• House Passes Energy Policy Act
  
• States, Enviros Ask for Stay of New Source Review Revisions
  
• EPA Proposes New Radioactive Waste Disposal Rule
  
• Petition Filed to Protect Rare Wildflower
  
• Park Service Survey Finds Concern About Political Influence
  
• Good News for Oregon's Western Snowy Plovers
  
• New Jersey Moves to Enforce Brownfield Redevelopment Initiative
  
• Researchers Aim to Heat Homes With Soybeans
  

House Passes Energy Policy Act

A broad range of critics fear the 1,400 page bill is a $23 billion mess of special interest giveaways.

"This bill looks backwards, not forward," said House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat.

But supporters say it will create some one million jobs, promote conservation and reduce America's thirst for foreign oil.

"With the sweeping energy bill passed today, all Americans can look forward to cleaner and more affordable energy, reliable electricity and reduced dependence on foreign oil for generations to come," said Representative Billy Tauzin, a Louisiana Republican and cochair of the House-Senate conference committee that hammered out the final legislation over the past several months.

The White House firmly supports the bill, which is in part based on the Bush administration's energy plan that critics believe was crafted by industry lobbyists during secret meetings with Vice President Dick Cheney.

Passage of the bill by the Senate could come as early as tomorrow, although some critics continue to urge Democrats may still try to try and block the legislation.

The National League of Cities (NLC), for example, wants the bill blocked because of a provision that would grant manufactures of the fuel additive methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) immunity from legal cases based on the argument that the additive is a defective product.

MTBE has been known to contaminate large quantities of surface and ground water through leaking underground storage tanks and pipelines to ground and surface water. Thus far, over 28 states have detected MTBE contamination in their water supply with the most extensive contaminations in California, New England and Mid-Atlantic states.

"Cash strapped local governments should not be forced to bear the cost or this responsibility," said Donald Borut, executive director of NLC. "It is bad policy and unconscionable that MTBE manufacturers should be shielded from assuming their responsibility to clean up contaminated water sites."

The MTBE provision, and language that delays new smog standards, are two of scores of complaints critics have about the bill, which was written by Republican staffers behind closed doors.

Two thirds of the $23 billion in tax breaks go to coal, oil and natural gas industries and the public interest group Taxypayers for Common Sense says the final bill will cost an additional $72 billion in authorized spending.

"This energy bill, like the original Bush energy plan, is a disaster for consumers, for taxpayers, for public health, and for the environment," said Gene Karpinski, executive director of the U.S. Public Interest Research Group.

Grassroots Republicans have lined up with other critics of the measure. Jim DiPeso, policy director of Republicans for Environmental Protection (REP America) calls the energy bill "a defective product that fails to adequately meet the nation's environmental, economic, and energy security needs."

"Congress had an opportunity to put America on a new energy course for the 21st century," DiPeso said today. "Instead, Congress took a pass and settled for the old time Washington religion - an expensive grab bag of handouts for grasping special interests."

The bill has several useful features, including incentives for energy efficiency and renewable energy development," DiPeso said. "Thanks to strenuous, bipartisan opposition, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge will remain closed to oil drilling. On balance, however, the bill's defects outweigh its good points. The biggest defect is failure to reduce America's dangerous dependence on foreign oil through proven efficiency measures."

States, Enviros Ask for Stay of New Source Review Revisions

The motion to stay follows on the heels of suits filed last month the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., by a coalition of conservation and public health organizations and by 12 state attorneys general.

Two states - California and Illinois - joined the 12 states who filed suit on October 27 challenging the revisions.

The new U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations are set to be introduced on December 26, 2003. The stay would block the rule changes from being implemented in the 12 states that defer to federal air rules; the 38 other states have three years to decide what to do about the new regulations.

"With this request for a stay, we are calling on the federal court to apply the brakes before the EPA deliberately drives the train of environmental enforcement off the tracks," said New Jersey Attorney General Peter Harvey. "The plain language of the Clean Air Act and common sense interpretation by the courts had us on track to achieve cleaner, healthier air. The EPA's new rule, if permitted to take effect, will derail our efforts and result in more pollution, more acid rain and more asthma and respiratory disease."

The Bush administration's controversial revisions change the "routine maintenance" exemption of the New Source Review program, which requires owners of older industrial facilities to install the best pollution control equipment available when they make a major modification to an existing facility that increases emissions.

The new rule exempts facility modifications that cost less than a certain percentage of the entire facility or a specific piece of equipment, as much as 20 percent for some industries.

If the modification is more than 20 percent, a facility could still find exemption from New Source Review if it is replacing pieces of equipment with other pieces that serve the same function.

The Bush administration and industry representatives say the revisions will boost the reliability, efficiency and safety of industrial power plants while continuing reductions of harmful emissions.

But critics say the changes gut the law and will allow many of the nation's largest sources of pollution - in particular coal fired power plants - to avoid tighter pollution controls indefinitely.

This case is closely related to another lawsuit filed by a similar coalition of states that challenged an earlier EPA rule, published December 31, 2002, that created other exemptions to the New Source Review program. The states have moved to consolidate the challenges to both rules and have also moved to stay the earlier set of exemptions.

Those motions are under consideration by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which will also hear the underlying challenge to the two rules.

"Given the dire threat to public health and the environment, and the strength of our case, the court should call a time out until we have the opportunity to show that these changes are illegal," said Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal. "The Bush administration seeks to repeal the Clean Air Act by dictatorial edict, which it can not legally do."

EPA Proposes New Radioactive Waste Disposal Rule

The proposal would facilitate this by allowing mixed radioactive and hazardous wastes to be considered only hazardous.

EPA officials say today's proposal is only the first step towards revising the rule and that the decision is far from final. The public can comment on the Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking through March 17, 2004.

In the proposal published in the Federal Register, the agency said that it is focused on finding a "simpler but protective approach to the present dual regulatory system applicable to low-activity mixed waste."

The EPA says it is seeking comment on approaches to "reduce the burden of the dual regulatory framework" for the waste.

But a coalition of environmental groups is already convinced the proposal should be scrapped.

"The EPA's proposal is to deregulate radioactive waste pure and simple," said Diane D'Arrigo, Nuclear Waste Project director at the Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS).

The coalition, which includes NIRS, the Nuclear Policy Research Institute, Sierra Club, and Public Citizen sent a letter Monday to EPA Administrator Michael Leavitt voicing their opposition to the proposal.

The groups wrote in the letter that the proposed new rule "could significantly harm the environment and public health if you do not act promptly to block it."

"The nuclear industry knows that in order to prolong its existence it must deal with nuclear waste and it must do so at minimal cost," said David Ritter, policy analyst with Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy & Environment Program. "The EPA is now helping to prop up the industry, at the expense of public health, by paving the way for tons of nuclear waste to be dumped in facilities that were not designed for, nor capable of containing, these dangerous radionuclides."

"That they are attempting to paint this effort as a benign shift in management style is just shameful, and contradictory to the stated mission of the EPA," Ritter added.

Petition Filed to Protect Rare Wildflower

A member of the snapdragon family that produces up to 18 lavender flowers, Graham's penstemon is found primarily on public lands and survives only in the Uinta Basin of northeastern Utah and northwestern Colorado. It is restricted to oil shale outcrops in this remote region.

Only 7,000 individual Graham's penstemon plants are thought to survive, the bulk of which are on lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Out of the 36 known Graham's penstemon sites, a quarter had fewer than ten plants when last surveyed.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service first considered the species for listing some 27 years ago, but it has taken no action.

In an emergency petition filed in October 2002, the groups asked the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to protect the plant under the ESA.

By law, the agency had three months in which to make a preliminary finding about the plant's conservation status, and one year to issue a formal ruling. More than a year later neither action has been completed required findings and the plant and its habitat remain unprotected.

"The Fish and Wildlife Service has neglected Graham's penstemon for decades," said Erin Robertson, staff biologist for Center for Native Ecosystems. "The Service refuses to act even though time is running out for this wildflower."

Robertson's organization, along with the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, Utah Native Plant Society, and Colorado Native Plant Society, represented by the Environmental Law Clinic at the University of Denver, filed the lawsuit.

The organizations say increased oil and gas leasing, exploration and development in the Uinta Basin has pushed the species to the brink of extinction.

They point to the threat from the BLM's upcoming November 24th oil and gas -lease in Utah that proposes to lease public lands for future development without affording any protection for the Graham's penstemon.

In addition, the Utah BLM has approved or is considering several large oil and gas exploration and drilling projects in the plant's habitat.

The organizations add that the BLM has even neglected monitoring for this species. For nine sites on BLM land, the most recent population data still dates back to 1979.

"Graham's penstemon populations are so limited in extent and so tied to oil bearing soils that no one can argue with the fact that they require immediate protection," said Dr. Leila M. Shultz, a research professor at Utah State University who conducted that 1979 penstemon inventory.

"That is what we concluded nearly 25 years ago, and it is all the more true today," said Shultz, who is not party to the law suit. "While it may be possible for oil and gas development to take place without damaging this biologically unique species, the burden of proof should be on the developers."

Park Service Survey Finds Concern About Political Influence

The results of the Campaign to Protect America's Lands survey workers also found that two thirds of surveyed Park Service employees believe that the agency is moving in the wrong direction under the leadership of the Bush administration.

According to the survey, employees believe the political leadership at the Department of the Interior and the Park Service is part of the problem.

Three out of four of survey respondents rated the Park Service leadership "poor" or "fair," and 85 percent of the survey respondents graded Interior Department leadership as doing a "poor" or "fair" job in "supporting the National Park Service in fulfilling its mission."

Four out of five respondents said that employee morale is lower than it was a couple of years ago.

Three out four of those surveyed expressed a great deal of concern about "special interest influence on park policies/decisions."

Nearly nine out of 10 respondents indicated that they had a great deal of concern that "decisions are being influenced by politics rather than professional experience/science," with nearly eight in 10 saying that such suspect decision making is worse than it was just a few years ago.

More than four in five - 84 percent - of those surveyed expressed a "great deal of concern" about being able to protect park resources.

The email based survey of 1,361 employees accounts for some 8 percent of all 17,035 permanent employees of the National Park Service.

Administration officials note that this is a small section of the agency, but have acknowledged some concerns about Park Service morale.

Money for the Park Service has been tight as Congress wrestles with a federal budget deficit estimated to be in excess of $400 billion.

But conservationists, and some vocal former Park Service employees, are keen to use the survey to further criticism of an administration many believe has little regard for the nation's national park system.

"This survey should serve as a rude wake up call for everyone who cares about preserving our national park system for future generations," said former Shenandoah National Park Superintendent and spokesperson for the Coalition of Concerned National Park Service Retirees Bill Wade. "It is a warning from those most closely involved in caring for the parks that the national park system is under attack today by the Bush administration and that things are getting progressively worse."

According to the Campaign to Protect America's Lands, which is a nonprofit conservation group, responses were distributed across all key criteria, including region, discipline, position and tenure with the Park Service.

"It is no exaggeration to say that as few as four to eight years of poor stewardship of our unique park resources could leave America's most cherished heritage areas irreversibly altered for the worse," said Campaign to Protect America's Lands Director Peter Altman. "But our parks are only the most visible victims of this administration - all of America's public lands are under assault by an administration that favors corporations over conservation."

Good News for Oregon's Western Snowy Plovers

Dave Lauten, a biologist with the Oregon Natural Heritage Information Center who has been monitoring plovers on the Oregon coast since 1997, said 59 chicks successfully left their nests this year. That figure translates into a success rate of 46 percent, nearly 10 percent better than average.

"That is on par with what we would need to recover the species," Lauten said. "It is reason to be optimistic that the birds are doing better."

Biologists say the higher number of fledglings this year is due to good weather, habitat improvement projects, cooperation from the public in avoiding nesting areas and better chick survival.

Seven of Oregon's eight critical habitat units, designated for the plover by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 1999, successfully produced plover chicks this year.

But the plover is far from secure - the key to recovery of the species is to get the population trend to increase over a much longer period of time.

Oregon's plover population went from 72 in 1993, when it was listed as threatened, to 141 in 1997. But the species suffered the effects of El Nino weather patterns in the winters of 1997 and 1998.

"In Oregon, about 40 adults were lost during El Nino and the population really has not regained ground, remaining relatively constant at about 100 birds," said Kerrie Palermo, a senior wildlife biologist for the Bureau of Land Management in Coos Bay.

"We are excited that this was a good breeding season, but chick production has still not been high enough to make gains in the overall population," said Palermo, who has worked on plover issues in Oregon and California for the last 15 years.

Snowy plovers are small, pale colored shorebirds with dark patches on either side of the upper breast. The coastal population, of which only about 2,000 individuals remain, breeds along the Pacific coast from southern Washington to southern Baja, California in Mexico.

The inland and coastal populations are listed collectively by the State of Oregon as a threatened species. Federal protections under the ESA apply only to the coastal population.

Historically, there were between 24 and 28 breeding sites for the coastal population of snowy plovers in Oregon. Only nine remain, primarily as a result of habitat loss.

New Jersey Moves to Enforce Brownfield Redevelopment Initiative

Campbell says three companies have failed to comply with requirements to clean up contaminated sites within state designated Brownfield Development Areas located in Camden, Trenton and Elizabeth. These areas are targeted for priority smart growth projects.

In Camden, DEP issued a directive against Knox Family Inc.; in Trenton, DEP issued a directive against Exide Corporation; and in Elizabeth, the agency issued a directive against Exact Anodizing Company.

"The contamination left by commercial operations at these three sites has not only created environmental risks, but also stymied revitalization efforts in the surrounding communities," said Campbell. "We will not allow the burden to be shifted from polluters to communities whose residents have had to live with brownfield sites for decades."

Brownfield sites are properties that are known or suspected to be contaminated from past industrial or commercial uses.

The directives announced today are the first actions against companies who refuse to participate voluntarily in remediating properties included in the state's Brownfield Development Area program since it was launched in 2002.

The program is designed to assist neighborhoods impacted by multiple brownfield sites and encourage smart growth.

As one component of its assistance to help spur progress in Brownfield Development Areas, DEP identifies companies that are legally responsible for addressing contamination on properties within the designated areas.

The three enforcement directives require each company to either participate in or pay for remediation of their respective sites. Failure to comply with the directives could result in significant penalties, Campbell says.

The DEP estimates that there may be as many as 10,000 brownfields in New Jersey. State officials say these abandoned, contaminated properties can have a devastating impact on their surrounding communities by contributing to urban decay, impairing tax bases and preventing new beneficial development.

"The Brownfield Development Area program creates a new opportunity for neighborhoods that are devoting their time and energy to making their communities a better place to live," Campbell said. "We would prefer to work voluntarily with liable companies, but the state is prepared to enforce its remediation requirements when there is a lack of cooperation."

Researchers Aim to Heat Homes With Soybeans

Called "soybean heating oil," the oil blend can be used in conventional furnaces without altering existing equipment, said Harry Gibson, a Purdue University professor of agricultural and biological engineering and one of the developers of the process.

Unlike standard fuel oil, soybean oil contains no sulfur, and blending soybean oil into standard heating oil decreases sulfur emissions, said Bernie Tao, a Purdue University professor of agricultural and biological engineering.

"The decreased sulfur emission we see with soybean heating oil is a major environmental benefit," he said.

And soybean heating oil is rather easy to produce, the researchers say.

"Soybean oil comes straight out of the bean," Tao said. "Producing the heating oil blend is a very straightforward process. We were surprised to find that nobody else is making this."

Once the oil is removed from the bean, it goes through a process called degumming, which makes the oil more stable by removing certain compounds.

Simply mixing degummed soybean oil with conventional fuel oil makes soybean heating oil, Tao explained.

In addition, it is comparably priced to standard fuel oil, the researchers said.

Over the last four heating seasons, the price of heating oil has ranged from $1 to $1.86 per gallon; over the same time period, the price of soybean oil has ranged from 93 cents to $1.72 per gallon.

According to the U.S. Department of Energy, 8.1 million homes in the United States used fuel oil for heating in 2001, the last year for which figures are available.

Of those homes, 6.3 million were located in the Northeast, with the majority of the remaining homes in the Midwest.

Gibson notes that replacing just 20 percent of the fuel oil used in 2001 with soybean oil could have potentially saved 1.3 billion gallons of fuel oil.

"Soybean oil is a renewable, domestic resource," said Gibson, who added that the use of soybeans as an additive in heating oil would be a boon to farmers, likely increasing the demand for their crops.

While it is possible to burn 100 percent soybean oil, pure soybean oil would not run efficiently in today's furnaces. But a 20 percent blend would work well, the researchers say, requiring only annual adjustments by a technician.

The researchers add that the key obstacle to the use of the new oil is infrastructure.

"The infrastructure for mixing soybean heating oil is not in place yet," Tao said. "But it could be easily put in place. The manufacturers of conventional fuel oil could mix soybean oil in at their facilities, or fuel oil distributors could mix it in on-site."

The technology originated as a winning entry submitted by a team of Purdue undergraduates in the 2001 New Uses For Soybeans Student Contest and was further developed by Gibson and colleagues.

The Purdue researchers have recently partnered with the Indiana Soybean Board to market this technology.