Groups Oppose HB 965

The Sierra Club PA Chapter joined the letter below, asking members of the PA House to oppose HB 965, expected to come up for a vote on second consideration today:

October 16, 2015

Re: Opposition to HB 965 (P.N. 1885) and SB 562

Dear Representative:

On behalf of the hundreds of thousands of members we represent in Pennsylvania, the undersigned respectfully request that you OPPOSE House Bill 965 (P.N. 1885), which is scheduled for second consideration this Monday, October 19.         

You may hear that HB 965 (and its Senate counterpart, SB 562) is necessary for legislative “oversight.”  In reality, this legislation would hamstring the current independent and bipartisan process for updating state agency regulations by giving standing committees of the legislature unilateral control to hold up proposals they dislike. At the same time, HB 965 will make Pennsylvania’s regulatory rulemaking process much less transparent to the general public.

At best, these bills are solutions in search of a problem; at worst, they represent legislative overreach that would politicize Pennsylvania’s rulemaking process and take the “independent” out of the Commonwealth's Independent Regulatory Review Commission (IRRC).

We are specifically concerned with two particular changes proposed by HB 965 and SB 562.

First, by enabling standing committees of the General Assembly to repeatedly delay IRRC votes on proposed regulations (and introducing other delays), HB 965 and SB 562 would further complicate an already complicated process – and effectively transfer executive powers to small groups of legislators.

By way of background, one of the stated intentions of the Regulatory Review Act is “to provide ultimate review of regulations by the General Assembly” (see section 2(a)). That step already exists in our current IRRC process. After the IRRC votes on a regulatory proposal by a state agency, legislative standing committees already have the power to further review or disapprove the proposal. When a committee invokes its power to review or disapprove, the regulatory proposal is stayed for fourteen days, so that it can be brought to a vote before the full legislature. For three decades, this process has given the General Assembly ample time to review new regulations proposed by state agencies.

HB 965 and SB 562 would turn this orderly process on its head by (among other things) giving legislative committees the additional power to “further review” proposed regulations before the IRRC ever votes – and to do so repeatedly. By exercising this power, a standing committee could postpone a vote by IRRC indefinitely, and thereby effectively block the executive rulemaking process. In addition, the bills would needlessly inflate several post-vote periods during which the legislature can take action against proposed regulations. These changes would only serve to create bureaucracy and red tape, hinder the passage of much-needed regulations (which are often necessary to implement federal law or statutes passed by the General itself has), and subject the formerly independent IRRC to the control of small groups of legislators.

Second, the bills would block publication of agency “Statements of Purpose” (SOP) in the Pennsylvania Bulletin. The only effect of this prohibition would be to make it harder for your constituents to understand proposed regulatory changes. The sponsorship memo for SB 562 suggests that blocking Bulletin publication will prevent courts from interpreting SOPs in a way that is inconsistent with the regulations or the intent of the General Assembly. But courts do not review and interpret SOPs because they are printed in the Bulletin; they do so because SOPs are drafted by agencies and introduced into evidence in judicial proceedings. Blocking Bulletin publication will prevent neither of these things. It will only eviscerate the ability of the public to learn about and comment on new regulations.

Please tell your leadership that you OPPOSE HB 965 and vote to keep the “independent” in the Independent Regulatory Review Commission.

Thank you for in advance for standing up for the integrity and transparency of our regulatory process and OPPOSING HB 965.

Sincerely,

David Masur, Executive Director                   Joanne Kilgour, Chapter Director

PennEnvironment                                        Sierra Club, Pennsylvania Chapter

Joseph Otis Minott, Executive Director           Matthew Stepp, Policy Director

Clean Air Council                                          Citizens for Pennsylvania’s Future

Jackson Morris, Director Eastern Energy      Gretchen Dahlkemper, National Field

Mark Szybist, Senior Program Advocate       Manager

Natural Resources Defense Council          Moms Clean Air Force

Josh McNeil, Executive Director                     Phil Wallis, Executive Director

Conservation Voters of Pennsylvania         Audubon Pennsylvania

Alice Tong, Eastern States Advocate               Khari Mosley, Pennsylvania Regional

Environmental Entrepreneurs (E2)               Programs Manager

                                                                          BlueGreen Alliance

Steve Hvozdovich                                            Mary Booth

Clean Water Action                                        Partnership for Policy Integrity

What you need to know about the Pennsylvania Clean Power Plan

President Obama and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) took historic action on August 3, 2015 when they announced the finalized Clean Power Plan (CPP), a step to reduce carbon pollution and combat climate change. The plan extends to the year 2030 and focuses on lowering emissions from power plants and increasing renewable energy and efficiency. States will individually develop plans to meet the guidelines laid out by the CPP.

Pennsylvania already has programs that would get us over halfway to our goal, if they are fully put into effect. These current policies would meet 51% of the goal. The other 49% will be covered by increasing energy efficiency, increasing renewable energy, and taking other additional measures. By adjusting the energy efficiency savings goal to 1.5% (which is consistent with leading states),PA  would get to 14% of the target.  The state can also increase the percent of renewable energy to 20%, which again compares to surrounding states and would alone get us 31% closer the aim. The leftover 4% is easily attainable by updating building codes and the efficiency of power plants. 

The Wolf administration's Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), will be holding 14 community listening sessions across to state to provide the public and opportunity to share their thoughts and opinions about the Clean Power Plan.  Click here to learn more about these sessions.

Members and staff at the first listening session held in Harrisburg on 15 September.

Field Notes: Ryerson Outing

Last weekend, the Pennsylvania Sierra Club held its first event as part of the Forest Watch Campaign. Working with the Allegheny Group and the Center for Coalfield Justice, we brought a group of urban Pittsburgh residents and community members from Southwestern Pennsylvania to Ryerson Station State Park. There, we held two hikes and a workshop on bringing together different groups fighting natural gas, longwall, and climate issues.

Southwestern Pennsylvania is under attack from coal and gas extraction on all fronts and Ryerson, a 1,164-acre state park found in Greene County, is no exception. The park was home to Duke Lake, a reservoir lake and cornerstone of the surrounding community. Ten years ago, Duke Lake was drained due to the cracks forming in the dam. The Department of Environmental Protection later determined longwall mining at CONSOL’s nearby Bailey Mine to be at fault. We chose to have our outing at Ryerson to highlight these past injustices and to learn how to support the current work being done by the community members in the area.

We started the day with a bird-watching hike through Polly Hollow led by a DCNR employee. The park is home to a variety of birds, both residents and visitors, and more than 120 species of birds have been documented in the park. While we didn’t see many birds on our hike, we certainly heard a few, including the Orchard Oriole. Participants also shared knowledge on different plants and mushroom varieties we saw along the trail.

A little later in the morning, the rest of our outings participants began to trickle in. The main hike took place along the Iron Bridge Trail. This path follows some of the North Fork of Dunkard fork, a little feeder stream, and what used to be Duke Lake. Here, we stopped to talk about some of the hydrology at Ryerson and wetlands in particular. Members of our group highlighted the important role that wetlands play in regulating streamflow and maintaining water quality.

After our hike, we broke for lunch back at the Iron Bridge where we had a workshop on balancing the complex relationships between communities, extraction, and activism. Our participants broke into small discussion groups to tackle the question, “if you could end all coal mining immediately, would you?” The groups spent a while deliberating and came back with some thoughtful responses. As a group made up of local residents and urban allies, everyone had a different approach and relationship to the issues in the region.

While most people had an immediate response, the effects of their initial decisions became clear through discussion. Some participants talked about the need to stave off future climate disasters but others talked about the immediate harm to local communities forced into a coal-based mono economy. Other people brought up the need for a slow and just economic transition parallel to backing away from a carbon-based economy. Regardless of their decision, it became clear that we don’t win unless everybody wins and many people questioned whether they were the ones to make that call in the first place.

After our workshop, we caravaned to a few locations in Greene County to see the impacts of the coal and gas industry. We stopped by a gas compressor station adjacent to the park, a coal refuse disposal area which is a valley filled in with toxic coal waste, and the largest coal preparation facility in the county that processes over 20 million tons of coal a year.

Veronica Coptis and Eva Westheimer from the Center for Coalfield Justice shared some background on the current threats to the park. Currently the beautiful streams left in Ryerson Station State Park are under imminent threat from ongoing longwall mining that is predicted to destroy them. With the recent news that Duke Lake cannot be restored because of ongoing ground movement from mining subsidence, these streams are vital to renewing and improving Ryerson State Park.

There is still work to be done to save Ryerson State Park. To get involved and learn more about these efforts, please contact Veronica at the Center for Coalfield Justice. To learn more about CCJ’s work with Ryerson, click here. To get involved with the Forest Watch Campaign or to plan an outing in your area, contact me.

Sierra Club Responds to DEP Draft Final Rulemaking for Oil and Gas Operations

August 12, 2015

Contact: 

Joanne Kilgour, Director, Sierra Club Pennsylvania Chapter, 412-965-9973, joanne.kilgour@sierraclub.org

Thomas Au, Conservation Chair, Sierra Club Pennsylvania Chapter, 717-234-7445

Sierra Club Responds to DEP Draft Final Rulemaking for Oil and Gas Operations

Governor Wolf has promised to ensure that Pennsylvania’s government would be open and transparent  and to regulate oil and gas drilling activities to ensure that operations would be conducted safely. Today, the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) and DEP Secretary Quigley followed through on the promise of openness and transparency, and announced some of the changes to how it will regulate oil and gas activities.

The Pennsylvania Sierra Club thanks DEP for the thorough and meaningful public participation process that led to this draft final rule, and applauds the administration for taking steps to limit fracking pits and impoundments. “Waste impoundments are a significant pollution threat and create dangerous conditions for public health and the environment,”  Chapter Director Joanne Kilgour stated. “We support provisions that prevent operators from using open pits for storage of dangerous substances, including wastewater, drill cuttings, and substances (like gels and cement) that return to the surface after fracking.  Many spills, leaks, and incidents involving pits have occurred which have contaminated water, soil, and air.”  The regulations will require containment of regulated substances, but does not totally ban open impoundments.

However, the Sierra Club remains concerned that the administration will not keep oil and gas operations at least one mile from schools and playgrounds and will not follow through to regulate noise pollution. The draft final regulations only require drilling activities to be a mere 200 feet from schools and playgrounds.  Schools, playgrounds, medical facilities, and nursing homes are public resources which should be protected from hazardous industrial activities, and in the interest of transparency we will seek a full explanation from DEP for its decision to establish such a small setback.  “Our children and those in need of medical attention require protection from oil and gas operations and  such a small protected area will not be sufficiently protective of their health. We will continue to seek additional protections for schools, playgrounds, and medical facilities.” stated Ms. Kilgour.

“Regulations to protect the public are long overdue”  stated Thomas Au, Conservation Chair for the Pennsylvania Sierra Club. “The degradation of our air, water, and health have been a fact of life since the drilling boom began several years ago. Pennsylvania is long past the time of continued debate on whether oil and gas activities impact health. Instead, there is an urgent need to face realities on the ground and fix critical problems, such as failures to immediately notify public officials of spills and leaks.”

The Sierra Club will continue to work with the administration to adopt oil and gas regulations that are fully protective of the public, and looks forward to the inclusion of public health in future regulatory packages. DEP has received significant input from both the public and the regulated community on these changes, and DEP must be empowered to move quickly to finalize these regulations.

#####

Welcome Tom Torres!

It’s hard for me to talk about myself because what I really want to do is talk about all of the incredible individuals I have had the opportunity to learn from over the past six years. I have supported rural groups resisting extraction in Appalachia, worked with communities of color in the Southeast to build new economic futures, and helped build broad coalitions all across the region to fight for self-determination. I don’t think it’s possible to talk about campaigns and not mention who makes the wins possible: the communities driving and defining our work.

As the Conservation Program Coordinator, I’ll be supporting the Chapter through the Forest Watch Initiative, a program that empowers Sierra Club members to become the eyes and ears of the forest. Through member outings and an interactive campaign platform, we hope to make connections between public land issues, oil and gas infrastructure, and frontline struggles all over the state. With over 20,000 members and a long history of successful grassroots work, the Pennsylvania Sierra Club is in a strong position to push back against the dirty industries that threaten our land, water, and people.

Tom overlooking a strip mine on Black Mtn., Appalachia, Va. 

Growing up the child of Mexican immigrants, I know the inherent value in resilient and diverse communities. My experience in Appalachia was as much about immigrants and manufacturing as it was mountains and riverbeds. Navigating different facets of the work — from farmers in Northeast Georgia and black landowners in the Alabama Black Belt to urban residents fighting for security and recognition — I have seen that strong communities are ones that recognize their collective power. Diversity in landscape, in issues, and in people is a value but also a challenge that must be met with compassion and understanding. I’m excited to experience everything Pennsylvania has to offer and I look forward to visiting with all of you across the state.

Tom Torres

Conservation Program Coordinator

Forest Watch Campaign

tom.torres@sierraclub.org

Sunbury Pipeline Landowner Rights Meeting

Nuclear Knowledge

Late long-time Sierra Club member and ardent activist Dr.Judy Johnsrud shares her knowledge on nuclear energy. The video includes 3 different segments over multiple years. Everyone will learn a lot as Judy describes the fundamental issues linked to the production and necessary isolation of nuclear waste. Some of Judy’s main points include:

• No safe level of exposure;
• Don’t transport the waste, but isolate on site;
• No radioactive materials in childrens’ toys;
• There is no radiation that should be below regulatory concern.