GAO Finds Weakness In EPA Information Security Controls

Aug 20: The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report entitled, Information Security: Environmental Protection Agency Needs to Resolve Weaknesses (GAO-12-696, Jul 19, 2012). The report was requested by a bipartisan group of Chairman and Ranking members from the House Committee on Energy and Commerce and its Subcommittees.

 

    In background information, GAO indicates that U.S. EPA is responsible for protecting human health and the environment by implementing and enforcing the laws and regulations intended to improve the quality of the nation's air, water, and lands. The Agency's policies and programs affect virtually all segments of the economy, society, and government. In addition, it relies extensively on networked computer systems to collect a wealth of environmental data and to disseminate much of this information while also protecting other forms of sensitive or confidential information.

 

    Because of the importance of the security of EPA's information systems, GAO was asked to determine whether the Agency has effectively implemented appropriate information security controls to protect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the information and systems that support its mission. To do this, GAO tested security controls over EPA's key networks and systems; reviewed policies, plans, and reports; and interviewed officials at EPA headquarters and two field offices.

 

    GAO found that although EPA has taken steps to safeguard the information and systems that support its mission, security control weaknesses pervaded its systems and networks, thereby jeopardizing the Agency's ability to sufficiently protect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of its information and systems. The Agency did not fully implement access controls, which are designed to prevent, limit, and detect unauthorized access to computing resources, programs, information, and facilities.

 

    Specifically, the agency did not always: (1) enforce strong policies for identifying and authenticating users by, for example, requiring the use of complex (i.e., not easily guessed) passwords; (2) limit users' access to systems to what was required for them to perform their official duties; (3) ensure that sensitive information, such as passwords for system administration, was encrypted so as not to be easily readable by unauthorized individuals; (4) keep logs of network activity or monitor key parts of its networks for possible security incidents; and (5) control physical access to its systems and information, such as controlling visitor access to computing equipment.

 

    In addition to weaknesses in access controls, EPA had mixed results in implementing other security controls. For example, EPA conducted appropriate background investigations for employees and contractors to ensure sufficient clearance requirements had been met before permitting access to information and information systems. However,

• EPA had not always securely configured network devices and updated operating system and database software with patches to protect against known vulnerabilities.
• EPA had not always ensured equipment used for sanitization and disposal of media was tested to verify correct performance.

    GAO indicated that an underlying reason for the control weaknesses is that EPA has not fully implemented a comprehensive information security program. Although EPA has established a framework for its security program, the Agency has not yet fully implemented all elements of its program. Specifically, it did not always finalize policies and procedures to guide staff in effectively implementing controls; ensure that all personnel were given relevant security training to understand their roles and responsibilities; update system security plans to reflect current agency security control requirements; assess management, operational, and technical controls for agency systems at least annually and based on risk; and implement a corrective action process to track and manage all weaknesses when remedial actions were necessary. Sustained management oversight and monitoring are necessary for EPA to implement these key information security practices and controls. Until EPA fully implements a comprehensive security program, it will have limited assurance that its information and information systems are adequately protected against unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, disruption, or loss.

    GAO made 12 recommendations to the Administrator of EPA to fully implement elements of EPA's comprehensive information security program. In commenting on a draft of this report, EPA's Assistant Administrator generally agreed with GAO's recommendations. Two of GAO's recommendations were revised to incorporate EPA's comments. In a separate report with limited distribution, GAO also made 94 recommendations to EPA to enhance access and other information security controls over its systems.

    Energy and Commerce  Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI) commented on the report saying, "Our oversight has shed much-needed light on the vulnerability of confidential information at federal agencies. This report raises serious questions about EPA's dedication to ensuring robust information protection and underscores the urgency for the agency to address security weaknesses. We will continue our oversight with a review of EPA's implementation of GAO's recommendations in the coming months."

    Access the complete 45-page GAO report (click here). Access the release from the House Energy and Commerce  Committee (click here). [#All]

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

More Reaction To Appeals Court Decision On E15 Ethanol Waiver

Aug 17: Mixed reaction, mostly negative, continues regarding the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit opinion in the controversial E15 (15 ethanol mix with gasoline) split decision in Grocery Manufacturers Assoc. v. U.S. EPA [See WIMS 8/17/12]. The majority Appeals Court held that no petitioner had standing to bring this action and thus dismissed all petitions for lack of jurisdiction. The decision upholds U.S. EPA's granted waivers for the use of E15. In our initial report we indicated that both the American Petroleum Institute (API) and the Environmental Working Group (EWG) issued strong statements disagreeing with Court's ruling. Additional reactions are included below.

 

    The Renewable Fuels Association (RFA)  issued a release applauding the decision and indicated the approval for model year 2001 and newer light duty vehicles and all flex fuel vehicles represents nearly two-thirds of all vehicles on the road and almost 75% of vehicle miles driven. RFA indicated that since the initial waiver filing in March 2009, vehicles were tested using E15 for a combined six million miles, health effects data on E15 was collected and approved, and a first of its kind misfueling mitigation plan was required and approved in order for retailer[s] to offer E15. Today, at least one station in Lawrence, KS, is selling E15 under the conditions set by the partial waiver.

 

    RFA President and CEO Bob Dinneen said, "Today's decision is an important step forward in the nation's quest to diversify our nation's fuel supply. Adding an E15 option along side E10 and higher ethanol blends allows consumers to make the fuel decisions that work best for them and their vehicle. Ethanol has a thirty year track record of safe and effective use in the market place and that record will continue. Allowing for additional ethanol use will help lower prices at the pump, create domestic jobs, and accelerate the commercialization of new biofuel technologies."

 

    House Science, Space, and Technology Committee Chairman Ralph Hall (R-TX) released a statement on the ruling on E15 ethanol ruling saying, "I am disappointed that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit today, on purely jurisdictional grounds, dismissed a challenge to the Environmental Protection Agency's partial Clean Air Act waivers for mid-level ethanol blends. The ruling occurred despite the fact that two of the three judges found the petitioners had standing under Article III of the Constitution, and despite the Agency's failure to argue against standing in its own arguments. The majority opinion appears to ignore the near-universal agreement among automakers and engine manufacturers that these waivers will result in damaged engines and voided warranties. I agree with the dissenting opinion of Judge Kavanaugh, which concluded that 'EPA's E15 waiver is flatly contrary to the plain text of the statute.'"

    Chairman Hall indicated further in his release, "EPA's decision to grant a waiver to allow E15 in the marketplace was based on limited scientific analysis and testing. H.R.3199, bipartisan legislation endorsed by the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology earlier this year, would have required a more robust assessment of the state of the science on mid-level ethanol blends, a process that should have been undertaken by the waiver applicants and EPA prior to the Agency's issuance of waivers for E15. Instead, the Agency relied on a single test program conducted by the Department of Energy. More recent evidence suggests serious and legitimate concerns about E15's impacts on engine durability, and even EPA has flagged the risk of widespread misfueling for hundreds of millions of vehicles and engines currently in use. In light of elevated food prices amidst widespread drought conditions, the continued pursuit of greater volumes of corn ethanol in our fuel supply should be re-examined closely. "

    Senator James Inhofe (R-OK), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, commented on the ruling saying, "The federal court's decision to uphold EPA's plan to permit higher-level blends of ethanol is a huge loss for Oklahomans and consumers nationwide. My constituents in Oklahoma want to be able to use fuel compatible with their vehicles, without having to worry about what kind of damage higher blends of ethanol will do to their engines. This ruling just enables EPA to continue pushing too much corn ethanol too fast through the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS), a program that has had negative impacts on the safety of those operating vehicles and other equipment as well as food prices.

    "I voted against the 2007 Energy Bill because I knew that dramatically and rapidly increasing the mandated volumes was a bad idea. As this ruling demonstrates, Congress needs to step in with a legislative fix -- that's why I've introduced S.1085, the Fuel Feedstock Freedom Act, which would help mitigate some of the negative impacts of this policy by giving states the option not to participate in the corn ethanol portion of the Renewable Fuel Standard. Today's court ruling should be a wake-up call for the United States Senate to do its job, hold hearings on RFS2, and address the adverse impacts of this unrealistic program."

    The Global Automakers, represents international motor vehicle manufacturers, said it was disappointed with the decision. The Automakers said, "We disagree with the court's finding that automobile manufacturers do not have standing to challenge an agency action that permits the use of a fuel, such as E15, in automobiles not designed or warranted for such use. However, we are pleased that the dissent found that we would have won on the merits of the case and view the majority's ruling as a temporary legal setback." 

    In a related matter, a few days before the ruling the International Energy Agency's (IEA's) latest Oil Market Report (OMR) indicated that the production of fuel ethanol -- produced from fermenting sugar or starch bearing crops such as corn -- has dropped to around 800 thousand barrels per day (kb/d) in the U.S., the lowest level in two years. IEA indicated that this fall in the output of ethanol, which is blended with unleaded gasoline blend stock, follows the worst drought in 55 years in the U.S., which is severely affecting its key corn growing regions. The continued absence of rain in combination with very low U.S. corn stocks have driven up corn prices to record highs during the last weeks.

    The high corn prices, in combination with falling ethanol prices (reflecting in part a combination of a weak economy and automobile efficiency improvements), have slashed ethanol producers profit margins. This has led to a number of ethanol plants reducing or temporarily halting production, which has in turn prompted the two year low in ethanol output. The OMR noted, "Given the current situation, we see U.S. ethanol production at an average around 850 kb/d in 2012, 60 kb/d lower than in 2011."

    Access a release from RFA with links to more information (click here). Access a release from Rep. Hall (click here). Access a release from Sen. Inhofe (click here). Access the release from Global Automakers (click here). Access the complete release from IEA with links to related information (click here). Access the complete opinion and dissents (click here). Access EPA's E15 website for more information and background (click here). [#Energy/Ethanol]

GAO Confirms Research For More Restrictive Coal Dust Standard

Aug 17: The Government Accountability Office (GAO) conducted a performance audit and released a report entitled, Mine Safety: Reports and Key Studies Support the Scientific Conclusions Underlying the Proposed Exposure Limit for Respirable Coal Mine Dust (GAO-12-832R, Aug 17, 2012).

 

    GAO indicates in background information that coal mine dust is one of the most serious occupational hazards in the coal mining industry, and overexposure can cause coal workers' pneumoconiosis (CWP) and a number of other lung diseases, collectively referred to as black lung disease. CWP has been the underlying or contributing cause of death for more than 75,000 coal miners since 1968, according to the Department of Health and Human Services' (HHS) National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), the Federal agency responsible for conducting research on work-related diseases and injuries and recommending occupational safety and health standards. Since 1970, the Department of Labor (Labor) has paid over $44 billion in benefits to miners totally disabled by respiratory diseases (or their survivors), including CWP, through the Black Lung Benefits Program.

    In October 2010, Labor's Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) -- the Federal agency responsible for setting and enforcing mine safety and health standards -- proposed revising the existing standard for coal mine dust to lower the permissible exposure limit (PEL) from 2.0 milligrams of dust per cubic meter of air (mg/m3) to 1.0 mg/m3. Several coal mining companies and others have questioned the evidence and analytical methods used to support the proposed PEL. In the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012, Congress required that GAO review and report on the data collection, sampling methods, and analyses MSHA used to support its proposal. Although MSHA's proposed rule includes other provisions, this review focuses on MSHA's proposal to lower the PEL for coal mine dust from 2.0 mg/m3 to 1.0 mg/m3. To respond to this requirement, GAO addressed the following question: What are the strengths and limitations of the data and analytical methods MSHA used to support its proposal to lower the PEL for coal mine dust?

    GAO's evaluation of the reports MSHA used to support its proposal and the key scientific studies on which the reports were based shows that they support the conclusion that lowering the PEL from 2.0 mg/m3 to 1.0 mg/m3 would reduce miners' risk of disease. The reports and key studies concluded that miners' cumulative exposure to coal mine dust at the current PEL over their working lives places them at an increased risk of developing CWP, progressive massive fibrosis, and decreased lung function, among other adverse health outcomes. To mitigate the limitations and biases in the data, the researchers took reasonable steps, such as using multiple x-ray specialists to reduce the risk of misclassifying disease and making adjustments to coal mine dust samples where bias was suspected. In addition to addressing the limitations and biases in the data, researchers used appropriate analytical methods to conclude that lowering the existing PEL would decrease miners' risk of developing black lung disease.

    For example, GAO said that in addition to taking steps to precisely estimate a miner's cumulative exposure, the researchers accounted for several factors in their analyses -- such as the age of the miners, the carbon content of the coal (coal rank), and other factors known to be associated with the disease -- to better estimate the effect of cumulative exposure to coal mine dust. Further, the other studies GAO identified generally supported the conclusion that reducing the PEL would reduce miners' risk of disease.

    Access the complete 24-page letter report (click here). [#Air, #Energy/Coal]

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

GAO Looks At EPA Power Plant Regulations & Reliability Concerns

Aug 16: The Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report entitled, EPA Regulations and Electricity: Better Monitoring by Agencies Could Strengthen Efforts to Address Potential Challenges (GAO-12-635, Jul 17, 2012). The report was requested by Senator John Rockefeller (D-WV), Chairman of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.

 

    In background information GAO indicates that, U.S. EPA recently proposed or finalized four regulations affecting coal-fueled electricity generating units (EGU), which provide almost half of the electricity in the United States: (1) the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule; (2) the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards; (3) the proposed Cooling Water Intake Structures regulation; and (4) the proposed Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals regulation.

 

    Power companies may retrofit or retire some units in response to the regulations. EPA estimated two of the regulations would prevent thousands of premature deaths and generate $160-$405 billion in annual benefits. Some stakeholders have expressed concerns that these regulations could increase electricity prices and compromise reliability -- the ability to meet consumers' demand. FERC and others have oversight over electricity prices and reliability. DOE can order a generating unit to run in certain emergencies.

 

    GAO was asked to examine: (1) actions power companies may take in response to these regulations; (2) their potential electricity market and reliability implications; and (3) the extent to which these implications can be mitigated. GAO reviewed agency documents, selected studies, and interviewed stakeholders.

 

    GAO found that it is uncertain how power companies may respond to four key EPA regulations, but available information suggests companies may retrofit most coal-fueled generating units with controls to reduce pollution, and that 2 to 12 percent of coal-fueled capacity may be retired. Some regions may see more significant levels of retirements. For example, one study examined 11 states in the Midwest and projected that 18 percent of coal-fueled capacity in that region could retire. EPA and some stakeholders GAO interviewed stated that some such retirements could occur as a result of other factors such as lower natural gas prices, regardless of the regulations. Power companies may also build new generating units, upgrade transmission systems to maintain reliability, and increasingly use natural gas to produce electricity as coal units retire and remaining coal units become somewhat more expensive to operate.

 

    GAO indicates that available information suggests these actions would likely increase electricity prices in some regions. Furthermore, while these actions may not cause widespread reliability concerns, they may contribute to reliability challenges in some regions. Regarding prices, the studies GAO reviewed estimated that increases could vary across the country, with one study projecting a range of increases from 0.1 percent in the Northwest to an increase of 13.5 percent in parts of the South more dependent on electricity generated from coal. According to EPA officials, the agency's estimates of price increases would be within the historical range of price fluctuations, and projected future prices may be below historic prices.

 

    Regarding reliability, these actions are not expected to pose widespread concerns but may contribute to challenges in some regions. EPA and some stakeholders GAO interviewed indicated that these actions should not affect reliability given existing tools. Some other stakeholders GAO interviewed identified potential reliability challenges. Among other things, it may be difficult to schedule and complete all retrofits to install controls and to resolve all potential reliability concerns associated with retirements within compliance deadlines.

 

    GAO also finds that existing tools could help mitigate many, though not all, of the potential adverse implications associated with the four EPA regulations, but the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), Department of Energy (DOE), and EPA do not have a joint, formal process to monitor industry's progress in responding to the regulations. Some tools, such as state regulatory reviews to evaluate the prudence of power company investments, may address some potential price increases. Furthermore, tools available to industry and regulators, as well as certain regulatory provisions, may address many potential reliability challenges.

 

    However, because of certain limitations, these tools may not fully address all challenges where generating units needed for reliability are not in compliance by the deadlines. FERC, DOE, and EPA have responsibilities concerning the electricity industry, and they have taken important first steps to understand these potential challenges by, for example, informally coordinating with power companies and others about industry's actions to respond to the regulations. However, they have not established a formal, documented process for jointly and routinely monitoring industry's progress and, absent such a process, the complexity and extent of potential reliability challenges may not be clear to these agencies. This may make it more difficult to assess whether existing tools are adequate or whether additional tools are needed.

 

    GAO recommends, among other things, that FERC, DOE, and EPA take additional steps to monitor industry's progress in responding to the regulations. DOE and EPA agreed with this recommendation, and FERC disagreed with this and another

recommendation. GAO said it continues to believe that it is important for FERC to take the recommended actions.

 

    Access the complete 105-page report (click here). [#Energy/EGU]

 

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

Field Hearing On Controversial Hydropower Development & Jobs Act

Aug 15: On August 1, House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings (R-WA) introduced H.R.6247, the Saving Our Dams and New Hydropower Development and Jobs Act. According to a release from Chairman Hastings, the bill "protects and promotes hydropower resources by ending practices that diminish existing hydropower, cutting regulatory red-tape, generating new non-federal funding for new projects and improving transparency." He indicated that hydropower is a clean, renewable form of energy that accounts for 70 percent of electricity in Washington State, seven percent of electricity generated in the U.S. and prevents 200 million annual metric tons of carbon emissions.

    Chairman Doc Hastings said, "This bill represents a clear vision and common sense reforms for how our Nation can protect existing hydropower and jumpstart new hydropower in order to produce more of this emissions-free and low-cost renewable energy. This bill would officially recognize hydropower as renewable energy and help eliminate government roadblocks and frivolous litigation that stifle development. Hydropower is an essential part of an all-of-the-above energy plan, and its expansion would create thousands of new American jobs, grow our economy and protect the environment."

    Today (August 15), Chairman Hastings held a legislative field hearing on the bill in Pasco, Washington. According to the announcement, the bill is designed to "protect the Federal Columbia River Power System, Power Marketing Administration customers, and Bureau of Reclamation dams and other facilities and to promote new Federal and other hydropower generation."The invited witnesses included representatives from: Grant County Public Utility District; Washington Association of Wheat Growers; United Power Trades Organization; Benton County Public Utility District; The Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations; Idaho Council Member & Chairman of the Power Committee; Northwest Power & Conservation Council; and the Washington Potato Commission.

 

    The organization American Rivers, which was not invited to testify, issued a release saying the bill is "designed to muzzle critics of unsafe and environmentally destructive dams, while protecting lavish subsidies to irrigators and agribusinesses that derive their profits from those dams." Bob Irvin, President of American Rivers said, "This extreme proposal would jeopardize jobs, public safety, and the outdoor recreation industry that fuels the economic engines of so many communities across America."

    He said, "American Rivers strongly opposes this bill. It articulates a radical anti-environmental agenda. It caters to a few extremist water and power users that have received outlandish taxpayer support for decades and are unwilling to stop feeding at the public trough, no matter how much harm they inflict on rivers and the human and natural communities that depend on those rivers."

    In an opening statement at the hearing, Chairman Hastings said, "There is no disagreement about the importance of salmon recovery, but it must be clearly stated that dams are helping recovery. With significant improvements to Columbia and Snake River dams, more fish are in the river than before the dams were built-and fish survival past the dams are much higher than ever before-up to 98 percent in some cases. While some insist the choice is 'dams or fish', it's been proven we can have 'fish and dams.' . . .

    "Our current Northwest dam infrastructure cleanly powers our industries, businesses, jobs and families - and at low cost. But we must not be satisfied with the status quo. With ongoing threats to these dams and future development of hydropower as a renewable resource, we simply cannot take the status quo for granted. This is the purpose of the legislation that I've proposed and this hearing: to protect and promote our valuable hydropower assets."

 

    Among other provisions the bill would block imposition of the so called, "Chu Memo", ordered by the Secretary of Energy, that which Chairman Hastings said "could force power rate increases by BPA and other power marketing administrations (PMA's). The bill would also prohibit groups filing lawsuits against the government from collecting federal funds and grants. The Chairman said, "Why should taxpayers fund both defendants and plaintiffs?"

 

    The Chairman recounted that, "Back in 2000, the campaign to tear out the Snake River dams was waged as a full public debate, but the dam removal extremists lost that battle. They lost because the people of the Pacific Northwest know that removal of these dams would be an extreme action that would cost jobs, increase power rates, and harm the region's economy. And they lost because the science doesn't even show removal will actually recover fish. This defeat didn't end the single-minded agenda of the dam removal extremists. Over the past decade, they changed their tactics from the overt to the more covert - but they are as committed and well-funded as ever. They've poured their money into lawyers and lawsuits aimed at pressuring federal agencies and seeking to advance their agenda in the courts, and particularly in the courtroom of a Portland judge who's now admitted his anti-dam bias. . ."

 

    American Rivers highlighted a provision which they said would provide "An expensive new subsidy would give blanket permission to private water users to build new dams, whether or not they are in the public interest. Taxpayers would then be required to reimburse the full cost of the private parties' investment." Additionally, they called the provision denying federal funds to groups that initiate lawsuits, "a shameful and unprecedented attack on American constitutional protections of free speech, the right to seek redress from our government, equal access to justice, and due process of law."

    Access the hearing website for links to all testimony, statements, announcements and a video (click here). Access a release and summary information from American Rivers (click here). Access legislative details for H.R.6247 (click here). [#Energy/Hydro]

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

Wind Energy Layoffs, PTC Action, & Presidential Politics

Aug 9: A release from the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) indicates that layoffs are increasing in the U.S. wind industry manufacturing sector in the absence of a policy signal only Congress can provide: extension of the Production Tax Credit that has been the basis for rapid growth of U.S. jobs and manufacturing since 2005 [See WIMS 8/1/12]. On August 2, the Senate Finance Committee, Chaired by Max Baucus (D-MT), with Ranking Member Orrin Hatch (R-UT), approved the bipartisan Family and Business Tax Cut Certainty Act of 2012 by a vote of 19 to 5. The legislation includes many tax cuts for small businesses, working families, research and development and renewable energy, including the controversial Production Tax Credit (PTC) for wind energy projects. Congress is now on break until after Labor Day.

 

    AWEA reports that layoffs announced last week include: In Tulsa, OK, DMI Industries announced 167 workers will be unemployed by November; In West Fargo, ND, DMI Industries said 216 jobs stand at risk; In Little Rock, AR, LM Wind Power announced job reductions that will impact 94 full-time employees and 140 temporary workers and contractors; In Dallas, TX, Trinity Structural Towers said it will shift reposition resources away from wind turbine tower manufacturing.

 

    AWEA indicates that the recent layoffs add to a longer list that have already happened this year. Those include: Wind turbine manufacturer Gamesa furloughed 165 of its Pennsylvania-based workers (July 5, Bloomberg); Wind measurement technology manufacturer NRG Systems laid off 18 Vermont-based employees in May, and an additional 12 in July– the first time in 30 years the firm has had to make any layoffs (May 22, Windpower Monthly and July 18, Burlington Free Press); Wind turbine manufacturer Vestas laid off 182 employees (January 12, Huffington Post); Wind project developer Iberdrola Renewables laid off 50 U.S. employees, about half of whom were based in Oregon (January 25, North American Windpower); and Wind pattern analysis company Windlogics cut 10 of their Minnesota-based employees (July 2, Minnesota Public Radio)

 

    AWEA CEO Denise Bode said the four companies, all major wind component manufacturers, laying off employees last week "represent what is happening and will continue to happen across the country in the U.S. wind industry if these businesses are not provided the policy certainty they need to continue to invest in America and its workers. I'm deeply distressed that our wind industry colleagues are facing furloughs and layoffs due to lack of stable tax policy. Unfortunately the industry has begun letting workers go up and down our American manufacturing supply chain, which the industry has so proudly built up in support of the U.S. economy and made-in-the-USA manufacturing. Congress must act now to give wind energy a stable business environment to keep building this new industry and save 37,000 American jobs by the first quarter of next year."

 

    As WIMS has previously reported, an extension of the PTC enjoys widespread, bipartisan support from groups as diverse as the National Governors Association, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers, Edison Electric Institute, the American Farm Bureau Federation, environmentalists, labor unions, and others. Members of the House and Senate from both parties have indicated their agreement that the PTC should be renewed.

    Despite the widespread support for the PTC extension, President Obama and Republican candidate Mitt Romney have sharply different views. President Obama and most Democrats support the extension; however, candidate Romney's campaign has indicated its desire to let the PTC expire at the end of the year [See WIMS 8/1/12]. The Romney campaign website indicates, "The 'green' technologies are typically far too expensive to compete in the marketplace, and studies have shown that for every 'green' job created there are actually more jobs destroyed. Unsurprisingly, this costly government investment has failed to create an economic boom."

    On August 13, House Energy and Commerce Committee Ranking Member Henry Waxman released a Memo on Paul Ryan's Budget Cuts to Clean Energy, detailing cuts to key energy programs in the House Republican budget, which he authored and now the nominee for vice president on the Republican presidential ticket. The Ryan budget, which passed the House earlier this year with no Democratic support, would cut billions of dollars in funding for development of clean energy and eliminate programs that have helped support over 60,000 jobs. Rep. Waxman said, "The Ryan budget would reverse progress we have made to advance clean energy technologies. By cutting clean energy initiatives and jobs, while continuing to give billions of dollars in subsidies to oil and gas companies, the Ryan proposal would undermine American innovation and surrender the clean energy market to China.  That is not what the American people need."

    The Waxman memo highlights five areas in which the Ryan budget would have a significant impact on clean energy programs:  (1) it reduces support for energy efficiency and renewable energy initiatives; (2) it halts the Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing (ATVM) Loan Program; (3) it removes funding for loan guarantees for energy efficiency and renewable energy projects; (4) it eliminates support for green transmission projects; and (5) it maintains nearly $40 billion in tax breaks for oil and gas companies.

    The Romney for President website, under its energy plan, indicates, "To begin with, wind and solar power, two of the most ballyhooed forms of alternative fuel, remain sharply uncompetitive on their own with conventional resources such as oil and natural gas in most applications. Indeed, at current prices, these technologies make little sense for the consuming public but great sense only for the companies reaping profits from taxpayer subsidies. . . As for job creation, studies show that "green" jobs might actually hurt employment more than they help it. Green energy is capital-intensive and tends to displace labor. Indeed, the track record in Europe shows that new "green" jobs came at a steep cost. . . The price tag in subsidies was exorbitant, rising to nearly $1.5 million per job in the wind industry. . . The failure of windmills and solar plants to become economically viable or make a significant contribution to our energy supply is a prime example."

    Yesterday (August 13), at a campaign stop in Boone, Iowa, President Obama said, "My opponent and I disagree when it comes to homegrown energy like wind. Wind power is creating new jobs all across Iowa. But Governor Romney says he wants to end the tax credit for wind energy producers. Now, America generates more than twice as much electricity from wind than when I took office. That's right. The wind industry supports about 7,000 jobs right here in Iowa. Without these wind energy tax credits, those jobs are at risk -- 37,000 jobs across the country would be at risk. So my attitude is let's stop giving taxpayer subsidies to oil companies that don't need them, and let's invest in clean energy that will put people back to work right here in Iowa. That's a choice in this election."

    Today (August 14) the Department of Energy (DOE) released a 93-page report -- 2011 Wind Technologies Market Report -- highlighting strong growth in the U.S. wind energy market in 2011, increasing the United States' share of clean energy and supporting tens of thousands of jobs, and underscoring the importance of continued policy support and clean energy tax credits to ensure that the manufacturing and jobs associated with this booming global industry remain in America. According to the report, the United States remained one of the world's largest and fastest growing wind markets in 2011, with wind power representing a remarkable 32% of all new electric capacity additions in the United States last year and accounting for $14 billion in new investment. According the report, the percentage of wind equipment made in America also increased dramatically. Nearly seventy percent of the equipment installed at U.S. wind farms last year -- including wind turbines and components like towers, blades, gears, and generators -- is now from domestic manufacturers, doubling from 35% in 2005.

 

    The report finds that in 2011, roughly 6,800 megawatts (MW) of new wind power capacity was added to the U.S. grid, a 31% increase from 2010 installations. The United States' wind power capacity reached 47,000 MW by the end of 2011 and has since grown to 50,000 MW, enough electricity to power 13 million homes annually or as many as in Nevada, Colorado, Wisconsin, Virginia, Alabama, and Connecticut combined. The country's cumulative installed wind energy capacity grew 16% from 2010, and has increased more than 18-fold since 2000. The report also finds that six states now meet more than 10% of their total electricity needs with wind power.

 

    Access a release with further details and links to related information from AWEA (click here). Access a release and link to the Memo from Rep. Waxman (click here). Access the Romney Energy Policy (click here). Access the President's Boone, IA speech (click here). Access a release from DOE and link to the wind energy market report (click here). Access an interactive map of U.S. wind manufacturing facilities(click here). [#Energy/Wind]

 

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

CBO Estimates Revenues From Opening All Fed Lands To Drilling

Aug 9: The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has issued a report analyzing a proposal requested by the Chairman of the House Budget Committee, and now Mitt Romney's Vice Presidential running mate, Paul Ryan (R-WI) -- to immediately open most Federal lands to oil and gas leasing. CBO indicates that the proposal would open two categories of property now unavailable for development: (1) lands where leasing is statutorily prohibited, notably, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR); and (2) onshore and offshore areas that are closed to leasing under current administrative policies, including sections of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) and certain onshore areas in which oil and gas leasing is either restricted or temporarily prohibited. CBO estimates that about 70 percent of undiscovered oil and gas resources on federal lands are available for leasing under current laws and administrative policies.

CBO expects that opening ANWR to development would:

• Yield about $5 billion in additional receipts over the next 10 years, primarily in the form of bonus payments made by private firms for the opportunity to explore for and develop resources in particular areas.
• Increase royalties by roughly $2 billion to $4 billion a year during the 2023–2035 period if oil and natural gas eventually were produced from those lands. Those estimates are quite uncertain.
• Provide the state of Alaska between 50 percent and 90 percent of those federal receipts if the specifications in the authorizing legislation were similar to those in recent legislation.

    CBO anticipates that new legislation directing the Department of the Interior to immediately offer most other federal lands for oil and gas leasing without any restrictions would accelerate the collection of around $2 billion of future leasing receipts into the next decade. Most of that revenue would come from OCS leases, and a portion of the proceeds would be shared with state governments. CBO expects that state and local policies toward resource development, particularly in California, will play a major role in determining whether or when those resources are developed.

    CBO also estimates that under current laws and policies, the government's gross proceeds from all federal oil and gas leases on public lands will total about $150 billion over the next decade, 2012–2022. Neither Representative Ryan, or Budget Committee Ranking Member Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) responded to the report. An LA Times article on the report indicated that the CBO estimate of opening ANWR, parts of the Atlantic, Pacific and Florida coasts together would yield $7 billion over the next decade -- "less than 5% of the $150 billion the federal budget already stands to get over that period from oil and gas leases on federal land already open to drilling."   

 

    Access a summary from CBO (click here). Access the complete 9-page CBO analysis (click here). Access the LA Times article(click here). [#Energy/OilGas]

 

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

UN Launches Sustainable Development Solutions Network

Aug 9: United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon launched a new independent global network of research centers, universities and technical institutions to help find solutions for some of the world's most pressing environmental, social and economic problems. The Sustainable Development Solutions Network will work with stakeholders including business, civil society, UN agencies and other international organizations to identify and share the best pathways to achieve sustainable development. 

    According to a release from the UN, this initiative is part of the work undertaken in response to the mandate on post-2015 and the outcome of UN Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20), which took place in Rio De Janeiro, Brazil, in June. The Solutions Network will be directed by Professor Jeffrey Sachs, director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University and Special Advisor to Secretary-General Ban on the global anti-poverty targets known as the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). It will operate in close coordination with the High-level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda.   

    Secretary-General Ban said, "The post-2015 objectives will help the world to focus on the vital challenges of sustainable development and the Sustainable Development Solutions Network will be an innovative way to draw upon worldwide expertise in the campuses, universities, scientific research centers and business technology divisions around the world."

    The High-level Panel will advise on the global development agenda beyond 2015, the target date for achieving the MDGs, and it will hold its first meeting at the end of September, in the margins of the annual high-level debate of the General Assembly. It is expected to submit its findings to the Secretary-General in the first half of 2013, and those findings will inform his report to Member States. The eight MDGs, agreed on by world leaders at a UN summit in 2000, set specific targets on poverty alleviation, education, gender equality, child and maternal health, environmental stability, HIV/AIDS reduction, and a 'Global Partnership for Development.'

    According to the news release, given that politics around the world too often focuses on short-term issues while governments often lack the timely information needed for long-term sustainable-development strategies, it is essential that scientists and technology experts outside of government support the development of long-term analyses, demonstration programs and development pathways. The SDSN is expected to provide an independent global, open and inclusive process to support and scale up problem-solving at local, national and global levels.

    Sachs said, "In the 20 years since the first Rio Earth Summit, the world has largely failed to address some of the most serious environmental and social problems pressing in on us. We can't afford business as usual. We need to engage the academic and scientific community, and tap into worldwide technological know-how in the private sector and civil society, in order to develop and implement practical solutions." Substantial emphasis will be placed on collaboration across countries to analyze common problems and learn from each other's experiences. The network will accelerate joint learning and help to overcome the compartmentalization of technical and policy work by promoting integrated "systems" approaches to addressing the complex economic, social and environmental challenges confronting governments.

    Ted Turner, global business leader, philanthropist and founder of CNN and the United Nations Foundation, will work together with other leaders in sustainable development to help guide and advise the network. Turner said, "We need development solutions based in science, and we need them now. The future of the planet and its people is at stake. The new Sustainable Development Solutions Network aims to promote smart and effective action ‐‐ before it's too late." said Turner.

 

    The SDSN website, which is scheduled to officially launch on September 1, notes that, "The scale of the global sustainable development challenge is unprecedented. The fight against extreme poverty has made great progress under the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), but more than 1 billion people continue to live in extreme poverty. Inequality and social exclusion are widening within most countries. With the world at 7 billion people and current annual GDP of US$70 trillion, human impacts on the environment have already reached dangerous levels. As the world population is estimated to rise to 9 billion by 2050 and global GDP to more than US$200 trillion, the world urgently needs a framework for sustainable development that addresses the challenges of ending poverty, increasing social inclusion, and sustaining the planet."

 

    Access a release from the UN (click here). Access the SDSN website for complete information (click here). Access a second release from the UN with additional information (click here). [#Sustain]

Rep. Waxman Wants Keystone XL EIS To Address Climate Change

Aug 8: House Energy and Commerce Committee Ranking Member Henry Waxman (D-CA) sent a letter to Assistant Secretary Kerri-Ann Jones regarding the State Department's pending evaluation of the environmental impacts of TransCanada's revised Keystone XL pipeline proposal. In the letter Rep. Waxman writes, "The revised Keystone XL tar sands pipeline proposal presents the question of whether it is in the national interest of the United States to approve a project to significantly increase imports of one of the most carbon-intensive sources of transportation fuel in the world. Much of the intense public opposition to the pipeline stems from concerns about its effects on climate change. For these reasons, I again urge the State Department to conduct a thorough and meaningful analysis of how approval of this project might affect the threat of climate change."

 

    Representative Waxman said, "The most critical issue that the State Department must evaluate in the EIS is the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline's implications fro climate change. Extraction of tar sands bitumen requires far more energy than extraction of conventional oil, and over its lifecycle, tar sands bitumen produces substantially greater greenhouse gas emissions than conventional oil. For example, the final EIS highlights a DOE study indicating that tar sands crude produces 17% higher greenhouse gas emissions over its lifecycle compared to the U.S. 2005 average fuel, while other studies have somewhat higher or lower estimates."

 

    On June 15, 2012, the State Department published its Notice of Intent To Prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) and To Conduct Scoping and To Initiate Consultation Under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act for the Proposed TransCanada Keystone XL Pipeline Proposed To Extend From Phillips, MT (the Border Crossing) to Steele City, NE.

 

    TransCanada proposes to construct and operate a crude oil pipeline and related facilities from an oil supply hub near Hardisty, Alberta, Canada to the northernmost point of the existing Keystone Pipeline Cushing Extension at Steele City, Nebraska. The pipeline is anticipated to be 1,179 miles long (329 miles of that are in Canada) and has an initial capacity of 830,000 barrels per day. To connect the Canadian and U.S. portions of the pipeline project, TransCanada must first obtain a Presidential Permit from the Department of State authorizing the construction, operation, and maintenance of the pipeline and related facilities at the international border.

 

    Interestingly, the State Department Federal Register SEIS notice does not mention the word "climate" or "climate change." The notices indicates that, in the SEIS, the Department of State will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of the construction and operation of the revised proposed project under these general headings: Geology and soils; Water resources; Fish, wildlife, and vegetation; Threatened and endangered species; Cultural resources; Land use, recreation and special interest areas; Visual resources; Air quality and noise; Socioeconomics; Environmental Justice; and, Reliability and safety.

 

    The State Department indicates on its website that, "We are cooperating with the state of Nebraska, as well as other relevant State and Federal agencies, in the review of the application. In June 2012, Governor Heinemann of Nebraska said that their review of the new proposed route will take six to ten months. Last November when we announced consideration of an alternate route through Nebraska, our best estimate on timing was that we would complete the review process in the first quarter of 2013. We will conduct our review in a rigorous, transparent and efficient manner, using existing analysis as appropriate." 

 

    The State Department also announced that it has selected Environmental Resources Management (known as "ERM") to serve as an independent third-party contractor for its environmental review of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline project. ERM will assist the Department in conducting a thorough analysis of both the new route in Nebraska (in cooperation with the State of Nebraska) and any relevant information that has become available. The Department will post a copy of the contract and organizational conflicts of interest disclosures on the State Department website as soon as possible after redaction of any confidential business information.

    Access the release from Rep. Waxman and link to the complete 5-page letter (click here). Access the Federal Register announcement (click here). Access the State Department website for the project (click here). Access the TransCanada hosted project website (click here). Access archived documents (click here). [#Energy/PipelineXL]

 

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

NAS Report On Identifying & Destroying Buried Chemical Munitions

Aug 6: The National Academy of Sciences' National Research Council has issued a new report indicating that the current approach for identifying and destroying buried chemical munitions and related chemical warfare materials uncovered during environmental remediation projects is neither reliable enough nor has the capability to efficiently tackle large-scale projects. An alternative or modified approach is needed to remediate the Redstone Arsenal and other such projects on active and former U.S. Department of Defense sites and ranges. The Redstone Arsenal facility in Alabama -- the site with the largest quantity of buried CWM in the U.S., and which has groundwater contamination -- is presented as a case study to show how issues raised in the report can be practically applied. 

   

    Following a 1985 directive from Congress, the Army has undertaken the monumental task of destroying the existing U.S. stockpile of chemical weapons. To date, 90 percent of the stockpile has been destroyed, and the remaining 10 percent is expected to be destroyed by 2022. However, during the early- to mid-20th century, chemical weapons and chemical warfare materiel were often disposed of by open pit burning and burial at approximately 250 sites in 40 states, the District of Columbia, and three territories. Remediation of this buried materiel, in addition to environmental cleanup of the burial sites, therefore poses significant challenges to the nation and DOD. The report examines important regulatory issues that ultimately affect the need, timing, and costs of remediating these sites. Federal and state environmental remediation policies address whether buried CWM must be excavated and destroyed or contained in place.

 

    Additionally, the report recommends that the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Army each select a single office to manage and fund recovered chemical warfare materiel (RCWM) remediation activities for DOD. Currently, authority and funding for RCWM activities depend on how and where the materiel is discovered, and could fall under multiple offices of either the secretary of defense or the Army Secretariat. The report indicates that the Army mission for RCWM remediation is turning into a much larger program that will rival those for conventional munition and hazardous substance cleanup and is expected to cost billions of dollars over several years. A clear organizational structure and long-term funding are needed.  

 

    The report calls for the secretary of the Army to establish a new position at the level of the senior executive service (civilian) or a general officer (military) to lead the RCWM program. The secretary should delegate full responsibility and accountability for RCWM program performance to this person, including for planning, budgeting, and execution and for day-to-day oversight, guidance, management, and direction of the program. 

 

    To destroy any intact chemical munitions uncovered during remediation efforts, teams will most likely use either the Army's Explosive Destruction System (EDS) or one of three commercially available technologies. The EDS is an effective and reliable technology, and the Army has an active research and development program under way to improve the throughput rate, or speed at which chemicals can be identified. The three commercially available destruction technologies have higher throughput rates, but reliability problems were encountered when one of these -- the Dynasafe Static Detonation Chamber -- was recently used to destroy a portion of stockpiled munitions in Anniston, AL. The report recommends ways to alleviate these problems and suggests alternatives to the EDS and commercial systems. Also explored is the potential use of robotic systems to access and remove buried CWM.

 

    The lack of an accurate inventory of buried munitions and of a reliable cost estimate for the RCWM program makes it difficult to establish precise, long-term budget requirements and draw up a funding plan for an RCWM program going forward that has the level of certainty typically associated with DOD project implementation. The report recommends as a "matter of urgency" that the secretary of defense increase funding for the remediation of chemical warfare materiel to enable the Army to complete the inventories of known and suspected buried chemical munitions no later than 2013 and develop a quantitative basis for overall funding of the program, with updates as needed to facilitate accurate budget forecasts. Pending establishment of a final RCWM management structure, this task should be assigned to the director of the Army's Chemical Materials Agency as chair of the provisional RCWM integrating office.

 

    Access a release from NAS (click here). Access the complete 144-page report and related information (click here). [#Remed, #Haz, #Water]

 

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

U.S. Settles With Gibson Guitar On Lacey Act Violations

Aug 6: The U.S. Department of Justice announced that Gibson Guitar Corp. entered into a criminal enforcement agreement with the U.S. resolving a criminal investigation into allegations that the company violated the Lacey Act by illegally purchasing and importing ebony wood from Madagascar and rosewood and ebony from India. The agreement was announced by Assistant Attorney General Ignacia S. Moreno of the Justice Department's Environment and Natural Resources Division, Jerry Martin, U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Tennessee and Dan Ashe, Director of the Department of the Interior's U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.

 

    According to a release, the criminal enforcement agreement defers prosecution for criminal violations of the Lacey Act and requires Gibson to pay a penalty amount of $300,000. The agreement further provides for a community service payment of $50,000 to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation to be used to promote the conservation, identification and propagation of protected tree species used in the musical instrument industry and the forests where those species are found. Gibson will also implement a compliance program designed to strengthen its compliance controls and procedures. In related civil forfeiture actions, Gibson will withdraw its claims to the wood seized in the course of the criminal investigation, including Madagascar ebony from shipments with a total invoice value of $261,844.

           

    In light of Gibson's acknowledgement of its conduct, its duties under the Lacey Act and its promised cooperation and remedial actions, the government will decline charging Gibson criminally in connection with Gibson's order, purchase or importation of ebony from Madagascar and ebony and rosewood from India, provided that Gibson fully carries out its obligations under the agreement, and commits no future violations of law, including Lacey Act violations.

 

    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Director Ashe noted, "The Lacey Act's illegal logging provisions were enacted with bipartisan support in Congress to protect vanishing foreign species and forest ecosystems, while ensuring a level playing field for America's forest products industry and the people and communities who depend on it. We're pleased that Gibson Guitar Corp. has recognized its duties under the Lacey Act to guard against the acquisition of wood of illegal origin from threatened forests and has taken responsibility for actions that may have contributed to the unlawful export and exploitation of wood from some of the world's most threatened forests."

 

    Since May 2008, it has been illegal under the Lacey Act to import into the United States plants and plant products (including wood) that have been harvested and exported in violation of the laws of another country. Congress extended the protections of the Lacey Act, the nation's oldest resource protection law, to these products in an effort to address the environmental and economic impact of illegal logging around the world.

 

    Gibson Guitar CEO, Henry Juszkiewicz commented on the settlement saying, "We felt compelled to settle as the costs of proving our case at trial would have cost millions of dollars and taken a very long time to resolve. This allows us to get back to the business of making guitars. An important part of the settlement is that we are getting back the materials seized in a second armed raid on our factories and we have formal acknowledgement that we can continue to source rosewood and ebony fingerboards from India, as we have done for many decades."

    The Gibson release states, "Despite the fact that, '...the government acknowledges that Gibson has cooperated with the Government and the investigation conducted by the Fish and Wildlife Service', Gibson was subject to two hostile raids on its factories by agents carrying weapons and attired in SWAT gear where employees were forced out of the premises, the production was shut down, goods were seized as contraband, and threats were made that would have forced the business to close."

    Juszkiewicz continued, "We feel that Gibson was inappropriately targeted, and a matter that could have been addressed with a simple contact a caring human being representing the government. Instead, the Government used violent and hostile means with the full force of the U.S. Government and several armed law enforcement agencies costing the tax payer millions of dollars and putting a job creating U.S.manufacture[r] at risk and at a competitive disadvantage. This shows the increasing trend on the part of government to criminalize rules and regulations and treat U.S. businesses in the same way drug dealers are treated. This is wrong and it is unfair. I am committed to working hard to correct the inequity that the law allows and insure there is fairness, due process, and the law is used for its intended purpose of stopping bad guys and stopping the very real deforestation of our planet."

    Gibson published the full agreement and an attached Statement of Facts that both the Government and Gibson agreed and a list of possible questions and answers from the company. Gibson invited anyone to "independently draw their own conclusions."

    Representatives Edward Markey (D-MA) and Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) issued a release applauding the settlement. Rep. Markey said, "Gibson's admission of wrongdoing is a win for the Lacey Act, a win for US jobs and a win for consumers who can be assured that illegally trafficked 'blood wood' won't be used to make their guitars. Gibson, the Tea Party and House Republicans attempted to gut the Lacey Act by changing the law in Congress before the case against the guitar maker was resolved. I commend the hard and deliberate work of the Fish and Wildlife Service and the Justice Department to bring this case to a close. I thank the U.S. hardwood and paper industries, who stood up for keeping jobs in America, rather than allowing cheap, illegal wood products from other countries to flood the market. I would also like to praise Sting, Dave Matthews Band, and Guster, along with the multitude of musicians and other individuals who stood up for the Lacey Act and who pledged to use legal, sustainable musical instruments. Let's keep the good tunes on good wood coming." 

 

    Rep. Blumenauer said, "This is another example of the Lacey Act working to protect valuable natural resources and positively reforming the global market for timber products. Not only has Gibson agreed to pay a penalty and forfeit its ill-gotten wood from Madagascar, but this case sends a message to other companies who think they can ignore the laws: The Lacey Act is on the job. The Lacey Act has been, and will continue to be, an effective tool in the fight to protect U.S. jobs and the environment." The Lacey Act was the focus of a House Natural Resources Committee hearing on May 8, 2012.

 

   Adam Grant, Senior Associate with World Resources Institute (WRI) issued a statement on the settlement saying, "This agreement closes an important chapter on the first major investigation and by far the most publicized cases under the 2008 amendments to the U.S. Lacey Act. The decision demonstrates that the Lacey Act has teeth. It shows that the law can be enacted with serious, but balanced penalties for violations. Fair enforcement of the Lacey Act, the world's first ban on the importation of illegally sourced wood, is important to ensure that the wood comes into the U.S. from legal sources. We are hopeful that this case will provide incentive to other wood product providers -- and their suppliers -- to engage in legal purchasing of wood and help protect endangered forests."

 

    Access a lengthy release with further details about the settlement (click here). Access the Gibson Guitar release, statement of facts, the full settlement language and list of Q&A's (click here). Access the statement from Reps. Markey & Blumenauer and link to the Pledge and musicians signing it (click here). Access the statement from WRI (click here). Access the House hearing on the Lacey Act with extensive testimony and a webcast (click here). [#Land, #Climate]

 

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals