In The News
Politico Pro: EPA ozone rule delayed
Tuesday July 26, 2011
The EPA won't meet its deadline to issue its reconsideration of the George W. Bush administration's ozone standard by the end of the month, but plans to issue the rule "shortly," according to an agency spokesman.
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson "is fully committed to finalizing EPA's reconsideration of the Clean Air Act health standard for ground level ozone. That reconsideration is currently going through interagency review led by OMB. Following completion of this final step, EPA will finalize its reconsideration, but will not issue the final rule on July 29, the date the agency had intended," EPA spokesman Brendan Gilfillan said in a statement.
"We look forward to finalizing this standard shortly. A new ozone standard will be based on the best science and meet the obligation established under the Clean Air Act to protect the health of the American people. In implementing this new standard, EPA will use the long-standing flexibility in the Clean Air Act to consider costs, jobs and the economy," he said.
The latest delay marks the fourth time the EPA has missed its deadline to issue the final standard after the Obama administration proposed last year to tighten the Bush-era standard that agency science advisers said wasn't strict enough to protect public health.
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson "is fully committed to finalizing EPA's reconsideration of the Clean Air Act health standard for ground level ozone. That reconsideration is currently going through interagency review led by OMB. Following completion of this final step, EPA will finalize its reconsideration, but will not issue the final rule on July 29, the date the agency had intended," EPA spokesman Brendan Gilfillan said in a statement.
"We look forward to finalizing this standard shortly. A new ozone standard will be based on the best science and meet the obligation established under the Clean Air Act to protect the health of the American people. In implementing this new standard, EPA will use the long-standing flexibility in the Clean Air Act to consider costs, jobs and the economy," he said.
The latest delay marks the fourth time the EPA has missed its deadline to issue the final standard after the Obama administration proposed last year to tighten the Bush-era standard that agency science advisers said wasn't strict enough to protect public health.
Daily Caller: Inhofe bill would shine sunlight on regulation costs
Monday July 25, 2011
Environmental regulations drain hundreds of billions of dollars from the U.S. economy each year, and it mostly goes unnoticed by the public.
But proposed legislation from Oklahoma Republican Sen. James Inhofe could make the cost of such government interference more transparent.
"Everybody here is focusing on spending and taxes," Inhofe said, "but what most people don't realize is the cost of regulation is just as much as the cost of all of the taxes ... it's just less detectable."
The legislation, known as the CARE Act, would require the U.S. Department of Transportation and Environmental Protection Agency to publicize - in terms of jobs and money - the direct economic costs of the regulations they publish under the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts.
Inhofe's bill currently has more than 20 Republican senators onboard, and he hopes to attract support from centrist Democrats like Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia.
Inhofe contends that the EPA issues regulations without considering how they will affect the economy, and that it imposes regulations without taking into account whether or not they will kill jobs. (Rep. David Rivera reportedly under investigation by FBI, IRS)
But proposed legislation from Oklahoma Republican Sen. James Inhofe could make the cost of such government interference more transparent.
"Everybody here is focusing on spending and taxes," Inhofe said, "but what most people don't realize is the cost of regulation is just as much as the cost of all of the taxes ... it's just less detectable."
The legislation, known as the CARE Act, would require the U.S. Department of Transportation and Environmental Protection Agency to publicize - in terms of jobs and money - the direct economic costs of the regulations they publish under the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts.
Inhofe's bill currently has more than 20 Republican senators onboard, and he hopes to attract support from centrist Democrats like Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia.
Inhofe contends that the EPA issues regulations without considering how they will affect the economy, and that it imposes regulations without taking into account whether or not they will kill jobs. (Rep. David Rivera reportedly under investigation by FBI, IRS)
Tulsa World: Ridley says cut could delay I-44 work
Friday July 22, 2011
WASHINGTON - Oklahoma Transportation Secretary Gary Ridley warned Thursday that a major cut in federal road funds could delay completion of a huge Interstate 44 project in Tulsa and result in additional traffic deaths.
Testifying before the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Ridley cited that section of road's "high fatality" rate, terming it some of the worst in Oklahoma's interstate system.
A contract for that section of I-44 is expected to be up for bid a year from now as the last part of a $300 million-plus project that runs from Riverside Drive to Yale Avenue.
"That is the oldest section of interstate that we have in our system," Ridley said.
"In fact, it was in place before the interstate system was established."
Ridley's dramatic testimony came in response to a question from U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe, a major player in efforts to come up with a measure to at least maintain current levels of road funding.
Even though the Oklahoma Republican and others have agreed to scale back those efforts to a two-year bill, a $12 billion hole remains.
Testifying before the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Ridley cited that section of road's "high fatality" rate, terming it some of the worst in Oklahoma's interstate system.
A contract for that section of I-44 is expected to be up for bid a year from now as the last part of a $300 million-plus project that runs from Riverside Drive to Yale Avenue.
"That is the oldest section of interstate that we have in our system," Ridley said.
"In fact, it was in place before the interstate system was established."
Ridley's dramatic testimony came in response to a question from U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe, a major player in efforts to come up with a measure to at least maintain current levels of road funding.
Even though the Oklahoma Republican and others have agreed to scale back those efforts to a two-year bill, a $12 billion hole remains.
Edmond Sun: Grove Valley receives national award
Thursday July 21, 2011
EDMOND - Deer Creek Grove Valley Elementary School has been selected as the 2011 Take Pride in America National Award winner for the outstanding school program in the nation.
Debbie Straughn, Grove Valley's principal, was in Washington, D.C., Monday to represent the school as both she and the school were honored at the Take Pride in America National Awards Ceremony and Reception held in their honor at The White House.
"Our panel of judges was impressed by the hard work and dedication you have demonstrated with your volunteer service," said Lisa Young with the U.S. Department of the Interior. "We are privileged to honor such accomplishments ... and to recognize your outstanding commitment to public lands. "
Grove Valley, in partnership with Tinker Air Force Base, has built a new outdoor classroom that boasts federally protected wetlands.
An Air Force Military Construction Project required removal of a small wetlands and relocation away from the Air Base where bird strike concerns would not be an issue. It also required the replacement of the wetlands to help meet national goals of "no-net loss of wetlands."
"Grove Valley Elementary is pleased to be the off-base partner and location for this wetlands," Straughn said.
Debbie Straughn, Grove Valley's principal, was in Washington, D.C., Monday to represent the school as both she and the school were honored at the Take Pride in America National Awards Ceremony and Reception held in their honor at The White House.
"Our panel of judges was impressed by the hard work and dedication you have demonstrated with your volunteer service," said Lisa Young with the U.S. Department of the Interior. "We are privileged to honor such accomplishments ... and to recognize your outstanding commitment to public lands. "
Grove Valley, in partnership with Tinker Air Force Base, has built a new outdoor classroom that boasts federally protected wetlands.
An Air Force Military Construction Project required removal of a small wetlands and relocation away from the Air Base where bird strike concerns would not be an issue. It also required the replacement of the wetlands to help meet national goals of "no-net loss of wetlands."
"Grove Valley Elementary is pleased to be the off-base partner and location for this wetlands," Straughn said.
EPA's Pending Ozone Decision Could Cause 7 Million Job Losses by 2020
Wednesday July 20, 2011
Within days, the Obama EPA is expected to announce their decision to tighten the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ground-level ozone.
In so doing, EPA is essentially changing the definition of clean air. The practical effect is that businesses and states will have to drastically curtail their development plans in order to meet the new standards. In some cases, in areas that cannot meet the requirements, development will grind to a halt.
This isn't mere hyperbole: EPA estimates that this rule could cost as much as $90 billion annually, making it the most expensive regulation ever proposed.
Not only will the rule break records for costs-and this will significantly raise the price of energy for all Americans-by EPA's own projections, it could put 650 additional counties into the category of "non-attainment, which is the equivalent of posting a "closed for business" sign on communities. Affected counties will suffer from severe EPA-imposed restrictions on job creation and business expansion, including large numbers of plant closures. The rule has been projected to result in as many as 7 million lost jobs by 2020, with an estimated decline in GDP of close to 4 percent.
In so doing, EPA is essentially changing the definition of clean air. The practical effect is that businesses and states will have to drastically curtail their development plans in order to meet the new standards. In some cases, in areas that cannot meet the requirements, development will grind to a halt.
This isn't mere hyperbole: EPA estimates that this rule could cost as much as $90 billion annually, making it the most expensive regulation ever proposed.
Not only will the rule break records for costs-and this will significantly raise the price of energy for all Americans-by EPA's own projections, it could put 650 additional counties into the category of "non-attainment, which is the equivalent of posting a "closed for business" sign on communities. Affected counties will suffer from severe EPA-imposed restrictions on job creation and business expansion, including large numbers of plant closures. The rule has been projected to result in as many as 7 million lost jobs by 2020, with an estimated decline in GDP of close to 4 percent.
National Journal: Congress May Join Fight Over EPA Smog Rules
Wednesday July 20, 2011
The Obama administration's plan to announce new antismog rules by month's end could face growing opposition from Republicans -- and some Democrats -- in Congress.
Industry and lobbyists are fighting the new Environmental Protection Agency ground-level ozone standards, which they claim will hurt the economy. Opponents of the rules say that forcing state regulatory agencies to draft plans to cut ozone levels will in turn require costly compliance from nearly all corners of the industrial and business sectors.
On Tuesday, Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., circulated a memo at the Republican lunch calling on members of Congress to object to the new standards, which the EPA plans to announce by July 29. The standards will set a lower acceptable level of ozone, which will affect more parts of the country than the current standards.
Industry and lobbyists are fighting the new Environmental Protection Agency ground-level ozone standards, which they claim will hurt the economy. Opponents of the rules say that forcing state regulatory agencies to draft plans to cut ozone levels will in turn require costly compliance from nearly all corners of the industrial and business sectors.
On Tuesday, Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., circulated a memo at the Republican lunch calling on members of Congress to object to the new standards, which the EPA plans to announce by July 29. The standards will set a lower acceptable level of ozone, which will affect more parts of the country than the current standards.
Inhofe Op Ed: Federal interference in energy development regulation a bad idea (The Hill)
Wednesday July 20, 2011
The United States reached an extraordinary milestone in 2009: A flood of domestic natural gas production propelled America past Russia to become the world's largest producer of natural gas. But considering the Obama administration's aggressive anti-fossil-fuel agenda, how could this possibly have occurred?
Two key reasons stand out: First, American ingenuity combined cutting-edge, horizontal drilling technologies with advancements in hydraulic fracturing to allow producers to tap America's truly massive natural gas shale deposits. But more importantly, these immense shale deposits are predominantly located in areas of the country where the states - not the federal government - primarily regulate oil and gas development. In such states as Pennsylvania, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Louisiana, West Virginia, Ohio, Michigan and North Dakota, a virtual boom in natural gas and oil development is transforming America's energy outlook, all thanks to the absence of federal red tape.
But unfortunately, this lack of federal control has not gone unnoticed by the Obama administration and the environmental lobby. Looking to reverse America's newfound status as the world's natural gas powerhouse, many on the left now are pressing a sympathetic Obama administration to flex its regulatory muscles and expand its reach over hydraulic fracturing, a practice that for decades has been effectively and efficiently regulated by states.
Two key reasons stand out: First, American ingenuity combined cutting-edge, horizontal drilling technologies with advancements in hydraulic fracturing to allow producers to tap America's truly massive natural gas shale deposits. But more importantly, these immense shale deposits are predominantly located in areas of the country where the states - not the federal government - primarily regulate oil and gas development. In such states as Pennsylvania, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Louisiana, West Virginia, Ohio, Michigan and North Dakota, a virtual boom in natural gas and oil development is transforming America's energy outlook, all thanks to the absence of federal red tape.
But unfortunately, this lack of federal control has not gone unnoticed by the Obama administration and the environmental lobby. Looking to reverse America's newfound status as the world's natural gas powerhouse, many on the left now are pressing a sympathetic Obama administration to flex its regulatory muscles and expand its reach over hydraulic fracturing, a practice that for decades has been effectively and efficiently regulated by states.
Politico Pro: Republicans object to DOI nominee's past views on fracking, meat
Tuesday July 19, 2011
The confirmation of President Barack Obama's pick for a top Interior Department post may turn on her diet and her views on fracking.
Republican senators on Tuesday grilled Rebecca Wodder - Obama's nominee for assistant secretary for fish, wildlife and parks - over a 2007 interview in which she criticized hydraulic fracturing's "nasty track record" and spoke against eating beef.
During a hearing of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) asked Wodder whether she stands by her comments to E magazine that she objected to factory farms.
"I eat almost no beef or pork because of the amount of resources consumed in producing food via cattle or pigs, and because I object to factory farms," Wodder said at the time, when she was president of American Rivers.
Wodder told the Senate panel that her dietary preferences were personal, but that the objection to factory farms was a comment on behalf of American Rivers.
Committee ranking member Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) criticized Wodder's stance on hydraulic fracturing after she wrote in June 2010 in The Huffington Post that "fracking has a nasty track record of creating a toxic chemical soup that pollutes groundwater and streams, threatening public health and wildlife."
Wodder again said she made her comments as the head of the rivers organization, and said she recognizes that the Interior post is an "entirely different job." She said natural gas is an important part of U.S. energy security, but that it's important to proceed carefully to avoid "unintended consequences."
Republican senators on Tuesday grilled Rebecca Wodder - Obama's nominee for assistant secretary for fish, wildlife and parks - over a 2007 interview in which she criticized hydraulic fracturing's "nasty track record" and spoke against eating beef.
During a hearing of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) asked Wodder whether she stands by her comments to E magazine that she objected to factory farms.
"I eat almost no beef or pork because of the amount of resources consumed in producing food via cattle or pigs, and because I object to factory farms," Wodder said at the time, when she was president of American Rivers.
Wodder told the Senate panel that her dietary preferences were personal, but that the objection to factory farms was a comment on behalf of American Rivers.
Committee ranking member Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) criticized Wodder's stance on hydraulic fracturing after she wrote in June 2010 in The Huffington Post that "fracking has a nasty track record of creating a toxic chemical soup that pollutes groundwater and streams, threatening public health and wildlife."
Wodder again said she made her comments as the head of the rivers organization, and said she recognizes that the Interior post is an "entirely different job." She said natural gas is an important part of U.S. energy security, but that it's important to proceed carefully to avoid "unintended consequences."
Tulsa World Editorial: Coal killers
Monday July 18, 2011
Oklahoma's congressional delegation has written the head of the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, claiming that the federal agency is trying to kill the state's coal mining industry. The delegation's fears appear to be valid.
The letter quotes from a leaked draft of an environmental impact statement on a proposed stream-protection rule: "The reasonable, foreseeable development scenario for coal production in the United States the (preferred option) is for no new mining activity in (Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri and Oklahoma)... ."
The congressmen also charge that the federal agency is attempting to override Oklahoma's own enforcement program, which it is not legally empowered to do.
Coal mining already is on the wane in Oklahoma, and it doesn't need a negative push from the feds.
According to an Oklahoma Department of Mines website, coal production in the state declined from its peak of 5.73 million tons in 1981 to 979,000 tons last year. Historically, Oklahoma coal, which is hot-burning and high in sulphur, was shipped to out-of-state electric plants. Recently, however, most of it is burned in cement and lime kilns within the state.
The letter quotes from a leaked draft of an environmental impact statement on a proposed stream-protection rule: "The reasonable, foreseeable development scenario for coal production in the United States the (preferred option) is for no new mining activity in (Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri and Oklahoma)... ."
The congressmen also charge that the federal agency is attempting to override Oklahoma's own enforcement program, which it is not legally empowered to do.
Coal mining already is on the wane in Oklahoma, and it doesn't need a negative push from the feds.
According to an Oklahoma Department of Mines website, coal production in the state declined from its peak of 5.73 million tons in 1981 to 979,000 tons last year. Historically, Oklahoma coal, which is hot-burning and high in sulphur, was shipped to out-of-state electric plants. Recently, however, most of it is burned in cement and lime kilns within the state.
Oklahoman: Agency accused of trying to kill state's coal mining industry
Friday July 15, 2011
WASHINGTON - Oklahoma's congressional delegation accused a federal agency on Thursday of trying to kill the state's coal mining industry.
In a letter to Joseph Pizarchik, director of the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, the lawmakers explain their growing sense of concern.
"OSM has taken two actions recently that seem to unfairly single out Oklahoma," their letter states.
"These two actions threaten an entire industry, its employees, and the state regulatory authority."
It quotes from what was described as a recently leaked draft environmental impact statement on a proposed stream-protection rule that the lawmakers clearly believe would mean an end to the state's coal mining industry.
That quote reads: "The reasonable, foreseeable development scenario for coal production in the United States the (preferred option) is for no new mining activity in (Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri and Oklahoma) ...."
The delegation wrote that "our hope is that you will realize that pursuing an option in your proposed stream protection rule that outright eliminates an entire industry is unacceptable."
In a letter to Joseph Pizarchik, director of the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, the lawmakers explain their growing sense of concern.
"OSM has taken two actions recently that seem to unfairly single out Oklahoma," their letter states.
"These two actions threaten an entire industry, its employees, and the state regulatory authority."
It quotes from what was described as a recently leaked draft environmental impact statement on a proposed stream-protection rule that the lawmakers clearly believe would mean an end to the state's coal mining industry.
That quote reads: "The reasonable, foreseeable development scenario for coal production in the United States the (preferred option) is for no new mining activity in (Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri and Oklahoma) ...."
The delegation wrote that "our hope is that you will realize that pursuing an option in your proposed stream protection rule that outright eliminates an entire industry is unacceptable."
