The environment in the news wednesday April 6, 2011

Chesapeake Bay Foundation calls for comprehensive federal analysis of Marcellus Shale drilling
Associated Press, 4 April 2011
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/chesapeake-bay-foundation-calls-for-comprehensive-federal-analysis-of-marcellus-shale-drilling/2011/04/04/AFakBbZC_story.html

The foundation said it has filed a petition under the National Environmental Policy Act calling for a review known as a programmatic environmental impact statement. The petition was signed by a number of environmental groups and more than 120 businesses, organizations and elected officials have also signed a letter to the president supporting the petition, the bay foundation said.

Assessments are under way, but none is comprehensive, the groups said.

An ongoing review by the federal Environmental Protection Agency, for example, deals with the impact on drinking water, said CBF attorney Amy McDonnell.

The foundation would like one review that also takes into account the impact on groundwater, air pollution and other areas, McDonnell said.

“Basically to look at everything. That is what the EPA study is going to fail to do,” said CBF attorney Amy McDonnell.

Hydraulic fracturing uses water and chemicals to break rock formations and free gas.

The process injects millions of gallons of chemical-laced water into shale thousands of feet underground to create cracks that release natural gas. That has raised concerns it will contaminate drinking water supplies, and participants in a bay foundation teleconference said there are also concerns about runoff from well sites, industrialization of rural areas, and other issues.

The Marcellus Shale formation runs beneath western Maryland, western Virginia, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, New York and Ohio.

The federal government is obligated by law to ensure drilling won’t adversely affect human health or the environment. However, multiple agencies have some authority over different aspects of drilling, McDonnell said.

“So, in order to make sure the cracks are filled, we need to have a cumulative impact study done to see where the cracks are and how we address those issues,” McDonnell said.

If a review is not conducted, the groups could sue to force the government to conduct one, a step that has been successfully taken in the past, McDonnell said.

CBF Pennsylvania Executive Director Matt Ehrhart noted 3,500 new permits are expected this year in the state with each site covering an average of four to six acres. Those sites also will generate thousands of trips by trucks to and from the sites, he noted.

How that activity affects the pollution limits set for the six states under the EPA’s bay restoration strategy is not well known, Ehrhart said.

Maryland lawmakers, for example, are considering a bill that would restrict natural gas drilling until a two-year study is completed, and New York has had a moratorium on gas drilling in the Marcellus Shale since 2008 while the new rules are being developed.

“There’s not a lot of information out there, which is precisely why we’ve taken this path,” Ehrhart said.

Deal needed to avoid budget train wreck; Dems push for $33 billion, Republicans want more cuts
Associated Press, 4 April 2011
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/deal-needed-to-avoid-budget-train-wreck-dems-push-for-33-billion-republicans-want-more-cuts/2011/04/04/AFnlikZC_story.html

Failure to reach a deal for the rest of this budget year, which ends on Sept. 30, could lead to a partial shutdown of the government when spending authority expires at midnight on Friday. It is unclear which side would absorb public blame and anger for such a dramatic turn of events. But there was likely to be political damage, and mainstream members of both parties say they want to avoid a shutdown.

At issue are cuts to so-called discretionary programs, the cost of running various government agencies that use only 12 percent of the federal budget.

Republicans took control of the House in a landslide last November with much of their success built around tea-party-aligned candidates elected on the promise of lower taxes, less spending and smaller government. Nearly six weeks ago, the House passed a bill calling for $61 billion in cuts in discretionary spending for the remainder of the year.

The Senate, which also must approve such a measure, never took it up.

Instead both houses of Congress have passed two short-term spending laws to keep government open while cutting $10 billion out of this year’s budget. That appropriation runs out Friday. Late last week, Obama said that compromise was close with Republicans on $33 billion in cuts, and he warned that without a deal the ensuing government shutdown would “jeopardize our economic recovery” just as jobs are finally being created.

There are indications the $33 billion figure may truly be in play, with sufficient votes lined up among mainstream House Republicans and Democrats. But House Speaker John Boehner is denying a deal is in the works, apparently fearing he would alienate the Republican tea party conference and damage party solidarity in advance of the coming 2012 presidential election. Many of the 87 new Republican House members say they will not go for a compromise.

What’s more, the huge political divisions may only harden on Tuesday when Republicans reveal their plans to further slash government outlays for the next fiscal year, a spending outline that was expected to call for profound changes in funding for U.S. social safety net programs, particularly government-funded health care for the elderly and the poor.

Those programs, known as Medicare and Medicaid, along with Social Security pension benefits and defense spending consume the vast majority of government spending. None of them is under consideration in the current battle over cuts for the remainder of this fiscal year, even though a special Obama commission on the debt has recommended dramatic changes in all that spending and in the American tax laws.

Obama has said little about the commission recommendations and sought to remain publicly above the fray, instead focusing his message on repairing the recession-ravaged economy and reducing unemployment.

He weighed in, however, after good news on the jobs front last Friday.

“Given the encouraging news we received today on jobs, it would be the height of irresponsibility to halt our economic momentum because of the same old Washington politics,” he said.

“It can’t be ‘my way or the highway politics,’” said the president. “We know that a compromise is within reach. And we also know that if these budget negotiations break down, it could shut down the government and jeopardize our economic recovery.”

Shortly before Obama spoke, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid shifted the Democrats’ position on one key element of the talks, in apparent deference to environmentalists angered by an earlier concession.

House Republicans included provisions in their $61 billion package of spending cuts that would block the Environmental Protection Agency from implementing regulations on a variety of industries that would cut emissions of climate changing greenhouse gases.

“Neither the White House or the Senate leaders is going to accept any EPA riders,” he said in a conference call with reporters.

The spending conflict also is playing out under the shadow of the upcoming requirement for Congress to vote on increasing the amount of money the government can borrow. Democrats cannot increase the debt ceiling without Republican support in both the Senate and House. The Treasury Department estimates the government will hit the $14.3 trillion debt ceiling sometime between April 15 and May 31. The administration has warned Congress that failing to raise the debt limit would lead to an unprecedented default on the national debt.

This pivotal week will test congressional abilities to compromise on a plan that moves some distance toward reducing deficit spending. Republicans warn the practice is leading toward the decline of American power and influence, and Democrats argue that cuts cannot be too Draconian in the face of a weak economic recovery and the needs of middle- and lower-income Americans.

House Republicans are willing to deal when it comes to budget riders to hobble the EPA.

One of the many sticking points in the budget brawl under way on Capitol Hill is the slew of controversial amendments House Republicans are pushing for in a short-term spending bill — including riders to limit federal spending on EPA rules, Planned Parenthood and other hot-button issues.

But many GOP lawmakers — including staunchly conservative freshmen — say they’re not drawing lines in the sand when it comes to hamstringing the Obama administration’s environmental policies.

“I want to see spending cuts, and that’s right now where I think the speaker is and where the majority of the caucus is,” freshman Republican Rep. Cory Gardner of Colorado told POLITICO on Monday night after a caucus meeting about the budget negotiations. “I haven’t seen anybody say that they have to have this or that on the EPA.”

Gardner serves on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, with jurisdiction over EPA rules.

Another Energy and Commerce Committee freshman, Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.), said he’d be willing to do without EPA riders if the spending cuts were big enough. “It might be a deal-maker; it wouldn’t be a deal-breaker,” he said of attaching EPA amendments. “I’m very concerned about debt as well.”

House Republicans cleared a spending bill in February for the remainder of the fiscal year that included riders to limit EPA rules on issues including climate change, mountaintop mining and water pollution. But those riders have caused friction in the tense budget negotiations, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told reporters last week that EPA was one area where Senate Democrats refuse to budge. Reid has said that the Senate will consider some GOP policy riders in order to strike a deal.

Of the amendments Republicans are pushing for, EPA isn’t at the top of the list for some. Rep. Lee Terry (R-Neb.) said he’s heard demands from his colleagues for amendments to defund Planned Parenthood and the administration’s health care policies, but not for EPA riders.

“The biggest thing I hear at home is defund Obamacare,” said Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.), "so if there is a major rider that’s probably the big issue that people bring back from their districts, it’s probably Obamacare.”

And despite overwhelming support in their caucus to stifle EPA regs, House Republicans appear willing to use other venues like stand-alone bills or future budget deals to attack agency rules.

“We’d like to have it,” Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) said of EPA pre-emption, but “that’s something that we can work on in [fiscal year 2012] and do it in a more deliberative fashion, so we’ll see.”

House Republicans have offered a spate of additional bills so far this Congress aimed at limiting EPA regulations, and the House is slated to vote Wednesday on legislation from Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) to unravel EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases. Still, many EPA critics see budget negotiations as their best bet to curtail the agency because while many of those measures can likely clear the House, they’ll have trouble making it through the Democratic-led Senate and winning the president’s approval.