TOP HEADLINES

 

Kavanaugh Defends Enviro Record, Says He Is Skeptic Of ‘Illegal Regulations.’

 

Kavanaugh Hints At CPP Opposition With Attack On Agency Policymaking.

 

Kavanaugh's Claims Of Pro-Environment Rulings Face Backlash.

 

Dems Prepare 'Flood' Of Energy, Climate Investigations.

 

Coal Industry Hands Another Rescue Plan To DOE.

 

Oil Giant Met With Greens For Years On Climate Policy.

 

Company Suspected Of Using Plant Closures To Get Subsidies.

 

 

 

White House and Diplomacy

 

OSTP

 

Senate Panel Advances Droegemeier Nomination To Lead OSTP. According to Politico, “The Senate Commerce Committee today advanced by voice vote the nomination of Kelvin Droegemeier, a meteorologist at the University of Oklahoma, to head the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. Droegemeier’s selection has attracted significant bipartisan support and his confirmation would end the longest span of time the White House has been without a science adviser. Chairman John Thune (R-S.D.) said it was his hope the full Senate would ‘move quickly’ to confirm his selection. In addition, lawmakers advanced the selection of Jim Morhard, nominee to be deputy administrator of NASA. He told Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) at his confirmation hearing that human activity is a ‘significant’ factor in climate change but declined to call it a dominant one.” [Politico, 9/5/18 (=)]

 

Trump Science Picks Cruise Through Committee. According to E&E News, “The Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee advanced two Trump administration science nominees this morning as the panel’s leading Democrat praised their views on climate change. By voice vote, the committee approved Kelvin Droegemeier as director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy and James Morhard as deputy administrator of NASA. Morhard last month told lawmakers he could not ‘authoritatively’ say that humans are the chief driver of rising temperatures. Yet after the vote, ranking member Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) said he was encouraged by follow-up communications with Morhard. ‘Mr. Morhard acknowledged that the climate is changing and that it is extremely likely that human activities are the dominant cause of this warming,’ Nelson said. Nelson and Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) then praised Droegemeier, who could influence federal policy on issues ranging from natural disaster preparation to nuclear power if confirmed. Nelson said he was encouraged by comments at a hearing last month where Droegemeier said he was ‘excited’ to work on climate change and opposed political interference in science.” [E&E News, 9/5/18 (=)]

 

Federal Agencies

 

EPA

 

Clean Power Plan (CPP) & Affordable Clean Energy (ACE)

 

General Coverage

 

Poll: Death Estimates Tied To Trump Coal Rule Make It Less Popular. According to The Hill, “Voters are less likely to support the Trump administration’s plan to regulate coal plant emissions if they’re told about a government analysis that estimates the rule would result in more than 1,000 additional deaths each year. Forty-five percent of respondents said they would be more likely to oppose the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Affordable Clean Energy rule once they learn that it would lead to approximately 1,400 more annual deaths than the Obama administration Clean Power Plan it’s replacing, according to a poll released this week by Politico and Morning Consult. Twenty-two percent of respondents said they would be more likely to support the Trump proposal after learning about the death figures. The EPA proposed the rule last month as a way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and replace the more aggressive Clean Power Plan. The new rule would ask states to formulate plans to reduce emissions at coal plants, giving them wide latitude in crafting those guidelines. The estimate of 1,400 additional deaths has dominated discussion of the plan, but it has also been highly controversial. While it is in official EPA documents, it comes from comparing the new rule to an Obama-era regulation that was never enforced because the Supreme Court halted its implementation.” [The Hill, 9/5/18 (=)]

 

EPA Faces Criticism For Rejecting Co-Firing In Power Plant GHG Proposal. According to Inside EPA, “EPA is facing criticism for rejecting co-firing coal with natural gas and biomass as strategies states must consider under its recently proposed ‘Affordable Clean Energy’ (ACE) rule to limit power plant greenhouse gases, with sources arguing the agency is intentionally constraining itself from achieving meaningful GHG reductions from co-firing. One source says if EPA had proposed co-firing alongside the seven ‘candidate technologies’ for improving coal plant efficiency, it could achieve far more GHG cuts than is expected under the rule. The Trump administration is replacing the Obama-era Clean Power Plan because it argues that rule illegally imposed standards based on ‘beyond the fenceline’ strategies such as fuel switching to gas or renewables, though the rule also included provisions based on improvements at coal plants. EPA’s Aug. 21 proposal does not set a national GHG limit but instead asks states to evaluate what reductions each coal unit could achieve using the identified technologies. The proposal notes that the agency has previously determined that co-firing with biomass or natural gas is not part of the Clean Act Act section 111(d)’s best system of emission reduction (BSER) due to cost and feasibility concerns.” [Inside EPA, 9/5/18 (=)]

 

Utilities Are Reluctant To Invest In Coal Plants, Even After Trump Tries To Save Them. According to Washington Examiner, “Utilities are expressing little interest in the Trump administration’s bid to help keep their coal plants alive, remaining committed to providing energy from cleaner and cheaper sources such as natural gas, wind, and solar. The Environmental Protection Agency proposed a rule Aug. 21 to replace President Barack Obama’s Clean Power Plan — his signature climate change initiative, targeting carbon pollution from coal plants — with a more modest measure designed to encourage plants to invest in efficiency upgrades that would allow them to burn less pollution, and exist longer. But no utilities contacted by the Washington Examiner said they would commit to improving their coal plants, or re-evaluate planned coal plant retirements because of the Trump administration’s new rule, known as Affordable Clean Energy, or ACE. And none of them have plans to build new coal plants. Instead, the utilities were eager to tout their achievements in reducing carbon dioxide emissions from coal, and their ambitions to create a modern grid with fewer polluters on it. ‘Based on what we know right now, we do not have any plants whose future would be affected by the adoption of the ACE rule,’ said Shannon Brushe, spokeswoman for Duke Energy, the giant utility based in Charlotte, N.C. ‘Any previously announced plant closures across the states we serve will continue regardless of the rule.’” [Washington Examiner, 9/4/18 (=)]

 

Utilities Stay Cool To Coal Despite Trump. According to Axios, “The Washington Examiner reports that key utilities, including Duke Energy and American Electric Power, aren’t looking to extend the lives of their coal-fired power plants despite Trump administration moves to help keep them running. Why it matters: Their piece gets several utility powerhouses on the record about their plans and signals the uphill climb facing the White House as it tries to revive the fortunes — or even substantially slow the decline — of the once-dominant fuel. EPA had floated the proposal recently to replace a much more sweeping Obama-era carbon emissions rule that was frozen by the courts. What they’re saying, per the Examiner: ‘[N]o utilities contacted by the Washington Examiner said they would commit to improving their coal plants, or re-evaluate planned coal plant retirements because of the Trump administration’s new rule, known as Affordable Clean Energy, or ACE. And none of them have plans to build new coal plants.’ Yes, but: The story adds to reports showing that despite the overall trend, the proposal could affect some power companies’ decisions on the future of their coal plants. The Examiner writes: ‘Trump EPA’s coal plan could be most beneficial for smaller utilities, like co-ops that provide energy to rural consumers.’ The intrigue: The administration’s efforts to boost coal go beyond the U.S. power sector. S&P Global Market Intelligence looks at an upcoming report by an industry-led group of DOE advisers on ways to bolster exports.” [Axios, 9/5/18 (=)]

 

Thousands Of Cities And Counties Are Fighting Trump's Fuel Efficiency Rollback. According to Earther, “The Trump administration’s rollback of clean vehicle regulations last month is going about as well as expected. Which is to say it isn’t going well, and a growing number of people who are pissed are fighting to stop it. Now you can add groups representing more than 3,400 cities and counties to that list. State attorneys general have already sued the administration over implementing what they view as an unlawful rollback of fuel efficiency standards. On Tuesday, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the National League of Cities, and more than a dozen other municipalities asked to join that suit by filing an amicus brief in support of clean car standards established under Obama. Their ranks includes cities big and small from New York to Ann Arbor, Michigan. A number of cities and counties opposing the fuel economy rollback are also part of various climate lawsuits against Big Oil. By filing the motion, they’re asking the D.C. Circuit Court to let them show all the ways climate change is already hurting their infrastructure, public health, water resources, and more.” [Earther, 9/5/18 (+)]

 

Opinion Pieces

 

Op-Ed: The Hidden Agenda Of The EPA 'Transparency Rule.' According to an op-ed by A.J. Russo in The Baltimore Sun, “In April 2018, the Trump administration, through the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), proposed the use of the ‘transparency rule,’ which states that the EPA can only consider scientific studies that include underlying data made openly available to the public for analysis. It would, therefore, limit what scientific data could be used to determine EPA regulations. A four-month public comment period on the rule closed last month, and more than 6,000 people and organizations weighed in. It is now in the final stages of deliberation and could be adopted as early as this fall. On the surface, the rule sounds harmless, even open-minded, doesn’t it? After all, transparency is an important principle of good science. But, the truth is, President Donald Trump and his band of climate changers have pulled a fast one. Here’s why. Many scientific studies that are peer-reviewed and published in high quality journals use information that cannot be openly revealed. This data must remain confidential for legitimate reasons — usually because the research documents include personal, identifiable records or intellectual property that can’t and shouldn’t be made public. Because of this, important and relevant studies associated with the effects of air pollution or water quality on people’s health might be excluded from EPA regulations. Beginning to understand the reason for the rule now?” [The Baltimore Sun, 9/5/18 (+)]

 

Op-Ed: EPA Expands Clean Air Act Loopholes For Coal Plants. According to an op-ed by Jack Lienke and Richard Revesz in The Hill, “Recently, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency unveiled a proposal to replace the Obama administration’s signature climate initiative, the Clean Power Plan, which aimed to cut planet-warming carbon dioxide emissions from the nation’s power sector. EPA calls its ‘Affordable Clean Energy’ proposal — ACE, for short — ‘a new rule to reduce greenhouse gas emissions’ from coal-fired power plants. There are just two problems with that characterization: First, ACE won’t do much of anything to reduce coal plants’ CO2 emissions — in fact, it might increase them. And second, the rule isn’t really new at all — at least, there’s nothing fresh about its most notable component. Instead, it’s a warmed-over policy from the George W. Bush years, served by one of the same attorneys, Bill Wehrum, who cooked it up the first time around. Now, as then, Wehrum’s goal is to extend the already prolonged lives of the nation’s oldest, dirtiest, and deadliest coal plants — some of which have been operation since the 1950s. For almost 50 years, coal plants have benefited from a design flaw in the landmark Clean Air Act of 1970. That law empowered EPA to set nationwide emission limits for industrial facilities like power plants. But for some of the most ubiquitous and harmful pollutants — like those that form soot and smog — EPA’s limits applied only to newly constructed facilities. Plants that were already in operation when the limits were issued didn’t have to comply — a practice known as ‘grandfathering.’” [The Hill, 9/5/18 (+)]

 

Andrew Wheeler

 

Democrats Criticize GOP 'Inaction' On PFAS Contamination. According to E&E News, “Democratic lawmakers in Michigan yesterday accused majority Republicans of ‘inaction’ on the contamination of tap water with old industrial chemicals, demanding that hearings be held to strengthen Michigan’s standard and to study why an internal state report that warned of dangers was ignored. The renewed calls came a day before the GOP-led state Legislature was to return to session after a summer break during which residents in the city of Parchment and Cooper Township in Kalamazoo County were told not to drink their municipal water for a month due to high levels of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS. The industrial compounds — which were used in products like firefighting foam and carpets — also have been found in at least 34 other sites in 19 communities. State Rep. Winnie Brinks, a Grand Rapids Democrat, said at a Capitol news conference that the state does not have an enforceable PFAS limit established in law, and the combined standard of 70 parts per trillion — set by Gov. Rick Snyder’s administration in January, mirroring a federal advisory level set in 2016 — should be 5 parts per trillion. ‘This cap would be the lowest in the country and would ensure that the water coming out of Michiganders’ taps is worth of being called pure,’ said Brinks, who introduced legislation in December to lower the PFAS standard. ‘Access to clean, safe drinking water is a fundamental right.’” [E&E News, 9/5/18 (=)]

 

Scott Pruitt

 

Pruitt Italy Trip Cost More. According to Politico, “Pruitt’s often-discussed June 2017 trip to Italy cost taxpayers a third more than previously reported, according to documents and accounting done by the nonprofit Environmental Integrity Project. The overall $164,200 cost includes $10,067 for a motorcade and $5,841 to house the drivers at the 5-star Baglioni Hotel Regina in Rome, according to the EPA records. Overall, EPA records obtained by EIP through various FOIA lawsuits show that Pruitt spent at least $4.6 million from February 2017 through March of this year for travel, security and other office expenses.” [Politico, 9/6/18 (=)]

 

Inspector General Reports

 

Stronger Procedures Needed For Air Model Changes — IG. According to E&E News, “EPA should tighten its procedures for making changes to the complex models that often play a critical role in predicting the impact of pollutant emissions, the agency’s inspector general said in an audit released today. Although EPA already has procedures in place for developing and evaluating new air quality dispersion models, ‘similar guidance is not available to define the process for model revisions,’ the audit said. Inspector General Arthur Elkins’ office recommended that the agency come up with standard operating procedures to follow in making changes to models, accompanied by plans to ensure ‘the desired quality of results.’ Without such procedures and plans, ‘the agency lacks the assurance that all necessary technical activities have been completed to produce a preferred model that generates results of sufficient quality for its intended uses,’ the audit said. In a reply memo, EPA air chief Bill Wehrum said the agency has followed a ‘systematic approach’ in updating its preferred model, known as AERMOD. Wehrum acknowledged, however, that those procedures were not ‘codified’ and were instead left to the discretion of an EPA modeling team.” [E&E News, 9/5/18 (=)]

 

EPA IG To Probe Landfill Permits. According to E&E News, “EPA’s inspector general is poised to look at whether municipal solid waste landfills have the right air quality permits. Among the questions to be examined as part of an upcoming audit, the inspector general will gauge how many active landfills are subject to federal air-permitting requirements and whether they actually follow those requirements, James Hatfield, head of the Office of Inspector General’s air directorate, wrote in a project notification memo to agency air chief Bill Wehrum released this afternoon. The audit is expected to uncover any weaknesses in state and local implementation of those requirements, as well as to improve enforcement, Hatfield wrote.” [E&E News, 9/5/18 (=)]

 

Citizen Science Efforts Lack Vision — Audit. According to E&E News, “EPA needs an overarching strategy for steering efforts to involve ordinary people in air pollution monitoring and other forms of citizen science, an in-house watchdog concluded in a new report. While dozens of projects have tapped citizen science in recent years, EPA ‘has not developed controls necessary to manage it from an agency-wide perspective,’ Inspector General Arthur Elkins’ office said in the review released this morning. As a result, EPA staffers ‘cannot undertake a systematic effort to analyze the risks and opportunities that citizen science presents,’ the report said. In response to the findings, acting EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler pledged to create a working group to establish ‘a more formal strategic vision and objectives’ for managing the use of citizen science, finish work on both a quality assurance handbook and an assessment of data management requirements, and do more to train EPA employees on developing projects, according to a memo attached to the report. For all of those steps, the planned completion date is December 2020, Wheeler and Jennifer Orme-Zavaleta, a top official in the Office of Research and Development, wrote in the memo.” [E&E News, 9/5/18 (=)]

 

DOE

 

Coal Industry Hands Another Rescue Plan To DOE. According to E&E News, “The Trump administration today received the second coal rescue plan in as many days from an industry-led panel. The National Coal Council’s ‘Power Reset’ lays out steps the industry hopes will ‘stem the tide’ of retirements of coal-fired power plants. The Department of Energy advisory panel’s report comes on the heels of another report, ‘Advancing U.S. Coal Exports,’ given to Energy Secretary Rick Perry yesterday (Greenwire, Sept. 4). Today’s report was compiled by a subcommittee led by Glenn Kellow, CEO of Peabody Energy Corp., the nation’s top coal company; Paul Sukut, CEO of Basin Electric Power Cooperative, a coal-reliant power company; and Matt Rose, executive chairman of BNSF Railway Co., which derives a fifth of its revenue from coal. While exports have surged, 82 percent of American coal was still burned at American power plants last year, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. With President Trump’s pledge to save coal looming large, Perry has loaded DOE’s table with options for coal’s rescue after the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission rejected his proposed coal and nuclear plant subsidy. The DOE coal council argued coal-fired power plants need to be compensated for grid resilience and reliability — the industry’s buzzwords in its struggle against grid operators and utilities that are rapidly converting to natural gas and renewable fuel sources.” [E&E News, 9/5/18 (=)]

 

DOE Puts More Fuel Into Advanced Vehicle Research. According to E&E News, “The Energy Department yesterday announced $80 million in research awards to advanced vehicle technology projects, including work on next-generation batteries aimed at making electric vehicles close in cost to gasoline-powered models before the end of the next decade. Some of the 42 grants continue existing research campaigns, such as advancing fast-vehicle charging technologies and biofuels for diesel engines. But others reflect newer priorities or issues, said Michael Berube, director of the Vehicle Technologies Office at DOE’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. ABB Inc. in Raleigh, N.C., for example, received $1.7 million to develop a ‘real-time cyber-attack and mitigation system’ to protect electric vehicles, vehicle charging equipment and utilities’ networks against hackers, reflecting growing anxiety about the capability of cyberattackers. The Electric Power Research Institute, an industry-backed nonprofit, got $2 million to retrofit cybersecurity protection for vehicle charging stations. Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh received $1.5 million for research on drones, delivery robots and driverless cars with the goal of lowering costs of goods transportation in the ‘last mile’ to customers’ locations.” [E&E News, 9/6/18 (=)]

 

Trump’s Newest Hire Thinks Science Is Like Nazi Propaganda. According to Think Progress, “President Donald Trump just appointed William Happer for the key job of ‘senior director for emerging technologies’ at the National Security Council. But Happer literally believes that more carbon pollution ‘would be a benefit’ to humanity, as he wrote in a widely mocked 2013 Wall Street Journal op-ed headlined ‘In Defense of Carbon Dioxide.’ So much for finding someone who understands that perhaps the most crucial emerging technologies for the security of America and all of humanity involve reducing carbon pollution. Sadly this continues the trend of this administration ceding the biggest job creating sector of the next few decades — clean energy — to the Chinese and Europeans, who are betting tens of billions of dollars on it. We’re fighting the wrong trade battle with China. The future is clean energy. Happer, a Princeton theoretical physicist is one of the most extreme climate science deniers, and someone who directly compared the overwhelming scientific consensus that carbon dioxide causes global warming to Nazi ‘propaganda.’ ‘This is George Orwell. This is the ‘Germans are the master race. The Jews are the scum of the earth.’ It’s that kind of propaganda,’ Happer told The Daily Princetonian in 2009. ‘Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. Every time you exhale, you exhale air that has 4 percent carbon dioxide. To say that that’s a pollutant just boggles my mind. What used to be science has turned into a cult.’” [Think Progress, 9/5/18 (+)]

 

Congress

 

Senate

 

First 'Minibus' Conference Closes Without Final Deal — Or Timeline. According to Politico, “In a marathon of opening statements, lawmakers mostly heaped praise on each other as they promised to get the package — which funds Veterans Affairs, energy and nuclear programs and Congress’ own operations — signed into law on time. Wednesday’s meeting marked the first conference committee on appropriations since June 2016, and the first Energy-Water conference since 2009. Negotiators made no mention of a timeline for the already-delayed bill, though Senate Appropriations chief Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) told reporters after the meeting that he hopes the package will be completed ‘in the next 24 hours.’ ‘We’re real close, we’re really close,’ Shelby said, adding that there are ‘small’ differences remaining, which several aides later confirmed.” [Politico, 9/5/18 (=)]

 

2018 Elections

 

Dems Prepare 'Flood' Of Energy, Climate Investigations. According to E&E News, “Andrew Wheeler, Ryan Zinke and Rick Perry should block off plenty of time for congressional hearings next year if Democrats seize control of the House in November. Congressional Democrats are eager to haul the heads of EPA and the Interior and Energy departments — along with other Trump Cabinet officials — before their committees in 2019 to grill them on their policies and tactics during the administration’s first two years. Democrats argue the Republican leadership in both chambers of Congress has allowed the executive branch to go virtually unchecked since President Trump took office, and they’re eager to seize committee gavels, subpoena power and control over hearing schedules and floor votes. ‘The big word for us is ‘accountability.’ Th at is, making the president accountable, but also doing something else: making the Republicans in our Congress accountable too because we have a responsibility to hold the executive branch accountable. But we are not doing our jobs,’ said Maryland Rep. Elijah Cummings, the top Democrat on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, who’s poised to be the panel’s next chairman if Democrats clinch the majority. … Their priorities range from holding hearings on climate rule rollbacks and investigating ex-EPA boss Scott Pruitt’s ethics allegations to forcing the Interior Department to comply with languishing requests for documents. ‘There’s such a backup, because [Republicans have] done zilch, I think there’s going to be a flood of oversight and investigative demands,’ said Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.), the ranking member of the House Oversight Subcommittee on Government Operations. ‘Our challenge is going to be to prioritize. We can’t do everything at once and all things are not equal.’” [E&E News, 9/6/18 (=)]

 

Delaware’s Primary Day. According to Politico, “Democratic Sen. Tom Carper faces his first serious primary challenge in decades today from Kerri Evelyn Harris — a veteran and community organizer bolstered by the progressive wing of the party — in a race that liberals are pointing to as a crucial opportunity to build upon national momentum by taking out the three-term senator. In Carper’s corner, the senator has the backing of former Vice President Joe Biden and environmental groups like the League of Conservation Voters Action Fund and the National Wildlife Federation Action Fund. Harris, meanwhile, has the support of leading liberal organizations like the Bernie Sanders-inspired Our Revolution and the Working Families Party. While Harris is not backed by any big environmental groups, she has called for a ‘Green New Deal’ that would deploy new jobs in the renewable energy sectors and automatic installation of solar panels on new home construction. In his pitch for reelection, Carper has touted his efforts to push back on the Trump administration’s roll back of environmental protections. ‘Last year, I led the effort to run EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt out of Washington and send him back to Oklahoma,’ Carper said in his opening statement at the lone debate in the primary. But Carper’s opponent breaks from him on policy mostly come from the left. She criticized him for previously voting for the Keystone pipeline — which he later said he regretted — and backing offshore drilling, although he opposes it off the Delaware coast.” [Politico, 9/6/18 (=)]

 

Miners Shovel $360K Into Manchin Campaign. According to E&E News, “The United Mine Workers of America union is spending at least $360,000 to re-elect West Virginia Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin, a congressional champion of saving imperiled benefit programs. The group’s political arm purchased television advertisements in mining media markets in both northern and southern West Virginia. The spots will begin airing in mid-October, just before Manchin, whom UMWA endorsed, faces Republican Patrick Morrisey on Nov. 6. Both candidates are pro-coal, but only Manchin has made pensions a campaign issue. Morrisey won the endorsement of coal companies as the West Virginia Coal Association broke with Manchin for the first time in his long political career (E&E News PM, Aug. 21). But Morrisey, the state attorney general, has not taken a stance on rescuing the UMWA pension plan covering more than 100,000 retirees and their families before it reaches insolvency in 2022. The Morrisey campaign did not respond to a request for comment today. ‘Joe cares about the people who do the work, not just the CEOs at the top,’ UMWA President Cecil Roberts said in a statement. ‘He was raised in a West Virginia coal community. He knows how important coal jobs are to those communities.’” [E&E News, 9/5/18 (=)]

 

Midterm Plans. According to Politico, “ClearPath Action Fund is eyeing a ‘very similar type of campaign’ investment in the midterms this year as it employed during the 2016 cycle, when it poured more than $4.8 million into 15 races, according to founder Jay Faison. ‘We think it’s the right thing to do to reward champions in clean energy,’ he told reporters Wednesday. ‘Interestingly, I think the candidates that are good on these issues are generally the ones that are pragmatic, fact-based members that want to work in a bipartisan way to actually get things done.’ Prospects for a Democratic ‘blue wave’ have not affected the group’s strategy for the fall, though Faison did say specific investments remained ‘fluid’ and ‘reallocations’ could occur based on polling. Their slate: Faison said he doesn’t expect additional endorsements. His group has endorsed Sen. Dean Heller for reelection and Rep. Martha McSally’s bid for Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake’s seat. It has also backed House Republican Reps. Carlos Curbelo, Fred Upton, Erik Paulsen, Brian Mast, Tom Reed, Steve Knight and Scott Taylor for reelection.” [Politico, 9/6/18 (=)]

 

Judiciary And Legal

 

Supreme Court

 

Kavanaugh Hints At CPP Opposition With Attack On Agency Policymaking. According to Inside EPA, “Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is hinting that he would vote to strike down the Obama EPA’s Clean Power Plan (CPP) utility greenhouse gas rule, attacking agencies for relying on ambiguities in ‘old law’ to justify novel new policymaking efforts after they fail to convince Congress to approve legislation to authorize the policies. Responding to a question from Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) during the Sept. 5 session of the week-long Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on his nomination, Kavanaugh described ‘a natural tendency that judges need to be aware of and respond to’ where agencies respond to Congress rejecting legislation that would expand their authority by claiming that they already have that authority thanks to ambiguities in existing law, and that judges should defer to those claims. ‘[A]n executive branch agency wants to do some new policy, and proposes a new policy to Congress. But Congress doesn’t pass the new policy. What often happens, or too often, I’ve seen, is that the executive then relies on the old law as a source of authority to do this new thing. And they try to say ‘well, the old law is ambiguous, so we can fit this new policy into the old law,’ as justification for doing this new thing. I’ve seen this in national security cases, I’ve seen this in environmental cases -- you see it all over the place,’ Kavanaugh said. While Kavanaugh did not name a specific rule or agency in his example, the scenario he outlined closely tracks the Obama administration’s development of its CPP that set GHG standards for existing power plants.” [Inside EPA, 9/5/18 (=)]

 

Kavanaugh's Claims Of Pro-Environment Rulings Face Backlash. According to E&E News, “‘I’ve ruled for environmentalists many times in big cases,’ he said, listing a handful of decisions involving the Clean Air Act. But many Democrats and environmentalists say the cases are misleading. They argue that Kavanaugh’s overall record shows a preference for industry litigants. ‘Judge Kavanaugh, the thing about patterns is that there are exceptions to the pattern,’ said Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii). Patrice Simms, vice president of litigation for Earthjustice, said that many of the named rulings were very narrow. ‘In every instance, his written opinions either side against the substantive regulatory claims that would be more protective of public health and the environment,’ he wrote in a blog post this week, ‘or he constructs legal theories that would procedurally and legally weaken public health protections over the long-term.’ Natural Resources Defense Council attorney John Walke argued that one of Kavanaugh’s examples, NRDC v. EPA, is particularly misleading. Walke was co-counsel in the case. Kavanaugh said the ruling favored ‘environmentalist interests’ by tossing a regulatory provision that gave cement makers an affirmative defense in citizen suits over accidental emissions.” [E&E News, 9/6/18 (=)]

 

Kavanaugh Tackles Doctrine That Loomed Over Climate Plan. According to E&E News, “The issue arose in legal debate over the Clean Power Plan in 2016. During oral arguments before the D.C. Circuit that year, Kavanaugh appeared to favor the use of the tougher standard. He said the rule was ‘fundamentally transforming an industry,’ and ‘Congress should be making the big policy decisions’ (Greenwire, Sept. 27, 2016). A majority decision adopting that analysis could have derailed the EPA rule. Clean Power Plan defenders countered at the time that the regulation — a program to cut emissions across the power sector — was not transformative but rather built on an existing downward trend in reliance on coal-fired power plants. The D.C. Circuit ultimately put the case on ice without deciding it, and the Trump administration is now crafting a weaker replacement rule. The Obama climate plan never came up directly during yesterday’s Senate hearing, but Kavanaugh did refer to the case without naming it when he joked about the last time the D.C. Circuit heard nearly eight hours of arguments on an issue. ‘When we got back to the conference room, I don’t think anyone was saying we should do that in every case,’ he said with a laugh. Environmental advocates have accused Kavanaugh of an overly broad application of the major questions doctrine, arguing that the judge has appeared particularly inclined to second-guess federal regulations that are tough on polluters.” [E&E News, 9/6/18 (=)]

 

How Kavanaugh May Get Grilled About His Environmental Record. According to The Washington Post, “So far, environmental issues have taken a back seat to those topics. But with several days of testimony from Kavanaugh still ahead of him before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Democrats laid the groundwork for grilling the judge about how much power he thinks the executive branch should have when writing rules meant to stop pollution. Throughout his time on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, Kavanaugh tended to take an industry-friendly approach to interpreting enviromental law. Importantly, Kavanaugh only wants to give the government more authority to regulate businesses when Congress clearly states it wants it to be that way. With that judicial philosophy, according to Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, Kavanaugh is exactly the sort of Supreme Court justice that industry wants. ‘Lots of big Republican influencers are polluters who like to pollute for free,’ Whitehouse told Kavanaugh during the hearing. ‘Big polluters, clearly, have big expectations for you on their deregulatory effort.’ Whitehouse’s office declined to say what the senator will ask Kavanaugh about this week. But in a statement by email, the senator noted that Democrats have not had the chance to review a vast number of documents from the nominee’s time working as a staffer in George W. Bush’s White House.” [The Washington Post, 9/5/18 (+)]

 

Dems To Call Out Kavanaugh. According to Politico, “Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is once again on the Hill today. To mark the occasion, top Democrats from the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee will hold a press conference alongside environmental advocates and victims of toxic pollution. Sens. Tom Carper, Ed Markey, Sheldon Whitehouse and Jeff Merkley will join representatives from the NRDC, Environmental Working Group and Natural Resources Council of Maine to discuss Kavanaugh’s record at 2:30 p.m. at Section 8 of the Capitol grounds at 1st and Constitution NE. Gwen Young, a 13-year-old resident of Hoosick Falls, N.Y., affected by PFAS chemicals will also speak. Catch up on what Kavanaugh said Wednesday regarding his environmental record here.” [Politico, 9/6/18 (=)]

 

Kavanaugh Defends Enviro Record, Says He Is Skeptic Of ‘Illegal Regulations.’ According to Politico, “‘I’ve heard it said that I’m a skeptic of regulation. I am not a skeptic of regulation at all,’ he said. ‘I am a skeptic of unauthorized regulation, of illegal regulation, of regulation that’s outside the bounds of what the laws passed by Congress have said.’ Under questioning by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) at the Senate Judiciary Committee, Kavanaugh said executive agencies often try to use old laws to justify policy decisions on issues like national security and environmental regulation. The issue is known in legal terms as the Chevron doctrine for the Supreme Court precedent that directs judges to defer to an agency’s reasonable interpretation of statutes that are ambiguous. ‘When those cases come to court, it’s our job to figure out whether the executive branch has acted within the authority given to it by Congress,’ he said. … Speaking specifically about his previous environmental rulings, Kavanaugh cited six cases from his time on the D.C. Circuit when he sided with environmentalists’ interests. That included a 2014 ruling in which he said EPA could not provide cement producers with the ability to use an ‘affirmative defense’ as a shield against citizen lawsuits if the plants emitted excess pollution during malfunctions. ‘Industry came in with their lawyers and said, ‘Just write the affirmative defense into the law,’ Kavanaugh said. ‘And I wrote the opinion saying, ‘No, it’s not in the law and yes, that might be a problem for industry, but we follow the law regardless.’ He also cited his dismissal of the lawsuits brought over the proposed version of the Obama EPA’s Clean Power Plan, which he ruled were premature.” [Politico, 9/5/18 (=)]

 

Kavanaugh Defends His Environmental Record. According to E&E News, “‘In environmental cases, some cases I’ve ruled against environmentalist interests, and in many cases I’ve ruled for environmentalist interests,’ he said. The answer was teed up by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), who opined during today’s Senate Judiciary Committee hearing that his Democratic colleagues who are concerned about Kavanaugh’s environmental record might be simply frustrated that they haven’t been able to get their own policies passed. Kavanaugh shared a list of cases in which he upheld regulations from EPA and other agencies. His highlights: American Trucking Associations v. EPA: a 2010 decision affirming EPA’s approval of California emissions limits. National Association of Manufacturers v. EPA: the 2014 ruling upholding EPA standards for fine particulate matter under the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA: a 2014 decision upholding an EPA rule for emissions from steam generating units. Kavanaugh also cited the D.C. Circuit’s decision to reject as premature Murray Energy Corp.’s challenge to the Clean Power Plan before it was finalized. Finally, he pointed to his vote in Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA, in which the court rejected an ‘affirmative defense’ for cement makers’ accidental emissions of hazardous air pollutants. ‘I wrote the opinion saying, ‘No, it’s not in the law, and yes, that might be a problem for industry, but we follow the law regardless,’ he said.” [E&E News, 9/5/18 (=)]

 

 

Industry and Finance

 

Oil Giant Met With Greens For Years On Climate Policy. According to E&E News, “Shell Oil Co. has convened regular meetings since early 2016 with key environmental groups and think tanks to build support for a nationwide carbon tax, according to sources. The company initiated meetings during the heart of the presidential race, in part because it was believed that greenhouse gas regulations would be strengthened if Democrat Hillary Clinton won the election. The meetings continued after President Trump’s victory, and company officials have hosted talks in Shell’s offices in Washington, D.C.; at restaurants; on conference calls; and over email. Shell met with officials from the Environmental Defense Fund, Nature Conservancy, World Resources Institute and Niskanen Center, a libertarian group that supports taxing greenhouse gas emissions, Shell spokesman Curtis Smith confirmed. ‘We value our partnerships with the private sector, including companies like Shell, and believe that these partnerships are important for achieving durable policy solutions,’ Jason Albritton, a senior policy adviser at the Nature Conservancy, said in an email. The meetings occurred regularly for about two years, until this summer, when most of the communication shifted to phone and email, according to sources. The contact between Shell and environmental groups continues on a weekly basis, but attendance by specific groups can vary.” [E&E News, 9/6/18 (=)]

 

Company Suspected Of Using Plant Closures To Get Subsidies. According to E&E News, “FirstEnergy Solutions, the power plant division of FirstEnergy Corp., filed for bankruptcy protection in April. The company has aggressively lobbied Washington for a federal lifeline for its ailing coal and nuclear facilities, which have been weighed down by low wholesale power prices and stiff competition from natural gas. The proposed plant retirements of Bruce Mansfield in Pennsylvania and W.H. Sammis in Ohio add fuel to the debate surrounding coal plant closures. The massive facilities are in politically important states, and they buy coal from Murray Energy Corp., an Ohio mining company led by a Trump confidant. The political backdrop prompted some analysts to wonder if last week’s announcement was designed to prompt a response from the Department of Energy, which is considering a plan to head off premature closures by subsidizing the use of coal. ‘One way to read the announcement is that it’s designed to force the hands of policymakers and regulators to think about a more concrete timeline for action to support baseload generation,’ said Joseph Aldina, who tracks the industry at S&P Global. ‘It may be a signal to policymakers and regulators.’ … ‘We’ve been walking very close to the edge of a reliability crisis. I think there are people who would argue that we’re there,’ said Conor Bernstein, a spokesman for the National Mining Association, a trade group. ‘The urgency increases with every new announced retirement.’” [E&E News, 9/6/18 (=)]

 

Utility-Backed Fund Raises $681M To Invest In Clean Tech. According to E&E News, “A private equity firm backed by some of the world’s largest utilities has raised $681 million to finance startups developing clean-energy technology. Energy Impact Partners LP, which represents giants including Southern Co., National Grid PLC and AGL Energy Ltd., has already invested more than $200 million in companies like Advanced Microgrid Solutions LLC, AutoGrid Systems Inc. and Tendril Networks Inc. The amount raised includes up to $150 million in U.S. Small Business Administration loans, according to a statement yesterday. Utilities are trying to capture future industry growth amid stagnant electricity demand and a rise in technologies that give customers more control over their energy use. Utilities disclosed about $6.8 billion in venture capital, private equity and merger and acquisition deals in 2017, Bloomberg NEF estimates. ‘We are helping them future-proof their business,’ Chief Executive Officer Hans Kobler said in an interview. ‘This is a difficult landscape and as utilities prepare for that, they need to look for what’s coming down the pike and we serve as their eyes and ears for them.’” [E&E News, 9/6/18 (=)]

 

Opinion Pieces

 

A Global Shift To Sustainability Would Save Us $26 Trillion. Why Aren’t We Doing It? According to Vox, “$26 trillion by 2030. That, according to the most authoritative research to date, is the amount of money humanity could save through a global shift to sustainable development. It’s a lot of money. Before you break your brain trying to imagine it, just pause to make a note that it’s a positive sum (uh, extremely positive), not negative. Net savings, not costs. That might come as a surprise since decades of conservative and fossil fuel propaganda have made it conventional wisdom that cleaning up our act is expensive — that it costs more than the status quo. It is the argument hauled out against every single pollution regulation. The argument has always been false on a sufficiently long time scale. Sooner or later, humanity must live sustainably or it won’t go on living — that’s what ‘sustainable’ means. And any fundamental shift toward sustainability is enjoyed by all subsequent generations of humans, so, y’know, the value compounds. If there are any people left in the year 5000, the question of whether it was ‘worth it’ to shift to sustainable practices will strike them as peculiar indeed. But there were ways to make the shift look expensive in the short to mid-term, especially since the prices of the fuel, food, and materials we use do not reflect their environmental damage. And traditional modeling and cost-benefit analysis have always been weighted in favor of the status quo, since the costs of new, more sustainable systems are apparent and their second- and third-order benefits are difficult to predict or quantify. (Innovation is the X-factor in all modeling.)” [Vox, 9/5/18 (+)]

 

 

Arizona

 

Voting Record Of John McCain’s Successor Aligns With Trump’s Anti-Environment Policies. According to Think Progress, “Former Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ), chosen by Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey (R) on Tuesday to fill the seat of the late Sen. John McCain (R), had a dismal environmental record during his three terms in the U.S. Senate. Kyl, who is scheduled to be sworn in on Wednesday, received an 8 percent lifetime score from the League of Conservation Voters (LCV), a score that reflected his propensity to vote against legislation that would provide basic protections to the environment and human health. In 2006, Kyl was ranked by National Journal as the fourth-most conservative U.S. senator. Kyl’s opposition to the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions and other types of air pollution and his support for the oil and gas industry, including offshore drilling, fall in line with the Trump administration’s record over the past 20 months. Since his retirement from the Senate in 2013, Kyl has worked as a lobbyist for Covington & Burling LLP where he has represented companies and trade associations in a variety of industries. Earlier this year, Kyl registered to lobby for mining company Freeport-McMoRan to get copper on a list of minerals deemed ‘critical to the economic and national security of the United States.’” [Think Progress, 9/5/18 (=)]

 

Virginia

 

Carbon Cap Debate Focuses On Uncertainty For Utility Customers. According to The News & Advance, “Would a cap on carbon emissions from big power plants make renewable energy a more economical option for electric utilities, or would it simply raise rates for industrial and other customers? Virginia won’t know until it adopts a rule for carbon dioxide emissions and utilities respond with their own proposals for living within new pollution limits, according to the State Corporation Commission. ‘There are too many uncertainties for staff to calculate or estimate those costs,’ said Greg Abbott, associate deputy director for public utility regulation at the SCC, in a presentation on Wednesday to a legislative commission focused on promoting manufacturing in Virginia. The challenge is already apparent in the escalating debate over Dominion Energy Virginia’s proposed 15-year ‘integrated resource plan’ and the consequences of a sweeping new law on utility regulation that allows excess monopoly earnings to help pay for billions of dollars in investments in the electric network.” [The News & Advance, 9/5/18 (=)]