This is gross hypocrisy, because Gov. Sherrill does not support S2338 - the Polluters Pay to Make New Jersey More Affordable Act - AKA the Climate Superfund Act. This is the bill that would make Big Oil pay for some of the climate damage they’ve done.

Senate Democratic leaders pulled the bill from a scheduled vote in July 2026 before the summer break due to insufficient support from the Governor and corporate Democrats and intense opposition from business groups (AKA “quiet friends of the Gov.”).

Gov. Sherrill also has done nothing to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or regulate greenhouse gas emissions.

It’s veery easy to issue statements that point the finger at Trump - but a lot harder to take on Big Oil and makes them pay.

Statement by Governor Sherrill on FEMA’s Denial of Disaster Declaration Appeal

“Once again, Donald Trump is using the federal government to punish those he sees as his political enemies, and everyday New Jerseyans are paying the price. Natural disasters don’t care about political parties. When FEMA agreed that disaster relief was warranted, Donald Trump overruled the experts – and common sense – leaving New Jersey taxpayers holding the $84 million bag.

“During a winter of unprecedented, back-to-back extreme storms, our workers and towns rose to the occasion and got their communities up and running again, and they should not be punished for doing so. While the President may be willing to turn his back on communities for his petty politics, my Administration will continue fighting to ensure New Jersey communities have the resources they need to prepare, respond, and recover when disaster strikes.”

Surely Gov. Sherrill must know that NJ taxpayers are holding a multi-billion climate damage/adaptation bag - $84 million is chump change.

(Source: NJ DEP “Remedial Priority System” (RPS) Scoring Of AeroMarine site)

The Keyport community is rightly outraged by the lack of action by the DEP in responding to major pollution problems and decades of failure to require cleanup of the AeroMarine landfill.

In the many DEP regulatory oversight failures that have been revealed thus far, I recently discovered another egregious example (via an Open Public Records Act request).

DEP conducted what is known as a “Remedial Priority Scoring” (RPS) at the AeroMarine site in what looks to be October of 2013 and determined that the site was “Low Risk” (see above portion of page 1 of the 6 page document).

[Update: a reader has questioned and requested confirmation of the 2013 date. The DEP revised the RPS method in 2012 as part of the SRRA privatization program. The fact that the Keyport scoring sheet is computer driven (see final page below: “computer will enter current date”) proves its after 2012. Prior RPS methods were paper records.]

The shocking results of that RPS are summarized below. (Complete document provided upon request).

The DEP knows that the risk information contained in a RPS document is “significant” and “sensitive” (those are DEP’s own words - see DEP memo below).

Communities and people living near toxic sites want to know about the risks in their back yards and whether they are being exposed to toxic chemicals (DEP calls exposed people “receptors”). If they obtained an RPS scoring document and found out they were at risk, they would demand action by the DEP.

In fact, in 2002 the DEP Assistant Commissioner who oversaw the DEP’s toxic site cleanup program warned DEP Commissioner Campbell that the DEP had kept the RPS scores for over 6,000 toxic sites secret and that thousands of contaminated sites were “not being addressed” (read the full DEP memo):

DEP kept what it described as “Significant” and “sensitive” data secret for YEARS.

Here is how the DEP currently downplays and describes the “Remedial Priority Scoring” (RPS):

The Remedial Priority System is a computerized modeling system designed to help the Department to categorize sites based on potential risk to public health, safety or the environment. […]

RPS was mandated pursuant to The [1976] Spill Compensation and Control Act (N.J.S.A. 58:10-23.16) as amended in section 39 of P.L. 2009, c.60 of the Site Remediation Reform Act (SRRA) which states “…the department shall establish a ranking system that establishes categories in which to rank sites based upon the level of risk to the public health, safety, or the environment, the length of time the site has been undergoing remediation, the economic impact of the contaminated site on the municipality and on surrounding property, and any other factors deemed relevant by the department.”

The original 1976 RPS law was amended in 2009 to expand the RPS from not only a risk management tool, but also a method to “categorize” contaminated sites for purposes of the new privatized cleanup program created by that 2009 law (SRRA).

Under the 2009 privatization law, low and medium risk RPS sites are given to private cleanup contractors (LSRPs) with little or no DEP oversight.

DEP only has direct oversight of a small fraction of the high priority/high risk sites.

When the DEP cleanup program was privatized in 2009, there was a lot of political pressure to minimize the number of DEP direct oversight sites - and thus eliminate the DEP “backlog” - and maximize the number of private LSRP sites.

These political pressures and the absolute incompetence of the DEP review and RPS for Aeromarine are a significant reason why the DEP failed in Keyport.

The “low priority” RPS scoring allowed the AeroMarine site cleanup to be addressed by a private contractor - Pacer Holdings - known as an LSRP, with little or no DEP oversight. This IS A BIG REASON why there was no DEP action at Aeromarine site.

The RPS document suggests that the DEP toxic site cleanup program apparently didn’t even KNOW the landfill existed and the RPS documents show they IGNORED groundwater pollution data and the 2010 Remedial Investigation that found high levels of volatile organic compounds in landfill gas.

Incredibly, the DEP RPS found the following risks to public health and the environment from the AeroMarine complex “Not Applicable”:

• Air Threat

• Surface Gas Threat

• Groundwater Threat

• Potential Release Threat

• Fire and Explosion Threat

The ONLY “contaminants of concern” DEP found at the site were “fuel oil” and “waste oil”.

Based on those two contaminants of concern, DEP found minor risks to surface water and direct contact with soils.

The DEP ignored documented groundwater contamination and the extremely high landfill gas VOC levels documented in the 2010 Remedial Investigation.

The DEP staffer who prepared the RPS document apparently didn’t even know a landfill existed at the site.

Source: NJ DEP - note that the DEP evaluator did not sign the RPS document and it looks like the scribbled date is “10/13”. These are bureaucratic red flags.

This kind of incompetence and negligence, recalls the shocking Kiddie Kollege daycare tragedy, where DEP negligence allowed scores of toddlers to be exposed to extremely high levels of toxic mercury. The levels in the building were so high that DEP warned its own inspectors to wear breathing apparatus before entering the building.

DEP has some explaining to do.

[Full disclosure: In the late 1980’s I supervised a small unit at DEP that conducted “Preliminary Assessment/Site Investigation” (PA/SI) at RCRA hazardous waste management sites - 3 of the 5 staff had PhD’s in chemistry - and was involved in developing the Department’s first “Case Management strategy” for remediation of toxic sites, so have some direct knowledge of these issues.]

(FDR’s “Little White House”, Warm Springs, Georgia. Photo Bill Wolfe)

I just now got around to reading the US Supreme Court’s latest outrage, in the decision to basically allow Trump to wreck the White House and build his garish ballroom and bunker (Hitler had one too, The Führerbunker).

Despite the obvious and undisputed fact that Congress must approve any building on White House grounds and Trump had no legal authority, the Court did not rule on whether Trump’s ballroom demolition project was legally authorized. They knew it was NOT and that it was illegal.

No, instead of standing up to Trump’s grotesque abuse of power, the cowards ruled that the plaintiff in the lawsuit challenging Trump - The National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United States - lacked legal “standing” to sue.

The Court ruled that these Trust preservation folks had not demonstrated a sufficient “injury in fact” and a ‘concrete and particularized injury”.

This court actually ruled the country’s leading historic preservation group - whose core mission is historic preservation - has no standing to sue to block the destruction of the White House, one of the nation’s most historic and symbolic buildings.

The Court dismissed the Trust’s expert’s statement of injury, a woman named Hoagland. Here’s how the dissent described Ms. Hoagland (bold is mine):

Hoagland, meanwhile, is deeply committed to the preservation of such historic American buildings, as evidenced by her decades-long membership in the Trust, leadership role in the organization, academic work as a professor of history and historic preservation, volunteer work providing presentations on the District of Columbia’s historic architecture, and authorship of works on historic American architecture. Hoagland enjoys viewing and appreciating such buildings in person. As a Capitol Hill resident, Hoagland regularly visits the White House to take in the historic building’s beauty and to appreciate its symbolism. By over-shadowing the traditional White House, Hoagland explains, the new ballroom will detract from the building’s message of republican simplicity and thereby worsen her viewing experience.

I just can’t get my head around how twisted the Justice’s thinking must be to rule that this group, with this expert, and on this building, lacked standing.

If this standing test were to be applied as precedent by the Court - instead of just a one off the avoid angering Trump - there would be veery, very few environmental lawsuits that could demonstrate standing. So legally, the decision could be a disaster.

That is just corrupt to its core.

But this is how the dissent diplomatically and respectfully disagrees: (and the decision was so bad that even Chief Justice Roberts joined the dissent)

The White House is not just any building, and—when it comes to historic preservation—Hoagland is not just any person. In failing to appreciate as much, the Court misconceives the plaintiff ’s injury, allowing the Executive’s likely infringement of the Legislature’s power of the purse and authority to regulate federal property in the District of Columbia to continue. Today’s decision is no victory for the separation of powers.

To get my head out of the Court’s sewer, I went back and looked at photos of my visit to FDR’s “Little White House” in Warm Springs Georgia.

According to Georgia State Parks and the National Park Service, Warm Springs was the birthplace of the New Deal:

Built in 1932 for just $8,738, the single-story, six-room clapboard cottage was viewed positively during the Great Depression. Its simplicity served as a powerful visual symbol of solidarity with everyday Americans who were facing severe economic hardship

Warm Springs was culturally romanticized as the place where FDR bonded with rural, working-class southerners. This environment heavily inspired his New Deal agricultural and rural electrification policies.

The house was designed by architect Henry Toombs in the Colonial Revival style, which was deeply rooted in traditional American architecture.

Compare all that to Trump’s garish gold laced ballroom and his Billionaire backed fascist policies.

All this is what 5 votes on the US Supreme Court chose to ignore.

Take a look - the contrast with Trump could not be more absolute.

This is what dignity, restraint, simplicity, compassion, craftsmanship, work, respect for nature, and character look like. The values that gave us the New Deal - a philosophical place we must get back to:

Note that DEP sends the message to corporate industry, don’t worry: DEP will only use the results of this study to design more studies, identify “possible” sources, and improve extraction methods - in other words NOT TO REGULATE.

We will tee up the regulation issues very soon in a petition for rulemaking that will at least force DEP to put its industry science cards on the table.

Gov. Sherrill must be desperate for some evidence of an achievement in protecting public health and the environment and in pushing back against the Trump administration’s rollbacks and “dismantling of the administrative state”.

Thus far, the Gov. and her DEP have done nothing (but rollbacks) on the regulatory and policy front and been AWOL in that Trump battle.

But yesterday, the Sherrill administration Attorney General Davenport issued another misleading press release, about her letter to the Trump EPA, see:

• AG Davenport Renews Call for EPA Action on Microplastics

There are a number of problems with this press release:

First, it recycles the Murphy Administration’s November 2025 petition to EPA (see Murphy press release). Therefore, the AG has broken no new ground and the Sherrill Administration can not take credit for doing anything.

The AG’s letter to EPA notes this:

As was discussed in the petition submitted by the seven Governors of New Jersey, Delaware, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan,Wisconsin, and Connecticut (“Governors’ Petition”) to EPA on November 26, 2025, microplastics are contaminants that are widespread, persistent, and increasingly present in our nation’s water systems. To properly understand and neutralize the health risks microplastics pose, comprehensive, federally mandated data collection and monitoring of the nation’s drinking water supplies for microplastics is both necessary and mandated by the Safe Water Drinking Act (“SWDA”).

But, in contrast, the AG’s press release creates an impression of leadership by the AG, claiming she “led” a comment letter (OMG! what bold leadership! a Comment letter! And after Trump EPA ignored the prior Murphy petition and screwed you!):

TRENTON — Attorney General Jennifer Davenport led a comment letter to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) once again urging it to include microplastics on its Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR) 6. The letter follows two prior multistate efforts — both led by New Jersey — requesting the inclusion of microplastics on this list of contaminants. The newly filed letter was joined by 12 other attorneys general.

Second, and far more importantly, substantively, the AG’s position is deeply troubling from a science and regulatory policy perspective.

The AG deploys the longstanding corporate excuse to do nothing: there is not enough data to impose regulations.

The AG literally parrots the chemical industry’s position on scientific uncertainty and regulation. The AG wrote:

“We are still learning the extent of the health risks posed to all of us by microplastics, and to respond appropriately we need more data,” said Attorney General Davenport. “Given that kids are particularly at risk from exposure to these tiny plastic fragments, it is especially important that the EPA require greater data collection and monitoring to inform further action to protect public health.”

Did you get that? “We need more data”. There is not enough data - i.e. scientific uncertainty - so government can’t regulate.

That is the OPPOSITE of the public health oriented policy to scientific uncertainty, which is known as the Precautionary Principle.

Gov. Sherrill’s administration joins a long list of corporate abuse on the issues of scientific uncertainty and the scientific burden required to justify regulation.

• This is exactly what the tobacco industry argued about smoking and the risk of cancer.

• This is exactly what the mining industry argued about the cancer risks of asbestos and coal dust.

• This is exactly what the chemical industry argued to block regulation of toxic chemicals.

• This is exactly what Big Oil and the fossil fuel industry argued about climate change.

That is a very long story, going back to early work on exposure to radiation, occupational exposure to lead, risks of lead in paints and gasoline, Rachel Carson’s expose on pesticides/herbicides/chemicals, asbestos and coal dust, regulation of synthetic chemicals, etc.

The first - and in my view the best - book on these issues is the 2008 book “Doubt is their product” by David Michaels. Michaels is the pioneer and he supports his arguments with strong science, but he gets little credit.

Let’s get back to the AG’s press release to show how this industry friendly policy with respect to scientific uncertainty and data is implemented by the Sherrill DEP.

The AG’s press release quotes (still!) Acting DEP Commissioner Potosnak, who also points the finger at EPA and doubles down on the AG’s views of science and regulation:

“New Jersey urges the federal government to do the right thing by requiring national testing to better understand the impact pollution from microplastics is having on the safety of our drinking water,” New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Acting Commissioner Ed Potosnak said. “Pollution from microplastics is widespread in the environment — and our understanding of the potential public health consequences is rapidly expanding, especially for children. By conducting microplastics monitoring across the nation, we will be able to develop strategies and standards to protect the health of all Americans.”

But what Potosnak and the AG’s press release did not mention is critical:

• DEP has existing legal authority under NJ’s Safe Drinking Water Act to set a NJ State “maximum contaminant level” (MCL), for microplastics. There is existing treatment technology available to remove microplastics from drinking water. So all this would take is for Potosnak to formally request that the NJ Drinking Water Quality Institute conduct research and submit a recommended MCL to him. This could be done in less than 6 months. DEP would then propose and adopt an MCL regulation. This could be done in 6 months as well.

• DEP has existing authority under NJ State Water Pollution Control Act to set surface and groundwater standards for microplastics to protect the physical, chemical and biological quality of NJ’s waters;

• DEP has existing authority under NJ Water Pollution Control Act to regulate the discharge of water pollution (NJPDES permits) to reduce the discharge of microplastic to the waters of the state; and

• DEP’s own Division of Science and Research recently published a study on microplastics and wastewater and surface water: “Microplastic Analysis in NJ Wastewater Treatment Systems and Receiving Water Bodies”:

And here is the tell, in DEP’s own fact sheet explaining what the study can and should be used for.

Look at how DEP actually implements the AG’s industry friendly policy with respect to scientific uncertainty and regulation.

This critical statement of regulatory policy is buried in the final paragraph of the fact sheet:

How will DEP use the data?

Research related to microplastics is an emerging priority for the State of New Jersey. This study provides one of the first datasets regarding the fate and transport of microplastics through WWTPs in NJ. The results can guide NJDEP with designing future microplastic- related studies, identifying possible sources of microplastics within the state, and improving extraction methods of microplastics from water samples.

Note that DEP claims that this issue is “emerging” (not already here and documented) and therefore is not ripe and it is premature to regulate.

Note that DEP emphasizes that the is “one of the first datasets” - a classic example of “we need more data before we can regulate”.

Note that DEP sends the message to corporate industry, don’t worry: DEP will only use the results of this study to design more studies, identify “possible” sources, and improve extraction methods - in other words NOT TO REGULATE.

We will tee up the regulation issues very soon in a petition for rulemaking that will at least force DEP to put its industry science cards on the table.

In the meantime, don’t be fooled by this vile and wicked gaslighting by a corporate democratic administration that is desperate to show results on the environment and public health.

• Governor Sherrill Signs Legislation Giving New Jerseyans Cleaner, More Affordable Energy at Their Fingertips

As usual, the Gov. used this bill to take another Neoliberal cheap shot at regulations - she just can’t help herself:

This bill cuts unnecessary red tape, expands access to affordable solar power, and proves that affordability and sustainability can go hand in hand."

Not even Gov. Chris Christie (Ex. Order #2 “regulatory relief”) and Red Tape Review Commission Lt. Kim Guadagno would stoop that low (harvesting the “red tape” coins under the couch cushions).

So called “balcony solar systems” will not address the energy affordability crisis and will NOT reduce energy costs, which are the result of a rigged PJM market.

They will produce very little power and this solar generation capacity, cumulatively, will have virtually no impact on greenhouse gas emissions.

In certain remote, mobile, or off grid applications, these systems make sense. But not in suburban NJ, where they are boutique.

I had 300 watts of solar on the roof of my Skoolie bus, initially paired with 400 amp hour lead acid batteries which I replaced with equivalent and lighter 200 amp hour lithium. I had a large capacity inverter, forgot the data on that. System ran refrigerator, lights, devices etc.

I paid less than $100 per 100 watt solar panel (back in 2017), so $285 for a 180 watt panel (plus inverter) seems like a lot (Source: NJ Sierra).

AI:

The $50 per month savings marketing claim - accepted at face value and reported asa a fact by NJ Spotlight - relies on flawless, idealized physics that do not align with real-world apartment living.

When you factor in vertical mounting losses, weather patterns, sub-optimal angles, and the reality that households do not have a perfectly flat daytime power demand, the actual monthly savings drop significantly to between $3 and $12.

Regardless, these systems are not only micro, they are additive capacity and don’t displace any fossil generation, so produce no GHG emissions reductions. I have not researched the lifecycle impacts, but it’s possible they might be counter-productive and actually increase GHG emissions.

So Gov. Sherrill’s claims about the bill are, at best, exaggerated.

And she exaggerates her energy record and leaves A LOT out:

This action builds on Governor Sherrill’s aggressive energy agenda to lower costs for New Jerseyans. During her inaugural address, Governor Sherrill signed Executive Orders 1 and 2 to freeze rate hikes and accelerate new energy generation, particularly affordable, clean energy that can be deployed quickly. Since then, the Sherrill Administration has approved 18 new solar and battery storage projects, announced a historic expansion of community solar to 3,000 megawatts, signed legislation to hold data centers and utility companies accountable, as well as fast-tracking advanced grid technologies that will help cut costs. Together, these actions are estimated to save New Jersey ratepayers $1 billion annually.

The Facts: Electricity rates are not frozen, they are increasing. The Gov.’s Executive Orders accelerated and deregulated DEP approvals to promote natural gas (fossil) power plants. The Gov.’s nuclear project will increase costs and ratepayer risks. The Gov.’s claimed solar and battery projects were not hers - they were developed by the Murphy administration. The benefits of those project will be offset by lost reductions in energy demand and GHG emissions reductions that would have resulted from projects -but failed to be realized - due to her diversion of $1 billion in clean energy investments (RGGI and Clean Energy Fund). The Gov. raided these funds to send $25 credit checks to create the false appearance that she has frozen rates. The Gov.s data center bill does NOT mandate use of renewable energy. The Gov. appointed a corporate “large load” (e.g. for data centers) consultant as BPU President. And the Gov. was AWOL at a key FERC PJM reform conference.

The Gov. also continues to use the NJ League of Conservation Voters (NJLCV) for political support:

Plug-in solar gives New Jersey families another tool to lower their energy costs while expanding access to clean, homegrown energy. By making it easier for renters and homeowners alike to take advantage of solar, the Garden State Balcony Solar Act will help make our clean energy transition more affordable, accessible, and equitable," said Jesse Sutherland, Political and Policy Director, of New Jersey LCV. "We congratulate Governor Sherrill, Senator McKeon, and Assemblyman Calabrese on this important step forward, and thank them for their leadership in making clean energy more accessible to all New Jerseyans."

This is unethical. The NJ LCV endorsed her candidacy and they donated almost $2 million to her campaign.

Sherrill’ current Acting Commissioner Potosnak was the former Director of NJLCV. He is still in an “Acting” capacity 8 months after the Gov. was sworn in.

I believe that Potasnak can not be sworn in because he violates NJ State Ethics laws on conflicts of interest and is under a 1 year prohibition issued by the State Ethics Commission in response to my complaint.

So the Gov. should just STOP using NJLCV politically.

What DEP is doing in Keyport does NOT COME CLOSE to complying with or meeting the minimum technical requirements of DEP’s own VI Guidance or regulations.

Not even close.

If corporate consultant submitted the DEP’s VI sampling plan, it would be immediately rejected.

DEP responded today to my Open Public Records Act (OPRA) request for the vapor intrusion sampling plan they are implementing in Keyport, in response to community concerns about a cancer cluster (documents provided upon request).

I also requested copies of EPA and external expert or peer review comments on the sampling plan.

• There was no public process for developing the sampling plan.

• There was no external review, peer review, and any other expert review of the DEP’s plan.

I was not surprised by that. DEP has long kept the vapor intrusion issues in house and corporate consultants captured DEP a long time ago.

But I was very surprised that the DEP sampling plan provided absolutely no justification of even cursory explanation of the sampling plan, i.e. 1) why it was being developed, 2) what sources, receptors, and impacts it was designed to evaluate, 3) what pollutants were targeted for sampling, and 4) the rationale for the number and location of the sampling sites.

The DEP’s Vapor Intrusion Guidance (VI) document calls the above information a “conceptual site model” and it is required and must be included in a vapor intrusion investigation.

According to the DEP VI:

This guidance is designed to help the person responsible for conducting the remediation to comply with the Department’s requirements established by the Technical Requirements for Site Remediation (TRSR or Technical Rules), N.J.A.C. 7:26E, dated May 2012. This guidance will be used by many different people involved in the remediation of a contaminated site; such as Licensed Site Remediation Professionals (LSRP), Non-LSRP environmental consultants and other environmental professionals. Therefore, the generic term “investigator” will be used to refer to any person that uses this guidance to remediate a contaminated site on behalf of a remediating party, including the remediating party itself.

The procedures for a person to vary from the technical requirements in regulation are outlined in the Technical Rules at N.J.A.C. 7:26E-1.7. Variances from a technical requirement or departure from guidance must be documented and adequately supported with data or other information. In applying technical guidance, the Department recognizes that professional judgment may result in a range of interpretations on the application of the guidance to site conditions.

The DEP is the “investigator” in Keyport.

As I’ve previously written, a 2010 Remedial Investigation documented extremely high levels of soil gas and those levels exceeded DEP’s VI soil gas screening values and therefore triggered a broader vapor intrusion investigation. More recently sampling in May 2026 also found high soil gas that exceeded DEP screening levels.

Here is DEP VI Guidance:

2.1.4 Soil Gas Exceedance of SGSL

Existing soil gas data are compared to the Department’s SGSL. An exceedance of these screening levels will necessitate further evaluation of the VI exposure pathway (per N.J.A.C. 7:26E-1.15).

But what DEP is doing as the “investigator” in Keyport does NOT COME CLOSE to complying with or meeting the minimum requirements of DEP’s own VI Guidance or regulations (e.g. se: 7:26E-1.12 Receptor evaluation - general and reporting requirements and NJAC 7:26E-1.15) and no one is even talking about this: 7:26E-1.16 Receptor evaluation - ecological).

Not even close.

If a corporate consultant submitted the DEP’s VI sampling plan, it would be immediately rejected as “administratively incomplete” and “technically deficient”.

DEP is not following their own rules.

DEP has provided no public input into the vapor investigation.

Yet DEP claims publicly to be doing everything possible to determine the source of the toxic problems at the Aeromrine landfill and be fully transparent and inform the community.

BTW, the DEP’s Vapor Intrusion Guidance document was significantly influenced by corporate consultants for the corporate polluters.

Here is the DEP “Stakeholder Committee” that developed that Guidance - DEP even took the unprecedented step of involving retired DEP employees! (but couldn’t manage to find one scientist or public health expert).

Note that there are 7 corporate consulting firms represented, but no academic scientists of public health advocates:

Department/Stakeholder Vapor Intrusion Guidance Committee

• Carey Compton, Chair, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

• Nicole Kalaigian, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

• John Boyer, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Retiree

• Ken Bird, Woodard & Curran Consultants

• Brian Blum, Langan Consultants

• Scott Drew, Geosyntec Consultants

• John Engdahl, Speedway

• Erica Snyder, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

• Diane Groth, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Retiree

• Andrew Sites, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Retiree

• Peter Sorge, JM Sorge, Inc., Environmental Consultants

• Chad VanSciver, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

• Additional Technical Assistance:

  Gunnar Barr, OBAR Systems

  Bill Morris, Vapor Mitigation Sciences

The fox designed the hen house.

Under DEP’s privatized toxic site cleanup program, the fox also certifies the safety of the hen house.

And here we are.

I have no idea what “energy related bill” Gov. Sherrill will sign tomorrow.

But I sure hope the NJ media will ask the Governor how - specifically - the bill will reduce energy costs to NJ consumers and reduce NJ’s greenhouse gas emissions.

Will Gov. Sherrill kill the pending $729 million rate increase?

With climate catastrophe happening across the world, the prime imperative is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Thus far, Gov. Sherrill has done NOTHING to reduce emissions and has said little about the need to do so.

We’’ll let you know what’s going on tomorrow when we find out what bill she signed.

I’m not optimistic.

There seems to be some confusion and reluctance in Keyport NJ and media circles to understand and report about the critical issue of “vapor intrusion”.

So I thought I’d again post this 2002 warning memo to the DEP Commissioner about the risks of vapor intrusion, which the DEP at the time called “Indoor Air From Contaminated Groundwater”.

I was there and participated in transmitting this information to Commissioner Brad Campbell, see this 2002 DEP “Vulnerability Assessment” memo.

The memo warned about these risk and also about the fact that DEP had approved “natural attenuation” cleanups and groundwater “Classification Exception Areas” (CEAs) at over 1,400 toxic sites. These sites had contaminated groundwater that may now be seeping into nearby buildings via vapor intrusion. This was something DEP failed to consider in issuing cleanup approvals and setting groundwater and soil cleanup standards.

“Natural attenuation” was where DEP allowed pollution to be left in the groundwater to dilute and biodegrade, instead of being cleaned up, which costs a lot of money. A CEA was the legal mechanism that allowed this to happen because it waived compliance with the groundwater standards within the mapped groundwater pollution plume. These are known as “institutional controls” (some call them “pave and waive” cleanups).

DEP scientists also warned that the groundwater standards did NOT consider vapor intrusion risks.

So the cleanup standards and the cleanup approaches were deeply flawed.

DEP now understood that these site could be causing vapors to migrate into people’s homes.

It was a MASSIVE OOPS!

And DEP has been covering that up for the last 25 years.

This is what is at stake in Keyport, NJ. This is what DEP does not want you to know.

The people of Pompon Lakes faced EXACTLY the same DEP obfuscation, where the Dupont site poisoned 450 homes with toxic vapor intrusion.

When will the media and the local activists make this clear?

(Source: screenshot of Google Maps, “Rochester, NY”, 8/30/26)

President Trump’s Order attempting to rename Lake Ontario “Lake America” is a sham: it has no legal effect, other than on executive branch agencies.

In fact, the Order gives those federal agencies 30 days to comply:

b) Within 30 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) shall, in coordination with the Board on Geographic Names and consistent with 43 U.S.C. 364 through 364f, take all appropriate actions to rename as “Lake America” the body of water currently named as Lake Ontario, bounded on the south and east by the State of New York, and on the north, west, and southwest by the Canadian province of Ontario. The Secretary, conjointly with the Board on Geographic Names, shall subsequently update the Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) to reflect the renaming of the Lake and remove all references to Lake Ontario from the GNIS, consistent with applicable law. The Board on Geographic Names shall provide guidance to ensure all Federal Government references to Lake Ontario, including on executive department and agency maps, contracts, and other documents and communications, shall reflect its renaming.

The Order has not been implemented by federal agencies yet.

The Order does not apply to Google Maps.

Yet in a disgusting display of cowardice, Google Maps immediately revised its maps to bow to Trump’s insane bullshit.

Who the hell runs Google Maps? They need to be fired, like yesterday.

(Source: Handex Consulting & Remediation, LLC)

After months of denial and gaslighting, the Sherrill DEP finally agreed to conduct a limited vapor intrusion investigation in Keyport, NJ, location of a suspected cancer cluster, see:

• Sherrill DEP Concedes - Reluctantly Begins Limited Sampling For Vapor Intrusion In Cancer Cluster Keyport, NJ

The DEP has zero credibility on the vapor intrusion issue, because they have denied it and withheld or downplayed data about known vapor risks for months.

So, one would think that they would be acutely aware of and sensitive to issues of trust and credibility.

One would be wrong.

DEP hired Handex Consulting & Remediation, LLC, a Florida based firm, whose clients are mostly major corporate polluters.

Handex’s clients include links to Trump, which they proudly advertise. (see above)

But that’s not all - look at all these major corporate polluters Handex represents:

WTF was DEP thinking?

The corporate polluters Handex represents have BILLIONS of dollars of cleanup liability from the impacts of vapor intrusion.

Does DEP - or anyone - really think that they are going to aggressively seek sources of vapor intrusion in Keyport to document a cancer cluster?

Rigorous scientific methods and sensitive sampling might implicate billions of dollars of liability for their current clients and impair the opportunity to gain future corporate polluter clients.

This is not the way for DEP to build trust, just the opposite.

I fired off a letter to Senate Environment Committee Chairman Smith in hopes of getting him involved, if only to do damage control:

Dear Chairman Smith - I don’t want to go into all the issues at play in Keyport, because I think you are aware of my various longstanding criticisms.

I think we all know that there are many people involved, some with good intentions but many with very destructive political agendas. Trust is gone. And perhaps rightly so.

We can all look to the DEP REAL climate rules and wind debates for the most recent examples of that.

So given that context, and the deep lack of trust in DEP, why would DEP procure Handex Consulting & Remediation, LLC, a Florida based firm, whose clients are mostly major corporate polluters?:

https://www.hcr-llc.com/clients

It was a good idea to go out of State, but a more independent or academic source would have been more appropriate.

DEP just opened themselves up to the criticism I am forced to and going to deploy.

Another dumb move. Are the Sherrill people just incompetent?

Wolfe

Wait until your neighbor puts a couple of trailers in the back of her 1 acre suburban lot - as “accessory dwelling units” (allowed at a density of 3 per acre!)

This would be legal after the local planning board quietly recommends zoning changes so that the town does not lose State funding and have to increase local property taxes.

[Update: 8/31/26 - Gov. Sherrill imported the California “abidance” agenda to NJ, see:

• Living In “Abundance” - At 150 Square Feet ~~~ end update]

There was no Sherrill press release on this one.

For decades, any move by the State Planning Commission or the Department of Environmental Protection to impose State land use policy or environmental regulations on towns was aggressively opposed and met with a barrage of resistance based on “HOME RULE”.

The State Plan must be VOLUNTARY!

Town demanded: State Mandate - State Pay!

Limits on development in the Pinelands and the Highlands had to be accompanied by State aid to offset the loss of property tax ratables. The “planning area” development restrictions had to be voluntary - the strictest limits could not be mandatory there!

DEP was blocked from implementing the State Plan land use policies in DEP land use, water resource, and infrastructure programs - oh no, DEP can’t do any of that! It would limit development and violate HOME RULE and impose costs on towns.

Well all that was just reversed by a bill Gov. Sherrill quietly signed into law yesterday, see S2960 Sca (1R).

We now have a twisted regime of indirect State land use mandate to develop - or else the State will take away funding. Literally the last 50 years of State land use planning and regulation was stood on its head.

Bill Statement:

this bill establishes a program to incentivize municipalities to amend their master plans and development regulations by incorporating certain housing strategies for the purpose of enhancing the development potential of property for residential purposes at greater densities.

The law basically penalizes towns that manage growth, protect natural resources, promote open space, maintain community character, and protect local property tax payers from bearing the huge costs of over development for local services, like schools, fire, police, etc.

The housing development strategies in the bill are a builders wet dream. Some of them are radical and are certain to be rejected by many towns, virtually all rural and most suburban towns.

What this will do is either promote totally inappropriate and destructive development and/or result in a huge shift in State funding from rural/suburban to more urban towns.

Take a look at these strategies - do they have ANY public support?

Is anyone even aware of the fact that this bill was just signed into law?

(a) permit development of an accessory dwelling unit in addition to a single-unit dwelling on developable lots in areas restricted to the development of single-unit dwellings;

(b) permit development of a two-unit dwelling on lots in areas restricted to the development of single-unit dwellings;

(c) permit development of a three-unit dwelling on lots in areas restricted to the development of single-unit dwellings;

(d) eliminate or reduce off-street parking requirements;

(e) eliminate or reduce minimum lot size requirements;

(f) permit the siting of manufactured housing or a mobile home on lots in areas restricted to the development of single-unit dwellings;

(g) permit development of a multi-unit dwelling or a mixed-use development on lots zoned exclusively for office, retail, or commercial uses;

(h) permit development of a multi-unit dwelling on at least 10 percent of the developable land within the municipality;

(i) permit higher density housing near transit stops; and

(j) eliminate or reduce minimum size requirements for dwelling units.

Here’s what elimination of minimum size requirements would look like, see:

• Living In “Abundance” - At 150 Square Feet

These are the same growth and development strategies that the builders and banks have been seeking for decades, but were blocked by a coalition of environmental groups, suburban and rural towns who didn’t want to be paved over like Bergen or Hudson counties, and affordable housing advocates who didn’t want to be used politically to promote the NJ Builders Association agenda .

And the law penalizes towns that LIMIT growth via a top down State mandate on land use, imposed under the guise of a State “incentive” program.

So State mandates that violate HOME RULE to PROMOTE GROWTH are OK, but are taboo if they limit growth.

Wait until your neighbor puts a couple of trailers in the back of her 1 acre suburban lot - as “accessory dwelling units” (could be at a density of 3 units/acre!).

This would be legal after the local planning board quietly recommends zoning changes so that the town does not lose State funding and have to increase local property taxes.

You’ll find out about all this after the builders proposed inappropriate developments that are now allowed under your new zoning scheme driven by this new law.

For a good summary of the bill, check out this article. The headline is misleading click bait, because the law does not withhold State funding. It would limit a town’s ability to receive certain State funds, including reduced school construction funding:

• NJ To Punish Towns Who Don’t OverBuild By Withholding State Funding For Schools

I assume that this was sold by the Democrats and Gov. Sherrill as part of her “affordability” program.

You really can’t make this stuff up -

Let me share a terrifying passage from Chapter 5 “Guardrails” (page 84 - 86) - does it sound familiar? (boldface mine)

Hitler had vowed privately that “no force on earth” could remove him from office as he entered the Reich Chancellery on the afternoon of January 30, a conviction he appeared to repeat publicly in his February Sport Palace speech. “If the German people abandon us at this hour, then that shall not deter us”, Hitler said that evening. “We will take the path necessary to make certain that Germany does not perish.” The two sentences were excluded form the official transcript of the Hitler speech, as Vossische Zeitung observed, leading the newspaper to wonder, “Might this deletion have been intended to conceal unconstitutional scheming?”

Hitler signaled similar intransigence in the days that followed. Speaking before a crowd of seventy thousand … on February 13, Hitler stated his intent to remain in office “regardless” - so oder so - of the election outcome. “If today, millions turn against me, they may be certain of this,” Hitler said. “I would rather bear the hatred of millions of my opponents than the contempt of my followers.”…

Hitler repeated the same sentiment … in a press conference for reporters in Berlin the next day. …. “The only majority capable of accomplishing anything politically,” Hitler said “is the one that declares its support for the current Reich government.” Hitler was determined to fulfill his political vision, he said, “even if the entire nation pelts me with stones.”

Hitler’s political intransigence and rhetorical belligerence had long fueled storm troop loyalty and violence. When Hitler vowed that “heads will roll”, his storm troops took him at his word. Following the national socialists’ July 1932 triumph in the Reichstag elections, expectations ran high that Hitler would be appointed chancellor. Violence spiked. In the most notorious incident, nine national socialists broke into an immigrant household in the village of Potempa on the Polish border, and kicked to death a young man, Konrad Pietzuch, in front of his mother and brother, then put a bullet in him for good measure. The “bestial murders” committed by the “soldiers of the Reich chancellor candidate Hitler” shocked the nation with its naked brutality, including Hindenburg who told Hitler on August 13, two days after the killing, that he could not entrust the government to a political party whose followers were “so intolerant, undisciplined, and in addition, so violent in their behavior.”

Hitler asked Hindenburg to “have a bit of understanding” for his followers, who, Hitler admitted, “sometimes get a little excited.” […]

On August 22, when 5 of the 9 suspects were sentenced to death in the Pietzuch killing, Hitler sent a telegram to the “Potempa Five.’ “My Comrades!” Hitler wrote. “In the face of this monstrous blood sentence, I feel bound to you in eternal loyalty.” Securing their freedom, Hitler wrote, was henceforth a matter of “honor and duty”.

• “Asked how the governor views the [$250 million] tax break, Maggie Garbarino, Sherrill’s deputy press secretary, said: “New Jersey has earned a strong reputation as a hub for innovation, and Gov. Sherrill welcomes new opportunities to attract businesses—such as data centers—to our state.” ~~~ ICN, 2/26/26

• “Sherrill wants it both ways: she touts AI and data centers as investments, jobs, and NJ’s high tech future, but she hides behind slogans and rhetoric about “guardrails”. But when you read the legislation, there are no real “guardrails” at all. ~~~ NYT, 8/23/26

• AFP Applauds Gov. Sherrill for Signing Data Center Bill, Choosing Prosperity Over Moratorium

Gov. Sherrill signed two bills into law yesterday on data centers, but her press release only mentions one of them.

And that omission is the tell.

I) The recent rhetorical U-turn and walk back

The Gov.’s press release did not mention that she signed a bill into law that revokes $250 million (of the $500 million) in tax credits allocated to data centers, see S4390.

The Gov. did not mention that she signed that bill for 2 reasons:

First, it would reveal that until very recently, NJ Democrats and Gov. Sherrill were all in on data centers, and even provided $500 million in tax credits to attract them to NJ. That was Gov Sherrill’s position as recently as February 26, 2026.

Second, it would reveal that she failed to revoke $250 million in tax credits issued to CoreWeave, a computing company based in Livingston that is building a 392,600-square-foot data center in Kenilworth, worth approximately $1.8 billion, see Inside Climate News on February 26, 2026):

• Amid Affordability Crisis, New Jersey Hands $250 Million Tax Break to Data Center

Asked how the governor views the tax break, Maggie Garbarino, Sherrill’s deputy press secretary, said: “New Jersey has earned a strong reputation as a hub for innovation, and Gov. Sherrill welcomes new opportunities to attract businesses—such as data centers—to our state.”

While President Trump has rescinded BILLIONS of dollars of funding for renewable energy and infrastructure authorized by Congress and allocated by the Biden administration, Gov. Sherrill just can’t seem to bring herself to revoke the $250 million corporate welfare check to CoreWeave (an absurdly huge subsidy, at $350,000 per job created per year!).

Like many other corporate Democrats across the country, Gov. Sherrill is desperately trying to quietly walk back that pro-data center policy due to the recent growth of strong public opposition.

Last Sunday, the NY Times ran a good story on that national walk back and the hypocrisy of some Democrats, with a focus on Pennsylvania Gov. Shapiro:

• The Data Center Backlash Bursts Into The Midterms

Gov. Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania, a potential Democratic candidate for president in 2028, had been a booster of A.I. investments. In June 2025, Mr. Shapiro said he was “proud” of Amazon’s $20 billion data center investment, bragging it would be the largest private sector investment in the state’s history.

On Tuesday, Mr. Shapiro signed an executive order imposing what he called the “strictest guardrails in the nation” to stop “predatory developers.”

“I’ve heard loud and clear from the people of Pennsylvania,” said Mr. Shapiro, who is up for re-election this year.

Now Mr. Shapiro has started airing a television ad attacking his Republican challenger, Stacy Garrity, as the “number one fan of data centers.” Ms. Garrity has her own ad hitting Mr. Shapiro for “data centers in our backyards,” but her campaign can afford only a small fraction of the airtime.”

Here was my reader comment on that NYT story, which I was surprised they printed:

You should have reported on how NJ Gov. Sherrill has promoted data centers and not walked any of it back. She moved very quickly and rammed a bill through the legislature before public opposition could build. On day one, she issued an Executive Order on "guardrails" and the legislature later passed a bill, which is toothless and has very vague objectives and no enforceable standards. Sherrill wants it both ways: she touts AI and data centers as investments, jobs, and NJ's high tech future, but she hides behind slogans and rhetoric about "guardrails. But when you read the legislation, there are no real "guardrails" at all. How does she get away with this?

Like Gov. Sherrill, Gov. Shapiro is also spinning like a top - his Executive Order on guardrails is not enforceable and thus performative and his “GRID” EO standards bill is stalled in the legislature.

II) Toothless Transparency

The other bill Gov. Sherrill signed into law yesterday was the so called transparency bill. The Gov. now considers that she has delivered on the “4 Pillars” of her comprehensive plan to provide “guardrails” on data centers.

We disagree, and we take down all 4 pillars and expose them as stunts, not policy.

We even highlight an important and revealing aspect that the Gov. has not mentioned: her corporate “large load” President of BPU.

I wrote a heads up story yesterday on the transparency bill, see:

• NJ Gov. Sherrill Will Sign A Sham Data Center Bill Tomorrow

The bill she will sign tomorrow does absolutely nothing to restrict data centers in terms of land use, energy, or environmental impact. The bill does nothing to regulate the impacts of data centers on the local environment, water resources, energy infrastructure, or greenhouse gas emissions.

The bill is a joke and sets no limits or restrictions on data centers at all.

Backing those harsh conclusions up, I previously wrote in detail about the substance of that bill, so readers can see:

• More Gaslighting On Data Centers

Soup to nuts, Sherrill has rapidly assembled a policy, regulatory, institutional, and personnel regime to rapidly promote data centers and fossil gas power.

And she did so with the cover of NJ Sierra Club.

The only surprise was that Dena Mottola, who clearly knows better, joined the Sierra Club in providing cover to Sherrill.

III) No restrictions on energy use, water use, land use, or air or water pollution

Gov. Sherrill’s data center bill lacks enforceable standards and delegates broad discretion to the BPU, including for so called “bring your own” renewable power. Actually, the bill is a trojan horse for new gas power plants.

As I wrote:

The Gov.’s bill does NOT mandate use of renewables and lacks a definition of “clean generation”. As you know, Gov. Sherrill’s Executive Order No. 2 supports fossil natural gas as clean power and directs DEP to expedite permitting, streamlining DEP regulations and recommend full waivers for natural gas plants to serve data centers, see paragraph #6:

https://www.nj.gov/infobank/eo/057sherrill/pdf/EO-2.pdf.

In addition, Gov. Sherrill rejected a moratorium on data center development until real standards, as advocated by over 60 NJ environmental and climate groups as well as as considered by other states:

• As 15 States Consider Bans On New Data Centers, NJ Gov. Sherrill Is Promoting Them

No need to take my word for it - look who is praising Gov.Sherrill’s data center policy - the Koch Brothers founded corporate right wing Americans For Prosperity:

• AFP Applauds Gov. Sherrill for Signing Data Center Bill, Choosing Prosperity Over Moratorium

IV) State Abdication - Voluntary Local Program

Gov. Sherrill’s press announcement yesterday included new data center programs to “Puts Power Back in the Hands of Communities”.

The Governor also announced new statewide guidance from the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) on CBAs to give municipalities the tools to ensure they are in the strongest negotiating position with data center developers over proposed projects. This guidance was sent to municipalities on August 25, via a Local Finance Notice, and outlines how municipalities can leverage [community benefit agreements] CBAs to help mitigate data center impacts, share in the economic benefits of these projects, and secure meaningful investments for their communities.

The guidance provides key considerations for evaluating impacts on local infrastructure and resources, assessing emergency response and infrastructure needs, and negotiating tangible community investments — from public infrastructure improvements and blight remediation to schools and workforce development programs. It also outlines state labor standards, including prevailing wage and project labor agreement requirements.

This is pure nonsense.

This is not serious.

This amounts to State abdication and delegation to local governments and voluntary programs.

And there are no new DEP regulatory powers to more strictly regulate land use, water use, and air and water pollution.

You can’t do this through State guidance, it requires legislation for host community benefits, off site impact mitigation, and land use controls. Guidance is not law or regulation. It has no binding effect on the private sector - NONE.

Municipal governments have very limited legal authority and no effective bargaining power with the corporate data center sharks.

As a result, they will get screwed and get crumbs in any “negotiations”.

Back in the day, I worked on Host Community Benefit legislation, to provide real money benefits to town for siting and mitigating the negative impacts of solid waste facilities.

Towns need clear legislative authority and strong minimum State standards for land use (MLUL), off site impact mitigation, and host community benefits, not unenforceable Guidance from Shell’s DCA.

Gov. Sherrill’s data center policy is sham.

Yesterday Tump declared a national emergency with respect to the Grid, see: EXECUTIVE ORDER 14420:

Section 1. National Emergency. As President of the United States, my highest duty is protecting the national security, foreign policy, and economy of this country. Certain foreign actors are increasingly creating and exploiting vulnerabilities in the United States bulk-power system, which provides the electricity that supports our national defense, vital emergency services, critical infrastructure, and economy. During my first term, I found that the bulk-power system could be a target of those seeking to commit malicious acts against the United States, including malicious cyber activities, because of the significant risks that a successful attack would have on our economy, human health and safety, and national defense.

Notice the mention of “foreign actors” (Iran?), the link to national defense (legal basis to deploy troops on US soil), and “malicious acts”, “sabotage’ and “subversion” (i.e. terrorism and enemies within, like ANTIFA).

Trump has already issued an Executive Order that designated ANTIFA a terrorist organization. Days later, he issued National Presidential Security Memo 7 that authorized draconian national security crackdowns, see:

• Trump National Security Memorandum Revives COINTELPRO

This Grid National Emergency Order lays a particular and plausible foundation for invoking the Insurrection Act and deploying military troops on US soil. Follow me in connecting the dots - this is not tin foil hat territory:

A few days ago, I read a powerful essay by Ralph Nader:

• Trump’s Plans to Steal the Elections Underway

It linked to a investigative series by the Washington Spectator, where Part 4 laid out detailed scenarios for Trump’s theft of the election - please read the whole terrifying thing:

• It’s the Power, Stupid: Dancing in the Dark, Part 4

Trump has already Federalized National Guard troops and deployed U.S. military personnel to American cities on the basis of alleged emergencies, including high violent crime, widespread homelessness, severe civil unrest, and lawlessness tied to anti-immigration enforcement protests.

The highly credible authors warned that virtually anything is possible - including a false flag - because all norms and laws have been trampled by Trump with little push back an no accountability (in fact the Supreme Court granted Trump immunity which, in concert with his pardon power, has led to impunity).

A terrorism event causing grid collapse would be a very plausible false flag for declaring a national emergency and invoking the Insurrection Act and other Article II implied Presidential emergency powers.

Curiously, just before reading these two essays on Trump’s election theft plans, I noticed that a story about major grid failure had reemerged in the news and was getting a lot of coverage. I first heard it on the BBC radio, see the NY Times scary story is typical:

• The Blackout That Could Devastate America

Why would that old story remerge right now? And be followed immediately by a Trump National Emergency declaration?

So I connected the dots (i.e. Trump Executive Orders, NSPM 7, Grid emergency, and widespread media coverage of the grid collapse story).

Specifically, shortly after reading the Washington Spectator’s Part 4, I retweeted the piece with a comment.

The retweet included a link that documented that the re-emerged grid collapse story was over 14 years old, and warned that “A national grid collapse could be the event that triggers the emergency”:

This was on August 24.

Trump issued the grid National Emergency Order just 2 days later on August 26.

Coincidence? Conspiracy theory?

Or do I smell a conspiracy?

Tomorrow NJ Gov. Sherrill will try to gaslight you about her efforts to regulate data centers and protect NJ ratepayers and the environment. (see above)

The bill she will sign tomorrow does absolutely nothing to restrict data centers in terms of land use, energy, or environmental impact. The bill does nothing to regulate the impacts of date centers on the local environment, water resources, energy infrastructure, or greenhouse gas emissions.

The bill is a joke and sets no limits or restrictions on data centers at all.

The bill merely requires limited reporting. It gives BPU and DEP no power to act on those reports.

The bill (S3379 [2R]):

Mandates that all data center owners and operators in New Jersey prepare and submit semi-annual energy and water usage reports to the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities (BPU) for a period of three years.

Merely requiring reports to there BPU is a joke. It is greenwashing. Don’t be fooled.

The DEP has legal authority to limit water use, restrict land use related environmental impacts, and control pollution emissions from data centers.

Gov. Sherrill did NOT support that. Just the opposite: she is deregulating, limiting DEP regulation, and accelerating the DEP approval of data centers. And she issued Executive Orders to do just that.

We’ve previously reported on how Gov. Sherrill’s Executive Orders, appointment of a “large load” data center corporate consultant to head the BPU. Sherrill’s prior data center law explicitly promotes data centers and Sherrill’s claims to have established protective “guardrails” are sham.

The recent explosion of public opposition to data centers has forced Gov. Sherrill and other Democratic Governors and political candidates to walk back their initial support for data centers (more coming on that).

So please, don’t be fooled by tomorrow’s Sherrill press event.

Don’t let her get away with this greenwashing, gaslighting, lying bullshit.

More to follow - this is just as heads up.

• The People Of Camden Should Blast DEP For Failure To Protect Their Community From Repeat Junkyard Fires

And now - after years overseeing lax oversight and providing legislative, regulatory, and enforcement favors to EMR - former NJ DEP Commissioner Shawn LaTourette actually works for them, see:

• Former NJDEP Chief LaTourette Now Works With EMR on its Environmental Issues

LaTourette, a Rutgers-Camden Law graduate who teaches an environmental justice course at the school, isn’t representing EMR as a lawyer, but instead serves as a consultant working with EMR USA CEO Joseph Balzano. LaTourette works for the Greenberg Traurig firm.

“What I am helping them with is the internal policies and protocols to help the safety of their facilities and their workforce and community and environment,” LaTourette said to TAPinto Camden.

Was he working for them all along?

LaTourette knows that this is a gross violation of the post employment restrictions of NJ State Ethics laws.

That’s why LaTourette tried to narrow his work role to “internal policies and protocols”. He cynically did this to try to evade ethics restrictions and avoid the obvious fact that his current work involves DEP regulatory work and regulatory and litigation issues now before DEP and the Courts - work he formerly directed as Commissioner of DEP

LaTourette stepped down at DEP on January 20, 2026.

Less than 5 months later, on May 14, 2026, he joined the firm Greenberg Traurig as a LAWYER - and he is clearly marketing his DEP experience:

The New Jersey Environmental Practice will serve clients with state-specific, federal, and multijurisdictional needs. LaTourette will equip clients with purpose-built permitting and development strategies designed to mitigate risk and deliver major projects in high-growth sectors, including energy, logistics, information technology and artificial intelligence, and infrastructure. Drawing from private- and public-sector experience resolving complex environmental disputes, LaTourette will represent clients in environmental investigations, civil enforcement actions, and litigation at the state and federal levels. He also will provide strategic, legal, and policy counsel to clients navigating regulatory changes, internal environmental affairs, and commercial transactions with significant environmental considerations. […]

New Jersey’s central role in developing bedrock American environmental law, and position as a pioneer in shaping the modern regulatory landscape, makes it a particularly significant market for expansion.

While DEP Commissioner, LaTourette actually did a lot of favors for EMR.

He did many things that benefitted EMR.

These favors now create the clear impression of a quid pro quo.

• LaTourette shielded EMR from strict DEP enforcement, see:

Records Show That The Murphy DEP Issued A $7,600 Enforcement Fine At Camden Scrap Metal Facility For Repeat Toxic Fires

• LaTourette ran regulatory interference for EMR by narrowly interpreting DEP’s regulatory powers, see:

Major Fire At Camden Scrap Metal “Recycling” Facility Again Exposes Lax DEP Oversight

• LaTourette misled the public and protected EMR from strict new legislation, see:

Murphy DEP Commissioner LaTourette Is Gaslighting About Lax Oversight Of Scrap Processing Facilities

Off the record, a friend of mine who is a reporter shared a recent conversation he had with LaTourette. I told this reporter that LaTourette flat out lied to him about DEP’s regulatory powers and that he grossly exaggerated the strength of a pending bill to tighten DEP regulations. Again, this was almost as if he were acting as a lobbyist for EMR.

Under NJ State Ethics law, all former state officers and employees face a lifetime ban preventing them from representing, assisting, or working on any specific cause, proceeding, application, or matter in which they had a “substantial and direct involvement” while in state service.

LaTourette had “substantial and direct involvement” with EMR while in state service.

A strict one-year post-employment ban also applies to agency heads, top deputies, assistant heads of principal departments, and certain high-level staff in the Governor’s Office.

These individuals are prohibited for one year from appearing before, negotiating on behalf of, or representing clients with the specific state agency they previously served.

It is less than one year since Mr. LaTourette left Office, hence there appears to be a clear violation of the 1 year prohibition as well as the permanent ban.

This is not LaTourette’’s first violation of State Ethics laws regarding revolving door restrictions.

Before he joined DEP, he worked for the developer of a controversial LNG facility on the Delaware River. Just days after DEP issued final permits to that facility, LaTourette joined DEP, the fastest revolving door ever.

After I complained and broke the story, the State Ethics Commission forced LaTourette to update his recusal statement and recuse, see: NJ Spotlight:

• DEP head recuses himself from permitting decisions for South Jersey LNG terminal

LaTourette had several other gross abuses of State ethics laws for which I filed complaints to the Ethics Commission, due to his work for Essex Chemical (look and see who is on the brief for Essex) and Dupont and BASF (see ethics complaint.)

So I filed another one today, see:

Dear NJ State Ethics Commission:

I just now learned that former DEP Commissioner LaTourette, who left office in January 2026, is currently serving as a consultant to EMR, a controversial scrap metal recycling company that Mr. LaTourette had extensive, substantial, and direct legal, regulatory, and personal involvement with in his official capacity as DEP Commissioner.

That current consulting work involves regulatory and litigation issues currently before DEP and the Attorney General, which are exactly the same issues was directly and substantially involved in while at DEP, see the news coverage:

• Former NJDEP Chief LaTourette Now Works With EMR on its Environmental Issues

Under NJ State Ethics law, all former state officers and employees face a lifetime ban preventing them from representing, assisting, or working on any specific cause, proceeding, application, or matter in which they had a “substantial and direct involvement” while in state service.

LaTourette had “substantial and direct involvement” with EMR while in state service.

A strict one-year post-employment ban also applies to agency heads, top deputies, assistant heads of principal departments, and certain high-level staff in the Governor’s Office.

These individuals are prohibited for one year from appearing before, negotiating on behalf of, or representing clients with the specific state agency they previously served.

It is less than one year since Mr. LaTourette left Office, hence there appears to be a clean violation of the 1 year prohibition as well as the permanent ban.

I strongly urge you to open an investigation of this matter, find facts, and enforce the law.

I am copying Senate Environment Committee Chairman Smith in expectation of legislative oversight as well as considering strengthening NJ’s ethics laws to prevent these kind of egregious abuses of law and the public interest.

Bill Wolfe

“This is what a ‘dark age’ looks like,” he wrote me in an email the morning after our conversation. “When science is no longer a source of enlightenment, people still need to believe in something.” The people of Flint had been betrayed, and the betrayal had pushed some of them “into the anti-science camp.” ~~~ NY Times (8/16/16)

Let me start by saying I am compelled to call this out: there was scientific malpractice and journalistic misconduct in the Keyport, NJ suspected cancer cluster.

We’ll outline the science issues today and do the journalistic issues in the next post.

I) Background - My Bio, Biases, and Motives

Regular readers here know that I am motivated by protection of the public interest and am a longtime strong critic of the chemical industry and the DEP.

But for others, unfortunately, given the nature of this criticism in terms of criticizing an academic scientist, I must put my cards on the table.

I joined DEP in 1985 in the hazardous waste management program (RCRA Corrective Action, civil service position). I was forced out of DEP in 1995 as a whistleblower for disclosing a confidential memo from DEP Commissioner Bob Shinn to Gov. Whitman regarding suppression of data, falsification of science, and minimization of risks of high levels of mercury found in NJ freshwater fish. The memo not only suppressed and falsified the science, but recommend a cynical public relations strategy to co-opt the environmentalists and mislead the press and public.

I then served for 7 years as Policy Director of the NJ Environmental Federation (1 year) and Sierra Club (6 years), where I was a strong critic of Gov. Whitman and DEP. I also had a column at the Star Ledger’s “NJ Voices” citizen journalism page (some of that work is archived here).

I was vindicated in 2002, when I was rehired by DEP Commissioner Brad Campbell as his “confidential” policy advisor, a political appointment that required the approval of Gov. McGreevey.

Since then, I founded and was Director of NJ PEER (the NJ Chapter of Public Employees For Environmental Responsibility).

You can scroll through 40 pages and examine my PEER work, which is archived here.

I first learned about the potential cancer cluster in Keyport back on April 24, and wrote about it:

• The Toxic Chickens Come Home To Roost In Keyport, NJ

The most likely route of exposure of residents in Keyport is from what is known as “vapor intrusion” (VI) - the subsurface migration of toxic gases and groundwater pollution into buildings.

Since that original post, I wrote several additional posts on Keyport and vapor intrusion.

Shortly after reading her story, I reached out to the NJ.Com reporter to praise her work and suggest followup reporting, particularly on the vapor intrusion issues.

Over several weeks, we shared several emails, where I provided extensive documentation of my concerns. I was asked to review their data (which was never provided) and advised that the reporter shared and discussed these emails with her editors. I was told that NJ.com would conduct VI sampling and had procured a scientific adviser. So NJ.com was fully aware of the issues and facts (emails provided upon request).

I sent Dr. Zelikoff a detailed email outlining my concerns. She has not responded (email provided upon request).

I am retired, no one is paying me, and have no economic or other interests in this issue.

II) Scientific Malpractice

1. The Flint lead case

Dr. Zelikoff, a trained PhD toxicologist at NYU, made incredibly bad scientific judgements in Keyport, in terms of her recommendations and sampling methods.

It was not the first time that she made virtually the same bad scientific judgements with respect to sampling methods, chemicals sampled, environmental media sampled, exposure pathways analyzed, and science.

Dr. Zelikoff was the source of a huge controversy in the Flint Michigan lead crisis.

So let’s first focus on the Flint lead crisis, because that case is very close to what’s going on now in Keyport.

At a time when academic scientists and federal and state regulatory agencies were intensely focused on extremely high levels of lead in drinking water, Zelikoff worked with a celebrity activist group (with no scientific credentials) to use an unreliable sampling device and methodology. This scared the public about risks of exposure to bathing in and breathing that water, and diverted attention from drinking water risks. Her work was harshly criticized by fellow scientists and regulators as not only bad science but as politicization of science. This polarized the community and further undermined the community’s trust in science.

Dr. Zelikoff's involvement in Flint took place primarily in 2016. During that time, she served as an independent reviewer for "Water Defense" (an environmental group founded by actor Mark Ruffalo).

In 2016, Water Defense claimed that Flint residents were unsafe even taking showers or baths. Dr. Zelikoff backed the group's data-gathering methods. However, other independent scientists—including the core Flint Water Study team from Virginia Tech—publicly criticized those claims as unscientific, alarmist, and unsubstantiated by real-world risk.

Dr. Zelikoff issued public statements highlighting that there were no federal or state safety policies regulating chemical exposure from showering, bathing, or inhaling respirable water droplets that could deposit contaminants directly into the lungs.

The Virginia Tech Flint Water Study team, led by Dr. Marc Edwards, publicly confronted Dr. Zelikoff. They presented her with a direct list of five highly criticized health claims made by Mark Ruffalo and Scott Smith regarding the safety of bathing. They requested she give a simple "yes" or "no" to indicate which claims she backed as an environmental toxicologist.

Dr. Zelikoff refused to answer the scientific query. Instead of engaging in a peer-to-peer data debate, she forwarded the scientists' request directly to NYU’s legal counsel for review. This move drew fierce condemnation from the academic community, with critics arguing she was using university lawyers to shield activist-driven warnings from standard scientific scrutiny.

Here’s how the NY Times tells that story: (please read the whole thing);

“Not everyone who challenges the claims of the E.P.A., C.D.C. and State of Michigan are automatically correct,” he wrote. Smith had no degrees in the sciences, Edwards noted, and appeared to be a businessman of dubious accomplishment who was now trying to market his sponges. Edwards made the case that Water Defense’s meddling would do harm. A recent increase in gastrointestinal infections in Flint, Edwards speculated, could have been caused by the poor hygiene that Smith’s “fear-mongering” had encouraged. The disinfection byproducts, or DBPs, that Water Defense had detected in showers — produced by reactions between chlorine and organic matter — had been reviewed by a scientist Edwards recruited, Dr. David Reckhow of the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, “one of the foremost authorities on DBPs in the world.” Reckhow’s assessment: “There is nothing at all unusual or abnormal in the Flint DBP data.”

Water Defense, though, made its own appeal to authority. Smith was not a credentialed scientist, it was true, but all his samples were being tested by an independent lab and reviewed by Judith Zelikoff, a toxicologist in the environmental-medicine department at New York University. (Water Defense is “producing data in an ethical and transparent manner,” Zelikoff told me, “and I will continue to support them.”) Once again, Flint residents were left to wonder whom to believe.

“This is exactly the danger of having untrustworthy government science,” Edwards wrote me in an email in May. “A Hollywood fraud rolls into town, and they cannot even call him out.” Concerned that Water Defense would scare even Flint residents who reported no adverse symptoms, he decided to go after Ruffalo and Smith the way he went after government officials last fall. “A-List Actor but F-List Scientist: Mark Ruffalo Brings Fear and Misinformation to Flint” read the headline of a blog post he published on flintwaterstudy.org. […]

“This is what a ‘dark age’ looks like,” he wrote me in an email the morning after our conversation. “When science is no longer a source of enlightenment, people still need to believe in something.” The people of Flint had been betrayed, and the betrayal had pushed some of them “into the anti-science camp.”

2. Let’s look at how that Flint experience is being repeated in Keyport.

Residents of Keyport, NJ documented a large number of cancer cases in their small community They feared a cancer cluster and they suspected that the source of the problem was an old industrial landfill, the Aeromarine landfill which had never been properly closed or remediated under NJ DEP oversight. The press (NJ.com/Star Ledger) picked up the story and ran with it.

The core science/risk issues in Keyport centered on the former Aeromarine landfill site and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) like benzene and vinyl chloride, which had previously been detected at high levels in landfill gas sampling. These levels exceeded the NJ DEP’s “vapor intrusion” “soil gas screening” values and should have triggered followup sampling, including of soils, groundwater, building sub slabs and indoor air for VOCs.

The NJ DEP has not disclosed and has effectively denied the existence of these risks to the community. They have no credibility in the community, just like in Flint.

Historically, these toxic VOC gases are the primary drivers of cancer risks near old industrial dumps because they can migrate through the soil and enter home basements (a process known as vapor intrusion).

At some point in time, NJ.com/Star Ledger procured Dr. Zelikoff a scientific advisor and to conduct independent sampling.

Instead of deploying standardized VOC and soil-gas or indoor vapor testing, the study commissioned by NJ.com utilized Dr. Zelikoff's team to track alternate metrics:

• PM 2.5 and Consumer Monitors: Her team installed PurpleAir monitors at local residences. While useful for tracking general air pollution or wildfire smoke, consumer particulate monitors do not measure ambient underground chemical vapor intrusion.

• Heavy Metals in Topsoil: Her sampling focused on heavy metals in the surrounding yards and parks. Metals are pervasive in NJ’s urban environment.

No volatile organic chemicals sampled for.

No vapor intrusion analyzed or sampled for.

Dr. Zelikoff has done prior research work on inhalation of fine particulate matter, PM 2.5. That seems to have biased her work.

Dr. Zelikoff has done prior research on inhalation of heavy metals and soils. Again, that seems to have biased her work.

Dr. Zelikoff, just like in Flint, used unreliable and dubious sampling methods, while ignoring approved, validated, and reliable scientific methods.

Wrong sampling methods. Wrong chemicals sampled. Wrong environmental media. Wrong exposure pathways.

It’s actually hard to get all this wrong

But it is a playbook - just like in Flint - for generating scary headlines

All while ignoring real and data documented chemicals, media, pathways and risks.

That is, at best, scientific malpractice (particularly in light of the prior Flint experience).

Next post on the journalistic misconduct coming soon.

(Note: AI helped on writing the Flint case, as it saved me research time and effort.)

[End Note: Ironically, I had to play the role of defending regulatory science (which I've been criticizing for years) and criticize citizen activist "science".]

Why is the Gov not required to disclose why she is leaving the State and who she is talking to?

Prior Governors have explained why they travel, where they are going, and how these trips benefit NJ.

Gov.Sherrill? Not so much. None.

My next post will focus on Sherrill’s national ambitions and how her “affordability” agenda, energy policy, and environmental rollback policies are driven by a strategy set by national corporate Democratic consultants and the Democratic Governors Association.

I live in an historic district of Philadelphia known as Queen Village.

Most of my neighbors have beautiful window planters and potted plants in front of their lovely brick homes.

Garbage and litter are immediately cleaned up. Some folks even help clean the stormwater drains and remove leaves.

Everyone cleans up their dog crap and most drive fine cars.

Children play in the streets and there is a general feeling of good will, regular order, and safety.

So I was shocked just now walking down 2nd Street to come across a man, unconscious, and laying in the street at the curb.

I tried to revive him and ask him if he was OK. He was partially conscious and his unusual trembling arm movements suggested that he was having some kind of episode. He could not move and could not get up.

I immediately started yelling for someone to call 911 (I never carry my phone). A few passers by claimed they didn’t have phones (how likely is that) and quickly walked on. No neighbors emerged to respond to me yelling in front of their houses.

This is a heavily pedestrian traveled street, especially on a Saturday at 5 pm.

But after a minute or so a guy came by and agreed to call 911.

A few minutes later, a man emerged from his house across the street and said that the man had been there for over an hour.

Dozens of people must have passed by in that hour.

How do you let a human being lie in the street unconscious for over an hour?

Several other people walked by before the ambulance arrived. None expressed any interest.

One older man and his wife and possibly grandchild, stayed with me and waited until the ambulance arrived.

Brotherly love?

Oh, did I mention that the well dressed man was clearly a brown skinned Hispanic man?