E&E PM: April 25, 2012
NEPA: House bill on streamlining federal review may have big consequences, Dems fear
John McArdle, E&E reporter
The White House and congressional Democrats have plenty of concerns about a new bill designed to streamline the federal permitting process, but at a hearing on the measure today, Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) was particularly troubled by a provision that would allow sponsors to conduct their own environmental impact statements.
While sponsors have already been allowed to pay for environmental reviews to be conducted by a third party that has been selected by government officials, the bill by Rep. Dennis Ross (R-Fla.) would give businesses an entirely new level of control over the process that Cohen said would undermine the integrity of environmental reviews that are required under the National Environmental Policy Act.
"Would that be like having TransCanada do the impact statement for the Keystone XL pipeline?" the congressman asked during a hearing today before a House Judiciary subcommittee. "Wow."
At a time when environmental groups have been quick to interpret any regulatory streamlining effort by Republicans as an attempt to sacrifice environmental protections for the sake of industry, Ross has tried to pitch his latest bill as a balanced approach. Ross, a former state lawmaker who has made government reform a focus of his freshman term, says his bill will give businesses much-needed certainty in the complicated federal permitting process by setting established deadlines for completing reviews. At the same time, the congressman has said, the bill ensures that environmental groups continue to be heard in the process (E&E Daily, April 23).
But Cohen saw little balance in the legislation.
A provision of the bill notes that upon request, a project sponsor "shall be authorized to prepare any document for purposes of an environmental review required ... if the lead agency furnishes oversight in such preparation and independently evaluates such document and the document is approved and adopted by the lead agency prior to taking any action or making any approval based on such document."
Cohen's concern was shared by Dinah Bear, who served for 25 years as deputy general counsel and then general counsel to the Council on Environmental Quality.
"This blurring of the distinction between government and private sector roles in the context of a process designed to inform government action is extremely troubling," Bear wrote in her testimony today.
"Government agencies ... are structured to represent the public and are accountable to the public through a variety of mechanisms. Corporations have legitimately different responsibilities to their shareholders. Both the public at large and corporate shareholders have the right to expect these respective sectors to behave in ways that are responsible about those distinctions."
Despite the concerns raised by Cohen today, Ross' bill is likely to be passed out of committee. It has already been co-sponsored by committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas).
