Time to leave the state. Let the illegals pay for everything…

  4. Bill cutler says:

    How too handle the total eco system polution caused by fracking from big oil is a bit more important than chasing businees away.

    With fracking their are 200 unknown chemicals injected into the earth to get 1 well

    Big oil has not disclosed what these chemicals are.
    N J Ecosystems are being destroyed and can never be repaired.
    N J has no serious water conservation program like California either.
    Calf has a new law that demands a persons water consumption be cut from the average current usage of 90 gallons a day to 55 gals a day
    This is the eco way to save water while protecting Resourses
    We should not be taxing commercial business
    Simple water efficiency products is a better solution
    where everyone in NJ wins
    Maybe politicians should watch Gas Land documentary
    and look at Calf.

  5. Dave says:

    Bill, this is not just a Fracking problem. The shady business’s that polluted in the first place go bankrupt back as far as the 40’s and thus owe nothing for the contamination. The business owner is not personally liable per say, and just reopens under a new name. This plays both ways since the environmental businesses also cash in on cleanups and over-regulation.

    Bill, BTW, California is no model, they have rivers dumping millions of gallons of potable water into the ocean and will not stop this because a few salamander’s are endangered at the tributary. On top of that, we can thank them for the high efficiency washing machines which do not properly clean the clothes, unless you set the washer to bulk loading, which fills the wash tub to top for a pair of socks, there for wasting more water then a traditional machine which had fully selectable fill levels, pre-extremism. (This is not my own opinion, the salesmen I dealt with admitted this is what is going on with the newer washers, I was blessed to buy a speed queen last november before the even more extremist laws kicked in Jan2018 that no longer allow a washer to have a manual timer)These are the same extremists who banned cumodin based mouse poisons because a mountain lion was poisoned. (sued EPA yada yada yada) So now we are left with paralytic poisons so the pests die in your dwelling and cause a potential public health issue. But I’m glad we saved one mountain lion.
    In summary, bottom line, we took the prayer and morals out of our schools of which our country is founded on and made politico’s & $$ our God, where being a good steward of the earth is part of what we were founded on. At this point if $$ comes first, a polluter is not going to give 2 cents about pollution unless held accountable. But these same people are the ones paying(ok, the law call it donating) for elections and then get the favors back by not being held accountable until it is too late and a maybe a media reporter will get some ratings by exposing the polluter.(assuming they polluter was not purchasing advertising space 😉

    As much as fracking has dark environmental impacts if not done in a prudent manner, it may very well saved the us economy from total collapse. Exporting some medical technology, similar computer tech such as cell phones and some food is not going to save our economy. Extremism in both directions is destroying us, aka it is Patriotic to pay higher taxes HAHAHAHAHAH. It is literally embarrasing to know I live somewhere where a person with that mantra in the state that is soon to be 2nd highest taxing to business state in the nation could get elected in the first place proclaiming that mantra. When I retire, I will be another one gone. There will be no one left to pay for the votes at some point.(i.e. those on the public dole voting these people in while a majority of those who work for a living &/or own business are not going to vote for higher taxes unless leaving the state or not already gone 😉

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.