NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION v. EGG HARBOR GAS & GO, LLC

 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-0309-06T50309-06T5

NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION,

Respondent,

v.

EGG HARBOR GAS & GO, LLC,

Appellant.

_____________________________________________

 

Submitted April 25, 2007 - Decided May 4, 2007

Before Judges Cuff and Baxter.

On appeal from Final Administrative Action of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Agency Docket No. 004326.

David M. DeClement, attorney for appellant.

Stuart Rabner, Attorney General, attorney for respondent (Patrick DeAlmeida, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel; Maria G. Kelly, Deputy Attorney General, on the brief).

PER CURIAM

Egg Harbor Gas & Go, LLC (Gas & Go) appeals from a final administrative order and penalty issued by the Department of Environmental Protection (Department) for violation of the Water Pollution Control Act, N.J.S.A. 58:10A-1 to -20, the Underground Storage of Hazardous Substances Act, N.J.S.A. 58:10A-21 to -35, and regulations promulgated thereunder. The Department conducted an underground storage tank inspection of appellant's gas station and cited the facility for numerous violations, including failure to register underground storage tanks with the Department, failure to demonstrate financial responsibility and failure to provide a mechanism for spill release detection. Gas & Go appealed the initial penalty assessment to the Office of Administrative Law, which after a hearing concluded that appellant had violated the applicable regulations and that the penalties demanded by the Department were appropriate. The Commissioner of the Department issued a Final Decision on August 21, 2006, accepting in its entirety the decision of the administrative law judge. Gas & Go then appealed.

The Commissioner's Final Decision of August 21, 2006, thoroughly analyzes the facts and reaches proper conclusions of law. Appellant's arguments to the contrary are without merit and do not warrant discussion in a written opinion. R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(D). We affirm substantially for the reasons set forth by the Commissioner in her written decision of August 21, 2006.

Affirmed.

 

(continued)

(continued)

2

A-0309-06T5

May 4, 2007