Return to Browsing

6 N.J.A.R. 140

Corrections, Department of; Concerned Citizens of North Camden v
Formats: PDF | DjVu— Help viewing DjVu Files
Citation: 6 N.J.A.R. 140
Decision Date: 1983
Synopsis: In preparation for construction of a medium security prison in the City of Camden, the Department of Corrections prepared an en- vironmental assessment statement, pursuant to Exec. Order No. 53 (1973). After review of the assessment, the Department of En- vironmental Protection advised the Department of Corrections that a full environmental impact statement would not be necessary but that it must receive a Waterfront Development benefits from the Division of Coastal Resources. During construction of the project, petitioners advised that pursuant to the Environmental Rights Act, it intended to file suit over the project and subsequently requested a hearing on the approval of the Waterfront Development permit. The administrative law judge assigned to the case determined that there is nothing in Exec. Order No. 53 which permits the Department of Environmental Protection to insist that the Department of Correc- tions obtain a Waterfront Development permit. The judge noted that an executive order could not be used as a method of creating a legal obligation which the legislature had not seen fit to impose on executive agencies. While the Executive Order provides for a recommendation by the Department of Environmental Protection, neither it not any statute permit the Department to require a permit. Since the Department of Corrections needed no permit to build the issuance of one could not reasonably give rise to an action by a third party to overturn the permit in a proceeding before the Department of environmental Protection. Accordingly, the administrative law judge dismissed the action. State of New Jersey 141 Herbert O. Brock, Esq., for petitioners (Morris and Brock, at- torneys) Howard B. Epstein, Deputy Attorney General, for respondent (Irwin I. Kimmelman, Attorney General of New Jersey, attorney)