Yeah, a few more billion "chisels" like this and Waxman might even make a small scratch on Cheney's 'stonewall'! btw, Cheney said before this even came up, that he hopes an issue like this does come up because he wants to take it to court. He thinks Clinton weakened the office, and he wants to strengthen it.
I mean, if this is all they got, LOL at the demolibs.
Waxman: Cheney Ignored EPA
By Nicholas M. Horrock
Chief White House Correspondent
Published 2/5/2002 8:02 PM
WASHINGTON, Feb. 5 (UPI) -- Continuing his investigation of President Bush's energy policy, California Democratic Rep. Henry A. Waxman Tuesday accused Vice President Dick Cheney's energy task force of ignoring warnings from the Environmental Protection Agency in preparing its recommendations.
Waxman said in a letter to the vice president that he had obtained a "confidential memorandum" from Tom Gibson, the associate administrator of EPA, to Cheney's energy task force "that states that EPA's concerns about the energy plan 'have not been addressed,' that new language in the latest draft is 'even more problematic' than earlier drafts." Waxman included the memorandum in a news release. It was dated April 27, 2001, a few weeks before the report was issued last spring.
Quoting Cheney's assertion on NBC's "Meet the Press" that his report on the nation's energy needs was a "good balanced report," Waxman said the memorandum from EPA "indicates, however, that the Administration's own environmental experts did not share this view."
Waxman quoted the following portion of the memorandum:
"EPA has provided comments regarding the language on oil refineries and fuel infrastructure and supply issues in past rounds of the document review process, but our concerns have not been addressed. In the latest draft, new language has been added which is even more problematic. Costs of compliance with environmental requirements are overstated, several inaccurate statements and opinions are presented as factual, and no citations are provided for many of these statements," the memorandum said.
"We are very concerned that this language is inaccurate and inappropriately implicates environmental programs as a major cause of supply constraints in the United States' refining capacity."
Waxman acknowledged in his letter that the comments were on a draft of Cheney's report, but claimed, "Despite EPA'S objections, the final version of the White House energy plan continues to blame environmental regulations for energy shortages."
Tom Gibson did not return telephone calls Tuesday. But EPA spokesman Joe Martyak responded. He acknowledged that the memorandum was valid, but said it was on a draft of the report, and EPA "was definitely satisfied" with the final report and found it "balanced and comprehensive."
His statements were echoed by Jennifer Miller Wise, Cheney's media spokeswoman, who pointed out that the May 16, 2001, report was accepted and passed by a bipartisan vote of Waxman's colleagues in the House of Representatives.
In section 7-13 of Cheney's report, the task force notes, "The U.S. refining industry has experienced a decade of low profitability and rates of return on investment. This has discouraged investment in new refineries."
Later, the report states, "While excess capacity may have deterred some new capacity investments in the past, more recently other factors, such as regulations, have deterred investments."
upi.com
EPA initially blasted White House energy plan
By Traci Watson
USA TODAY
Less than a month before President Bush presented his energy plan to the nation, the Environmental Protection Agency sent the White House energy task force a blistering memo saying that the latest draft was ''problematic,'' ''overly simplistic'' and ''not supported by the facts.''
Commenting on what was then Chapter 8 of the energy plan, the memo says, ''Costs of compliance with environmental requirements are overstated, several inaccurate statements and opinions are presented as factual, and no citations are provided for many of these statements.''
It continues, ''We are very concerned that this language is inaccurate and inappropriately implicates environmental programs as a major cause of supply constraints in the United States' refining capacity.''
The memo suggests there was disagreement among Cabinet members over the direction of energy policy.
On Tuesday, however, EPA Administrator Christie Whitman's office said it was satisfied with the final version of the energy report, which was released last May.
''We thought the issues we raised were addressed,'' EPA spokesman Joe Martyak said.
Vice President Cheney, who headed the task force, agreed through a spokeswoman. ''The views and input of all members of the National Energy Policy Development Group resulted in a balanced and comprehensive energy plan,'' spokeswoman Jennifer Millerwise said.
The three-page memo is written on stationery labeled ''Office of the Administrator.''
The memo does not bear Whitman's name or her signature. It is signed by Tom Gibson, associate administrator for policy, economics and innovation, and is addressed to Andrew Lundquist, who helped direct the task force.
Cheney's role in the task force has been an issue. He has been accused of leaning too heavily toward the interests of energy companies.
The White House has refused to divulge whom Cheney met with in developing the report. It says the president and his staff have the right to hold private consultations.
The memo was obtained by Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., who has criticized the way Cheney has developed administration energy policy.
Some of the EPA's complaints in the memo were addressed, however. One referred to low-pollution gasoline blends, which are required by many states trying to meet clean air-standards.
According to the memo, Cheney's draft plan reported there were 50 different blends of gasoline in the USA, and that caused problems for refineries. ''EPA disagrees with that figure,'' the memo says. The final report refers to blends without specifying a number.
In other cases, the final version of the report changes language the EPA objected to but doesn't address the heart of the agency's complaints.
The memo says, for example, that ''statements regarding coal-generated electricity create the false impression that environmental regulations are the sole cause of the decrease in investment in new coal generation.''
The final report notes other causes but insists that ''regulatory uncertainty'' is the main problem.
usatoday.com |
