As a vote on the proposed PVSC power plant appears imminent, NJEJA is shining a spotlight on our letter to PVSC which went unanswered. On September 19, NJEJA submitted a letter to the Passaic Valley Sewerage Commission’s Commissioners expressing our deep opposition to the proposal of a fourth power plant in the Ironbound Community of Newark, New Jersey.
For years, community members both in the East Ward and across the state have been clear: no more power plants in Newark! Not only has the community continually come to monthly PVSC meetings to voice strong opposition to this plan, but numerous technical, legal, and planning experts have highlighted that there are better alternatives for the energy needs of PVSC than a fourth power plant.
We stand in solidarity with the residents of the Ironbound in opposing this plant as it will contribute to local air pollution, exacerbate risks to negative health outcomes, and continue a reliance on fossil fuels when a rapid transition to renewables is deeply needed.
Commissioners, leave behind a legacy of environmental justice and Vote No on this proposal.
Environmental justice organizations across the country came together to support federal protections of LIHEAP (Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program) which brings not only economic relief to families across the country, but yields public health benefit as well.
This letter – addressed to the House and Senate Subcommittees on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies – calls on lawmakers to fully fund LIHEAP at $5.1 billion, and to include supplemental emergency funding of $2 billion. Additionally, the letter requests assurances that the LIHEAP office will be fully staffed moving forward after news broken that HHS illegally fired LIHEAP staff.
NJ organizations from across the state and advocacy spaces joined together to call on Governor Murphy’s office to continue their support for the implementation of the Advanced Clean Trucks rules and regulations. The rules would support efforts to curb local air pollution levels by incrementally increasing the number of electric vehicles on the road, thereby decreasing levels of diesel exhaust and related air pollution. This work has co-benefits of supporting climate mitigation policies as well as public health goals.
To learn more about the Advanced Clean Truck rules, read our blog post Debunking ACT Myths. For questions, please reach out to us at info@njeja.org.
In continuation of reviewing and redoing the 2019 New Jersey Energy Master Plan, the NJ Board of Public Utilities (BPU) solicited comments on their analysis and work. NJEJA offered our support and guidance based on our work, experience, and relationships with community partners to articulate support for increased usage of renewable energy, opposition to carbon capture/hydrogen technologies, and continued prioritization of low-income and environmental justice communities.
For questions, please reach out to us at info@njeja.org
When discussing emissions, the focus often centers on power plants, while the environmental impacts of goods movement (i.e., trucks, trains, ships, and other forms of transportation) are frequently overlooked.In 2020 alone, New Jersey’s Medium- and Heavy-Duty Vehicles (MHDV) fleet neared 423,000 vehicles and was responsible for producing approximately 7.6 million metric tons of greenhouse gases, which are direct contributors to climate change. Mid-sized vehicles include utility and delivery vehicles, motorhomes, ambulances, and small school buses, while heavy-duty vehicles include dump trucks, tractor-trailers, and construction vehicles, among others. Collectively, MDHVs account for about 20% of greenhouse gas emissions from road fleets.
In addition to their role in the climate crisis, medium and heavy-duty vehicles are major contributors to poor air quality, producing dangerous co-pollutant emissions such as volatile organic compounds (VOCs), particulate matter (PM), and sulfur oxides (SOx). These emissions range in color and weight, but have been demonstrated to have severe health impacts. They disproportionately affect environmental justice communities — particularly low-income communities, and communities Of Color — due to their proximity to transportation hubs and goods movement infrastructure. As a result, EJ communities bear the brunt of our easy access to goods via a myriad of negative health impacts, including higher rates of asthma, heart disease, and respiratory infections, as well as adverse birth outcomes such as low birth weight, premature birth, and neurodevelopmental difficulties. These negative health impacts produce both emotional stress and physical tolls to communities, while also imposing significant economic costs.
Recognizing the need to address these problems, the New Jersey legislative body adopted the Advanced Clean Trucks (ACT) Rule, modeled after a similar California rule. ACT aims to facilitate a transition to zero-emission medium and heavy-duty (MHDV) trucks from 2025-2035 by requiring manufacturers to sell these trucks at an increasing percentage of their yearly sales. By enacting this rule, New Jersey jas joined a coalition of 11 other states nationwide working to reduce emissions from MHD vehicles, reducing air pollution, and advancing environmental justice through the adoption of electrified vehicles.
In New Jersey, implementation of the ACT Rule will follow a gradual, upward trajectory over ten years. The regulation primarily impacts two main groups: vehicle manufacturers and dealers. Manufacturers comply with the ACT Rule through a credit and deficit structure. Under this framework, each sale of a fossil-fuel-powered vehicle incurs a deficit, while sales of zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) or near-zero-emission vehicles (NZEVs) generate credits. The value of each credit and deficit is weighed according to the vehicle’s size and classification, with larger trucks incurring more credits/deficits and smaller trucks incurring fewer. By the end of the year, manufacturers reach compliance when the total number of credits retired equals the total deficits. Dealers, then, are responsible for selling and distributing the vehicles that manufacturers produce.
The chart below demonstrates the progression of zero-emission vehicles (ZEV) that manufacturers must follow:
Year
Class 2b-3
Class 4-8
Class 7-8
2025
7%
11%
7%
2026
10%
13%
10%
2027
15%
20%
15%
2028
20%
30%
20%
2029
25%
40%
25%
2030
30%
50%
30%
2031
35%
55%
35%
2032
40%
60%
40%
2033
45%
65%
40%
2034
50%
70%
40%
2035 & beyond
55%
75%
40%
Sales Percentage Schedule (2025-2035)
The successful implementation of ACT in other states has led to a rapid shift in industry behavior, undeniably lowering tailpipe emissions and improving air quality in these states. One such example comes from California, where the state body facilitating ACT implementation noted that ZEV sales more than doubled from 2022-2023.
Despite the clear and dire need to address the effects of diesel-powered vehicles — including their physical, communal, environmental, and climate impacts — and the demonstrated success of ACT in other states, there has been significant industry opposition to this rule. Additionally, proposed legislation in the New Jersey Assembly threatens to delay implementation of ACT until 2027.
While we acknowledge that stakeholders may have valid concerns, many of these issues were also raised in California and other ACT states and were successfully addressed in tandem with implementation. Below are a few misconceptions about ACT that NJEJA hopes to dispel.
CLAIM: ACT bans sales of diesel or combustion-powered vehicles after 2025.
FALSE: ACT only mandates the sales of zero-emission vehicles at an increased percentage every year. This does not preclude manufacturers from selling other types of vehicles, but instead requires that they comply with target ZEV sales every year.
CLAIN: ACT requires vehicle dealers to buy ZEVs and NZEVs.
FALSE: The responsibility of compliance with ACT lies with manufacturers. Any manufacturer’s attempts to shift compliance to dealers by “rationing”, or refusing to sell diesel trucks unless the dealer buys a certain number of ZEVs or NZEVs, are not mandated or authorized by ACT. This tactic allows manufacturers to convince dealers that ACT is not in their best interest. The reality is that ACT does not force dealers to buy cars they do not need, and it provides manufacturers ample flexibility to build a diverse fleet of diesel vs electric vehicles. This challenge can be surmounted through legislative and regulatory oversight at the state level, but should not bar New Jersey from moving forward with ACT implementation.
CLAIM: There is no market for zero-emission medium and heavy-duty trucks.
FALSE: According to the Zero Emission Technology Inventory, there are over 200 commercially available models of ZEVs for medium and heavy duty trucks in the United States. California – where the Advanced Clean Trucks rule was adopted in 2021 – saw sales of zero-emission medium and heavy-duty trucks double from 2022 to 2023, demonstrating that the market for ZEVs will continue to grow as demand for these vehicles increases.
CLAIM: Zero-emission medium and heavy-duty trucks are more expensive.
FALSE: While upfront costs for some ZEVs are currently higher than their diesel counterpart, maintenance costs are reportedly 40-70% lower, and lifetime costs of ZEVs are projected to be lower than operating diesel trucks as well. This results in lower costs overall: both an environmental and economic benefit.
CLAIM: New Jersey does not have suitable charging infrastructure for electric vehicles to comply with ACT.
FALSE: There are ZEVs on the market that do not require public charging stations, as charging at depots where goods are loaded or unloaded can cover most of these vehicles’ travel range. Additionally, a critical aspect of ACT is that manufacturers can trade credits to be in compliance with the rule. This means that if a fleet of buses can be electrified while other types of heavy-duty vehicles cannot be, then a manufacturer that has an excess of credits due to their electrified bus fleet can sell those credits to other manufacturers until later years when those vehicles can be sold in compliance with ACT.
CLAIM: Delaying until 2027 will give the trucking industry enough time to comply with ACT.
PARTLY TRUE, PARTLY FALSE: The ACT Rule does not necessitate that all EV charging infrastructure be ready and built, or that all fleets be converted to ZEVs in 2025. Instead, it intentionally starts with small percentages to ease manufacturers, private interests, and public stakeholders into compliance. This leaves space for investment in public charging infrastructure, including $250 million from the IRA for New Jersey, and increases the innovation and scalability of ZEVs, which in turn, would result in the decrease of initial and overall costs over time. While delaying implementation would technically grant more time to the industry, it also means that the starting compliance thresholds are higher in 2027 since a delay doesn’t push back the whole timing. Waiting two years makes it more difficult to catalyze this process, especially without the safety net of gradual phase-in and early preparation that time undoubtedly adds.
For the health of our communities, the success of ACT’s implementation, and the growth of the ZEV economy, it is essential to continue on the path started in the initial rule-making and adhere to the original implementation timeline. Diesel emissions not only endanger the health and well-being of surrounding communities but also pose significant risks to those within the industry itself, including truck drivers and warehouse workers who experience prolonged exposure to air pollutants. By advancing the transition to zero-emission vehicles, we can significantly reduce health impacts and improve the well-being and quality of life for workers in the industry. Surely there will be challenges as implementation of a new program is never a simple process, but it is only through cross-sector collaboration (including environmental and social justice groups, community members, workers in the trucking industry, other industry stakeholders, health experts, and elected officials) that we can holistically address these concerns without delaying ACT implementation. Only then can we be sure we are taking the necessary steps towards decreasing local air pollution and greenhouse gases through technology that has been tested and proven to work effectively and at scale.
As part of New Jersey’s efforts to curb the urban heat island effect and support disproportionately polluted communities across the state, the NJ Board of Public Utilities put out a call for comments on their Urban Heat Island mitigation program. NJEJA offered our guidance and expertise in this area to support the BPU in fulfilling their program goals and supporting overburdened communities.
For questions, please reach out to us at info@njeja.org
Recently, the Trump Administration put out a rule that would remove important regulations in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) which protects environmental justice communities. If implemented, the new rules would expedite permitting and prioritize efficiency over thorough analysis of the cumulative impacts and risk to EJ communities.
NJEJA joined our partners at the Moving Forward Network, NRDC, and the Environmental Justice Health Alliance to express our opposition to these new rules as they will likely lead to further disproportionate impact on environmental justice communities across the country.
For questions and additional support on NJ EJ Law engagement, please reach out to us at info@njeja.org
NJEJA, along with signed partners, respectfully submit these comments under the New Jersey EJ Law to the Reworld Union Facility in Rahway, New Jersey regarding their Title V Operating Permit.
For questions and additional support on NJ EJ Law engagement, please reach out to us at info@njeja.org
For the second installment of our Community Spotlight series, Director of Organizing Oriana Holmes-Price speaks with Ty Gould Jacinto, founder of the Native American Advancement Corporation. Ty shares her journey in environmental justice, from launching workforce development initiatives to advancing conservation efforts through weatherization, solar energy, and land stewardship. The two explore the challenges of advocating for Indigenous communities in South Jersey, the intersection of environmental and economic justice, and the importance of reconnecting with the land. This series, released throughout 2025, highlights local leaders working to advance environmental justice across New Jersey.
Introduction
Oriana: Tell us a bit about yourself and your organization.
Ty: My name is Ty Gould Jacinto from the Nanticoke Lenni-Lenape Nation in southern New Jersey, and I work for the Native American Advancement Corporation, which is a nonprofit organization that was started by myself and is still run by myself. We are a BIPOC organization, so all of our board members and our management are from the Native communities around the area—not just ours, but others. And we are in energy conservation with weatherization and now solar, which is exciting. And we also have a conservation place called the Cohanzick Nature Reserve, where we are teaching the new generation, as well as anybody else that wants to learn, about reducing the carbon footprint, soil conservation, water conservation, and being perfect land stewards—understanding the sacred symbiosis, being one with nature.
Founding of Native American Advancement Corporation
Oriana: What inspired you to create the Native American Advancement Corporation? How did you fall into this world of advocacy?
Ty: The Native American Advancement Corporation was birthed out of a response to a need for jobs for our local community. The lower five counties of New Jersey are in a high poverty level with very low opportunities for work. At the same time, a lot of our employment did not cater to that segment of the population that was hands-on—meaning carpenters, farmers, and so forth. So it was built out of a need for workforce development.
There was an opportunity to get into the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) program, and out of that need, I started the nonprofit organization. I am a fourth-generation carpenter, so I’ve been immersed in carpentry all my life. This was a perfect opportunity to get involved in the Weatherization Assistance Program. At that time, I brought my father over, Chief Mark Gould, to be our construction manager, because I always learned from him, and, you know, he had his own construction company.
We do highly skilled training through the BPI, and that’s how NAAC got started. And then, from there, we did the weatherization assistance, then we added on the heating improvement program, then we added on lead. Now we do LIHEAP assistance, and now we’re into solar. We do AmeriCorps Climate Corps with our new Cohanzick Reserve, and it just keeps growing from there. Everything that we’re adding on aligns with our mission of conservation.
Environmental justice looks different here than in the cities. In urban areas, people deal with air pollution, lead pipes, and heat islands. But here, we have to fight for soil conservation, groundwater preservation, and sustainable farming practices.
Ty Gould Jacinto
Environmental Justice and Program Impact
Oriana: What does actually achieving environmental justice mean to you? How do you see that as part of the bigger picture?
Ty: That’s a loaded question because there are a lot of aspects to environmental justice. One being that the education level—we’re not catering to the regular people. We’re expecting everyone to be technically inclined, to find information on the web and social media, when that’s just not the case.
You have the elderly population that has no connection at all. So they may be living next to a brownfield, or they may not know what their rights are. So how do you get that word to them? To advocate for them, we have to either get flyers to them or go door to door. How do you get people to be able to respond to what your programs are if they’re not technically inclined?
We found a huge gap where people did not know they could get weatherization assistance. It is double the poverty level. Homeowners weren’t even aware that they could qualify for such programs. We’ve been in houses where we replaced a heater for a 95-year-old woman who had no heat for five years in her house. When our guys got there, it was one of the coldest Februarys we had, lots of snow on the ground, and she was huddled over a kerosene space heater in her kitchen. By the time they got to her bedroom, she had two sleeping bags that she slept with just to stay warm at night. Her house was no higher than 55 degrees with that kerosene heater.
So when you talk about environmental justice, you’re talking about the fact that there are programs that people can’t access because there’s no communication for them. We had to find creative ways. One of them was boots on the ground, door to door. We took our AmeriCorps program and did client education with our AmeriCorps Climate Corps program, letting people know that they qualify for this program and that this program exists. We can’t leave that segment of the population out, because then they’ll also be left out of another program they could benefit from just because they aren’t electronically inclined.
Challenges and Overcoming Barriers
Oriana: I want to stick with the thread that you’ve been sharing so far around the challenges that you’re facing. What are some of the biggest challenges you’ve had to overcome?
Ty: Well, the biggest obstacle we overcame was the fact that I was a Native American female. Some of the local agencies, and I don’t want to say any names, would not cooperate with us and even tried to shut us down, so we had to prove ourselves even more.
I’ve been immersed in this work my whole life. I have my eight trades construction certification, I know how to build a house from the bottom up, and I understand the technical language. Yet, despite all that, some agencies wouldn’t take us seriously. There were roadblocks everywhere—barriers meant to keep us out of opportunities. But I had a computer science background, so I built our own internal systems to track data, to streamline our processes, and to ensure we were operating at the highest level. That level of preparation helped us succeed, but it also made us resilient. We had to fight for our seat at the table. And once we got there, we didn’t just show up—we showed out. We made sure that our work spoke for itself.
Another challenge was financial sustainability. We’re a nonprofit, and every year it’s a battle to secure funding. It’s a competitive space, and many organizations don’t understand the depth of need in Indigenous communities. People assume we have access to all these benefits, but that’s not the reality. So, I spend a lot of time advocating for funding, writing grants, and proving that our programs are not just necessary but impactful.
Environmental Injustices in South Jersey
Oriana: For people who are not familiar with the Deep South in New Jersey, what are some of the key issues that the lower counties face that you’re helping to address?
Ty: A big issue is just getting the word out. We serve a very rural area, covering a 50-mile radius, so efficiency is key. When we visit someone’s home for weatherization or solar work, we have to make sure we bring everything we need—every tool, every piece of equipment—because going back just for one item would cost too much time and money.
Another challenge is water conservation. We’ve seen the overuse of groundwater because of large-scale farming operations planting non-native trees that require excessive irrigation. These farms don’t realize—or don’t care—that their water usage is depleting our aquifers. There’s also the issue of deep tilling, which erodes topsoil and leads to sediment buildup in river basins, disrupting fish populations.
Environmental justice looks different here than in the cities. In urban areas, people deal with air pollution, lead pipes, and heat islands. But here, we have to fight for soil conservation, groundwater preservation, and sustainable farming practices.
One of the biggest injustices we’re facing now is land conservation that ignores Indigenous communities. Conservation groups and the state are buying up large tracts of land, which on the surface sounds great. But in reality, they’re fencing off areas that our people have traditionally used for hunting, fishing, and gathering. We’ve gone from exploitation of the land to over-restriction, and we’re caught in the middle.
For example, we used to have access to large forests where we could harvest plants for medicine, hunt for food, and gather natural materials. Now, those same lands have “Do Not Enter” signs, and we’re being pushed out of spaces we’ve used for generations. And yet, at the same time, the deer population is out of control because there aren’t enough natural predators. It’s an imbalance that’s been created because people with no ties to the land are making decisions without consulting the communities that have lived here for centuries.
Investing in the Next Generation
Oriana: What advice would you share with someone who is new to this space — someone who is new to environmental justice work, Indigenous-based work, or equity work in general?
Ty: I would say, start asking questions and don’t be complacent. If you see something that doesn’t make sense, ask why.
For example, if you have a tree farm down the road from you and you see massive amounts of sprinklers running all the time, ask yourself, “Why are we watering those trees? The Indigenous trees in my yard don’t need extra watering—so why do these?” Ask why we’re planting trees from Japan that require more water, and why we’re allowing them to be sold and planted in local yards when they don’t belong here.
One of the things we advocate for is “God’s Grass”—what the Creator naturally grows. A meadow full of clover, dandelions, wildflowers, herbs, and medicines. But instead of embracing that, we put down weed killer. We poison the very plants that feed the birds and the bees.
Since the 1970s, we’ve lost 30 million birds because of our landscaping practices. Why? Because we’ve been conditioned to believe that a green, uniform lawn is more beautiful than a natural meadow. Towns impose ordinances that don’t allow grass to grow taller than 12 inches, but what if we changed the mindset? What if we recognized that these so-called “weeds” are actually food, medicine, and habitat? The concept of “weeds” didn’t exist until the grass industry created it. Before then, these plants were resources. Now, people see them as nuisances and spray chemicals to kill them.
If we want to fix this, we have to teach the next generation. We have to invest in youth. Because in 18 years, today’s children will be voting. They will be making decisions. You already see it happening on college campuses—young people are pushing for change. That’s where real transformation begins.
Challenging the Status Quo
Oriana: I think the last question that we can close out with is: If there’s one thing you want people to know about you, either personally or about NAAC and the regions you serve, what would it be?
Ty: If there’s one thing I want people to know about me, it’s this: It’s not I that lives, but the Creator that lives in me. That’s the essence of everything I do.
As facilities begin to comply with the rules of the Environmental Justice Law (EJ Law), it is important for communities to know how the process works, which facilities are subject to the law, and where pathways for advocacy can be found. This fact sheet can shed light on these important topics.
For questions and additional support, please reach out to us at info@njeja.org
