Bipartisan Senate Transportation Funding Bill Released

Nov 7: Following last weeks defeat in the Senate of the President's $60 billion infrastructure bill (S.1769, the Rebuild America Jobs Act) and the defeat of the Republican alternative bill (S.1786, the Long-Term Surface Transportation Extension Act) [See WIMS 11/4/11]; a bipartisan group of Senators has released the bill text for -- Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21) -- legislation to reauthorize the nation's transportation programs for two years. The Senators include: Senators Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Chairman of the Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee; James Inhofe (R-OK), Ranking Member of the EPW Committee; Senator Max Baucus (D-MT), Chairman of the EPW Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee; and Senator David Vitter (R-LA), Ranking Member of the EPW Subcommittee.

 

    Senator Boxer said, "I am proud to be Chairman of a committee that has joined together across party lines to write a strong, job-creating transportation bill. I believe that our bill will not only protect the 1.8 million existing transportation jobs, but we will also create up to an additional million jobs thanks to the way our bill leverages federal funds. My deepest thanks to my Ranking Member, Senator Jim Inhofe, the Subcommittee Chair, Senator Max Baucus and Subcommittee Ranking Member, Senator David Vitter."

 

    Senator Inhofe said, "I commend Senators Boxer, Vitter and Baucus for their work in striking the right balance on our highway bill, and I am pleased to join them as we unveil it today. Yesterday's votes on both the Democrat and Republican infrastructure bills showed that there is a strong bipartisan majority in the Senate that supports putting Americans back to work by building our roads and bridges. I look forward to working with my EPW colleagues to pass this bill -- which is proven to help strengthen our economy and create jobs -- in the committee next week."

 

    Senator Baucus said, "Maintaining a strong transportation system is a proven way to create jobs and keep America strong and competitive, something we need now more than ever. Because Montana is a highway state, we know firsthand that the smart transportation investments in this bill will deliver big returns in construction jobs in the short term and they will support American commerce around the country and around the world for years to come. This is a bipartisan package everyone can support."

 

    Senator Vitter said, "I'm encouraged that we've found an efficient way of addressing some of our most important transportation needs.  The American people -- and many American businesses -- depend on reliable infrastructure, and I'm glad that we were able to find some common ground with this bipartisan bill."

 

    According to a release, the legislation maintains funding at current levels, reforms the nation's transportation programs to make them more efficient, and provides robust assistance for transportation projects under the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) program to leverage state, local, and private-sector funding. The bill will be marked up in the EPW Committee on November 9 at 10:00 AM ET. The current surface transportation bill expires on March 31, and many groups, ranging from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to the AFL-CIO, have called for immediate action to reauthorize the nation's transportation programs.

 

    In a summary of the legislation the Senators identify key highlights of the bill as follows:

•  Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21) reauthorizes the Federal-aid highway program at the Congressional Budget Office's baseline level—equal to current funding levels plus inflation—for two fiscal years.
• MAP-21 consolidates the number of Federal programs by two-thirds, from about 90 programs down to less than 30, to focus resources on key national goals and reduce duplicative programs.
• Eliminates earmarks.
• Expedites project delivery while protecting the environment.
• Creates a new title called "America Fast Forward," which strengthens the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Program (TIFIA) program to leverage federal dollars further than they have been stretched before.
• Consolidates certain programs into a focused freight program to improve the movement of goods.

    The bill would establish three new core programs as follows:

• National Highway Performance Program – This section consolidates existing programs (the Interstate Maintenance, National Highway System, and Highway Bridge programs) to create a single new program, which will provide increased flexibility, while guiding state and local investments to maintain and improve the conditions and performance of the National Highway System (NHS). This program will eliminate the barriers between existing programs that limit states' flexibility to address the most vital needs for highways and bridges and holds states accountable for improving outcomes and using tax dollars efficiently.
• Transportation Mobility Program – This program replaces the current Surface Transportation Program, but retains the same structure, goals and flexibility to allow states and metropolitan areas to invest in the projects that fit their unique needs and priorities. It also gives a broad eligibility of surface transportation projects that can be constructed. Activities that previously received dedicated funding in SAFETEA-LU, but are being consolidated under MAP-21, will be retained as eligible activities under the Transportation Mobility Program.
• National Freight Network Program – Our nation's economic health depends on a transportation system that provides for reliable and timely goods movements. Unfortunately, the condition and capacity of the highway system has failed to keep up with the growth in freight movement and is hampering the ability of businesses to efficiently transport goods due to congestion. MAP-21 addresses the need to improve goods movement by consolidating existing programs into a new focused freight program that provides funds to the states by formula for projects to improve regional and national freight movements on highways, including freight intermodal connectors.

    Access a release from the Senators (click here). Access a 4-page bill summary (click here). Access the complete 600-page draft bill (click here). [#Transport]

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)

GOP & Senate Rules Defeat $60 Billion Infrastructure Funding Bill

Nov 3: Senate Republicans and rules requiring 60 votes in order to consider contested legislation combined to defeat the "infrastructure piece" (S.1769, the Rebuild America Jobs Act) [See WIMS 11/2/11] of the President's overall American Jobs Act, by a 51-49 vote. The President issued the following statement:

 

    "For the third time in recent weeks, every single Republican in the United States Senate has chosen to obstruct a jobs bill that independent economists said would boost our economy and put Americans back to work. At a time when more than a million construction workers are looking for a job, they voted "no" to putting them back to work doing the work America needs done -- rebuilding  our roads, bridges, airports and transit systems. That makes no sense.

    "It makes no sense when you consider that this bill was made up of the same kinds of common-sense proposals that many of these Senators have fought for in the past. It was fully paid for. And even though it was supported by more than 70 percent of the American people -- Republicans, Democrats, and independents -- 100 percent of Senate Republicans said no. It's more clear than ever that Republicans in Washington are out of touch with Americans from all ends of the political spectrum.

    "The American people deserve to know why their Republican representatives in Washington refuse to put some of the workers hit hardest by the economic downturn back on the job rebuilding America. They deserve an explanation as to why Republicans refuse to step up to the plate and do what's necessary to create jobs and grow the economy right now. It's time for Republicans in Congress to put country ahead of party and listen to the people they were elected to serve. It's time for them to do their job and focus on Americans' jobs.  And until they do, I will continue to do everything in my power to move this country forward."

    After voting to defeat the President's proposal, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) offered the Republican alternative bill, S.1786, the Long-Term Surface Transportation Extension Act. That bill was also defeated along party lines by a vote of 53-47 (60-vote threshold).  In discussing the Republican alternative bill, Senator McConnell said:

    "We're going to see two very different approaches to infrastructure and job creation today. The American people can decide for themselves which one makes more sense. The Republican proposal extends the current highway bill for another two years, giving states and contractors the certainty they need to start new infrastructure projects and create jobs. The legislation Senator Hatch is proposing today puts an end to that uncertainty for the next two years. This proposal also gives states the authority to decide how this money is spent. If folks in Ohio or Kentucky want to build a bridge, Washington can't force them to build a bike path.

    "The Republican proposal accelerates the review period and clears away the bureaucratic red tape. The President admitted a few months ago that the shovel-ready projects in his first stimulus bill didn't turn out to be as shovel-ready as he thought. Our proposal helps make sure they are. Our bill prohibits the EPA from imposing burdensome and unnecessary new regulations on American cement producers and domestic boilers, so the cost of American-made materials for the projects paid for through this highway bill don't skyrocket just as they're set to begin. This bill keeps those costs down. Best of all, it's fully paid for through funds that were originally appropriated for another purpose but not spent. Whatever's left over after these projects are funded goes to pay down the deficit. . ."   

    Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Chairman of the Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee, issued a statement following the two votes saying, "It is outrageous that Republicans defeated President Obama's bill, which would put people back to work by investing in our nation's aging infrastructure. Instead of supporting the President's proposal, Republicans offered a bill that would roll back public health safeguards and cause massive job losses through draconian funding cuts to programs that help all Americans."

    Senator James Inhofe (R-OK), Ranking Member on the EPW Committee issued a lengthy statement saying in part, ". . .after today's vote on President Obama's failed infrastructure plan, I urge my colleagues to turn their attention now to a bill that is proven to create jobs and give our economy a much-needed boost. Of course, I'm talking about the bipartisan highway bill that I am sponsoring with my good friends, Senators Boxer, Vitter and Baucus. Most people are amazed at how close Senator Boxer and I are on this issue. While I appreciate President Obama's acknowledgement that infrastructure spending is highly effective at spurring job growth, it is clear that his plan was all show with no substance.  His bill was purely a political opportunity: it gave him a chance to stand in front of a bridge and make a speech about creating jobs, knowing full well that his bill would never pass. . .

    "The good news is that today's votes, on both the Democrat and Republican infrastructure bills, showed that there is a strong bipartisan majority in the Senate that supports creating jobs and strengthening our economy by rebuilding our crumbling roads and bridges.  Fortunately, Senator Boxer and I are about to unveil our highway bill, which will do just that. . ."

    Last month, Senators Boxer, Inhofe Baucus (D-MT), and Vitter (R-LA), announced that they will markup a two-year surface transportation bill, Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21), on November 9 in the EPW Committee.

    Access the statement from the President (click here). Access the statement from Senator McConnell (click here). Access the statement from Senator Boxer including links to information on the MAP-21 proposal (click here). Access the release from Senator Inhofe (click here). Access legislative details including links to roll call votes for S.1769 (click here). Access legislative details including links to roll call votes for S.1786 (click here). [#Transport]

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)

President's $60 Billion In Infrastructure Funding Likely To Fail

Nov 2: As part of President Obama's "We Can't Wait" campaign, he delivered remarks in front of Washington, DC's Key Bridge and urged Congress to pass the transportation piece of the American Jobs Act (AJA), which he said would make an immediate investment of $50 billion in the nation's transportation infrastructure and a $10 billion investment to create a bipartisan National Infrastructure Bank. He indicated that together, the initiatives would put hundreds of thousands of construction workers back on the job rebuilding our roads, rails, and runways.

    A White House release reports that according to the U.S. Department of Transportation's Federal Highway Administration, the Key Bridge is in need of crucial repairs and maintenance work. In order to ensure the Key Bridge remains both safe and functional well into the future, the District Department of Transportation (DDOT) proposed a $20 million project to rehabilitate and repair critical portions of the bridge. However, the city is deferring this maintenance to 2015 due to a lack of funds. If Congress passes this bill, DDOT could make these critical repairs more quickly and put Americans back to work as early as 2013.

    The President said, "Construction workers have been among the Americans hit hardest over the past few years. And that makes no sense when there's so much of America that needs rebuilding. This week, Congress has the chance to do something about it and pass a bill that will put hundreds of thousands of construction workers back to work rebuilding our roads, bridges, airports and transit systems. It's a bill that includes the kinds of ideas both parties have voted for in the past, it's paid for, and its ideas are supported by an overwhelming majority of the American people. It's time for Congress to act."

    The White House released a report entitled, Recent Examples of the Economic Benefits From Investing In Infrastructure, to highlight the importance of rebuilding roads, bridges, railways, and airports across the nation. The report states, "In order to meet the needs of a growing economy, there is an ongoing need for new investments to maintain, upgrade, and expand the nation's stock of transportation infrastructure." The report highlights projects from Arizona, D.C., Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington and West Virginia.

    The Administration also announced several "common-sense steps" it has taken to improve the process of reviewing and approving transportation projects, help cut red tape, and leverage additional private sector funding in order to promote private sector growth and job creation. The steps include:

• Directing the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) to award $527 million in competitive TIGER grants by the end of 2011 -- months ahead of schedule. The TIGER program puts American workers back on the job by helping to rebuild our nation's roads and bridges, and working on innovative projects like streetcar and light rail systems. This year, DOT received about 1,000 applications, including at least one from every state.
• Directing DOT to shorten the application process for the 2012 round of TIFIA funding [Transportation Infrastructure Finance And Innovation Act], which will accelerate projects and put workers back on the job more quickly. TIFIA provides up to one-third of the financing needed for bridge, tunnel, toll, transit, and other large-scale transportation projects. That means the annual funding level of $110 million in TIFIA funds can support projects totaling up to $3 billion in construction.
• Establishing a Transportation Rapid Response Team to expedite reviews of surface transportation projects. Co-chaired by the Council on Environmental Quality and the U.S. Department of Transportation, the team will identify and implement best practices to improve the transparency, efficiency and effectiveness of environmental review and permit decisions for transportation projects, protecting public health and putting Americans back to work.

    On the motion to proceed S.1769, the Rebuild America Jobs Act.the Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said, "I hope we can work out something to have a vote on this most important measure. It is very important. This is a piece of legislation that the entire population of America supports by a ratio of some 76 percent. Republicans support it; Democrats support it; Independents support it. The only people in the world who do not support it are Republicans here in the Senate. So I hope we can work out something and move to this and it would be unnecessary for us to have to have cloture invoked or try to have cloture invoked." Senator Reid indicated that a cloture vote would be held on Thursday morning (November 3) if some deal between Democrats and Republican cannot be worked out.

 

    In a separate release, Senator Reid said, "Tomorrow the Senate will vote on the Rebuild America Jobs Act, a plan to put hundreds of thousands of Americans back to work constructing thousands of miles of roads and bridges, runways and train tracks. The plan is paid for with a small tax -- less than a penny -- on every dollar a person earns in excess of $1 million a year. The legislation asks millionaires and billionaires to contribute just a little bit more than they do today, knowing there is a price tag associated with getting our economy back on track. My Republican colleagues say they oppose this plan to hire hundreds of thousands of construction workers and rebuild our nation's collapsing infrastructure because they believe the wealthiest Americans can't afford to pay a few pennies more. But even the majority of the people who would pay this tax say that simply isn't true. They support our plan. . .

 

    "So, tomorrow my Republican colleagues will face a choice. The choice is not whether to invest in roads or bridges, or whether the richest of the rich can spare a few dollars for the sake of our economy. The choice is about priorities. Who will Republicans put first — the millions of ordinary Americans struggling to find work and put food on the table? Or the millionaires and billionaires whose biggest problem is that they may have to pay an additional $7,000 on the second million they make each year?. . . Seventy-two percent of Americans, including 54 percent of Republicans, want us to pass this plan. And 76 percent of them, including 56 percent of Republicans, want us to pay for it by asking the nation's wealthiest citizens to contribute their fair share. . ."

 

    Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) did not respond to Senator Reid's remarks directly, but instead urged the Senate to take up what Republicans are calling the House-passed "Forgotten 15" -- referring to 15 bills that have bee passed in the House and are now waiting to be considered in the Senate [See WIMS 10/28/11]. Senator McConnell said, ". . .the Republican Majority in the House of Representatives has been passing bills that actually have a chance of gaining bipartisan support and becoming law. They're actually trying to get something done.

    "Unlike the President and the Democrats who run the Senate, House Republicans are designing legislation to pass, rather than fail. They want to make a difference rather than a point. And the only thing keeping these bills from becoming law is the fact that Democrats in the Senate won't take them up. We know the President's strategy. His so-called jobs bill has one purpose: to divide us. Just this morning, I read a story that quoted some Democrat operative almost bragging about the fact that they don't except any of the legislation the President's been out there talking about on his bus tour to pass. They openly admit these bills are designed to fail.

    "It's not exactly a state secret that Republicans -- and yes, some Democrats -- don't think we should be raising taxes right now on the very people we're counting on to create the jobs we need to get us out of a jobs crisis. And yet the one thing that every single proposal Democrats bring to the floor has in common is that it does just that. So the Democrats' plan is to keep putting bills on the floor they know ahead of time we'll vote against, instead of trying to solve the problem. And they don't even hide it. The President's top strategist actually issued a memo a few weeks ago saying the President would use this legislation not as a way to help people but as a way to pummel Republicans. Meanwhile, House Republicans have passed bill after bill that are actually designed to do something. . . [Senator McConnell listed the 15 bills passed by the House]

    "This is just the latest example of a simple, bipartisan bill that struggling businesses are begging us to pass.  But that Senate Democrats are holding up right now because it doesn't fit with their story line. "I'm not saying they have to vote on every one of these bills just as they are. There's an amendments process for that. "But why not take them up? "Everyone would help create jobs. And none of them would raise taxes. . .

    "What we're witnessing in Washington right now is two very different styles of governance: a Republican majority in the House that believes we should actually do something about the problems we face, and which has put together and actually passed bipartisan legislation that would help address those problems. And a Democratic Majority in the Senate that's teamed up with the White House on a strategy of doing nothing -- all for the sake of trying to score political points and spread the blame for an economy that their own policies have cemented into place as they look ahead to an election that's more than a year away. . ."

    Access a release from the White House (click here). Access the White House report on infrastructure projects (click here). Access a release from Sen. Reid (click here). Access the complete statement and video from Sen. McConnell (click here). Access legislative details for S.1769 (click here). [#Transport]

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)

Senate Hearing On Importance Of Transportation Investments

Mar 3: The Senate Environment and Pubic Works Committee, Chaired by Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) held a hearing on, The Importance of Transportation Investments to the National Economy and Jobs. Witnesses testifying at the hearing included representatives from the: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials; American Road and Transportation Builders Association; National Construction Alliance II; and the Associated General Contractors of America. Senator Boxer and Ranking Member James Inhofe (R-OK) both delivered opening statements.

 

    The Committee discussed the agreement reached in the Senate in the evening of March 2, that ended Senator Jim Bunning's (R-KY) one-man hold on key legislation to extend he authority another 30 days of surface transportation authorization under the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient, Transportation Equity Act -- A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) which expired March 1, 2010. Another bill to extend SAFETEA-LU through the end of 2010 is now pending action [See WIMS 3/1/10].

 

    Chairman Boxer said, "We know transportation infrastructure investment is a proven jobs creator. According to the Department of Transportation (DOT) every $1 billion in Federal money for transportation that is matched by state and local funds supports approximately 34,700 jobs. According to a recent report by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), more than 280,000 direct jobs have been created or sustained at projects across the country as a result of the highway and transit funding in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). "

 

    She said, "In coming weeks we will be considering many important aspects of the surface transportation authorization, including , among other topics, federal, state and local partnerships to accelerate transportation benefits, mobility and congestion in urban and rural America, and transportation's impact on the environment. The next highway, transit and highway safety authorization provides an opportunity to take a fresh look at these programs and make the changes necessary to ensure our transportation system will meet America's needs in the coming years. At the end of the day it's a matter of setting the right priorities and crafting innovative and effective means to address them." Both Senator Boxer and Inhofe commented that while there are major disagreements on many issues considered by the Committee, Republicans and Democrats generally agree on many transportation issues.

 

    Senator Inhofe said he was "relieved the Senate was able to work out a deal last night on the 30-day extension of the highway program." But, he continued "this is in no way a victory. This simply means that we will go back to the highway program being funded $1 billion a month lower than 2009 levels and living with the uncertainty of short-term extension. In fact, the states won't receive the new funding provided by this extension for close to a month -- just when this extension is expiring. The House needs to move and pass the long-term extension the Senate sent over last week."

 

    Senator Inhofe indicated, "Despite the relatively small amount of highway investment in the stimulus bill, it is evident that highway investment is a proven job creator-much more so than any of the other of the Administration's so-called "stimulus" initiatives. Although I support increased infrastructure investment in any form, it is important to note that supplemental highway funding in the so called "jobs bill" is in no way a substitute for the short- and long-term economic necessity of a multi-year highway bill re-authorization.

 

    He said, "The Department of Transportation has estimated that the maintenance backlog on our nation's roads and bridges exceeds $600 billion. I have often said that, despite its large size, SAFETEA didn't even maintain the system we have. The previous estimate was just $500 billion-in other words, increases in the costs of steel, cement and higher wages, combined with chronic underinvestment, have put us into an even deeper hole. . . As the rest of the world continues to finance new ports, highways, and sophisticated rail networks to attract new commerce, we are falling far behind, and our underinvestment means that our domestic industries are operating globally at a competitive disadvantage. If we fail to provide a free-flowing transportation system to accommodate the needs of our economy, our manufacturing industries will be forced to export their operations abroad."

 

    Access the hearing website and links to all testimony and a webcast of the hearing (click here).

States Seek To Join Endangerment Finding Lawsuit

Jan 22: Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley’s Office announced that it was leading a coalition of 16 states and New York City, in filing a motion to intervene in a lawsuit brought by industry groups last fall to challenge U.S. EPA's Endangerment Finding. The Endangerment Finding, announced December 7 [See WIMS 12/7/09 & Multiple Articles], is the Agency's formal determination that greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions cause climate change and as a result may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health and welfare. EPA published the Endangerment Finding in response to the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Massachusetts v. EPA. The finding is the first step towards regulating greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. The filing signals the states’ intention to join with the EPA in defending EPA’s decision. The motion was filed in the Federal Appeals Court in Washington, DC.

Joining Massachusetts in the motion to intervene were the states of Arizona, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Iowa, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington, and the City of New York. Attorney General Coakley, who recently lost her run for Ted Kennedy's Senate seat to [See WIMS 1/20/10] Republican Scott Brown said, “The Endangerment Finding marked the end of an era in which the federal government refused to acknowledge that anything could or should be done about global climate change. We are confident that the court will uphold the EPA’s action and that the EPA will press forward with its plan to begin regulation of greenhouse gases. While we continue to hope that Congress will enact effective and comprehensive legislation to control and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, we firmly believe that the EPA has an important role to play whether or not Congress acts and we cannot afford to wait.”

On December 23, 2009, industry groups from various sectors (e.g., Massey Energy Co., National Cattlemen’s Beef Association and Alpha Natural Resources Inc., etc.) filed a single petition for review in the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. Petitioners have not yet identified the specific issues they intend to raise, but Attorney General Coakley’s Office intends to argue that the legal and scientific basis for the EPA’s Endangerment Finding is sound and should be upheld. Assistant Attorney General Carol Iancu, and Assistant Attorney General Tracy Triplett, both of Attorney General Coakley’s Environmental Protection Division are handling the case.

In announcing its participation in the industry groups' lawsuit in December, Tamara Thies, chief environmental counsel for the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) said, “EPA’s finding is not based on a rigorous scientific analysis; yet it would trigger a cascade of future greenhouse gas regulations with sweeping impacts across the entire U.S. economy. Why the Administration decided to move forward on this type of rule when there’s so much uncertainty surrounding humans’ contribution to climate change is perplexing.”

NCBA cited the so-called "Climategate" issue saying, "'Climategate' revealed that the data on which the EPA relied to make this finding is questionable and may have been manipulated to tell a story that global warming alarmists wanted to tell. The fact that the EPA is ignoring this scandal is not going to make it go away.” NCBA also said that as was evident in Copenhagen, "other countries around the world like China and India are unwilling to tie the hands of their economic engines and impose these kinds of costs on their citizens.”

Access a release from the MA AG (click here). Access a release from NCBA with links to additional information (click here).

North Dakota Democrat Introduces Bill To Prevent EPA GHG Regs

Jan 8: Signaling additional controversy and complications for the Obama Administration in attempting to deal with climate change, regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and implement the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in (Massachusetts, et al. v. EPA, et al., No. 05-1120), Democratic Representative Earl Pomeroy of North Dakota announced the introduction of H.R. 4396, the Save Our Energy Jobs Act, which he said would prohibit U.S. EPA from regulating greenhouse gases. He said the legislation has been introduced in response to a recent EPA announcement that it was moving forward on new rules to regulate GHG emissions under the Clean Air Act. In a release he indicated, "This action, if not prevented, could dramatically increase energy rates as well as end up costing North Dakota jobs." The Administration already faces nearly unanimous opposition from House and Senate Republicans on the issue and the Senate will soon consider a "disapproval resolution" proposed by Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) to stop U.S. EPA from regulating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions under the Clean Air Act [See WIMS 12/15/09 & 1/6/10].

Representative Pomeroy said, "Regulation of greenhouse gas emissions under the current provisions of the Clean Air Act is irresponsible and just plain wrong. That is why I introduced the Save Our Energy Jobs Act which would stop the EPA from moving forward with its proposal. I am not about to let some Washington bureaucrat dictate new public policy that will raise our electricity rates and put at risk the thousands of coal-related jobs in our state." There were no cosponsors to the bill which was referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Chaired by Representative Henry Waxman (D-CA).

On April 2, 2007, the United States Supreme Court, in Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) found that the EPA has the authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gas emissions should they find these emissions to be harmful to public health and welfare. Subsequent to this new authority, on December 7, 2009, the EPA released a final endangerment finding that greenhouse gas emissions do endanger both public health and welfare [See WIMS 12/8/09]. Making this determination was necessary to finalizing the EPA’s proposed greenhouse gas emissions standards for light-duty vehicles, which have been proposed by EPA and the Department of Transportation’s National Highway Safety Administration. Once this EPA rule becomes final, greenhouse gases will officially be regulated pollutants under the Clean Air Act. Representative Pomeroy indicated, "This action would then subject stationary sources which emit greenhouse gas emissions, such as power plants and factories like those managed by North Dakota Rural Electric Cooperatives, Basin Electric and Minnkota Power, to regulation under the Clean Air Act."

In anticipation of this outcome, EPA has announced a proposed rule requiring large industrial facilities that emit at least 25,000 tons of greenhouse gas emissions a year to obtain construction and operating permits covering these emissions [See WIMS 10/1/09]. Representative Pomeroy indicated, "These permits must demonstrate the use of best available control technologies and energy efficiency measures to minimize greenhouse gas emissions and would cover all of North Dakota’s seven coal fired power plants, the Tesoro oil refinery in Mandan and other industries across the state. However, current control technologies and measures are either unproven or incredibly expensive and could in effect, make new coal facilities impossible to build."

Included in the Representative's release was a comment from the North Dakota Association of Rural Electric Cooperatives Executive Vice President and General Manager Dennis Hill who said, "Rep. Pomeroy’s bill supports our position that Congress should be in charge of setting the policy on climate change legislation. We’ve been working with our Congressional delegation to adopt provisions in a comprehensive climate change bill that achieve carbon reductions at a pace that’s fair, affordable and achievable. We believe any climate legislation should make clear that Congress, not the EPA, sets the policy on carbon." Representative Pomeroy indicated, "This action could result in significantly raising local energy prices and endanger the 28,000 direct and indirect jobs that are connected to North Dakota’s coal industry, not to mention thousands of jobs connected to our manufacturing and expanding oil and gas industries."

Access a release from Representative Pomeroy (click here). Access legislative details for H.R. 4396 (click here).

Sen. Murkowski's Disapproval Resolution On Endangerment Finding

Dec 14: U.S. Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), announced her intention to file a disapproval resolution to stop U.S. EPA from regulating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions under the Clean Air Act. Murkowski’s resolution comes in the wake of the agency’s recent endangerment finding, which she said will result in "damaging new regulations that endanger America’s economy." The Senator's announced disapproval came one day before EPA's endangerment finding was officially published in the Federal Register [74 FR 66495-66546, 12/15/09]. The endangerment finding was announced by EPA on December 7 [See WIMS 12/8/09].

Murkowski said, “I remain committed to reducing emissions through a policy that will protect our environment and strengthen our economy, but EPA’s backdoor climate regulations achieve neither of those goals. EPA regulation must be taken off the table so that we can focus on more responsible approaches to dealing with global climate change.” Murkowski indicated that while the Administration claims the endangerment finding is merely an affirmation of the science behind global climate change, she said "that aspect is just the tip of the iceberg."

She said further, “The EPA administrator’s move has thrown open the door to expensive and intrusive government regulation -- as far from a market-based solution as we can possibly imagine. The endangerment finding is aptly named. It endangers jobs, it endangers economic growth, and it endangers American competitiveness, while setting the stage for backdoor bureaucratic intrusion into the lives of Americans on an unprecedented scale. The EPA has taken these actions despite the fact that Congress is continuing to work on climate legislation. I find that highly counter-productive, especially as our nation struggles to regain its economic footing. The endangerment finding must be stopped so that Congress can pass responsible legislation that is sound on its own merits, and not merely a defense against the threat of damaging regulations.”

Murkowski warned those who believe EPA action will prod Congress to act faster that such a strategy is likely to fail and carry with it unintended consequences. She said, “Make no mistake -- Congress is being threatened in a misguided attempt to move a climate bill forward. But this strategy is highly flawed because it assumes Congress will pass economically damaging legislation in order to stave off economically damaging regulations. That’s a false choice and it should be rejected outright. “This administration should be able to work with this Congress to pass needed, common-sense, and transparent reforms to our energy and environmental policies. Until the administration stops playing Russian roulette with the economy and decides to reach across the aisle, however, it will be difficult to do anything but oppose the irresponsible decisions that are being made.”

In a release, Murkowski indicated she will file her disapproval resolution pursuant to the provisions of the Congressional Review Act (CRA). Senators Don Nickles (R-OK) and Harry Reid (D-NV), were the principal sponsors of the CRA, incorporated into the Contract with America Advancement Act of 1996, and signed into law by President Bill Clinton. Upon introduction, a disapproval resolution is referred to the committee of jurisdiction, which in this case will be the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works (EPW). If the committee does not favorably report the resolution within 20 calendar days, it may be discharged upon petition by 30 Senators. Once a disapproval resolution is placed on the Senate calendar, it is then subject to expedited consideration on the Senate floor, and not subject to filibuster.

Access a release from Senator Murkowski (click here). Access a video of the Senator's floor speech (click here). Access the full text of the floor speech (click here).

API Says EPA Endangerment Finding "Clearly Politically Motivated"

Dec 7: As WIMS reported yesterday, U.S. EPA's endangerment finding announced on December 7 [See WIMS 12/7/09, 12/08/09] has resulted in the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) announcing it will file suit in Federal court to overturn finding and various mixed reactions from interest groups and politicians. Also, in a harshly critical statement, Jack Gerard, President of the American Petroleum Institute said there was no pressing reason for the finding and EPA’s action was "clearly politically motivated."

Gerard said, “This action poses a threat to every American family and business if it leads to regulation of greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. Such regulation would be intrusive, inefficient, and excessively costly. It could chill job growth and delay business expansion. The Clean Air Act was meant to control traditional air pollution, not greenhouse gases that come from every vehicle, home, factory and farm in America. A fit-for-purpose climate law is a much preferred solution.

“There was no compelling deadline that forced EPA’s hand on this decision. It is a decision that is clearly politically motivated to coincide with the start of the Copenhagen climate summit. EPA’s finding is inadequate, unsupported by the record and fails to demonstrate a significant risk of harm to public health or welfare. API members are reducing greenhouse gas emissions and investing in technology to reduce them further. Between 2000 and 2008, U.S.-based oil and natural gas companies invested $58 billion in low-carbon energy technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, more than either the federal government or all other U.S.-based private industry combined.”

In a related action, National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) Vice President of Energy & Resources Policy Keith McCoy also issued a statement saying, "The NAM is concerned that the EPA did not seriously take into consideration any of the thousands of comments manufacturers made on this proposal. The endangerment finding will have a cascading effect on the ability of all manufacturers to grow and prosper. By declaring GHG emissions a threat to public health and welfare through its endangerment finding, the EPA is paving the way to begin regulating carbon emissions across the board, including large stationary sources such as manufacturing plants, hospitals and libraries under the Clean Air Act.

"Let me be clear: the NAM supports cost-effective efforts to address climate change but believes the appropriate authority to address this should be Congress. The EPA is moving forward with an agenda that will put additional burdens on manufacturers, cost jobs and drive up the price of energy. This finding comes when unemployment is hovering at 10 percent, and many manufacturers are struggling to stay in business. It is doubtful that this endangerment finding will achieve its stated goal, but it is certain to come at a huge cost to the economy. Our nation needs a comprehensive federal policy that will achieve environmental results without inflicting unnecessary economic harm. This is a complex issue that deserves a rigorous, public and transparent debate in Congress."

NAM acknowledged that EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson indicated that she would prefer Congress address this issue. But said, "therefore, we are disappointed the EPA chose this power grab move. We will continue to work with Congress to address this important issue and urge the EPA to think about the economic harm it is inflicting before moving forward with additional rules."

In announcing the endangerment finding, EPA noted that its "findings do not in and of themselves impose any emission reduction requirements but rather allow EPA to finalize the GHG standards proposed earlier this year for new light-duty vehicles as part of the joint rulemaking with the Department of Transportation." EPA indicated in a release that "President Obama and Administrator Jackson have publicly stated that they support a legislative solution to the problem of climate change and Congress’ efforts to pass comprehensive climate legislation. However, climate change is threatening public health and welfare, and it is critical that EPA fulfill its obligation to respond to the 2007 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that determined that greenhouse gases fit within the Clean Air Act definition of air pollutants."

EPA issued the proposed findings in April 2009 [See WIMS 4/27/09] and held a 60-day public comment period. The agency received more than 380,000 comments, which it said "were carefully reviewed and considered during the development of the final findings."

Access the statement from API (click here). Access the statement from NAM (click here). Access a release from EPA on the finding (click here). Access EPA's Endangerment website for complete information and background (click here).

EPA May Grant Ethanol Waiver; But More Testing Needed

Dec 1: U.S. EPA announced that it expects to make a final determination in mid-2010 regarding whether to increase the allowable ethanol content in fuel. In a letter sent today (December 1) to Growth Energy -- a bio fuels industry association that had asked EPA to grant a waiver that would allow for the use of up to 15 percent of ethanol in gasoline -- the Agency said that while not all tests have been completed, "the results of two tests indicate that engines in newer cars likely can handle an ethanol blend higher than the current 10-percent limit." The Agency will decide whether to raise the blending limit when more testing data is available. EPA also announced that it has begun the process to craft the labeling requirements that will be necessary if the blending limit is raised.

In March 2009, Growth Energy requested a waiver to allow for the use of up to 15 percent ethanol in gasoline, an increase of five percent points. Under the Clean Air Act, EPA was required to respond to the waiver request by December 1, 2009. EPA has been evaluating the group’s request and has received a broad range of public comments as part of the administrative rulemaking process. EPA and the Department of Energy also undertook a number of studies to determine whether cars could handle higher ethanol blends. Testing has been proceeding as quickly as possible given the available testing facilities. The current limit on the amount of ethanol that can be blended into a gallon of gasoline is at ten volume percent ethanol (E10) for conventional (non flex-fuel) vehicles. Growth Energy and 54 ethanol manufacturers submitted the application requesting an increase in the amount of ethanol blended into a gallon of gasoline to up to 15 volume percent (E15) on March 6, 2009. EPA conducted an extended comment period that ended on July 20, 2009 [See WIMS 5/15/09].

Despite support for the E15 waiver by 10 Midwestern governors supporting the proposal [See WIMS 7/17/09], the Association of International Automobile Manufacturers (AIAM) and the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers (Alliance). AIAM said, "The consequence of potential equipment malfunctions caused by the use of E15 extends beyond failure to sufficiently control emissions. It will also create a high risk of consumer dissatisfaction due to drivability problems which would needlessly damage product reputation and imperil customer satisfaction with dealer service." The Alliance asked "EPA to deny this waiver application, in whole and in part, because insufficient data are available to determine whether the proposed fuel blend(s) can satisfy the legal requirements under the Clean Air Act section 211(f)(4)." [See WIMS 7/21/09].

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Secretary Tom Vilsack issued a statement on the ethanol waiver request saying, "We are very encouraged that the results of the tests of E15 in newer model cars have been positive. The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) movement towards developing an effective labeling rule sends a strong signal about the future viability of the biofuels industry. Biofuels are a vital component of America's energy future, helping to break our dependence on oil. This commitment reflects the Obama Administration's support for a strong biofuels industry helping to increase income for farmers and jobs in rural America."

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) issued a release supporting EPA's decision to postpone approving any increase in the amount of ethanol allowed in gasoline saying, "More ethanol in gasoline could increase tailpipe pollution or damage older vehicles." UCS said, "The Obama administration is respecting the role of science and resisting industry pressure to put private interests ahead of public health and the environment. Raising ethanol blend percentages without testing what it would do to air quality and vehicle engines is like going in for surgery before getting a diagnosis. It wouldn't be good for the industry or the environment to rush ahead only to find out later that we guessed wrong."

Access a release from EPA (click here). Access links to EPA's letter to petitioners and complete background information on the E15 waiver (click here). Access the statement from USDA (click here). Access a release from UCS (click here).

National Vehicle Fuel Efficiency & GHG Emissions Standards Proposed

Sep 15: U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Secretary Ray LaHood and U.S. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson jointly proposed a rule establishing an "historic national program" that would improve vehicle fuel economy and reduce greenhouse gases. They said their proposal builds upon core principles President Obama announced with automakers, the United Auto Workers, leaders in the environmental community, governors and state officials in May [See WIMS 5/19/09], and would provide coordinated national vehicle fuel efficiency and emissions standards. The proposed program would also conserve billions of barrels of oil, save consumers money at the pump, increase fuel economy, and reduce millions of tons of greenhouse gas emissions.

EPA Administrator Jackson said, “American drivers will keep more money in their pockets, put less pollution into the air, and help reduce a dependence on oil that sends billions of dollars out of our economy every year. By bringing together a broad coalition of stakeholders -- including an unprecedented partnership with American automakers -- we have crafted a path forward that is win-win for our health, our environment, and our economy. Through that partnership, we’ve taken the historic step of proposing the nation’s first ever greenhouse gas emissions standards for vehicles, and moved substantially closer to an efficient, clean energy future.”

Transportation Secretary LaHood said, “The increases in fuel economy and the reductions in greenhouse gases we are proposing today would bring about a new era in automotive history. These proposed standards would help consumers save money at the gas pump, help the environment, and decrease our dependence on oil -- all while ensuring that consumers still have a full range of vehicle choices.”

Under the proposed program, which covers model years 2012 through 2016, automobile manufacturers would be able to build a single, light-duty national fleet that satisfies all Federal requirements as well as the standards of California and other states. The proposed program includes miles per gallon requirements under NHTSA’s Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards (CAFE) program and the first-ever national emissions standards under EPA’s greenhouse gas program. The collaboration of Federal agencies for this proposal also allows for clearer rules for all automakers, instead of three standards (DOT, EPA, and a state standard).

Specifically, the Agencies said the program would: Increase fuel economy by approximately five percent every year; Reduce greenhouse gas emissions by nearly 950 million metric tons; Save the average car buyer more than $3,000 in fuel costs; and Conserve 1.8 billion barrels of oil.

EPA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) have worked closely to develop the coordinated joint proposal and have met with many stakeholders including automakers to insure the standards proposed today are both aggressive and achievable given the current financial state of the auto industry. NHTSA and EPA expect automobile manufacturers would meet these proposed standards by improving engine efficiency, transmissions and tires, as well as increasing the use of start-stop technology and improvements in air conditioning systems. EPA and NHTSA also anticipate that these standards would promote the more widespread use of advanced fuel-saving technologies like hybrid vehicles and clean diesel engines.

NHTSA and EPA are providing a 60-day comment period that begins with publication of the proposal in the Federal Register. NHTSA has prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed CAFE standards. The Draft EIS compares the environmental impacts of the Agency’s proposal and reasonable alternatives. NHTSA is providing a 45-day comment period on the Draft EIS.

Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) issued a release saying passenger vehicles account for about 40 percent of all U.S. oil consumption and nearly 20 percent of all U.S. carbon dioxide emissions. EDF President Fred Krupp said, "This is a critical step to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and curb pollution that threatens our health. It will deliver immediate benefits for the country as Congress crafts comprehensive climate legislation." EDF indicated in their release that under the proposed new standards from EPA and NHTSA, vehicles would meet an estimated combined average emissions level of 250 grams of carbon dioxide (CO2) per mile in model year 2016, comparable to 35.5 miles per gallon. The proposed new standards would apply to model year 2012 to 2016 vehicles.

Access a release from DOT and EPA (click here). Access EPA's website on the proposal (click here). Access the NHTSA website on the proposal (click here). Access a release from EDF (click here).

EPA Proposes Stringent Standards for Ocean-Going Ships

Subscribers & Readers Note: WIMS will not be publishing tomorrow, Friday, July 3, 2009, which is the official Federal observance for the Fourth of July holiday. We will resume publishing on Monday, July 6, 2009.

Jul 1: U.S. EPA announced the its next steps in a coordinated strategy to "slash" harmful emissions from ocean-going vessels. EPA is proposing a rule under the Clean Air Act that sets tough engine and fuel standards for U.S. flagged ships that would harmonize with international standards and lead to significant air quality improvements throughout the country.

EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said, “These emissions are contributing to health, environmental and economic challenges for port communities and others that are miles inland. Building on our work to form an international agreement earlier this year, we’re taking the next steps to reduce significant amounts of harmful pollution from getting into the air we breathe. Lowering emissions from American ships will help safeguard our port communities, and demonstrate American leadership in protecting our health and the environment around the globe.”

The rule comes on the heels of a key part of EPA’s strategy, a proposal last March [See WIMS 3/30/09] by the United States and Canada to designate thousands of miles of the two countries’ coasts as an Emission Control Area (ECA). The International Maritime Organization (IMO), a United Nations agency, begins consideration of the ECA plan this month, which would result in stringent standards for large ships operating within 200 nautical miles of the coasts of Canada and the United States.

According to EPA, air pollution from large ships, such as oil tankers and cargo ships, is expected to grow rapidly in line with port traffic increases. By 2030, the domestic and international strategy is expected to reduce annual emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) from large marine diesel engines by about 1.2 million tons and particulate matter (PM) emissions by about 143,000 tons. When fully implemented, the coordinated effort would reduce NOx emissions by 80 percent and PM emissions by 85 percent compared to current emissions.

The emission reductions from the proposed strategy would yield significant health and welfare benefits that would span beyond U.S. ports and coastlines, reaching inland areas. EPA estimates that in 2030, this effort would prevent between 13,000 and 33,000 premature deaths, 1.5 million work days lost, and 10 million minor restricted-activity days. The estimated annual health benefits in 2030 as a result of reduced air pollution are valued between $110 and $280 billion at an annual projected cost of approximately $3.1 billion -- as high as a 90-to-1 benefit-to-cost ratio.

The proposed rulemaking is designed to reflect the IMO’s stringent ECA standards and broader worldwide program. The rule adds two new tiers of NOx standards and strengthens EPA’s existing diesel fuel program for these ships. It represents another milestone in EPA’s decade-long effort to reduce pollution from both new and existing diesel engines under the National Clean Diesel Campaign.

Environmental groups praised the action. Elena Craft, Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) Air Quality Specialist said, "Ships are floating smokestacks that deliver soot and smog straight to the heart of our most crowded coastal cities, home to 87 million Americans, so we are very pleased with this most recent action. Here in Houston for example, we urgently need improved clean air standards to protect the kids and families hard hit by pollution delivered by more than 8,000 vessels visiting our port every year."

In a related matter, beginning July 1, 2009, California will require ocean-going vessels to switch to progressively cleaner fuels despite a legal challenge mounted by the Pacific Merchant Shipping Association (PMSA). On Jun 30, the Eastern District of California denied PMSA’s motion for summary judgment, which if granted, would have derailed clean fuel rules designed to significantly reduce toxic emissions from ships that visit California’s ports. The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and Coalition for Clean Air are defendant-intervenors in the lawsuit PMSA filed on April 27, 2009.

The landmark low-sulfur fuel regulations adopted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) begin implementation with a second deadline on January 1, 2012 to require that all ocean-going vessels entering California ports switch to progressively cleaner fuels starting at 24 miles from California’s coast. Air pollution produced by ocean-going vessels exposes 80 percent of Californians to significant cancer risk and is responsible for claiming the lives of thousands of Californians annually and sickening hundreds of thousands across the state, according to NRDC.

NRDC explains that ocean-going vessels are very large and include large cargo vessels such as container vessels, tankers, bulk carriers, and car carriers, as well as passenger cruise vessels. The main engines on these vessels are as tall as a five story building and weigh 1,500 tons; they produce enough energy to power 30,000 houses. Ocean-going vessels typically use low-grade “bunker fuel.” Such fuel contains an average of about 25,000 parts per million (ppm) sulfur, as opposed to diesel fuel for trucks and other motor vehicles, which is limited to 15 ppm sulfur.

Access a release from EPA (click here). Access EPA's Ocean-Going Vessels website for extensive information on the proposed regulations (click here). Access the IMO website for additional information (click here). Access the EPA docket for this rulemaking for background documents and reviewing and submitting comments (click here). Access a release from EDF (click here). Access a release on the CARB case from NRDC (click here).

EPA Issues "California Waiver" For Vehicle GHG Controls

Jun 30: After years of intense legal and political wrangling, U.S. EPA is granting California’s waiver request enabling the state to enforce its greenhouse gas emissions standards for new motor vehicles, beginning with the current model year. EPA said, "Using the law and science as its guide, EPA has taken this action to tackle air pollution and protect human health."

EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said, “This decision puts the law and science first. After review of the scientific findings, and another comprehensive round of public engagement, I have decided this is the appropriate course under the law. This waiver is consistent with the Clean Air Act as it’s been used for the last 40 years and supports the prerogatives of the 13 states and the District of Columbia who have opted to follow California’s lead. More importantly, this decision reinforces the historic agreement on nationwide emissions standards developed by a broad coalition of industry, government and environmental stakeholders earlier this year.”

The first California waiver request was made in December 2005 and was subsequently denied in March 2008. This previous decision was based on a Bush-era interpretation of the Clean Air Act finding that California did not have a need for its greenhouse gas emission standards to meet “compelling and extraordinary conditions.” California made its request for a waiver of federal preemption under CAA Section 209(b), to permit enforcement of the State's new motor vehicle emission standards to control greenhouse gas emissions adopted in September 2005. The State subsequently submitted its waiver request to EPA in December that year.

Shortly after taking office in January, President Barack Obama directed EPA to assess the appropriateness of denying the waiver. EPA received a letter from California on January 21, 2009, raising several issues for Administrator Jackson to review regarding the denial. Last month, President Obama announced a first-ever national policy aimed at both increasing fuel economy and reducing greenhouse gas pollution for all new cars and trucks sold in the United States [See WIMS 5/19/09]. The new standards would cover model years 2012-2016. When the national program takes effect, California has committed to allowing automakers who show compliance with the national program to also be deemed in compliance with state requirements.

In a release, EPA indicated that with the decision to grant the California waiver, the Agency returns to its traditional legal interpretation of the Clean Air Act that has been applied consistently during the past 40 years. EPA finds that California continues to have a need for its motor vehicle emissions program, including the greenhouse gas standards. EPA also finds that the California program meets legal requirements regarding the protectiveness of public health and welfare as well as technological feasibility.

EPA said it based its decision on an extensive record of scientific and technical evidence. As part of the reconsideration, EPA revisited the prior decision documents and record. The Agency also opened a new comment period, including public hearings. The Clean Air Act gives EPA the authority to allow California to adopt its own emission standards for new motor vehicles due to the seriousness of the State’s air pollution challenges. There is a long-standing history of EPA granting waivers to the State of California.

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger issued a statement on EPA's action saying, "After being asleep at the wheel for over two decades, the federal government has finally stepped up and granted California its nation-leading tailpipe emissions waiver. This decision is a huge step for our emerging green economy that will create thousands of new jobs and bring Californians the cars they want while reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Thanks to the environmental commitment of President Obama and the continued leadership of state Senator Fran Pavley, California's long battle to reduce pollution from passenger vehicles is over, and a greener, cleaner future has finally arrived."

California is the only state under the Federal Clean Air Act, with the unique ability to set stricter-than-Federal standards for vehicles, as long as it gets a waiver from the Federal government. Once California receives a waiver from the Federal government, then other states can choose to adopt California's cleaner standards. Thirteen other states and the District of Columbia have adopted California's clean car standards. The thirteen other states, as of January 21, 2009, that have adopted California's standards include: Arizona, Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington.

The California release includes comments from a number of the other state Governors. For example: Vermont Governor Jim Douglas said, "The Obama Administration's decision to grant California a waiver for its standards restricting greenhouse gas emission from motor vehicles is a significant step in the right direction for Vermont and other states that adopted these standards. My commitment to reducing carbon emissions in Vermont is longstanding as Vermont has been fighting to join California in adopting these standards for some time now. . . Auto emissions are one of the main contributors to greenhouse gas concentrations. This is particularly true in Vermont where the transportation sector accounts for approximately 45 percent of our carbon footprint. That is why reducing an emission from automobiles is so important here in Vermont."

U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Chairman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works issued a statement saying, "The granting of this waiver will unleash innovative technologies that will create millions of clean energy jobs as we move toward new cleaner and more efficient vehicles. It should be comforting to the American people to know that the Environmental Protection Agency is now putting science and the law back into the driver’s seat rather than politics and special interests. I commend the Obama Administration for doing what is right for the people of California, the environment and the many states in the union that intend to follow California’s lead in cleaning up tailpipe emissions.”

Dave McCurdy, president and CEO, Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers (AAM) said, "President Obama’s decision last month to create a single national program for greenhouse gas emissions and fuel economy standards moves us toward a policy that ensures that consumers in all 50 states have access to highly fuel-efficient vehicles at an affordable price. We are hopeful the granting of this waiver will not undermine the enormous efforts put forth to create the national program. The President has succeeded in bringing three regulatory bodies, 15 states, a dozen automakers and many environmental groups to the table. The national program has launched a new beginning, a new chapter and a new era of cooperation. Automakers remain committed to working with all parties to further this single national program administered by the federal government."

AAM reported that EPA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) have initiated efforts to issue a joint rulemaking that is intended to reflect a coordinated and harmonized approach to implementing the Clean Air Act and the Energy Policy and Conservation Act. The rulemaking is expected to begin shortly and be concluded by March 30, 2010 and will apply to vehicles from MY 2012-2016.

James Fine, economist and policy scientist at Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) said, "Cleaner cars are a trifecta that will save families money at the gas pump, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and cut global warming pollution from tailpipes." EDF issued a new report, Saving Fuel, Saving Money, Saving Our Climate, that compares automobile fleets under two scenarios for years 2010 through 2030. The first scenario is based on current and projected Federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFÉ) standards. The second scenario is based on implementation of California's vehicle greenhouse gas performance standards (i.e., Clean Car Standards) through 2020, with continued progress through 2030. The Clean Car Standards can be achieved using existing technologies, including: alternative fuels, advanced tire technology, engine adjustments and improved air conditioning systems. Fine said, "This study shows that once these standards go into effect in these states, drivers will save billions of dollars, while dramatically reducing global warming pollution from tailpipes, one of the major sources of global warming pollution."

Access a release and audio clips from U.S. EPA (click here). Access EPA's CA Waiver website for extensive background information (click here). Access a release from Gov. Schwarzenegger that includes comments from other Governors (click here). Access a release from Sen. Boxer (click here). Access a release from AAM (click here). Access a release from EDF and link to the report (click here). For background information on the historical controversy see numerous WIMS-eNewsUSA blog posts (click here).

House Dems Push Back On Obama Short-Term Transportation Plan

Jun 24: Following the release of the Committee Print on June 22 [See WIMS 6/23/09], the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Subcommittee on Highways and Transit met and marked up and approved by voice vote the Print of the "Surface Transportation Authorization Act of 2009." The $500 billion bill authorizes the nation's surface transportation programs. The current authorization, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), expires on September 30, 2009. The bill will now go to the full committee for consideration sometime in July.

Full Committee Chair, James Oberstar (D-MN) said on release of the Committee Print that the bill, “lays out a plan to transform our surface transportation system so that it can meet today’s needs and tomorrow’s challenges. It restructures surface transportation programs to a performance-based framework to cut fatalities and injuries on our highways, bring highway, bridge, and public transit systems to a state of good repair, reduce congestion and greenhouse gas emissions, and support robust investment in our nation’s infrastructure.” Subcommittee Chair, Representative Peter DeFazio (D-OR) said the bill "provides our nation a vision and a path towards a 21st Century transportation system. It will make our highways safer, improve our roads and transit systems, make our businesses more competitive by reducing their costs due to time spent in traffic, and reduce the amount of time the average person spends in gridlock. This is an opportunity to move past broken policies of the past and move toward a more accountable and efficient future.”

The House action on the bill, is contrary to a June 17, request from U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Secretary Ray LaHood calling for an immediate, short-term 18-month highway reauthorization to replenish the Highway Trust Fund which may run out of money in late August [See WIMS 6/18/09]. LaHood said the Administration opposes a gas tax increase "during this challenging, recessionary period." Rather than the comprehensive bill being proposed by Oberstar, LaHood said, "we should not rush legislation. We should work together on a full reauthorization that best meets the demands of the country. The first step is making sure that the Highway Trust Fund is solvent. The next step is addressing our transportation priorities over the long term."

On June 24, the 32 Democratic members of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee sent a letter to President Obama expressing, "our profound disappointment in your Administration's proposal to extend the current surface transportation programs for 18 months. . . Your proposal fails to acknowledge the severity and urgency of the challenges facing the nation's surface transportation system at this critical time. . . The Administration's business-as-usual approach, with multiple extensions passed before enactment of a new multi-year highway, highway safety, and transit authorization act is unacceptable. That is the failed experience of the past. . .a piecemeal approach to fixing our transportation network will not work."

On the Senate side, the Senate Environment and Pubic Works Committee, Chaired by Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) held a hearing today (June 25) on the "Impacts of Expected Highway Trust Fund Insolvency." Senator Boxer has agreed with the Administration's short-term extension plan and said today, "I look forward to working with the Administration on this proposal, which would keep the recovery and job creation moving forward and give us the necessary time to pass a more comprehensive and transformational multi-year transportation authorization bill with stable and reliable funding sources." [Note: WIMS will report on the Senate hearing in tomorrow's report].

Access links to the Subcommittee's summary of subject matter and a video of the markup (click here). Access the June 24 letter to President Obama (click here). Access an announcement from Chairman Oberstar (click here). Access links to the Committee Print, Executive Summary, Federal Surface Transportation Framework, Blueprint for Investment and Reform and more from the T&I website (click here, scroll down to "Issues in the Spotlight").

Report Outlines A New Vision For U.S. Transportation Policy

Jun 9: Calling its recommendations a "framework for comprehensive reform," the Bipartisan Policy Center’s National Transportation Policy Project (NTPP) released its plan for transforming Federal surface transportation policy. If adopted by the Administration and Congress in this year’s authorization bill, the plan would constitute the first major overhaul of transportation policy in more than 50 years. It proposes restructuring Federal programs, updating the criteria for formulas, and creating a performance-based system that directly ties transportation spending to broader national goals, including economic growth, connectivity, accessibility, safety, energy security and environmental protection. Currently, transportation funding is distributed on a politically-driven basis with little analysis of benefits and no accountability for results.

According to a release, the plan has a strong bipartisan foundation. Under the leadership of former Detroit Mayor Dennis Archer, former Congressman Sherwood Boehlert, former Senator Slade Gorton, and former Congressman Martin Sabo, the NTPP -- a bipartisan group of 26 diverse members -- produced its plan -- Performance Driven: A New Vision for U.S. Transportation Policy -- as a blueprint for a new national transportation system that is efficient, effective, and accountable for performance.

As Congress is scheduled to take up reauthorization of the nation’s surface transportation law, SAFETEA-LU, this year, NTPP is calling for a complete restructuring of the Federal transportation funding system. To date, there is no Federal requirement to optimize returns on public investments, and programs are not structured to reward outcomes, or even to document them. Moreover, existing programs do little to target Federal support for transportation programs to further economic growth or link to jobs and productivity.

Senator Mark Warner (D-VA), an original co-founding chair of NTPP, attended the release announcement and commended NTPP’s bipartisan report. He especially praised the NTPP for advocating "a bottom-up approach to reform whereby states and metropolitan areas can develop their own solutions to transportation problems." He said, “This idea, called mode-neutrality, enables states like Virginia to make their own decisions about how to spend federal money as long as their investments meet accountability standards and promote national goals.”

NTPP also proposes holding all funding recipients accountable for their contributions to national goals. A new system of metrics would measure project performance in several areas: improved access, a more efficient national network, reduced corridor congestion and petroleum consumption, reduced CO2 emissions, and reduced fatalities and injuries. States and regions whose investments performed well against those goals would be entitled to bonus funding; areas that did not would be subject to greater Federal scrutiny in receiving transportation funding.

World Resources Institute (WRI), a member of the NTPP, issued a release on the report saying the recommendations are intended to create a thorough framework within the reauthorization of the transportation bill, which expires September 30. The NTPP calls for U.S. transportation funding to directly serve five clear goals: economic growth, connectivity, metropolitan access, energy and environment, and safety.

Nancy Kete, director of EMBARQ -- The World Resources Institute Center for Sustainable Transport, and one of the NTPP’s key members focused on the energy and environment goals said, "A transportation system that emits a full third of our greenhouse gases and is almost entirely dependent on oil is not sustainable from an economic, national security, or environmental perspective. I am pleased with how much the members have focused on ensuring that transportation policy is responsive to the 21st century challenges of energy security and climate change. We’re calling for a dramatic change in the way transportation investment decisions are made. A new bill must play a fundamental role in reducing greenhouse gases over the coming decades. Low-carbon fuels and the Obama administration’s decision to improve fuel economy standards will not be enough for us to reach our targets."

She continued saying, "States and localities will need to consider transportation-demand management measures. Congestion pricing, increasing the quality and supply of transit, and improving integrated transportation and land-use planning will help avoid GHG emissions in the future. The proposed new programs under the NTPP recommendations would allow states and localities full flexibility to meet national goals according to their needs and priorities. The accountability measures and incentive provisions will keep everyone on track towards cutting U.S. GHG emissions potentially required under the Waxman-Markey bill.”

Access a lengthy release (click here). Access the NTPP website for links to an executive summary, the complete report, a video of the launch press conference, project members and more (click here). Access a release and links to further information from WRI (click here).