Lawmakers in New Jersey have revised the proposed Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act, reducing some of its requirements for companies operating in the state. The bill, S-679, originally called for businesses with at least $1 billion in annual revenue to report both direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions. However, amendments made by the Senate Environment & Energy Committee have removed the requirement to measure and report “Scope 3” emissions, which cover activities outside a company’s direct control such as those by suppliers, shippers, and consumers.
Ray Cantor, Deputy Chief Government Affairs Officer at the New Jersey Business & Industry Association (NJBIA), told the committee: “We are still opposed, but it’s a much more workable bill with the amendments removing Scope 3.”
Cantor explained that measuring emissions across an entire supply chain would have been costly and difficult because not all global partners track their own data or can verify its accuracy. He added: “If the Scope 3 provision had been left in the bill, it could have forced companies to change suppliers, leaving out small businesses that are unable to track this type of data.”
Senator Bob Smith (D-17), who chairs the committee and sponsors the bill alongside Sen. John McKeon (D-27), said they moved forward with amendments after determining that including Scope 3 made the legislation “not passable.” The bill still requires reporting on Scope 1 emissions (from company facilities and vehicles) and Scope 2 emissions (from purchased power such as electricity or heating).
“At the end of the day, we are judged on whether we get something done or not,” Smith said.
Cantor also requested further changes to clarify which companies must comply. As written, any business with $1 billion in aggregate revenue that does business in New Jersey would be subject to reporting—even if their operations within the state are minimal. He said: “This legislation does not define what exactly it means to ‘do business in New Jersey.’ You could have a business in the port with just one office, maybe it’s not even staffed, but that could be considered ‘doing business’ in the State of New Jersey.”
He pointed out that California’s similar law ties requirements to specific economic thresholds like payroll or sales within that state. Cantor urged lawmakers: “We respectfully request that you use the California definition of what it means to be doing business in the state. Doing that in New Jersey would take away the ambiguity that is now in the legislation and provide companies with more certainty about exactly who is and is not covered by this.”
Smith noted there will be additional opportunities for changes before final passage. “We will take a look at Mr. Cantor’s constructive criticism about defining which businesses are going to provide this information, but that’ll be in a later stage,” he said before Thursday’s committee vote.
The NJBIA represents private-sector employers throughout New Jersey and serves as one of the nation’s largest statewide employer associations according to its official website. The organization provides advocacy services and resources aimed at supporting business prosperity across sectors including manufacturing and services and works closely with government entities and academic institutions. Michele Siekerka currently leads NJBIA as president and chief executive officer based out of Trenton.
