DEP Designed Rutgers Training Program For Industry & Consultants
No Program To Help The Public Navigate Complex DEP Regulations
Musk And DOGE Are Not The Only Ones Corrupting Government
Yesterday, I got an unusual Sunday afternoon email with a red exclamation point (!) from Rutgers. Oh my, what could be so important on a highly unusually warm spring day?
Was the State Climatologist in meltdown?
Nope.
It was strictly a business pitch: “Hurry – register today!” (literally verbatim).
As if Rutgers were selling cheeseburgers.
But they were selling information and access to DEP regulators regarding the production and management of toxic chemicals and how to comply with complex air pollution regulations designed to protect public health.
Rutgers’ marketing scheme made this abundantly clear, and they also made it very clear who they were marketing to (i.e. toxic polluters and their consultants):
Do you need to prepare a Pollution Prevention Plan? Are you required to submit a Release and Pollution Prevention Report and Summary?
Does staying current with new regulations and maintaining compliance with all state and federal air permitting regulations seem daunting?
“Daunting”? Yes, DEP regulations sure are “daunting”, even to me, and I’m a former DEP regulator.
So, let’s reframe those questions from a public interest perspective, a perspective that seems to have vanished:
Do you know what a Pollution Prevention Plan is and that toxic polluters in your community are required to REDUCE toxic chemicals?
Do you know the health effects and the industrial sources of toxic pollution in your community and the air you breath?
The folks at DEP and Rutgers don’t see things from that perspective. Worse, they seem oblivious to that perspective and unaware of how they have been “captured” by private corporate interests and those seeking “business opportunities”.
Perhaps the most blatant example of this toxic integration of DEP regulators, Rutgers, and pure business interests was Rutgers’ promotion of the “NJDEP Qualified Environmental Air Compliance Auditor Program”:
Earning a spot on this list will let potential customers know that you have completed NJDEP-approved training that has prepared you to perform audits efficiently, effectively, and in keeping with all NJDEP rules and guidelines. Because the NJDEP distributes this list to individuals and organizations who are seeking capable auditors, this program provides exposure to new audiences that can turn into potential business opportunities.
Learn more about the NJDEP Small Business Assistance Program.
“Business opportunities”! Wow. Just wow.
And I didn’t even know that DEP had created a “Small Business Assistance Program”.
So I sent Rutgers an inquiry:
Hi Pamela – Does Rutgers provide a similar helpful training program oriented to the public and/or environmental groups and media about how to understand and participate in complex DEP regulatory programs?
If so, please send me a link.
If not, why not? And who can I contact at Rutgers to propose that you do?
My goodness, Rutgers replied almost immediately, and at 8:27 pm on a Sunday night!
Bill –
Thank you for your email. If you would like to discuss in more detail, you can contact Ky Asral or Edward Bakos from the NJDEP. They designed this program and are happy to answer any questions you have. If you need their contact information, I would be happy to provide it to you. Have a lovely night!
So, now we have the DEP regulators (public employees responsible for protecting public health) designing the program for Rutgers (a public institution) to train private business interests on how to comply with environmental regulations and promote “business opportunities”.
The public, and even the environmental groups, have very little knowledge of these important public health and environmental regulations and what compliance means.
There is virtually no public involvement in the science and development of the DEP regulations; very little awareness or participation in the DEP permit process (with the exception of a handful of controversial permits); and no public role in DEP monitoring and enforcement. None.
The entire DEP apparatus has become effectively privatized and/or captured by the regulated industries DEP serves.
That’s not qualitatively different from the open and blatant corruption now underway in Washington by Musk and his DOGE techies.
I raised strong objections to Rutgers and laid out the context, with a copy to DEP Commissioner LaTourette. We’ll keep you posted if DEP or Rutgers replies substantively. If readers know who I should contact at Rutgers, please let me know, see:
———- Original Message ———-
From: Bill WOLFE <b>
To: Pamela Springard-Mayer <pspring@njaes.rutgers.edu>
Cc: “shawn.latourette@dep.nj.gov” <shawn.latourette@dep.nj.gov>
Date: 04/01/2025 8:21 AM EDT
Subject: Re: Rutgers Air Quality & Compliance Training Courses
Pamela – please send me DEP contact info. I’ve raised this issue with DEP before and gotten no reply. I think DEP may have simply said that the program is open to the public.
It seems unbalanced and unfair. The State University is being used by a State agency to provide benefits to the private sector (regulated entities and their consultants) with no corresponding public program.
The regulated community already has consultants, engineers, and lawyers to help them navigate (and often manipulate) complex regulatory frameworks. In contrast, the citizen and even the staffed environmental groups lack those resources and expertises. There are academic theories of “regulatory capture” that might apply to this situation.
In addition to DEP, I would think Rutgers would have an interest in providing balanced allocation of university resources, in the public interest, as part of their academic mission (including as a publicly funded Land Grant institution). Is there someone at Rutgers responsible for these kinds of policy choices? Could Rutgers design a similar program targeted at citizen participation in DEP planning and regulatory programs? I note that several former DEP managers are affiliated with Rutgers (off the top of my head, I can think of 3 I’ve worked with).
(BTW, for the context of concern:
1) DEP has other regulated industry oriented groups that I’ve raised these concerns about.
2) DEP has dramatically reduced the preparation of numerous annual Reports on environmental programs over the last decades (some of them mandated by law. That lack of Reporting has shifted the burden for accessing information to the public and on line individual searches (DEP “data miner”). The DEP has not only shifted the burden from DEP providing Statewide data to the public to conduct individual searches, but the DEP has hollowed out the Reports they do produce and no longer provides the background program information and data analysis that previously was provided in the annual Reports.
3) DEP has narrowed the scope of information provided to the public under the Open Public Records Act (OPRA) via extremely broad interpretations of the OPRA exemptions, especially the “deliberative privilege” exemption.
4) DEP Commissioner formed and appointed private sector industry scientists to the DEP Science Advisory Board.
5) DEP “Stakeholder” groups manifest similar problems and DEP alone sets the narrow agenda and ground rules for those proceedings.
6) DEP’s Data miner is cumbersome, complex, and unworkable. Reliance on that system to satisfy transparency is deeply flawed policy.
As you can see, it’s becoming a very difficult information environment and the disparities in access and expertise are weighing even more heavily against the public interest, while sliding further down the slippery slope of “regulatory capture”.
FYI, ironically, I was involved in the research and internal DEP policy development that led to the Pollution Prevention Act (Jeanne Herb recently retired?). I can assure you that all this was NOT the vision and values that guided that Legislation and original set of program regulations and Reports.
Look forward to your reply.
Bill Wolfe
