“We hear stories of people paying folks $50 through Craigslist to come and wear shirts supporting ‘Coal for America,’” Lisa Jackson, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s administrator and surprise guest at the “Rebel With A Cause” gala, told a ballroom of activists on Thursday night.

EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson speaks in Denver. (Photo by Troy Hooper)

“What’s really neat is the thousands of people who came because they care, the moms who came,” Jackson said to a receptive crowd that filled the Seawell Grand Ballroom at the Denver Center for the Performing Arts for dinner, a live auction and awards ceremony.

The audience stood and clapped when Jackson took the stage as the gala’s surprise guest. Her treatment here was quite different than what she receives in the nation’s capitol.

“It’s so rare that I walk into the room … and hear the applause that which counters those things I hear inside the Washington Beltway, which is that ‘average Americans just don’t care about air and water.’

“We know better,” she said.

Gov. John Hickenlooper at the "Rebel With A Cause" gala in Denver last night. (Photo by Troy Hooper)

“We want to help states that are trying to ensure that the wealth and potential that lies in natural gas doesn’t come at a price that would be far too high,” she said, adding that the agency plans to roll out the first results of its study at the end of the year with more to follow as the information becomes available.

“Our heritage is no more beautifully on display than in the Rocky Mountains,” said Jackson, who is in Colorado to speak to a Denver high school today about science and technology. She also mentioned she’d be meeting with Gov. John Hickenlooper, who dropped in on the gala to socialize.

Some of Colorado’s biggest critics of the EPA weren’t in the room. But U.S. Reps. Scott Tipton, Cory Gardner, Mike Coffman and Doug Lamborn have consistently voted for legislation that weakens the U.S. government’s ability to regulate pollution that spoils the nation’s common air, water and land.

“We have a canon of environmental laws in this country that is under siege,” Jackson said.

To combat the undermining of environmental laws, two state conservation groups, Colorado Environmental Coalition and Colorado Conservation Voters, announced a merger at last night’s gala that will see Pete Maysmith at the helm of the new organization, which has not been named yet.

“Our stunning mountains, flowing rivers, gorgeous lakes, and clear blue skies brought us to Colorado and have kept us here,” Maysmith said. “We all know there is much more to be done to protect and preserve Colorado’s beauty and enhance the quality of life for all.”

Elise Jones, the outgoing executive director of Colorado Environmental Coalition, said the new group will “create an uber force for the environment, a juggernaut for Colorado’s natural heritage.”

Jones is leaving nonprofit work to run for a seat on the Boulder County Board of Commissioners.

The merger of the two organizations has been talked about for a number of years, according to the conservationists, and they said now is the time to combine the strengths of both groups: Colorado Environmental Coalition’s policy, advocacy and organizing work and Colorado Conservation Voters’ focus on electing pro-environment candidates to public office and holding them accountable.

Officials for the two groups say they have combined to affect more than 130 different bills at the state legislature in the past six years, taking on water conservation, air quality, energy efficiency and transit.

Image: ©iStockphoto.com/aristotoo

An influential trade association representing companies that provide water services to one in four Americans says it will continue its membership with the American Legislative Exchange Council, a conservative group that has worked with the energy industry to create loophole-filled water protections and opposes federal oversight of fracking.

The National Association of Water Companies represents the far-reaching privatized water utility industry that serves “nearly 73 million people every day,” according to the association’s website. NAWC represents more than 150 private water companies, each of whom pay an annual fee to the association. Its board of directors is drawn from the leadership of some of the country’s largest water companies.

NAWC works with ALEC to persuade state and local officials to adopt policies favorable to the private water industry. NAWC declined to comment on when it first became involved with ALEC and the amount it pays in annual dues. According to The New York Times, ALEC “is primarily financed by more than 200 private-sector members, whose annual dues of $7,000 to $25,000 accounted for most of its $7 million budget in 2010.”

ALEC connects its corporate members with state legislators to create model bills on a variety of issues. In recent weeks, high-profile companies like Coca-Cola, McDonald’s, and Kraft Foods have dropped their ALEC memberships after the organization’s support for controversial gun rights legislation and voter identification laws was exposed. Following the uproar, ALEC announced it would eliminate its task force that dealt with “non-economic” issues.

ALEC has also been active on issues surrounding hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, a controversial drilling technique in which millions of gallons of water — mixed with sand and chemicals — is forced into the ground. Fracking can generate substantial revenues for some water companies, but environmentalists fear that it has the potential to put drinking water resources at risk.

Last week, The New York Times reported that ALEC’s model legislation requiring disclosure of the chemicals used in fracking — which the paper reported was backed by ExxonMobil — includes “loopholes that would allow energy companies to withhold the names of certain fluid contents, for reasons including that they have been deemed trade secrets.”

ALEC also staunchly opposes federal oversight of fracking by the EPA. According to ALEC, the EPA is creating a “regulatory train wreck.”

Asked if the NAWC planned to continue its ALEC membership despite ALEC’s stances on fracking regulation, the trade association defended its involvement.

Jessica Knight, NAWC’s Director of Strategic Relations & Communications, said in an emailed statement: “At the core of NAWC’s mission is education of local decision makers on the role private water companies can play in helping communities provide their residents with safe, reliable water service. We belong to a wide range of organizations that include those individuals in their membership, such as the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the National League of Cities, the International City/County Management Association, and ALEC, just to name a few. Our involvement is limited to the educational part of our mission, described above.”

But Knight sought to distance the water industry from ALEC’s environmental policies, telling The American Independent that NAWC supports regulation by the EPA.

“As for hydraulic fracturing (commonly known as hydrofracking), NAWC supports regulation of these activities by the EPA and its partner agencies,” said Knight. “Though NAWC understands the need for sound energy policy, our nation’s drinking water supplies must be protected.”

NAWC has also partnered with the EPA on issues like water conservation.

While Knight wouldn’t comment directly on the “trade secret” loophole reportedly pushed by ALEC, she did emphasize the importance of requiring disclosure of chemicals used in fracking.

“Drinking water systems need information about chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing activities, as well as the amount and sources of water to be used, in order to address potential impacts on communities and their drinking water supplies,” Knight said.

NAWC has worked closely with ALEC on issues relating to privatization.

At ALEC’s 2011 annual meeting, NAWC executive director Michael Deane participated in a panel called “Tapping the Private Sector to Save Money and Improve Performance,” according to documents obtained by the group Common Cause.

The panel was moderated by Geoff Segal, an expert on privatization who previously worked at the libertarian Reason Foundation. Segal currently sits on Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell’s Commission on Government Reform & Restructuring, whose mission includes seeking out “means to more effectively and efficiently perform core state functions, including potential privatization of government operations where appropriate.”

According to minutes from the ALEC meeting, public- and private-sector ALEC members unanimously adopted model legislation called “Establishing a Public-Private Partnership (P3) Authority Act.” The bill would establish “a state Partnership Committee and an Office of Public-Private Partnerships to identify and establish public-private partnerships and approve qualified bidders, requests for proposals, and template contracts.”

Promoting public-private partnerships is a top policy priority for the NAWC.

According to NAWC, Deane’s participation in the ALEC panel was limited to discussion of public-private infrastructure partnerships and was not related to hydraulic fracturing, and Deane did not vote on what model legislation should be adopted.

NAWC’s involvement in ALEC is not the only example of the private water industry’s entanglement with groups whose interests are seemingly at odds with the protection of drinking water resources. Two of the country’s biggest private water utility companies – American Water and Aqua America – are dues-paying members of a powerful industry coalition in Pennsylvania that lobbies to expand fracking. Both companies are on the NAWC’s board of directors.

U.S. Sens. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and John Barrasso, R-Wyo., introduced the WEST Act last week, extolling it as a job generator. In an op-ed he wrote Monday for the St. George News, Hatch lauded oil and gas drilling as nirvana on earth, a slam-dunk way to jump-start employment in the region.

“Job creation and energy production is typically a match made in Heaven in Utah and other western states. They are a perfect complement – much like former Jazzmen Karl Malone and John Stockton were in their heyday,” the senator wrote.

But not everyone is jumping up from their seats, hooting and hollering in favor of hydraulic fracturing.

Gathered concentrated oil burns during a controlled oil fire in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010. The U.S. Coast Guard worked in partnership with BP, local residents, and other agencies to conduct this "in-situ burn" to aid in preventing the spread of oil following the April 20 explosion on Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit Deepwater Horizon. (U.S. Navy photo)

“The WEST Act is not aligned with the conservation values of the American people,” said Emily Diamond-Falk, communications manager for The Wilderness Society in Washington, D.C. “In a recent Colorado College survey, a majority of independent voters across the West said that they were in favor of ‘reducing our need for more coal, oil and gas by expanding our use of clean, renewable energy that can be generated in the United States. The same poll found that voters were in strong agreement that ‘our national parks, forests, monuments and wildlife areas are an essential part of your state’s economy.’ It appears that the WEST ACT is an effort to open our shared public lands and waters to industrial development and pollution.”

The bills bundled into the WEST Act include the Jobs and Energy Permitting Act, or H.R. 2021, which was cited in a report commissioned by Reps. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., Edward Markey, D-Mass., and Howard Berman, D-Calif., late last year that called the Republican-led 112th Congress “the most anti-environment House in U.S. history.” The legislation would upend the Supreme Court’s decision that the Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. The bill also prohibits the EPA from collecting emissions information.

The WEST Act would undermine the Clean Air Act in a multitude of ways. It includes the so-called Farm Dust Regulation Prevention Act, which would cast doubt on the EPA’s ability to regulate coarse particulate matter from mining and extraction industries, or dust that contains arsenic or other heavy metals, or dust that substantially harms public health by other means. U.S. Reps. Diana DeGette and Jared Polis, both D-Colo., have been vocal in their skepticism of the bills’ intentions.

The WEST ACT would additionally include the expedited consideration of permits to drill in the Gulf of Mexico and off the coast of Virginia and end what Republicans say is the Obama administration’s de facto moratorium on new offshore drilling. The Restarting American Offshore Leasing Now Act, or H.R. 1230, and The Reversing President Obama’s Offshore Moratorium Act, H.R. 1231, are the House versions of the legislation now in the WEST ACT.

According to Hatch’s editorial, the WEST ACT would also “end the confusion and uncertainty in the EPA’s decision-making process for air permits, which is delaying energy exploration in Utah and across America, including in the Alaskan Outer Continental Shelf, a project expected to create 50,000 jobs and produce 1 million barrels of oil per day.”

Barrasso said the GOP has laid out a clear path to energy security and job creation.

“For too long, the Obama administration’s anti-American energy policies have strangled western job creators,” he said. “By removing harmful EPA and public lands regulations, our legislation encourages American energy production and economic growth.”

In reality, drilling has reached its highest level under President Obama than at any point since the Reagan administration. Domestic oil production hit an eight-year high in 2011, and natural gas production hit an all-time high that year.

Image: ©iStockphoto.com/aristotoo

Two of the country’s largest private water utility companies are participants in a massive lobbying effort to expand controversial shale gas drilling — a heavy industrial activity that promises to enrich the water companies but may also put drinking water resources at risk.

The situation — which some watchdogs describe as a troubling conflict of interest — underscores the complex issues raised by the nationwide push to privatize infrastructure and services like water, prisons, and roads.

The water companies – American Water and Aqua America – are leading drinking water suppliers in Pennsylvania, where drilling is booming. They also sell water to gas companies — which use a drilling technique that requires massive amounts of water — and have expressed interest in treating drilling wastewater, a potentially lucrative opportunity.

These investor-owned, publicly traded water utility companies are also dues-paying “associate members” of the gas industry’s powerful Marcellus Shale Coalition, a fact confirmed by coalition spokesman Travis Windle, who says associate members pay $15,000 annually in dues. “Our associate members are really the backbone of the industry,” adds Windle.

Both water companies serve millions of people across the country – Aqua America operates in 11 states and American Water in more than 30. Neither company is currently in Colorado.

The coalition, which is led by major gas producers, contends that “responsible development of natural gas” will bolster the region’s economy while providing an important source of domestic energy. It has reported over $2 million in Pennsylvania lobbying expenditures since 2010.

Aqua America joined the coalition in 2010 and Pennsylvania American Water – a subsidiary of American Water – joined in 2011, according to the coalition’s quarterly magazine, which publishes a full member list in each issue.

Shale gas drillers use a combination of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking,” to extract gas from the Marcellus formation in Pennsylvania. The controversial technique forces millions of gallons of water — mixed with sand and chemicals — into the ground to crack the shale rock and release gas. In addition to the potential risks posed by actual fracturing, the process produces large amounts of toxic wastewater that can be difficult to dispose of safely.

The Environmental Protection Agency is currently conducting a congressionally-mandated study “to investigate the potential adverse impact that hydraulic fracturing may have on water quality and public health.” Pennsylvania is home to three of the seven sites selected for the nationwide study.

Separately, the EPA is testing the water of some Pennsylvania residents who say that nearby gas drilling contaminated their wells. According to the EPA, early test results indicate the water is safe to drink, however, some environmentalists disagree with that analysis.

In the meantime, the water companies are selling water to the drillers while calling for fracking to be done in an environmentally responsible manner. In a presentation to investors last month, American Water stated that it is “realizing additional revenues from water sales to drilling companies while remaining vigilant in protecting our water sources.”

In the presentation, the company noted it is “currently selling water to gas drillers at 34 distribution points in Pennsylvania,” and that it “sold 250.4 million gallons of water to gas drillers from January through December of 2011, producing $1.6 million in revenues.”

(Some public water utilities sell to drillers too, but no public utilities are part of the Marcellus Shale Coalition.)

American Water spokesman Terry Maenza says the company’s support for environmental protection is unchanged by its role in the shale coalition and that it is also a member of numerous environmental groups.

“By the nature of our business, we will continue to be stewards of the environment, ensuring water source protection,” says Maenza.

The company isn’t currently in the drilling wastewater treatment business, according to Maenza, though during a quarterly earnings call last year, American Water CEO Jeff Sterba told investors, “We are very definitely looking and working in the wastewater treatment area.” Maenza declined to comment on any specific initiatives.

Aqua America executive Karl Kyriss says his company’s involvement in the coalition helps protect water resources.

“By participating, we can have some direct input into the group that is looking to support development of the Marcellus Shale,” says Kyriss. “But we are very much committed that it be done in an environmentally sensitive and protected manner. And we think we can do that better from the inside than just sort of watching what happens.”

Aqua America is aggressively positioning itself to take advantage of what CEO Nick DeBenedictis has described to investors as a “water-energy nexus that could have a positive impact on the future of our company.” In recent years, the company has made sizeable acquisitions in Texas and Ohio – states that, like Pennsylvania, are home to large shale gas plays – and is also building a pipeline in Pennsylvania to supply water to drillers.

DeBenedictis believes the pipeline will ease the wear and tear on roads and the environment currently caused by trucks carrying water to wells.

Recently, however, that pipeline has come under fire from local anti-drilling activists because the project will displace dozens of residents from a mobile home park.

Like American Water, Aqua America is not currently in the drilling wastewater treatment business, but may expand into that market in the future.

Some environmental advocates see potential conflicts between the interests of the private water industry and the interests of drinking water consumers.

“If American Water and Aqua America wanted to ensure that their water supplies were protected, they would support a national ban on hydraulic fracturing for shale gas,” argues Mary Grant, a researcher at Food and Water Watch, which has reported on Aqua America’s ties to the coalition. “But, instead of acting on the precautionary principle, they are paying thousands of dollars a year to an industry coalition that advocates for shale gas development, despite the risks to water quality.”

“We are concerned that these relationships encourage investor owned water utilities to endorse shale gas development despite its risk to public water supplies,” Grant says.

Eric Goldstein, a senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, adds, “Sometimes the interests of private ownership are inconsistent with the concept of preserving our water resources in the public trust for future generations. And the potential clashing of those interests is why these questions have been raised about whether for-profit companies ought to be running public water supplies.”

Anti-fracking demonstrators in Boulder this week. (Photo by Troy Hooper)

“The Task Force discussed jurisdictional issues regarding substantive regulations but determined that drawing bright lines between state and local jurisdictional authority was neither realistic nor productive,” the task force wrote in the report’s cover letter.

There is still much work to be done. The task force report didn’t address key issues such as whether the minimum distance between drilling and residences and schools should be expanded.

A number of communities are drafting new land-use regulations to better mitigate the impacts of energy exploration but Colorado Attorney General John Suthers and the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission sent letters to them warning that local laws could conflict with state laws.

State rules currently call for drilling setbacks of 150 feet in rural areas and 350 feet in urban areas.

Michael Freeman, an attorney for Earth Justice, said state officials were supposed to begin discussing improved setbacks in 2009. He said he was pleased there is a hearing today on the setback issue, which isn’t likely to be resolved soon. Another overdue issue, he added, is how drillers clean up after themselves. Colorado has a ways to go to increase public confidence in the state’s ability to regulate oil and gas. A recent report called the state’s regulatory system “inadequate” and soft on polluters.

“There are still a lot of issues that have to be dealt with to make sure public health is protected,” Freeman said.

The Colorado Environmental Coalition’s Charlie Montgomery called the task force’s report “really constructive.” He said continued attention to industrial pressures put on residential areas, such as Battlement Mesa on the Western Slope and Erie and Longmont on the Front Range, is critical.

COGCC, which its critics contend is too cozy with industry, is charged with both promoting the extraction business and with protecting against its negative impacts on health and environment.

“We just have to figure out what we can do to try to really do the best job protecting schools, neighborhoods, houses when drilling and fracking is coming in really close to where people live,” Montgomery said.

Hydraulic fracturing — aka “fracking” in which water, sand and chemicals are flushed into holes drilled into the earth to break up shale rock and release oil and gas deposits — has ushered in a new era of domestic energy exploration as well as concerns about its impacts on public health and the environment. There have been concerns fracking can contaminate groundwater, and it releases methane — a greenhouse gas more potent than carbon dioxide — into the atmosphere.

Studies show the injection of fracking wastewater into disposal wells can also trigger earthquakes.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency issued the first national standards to curb fracking’s air pollutants Wednesday. The rules will, beginning in 2015, require all oil and gas companies to capture smog-forming volatile organic compounds that are emitted during the final stages of well construction. The national standards are similar to regulations Colorado and Wyoming already have in place. In other states, those gases are currently released into the atmosphere or burned in a flaring process.

“The EPA’s new standards to reduce air pollution utilize existing technology and are a responsible step towards enforcing the Clean Air Act and protecting the air we breathe,” U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colorado, said in prepared statement. “I look forward to working with the administration, my congressional colleagues and other stakeholders on other initiatives – like my FRAC Act – to improve the safety and efficacy of natural gas extraction and development.”

Colorado’s oil-and-gas task force convened on March 9 and met once per week through April. Officials said they received 1,600 public comments. Here are the task force’s recommendations:

· Encouraging local governments to designate a Local Government Designee (LGD) and to participate in the COGCC’s LGD program. Encourage LGDs to communicate industry proposals and issues with local elected officials and the public as soon as possible. However, if there is no LGD, then the municipal or county clerk may be the contact for a local jurisdiction. Providing strong encouragement to oil and gas operators to engage local government officials and the public as early in the COGCC permitting process as possible to solicit input. Initial outreach to the LGDs should occur before the application for permit to drill is filed with the COGCC. Issues to be addressed will vary site-by-site.

· Informing LGDs of opportunity to request additional 10 days to review permits and to request assistance from Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE). COGCC shall inform LGDs if formal consultation with CDPHE or CPW is to occur on a drilling permit application.

· Taking actions to ensure that the two new LGD liaisons at COGCC will be effective in working with local governments, oil and gas operators, and the public.

· Providing for a mutual understanding of oil and gas industry and local government practices by facilitating distribution of accurate information. Local governments, oil and gas operators, and COGCC should collaborate to, for example, identify the potential development impacts, duration of drilling operations, and proposed mitigation to protect public health, safety, welfare and the environment.

· Formalizing and promote opportunities for technical training of LGDs and other training/briefings for the general public. This should include annual training for new LGDs and periodic work sessions for LGDs or local government entities, based on need.

· Providing general education presentations in community forums, covering the entire state periodically.

· Local governments and operators should consider using an Memorandum of Understanding and/or Intergovernmental Agreement, as appropriate, to address issues of local concern (e.g. standard conditions of approval, public outreach, etc.).

· Promoting opportunity for COGCC staff to obtain information regarding local government process and requirements, as appropriate. Local governments are encouraged to notify COGCC early in the process of developing local regulations.

U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette (Photo via http://degette.house.gov)

“The researchers found higher lifetime cancer risks for people living closer to the wells,” reads the letter from DeGette and Rep. Henry Waxman. “They also concluded that these nearby residents have a higher risk of experiencing neurological and respiratory health effects, such as headaches, throat and eye irritation, impaired lung capacity, dizziness, fatigue, numbness in the limbs, and tremors.”

The study that DeGette, D-Colorado, and Waxman, D-California, referenced was based on a three-year review of the Battlement Mesa area of Garfield County where several companies are drilling for natural gas that a class-action lawsuit claims is endangering the community.

Escalated levels of ozone pollution have been recorded in the Uintah Basin in Utah and the Green River Basin in Wyoming near oil drilling sites and researchers say residents living near hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking,” operations in the Piceance and Denver-Julesberg basins in Colorado are also susceptible to dirtier air, which can impair breathing and worsen respiratory problems such as asthma.

Regulators at all levels of government are trying to establish safe standards for air emissions from fracking, which the EPA has also, at least preliminarily, linked to ground water contamination in Wyoming. Opponents of oil and gas drilling contend existing regulations are too lenient and that they are not adequately enforced. A recent report found there were 516 spills in Colorado last year and only five of them resulted in fines for the companies that allowed them to happen.

Gov. John Hickenlooper recently convened a task force to “help clarify and better coordinate” the regulatory jurisdiction between state and local governments but his critics claim the task force is a Trojan horse, designed to take away rights from local governments and instead leave their fates up to the allegedly inept state system. Boulder County, Longmont and Colorado Springs have already temporarily halted drilling activity while Commerce City, Erie and Aurora, Arapahoe County, Douglas County, Elbert County, El Paso County and Huerfano County are vying for their own regulations.

DeGette and U.S. Rep. Jared Polis, D- Colorado, have previously asked President Obama to strengthen federal environmental and public health standards to protect against the risks associated with fracking. In speeches this year and last, Obama has emphasized natural gas as a key resource in his “all-of-the-above” strategy to reduce the nation’s reliance on foreign oil.

Many Coloradans are protesting the increased drilling in the state, and asking for the federal government to stave off oil and gas development in the North Fork Valley and other locales.

Here is DeGette and Waxman’s letter in its entirety:

April 3, 2012

The Honorable Lisa Jackson
Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Ariel Rios Building
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20460

Dear Administrator Jackson:

EPA is working to finalize new standards for oil and gas operations to reduce emissions of smog-forming volatile organic compounds and toxic air pollutants that can cause cancer and other serious health effects. As you consider these standards, we ask that you consider a new study from the Colorado School of Public Health that raises concerns about the potential public health impact of air emissions from unconventional gas drilling operations. The findings from this study, while preliminary, reinforce the importance of your forthcoming rules and the need for additional research.

Scientists at the Colorado School of Public Health examined three years of air monitoring data in Garfield County, Colorado and concluded that residents living near natural gas wells may face increased exposure to benzene, a known human carcinogen, and other toxic chemicals, such as ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylene. The researchers found higher lifetime cancer risks for people living closer to the wells. They also concluded that these nearby residents have a higher risk of experiencing neurological and respiratory health effects, such as headaches, throat and eye irritation, impaired lung capacity, dizziness, fatigue, numbness in the limbs, and tremors.

The authors concluded:

[P]reliminary results indicate that health effects resulting from air emissions during development of unconventional natural gas resources are most likely to occur in residents living nearest to the well pads and warrant further study. Risk prevention efforts should be directed towards reducing air emission exposures for persons living and working near wells during well completions.

We support the responsible and safe production of U.S. oil and natural gas resources. The good news is that we can control potentially harmful air emissions from drilling operations by implementing proven technology and best practices already in use today. We hope that you will consider the results of this new study in your rulemaking, and we look forward to reviewing EPA’s new rules once finalized.

Sincerely,

Henry A. Waxman
Ranking Member

Diana DeGette
Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations

National standards to limit greenhouse gas emissions from future power plants have been a long time coming as there is no uniform national limit on the amount of carbon pollution that either new or existing facilities can currently emit. Five years ago, the Supreme Court ruled that greenhouse gases are air pollutants covered by the Clean Air Act, and in 2009 the Environmental Protection Agency determined that carbon pollution threatens Americans’ health and welfare.

U.S. Sen. Mark Udall (Photo by Troy Hooper)

“Moving our country toward a clean energy future will help stabilize energy prices, create new jobs, diversify the energy sources on which we depend, and make our country more secure,” Udall said. “It is crucial that we begin to reduce our dependence on the dirty fuels of the last century and curb the effects of climate change. The benefits of clean air are numerous and profound to Colorado’s public health and economy. While I would prefer to see a legislative solution that includes a comprehensive energy policy for America and focuses on clean, domestic sources of energy, the proposed standard can serve as an important backstop to congressional inaction and put a price on carbon pollution.”

The issuance of draft rules for carbon emissions didn’t come with quite the same fanfare as the December announcement of the EPA’s final rules to control power plant mercury emissions.

EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson called the carbon limit “a common-sense step to reduce pollution in our air, protect the planet for our children, and move us into a new era of American energy.”

Power plants are reportedly responsible for 40 percent of the nation’s output of carbon dioxide.

The proposed carbon standards, however, would not apply to existing power plants.

Industry groups such as the National Mining Association are already calling on Congress to spike the proposed rules, arguing they will lead to higher costs of living for Americans.

“EPA’s proposal for controlling greenhouse gas emissions from about half the nation’s electric power supply is a poorly disguised cap-and-tax scheme that represents energy and economic policy at its worst,” National Mining Association President and CEO Hal Quinn said in a prepared statement. “Higher utility bills and fewer jobs are the only certain outcomes from this reckless attempt to override Congress’s repeated refusal to enact punitive caps on carbon dioxide emissions.”

Colorado’s conservative congressmen — Scott Tipton, Cory Gardner, Doug Lamborn and Mike Coffman — have previously pledged to vote against any climate-change legislation.

The EPA claims new natural gas plants will be able to meet the new carbon standard without adding any additional technology. But new coal plants would need to install technology that captures carbon dioxide emissions and sequesters them into the ground rather than release them into the air.

Federal officials downplayed any negative impact a carbon standard would have on industry.

“Even without today’s action, the power plants that are currently projected to be built going forward would already comply with the standard,” the EPA said in a press release. “As a result, EPA does not project additional cost for industry to comply with this standard.”

EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson (Pic by USACEpublicaffairs, via Flickr)

According to Jackson, the EPA’s budget request of $8.344 billion “focuses on fulfilling EPA’s core mission of protecting public health and the environment.”

From Jackson’s testimony:

Specifically, this budget proposes that $1.2 billion – nearly 15 percent of EPA’s overall request – be allocated back to the states and tribes, through categorical grants. This includes funding for state and local air quality management grants, pollution control grants and the tribal general assistance program.

The budget also proposes that a combined $2 billion – another 25 percent of EPA’s budget request – also goes directly to the states for the Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds. This funding will help support efficient system wide investments and development of water infrastructure in our communities. We are working collaboratively to identify opportunities to fund green infrastructure – projects that can reduce pollution efficiently and less expensively than traditional grey infrastructure.

The EPA has been harshly criticized by members of the GOP recently, with some lawmakers calling it a “job-killing” agency with “out of control” regulations. Presidential front-runner Mitt Romney recently called on President Obama to fire Jackson, Energy Secretary Steven Chu and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar. Calling them the “gas hike trio,” Romney told a crowd of supporters that the three “have been working like crazy to drive up the price of gasoline.”

In response to those claims, an Obama campaign spokesman told ABC News that Romney raised the gas tax by 400 percent while governor of Massachusetts and issued a tax plan that would continue to charge taxpayers “$4 billion a year to subsidize oil and gas companies making record profits.” Romney also opposed raising fuel economy standards, which some say could save consumers an average of $8,000 per vehicle.

In Florida, an effort to adhere to the Clean Water Act has been highly controversial – especially among business-backed groups that fear more stringent regulations could hurt their bottom line.

Florida currently relies on a narrative water quality standard, the wording of which (.pdf) has been criticized as too vague to be effective. A lawsuit settled in 2009 resulted in a mandate requiring Florida to implement stricter rules. Though the EPA is the federal agency mandating those rules, the agency has said it would allow the Florida Department of Environmental Protection to develop its own rules, and implement them if they are approved. Environmental groups argue that the EPA’s version would be more stringent, but industry, agriculture and utility interests prefer the state’s version.

Temperature inversions that prevent pollutants from escaping into the atmosphere are partially to blame for the brown cloud that has long hung over Denver in the winter, but last year the American Lung Association of Colorado issued a report card that gave four out of eight Front Range counties failing grades for ozone pollution. None of the eight counties received a grade higher than a “C.”

Now state officials have a plan to reduce pollutants by more than 70,000 tons annually by 2018. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency preliminarily approved the plan Friday.

Smog in Denver. (Image: Colorado Department of Health and Environment)

A key part of the plan is the 2010 Clean Air-Clean Jobs Act that the Colorado General Assembly passed to improve emissions controls; retire old, inefficient coal-fired power plants; and convert some electric-generating units from coal to natural gas.

The Colorado Air Quality Control Commission has also approved the plan that aims to annually subtract 35,000 tons of nitrogen oxides, which play a role in ground-level formation of ozone. It targets 16 facilities around the state including coal-fired power plants and cement kilns.

“Our plan will lead to less haze and improved visibility in some of Colorado’s most treasured and scenic areas, including Rocky Mountain National Park, Mesa Verde, Maroon Bells and the Great Sand Dunes,” said Dr. Christopher E. Urbina, executive director and chief medical officer of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. “Colorado has long recognized the importance of protecting air quality in national parks and wilderness areas, and has taken a leadership role in developing a plan that reduces emissions of pollutants that adversely impact visibility.The tremendous pollution reductions will also have significant public health benefits.”

Colorado Oil & Gas Association President and CEO Tisha Conoly Schuller hailed the collaborative effort between industry and regulators and she said the “Clean Air-Clean Jobs Act will support job creation in Colorado’s natural gas sector while measurably reducing air pollutant emissions.”

David Eves, president and CEO of Public Service Co. of Colorado, an Xcel Energy company, said the “EPA’s proposal to approve Colorado’s plan works for both the environment and our customers.”

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency approved the Southern Ute Indian Tribe’s program Monday after nearly a decade of attempts to create an in-house permitting program to cover the reservation’s 1,058 square miles that span La Plata, Archuleta and Montezuma counties.

Oil and gas rigs dot the Ignacio-based tribe’s land in the natural gas-rich San Juan Basin.

The Southern Utes even have their own gas production company, Red Willow Production Co., which operates more than 400 wells on the reservation, primarily concentrating on coal bed methane. The company partners with major operators, such as BP, Elm Ridge, ConocoPhillips and Energen.

Red Willow Production Co. in southwestern Colorado.

Jim Martin, the regional administrator for the EPA in Denver, called the OK “a significant step forward” for the tribe and for the environment.

“EPA’s approval reflects the tribe’s exceptional effort to build the expertise and capacity to manage air quality on the reservation,” Martin said in a prepared statement.

Home of Colorado’s deepest-rooted inhabitants, the reservation includes a population of roughly 1,200 people, a casino and resort, community center, and a cultural center and museum.

“EPA approval of this program is an achievement that was envisioned by many past tribal leaders and is the culmination of extensive cooperation among the tribe, EPA, State of Colorado, La Plata County, and oil and gas industry operators,” Tribal Chairman Jimmy R. Newton Jr. said in a news release.

“The tribe looks forward to administering the program in a manner that ensures protection of the reservation air shed and contributes positively to regional air quality,” he said.