Follow Us:

Energy & Environment

  • Article
  • Comments

Four Former NJ Governors Oppose Pinelands Pipeline Project

In letter to Pinelands Commission, governors from both sides of the aisle caution not to 'compromise the integrity' of Pinelands Plan

Jaclyn Rhoads (Pinelands Preservation Alliance), Doug O’Malley (Environment New Jersey), Dave Pringle (New Jersey Environmental Federation), and Jeff Tittel (New Jersey Sierra Club) oppose a proposed pipeline through the Pinelands.

In a highly unusual rebuke, four former governors -- two Republicans and two Democrats -- have written to the New Jersey Pinelands Commission opposing a proposal to build a natural gas pipeline through the protected Pinelands Forest Management Area.

The joint letter signed by former Democratic Govs. Brendan Byrne and Jim Florio and Republicans Thomas Kean and Christie Whitman expresses concern about a proposed 22-mile gas pipeline beginning in Maurice River and ending at the B.L. England plant in Upper Township in Cape May County.

“The current proposal would compromise the integrity of the Pinelands Plan and serve to encourage future development contrary to the vision the plan sets out for growth and conservation in the Pinelands,’’ the governors wrote earlier this month to Mark Lohbauer, chair of the commission.

The letter marks a possibly unprecedented intervention by former governors from both sides of the aisle in what is essentially a regulatory issue facing a sitting governor, whose office has been aggressively pushing the pipeline proposal.

‘’You never see former governors weighing in on a regulatory issue,’’ said Jeff Tittel, director of the New Jersey Sierra Club, a vocal critic of the project. “That’s why it is a big deal.’’

The pipeline project gained momentum when the Pinelands Commission and the state Board of Public Utilities released a draft memorandum of agreement pushing the proposal forward on the eve of the Thanksgiving weekend. The commission is expected to make a decision on the project on January 10.

The $90 million project, proposed by South Jersey Gas, has spurred widespread opposition from environmental groups, who held a press conference yesterday on the steps of the Statehouse again denouncing the plan while releasing the letter.

An Ongoing Disagreement

The dispute is the latest in a growing row between environmental organizations and gas and electric utilities over new transmission lines cutting through previously protected natural resources, not only the Pinelands, but also the New Jersey Highlands, which supplies drinking water for millions of residents.

For example, a $750 million, 45-mile high-voltage transmission line proposed by Public Service Electric & Gas crosses segments of three national parks in the Highlands region. Other gas pipeline projects are under consideration or have been approved in the same area.

Most of the projects conform with the Energy Master Plan adopted by the Christie administration, which stresses the need to expand both the natural gas and electricity transmission lines crisscrossing the state, as well as promote the development of new natural-gas-fired power plants. The administration also wants to prevent any new coal-fired plants from operating in New Jersey.

B.L. England’s plant was one of the few remaining coal-fired facilities in New Jersey, a unit many of the same groups opposing the natural gas pipeline had long sought to shut down. Now, they're objecting to repowering the unit with natural gas -- a much cleaner fuel than coal -- saying it is still a fossil fuel that will contribute to global climate change.

Most of all, the groups argued that the pipeline project violates regulations written to protect the Pinelands, an argument the four Governors implicitly endorsed.

In their letter, they said the Pinelands program will only work over the long term if the plan is implemented consistently.

“Only then will utility companies, developers, and others in government and industry form their own long-range plans to comply with the Pinelands vision,’’ the governors wrote. “Indeed, the need to set out clear and stable guidance for infrastructure development such as pipelines was one of the principal motivations behind the Pinelands legislation and Plan. For these reasons, we urge the commission to stick to the Plan in this case.’’

Corporate Supporters
Most Popular Stories