We had dinner with some old friends last night. The conversation inevitably turned to politics (ugh). I brought up my recent blog about CRA and the overturning of the Stream Protection Rule. I tried to explain why anyone (read Republicans and a couple of Democrats) would want to permit (encourage?) blowing the tops off of mountains and then dump the refuse left after removing the coal into the local streams free of charge with no conseqences. Obviously, this not only destroys the stream right there on the spot but sends life and health threatening pollutants down stream to contaminate the entire watershed that people rely on for drinking water and other uses.
It would seem like a “no brainer” to stop this wholesale destruction of the landscape and the critical water resource. But, noooooooooo. This is how our Republican legislators view this:
“If you’re worried about job losses due to access restrictions and rising energy costs … and if you care about states’ rights, which so many of us do, or overregulation by the federal government, which we clearly do, you should support this resolution,” said Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska).
Democrats tried to save the rule that took more than seven years to craft. Now it becomes the second measure ever to die through the Congressional Review Act.
“Polluters should pay for the pollution,” Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee ranking member Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) said in its defense. “And that is what the rule says, and that is what is trying to be overrun today.”
This is the statement by Sierra Club Executive Director Mike Brune:
“This extreme move demonstrates that this Congress and Administration believe that — despite mountains of evidence that mining harms communities — coal companies should not be held accountable for the damage they do.”
The fact is that this action will not add one job to what has become a dying industry. Mining coal and burning it to produce electricity is heading for extinction and the ESA (the Endangered Species Act) is not going to save it. Rather than being smart about helping our country transition to a fossil free economy, the majority party in Congress would rather try and subsidize outdated industries at the expense of public health and common sense for political gain.
Pretty sad state of affairs in my humble opinion? But what do you think about this?
Congress Kills Landmark Obama Coal Mining Rule
Dylan Brown, E&E News reporter
Thursday, February 2, 2017
The Senate voted this afternoon to repeal one of the Obama administration’s landmark rules for protecting waterways from coal mining.
With the House having passed the resolution of disapproval earlier this week, the measure now heads to President Trump, who has promised to sign it.
The measure to kill the Interior Department’s Stream Protection Rule, H.J. Res. 38, passed 55-45, with help from coal-state Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.), Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.) and Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.).
“If you’re worried about job losses due to access restrictions and rising energy costs … and if you care about states’ rights, which so many of us do, or overregulation by the federal government, which we clearly do, you should support this resolution,” said Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska).
Democrats tried to save the rule that took more than seven years to craft. Now it becomes the second measure ever to die through the Congressional Review Act.
“Polluters should pay for the pollution,” Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee ranking member Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) said in its defense. “And that is what the rule says, and that is what is trying to be overrun today.”
Manchin, long a champion of his state’s coal interests, said his vote was to eliminate “overreaching and duplicative rules that do nothing but create havoc.”
Heitkamp added: “Had the previous administration actually listened and worked constructively with Sen. Manchin and myself and my utilities and the coal industry in North Dakota, we would not be standing here now.”
With the CRA prohibiting any “substantially similar” regulation from a federal agency, Cantwell said, “I hope people aren’t advocating for pollution as an economic solution, because it won’t work.”
President Obama’s team was bullish on cracking down on mine pollution from the beginning. They took action through U.S. EPA and under the Clean Water Act.
The Stream Protection Rule added permitting and monitoring requirements for coal mines under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act.
“The negative impacts of the regulation will be felt far beyond the coalfields, extending to railroads, utilities, and the companies that service and support mining communities, from restaurants to hotels to equipment suppliers,” the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and 30 state and local chambers wrote in a letter.
Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune said: “This extreme move demonstrates that this Congress and Administration believe that — despite mountains of evidence that mining harms communities — coal companies should not be held accountable for the damage they do.”
The Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement began work on the Stream Protection Rule to undo the George W. Bush administration’s Stream Buffer Zone Rule. In the meantime, a federal judge scrapped the Bush-era rule. The new administration will now have to work with Reagan-era standards.
SEC rule
The Senate this afternoon moved to another CRA measure, kicking off debate on H.J. Res. 41 to slash Securities and Exchange Commission requirements that oil, gas and mining companies disclose payments to governments.
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) took to the floor in recent days to condemn the regulation as a financial burden and competitive disadvantage to U.S. companies.
Standing in front of his “Republican Wheel of Giveaways,” Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) condemned the repeal as another gift to the extraction industries.
“The only people cheering Congress’ attempt to enable bribery and corruption in the oil industry are sitting in the boardrooms of multinational oil companies and the palaces of foreign autocrats,” said Center for American Progress public lands and energy advocate Matt Lee-Ashley.
“These votes mark the start of what CAP expects to be an unprecedented sellout of basic American environmental protections to billionaires, lobbyists and special interests,” he said.
Twitter: @DylanBrown26 Email: dbrown@eenews.net
Congress Kills SEC Reporting Rule; House to Vote on Methane
Arianna Skibell, E&E News reporter
Friday, February 3, 2017
Repealing the Bureau of Land Management’s methane venting and flaring rule would be a huge boon for Exxon Mobil Corp. and other oil and gas companies, environmental group Friends of the Earth said in an analysis released today.
The group published the results of a freedom of information request filed with the Interior Department as Congress prepares to use the Congressional Review Act to kill the rule. A House vote is set for today.
The action comes amid a flurry of anti-regulatory activity on Capitol Hill. Yesterday the Senate voted to kill the coal mining Stream Protection Rule.
And the chamber this morning followed the House in passing H.J. Res. 41 against the Securities and Exchange Commission drilling and mining global government payments reporting rule (E&E Daily, Feb. 1). The vote was 52-47.
BLM’s rule seeks to curb greenhouse gas emissions from oil and gas flaring, venting and leakage on public and tribal lands. An analysis by the Environmental Defense Fund says the releases amount to almost $300 million per year worth of lost fuel.
“They are giving away a taxpayer-owned resource for free,” said Lukas Ross, climate and energy campaigner at Friends of the Earth. “Seems like Big Oil is having a pretty fantastic week, all things considered.”
The FOE report highlights oil and gas companies that the group says are either using or releasing public natural gas and that also have close ties with the Trump administration.
Documents show Exxon Mobil, Devon Energy Corp. and Encana Corp., all with some ties to the new government, used significant amounts of gas for equipment or released it,
Taxpayers could lose up to $800 million in forgone royalties over a decade, Friends of the Earth pointed out in a news release, citing a 2014 report from the Western Values Project.
“If the Congressional Review Act is brought to bear against the flaring rule, it wouldn’t just erase a single regulation,” FOE wrote, “ it would block all future administrations from developing anything similar. This would be a disaster.”
‘Most egregious’
Friends of the Earth releasing the documents today shows how environmental groups and Democrats are trying to stop Congress from scrapping the rule, or at least warn them about what they see as the potential effects.
Earlier this week, House Natural Resources Committee Democrats held an unofficial hearing on the issue (E&E Daily, Feb. 2). And yesterday 24 Senate Democrats urged leaders to protect the rule.
They say the rule is essential for protecting public health and addressing climate change. They also say it’s good for a “rapidly expanding” segment of the oil and gas industry that handles methane waste mitigation (Energywire, Jan. 27).
“Manufacturing, development and outfitting of oil and gas wells with these technologies is a vibrant and growing American business already located in 46 states throughout the country,” they wrote.
“This burgeoning industry needs the certainty that comes with a common baseline standard across the West to invest in growth,” they said.
But Kathleen Sgamma, president of the Western Energy Alliance, has said the venting and flaring rule may actually hamper methane-capture technologies and innovation with red tape.
Sgamma said last month that “companies already have an incentive to capture as much methane as possible because it’s the very product they sell.”
Republicans and pro-drilling Democrats have joined companies in calling the rule too costly, duplicative and beyond BLM’s power to promulgate (Energywire, Jan. 17).
“These are probably the most egregious of all the rules that we can think of,” House Natural Resources Chairman Rob Bishop (R-Utah) said on a call with reporters last month.
More rules targeted
The Senate has not said when it will take up H.J. Res. 36 to kill the methane rule, but the chamber has usually acted soon after the House.
Also this week, Oklahoma Rep. Markwayne Mullin (R) introduced H.J. Res. 59 to strip recent U.S. EPA safety regulations for thousands of refineries and chemical factories.
Chemical and fossil fuel interests, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, have long clamored for such a measure. They say the EPA regulation, known as the risk management program rule, would pose undue costs (Greenwire, Jan. 26).
The Obama administration finalized the rule in December in response to a 2013 explosion at a Texas fertilizer plant that killed 15 people (E&E News PM, Dec. 21, 2016).
Mullin said in a statement, “It trades safety for paperwork and delivers far more burden than benefit for businesses that have to abide by it.”
The American Chemistry Council praised Mullin’s move, saying EPA’s regulation would “creat[e] new national and local security issues.”
Public safety advocates say that use of the CRA will scuttle all EPA attempts to crack down on refinery and chemical plant safety.
The House already has a roster of other resolutions to vote on next week, including H.J. Res. 44, to scrap BLM’s land-use plan rule, dubbed Planning 2.0 (E&E Daily, Jan. 31).
At this point, Democrats can do little more than try to run out the clock to prevent Republicans from killing all the Obama-era rules on the chopping block.
Reporters Gabriel Dunsmith, Dylan Brown and Hannah Hess contributed.
Twitter: @AriannaSkibell Email: askibell@eenews.net
