Electric Ratepayers Subsidize Corporate Air Polluters
The Public And The Press Are Totally In The Dark
No Legislative Policy Allows DEP To Shift The Burden Of Pollution Fees To Electric Ratepayers
(Source: NJ DEP SIP)
The Murphy DEP today adopted an EPA approved amendment of the NJ Clean Air Act’s State Implementation Plan (SIP). (read the amendment)
The DEP amendment shifts the burden of paying *$36.8 million for federal Clean Air Act mandated air pollution fees from corporate polluters to electric ratepayers!
That’s right: at a time when the NJ Legislature is holding oversight hearings on the high and increasing costs of electricity and ways to lower them, the Murphy DEP just increased your electric bill and gave a subsidy to corporate air polluters.
The federal Clean Air Act imposes air pollution fees on polluters in State’s that fail to meet the air quality standards of the Act. DEP’s SIP explains:
The primary purpose of this document is to demonstrate an acceptable equivalent alternative program to fulfill the Clean Air Act (CAA) Section 185 fee requirement for the New York-N. New Jersey-Long Island (NY-NJ-CT) Nonattainment Area classified as Severe-17 for the revoked1979 1-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). CAA Section 185 applies to ozone non-attainment areas classified as Severe or Extreme which fail to attain by the attainment date. The fee, applicable to major sources of volatile organic compounds (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx), must be collected for every year following the failure to reach attainment until the area attains the NAAQS.
These pollution fees are significant: (see Table 2 above)
Pursuant to CAA Section 185(b), the fee shall be equal to $5,000 per ton (adjusted annually for inflation beginning after 1990) emitted by the major source during the calendar year more than 80 percent of the baseline amount. USEPA publishes inflation adjusted fee rates periodically. The inflation adjusted fee rate of $8,511.33 per ton and $8,755.33 per ton for 2008 and 2009, respectively, are used to calculate fee obligations.
Instead of imposing these mandatory pollution fees on major polluters, the Murphy DEP crafted an “alternative”.
The DEP’s alternative to industry fees is your electric bill:
This document demonstrates that New Jersey’s Clean Energy Program (NJCEP), which collects fees from electricity ratepayers on a statewide basis and uses the proceeds to fund energy efficiency and renewable energy in New Jersey, is an acceptable alternative program to satisfy the Section 185 fee program requirements for the revoked 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS.
It’s bad enough that polluters cause people of NJ to breath unhealthy air, that the DEP has failed to meet the Clean Air Act’s mandated compliance dates, and that NJ’s air is classified as Severe or Extreme non-attainment.
It’s bad enough that NJ electricity bills are already too high.
And the DEP has diverted $36.8 million of “proceeds to fund energy efficiency and renewable energy”, – which include low income energy assistance – to subsidize corporate polluters!
But it is outrageous and unacceptable that DEP subsidizes corporate polluters and shift their pollution fee burden to your electric bill.
There is no legislation passed that allows DEP to do this.
The legislature seems totally unaware of this DEP policy.
The media and public are unaware as well.
Buried in Appendix 3 of the subject SIP amendment, the Department wrote:
“During the comment period, no comments were received on the proposed program.“
Not one comment. Think about that. Do you really think if people knew about this that no one would have objected?
Given the widespread public support for clean air and the importance of equitable and adequate funding of clean air programs to all NJ’s residents, that statement is deeply troubling and strongly suggests that the Department’s public education, outreach, and public participation program is completely broken.
Corporate polluter subsidies on the back of your monthly electric bill: nothing could more clearly expose the corrupt political power of corporate polluters in NJ, who have captured DEP.
Of course, these are the kinds of decisions made by a DEP Commissioner who was a former lawyer for corporate polluters.
Who will hold him accountable for that?
* corrected version – sorry for the math error!