Just How Destructive Will Bush's Last-Minute Deregulations Be?

As the media focuses on President-elect Obama and the transition of power here in Washington, the Bush administration is quietly trying to push through a wide array of federal regulations before President Bush leaves office in January.

Up to ninety proposed regulations could be finalized by the outgoing administration, many of which would weaken government rules aimed at protecting consumers and the environment. According to the Washington Post, the new rules would be among the most controversial deregulatory steps of the Bush era. They include rules that could weaken workplace safety protections, allow local police to spy in the so-called “war on terror” and make it easier for federal agencies to ignore the Endangered Species Act.

While it’s nothing new for outgoing administrations to try and enact these so-called “midnight regulations,” the Bush administration has accelerated the process to ensure the changes it wants will be finalized by November 22nd. That’s sixty days before the next administration takes control. Most federal rules go into effect sixty days after they’ve been finalized, and it would be a major bureaucratic undertaking for the Obama administration to reverse federal rules already in effect.

Bush Officials Plan to Dial Back Environmental Protections
By Renee Schoof
McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON — In the next few weeks, the Bush administration is expected to relax environmental-protection rules on power plants near national parks, uranium mining near the Grand Canyon and more mountaintop-removal coal mining in Appalachia.

The administration is widely expected to try to get some of the rules into final form by the week before Thanksgiving because, in some cases, there's a 60-day delay before new regulations take effect. And once the rules are in place, undoing them generally would be a more time-consuming job for the next Congress and administration.

The regulations already have had periods of public comment, and no further comments are being taken. The administration has proposed the rules and final approval is considered likely.

It's common for administrations to issue a spate of regulations just before leaving office. The Bush administration's changes are in keeping with President Bush 's overall support of deregulation.

Here's a look at some changes that are likely to go into effect before the inauguration.

GRAND CANYON

Higher prices for uranium, driven by expanded interest in nuclear power, have resulted in thousands of mining claims being filed on land within three miles of the Grand Canyon .

The House of Representatives and Senate natural resources committees have the authority under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act to order emergency withdrawals of federal land from future mining claims for three years, while Congress decides whether a permanent ban is needed. The House committee issued such a withdrawal order in June for about 1 million acres near the Grand Canyon , including the land the claims were filed on.

Now the Department of Interior has proposed scrapping its own rule that puts such orders from the congressional committees into practice.

The Interior Department could decide to use its own power to halt new claims, but it doesn't see any emergency that would prompt such action, department spokesman Chris Paolino said. The department would require environmental impact studies before it approved any mining on the claims, he added.

One of the main hazards from uranium mining is seepage from tailings piles that poisons water. A report for the Arizona Department of Game and Fish said people would be at risk if they ingested radium-226, arsenic and other hazardous substances from water and tainted fish.

Environmental groups say the government must consider the possible danger of uranium leaching into the Colorado River , a source of drinking water for Phoenix , Las Vegas and Los Angeles . Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano in March urged Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne to halt new claims and order a study of uranium mining near the canyon.

MOUNTAINTOP-REMOVAL COAL MINING

Another proposed rule change from the Department of Interior would change rules on dumping the earth removed for mining into nearby streams.

The current rule, dating from the Reagan administration, says that no surface mining may occur within 100 feet of a stream unless there'd be no harm to water quality or quantity. The rule change essentially would eliminate the buffer by allowing the government to grant waivers so that mining companies can dump the rubble from mountaintops into valleys, burying streams.

The new rule would let companies explain why they can't avoid dumping into streams and how they intend to minimize harm. A September report on the proposal by the department's Office of Surface Mining said that environmental concerns would be taken into account "to the extent possible, using the best technology currently available."

The government and mining companies have been ignoring the buffer since the 1990s, said Joan Mulhern , an attorney with Earthjustice, a nonprofit law firm for environmental protection.

Before the rule can be changed, however, the Department of Interior must get written approval from Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Stephen Johnson .

"In order to concur, the EPA would have to find that the activities authorized by the rule would not violate water-quality standards, and all the evidence is to the contrary," Mulhern said.

AIR POLLUTION

Two rule changes would apply to electric power plants and other stationary sources of air pollution.

The first mainly concerns older power plants. Under the Clean Air Act, plants that are updated must install pollution-control technology if they'll produce more emissions. The rule change would allow plants to measure emissions on an hourly basis, rather than their total yearly output. This way, plants could run for more hours and increase overall emissions without exceeding the threshold that would require additional pollution controls.

The other change would make it easier for companies to build polluting facilities near national parks and wilderness areas. It also would change the way that companies must measure the impact of their pollution.

ENDANGERED SPECIES

The Endangered Species Act prohibits any federal actions that would jeopardize the existence of a listed species or "adversely modify" critical habitats. The 1973 law has helped save species such as the bald eagle from extinction.

Bush administration officials have argued that the act can't be used to protect animals and habitats from climate change by regulating specific sources of greenhouse gas emissions.

A proposed rule change would allow federal agencies to decide for themselves whether timber sales, new dams or other projects harm wildlife protected under the act. In many cases, they'd no longer have to consult the agencies that are charged with administering the Endangered Species Act, the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service.

OTHERS

Among the rule changes and plans that might become final are commercial oil-shale leasing, a new rule that would allow loaded, concealed weapons in some national parks, and oil and gas leasing on wild public lands in West Virginia and Utah .

WithTime Short, Bush Pushes EPA to Relax Power-Plant Rule
Renee Schoof | McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON — At the Bush administration’s direction, the Environmental Protection Agency is working on a new rule that would weaken pollution regulations for power plants, allowing them to increase emissions without adding controls.

EPA officials have been working on a fast track to meet a Saturday deadline, but many of them are arguing against changing the rule, said former EPA attorney John Walke and an EPA career official who spoke only on the condition of anonymity because the official wasn’t authorized to make statements.

They said that the EPA was expected to decide in November on another eleventh-hour rule that would allow more power plants to be built near national parks and wilderness areas.

Power companies have sought the rule about power plant emissions for many years, and it was part of Vice President Dick Cheney’s 2001 energy plan. Rules finalized more than 60 days before the administration leaves office are harder for the next administration to undo.

The Clean Air Act requires older plants that have their lives extended with new equipment to install pollution-control technology if their emissions increase. The rule change would allow plants to measure emissions on an hourly basis, rather than their total yearly output. This way, plants could run for more hours and increase overall emissions without exceeding the threshold that would require additional pollution controls.

The Edison Electric Institute, an association of shareholder-owned electric companies that represents about 70 percent of the U.S. electric-power industry, told the EPA that it supports changing the rule because improvements at plants would allow them to produce more energy with less fuel and in this way reduce emissions per unit of electrical output.

The EPA official said that concerns in the agency were that the analysis justifying the rule change was weak and the administration didn’t plan to make the analysis public for a comment period, as is customary.

The EPA originally argued that changing the rule wouldn’t seriously harm the environment because another law, the Clean Air Interstate Rule, reduced power plant emissions, offsetting any increase under the new rule. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the interstate rule, however, and the EPA was stuck with having to develop a new analysis to justify the change.

Walke, who’s now the director of the Natural Resources Defense Council’s clean air program, said that EPA officials in two departments told him that they’d been instructed to finalize the rule by Saturday. When such rules are made, it’s common practice for the White House and the vice president’s office to give the EPA their views before the EPA chief makes a decision.

Walke said that two EPA officials told him that EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson and Robert Meyers, the assistant administrator in charge of air issues, didn’t agree with the new rule. EPA spokesman Jonathan Schradar said they hadn’t made a decision yet and that he had no comment about their views.

Schradar said the EPA was committed to finalizing the rule by the time Bush left office in January. He said work was continuing on it and that "rumors are exaggerated" about a Saturday deadline.

The Wall Street Journal reported Monday that the administration was moving to adopt the changes to the power-plant emissions rule.

The EPA is under no obligation to reveal internal deliberations, so in many cases the public never knows what objections may have been raised.

The White House wouldn’t comment on its views about changing the rule, Kristen Hellmer, a spokeswoman for the White House’s Council on Environmental Quality, said Monday.

Walke charged in a comment to the EPA that the rule would amount to a "parting gift to the utility industry."

The rule change applies to old plants that are expanded or upgraded to prolong their lives. The changes can make them more efficient but not as clean as they’d be with modern pollution controls.

The emissions bring smog, acid rain and particulates. The Bush administration argues that carbon dioxide, which power plants also emit, shouldn’t be regulated under the Clean Air Act.

Tons of Drugs Dumped into Wastewater
Jeff Donn, Martha Mendoza,Justin Pritchard
Associated Press

U.S. hospitals and long-term care facilities annually flush millions of pounds of unused pharmaceuticals down the drain, pumping contaminants into America's drinking water, according to an ongoing Associated Press investigation.

These discarded medications are expired, spoiled, over-prescribed or unneeded. Some are simply unused because patients refuse to take them, can't tolerate them or die with nearly full 90-day supplies of multiple prescriptions on their nightstands.

Few of the country's 5,700 hospitals and 45,000 long-term care homes keep data on the pharmaceutical waste they generate. Based on a small sample, though, the AP was able to project an annual national estimate of at least 250 million pounds of pharmaceuticals and contaminated packaging, with no way to separate out the drug volume.

One thing is clear: The enormous amount of pharmaceuticals being flushed by the health services industry is aggravating an emerging problem documented by a series of AP investigative stories - the commonplace presence of minute concentrations of pharmaceuticals in the nation's drinking water supplies, affecting at least 46 million Americans.

Researchers are finding evidence that even extremely diluted concentrations of pharmaceutical residues harm fish, frogs and other aquatic species in the wild. Also, researchers report that human cells fail to grow normally in the laboratory when exposed to trace concentrations of certain drugs.

The original AP series in March prompted federal and local legislative hearings, brought about calls for mandatory testing and disclosure, and led officials in more than two dozen additional metropolitan areas to analyze their drinking water.

ENVIRONMENT -- EPA REFUSES TO ANSWER TO CONGRESSIONAL SUBPOENA

This month marks one year since the Supreme Court ordered the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to begin regulating greenhouse gases, which EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson had refused to do.

On April 2, the House Global Warming Committee, in a unanimous vote, issued a subpoena for documents relating to the agency's refusal to follow the Supreme Court mandate.

On April 11, the agency asked for an extension on answering the subpoena. However, in a follow-up letter last week, the EPA declined to respond to the active subpoena and instead asked the committee to withdraw it.

The EPA is also currently defying a subpoena from the House Oversight Committee for related documents. According to a statement by the committee, "If the EPA fails to comply with the deadline, Johnson will have triggered a potential contempt process."

Yucca Mountain and Nuclear Waste

By: David Phillips

April 7, 2008

Yucca Mountain, located 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, was picked as the repository to hold the nation's nuclear waste. The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 had three western States under consideration and in 1987 with Congress being pressed to pick a site, they decide on Yucca Mountain.

''The politics won out,'' said Allison Macfarlane of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Yucca Mountain Project. ''The weakest state, politically, that was under consideration, got stuck with it.''

Well, twenty years later and with more than $9 billion of our tax dollars spent, it is still not open and may never be open. And in my opinion it never should.

Several facts have come to light in recent years, such as the Mountain sits on a fault line, underground water, and falsified reports by the Department of Energy (DOE) scientists who work at the site.

Yucca Mountain was originally designed to hold 77,000 tons of nuclear waste. Currently, nuclear waste is stored on site at the various nuclear power plants throughout the United States. According to the DOE, by the time Yucca Mountain opens there will be more than 77,000 tons of nuclear waste in the United States, so the DOE has asked to increase the storage capacity.

Last year the Bush administration’s DOE made public its proposed Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP). This program pushed by Bush is offering to take other countries’ commercial high-level radioactive wastes for permanent disposal in the U.S.

Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS) Nuclear Waste Specialist Kevin Kamps said of Bush’s GNEP, “It would bury the U.S. under a mountain of radioactive garbage”.

In 2005 the public was made aware of the fact that possible dangers exist because Yucca Mountain either sits directly atop or near 33 known fault lines, the largest of which, the Ghost Dance Fault, which runs directly through the site. But that did not appear as cause to stop the program. Seeing how Yucca Mountain is only 100 miles from Las Vegas, Bush and the DOE must have figured that it was a good bet that no earthquakes would happen while they were in charge.

The Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, using computer modeling based on geological data, historical quakes and results from about 20 test wells, they showed that a magnitude 5 or 6 earthquake could raise the water table between 450-750 feet at the storage site. Because the repository would be only 600 to 800 feet above the present water table, "flooding could be expected to occur," they write.

The water table below the Yucca Mountain site is unusually deep, about 1,500 feet below the surface, Davies said. But within a six-mile area north of the proposed storage facility the groundwater level rapidly rises to a more normal depth of about 600 feet. (Source: NIRS)

The containers the waste will be stored in, if exposed to the ground water, could cause leakage and contaminate water tables throughout Nevada. Imagine if the water made it into the Colorado River that feeds most of Southern Nevada and Southern California. Again another gamble Bush and the DOE are willing to take.

According to the DOE, a hydrologist at the US Geological Survey (USGS), who was studying how water flowed through the mountain, faked documentation on the times and dates at which certain geological samples were taken from the site.

Yucca Mountain in not just a boondoggle, but has the potential of creating one of the most deadly environmental disasters ever seen on the planet.

Oh, did I mention that Yucca Mountain, which is thousands of years old, is an extinct Volcano.

David Phillips is a Vietnam Era Veteran, a Democratic Party Activist, and David is also the Publisher and Editor of the online political magazine YodasWorld.org

 E-Mail Questions or Comments: oneyoda@aol.com

You can also read David’s weekly column in the Santa Ynez Valley Journal or you can go to their web site: www.Syvjournal.com

EPA CONTINUES TO IGNORE SUPREME COURT RULING TO REGULATE CO2

Since 1999, environmental groups have been pushing the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to regulate carbon dioxide emissions, but the EPA has consistently rejected their pleas.

Last April, the Supreme Court overruled the EPA and found the agency had violated the Clean Air Act in "its refusal to decide whether greenhouse gases cause or contribute to climate change," ordering it to regulate carbon dioxide.

Nearly a year later, however, the EPA has failed to act. "At this time, the agency does not have a specific timeline for responding to the remand," the EPA's Robert Meyers wrote this week in a letter to environmental groups.

The agency's long history of inaction pushed the state of California to ask for permission to start regulating carbon dioxide emissions on its own, but the state's request was denied by the EPA in January. Sierra Club attorney David Bookbinder responded to Meyers's letter, stating, "Unless EPA owns up to its obligations immediately, we will be forced to take the administration back to court."

Americans for Balanced Energy Choices (ABEC) -- a coal industry front group that has sponsored multiple presidential debates and whose members paid for an advertisement comparing the governor of Kansas to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad -- has sunk to new lows.

On LearnAboutCoal.org, ABEC employs young children to make the case for coal. Upon loading the site, viewers may encounter "Adam," who carries a skateboard and says: "I'm pretty stoked about the future of energy in this country. One reason for that is that I've taken the time to learn more about American coal."

Physicians for Social Responsibility blasted ABEC for its use of children to hawk a polluting and dangerous industry. They point out that coal plants are the largest source of mercury emissions in the U.S. and that "Pregnant women and children are especially vulnerable to the toxic effects of mercury. ... No parent would allow their child to be exposed to such danger."

The White House's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) is a "super-powerful office" that reviews all major federal regulations of "non-independent federal agencies" on a range of issues, from workplace safety to water quality.

OIRA and agency representatives regularly meet with "outside stakeholders" to solicit opinions on regulations. Vice President Cheney's office has recently taken an interest in these meetings. In June, The Progress Report noted that lobbyists for major polluters visited the White House to lobby against tighter smog standards. At that time, Clean Air Watch observed how unusual it was for a representative from Cheney's office to attend that meeting.

This incident was not isolated. As OMB Watch has noted, OIRA has "held more than 540 regulatory review meetings since February 2002." Prior to Feb. 2007, Cheney's office attended just three meetings; since that time, it has attended eight. 

In the past, Cheney has taken "full advantage of the president’s cluelessness" to control the administration's environmental agenda and stop progress against global warming. 

Cheney likely has a sympathizer in current OIRA head Susan Dudley. In her previous job at the industry-backed Mercatus Center, Dudley opposed tougher smog standards, air bags in cars, and regulations for arsenic in drinking water.

ENVIRONMENT -- SENATE PASSES FIRST FUEL ECONOMY HIKE 'IN NEARLY TWO DECADES'

In a 65 to 27 vote, the Senate approved a "sweeping energy legislation package...that would mandate the first substantial change in the nation's vehicle fuel-efficiency law since 1975 despite opposition from auto companies and their Senate supporters."

The energy bill, which still requires House approval, will "require cars, trucks and sport-utility vehicles to achieve 35 miles per gallon by 2020." Furthermore, the bill requires "that the use of biofuels climbs to 36 billion gallons by 2022" and sets "penalties for gasoline price-gouging and would give the government new powers to investigate oil companies' pricing."

While the bill's passage is considered a major victory for the Senate over car manufacturers and oil companies that "fought for a much smaller increase," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) expressed disappointment in "the Administration and most Senate Republicans," who "successfully blocked a crucial component of the Democratic plan that would have raised taxes on oil companies by about $32 billion and used the money on tax breaks for wind power, solar power, ethanol and other renewable fuels."

Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA) explained his support of the measure saying, "We're taxing the oil industry to get a renewable energy industry started. ... I hope you'll understand that God only made so much fossil fuel and that there's got to be a follow-on if we're going to have growth in our economy."

Sen. Dianne Finestein (D-CA), echoing the Union of Concerned Scientists, released a statement in which she explained the impact of the new fuel economy standards: "By 2025, the fuel economy increases would: Save.. Nearly the amount of oil imported today from the Persian Gulf [every day], achieve up to 18 percent reduction of carbon dioxide emissions from anticipated levels, or the equivalent of taking 60 million cars off the road in one year, and save consumers $79-98 billion at the pump."

POLLUTERS FLOURISH UNDER THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION:

"Environmental enforcement efforts by the U.S. EPA and the Justice Department have plummeted over the last five years, resulting in a 38 percent decline in criminal fines and a 25 percent drop in civil penalties, according to a new report from the nonprofit Environmental Integrity Project (EIP)."

Through examination of ten years of federal data, the group concluded that enforcement was much stronger under the Clinton administration but has lacked since President Bush took office.

The EIP's analysis revealed that the EPA's effectiveness has dropped in four of five categories: cases filed, number of civil penalties, criminal fines, and criminal investigations. The only category, which did not decline, was "value of enforcements," but the EIP adds that even this is "endangered" because the Bush administration continues to "try to weaken or eliminate New Source Review" rules, which are designed to ensure that power plants meet pollution guidelines under the Clean Air Act.

Reflecting the dismal enforcement under Bush, the EIP reports that the Justice Department files, on average, only 16 lawsuits per year "against polluters who refuse to settle," whereas the Clinton administration prosecuted an average of 52 per year.

The Bush administration was quick to deny the claims. "Any suggestion that the Justice Department is not enforcing the nation's laws is utterly false," said Matthew J. McKeown of the Department of Justice.

Big Business Dodging Toxic Cleanup Costs, Group Charges
Justin Rood Reports:

Corporations responsible for hundreds of the most toxic sites in the United States spent nearly as much money lobbying politicians and funding political campaigns as they did repaying the government for cleaning up their messes, according to a new analysis by a Washington, D.C. watchdog group.

As a result, the companies may dodge hundreds of millions in cleanup fees, charges the non-profit, non-partisan Center for Public Integrity.

Companies like petroleum giant Exxon Mobil Corp. or defense contracting giant Raytheon are among the roughly 100 businesses responsible for the vast majority of privately controlled polluted or contaminated "Superfund" sites throughout the United States, according to the new report by the Center for Public Integrity.

Half of all Americans live within 10 miles of a Superfund site, the group said.

Between 1998 and 2005, those companies repaid the federal government $1.3 billion for the cost of cleaning up their toxic sites. During the same period, those companies also spent $1.2 billion on lobbying and political donations.

As those companies pumped money into the coffers of Washington's lobbyists and lawmakers, their cleanup fees slowed to a trickle. While in 1999 those corporations repaid a total of $320 million to the Environmental Protection Agency, which manages the Superfund cleanup effort, those same companies paid just $60 million in 2006.

"This is what goes on in Washington. It's no surprise," said CPI Director Bill Buzenberg, who explained that many companies hire former EPA officials to help them convince the agency to go easy on them. "It's cost effective. You pay a few million and get a few hundred million in savings."

ExxonMobil and Raytheon did not respond with comment for this story.

Bush Wants to Weaken Chemical Security Laws

The Bush administration would be able to override tough state regulations of chemical facilities if Congress doesn't do something about it, some Democratic lawmakers say.

On Thursday, the Democrats tried to stop the new Bush rule, by attaching a provision to an Iraq war funding bill.

The lawmakers, including Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., were concerned that draft regulations published by the Homeland Security Department in December, due to be finalized by April 4, would trump more stringent state rules.

Lautenberg said New Jersey has the strongest chemical security laws in the nation.

"Our language supports stronger chemical security laws like those in New Jersey and protects states' rights," Lautenberg said in a statement. "The Bush administration should not undermine these state laws and leave our country at risk of a chemical attack."

Last week similar language was inserted into the House version of the supplemental spending bill by Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas. The Senate must vote on the measure, and then the differences between the House and Senate language will have to be ironed out before the bill becomes law.

There are about 14,000 high-risk chemical facilities across the nation, more than 100 of them within reach of populations of 1 million or more. About 7,000 facilities put 1,000 or more people at risk, and roughly 550 of those place 100,000 or more at risk in the case of an accident or attack.

Some members of Congress strongly support the right of states to pass more stringent security rules but believe it's premature for lawmakers to alter chemical security language before the final rules have been published.

"We should not interrupt the regulatory process and further delay the implementation of a long-overdue program to manage the security risk at our nation's high-risk chemical facilities," said Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, the senior Republican on the Homeland Security Committee.

"State laws ultimately cannot and should not conflict with federal authorities for securing chemical facilities," said Homeland Security spokesman Russ Knocke. He said there's no question that states and localities have an important role to play, but when it comes to terrorism, the expectation is that the federal government is responsible for protecting the homeland.

The American Chemistry Council, which represents the largest producers of chemicals in the country, strongly opposed the Lautenberg language.

"Congress should support these regulations, not undermine the DHS rules before they are even implemented," said ACC President Jack Gerard. "If Congress meddles with the law, chemical facilities that are already implementing stringent security measures will be left in limbo about their regulatory obligations."

Russia to analyse yellow-orange snow in Siberia
Fri Feb 2, 9:38 AM ET
 

Russia's Emergency Ministry planned to fly a chemical laboratory on Thursday to the Omsk region in southern Siberia to analyse oily yellow and orange snow which has covered an area home to 27,000 people.

"A special mobile chemical laboratory will enable us to carry out express analysis of the snow at the site," Viktor Beltsov, a spokesman for the ministry, said.

The snow covered a 1,500 sq km area with 7,280 homes, Beltsov said.

Omsk is a heavily industrial city with a number of oil and gas refineries.

EPA exempts some pesticide use
By H.JOSEF HEBERT
Associated Press Writer

The Environmental Protection Agency announced Tuesday that pesticides can be applied over and near bodies of water without a permit under the federal Clean Water Act.

The decision brought immediate criticism from an environmental watchdog group and from a senator involved in environmental issues. They said it would make it easier to pollute the nation's lakes and streams.

But the EPA said the two specific circumstances in which clean water permits no longer will be needed will add to public health by allowing for better eradication of pests.

"This clean water rule strengthens and streamlines efforts of public health officials and communities to control pests and invasive species while maintaining important environmental safeguards," said Benjamin Grumbles, the EPA's assistant administrator for water-related issues.

Under the rule, pesticides can be applied directly into water or sprayed nearby or onto foliage over water without a pollution permit if the application is needed to control aquatic weeds, mosquitoes or other pests.

Sen. Jim Jeffords, I-Vt., the ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said the permitting exemption will lead to more toxic pollution getting into lakes and streams. He said a billion pounds of pesticides are used annual in the United States "and much of it ends up in our waterways."

"We must strengthen, not weaken, our policies and laws that prevent pesticides from polluting rivers, streams, lakes and our underground water supplies," Jeffords said in a statement.

Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides, a private public health and environmental advocacy group, called the ruling a weakening of federal protection because the Clean Water Act set limits on the maximum contamination levels that would be allowed to protect waterways.

"More protection is need from pesticides, not less," said Feldman.

____

Environmental Protection Agency: http://www.epa.gov/

Beyond Pesticides: http://www.beyondpesticides.org

ENVIRONMENT -- JUDGES STRIKE DOWN BUSH ANTI-ENVIRONMENT POLICIES:

Federal judges in western states are chastising the Bush administration's "repeated and sometimes willful failure to enforce laws protecting fish, forests, wildlife and clean air."

In a scathing ruling, U.S. District Judge James Redden wrote that federal agencies "have repeatedly and collectively failed to demonstrate a willingness to do what is necessary to halt the reverse and trend toward species extinction."

Redden's decision is the most recent in a string of rulings critical of President Bush's environmental policies.

In late August, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer accused the Forest Service of privileging timber harvesting and "trampling" environmental laws.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Laporte recently reinstated Clinton's "roadless rule," charging that the Bush administration had failed to cite any new evidence for its elimination, and in Montana last week, U.S. District Judge Donald W. Malloy wrote that the Fish and Wildlife Service had "lost touch with science."

Dan Rohlf, law professor at Lewis & Clark Law School, noted, "You are seeing frustration in the federal judiciary. When judges express that frustration on paper, which is not all that often, they are often reflecting what they see as a systematic effort to get around the law."

ENVIRONMENT -- BUSH RELEASES WEAK NEW STANDARDS ON LETHAL AIR POLLUTANTS:

For the first time in nearly a decade, the Bush administration last week released new air quality standards for particle soot, "the most lethal of common air pollutants."

The new rule "lowers the limit on how much fine particulate matter Americans may be exposed to over a 24-hour period," but "leaves unchanged the annual limit for 'fine particulate matter,' or soot, in the air."

Medical groups, environmentalists, and local public health officials blasted the announcement.

"For the first time in its 36-year history, EPA has ignored the recommendations of its independent scientific advisers, as well as agency staff experts, in setting health-based air quality standards," said one director of an association representing state and local air-pollution control officials.

"This final action will result in thousands of avoidable premature deaths, and thousands of cases of cardiovascular and lung disease throughout the country,'' he said.

Frank O'Donnell of Clean Air Watch called it "the single worst action the Bush administration has taken on air pollution," and noted that "literally dozens of medical and health groups -- including the American Medical Association, the American Lung Association, the American Heart Association, the American Cancer Society and the American Academy of Pediatrics -- had all urged the EPA to set much tougher standards."

ENVIRONMENT -- CONSERVATIVES COMPLAIN BP SPILL HURT CHANCES OF ARCTIC DRILLING:

Both the House and Senate opened hearings this last week on "pipeline safety legislation to address BP's handling of its Alaskan oil pipelines."

Lawmakers berated BP officials for failing to adequately address corrosion in its North Slope pipelines, but the hearings quickly turned to the future of drilling in the Artic National Wildlife Refuge.

The Wall Street Journal editorial board argued in August that members of Congress should "use the BP mess as an excellent reason" to drill in the Arctic refuge.

But, conservatives argued that "BP's failure to maintain and test key North Slope pipelines has shattered its claim to a 'gold standard' of environmental stewardship and has jeopardized efforts to open sensitive areas to drilling in Alaska and elsewhere."

"We won't get the votes we had already on ANWR, not to mention moving ahead," complained Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM).

Sen. Jim Bunning (R-KY) lectured BP officials, "You have completely set back any hope we had to get that bill passed in the Congress of the United States, I hope you know that."

US JUDGE BLOCKS BUSH LOGGING PLAN IN PROTECTED GIANT SEQUOIA PARK

A federal judge has blocked a plan by the US government to allow commercial logging in California's Giant Sequoia National Monument, handing a victory to environmentalists who had sued to protect the ancient trees.

The giant Sequoias, evergreen redwood trees native only to California's Sierra Nevada, can live for several thousand years and grow 90 meters (295 feet) high, with trunks 10 meters (33 feet) in diameter.

The powerful Sierra Club and several other environmental groups sued the federal government after the administration of President George W. Bush decided in 2005 to open parts of the forest to commercial logging, in contradiction of a decree signed in 2000 by Bush's predecessor, Bill Clinton.

"The Forest Service's interest in harvesting timber has trampled the applicable environmental laws," Judge Charles Breyer, attorney general for the US District Court for Northern California, wrote in his decision.

The Forest Service "should be managing Giant Sequoia as a gift to future generations, not as a gift to the timber industry," said Bruce Hamilton, Sierra Club's conservation director, who welcomed the decision.

The Sierra Club wants the management of the national monument, located 300 kilometers (186 miles) north of Los Angeles in the Sierra Nevada mountains, to be transferred to neighboring Sequoia National Park, where flora and fauna are strictly protected.

California's Democratic attorney general, Bill Lockyer, who filed a lawsuit in 2005 aginst the Bush administration's plan, hailed the ruling as "a resounding victory for the Giant Sequoias, towering treasures that symbolize the magnificent beauty of California's Sierra Nevada range and inspire awe in all of us."

KATRINA -- ONE YEAR LATER, NEW ORLEANS INFRASTRUCTURE REMAINS IN SHAMBLES:

As the first anniversary of Hurricane Katrina approaches, the Brookings Institution has released a report examining the state of recovery and rebuilding in New Orleans.

The findings paint a grim picture. While the demolition of old houses has progressed, new housing is lagging because "rent prices in the region have increased by 39 percent over the year and home sale prices have spiked in suburban parishes."

Exacerbating the problem is the fact that those in search of housing are receiving little assistance from the federal government.

Roughly 100,000 people have applied for the "Road Home" housing-aid program, but they still have not received government grants and may have to wait "more than two years before the last of the money is handed out."

A laundry list of other problems remain.

There is "a lack of public transportation, child-care services and hospitals." Gas and electricity are available only to "41 and 60 percent of the pre-Katrina customer base, respectively."

Even with the loss of 190,000 workers, the unemployment level in New Orleans has reached 7.2 percent, "higher than last August." For the region's 278,000 workers who have been displaced by the storm, finding a job is proving even more difficult, with nearly one in four unemployed.

ENVIRONMENT -- AMERICA SWELTERS DURING THE HOTTEST YEAR TO DATE: 

“The first six months of 2006 were the warmest, on average, since the United States started keeping records in 1895, and global warming is a contributing factor," a U.S. climate expert said yesterday.

"July, August and September are forecast to continue the hot trend over most of the United States, including the vast area of the country west of the Mississippi River, as well as New England, Florida and southern Alaska," Reuters reports.

This week has seen "record high temperatures in New York and Connecticut," according to the the National Weather Service," while heat readings "topped 100 F from California to Texas and South Dakota to Kansas." 

Meanwhile, "vast swathes of Europe have baked in tropical temperatures that have claimed nine lives in France alone," while Britain "recorded its hottest July day ever," surpassing a record set in 1911.

Warming 'threat to Asian security'
Grim scenario of disease and disaster
By Geoff Hiscock, CNN

SYDNEY, Australia (CNN) -- Rapid global warming poses a variety of security threats to the Asia Pacific region that have been "seriously underestimated," a new study says.

The report, released Tuesday by a Sydney-based think tank, paints a grim scenario of disease, food and water shortages, natural disasters, territorial tensions and mass population movements threatening political stability in the region.

Rising sea levels, for example, could threaten heavily urbanized parts of Asia, such as China's Yellow and Yangzi River deltas, and heavily populated low-lying countries such as Bangladesh, the report entitled "Heating up the Planet: Climate Change and Security," by the Lowy Institute says.

Warmer temperatures could see the greater spread of infectious diseases such as malaria and dengue fever, while extreme weather events could diminish food and clean water supplies.

And large, unregulated movements of people could put a heavy strain on the capacity of nations to cope, particularly if there are pre-existing ethnic and social tensions.

Besides Bangladesh and China's east coast, other communities at risk from rising sea levels include Manila Bay in the Philippines, the coastal fringes of Indonesia's Sumatra, Java and Kalimantan, and the Mekong, Chao Phraya and Irrawaddy deltas in Vietnam, Thailand and Myanmar respectively.

Many small islands in the Pacific would be inundated, while the loss of economic rights associated with atolls and rocky outcrops off the East Asian coast could trigger territorial tensions.

The authors, Australian academics Dr. Alan Dupont and Dr. Graeme Pearman, argue that "there is no longer much doubt that the world is facing a prolonged period of planetary warming," that has been fueled largely by modern lifestyles.

Tipping point
They say that while people have coped with climate change in the past when it has been spread over centuries or longer, it is the potential rapidity of change that makes the threat so significant now.

"Compressed within the space of a single century, global warming will present far more daunting challenges of human and biological adaptation," they say.

Abrupt climate change could push the plant's fragile ecosystem "past an environmental tripping point from which there will be no winners," Dupont and Pearman say.

The most effective way to lessen the security risk of this prospective climate change is to reduce the level of greenhouse gases that are responsible for heating up the planet.

The Lowy Institute report says the impact of climate change will add to destabilizing pressures on the region.

It points to low-lying countries such as Bangladesh, where a one-meter rise in sea-level would flood 17.5 percent of its area and much of its food basket in the Ganges River delta.

"Far from exaggerating the impact of climate change, it is possible that scientists may have underestimated the threat," the study's authors say.

They identify a number of climatic wild cards, which are low-probability events with high impact. They include the collapse of the global Thermohaline (deep-ocean) Circulation, which could trigger a rapid cooling of Europe's climate, a de-oxygenation of the deep ocean, and reduced capacity of the oceans to absorb part of the released carbon dioxide.

They say another wild card may be the way aerosols are masking the real level of global warming, pointing to the Asian "brown haze" that stretches from the northern Indian Ocean to China and Southeast Asia during the northern summer.

Five complications
According to the report, climate change will complicate the regional security environment in several ways:

Weather extremes and greater fluctuations in rainfall and temperatures could quickly refashion the Asia-Pacific region's productive landscape and exacerbate food, water and energy scarcities. Rising sea levels are of particular concern because of the density of coastal populations and the potential for large-scale displacement of people in Asia.

Climate change will contribute to destabilizing, unregulated population movements in Asia and the Pacific. While most of these flows are likely to be internal, their ripple effects will be felt beyond the borders of the states most affected, requiring cooperative regional solutions.

More extreme weather patterns will result in greater death and destruction from natural disasters, adding to the burden on poorer countries and stretching the resources and coping ability of even the most developed nations.

Extreme weather events and climate-related disasters will not only trigger short-term disease spikes but also have more enduring health security consequences, since some infectious diseases will become more widespread as the planet heats up.

Even if not catastrophic in themselves, the cumulative impact of rising temperatures, sea levels and more mega droughts on agriculture, fresh water and energy could threaten the security of states in the region by reducing their carrying capacity below a minimum threshold.
The study concludes with a number of recommendations, including a cut in the level of greenhouse gases.

It says this would require a "fundamental transformation" of the world's approach to energy use, with cleaner coal, more fuel-efficient hybrid cars and the increased use of gas, nuclear power and renewable energy sources.

It says relying on fossil fuels inevitably would warm the planet to levels that would put unprecedented stress on its ecosystem, and "challenge the adaptive capacities of future generations."

SMALL CARS	Make/Model	Combined MPG	Annual Fuel Cost
	Honda Insight 3 cyl, 1L, Auto	56	$792
	Honda Civic Hybrid 4 cyl, 1.3L, Auto	50	$885
	VW New Beetle 4 cyl, 1.9L, Man(5)	40	$1095
	VW Golf 4 cyl, 1.9L, Man(5)	40	$1095
	VW Jetta 4 cyl, 1.9L, Man(5)	38	$1152
	Toyota Corolla 4 cyl, 1.8L, Man(5)	36	$1230
	Hyundai Accent 4 cyl, 1.6L, Man(5)	33	$1341
	Kia Rio 4 cyl, 1.6L, Man(5)	33	$1341
	Scion xA 4 cyl, 1.5L, Auto	34	$1301
	Honda Civic 4 cyl, 1.8L, Auto	34	$1301
	Toyota Corolla 4 cyl, 1.8L, Auto	33	$1341
	Hynadai Accent 4 cyl, 1.8L, Auto	32	$587
	MINI Cooper 4 cyl, 1.6L, Man(5)	31	$1526
	Mazda 3 4 cyl, 2L, Man(5)	31	$1429
	Nissan Sentra 4 cyl, 1.8L, Man(5)	31	$1429
FAMILY SEDANS	Make/Model	Combined MPG	Annual Fuel Cost
	Toyota Prius	55	$805
STATION WAGONS	Make/Model	Combined MPG	Annual Fuel Cost
	Pontiac Vibe 4 cyl, 1.8L, Man(5)	33	$1341
	Toyota Matrix 4 cyl, 1.8L, Man(5)	33	$1341
	Scion xB 4 cyl, 1.5L, Auto	31	$1429
	Pontiac Vibe 4 cyl, 1.5L, Man(5)	31	$1429
SUVs	Make/Model	Combined MPG	Annual Fuel Cost
	Ford Escape Hybrid FWD 4 cyl, 2.3L, Auto	33	$1341
	Ford Escape Hybrid 4WD 4 cyl, 2.3L, Auto	31	$1429
	Mazda Tribute Hybrid 4WD 4 cyl, 2.3L, Auto	31	$1429
	Mercury Mariner Hybrid 4WD 4 cyl, 2.3L, Auto	31	$1429

All information is from www.fueleconomy.gov

ENERGY -- REDFORD BLASTS LACK OF BUSH LEADERSHIP ON ENERGY POLICY:

Last Thursday, actor and activist Robert Redford appeared on CNN's Larry King Live to discuss rising oil prices and to promote American Progress's Kick the Oil Habit campaign (www.KickTheOilHabit.org).

Redford explained, "I think it's important to see the true story being told about how we got there, why we've had a lack of political leadership on the issue and what the solutions are and how the American people, by looking at this campaign, can get involved and push, pressure their elected officials."

One of the solutions Redford mentioned is to promote the usage of E-85, an alternative ethanol-based fuel.

The show also highlighted a new online video calling attention to the disastrous consequences of America's addiction to oil. Watch the video and take action at KickTheOilHabit.org.

ENVIRONMENT -- EPA DIVERTS RESOURCES FROM PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT TO HOMELAND SECURITY:

The Bush administration continues to cut funding for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and divert resources devoted to protecting the nation's natural resources.

Most recently on May 1, the EPA announced the creation of a new top-level position, the Associate Administrator for Homeland Security, which will be "responsible for EPA's planning, prevention, preparedness and response to incidents of national significance."

This move comes on top of President Bush's $184-million request for EPA homeland security programs and the announcement of a $45-million "Water Sentintel" program designed to "develop an operational water monitoring and surveillance system for dangerous contaminants."

At the same time, President Bush has cut funding for the EPA's conservation programs, including dropping the library budget from $2.5 million in 2006 to $500,000 for 2007; cutting grants for creating and preserving non-federal parks, forest land, and wildlife refuges; and eliminating the Office of Children's Health Protection.

ENVIRONMENT --  POLLUTION AT BP REFINERY IN TEXAS TRIPLES IN ONE YEAR:

British Petroleum (BP), which is already under criminal investigation for a huge oil spill in Alaska and was recently fined $21.3 million for an explosion at its Texas City refinery last year that killed 15 people, is now under fire for reporting the same refinery "released three times as much pollution in 2004 as it did in 2003, according to the most recent data from the Environmental Protection Agency."

The "increase in emissions at BP was so large it distorted the data for refineries nationwide" and "makes the facility far and away the most polluting refinery in the U.S."

BP "is investigating whether it has been accurately documenting pollution," and if their numbers turn out to have been inaccurate, it "could prompt the EPA to penalize the company" with a $32,500 per violation fine.

"Most of the increase in pollution was from formaldehyde and ammonia, which can form smog and soot and irritate the eyes, nose and throat."

"Erroneous estimates of pollution from the industry are not new," the Houston Chronicle reported this weekend. "In 2000, as part of the Texas Air Quality Study, researchers found that companies in the Houston area were underreporting emissions of certain chemicals by as much as three to 10 times."

And in 2004, the EPA's inspector general "the agency was not monitoring pollution to double-check the industry's numbers" despite a court order saying they had to do so.

ENVIRONMENT -- HEALTH ORGANIZATIONS REJECT EPA'S LAX AIR QUALITY RULES:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is updating air-quality rules for both coarse and fine particulate matter.

"Fine particulates" -- dust, dirt, soot, smoke, and liquid droplet particles found in the air -- are the "nation's deadliest pollutant," according to the American Lung Association.

Exposure to fine particulates is tied to premature death, lung disease, asthma attacks, heart attacks, and other health effects.

Business associations are urging the EPA to reject stricter regulations, while environmental groups are criticizing the administration's attempts to provide exemptions for agriculture and mining sources of particulate matter.

But one important group that was silent last time the EPA updated the air quality rules in 1997 is now weighing in: the American Medical Association (AMA).

Clean Air Watch notes that a number of AMA lobbyists are close to the Bush administration. But the physicians' organization has spoken out against the EPA, calling particulates a "national public-health problem" and urging the agency "to adopt tougher standards than proposed."

CLIMATE CHANGE - ADMINISTRATION CONTINUES TO MUZZLE SCIENTISTS:

Last week, NASA Administrator Michael Griffin announced new guidelines that would allow NASA scientists to speak more freely on topics such as climate change.

Griffin said the new policy "guarantees that NASA scientists may communicate their conclusions to the media, but requires that they draw a distinction between professional conclusions and personal views."

The move was meant to quell complains from scientists such as NASA's climate change expert James Hansen, who said, "In my more than three decades in the government, I’ve never witnessed such restrictions on the ability of scientists to communicate with the public."

But the Washington Post reports today that the administration is still stifling other agencies when its scientists discuss climate change with the public.

Researchers at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration say "administration officials have chastised them for speaking on policy questions;

removed references to global warming from their reports, news releases and conference Web sites;

investigated news leaks; and sometimes urged them to stop speaking to the media altogether."

One scientist said administration officials "purged key words from the releases, including 'global warming,' 'warming climate' and 'climate change.'"

ENVIRONMENT -- INDUSTRY-FRIENDLY GOVERNOR NOMINATED TO HEAD INTERIOR DEPARTMENT:

President Bush has nominated Idaho Gov. Dirk Kempthorne to replace Gale Norton as Interior secretary.

In 2003, Kempthorne was rumored to be the leading candidate to head the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). But a rash of reports detailed that, under the Kempthorne administration, "Idaho’s pristine air [had] gotten dirtier, more rivers [had] been polluted, fewer polluters [had] been inspected and more toxins [had] contaminated the air, water and land."  

Kempthorne financed his 2002 re-election campaign with $86,000 from timber, mining, and energy industries. Environmental rights groups immediately rallied in opposition to the nomination.

Earthjustice released a statement saying, "As Governor, Kempthorne led the charge to strip protection from 60 million acres of America's last wild forests and he's consistently fought against protection for wildlife like grizzly bears and salmon in his home state of Idaho.

He's openly hostile to America's natural areas and wildlife -- which puts him outside the mainstream of what people want to see for their children and their future."

ENVIRONMENT -- EPA SUED FOR LYING AFTER 9/11:

Twelve New Yorkers are suing the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), alleging that the agency misled residents about the city's air quality after 9/11.

Two days after the attacks, the EPA began issuing press statements reassuring residents and rescue workers close to the World Trade Center.

But by Dec. 2001, environmental groups were finding "asbestos and other toxins at double the threshold of safety" and a Freedom of Information Act request turned up 800 pages of hidden EPA samples that revealed the same.

A 2003 EPA Inspector General report concluded that the White House had pressured the EPA to provide false information to New Yorkers:

"Furthermore, the White House Council on Environmental Quality influenced...the information that EPA communicated to the public through its early press releases when it convinced EPA to add reassuring statements and delete cautionary ones." "We were being duped," said Brooklyn Heights resident and plaintiff Jenny Orkin, "and I'd like to find out why."