Energy floor debate opens floodgates on amendments: “The Senate's first foray into a broad
energy debate in four years has unleashed a raft of amendments, as senators look to attach their policy priorities to a moving legislative vehicle as it leaves the station. "The amendment list is growing — I can confirm that," quipped Energy and Natural Resources
Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) yesterday afternoon, as the list grew to more than 120.
Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) launched a push yesterday to add reforms to the 1872 General Mining Act to the bill, a long-standing priority for Western Democrats. Udall has floated an amendment based
on his "Hardrock Mining and Reclamation Act," S. 1386, which would set a royalty rate between 5% and 8% for hardrock mining operations on federal lands and impose an abandoned mine reclamation fee. A version of the legislation, H.R. 2579, passed out of the
House Natural Resources Committee last year, and Chairman Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) is a longtime proponent of hardrock mining reform. Udall and Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) are pushing another related amendment to strike Murkowski's "American Mineral Security
Act," S. 1317, a long-standing proposal to streamline permitting for critical minerals, from the underlying bill. Murkowski's legislation on critical minerals — those deemed essential to certain military and energy technologies — has long frustrated Democrats
and green groups, and many of them cited it in their initial criticisms of the energy package. "Streamlining the approval process means arbitrary deadlines and reducing public input on massive mining projects that could cause further environmental destruction
on public lands," Udall said on the floor yesterday.”
[E&E News, 3/4/20]
http://bit.ly/2TnGH6Q
Court scraps Colo. roadless exception — again: “The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday
reversed a lower court ruling, forcing the federal government to reconsider yet again where coal mining is allowed in "roadless" areas of Colorado. As the judges noted in the ruling, the case is "the latest installment in a long-running dispute concerning
road construction and coal leases" around the North Fork of the Gunnison River west of Denver. In a 2-1 decision, the appellate court ordered another examination of a coal mining carve-out in the Colorado Roadless Rule. The 2012 law protected 4.2 million acres
of the Gunnison National Forest but allowed mining to continue on 19,100 acres home to two coal operations — the West Elk mine, Colorado's biggest mine, and the Elk Creek mine, which shut down in 2013 and is actively being cleaned up. The North Fork exception
helped secure the rule's passage, but immediately became an environmental group target. In 2014, the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado blocked a proposed West Elk expansion, citing issues with the greenhouse gas emissions analysis in the Forest
Service's review under the National Environmental Policy Act (E&E News PM, June 27, 2014). The decision vacated the entire North Fork exception until the Forest Service prepared a supplemental final environmental impact statement and readopted the exception
in 2016. West Elk owner Arch Coal Inc. then applied for two lease modifications at the mine, adding 1,720 acres and 10.1 million tons of coal. Federal regulators did another supplemental final EIS and approved the leases.”
[E&E News, 3/4/20]
http://bit.ly/3cv0M2y
Outlook grim for Democrats' energy bill wish list: “Senate Democrats are facing a number
of procedural and substantive challenges in their efforts to add building codes, clean energy tax credits and a crackdown on superpolluting hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) to the energy bill currently on the floor. Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) vowed to
push for all three policies at the outset of this week's debate on the bipartisan energy bill assembled by Energy and Natural Resources Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and ranking member Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.). "Democrats want amendments to the energy
bill so we can make real progress on climate change," Schumer said Monday. "That's what we're hoping to achieve this week." Schumer said, "Few pieces of legislation offer more opportunity for progress on climate than those that concern our energy policy. We
cannot miss this opportunity to make real, substantive progress on climate change." Manchin told E&E News yesterday to expect votes on the building codes provisions and clean energy taxes. Supporters of the bill to limit HFCs continued yesterday to press for
a vote on that measure, as well. While Schumer has challenged Republicans to make good on their shift on climate change in recent months by supporting the amendments, both the building codes and HFCs measures enjoy bipartisan support.”
[E&E News, 3/4/20]
http://bit.ly/2Ik3YAk
OPINION: Proposed NEPA revisions: “January of this year, the Trump administration proposed
changes to the regulations guiding the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. This process typically plays out through environmental assessments connected to smaller-scale federal projects or more detailed Environmental Impact Statements related
to highly complex federal undertakings. Like most federal land managers, I had considerable involvement with the NEPA process over the course of my career. Are the proposed changes something to celebrate? A little context would help to answer that question.
The National Environmental Policy Act was passed at the height of the environmental movement in 1970. Prior to NEPA, the federal government had no obligation to notify the public about proposed projects or to accept public comments on those projects. If the
federal government needed to take your ranch to build a reservoir or wanted to put a modern highway through your historic neighborhood, those things could happen with little notice to the public and minimal obligation on the part of the government to accept
citizens’ comments on those projects. NEPA changed all that. Fundamentally, NEPA was a “sunshine” law that brought federal projects into the public eye and required the federal government to accept public input on those projects. Almost all Americans would
likely agree that these were changes for the better. As can happen with any bureaucratic process, NEPA has gotten more complicated over the years. One can argue that the growth in complexity was inevitable as time passed, but it’s also possible to view the
evolutionary changes to the process as burdensome. As the complexity of the NEPA process grew, it became more and more challenging for federal agencies to manage the process with their own limited staff. This led to the development of a cottage industry in
the private sector as private contractors hired staff with expertise to assist the federal government in complying with NEPA. Inevitably, the cost of paying to fulfill NEPA requirements increased and that added expense was ultimately borne by the taxpayers.”
[Grand Junction Daily Sentinel, 3/4/20]
http://bit.ly/2uXaOIS
RADIO: Issues Of The Environment: The Battle For Environmental Protections And Future Sustainability:
“Since President Donald Trump took office, 58 environmental protection policies have been rolled back or rescinded. 37-more are in the process of being taken off the books. In this week's "Issues of the Environment," WEMU's David Fair checks in with 12th
District Michigan Congresswoman, Debbie Dingell, about efforts to thwart federal policies that threaten environmental health and sustainability. Although the past decade has been the hottest on record, Trump failed to make any reference to climate change in
his latest State of the Union address. He has also rolled back nearly 100 previously-enacted environmental rules, while including regulations on air pollution, water safety, chemical contamination, and animals. Michigan Congresswoman Debbie Dingell says some
of the most critical rollbacks hurt southeast Michigan. The Trump Administration has announced significant rollbacks of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Dingell will soon be introducing a resolution opposing these changes. Dingell says, “For
fifty years, the National Environmental Policy Act has been the bedrock of conservation law and preserved the environment, human health, and the people’s voice in policy decisions. NEPA’s directive is clear: the government must consider how a project will
affect the environment, and communities and people affected by the projects must have a fair chance to weigh in on its merits. NEPA – which John worked for years to pass, and was signed by President Nixon – holds polluters accountable and protects endangered
species, water quality, and the environment.’”
[NPR, 3/4/20]
http://bit.ly/3alYH74
Last Chance to Voice Support for Key Environmental Law: “One of America’s primary environmental
and community health laws is under attack. For half a century, the National Environmental Policy Act, known as NEPA, has effectively protected air, water, forests, and the health and vitality of countless communities. But sweeping changes proposed by the Trump
administration would eviscerate the law’s implementation by undermining environmental protections, public health, and citizen input on local projects. A public comment period about the proposed changes is open through March 10, 2020. NEPA was signed by Republican
President Richard Nixon 50 years ago, at a time of startling environmental degradation. New York City suffered fatal smog episodes, California’s scenic beaches were fouled by oil, and Midwest rivers burst into flames from chemical pollution. “Freeway revolts”
erupted as interstate highway construction sliced through communities and landscapes. When Washington Senator Henry “Scoop” Jackson described these conditions in February 1969, while introducing NEPA to Congress, he said lax federal policy allowed “haphazard
urban growth, the loss of open spaces…deforestation, faltering transportation systems, a proliferation of pesticides and chemicals” and other problems harmful to the public interest. Urged by a concerned public, Jackson and other legislators negotiated the
nation’s first comprehensive environmental policy. NEPA passed the Senate unanimously and faced only 15 opposing votes in the House. At its 1970 signing, President Nixon called it an opportunity to reclaim the nation’s environmental health. Since then more
than 100 nations have emulated the law.”
[The Relevator, 3/4/20]
http://bit.ly/2THd5Qy
Coal leasing sputters despite Trump's promises: “The Trump administration frequently claims
it ended the "war on coal." Last week, when the Interior Department rolled out its latest justification for renting federal land to coal companies, acting Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management Casey Hammond said lifting the Obama-era coal leasing
moratorium "allows local communities to prosper." The numbers tell a different story. Since former Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke officially halted the leasing pause at President Trump's command, national coal production has fallen, and so has demand for new
coal. On March 29, 2017, when Zinke lifted the leasing moratorium, coal companies had filed applications to mine 2.7 billion tons. Since then, the Bureau of Land Management has sold nearly 83 million tons — half of which had been exempt from the Obama ban
— and received new requests for another 80 million tons. Meanwhile, coal companies withdrew applications for 930 million tons. Today, less than 1.8 billion tons is up for lease, with many of those applications on hold as massive reserves already leased last
longer than ever. That undercuts claims the moratorium was "crippling" in places like Wyoming, which mines 40% of U.S. coal almost exclusively on public land. In last week's final environmental assessment, BLM said the order to lift the moratorium "did not
alter coal production levels or rates or cause any change to associated socioeconomic impacts." The impact of renewing leasing generally was "too speculative to ascertain." "Zinke had no impact, basically, is what they're saying," said Jeremy Nichols of WildEarth
Guardians. "At the end of the day, the market is already moving in a direction that will achieve 'keep it in the ground.'" Activists spent years demanding the pause to overhaul a leasing system they say shortchanges taxpayers and ignores climate change impacts.
But the market moratorium could undermine the case that renewed leasing matters in the fight against climate change.”
[E&E News, 3/3/20]
http://bit.ly/2VQqnND
LETTER: National Environmental Policy is under attack: “The National Environmental Policy
Act is under attack, and it is up to us to save it. Since 1970, NEPA has required that environmental impact studies are completed before new construction. The Trump administration has been constantly repealing important environmental protections, and the latest
environmental assault is on NEPA through the Council on Environmental Quality. This is an attempt to fast track projects through the approval process before considering the environmental consequences and impacts on communities. This process is essential to
allow residents to voice discontent and protect their lands. With the proposed alterations to NEPA, new construction projects could break ground before the environmental impacts are analyzed. Conservation of our natural resources needs to be valued over the
profits of landowners. Portsmouth residents are known for being outspoken regarding land development. Our voices need to be heard regarding projects that could be poison our environment and threaten our quality of life. NEPA helps to prevent highways and pipelines
from fracturing our natural resources, and we cannot let this dangerous measure go forward. I urge you to act by signing petitions, writing letters, and asking your elected officials to stand up with us. Talk to your friends, family, and neighbors about this
issue. The current administration only cares about furthering its own agenda of greed and not the everlasting damage caused by destroying our precious lands and resources. Enough is enough.”
[Portsmouth Sea Cost, 2/24/20]
http://bit.ly/32PZA5f
Justin McCarthy
Interim Director, NEPA Campaign
The Partnership Project
1612 K St, NW
Washington, DC 20006 USA
C: (540) 312-3797
E: jmccarthy@partnershipproject.org
The Partnership Project, a registered 501 (c) (3) non-profit, is a collaborative effort of over 20 of the country’s most influential advocacy organizations, including Sierra Club, Earthjustice, League of Conservation Voters, and Natural
Resources Defense Council.