Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : WHO IS RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT IN 2004 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: calgal who wrote (2575)	6/20/2003 1:15:22 AM
From: calgal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10965

GOP Senators' Draft Gives States Leeway on Air Rules Inclusion in Transportation Bill Is Proposed By Guy Gugliotta Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, June 20, 2003; Page A08 URL:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14754-2003Jun19.html Senate Republicans have circulated a draft document that would use one of Congress's most popular pieces of legislation as a vehicle to allow states broader discretion in how they conform to federal air pollution standards and other environmental requirements. Environmental advocacy groups charged that the proposals would seriously weaken heightened state obligations under the Clean Air Act. Senate Republicans "have been fighting a war against these new standards since Day One," said Mark Wenzler, energy programs director for the National Environmental Trust. "But these guys don't give up." The draft document proposes a number of changes that would allow states contemplating new transportation projects to delay or skirt compliance with air quality laws by making use of discretionary procedures that do not require federal approval. The draft also appears to weaken the role of environmental authorities in weighing the possible consequences of federally funded infrastructure projects on communities, waterways, wildlife habitat and other natural resources. Republicans circulated the draft provisions, dated June 12, within the Environment and Public Works Committee as proposed language for the upcoming transportation bill, which authorizes infrastructure projects for virtually every state and is always one of Congress's most popular pieces of legislation. The Washington Post obtained a copy of the provisions. Committee spokesman Michael Catanzaro described the draft as "old news" and "not relevant in terms of where we are" in negotiating the bill's contents. "We have moved on and made changes in many of these provisions," Catanzaro said. "We're nowhere near to being done with this, and . . . we're working intensely with the guys on the other side of the aisle." Catanzaro said he would not discuss specifics of the draft proposals. Wenzler said the advocacy groups' dispute with committee Republicans centers on perceived efforts to roll back more stringent air pollution standards put into effect during the administration of President Bill Clinton. Wenzler said committee Chairman James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.) and Sen. Christopher S. Bond (R-Mo.), chairman of the subcommittee on transportation, infrastructure and nuclear safety, have led the effort and have decided to use the "must-pass" transportation bill as a way to win support from otherwise reluctant Democrats. The draft contains a proposal that would allow states to sidestep federal air pollution standards if violations occurred as a result of "exceptional events," which include "but are not limited to" occurrences such as volcanic eruptions or forest fires. Wenzler described this provision as an invitation for states to "classify all kinds of things as exceptional events." The draft would also allow states to proclaim an area "unclassifiable" in its ability to meet pollution standards. Wenzler said an unclassifiable designation would grant an area "a limbo" of noncompliance instead of requiring it to attain the federal standard. Advocacy groups also complained that the draft proposals sought to weaken the principle of "transportation conformity," which requires states' highway, airport or other infrastructure projects to conform to environmental standards before going forward. Instead, said Mark Replogle, the transportation director for Environmental Defense, the Republican proposals would allow states to start projects before conformity has been resolved, making it more difficult to stop them once a decision is made. "Problems are not being solved here," Replogle said. "Problems are being created." If new highways create too much pollution, the burden of conformity -- bringing the area into compliance with clean air standards -- would have to be picked up by industry and small business, he added. Also in play, Replogle said, were requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), passed in 1969, requiring federal agencies to consider the environmental impact of federally funded infrastructure projects. Replogle said the draft provisions would allow states much greater say in decisions over whether roads could cross wildlife refuges, parks or historical sites. Susan Prolman, government relations counsel for Defenders of Wildlife, said the draft would give the Department of Transportation an enhanced role in approving projects, which would subvert NEPA's historical role in ensuring that highway building "is undertaken in a thoughtful, responsible manner." © 2003 The Washington Post Company