HB 965: The latest attack on environmental protection.

It's typically easy to tell if a piece of legislation is aimed at helping polluters, no matter how hard policymakers try to hide it. Take the General Assembly's recent effort to eliminate new environmental regulations on conventional oil and gas. While the language was buried in a little read bill, it's intent was plain as day.

For the General Assembly's next attack on the environment, they're trying a new tactic - bury their intent in regulatory legalese. In April, the Senate took up a non-controversial bill (Senate Bill 562) that its legislative sponsor, Senator Gordner (R-Bloomsburg), argued would provide the General Assembly more time to study and assess new regulations making their way through the independent review process. The bill quickly passed unanimously, with little debate, and no media fanfare.

The House then took up a similar bill (House Bill 965) and its sponsor, Rep. Godshall (R-Montgomery), made the same legislative oversight argument Sen. Gordner made about his bill. But with many fundamentally important environmental regulations working through the review process such as the Clean Power Plan, new oil and gas rules, and methane leakage regulations, PennFuture and other organizations took a closer look at the bill language and found something troubling.

The legislation is essentially a Trojan horse. It does include language that would give the General Assembly a defined amount of time to review new regulations before it makes it to the final independent review steps, which already include review by legislators. But it also grants new power to the standing committees of the legislature to delay - potentially indefinitely - any regulation they don't like. It also blocks state agencies from publicly posting their regulatory intent and goals in the Pennsylvania Bulletin. In other words, House Bill 965 and Senate Bill 562, in a convoluted way, aim to provide the legislature constitutionally debatable veto power over new regulations while greatly limiting public transparency.

To put it bluntly, this legislation puts not just environmental rules in jeopardy, but any regulatory matter in limbo.

Once the true intent of the legislation was made apparent, a real debate on the bill ensued in the House. Last week, after contentious debate, House Bill 965 passed 113-84, with all but one Democratic member and five Republican members voting against it. Because there were differences between the House and Senate versions, the Senate has now taken up House Bill 965 in an attempt to quickly pass it before it adjourns for the remainder of the year.

It's critical that this bill fail to make it into law as it imperils many major environmental efforts to clean the Commonwealth's air, land, and waters for present and future generations.

Matt Stepp is policy director for PennFuture and is based in Philadelphia. He tweets @MatthewStepp.

Key questions for evaluating severance tax legislation

Pennsylvania lawmakers are in the third week of a budget stalemate that even the most optimistic political observers saw from miles away. I cannot overstate how important these budget negotiations are to the environment. In addition to funding state environmental protection agencies, the budget negotiations include debate on levying a severance tax on natural gas drilling and using part of that revenue to invest in Pennsylvania's clean energy economy as well as enforcing environmental regulations.

So far, the severance tax has been a moving target in the budget debate. Negotiations have ranged from haggling over the details to outright hostility. Legislative leaders such as Rep. Mike Turzai (R-Allegheny) have been particularly outspoken and largely refuse to negotiate with Gov. Tom Wolf on any aspect of the tax. Other leaders, such as Sen. Jake Corman (R-Centre), are more open to negotiating.

Negotiations are expected to continue at least for another couple of weeks, if not longer. But as the negotiations drag on though, there are some key questions to keep in mind when evaluating any potential piece of severance tax legislation:

1. Where is the revenue going? The most important part of any severance tax proposal is how the revenue is invested. PennFuture has strongly advocated that part of the revenue must go to re-starting key clean energy programs as well as beefing up enforcement of environmental regulations. In both cases, budget cuts have severely depleted these programs at a staggering cost to the environment. Their inclusion in any severance tax legislation is crucial.
2. What about the Impact Fee? In 2012, policymakers implemented a "Impact Fee" on natural gas drillers that effectively taxes the industry at the lowest rate of any state with gas drilling. The majority of the revenue from the fee is returned to local municipalities impacted by drilling to rebuild their infrastructure. As a result, the Impact Fee is very popular among drilling counties, making whether the Fee remains or is eliminated due to levying a severance tax a key negotiation sticking point.
3. What about the price floor? Gov. Wolf's severance tax proposal includes a "price floor" of $2.97/mcf, meaning that natural gas drillers would be taxed at $2.97/mcf even if the price of gas falls below this level. In theory, the price floor protects state revenue from possible fluctuations in the price of gas as well as guaranteeing a minimum level of revenue. Currently, natural gas prices in Pennsylvania are lower than the price floor, but are expected to rise as pipeline projects are completed. Nonetheless, the natural gas industry still decries the price floor.
4. What about policy riders? During the course of crafting legislation, the General Assembly has a funny habit of sneaking in provisions in larger bills it knows it can't pass on its own. Their hope is no one notices. Any potential severance tax deal will offer an opportunity to do the same and we've already seen legislative leaders attempt to eliminate new oil and gas regulations by slipping a provision in the Fiscal Code bill. It's entirely possible a similar situation could happen again, potentially reducing the overall benefit of the deal.

Ultimately, the severance tax is crucial environmental policy - if not the most important piece of environmental policy to be enacted in 2015. It's vital we get it right.

Matthew Stepp is director of policy for PennFuture and works out of our Philadelphia and Harrisburg offices. He tweets @MatthewStepp.

No joy in Mudville: General Assembly strikes out down the stretch on key environmental issues

Our preview of the stretch run of the fall legislative session discussed the need for the General Assembly to defeat two bad environmental bills along with the opportunity to pass two excellent bills. Unfortunately, by passing both bad bills and failing to pass either good bill, the General Assembly went 0 for 4 and wore the collar as fans of clean water, acting responsibly on climate, protecting public health, and reducing energy use were left to ponder what might have been in the face of these strikeouts.

Let's look at the legislative box score, which is chock full of errors.

The passage of House Bill 1565 will undermine the current requirements for riparian buffers that protect High Quality and Exceptional Value streams, Pennsylvania's best waters. Riparian buffers reduce flooding and stormwater runoff, improve water quality, decrease pollution, protect drinking water and improve habitat for fish and other wildlife.

HB 1565 rolled into the Senate with considerable momentum from its lopsided passage in the House. A hard push by environmental, conservation and angling organizations made the Senate vote close, but unfortunately the bill was approved 27-22 and has just been signed into law by Governor Corbett as Act 162 of 2014.

The passage of House Bill 2354 will delay and harm Pennsylvania's ability to develop an effective plan to comply with the proposed U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Clean Power Plan. The EPA plan would deliver significant carbon pollution reductions from power plants, help fight global warming, and improve public health, and represents an extraordinary opportunity to boost renewable energy and energy efficiency efforts in Pennsylvania and across America. HB 2354 now risks a federal takeover of Pennsylvania's carbon compliance efforts.

The Senate Appropriations Committee voted 14-12 to approve a compromise amendment offered by Senator John Rafferty, R-Montgomery, that would have given the General Assembly significant input into the crafting of the Pennsylvania compliance plan but without jeopardizing the ability of the Department of Environmental Protection to submit a state plan to the EPA in a timely manner as required by law.

PennFuture supported the Rafferty amendment and commends the eight Democrats and six Republicans who voted in favor. Unfortunately, the full Senate voted 29-20 to return to the previous version of the of the legislation and thus nullify the Rafferty amendment. Governor Corbett has now signed HB 2354 into law as Act 175 of 2014.

House Bill 343, sponsored by Rep. Ron Miller, R-York, would have provided important and long overdue standards for private well water construction that will protect human health and water resources. Over three million Pennsylvania residents rely on one million private water wells for their drinking water supply, with approximately 20,000 wells drilled annually. Only Michigan has a larger population served by private water supplies. Despite these facts, Pennsylvania remains one of two states lacking statewide regulations for private well construction.

The House passed HB 343 by a wide margin on June 27, but the Senate Environmental Resources and Energy Committee whiffed on the bill and did not give it further consideration. Rep. Miller is retiring at the end of the session so hopefully other legislators will step up to the plate on this important issue.

House Bill 34, sponsored by Rep. Kate Harper, R-Montgomery, would have required high-performance green building standards in most state-owned building construction projects. Passage of the bill would be a win for both the environment and Pennsylvania taxpayers as there would be substantial reduction in operating costs and energy and water use over the life of the buildings.

The House passed HB 34 by a wide margin in early 2013, but the bill stalled in the Senate. In the waning days of the session, the bill started to move in the Senate but an apparent deal with the House to pair Senate action on HB 34 in return for House action on a Senate building codes bill fell through.

PennFuture thanks the members of the General Assembly who opposed HB 1565 and HB 2354, and worked to pass HB 343 and 34. We can only hope that next year's legislative lineup will be stronger when it comes to conserving Penn's Woods and protecting its citizens.


Steve Stroman is state policy director for PennFuture and is based in Harrisburg. He tweets @SteveStroman1.

A citizen's guide to the legislative home stretch in Harrisburg

The 2013-2014 session of the Pennsylvania General Assembly is down to five scheduled legislative session days: October 6, 7, 8, 14 and 15.

It is possible that either the House or the Senate could return to Harrisburg to cast votes in a lame duck session after the November 4 election. However, statements from key Senate Republican and House Republican leaders suggest that such votes are unlikely.

There are scores of bills that could be voted and potentially sent to the governor during the remaining five days of session. These five days will be characterized by constant pressure from lobbyists and advocacy organizations, intense bargaining between House and Senate Republican leaders, and urgent calls from all quarters for bills to be voted given the slipping sands of legislative time. With polls showing Governor Tom Corbett consistently trailing challenger Tom Wolf, a potential change in administration is also casting a shadow over the end of the session and fueling an urgent need by some interests to move legislation.

While there is no guarantee that these five days will match the excitement and chaos of Tuesday night's Kansas City-Oakland playoff tilt, we're expecting our fair share of wild card drama over the coming fortnight.

We're also going to need citizens to be there with PennFuture in the days ahead, and not just in spirit or as spectators as it is critical that legislators hear from their constituents on several pressing pieces of environmental and energy legislation.

Here is a scorecard of some of the bills we're following:

House Bill 1565 would undermine the current requirements for riparian buffers that protect High Quality and Exceptional Value streams, Pennsylvania's best waters. Riparian buffers reduce flooding and stormwater runoff, improve water quality, decrease pollution, protect drinking water and improve habitat for fish and other wildlife.

HB 1565 moved through the House quickly in late September. It is now expected to be voted by the Senate Environmental Resources and Energy Committee on October 6, and may be considered by the full Senate soon thereafter. PennFuture is working with a coalition of environmental, conservation and angling organizations to stop the bill.

House Bill 2354 would delay and harm Pennsylvania's ability to develop an effective plan to comply with the proposed U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Clean Power Plan. The EPA plan would deliver significant carbon pollution reductions from power plants, help fight global warming, and improve public health, and represents an extraordinary opportunity to boost renewable energy and energy efficiency efforts in Pennsylvania and across America.

HB 2354 moved through the House quickly in late June. It is now expected to be voted by the Senate Environmental Resources and Energy Committee on October 6, and may be considered by the full Senate soon thereafter. PennFuture is working with a coalition of environmental and public health organizations to stop the bill.

House Bill 343, sponsored by Rep. Ron Miller, R-York, would provide important and long overdue standards for private well-water construction that will protect human health and water resources. Over three million Pennsylvania residents rely on one million private water wells for their drinking water supply, with approximately 20,000 wells drilled annually. Only Michigan has a larger population served by private water supplies. Despite these facts, Pennsylvania remains one of two states lacking statewide regulations for private well construction.

The House passed HB 343 by a wide margin on June 27, but it remains to be seen whether the bill will be considered by the Senate Environmental Resources and Energy Committee during its last voting meeting of the session on October 6.

House Bill 34, sponsored by Rep. Kate Harper, R-Montgomery, would require high-performance green building standards in most state-owned building construction projects. Passage of the bill would be a win for both the environment and Pennsylvania taxpayers as there would be substantial reduction in operating costs and energy and water use over the life of the buildings.

The House passed HB 34 by a wide margin in early 2013, but the bill has been stalled in the Senate. Attention may now be shifting in the waning days of the session to companion legislation sponsored by Senator John Rafferty, R-Montgomery.

Stay tuned. Take full advantage of the breaks between playoff innings and other activities. We're going to need your help.

Steve Stroman is state policy director for PennFuture and is based in Harrisburg. He tweets @SteveStroman1.

Environmental champions among legislative retirements

As of today, 10 members of the Pennsylvania General Assembly have announced their retirements. Here is the list:

House
Rep. Ryan Aument, R-Lancaster
Rep. Gordon Denlinger, R-Lancaster
Rep. Phyllis Mundy, D-Luzerne
Rep. Chris Ross, R-Chester
Rep. Jerry Stern, R-Blair
Rep. Dick Stevenson, R-Mercer

Senate
Sen. Mike Brubaker, R-Lancaster
Sen. Edwin Erickson, R-Delaware
Sen. Jim Ferlo, D-Allegheny
Sen. Mike Waugh, R-York

The list of retirements includes four of our strongest environmental champions in Harrisburg: Rep. Mundy, Rep. Ross, Sen. Erickson and Sen. Ferlo.

Rep. Ross and Sen. Erickson have been the prime sponsors or prime movers of some of the best and most significant environmental and clean energy laws enacted by the General Assembly over the past decade. These laws include the 2004 Alternative Energy Portfolio Standard law; Growing Greener II in 2005; the Pennsylvania Climate Change Act and the Alternative Energy Investment Act in 2008; the 2010 electronic waste recycling law; and the 2013 law that allows local governments to form authorities to tackle stormwater issues. Needless to say, Rep. Ross and Sen. Erickson will be greatly missed when their terms end at the end of November 2014.

State Policy Director Steve Stroman is based in PennFuture's Harrisburg office, directly across the street from the state capitol.
 

Unfinished business

The General Assembly left Harrisburg for the summer with two major pieces of unfinished legislative business from PennFuture’s perspective.

One task for this fall will be passing green building legislation that will be a win for both Pennsylvania’s environment and the taxpayers. House Bill 34, sponsored by Rep. Kate Harper, R-Montgomery, requires high-performance building standards in most major construction and rehabilitation projects for buildings owned or substantially leased by Pennsylvania state government. The green buildings required in HB 34 will generate less pollution yet lead to substantial savings in energy and water bills over the life of the buildings.

HB 34 was approved by the House on February 13 and by the Senate Environmental Resources and Energy Committee on June 18.  It now awaits consideration by the full Senate this fall.

The General Assembly must also pass legislation to address the Commonwealth’s staggering $4.5 billion funding shortfall for our roads, bridges and public transportation systems. Pennsylvania leads the nation in deteriorated bridges. Nearly a quarter of our 44,000 miles of state-owned roads are rated poor. Our public transportation systems are badly in need of investments in infrastructure, equipment and deferred maintenance.

Thanks to the tremendous leadership of Senate Transportation Committee Chair John Rafferty, R-Montgomery, the Senate passed a transportation funding bill that will generate $2.5 billion in new revenue by the 2017-18 fiscal year. Senate Bill 1 as passed by the Senate had many laudable features including an emphasis on rebuilding infrastructure, robust investments in public transportation, and dedicated funding for bicycle and pedestrian trails and projects. The bill was then considerably weakened when it was approved by the House Transportation Committee in late June.

A major downfall of both the Senate and House versions is that nearly one-seventh of the largest source of funding in SB 1, the uncapping of the Oil Company Franchise Tax, would go to Pennsylvania Turnpike expansion projects. There is no conceivable source of funding to finish the Pittsburgh and Monroeville legs of the Mon-Fayette toll road boondoggle, even with the new funding in SB 1, and there are many other obstacles ensuring that this section of the road will never be built. The General Assembly should amend SB 1 to cut off funding for these sections of the toll road, and redirect that money toward the repair of existing infrastructure, where it is badly needed.