In The News
WSJ: Range Fires Ignite Dispute
Monday June 6, 2011
American cattle producers from Texas to Tennessee ship their herds each summer to the Flint Hills region of Kansas, where the animals bulk up on grass before they're dispatched to feedlots and then slaughtered.
Ranchers help prime the sprawling pastures by torching them to burn out prairie brush, clearing the way for stands of big bluestem and other grasses that are cheap cattle feed.
But the springtime fires also send up smoke that's tipping heartland cities into violations of clean-air regulations, the federal government says.
Now the Environmental Protection Agency is threatening to restrain the Kansas range fires if ranchers' don't do so voluntarily, perhaps by burning only when wind doesn't blow the smoke over cities. The EPA's crackdown is kicking up a political storm in cattle country-a potential harbinger of high-stakes fights elsewhere as the agency prepares this summer to announce tougher clean-air standards nationwide.
On one side of the Kansas conflict are the EPA and some environmental groups, which say the unabated ranch fires present a public-health threat. On the other side are Kansas ranchers, city officials and state environmental regulators, who fear an EPA clean-air campaign could cost businesses and residents big money.
Ranchers help prime the sprawling pastures by torching them to burn out prairie brush, clearing the way for stands of big bluestem and other grasses that are cheap cattle feed.
But the springtime fires also send up smoke that's tipping heartland cities into violations of clean-air regulations, the federal government says.
Now the Environmental Protection Agency is threatening to restrain the Kansas range fires if ranchers' don't do so voluntarily, perhaps by burning only when wind doesn't blow the smoke over cities. The EPA's crackdown is kicking up a political storm in cattle country-a potential harbinger of high-stakes fights elsewhere as the agency prepares this summer to announce tougher clean-air standards nationwide.
On one side of the Kansas conflict are the EPA and some environmental groups, which say the unabated ranch fires present a public-health threat. On the other side are Kansas ranchers, city officials and state environmental regulators, who fear an EPA clean-air campaign could cost businesses and residents big money.
Oklahoman Editorial: Oklahoma AG sues to stop EPA's scrubber plan
Friday June 3, 2011
Less than six months after taking office, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt is making good on campaign promises to challenge the federal government for legislative and bureaucratic overreach.
An example is the Environmental Protection Agency's rejection of a state mitigation plan regarding the "regional haze" that the EPA claims is adversely affecting federal wildlife refuges. Rather than accepting a plan endorsed by utilities and state environmental officials, the EPA has ordered a harsh and expensive remedy for haze linked to coal-fired power plants.
Rather than bail out of the fight and accept EPA's diktat, Pruitt has sued the agency. Gov. Mary Fallin, a fellow Republican who has a similar anti-federal bureaucracy worldview, praised Pruitt's decision to commit state resources to this battle.
An example is the Environmental Protection Agency's rejection of a state mitigation plan regarding the "regional haze" that the EPA claims is adversely affecting federal wildlife refuges. Rather than accepting a plan endorsed by utilities and state environmental officials, the EPA has ordered a harsh and expensive remedy for haze linked to coal-fired power plants.
Rather than bail out of the fight and accept EPA's diktat, Pruitt has sued the agency. Gov. Mary Fallin, a fellow Republican who has a similar anti-federal bureaucracy worldview, praised Pruitt's decision to commit state resources to this battle.
What They Are Saying About Obama Commerce Nominee Bryson
Thursday June 2, 2011
WATCH: FOX Business: Inhofe Discusses Opposition to Commerce Nomination - John Bryson - Senator Inhofe was on Fox Business Wed night discussing concerns regarding President Obama's nomination of John Byrson to head the Department of Commerce. Read Inhofe's statement on Bryson here.
Wall Street Journal: Secretary of Subsidy - Fortunately for BrightSource, its efforts are sustained by an impressive array of federal, state and local subsidies, including a $1.6 billion loan guarantee from the Department of Energy, one of the largest solar guarantees on record. The company notes federal provisions providing solar projects with a 30% investment tax credit through 2016, as well as accelerated depreciations of capital costs for solar entities, among other goodies. The risk is that the subsidy spigot could someday be turned off as voters get wise to the high costs, economic inefficiencies and unintended environmental side-effects of renewables. That's a possibility the filing acknowledges, though it adds brightly that it expects demand to "continue to increase as a result of regulatory policies and incentives put in place to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and improve energy security." As an example, it points to California legislation requiring retail energy sellers to "derive 33% of the energy they supply from renewable energy sources by 2020." Which brings us back to the President's praise for Mr. Bryson as an innovator. All technologies-including those connected to renewables-involve risk, and entrepreneurship means taking chances on innovation. But a core conceit of this Administration's economic policy is that it can achieve better results if government allocates capital to favored companies rather than letting private markets do the job. The results so far have been as underwhelming as the current economic recovery. In nominating Mr. Bryson, Mr. Obama has chosen a man who would appear to believe wholeheartedly in this model of politicized investment. Senators might want to ask the nominee whether he represents a vision of "commerce" that bears any relation to what is supposed to happen in a free market.
Wall Street Journal: Secretary of Subsidy - Fortunately for BrightSource, its efforts are sustained by an impressive array of federal, state and local subsidies, including a $1.6 billion loan guarantee from the Department of Energy, one of the largest solar guarantees on record. The company notes federal provisions providing solar projects with a 30% investment tax credit through 2016, as well as accelerated depreciations of capital costs for solar entities, among other goodies. The risk is that the subsidy spigot could someday be turned off as voters get wise to the high costs, economic inefficiencies and unintended environmental side-effects of renewables. That's a possibility the filing acknowledges, though it adds brightly that it expects demand to "continue to increase as a result of regulatory policies and incentives put in place to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and improve energy security." As an example, it points to California legislation requiring retail energy sellers to "derive 33% of the energy they supply from renewable energy sources by 2020." Which brings us back to the President's praise for Mr. Bryson as an innovator. All technologies-including those connected to renewables-involve risk, and entrepreneurship means taking chances on innovation. But a core conceit of this Administration's economic policy is that it can achieve better results if government allocates capital to favored companies rather than letting private markets do the job. The results so far have been as underwhelming as the current economic recovery. In nominating Mr. Bryson, Mr. Obama has chosen a man who would appear to believe wholeheartedly in this model of politicized investment. Senators might want to ask the nominee whether he represents a vision of "commerce" that bears any relation to what is supposed to happen in a free market.
Tulsa World: State sues EPA over regional haze plan
Wednesday June 1, 2011
OKLAHOMA CITY - Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt on Tuesday sued the Environmental Protection Agency, alleging the federal agency violated its procedures in rejecting a state plan to reduce emissions from three coal-fired power plants.
Pruitt said the EPA is formulating its own plan to reduce regional haze, a move that would be costly to electricity consumers.
"It is estimated the federal implementation plan the EPA is proposing for the state of Oklahoma could potentially cost the state $2 billion to $2.5 billion where we will be required to place scrubbers on every coal-fired plant in the state of Oklahoma," Pruitt said. "If that occurs, our utility rates it is projected in the state of Oklahoma will go up 13 to 20 percent in a three-year period."
Pruitt announced the lawsuit Tuesday during a news conference with Corporation Commission Chairwoman Dana Murphy and Oklahoma Environmental Secretary Gary Sherrer.
Pruitt said the EPA is formulating its own plan to reduce regional haze, a move that would be costly to electricity consumers.
"It is estimated the federal implementation plan the EPA is proposing for the state of Oklahoma could potentially cost the state $2 billion to $2.5 billion where we will be required to place scrubbers on every coal-fired plant in the state of Oklahoma," Pruitt said. "If that occurs, our utility rates it is projected in the state of Oklahoma will go up 13 to 20 percent in a three-year period."
Pruitt announced the lawsuit Tuesday during a news conference with Corporation Commission Chairwoman Dana Murphy and Oklahoma Environmental Secretary Gary Sherrer.
E&E; News: Inhofe calls for hearings on EPA paint rule
Wednesday June 1, 2011
The top Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee is calling for oversight hearings on U.S. EPA's implementation of its lead-based paint renovation rule.
Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) and seven other Republican senators sent a letter Friday urging Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) to convene a hearing on the agency's Lead: Renovation, Repair and Painting (LRRP) regulation.
"We agree that it is vitally important to protect children and pregnant women from exposure to lead-based paint," the letter said. "Unfortunately the implementation has been inconsistent and confusing."
The LRRP rule was finalized in April of last year and requires contractors to obtain certification in lead-safe work practices before renovating properties built before 1978, when lead was banned from use in residences (Greenwire, April 23, 2010).
Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) and seven other Republican senators sent a letter Friday urging Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) to convene a hearing on the agency's Lead: Renovation, Repair and Painting (LRRP) regulation.
"We agree that it is vitally important to protect children and pregnant women from exposure to lead-based paint," the letter said. "Unfortunately the implementation has been inconsistent and confusing."
The LRRP rule was finalized in April of last year and requires contractors to obtain certification in lead-safe work practices before renovating properties built before 1978, when lead was banned from use in residences (Greenwire, April 23, 2010).
Tulsa World: Inhofe predicts transportation bill will fall short
Wednesday June 1, 2011
WASHINGTON - U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe, despite what another key player called a breakthrough on the next major transportation bill, predicted that effort will fall far short of a much-delayed six-year measure.
"It is going to end up a two-year bill," the Oklahoma Republican said, conceding he shares the disappointment that states and others will no doubt voice.
"We can't do it. The money is just not there."
To even get that scaled-down version through with the support of his fellow Republicans, Inhofe said he had to give in and make elimination of all earmarks part of the announcement issued last week by a group of key transportation players in the Senate.
Inhofe, who refuses to take a backseat to anyone when it comes to conservative principles, again blamed other Republicans for demagoguing the earmark issue and handing a huge victory to the Obama administration, which, he said, now will get to determine which projects get funded.
"It is going to end up a two-year bill," the Oklahoma Republican said, conceding he shares the disappointment that states and others will no doubt voice.
"We can't do it. The money is just not there."
To even get that scaled-down version through with the support of his fellow Republicans, Inhofe said he had to give in and make elimination of all earmarks part of the announcement issued last week by a group of key transportation players in the Senate.
Inhofe, who refuses to take a backseat to anyone when it comes to conservative principles, again blamed other Republicans for demagoguing the earmark issue and handing a huge victory to the Obama administration, which, he said, now will get to determine which projects get funded.
E&E; News: Political overtones at NRC concern former commissioner
Friday May 27, 2011
A former regulator and nuclear pioneer with more than 50 years of experience in the field worries that politics and personal ambition may be infiltrating policy decisions at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Forrest Remick, 80, earned one of the first operating licenses and directed one of the first licensed nuclear reactors at a university in the United States. The Pennsylvania native helped deploy civilian nuclear power throughout the United States and abroad by training operators and even advised NRC on how to design plants and safety standards.
Also a former Republican commissioner at NRC, Remick has skillfully straddled the worlds of science and policy.
Although he has since retired, Remick said his decades in the field have given him insight on the play of politics within NRC. And while politics are mainly estranged from the commission's day-to-day functions, he said they have the potential to seep into decisions made by the presidentially designated chair of the commission who sometimes is swayed by personal ambition.
As a commissioner, he witnessed such maneuvering when a chairman attempted to address Congressional oversight hearings without the participation of other NRC commissioners. Remick said he and his fellow commissioners quashed that attempt.
Forrest Remick, 80, earned one of the first operating licenses and directed one of the first licensed nuclear reactors at a university in the United States. The Pennsylvania native helped deploy civilian nuclear power throughout the United States and abroad by training operators and even advised NRC on how to design plants and safety standards.
Also a former Republican commissioner at NRC, Remick has skillfully straddled the worlds of science and policy.
Although he has since retired, Remick said his decades in the field have given him insight on the play of politics within NRC. And while politics are mainly estranged from the commission's day-to-day functions, he said they have the potential to seep into decisions made by the presidentially designated chair of the commission who sometimes is swayed by personal ambition.
As a commissioner, he witnessed such maneuvering when a chairman attempted to address Congressional oversight hearings without the participation of other NRC commissioners. Remick said he and his fellow commissioners quashed that attempt.
E&E; News: Inhofe floats ethanol opt-out bill
Friday May 27, 2011
A bipartisan group of lawmakers led by Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) and Rep. Brian Bilbray (R-Calif.) yesterday offered measures in both chambers that would let states opt out of complying with federal mandates for corn ethanol use and expand the definition of advanced biofuels.
The legislation would allow states to pass laws "opting out" of the federal renewable fuel standard's conventional ethanol targets. If a state approved such a law, U.S. EPA would then reduce the national mandate by a percentage to reflect that state's share of consumption in national gasoline usage.
To help protect the market for zero-ethanol gasoline, EPA would then issue credits to fuel terminals that handle gasoline for opt-out states. That mechanism is designed to avoid penalizing fuel terminals for difficulty meeting their own ethanol targets thanks to the opt-out market.
The legislation would allow states to pass laws "opting out" of the federal renewable fuel standard's conventional ethanol targets. If a state approved such a law, U.S. EPA would then reduce the national mandate by a percentage to reflect that state's share of consumption in national gasoline usage.
To help protect the market for zero-ethanol gasoline, EPA would then issue credits to fuel terminals that handle gasoline for opt-out states. That mechanism is designed to avoid penalizing fuel terminals for difficulty meeting their own ethanol targets thanks to the opt-out market.
CQ TODAY: White House Regulatory Overhaul Gets Lukewarm Response
Friday May 27, 2011
The Obama administration is receiving mixed reviews from lawmakers for a laundry list of steps that federal agencies plan to take to comply with a presidential order to streamline the regulatory process.
Jacob J. Lew, director of the Office of Management and Budget, cast the proposals released Thursday and affecting numerous federal agencies as the dawning of a new regulatory era.
"This is not a one-time project," he told reporters. "This is a new way of doing business."
The plans, issued in response to a January executive order directing agencies to streamline the regulatory process, would save billions of dollars while protecting public health and safety, Lew said.
Cass Sunstein, the head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, said the proposals cumulatively would save tens of millions of hours of paperwork.
For example, EPA, which has borne the brunt of withering criticism from Republicans over regulatory overreach, announced more than two dozen reviews of regulations, including numerous efforts to reduce reporting or permitting requirements.
Jacob J. Lew, director of the Office of Management and Budget, cast the proposals released Thursday and affecting numerous federal agencies as the dawning of a new regulatory era.
"This is not a one-time project," he told reporters. "This is a new way of doing business."
The plans, issued in response to a January executive order directing agencies to streamline the regulatory process, would save billions of dollars while protecting public health and safety, Lew said.
Cass Sunstein, the head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, said the proposals cumulatively would save tens of millions of hours of paperwork.
For example, EPA, which has borne the brunt of withering criticism from Republicans over regulatory overreach, announced more than two dozen reviews of regulations, including numerous efforts to reduce reporting or permitting requirements.
Inhofe to reintroduce bill to allow states to offer 'ethanol-free' gasoline
Thursday May 26, 2011
Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee, will reintroduce legislation this afternoon that would allow states to opt out of the conventional biofuel requirement under RFS2 and would also expand the definition of cellulosic biofuel under the regulation, OPIS has confirmed.
Much of the bill is the same as Inhofe introduced during the previous Congress, Republican EPW staffers explained to OPIS. Specifically, the bill would allow states to opt-out of just the conventional biofuel carve-out of RFS2. The bulk of the conventional biofuel requirement is comprised of corn- based ethanol. Inhofe's bill would essentially allow for "ethanol-free gasoline," the senator previously explained.
Unchanged from the previous bill, the opt-out would be recognized by the administrator of the EPA, who would then reduce the amount of the national conventional biofuel mandate by the percentage amount of the state which chooses to opt out.
Much of the bill is the same as Inhofe introduced during the previous Congress, Republican EPW staffers explained to OPIS. Specifically, the bill would allow states to opt-out of just the conventional biofuel carve-out of RFS2. The bulk of the conventional biofuel requirement is comprised of corn- based ethanol. Inhofe's bill would essentially allow for "ethanol-free gasoline," the senator previously explained.
Unchanged from the previous bill, the opt-out would be recognized by the administrator of the EPA, who would then reduce the amount of the national conventional biofuel mandate by the percentage amount of the state which chooses to opt out.
