Uncategorized

By Richard Garrett, Jr.

IT’S NOT ALL ABOUT WIND, AT LEAST NOT ALL OF THE TIME…

Even though a great deal of time so far this session has been devoted to legislation related to wind energy development, yesterday’s House Minerals, Business and Economic Development Committee heard from sponsors about an alternative, and some would say, renewable source of energy — nuclear power. (Please note — its not my purpose to renew that debate!)

The bill, HB 0097 (to read it go to this page and click on the link to “2010 Bill Information” and then click on the bill title), proposes to authorize a task force study at a cost of $18,000 that would look into what might be described as the nuclear energy ecosystem in Wyoming.

Specifically, the task force would explore nuclear energy production and incentives, examine the use of unappropriated water, research state regulatory provisions that unduly restrict nuclear power plants, understand the role of local governments, identify federal statutes that may preempt or limit state authority, understand opportunities for nuclear waste storage and define the role of higher education in the state’s effort to promote the nuclear industry.

The task force would be obligated to produce a report to the House Minerals Committee no later than November 1, 2010 and that committee would in turn offer proposed legislation for next year’s session.

The task force would include two members each from the Senate and House and three individuals appointed by the governor. It was on this last point that the Wyoming Outdoor Council chose to focus our immediate concerns.

MY TESTIMONY

I testified on behalf of the Wyoming Outdoor Council that the authorizing legislation should not restrict the governor’s choices for participants on the task force and specifically urged the committee to encourage the governor to appoint task force study members from the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality and from the University of Wyoming School of Energy Resources.

These selections would seem eminently practical and could lend a degree of expertise to the panel from existing state entities that should not be ignored. In particular, we are concerned about in-situ uranium mining impacts on ground water supplies (and we are also concerned about that practice’s impact on wildlife — in fact, Sophie Osborn, the Council’s wildlife biologist, is currently examining this issue).

We are very concerned that the task force study might prove a springboard to renewing the notion that Wyoming should become a dumping ground for radioactive waste.

The committee approved the bill and its funding will now be determined in the budget process. As always, the bill will have to be heard and win support on the opposite end of the capitol — in this case, in the Senate — and must also pass muster with the governor before it can be enacted.

I invite your thoughts and input on this bill and any others that have caught your attention.

Please feel free, as always, to email me at richard@wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org or call, 307-438-9516.

I also encourage you to let me know if you are in Cheyenne before the end of the session. It would be great to meet up, share ideas and show you around the capitol.

By Richard Garrett, Jr.

APPROPRIATIONS SEEKS TO TIGHTEN DEQ’S BELT — WE RESIST

As Wyoming Outdoor Council members know, we’ve been tracking (and engaging in) several wind-energy-related bills.

One of these is HB 0072, sponsored by Rep. Tim Stubson of Casper.

This bill, which can be seen here: http://legisweb.state.wy.us/2010/Titles/HB0072.htm, is a direct result of the efforts of the state’s Wind Energy Task Force.

Its official description is as follows:

AN ACT relating to siting and regulation of wind energy facilities; requiring permitting by boards of county commissioners; establishing minimum standards for wind energy facilities; providing for the review of county permitting decisions; allowing counties to adopt requirements; providing for referrals to the Industrial Siting Council; amending the Industrial Siting Council’s jurisdiction; requiring rulemaking; providing penalties; requiring fees; requiring financial assurances; and providing for an effective date.

Simply by reading the bill’s description one can see that the wind energy task force did a fine job of identifying a variety of issues regarding wind energy development, many of which must be subject to review and oversight by the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality.

One important implication of the bill is to require staffing at the Department of Environmental Quality and within the Industrial Siting Council to oversee this development.

And for the appropriations committee, there is the rub.

As everyone knows by now, state revenues are down (dramatically) and the expected pace of recovery is uncertain. In response to this, Gov. Dave Freudenthal ordered a hiring freeze in 2009 coupled with across-the-board budget reductions.

The Legislature, during this budget session, is determined to toe that line and perhaps make deeper cuts. Meanwhile, if there is one growth sector in the Wyoming energy economy it is industrial wind farm development.

So there is tension — the DEQ must have capable and expert personnel to make sure that wind development conforms to the Legislature’s intent, and yet the Legislature seems equally intent on reducing staffing levels at the DEQ.

It’s within that context that the House Appropriations Committee heard from DEQ Director John Corra at this morning’s hearing.

Director Corra made it clear to the committee that environmental concerns from ozone, to refineries, to produced water, to landfills, mean that the DEQ must have the resources to match these challenges.

Meanwhile, some on the committee seem determined to not allow the DEQ to add even one person to its staff.

UNDERFUNDED DEQ

The Wyoming Outdoor Council believes that the DEQ is underfunded and under-resourced. I have communicated these concerns to appropriations committee members, the DEQ and the governor’s office.

The environmental challenges that our state faces mean that the state must affirm its commitment to responsible and well-managed energy development and environmental oversight.

If you agree, please go to the Legislature’s website at this link: http://legisweb.state.wy.us/LEGINFO/participate.htm … And let the Legislature hear your concerns.

Alternatively, and if you’d prefer, contact me either by email or phone call and I will be sure to pass your thoughts along to legislators. I’d love to hear from you.

Contact: Richard Garrett, Jr., energy and legislative advocate, Wyoming Outdoor Council, 307-332-7031 x18; 307-438-9516; richard@wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org.

By Richard Garrett, Jr.

WIND DEBATE STIRS WYOMING HOUSE…

Taxing Wind Proves Vexing

The House Revenue Committee listened to a sometimes contentious debate Monday morning regarding HB 101, the proposed state tax on wind energy production (http://legisweb.state.wy.us/2010/Titles/HB0101.htm).

The bill is officially described as follows:

AN ACT relating to taxation and revenue; imposing a tax upon the production of electricity from wind resources as specified; providing for administration, imposition, enforcement and distribution as specified; providing applicability; and providing for an effective date.

The committee heard its chair, Rep. Rodney “Pete” Anderson, of Laramie County, announce 3 key amendments to the bill as originally authored.

(It’s worth noting that this bill is one of four key pieces of wind-energy-related bills that are supported by the governor.)

Here is a description of those amendments:

(1) Lower the rate of the proposed excise tax from $3 to $1 per megawatt hour.

(2) Distribute all proceeds from the tax to affected counties on a proportional basis–the bill as originally proposed would have split
revenues 40/60 between the counties and the state, respectively.

(3) Make the tax effective in 2012 and further provide for no excise tax on a wind farm development during its first three years of
operation.

After enduring more than an hour of at times contradictory testimony, the committee voted to approve amendments 1 and 3 but kept in place the revenue split that amendment 2 would have modified.

The committee heard from a number of special interests on the bill including Rocky Mountain Power, Duke Energy (represented by Larry Wolfe of Holland and Hart), Carbon and Natrona county commissioners, land owners, BP America, Wasatch Wind and the Wyoming Power Producer’s Coalition.

Almost uniformly, they spoke in rather tepid support of the bill conditioned on the passage of each of the three amendments. With the failure of amendment 2–the amendment that would have directed all money collected to affected counties on a proportional basis–it’s hard to predict how these key stakeholders will treat the bill that was finally approved out of the committee; their lukewarm support may well evaporate.

SOUND FAMILIAR?

It’s interesting to note that those in opposition to the bill employed a familiar tactic in urging the committee to vote against the tax–each warned that if taxed, the nascent wind energy industry would surely leave Wyoming. The Wyoming Legislature has heard this tactic over and over again through the years from other energy producers. To date, none of those industries have left the state.

And given the abundance of world-class wind with which Wyoming is scoured every day, it seems unlikely that the wind energy industry will find haven on a windier shore.

The bill will now go to the House for a hearing by the Committee of the Whole. Its passage there will mean that it goes on to the Senate where many of the same characters will reassemble and offer the same arguments anew.

BY THE WAY…

The last component of the four wind energy bills has been introduced and will be heard by the House Minerals, Business and Economic Development Committee this week–it’s HB0079, sponsored by Rep. Kermit Brown.

This bill will impose a moratorium on the exercise of the power of eminent domain by merchant wind generators (those who produce energy solely for export to other states).

Contact: Richard Garrett, Jr., energy and legislative advocate, Wyoming Outdoor Council, 307-332-7031 x18; richard@wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org.

By Richard Garrett, Jr.

WIND TAKES CENTER STAGE…

Yesterday’s Joint Minerals, Business and Economic Development Committee heard from Rep. Tim Stubson and Sen. Drew Perkins on two of the four major wind energy related bills that will be introduced during this legislative session.

The bills are the result of the efforts of the Wind Energy Task Force that met four times during the interim–a task force that was co-chaired by Sen. Jim Anderson and Rep. Rodney Anderson.

It’s worth noting that the Wyoming Outdoor Council’s wildlife biologist Sophie Osborn and I attended each of the task force meetings. Sophie presented to the task force on a variety of wildlife issues and in particular offered important perspective on how wind energy could impact the sage-grouse. I have heard from several task force members that her contributions played a key role in their work.

HERE IS AN OVERVIEW OF THE BILLS

HB 0072 will give counties basic tools and authority for the siting and configuration of wind farm development. Counties can impose setback standards, decommissioning requirements and safety regulations. These tools can be used regardless of the size of a wind farm development. Counties will also be able to refer their concerns to the state through the Industrial Siting Council which in turn will be required to conduct a site review process which would include all the provisions mentioned above and also account for socioeconomic impacts of the development.

This bill, as it is written today, can be found at: http://legisweb.state.wy.us/2010/Titles/HB0072.htm. Remember, though, that once successfully introduced, the bill may undergo amendment.

SF 0066, according to Senator Perkins, will expand and modify the authority of the Industrial Siting Council to better account for wind farm development. For example, rather than a “dollars invested” threshold that would trigger ISC review, any wind farm that exceeds 30 turbines must be reviewed by the Industrial Siting Council.

Senator Perkins acknowledged that the 30 turbine number was somewhat arbitrary and that there had been discussion about higher and lower numbers as a triggering mechanism. There is sure to be debate about this key provision. (By comparison, and according to today’s standards, a wind farm development would not be subject to ISC review unless it exceeded 56 turbines; clearly this is a step in the right direction but since wind farms can consume so much open space, it might be advisable to lower the threshold number even further.)

This bill can be seen at: http://legisweb.state.wy.us/2010/Titles/SF0066.htm

We will see at least two more bills introduced this session about wind energy development. There are several ideas floating around about an excise tax (an idea supported by the governor). And there will be a bill dealing with eminent domain issues–the governor has proposed a one year moratorium on eminent domain while some legislators seem to be leaning toward excluding wind developers from ever being able to exercise that prerogative.

I will keep you posted on these and other bills. If any of our readers have ideas that they’d like to share, I hope you will get in touch with me by email, richard@wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org. And finally, if you’re in Cheyenne, please look me up!

Contact: Richard Garrett, Jr., energy and legislative advocate, Wyoming Outdoor Council, 307-332-7031 x18; richard@wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org.

By Richard Garrett, Jr.

AND THEY’RE OFF…

Governor Freudenthal’s State of the State

Perhaps predictably in the time of Tea Parties, Scott Brown, and the D.C. treadmill (go nowhere, but go there fast) the governor opted for a decidedly conservative run at the biennium budget. In fact, he went so far as to suggest that the legislature simply approve the Joint Appropriation Committee’s budget (one largely shaped around his own offering) and go home. This is a no-growth budget that back-stops the across-the-board cuts that the governor imposed in the summer of 2009.

Notably, the governor offered no insight on environmental issues. As I’ve talked with others, some think this is a good thing. To them it suggests no roll-backs and no cut-backs. I suppose that is a reasonable point of view except that the governor has flown to Washington at least 3 times in the last few weeks to push the Obama administration on its approach to federal land use and energy policy issues.

RUBBER ON THE ROAD

In practical terms, the governor opposes any use of the “rainy day fund” into which the legislature has squirreled some $700 million over the last several years. He is uncertain of any sustainable national economic recovery and notes that regardless, the Wyoming economy always lags behind national indicators.

The governor did address, as he did in a press conference last week, wind energy development in Wyoming. He is proposing, or supporting, four pieces of legislation he hopes will encourage wind development and yet give the state and local governments tools and resources to manage its growth. Thus he suggests that the Industrial Siting Act be amended to better account for wind development (he thinks that any project of 30 or more turbines should be subject to Industrial Siting review). Additionally, he advocates empowering counties to engage in the siting process.

The governor has also proposed a 3 percent excise tax on wind energy, the proceeds of which would be divided 60-40 (state-local) and used to offset some of the impacts of wind energy development on infrastructure. Finally, he is in favor of a one year moratorium on the ability of merchant generators (those companies that develop wind energy solely for transmitting power to other states) to exercise eminent domain for the placement of their collector or feeder lines (the power lines that would interconnect wind farm development with the larger interstate transmission grid).

Each of these ideas seem eminently practical (though the Wyoming Outdoor Council is neutral on the excise tax proposal). That said, we are probably going to push for a smaller number of turbines as a threshold for triggering the Industrial Siting process. This doesn’t seem unreasonable since a 30-turbine wind farm can occupy as many as 700 acres (or considerably more). Impacts to land, wildlife, and viewshed can be considerable and industrial siting should be strengthened to recognize this fact.

OTHER ACTION

In addition to the wind energy bills, we will be following bills related to carbon sequestration liability, rangeland health assessments, socioeconomic analysis of activities on state land, and other bills that almost certainly will be introduced by the end of the week.

Meanwhile, one bill, SF 21, that we intended to follow has already died, for two reasons (!) — the committee chair told me he won’t bring it before the committee and the business plan that supported the idea has faltered — thus support for the bill has evaporated. This bill was intended to amend existing legislation and extend a sales and use tax exemption to apply to an oxy-combustion and advanced coal facility (power plant) that was proposed to be constructed in northeast Wyoming.

AND FINALLY

The Wyoming Outdoor Council’s executive director Laurie Milford came to town and spent the afternoon at the Legislature. It was great to have her support and to see once again how well respected and recognized the Outdoor Council is.

Contact: Richard Garrett, Jr., energy and legislative advocate, Wyoming Outdoor Council, 307-332-7031 x18; richard@wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org.

THE U.S. FOREST SERVICE HAS INDICATED IT INTENDS TO REVERSE COURSE on a previous decision to lease 44,000 acres in the Wyoming Range for oil and gas development.

The federal agency on Thursday released a draft of its long-awaited updated analysis of contested oil and gas leases on the eastern front of the Wyoming Range in the Bridger-Teton National Forest.

The draft states the agency’s preferred course of action now is to cancel all of the contested leases—a decision that would be in line with the wishes of a broad coalition that has worked for four years to protect the Wyoming Range from development. Those working to protect the range include Wyoming Gov. Dave Freudenthal, area ranchers, sportsmen’s groups, labor union members, outfitters, outdoors enthusiasts and conservation organizations.

LEASES CONTROVERSIAL FROM THE START

The Forest Service leased the acres in question for oil and gas development in four sales in 2005 and 2006. The leases faced numerous protests from conservation groups, labor unions, hunters and fishermen, concerned citizens, and the governor’s office, among others—who came together to stop the industrialization of the Wyoming Range, and conserve its recreational values.

The Wyoming Range Legacy Act—introduced by Wyoming Sen. John Barrasso in October 2007 in response to the development threats—was signed into law in March 2009. The act removed 1.2 million acres of the Wyoming Range from future oil and gas leasing, and had widespread public support.

The legislation left the fate of the 44,720 acres of contested leases to the agencies. The U.S. Bureau of Land Management decided in August to rescind about half of the contested leases, and refund the high bidders.

This latest draft analysis by the Forest Service addresses the entire 44,720 acres—not simply the remaining 21,000 acres—because industry is currently challenging the BLM’s decision to rescind the other half of the leases.

This updated analysis shows that the Forest Service’s preferred alternative is to cancel all of the leases from the first two sales.

Media Contact: Lisa McGee, Wyoming Outdoor Council, 307-332-7031 x20; lisa@wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org.

By Lisa McGee

THE SHOSHONE NATIONAL FOREST could approve, in the coming months, a decade-old application to drill for oil near Dubois, Wyoming. If the project is given the green light, it would be the first well drilled on the Shoshone in more than 20 years.

Because the drilling would be part of a larger oil and gas unit—more development could follow. As is, the project would require the clear-cutting and leveling of several acres of Shoshone National Forest land to make way for new and upgraded roads and a large well pad.

The U.S. Forest Service has indicated it intends to bypass an in-depth environmental review of this proposed project.

The Outdoor Council believes the Shoshone National Forest deserves better. The proposed oil well was controversial ten years ago and is even more unsettling today. The Council’s members are requesting that the agency proceed more cautiously, and with a thorough review of potential impacts to nearby streams and to big game species, such as elk.

The area where the drilling would take place is important elk winter range and spring calving grounds and is right in the middle of an elk migration route that links the forest to Yellowstone National Park.

It is also an area referred to as “bear central” by a local wildlife manager, because it provides some of the most important springtime grizzly bear habitat in the Greater Yellowstone area, offering the bears a wide variety of lower-elevation food sources.

HOW TO PARTICIPATE

Although the Forest Service is not hosting any official public meetings regarding this project, Rick Metzger, the Wind River district ranger, has agreed to meet with interested citizens on Tuesday, February 2, at 6 p.m., at the Forest Service office in Dubois. The Wyoming Outdoor Council is encouraging people to attend.

The Shoshone National Forest is accepting public comments on the project until February 8.

Those interested can send comments to: Rick Metzger, Wind River Ranger District, P.O. Box 186, Dubois, WY 82513, or by email at comments-rocky-mountain-shoshone-wind-river@fs.fed.us or fax a comment to (307) 455-3866 ATTN: Rick Metzger. Include “Scott Well #2” in subject line of emails and faxes.

OLD APPLICATION

This drilling proposal originally came before the U.S. Forest Service in 1999 and—due to public opposition and company inaction then and over the last decade—it was never approved and has remained under suspension.

But late in 2009 the Bureau of Land Management urged the Forest Service to deal with the long-suspended lease, and the Service responded by contacting the company, Hudson Group, LLC, which subsequently expressed a renewed interest in developing the lease.

This fall, the Forest Service indicated it would prefer to opt out of completing a detailed environmental review, claiming the project meets criteria such that it could be “categorically excluded” from review, which would essentially fast-track the approval. Traditionally used for minor administrative actions such as painting a building or mowing a lawn—actions that will have an insignificant effect on the environment—the use of categorical exclusions was expanded under the prior presidential administration. This type of exclusion was adopted toward the end of the last administration, and it would be its first application on any national forest in Wyoming.

The Wyoming Outdoor Council believes the authorization of this kind of industrial development should be made only with the most careful and detailed environmental analysis. The Shoshone is one of our most treasured national forests, and is one of this country’s last, best places for wildlife, biodiversity, and untouched backcountry landscapes.

WILD BACKCOUNTRY

Bordering Yellowstone National Park, the Shoshone National Forest is the United State’s first federally protected national forest, created by an act of Congress in 1891.

Some have mused that if Teddy Roosevelt were to explore the Shoshone today, it would look very much the same to him as it did when he visited in the late 19th century. This is a testament to an engaged public that has demanded routinely and passionately that the Shoshone be managed to retain the wild characteristics that set it apart from other forests in this country and around the globe. The Shoshone National Forest is what we at the Outdoor Council refer to as a “heritage landscape.” Heritage landscapes are places where the wildlife, scenic, historic, cultural, or recreational values are too important to the people of Wyoming—and to the nation as a whole—to sacrifice to industrial development.

The Council is working to ensure that the Shoshone National Forest remains a place where wildlife continues to thrive and people can go to experience world-class backcountry hiking, camping, hunting, and fishing—not unlike the experiences people had more than a century ago. There are perhaps few better examples of a heritage landscape than the Shoshone National Forest.

Contact: Lisa McGee, Wyoming Outdoor Council, 307-332-7031 x20; lisa@wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org.

WYOMING’S NEXT ENERGY BOOM, in the form of industrial-scale wind farms, might already be here.

And the sheer volume of new applications for Wyoming wind projects has taken most observers by surprise. There have been about 100 applications for potential wind farms on federal land, alone, since 2002—and most of those have come in the past three years.

Although unlikely, if all of the applications were approved and developed, wind farms could cover an estimated 1 million acres of public land—and perhaps another 750,000 to 1 million acres of private land in Wyoming.

The Wyoming Outdoor Council has created a team of staff members whose goal it is to get out ahead of the next energy boom, and to offer meaningful leadership on the ground.

“We’ve worked hard to develop the expertise, and the means, to engage effectively with decision makers,” said Laurie Milford, executive director. “And we’re now in a position to help ensure that we make strides as a nation toward curbing climate change, without sacrificing Wyoming’s wildlife and most cherished landscapes.”

Download a PDF of our latest newsletter here, or click on the image of the newsletter above.

WITH THE AIM OF BRINGING HEALTH BENEFITS to millions of Americans, the Environmental Protection Agency proposed new smog standards on Thursday.

The new standards would replace Bush-era rules that experts agree are inadequate to protect people from potentially dangerous air pollution.

The standards would be the strictest to date, and would be in line with the unanimous recommendation put forth in 2008 by the agency’s Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee, which was composed of preeminent medical doctors, air quality experts, and public health professionals.

“EPA is stepping up to protect Americans from one of the most persistent and widespread pollutants we face,” said EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, in a prepared statement. “Smog in the air we breathe poses a very serious health threat, especially to children and individuals suffering from asthma and lung disease. It dirties our air, clouds our cities, and drives up our health care costs across the country.”

Using the best science to strengthen these standards is a long overdue action, Jackson said, and will help millions of Americans “breathe easier and live healthier.”

In 2008, the Bush administration rejected the unanimous recommendations of the EPA’s expert advisory panel, and chose instead to set a weaker standard that would allow for more pollution.

Many medical professionals and public health officials protested that decision, and in 2009, in Pinedale, Wyoming, a grassroots organization called Citizens United for Responsible Energy Development—along with other local individuals—petitioned the Cowboy State to set its own smog standard that would be in line with what the scientists and medical professionals had recommended to the EPA.

That request was ultimately dropped by Wyoming’s Environmental Quality Council, but the EPA’s newly proposed standard for smog would be roughly the same level of pollution control that the Wyoming petitioners had asked for.

Mary Lynn Worl, a retired teacher who was one of the Pinedale-area petitioners, said she was pleased with Thursday’s announcement.

“This is good news,” Worl said. “I’m personally very pleased that the EPA has taken this action. It certainly recognizes the scientific evidence that a stricter standard is needed to protect human health.”

Bruce Pendery, program director for the Wyoming Outdoor Council, agreed.

“The science is overwhelming on this point, and it’s great that we’ll finally have a national standard that reflects the science” Pendery said. “We need to keep in mind that this standard is all about protecting our health, especially that of elderly people, our children, and those with respiratory problems.”

THE PROBLEM WITH OZONE

Smog, also known as ground-level ozone, is especially dangerous to children and the elderly, and can cause a number of serious health problems, including aggravation of asthma and increased risk of premature death in people with heart or lung disease, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the EPA.

Ozone can also harm healthy people who work and play outdoors. The damage caused to people’s lungs by ozone is thought to be immediate and irreversible.

The EPA on Thursday proposed to set the “primary” standard, which protects public health, at a level between 0.060 and 0.070 parts per million measured over eight hours. The current national primary standard is 0.075 ppm. Children are at the greatest risk from ozone because their lungs are still developing and they are most likely to be active outdoors, and they are more likely than adults to have asthma, according to the agency.

The EPA is also proposing to set a separate “secondary” standard to protect the environment, especially plants and trees. Secondary standards are set with the intention of protecting the “public welfare.” The seasonal standard the EPA is recommending is designed to protect plants and trees from damage caused by repeated ozone exposure, which can reduce tree growth, damage leaves, and increase susceptibility to disease, the agency explained in a media release.

OLD STANDARD WAS INADEQUATE

Administrator Jackson announced in September of 2009 that the Obama administration would reconsider the existing ozone standards, which the Bush administration set at 0.075 ppm. Since September, the EPA conducted a review of the science that guided the 2008 decision, including more than 1,700 scientific studies and public comments from the 2008 rulemaking process, according to the agency.

The EPA also reviewed the findings of the independent Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee, which unanimously recommended that standards be set in the ranges ultimately proposed on Thursday by the agency.

Depending on the level of the final standard, the proposal will yield health benefits between $13 billion and $100 billion, according to the EPA.

“This proposal would help reduce premature deaths, aggravated asthma, bronchitis cases, hospital and emergency room visits and days when people miss work or school because of ozone-related symptoms,” the agency wrote in is release. “Estimated costs of implementing this proposal range from $19 billion to $90 billion.”

This rulemaking is important for Wyoming, especially western Wyoming in the Pinedale area where ozone levels in excess of even the current, weaker, national standard have been recorded in recent years.

Ozone levels have gotten so high in the Pinedale area in recent winters that they have rivaled the worst bad-ozone days in major metropolitan areas, such as Los Angeles. As a result, the state, with the support of Gov. Dave Freudenthal, has recommended that the EPA designate the Pinedale area in nonattainment with the national ambient air quality standard for ozone.

Ground-level ozone forms when emissions from industrial facilities, power plants, landfills, and motor vehicles react with sunlight.

The EPA will take public comment for 60 days after the proposed rule is published in the Federal Register.

The photo above of natural gas flaring was taken by Linda Baker in the Upper Green River Valley, a rural area in western Wyoming that has experienced big-city like ozone pollution spikes in recent years as a result of a natural gas drilling boom.

Photo by Linda Baker

U.S. SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR KEN SALAZAR on Wednesday announced major reforms to the way the federal government manages oil and gas drilling on federal lands.

The announcement immediately won guarded praise from conservation groups, including the Wyoming Outdoor Council.

Citing a need to improve “certainty and order” in oil and gas leasing on U.S. public lands, Salazar said the Bureau of Land Management will undertake to improve protections for land, water, and wildlife and reduce potential conflicts that can lead to costly and time-consuming protests and litigation of leases.

The Department of the Interior will also establish a new “energy reform team” to identify and implement important energy management reforms, Salazar said.

“The new initiatives should go a long way to establishing greater oversight of oil and gas lease offerings,” said Bruce Pendery, program director with the Wyoming Outdoor Council.

But Pendery said a thorough analysis of the reforms will be impossible until more details are provided by the Interior Department.

“These reforms seem to represent a major step in the right direction for onshore oil and gas management,” Pendery said. “They will help restore balance, accountability, and common sense to a system that had essentially become single use rather than multiple use.”

The new initiatives should create better oversight of the federal oil and gas program by requiring “interdisciplinary” review of nominated lease parcels, he said. Such a review would include input not only from the oil and gas experts — as had been the practice in the past — but from experts such as wildlife biologists, archaeologists, soil scientists, and others, he said.

Additionally, Salazar announced the development of a new approach to managing major oil and gas plays. The approach will include developing “master leasing and development plans,” which Pendery believes could create a more cohesive, bigger-picture approach to managing areas that are anticipated to see intensive new oil and gas development.

“The previous Administration’s ‘anywhere, anyhow’ policy on oil and gas development ran afoul of communities, carved up the landscape, and fueled costly conflicts that created uncertainty for investors and industry,” Salazar said in his announcement. “We need a fresh look – from inside the federal government and from outside – at how we can better manage Americans’ energy resources.”

The federal Bureau of Land Management is issuing new guidance for local field managers that will help bring clarity, consistency, and public engagement to the onshore oil and gas leasing process while balancing the many resource values that the BLM is entrusted with protecting on behalf of the American people, Salazar said.

“In addition, with the help of our new energy reform team, we will improve the Department’s internal operations to better manage publicly owned energy resources and the revenues they produce,” Salazar said.

Pendery agreed these changes are both necessary and overdue.

“We should see greater oversight of where leasing will occur, and greater public involvement at all levels, which is an important step forward,” Pendery said. “The plan to emphasize leasing in already-developed areas and allowing leasing in new areas only after careful planning is commendable.”

SCALING BACK SO-CALLED ‘CATEGORICAL EXCLUSIONS’

The Interior Department is also moving toward greater oversight of so-called categorical exclusions, a tool for fast-tracking development by bypassing detailed environmental review. The use of categorical exclusions proliferated during the previous presidential administration, and conservationists, sportsmen’s groups and others have long-argued that the tool was being abused in places such as Wyoming’s Pinedale Anticline Field, at the expense of the environment.

A 2009 report from the Government Accountability Office — the investigative arm of congress — found that local Bureau of Land Management field offices in Wyoming and Utah, among other places, had misused or misapplied the categorical exclusions tool, and the GAO recommended reforms to the process.

“These reforms to the way categorical exclusions will be implemented are in line with the National Environmental Policy Act, and this, also, is overdue,” Pendery said.

And Pendery noted that President Barack Obama issued a proclamation on Tuesday, the day before Salazar’s announcements, recognizing the 40th anniversary of NEPA, celebrating our nation’s “basic national charter for the protection of the environment.”

Media Contact: Bruce Pendery, Wyoming Outdoor Council, 435-752-2111, bruce@wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org

LINKS:

* Click here for the Department of the Interior media release about the reforms.

* Click here for Interior Secretary Ken Salazar’s official order.

* Click here for an energy reform fact sheet.

*Photo immediately above is Western Wyoming’s Jonah natural gas field. The photo at the top of this post was taken on Western Wyoming’s Pinedale Anticline field.