The Environmental Promise Obama Completely Abandoned

Five years ago, the administration vowed to regulate coal ash, a toxic power-plant byproduct. Green groups are still waiting.

An aerial image of the Kingston ash spill from Dec. 23, 2008. 
National Journal
Patrick Reis
See more stories about...
Patrick Reis
Nov. 17, 2013, 4 p.m.

Be­fore Pres­id­ent Obama had even taken the oath of of­fice, his ad­min­is­tra­tion was prom­ising to pro­tect the pub­lic from tox­ic coal waste pro­duced by power plants. But well in­to the pres­id­ent’s second term — and nearly five years after Amer­ic­ans learned of the dangers of coal ash after a massive spill dev­ast­ated a Ten­ness­ee town — that pledge is a green dream that is at least de­ferred, and quite pos­sibly dead.

The Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion has all but hal­ted its re­view of the ex­ist­ing policies for stor­ing coal ash, and al­though en­vir­on­ment­al­ists are eagerly await­ing a fi­nal an­swer on the is­sue, they’re not op­tim­ist­ic. While they’re loathe to ad­mit it pub­licly, en­vir­on­ment­al ad­voc­ates will privately con­cede they no longer ex­pect the ad­min­is­tra­tion to is­sue the tough rules they’ve long sought.

En­vir­on­ment­al groups — in­clud­ing the Si­erra Club, Earthjustice, and Ap­palachi­an Voices — were handed a minor vic­tory two weeks ago when a fed­er­al judge gave the ad­min­is­tra­tion two months to set a dead­line to fin­ish its re­view of coal-ash stor­age rules. But the vic­tory is bit­ter­sweet at best, be­cause even se­cur­ing that dead­line re­quired the en­vir­on­ment­al groups to sue an ad­min­is­tra­tion that once seemed all but cer­tain to side with them.

Mo­mentum built for new rules in Decem­ber 2008, when the con­tain­ment wall of a coal-ash pond at a Ten­ness­ee Val­ley Au­thor­ity power plant gave way, send­ing more than 1 bil­lion gal­lons of the ar­sen­ic- and lead-laden waste in­to the town of King­ston. The spill flooded homes and dumped linger­ing tox­ins in­to the loc­al wa­ter sup­ply.

At her con­firm­a­tion hear­ing weeks later, Lisa Jack­son, the in­com­ing ad­min­is­trat­or of the En­vir­on­ment­al Pro­tec­tion Agency, prom­ised to re­view the ex­ist­ing rules for stor­ing coal waste, and by Oc­to­ber of that year agency sci­ent­ists had pre­pared a plan to rad­ic­ally change them. EPA was ready to pro­pose re­clas­si­fy­ing coal ash as a haz­ard­ous waste and to is­sue the first set of bind­ing fed­er­al stand­ards for its stor­age and dis­pos­al.

Be­fore EPA could pub­li­cize its pre­ferred ap­proach, however, of­fi­cials had to route it through the White House Of­fice of Man­age­ment and Budget, which con­ducts in­ter­agency re­views of reg­u­la­tions that are deemed to be eco­nom­ic­ally sig­ni­fic­ant. And that’s where everything changed. The rules lingered at the White House for nearly sev­en months, and when they emerged, the un­am­bigu­ous push for stricter stand­ards had been re­moved.

The draft that EPA sent to the White House also men­tioned a second op­tion for reg­u­lat­ing the waste, which would as­sign the ash non­haz­ard­ous status and leave en­force­ment to the states — an ar­range­ment that has been in place for dec­ades. But the agency didn’t en­dorse that ap­proach, say­ing it “would not be pro­tect­ive of hu­man [health] and the en­vir­on­ment.” Dur­ing the White House re­view, however, the haz­ard­ous and non­haz­ard­ous op­tions were placed on equal foot­ing.

The coal-min­ing and util­ity in­dus­tries ap­plauded the el­ev­a­tion of the non­haz­ard­ous op­tion in 2010, say­ing it was enough to en­sure pub­lic safety and that the stricter al­tern­at­ive would place an un­ne­ces­sary bur­den on coal-fired power plants.

EPA re­leased that “mul­tiple choice” pro­pos­al in May 2010. Since then, little has happened. More than three years later, the agency has not re­leased a fi­nal rule, and the only sign of life on the is­sue was EPA’s Oc­to­ber 2011 re­quest to the pub­lic for more in­form­a­tion.

Why did the ad­min­is­tra­tion re­verse course on coal ash? The White House re­ferred ques­tions about the 2009 change to OMB’s press of­fice, which did not reply. For its part, EPA in­sists that it’s simply do­ing due di­li­gence. The agency is eval­u­at­ing new data and look­ing through the nearly half-mil­lion com­ments it has re­ceived on the pro­posed rule, said EPA spokes­wo­man Al­isha John­son. She de­clined to com­ment on when the agency might com­ply with the fed­er­al court’s or­der to pub­lish a sched­ule for fin­ish­ing the rule.

The ad­min­is­tra­tion’s en­vir­on­ment­al crit­ics, however, say the troubles are not tech­nic­al or sci­entif­ic but polit­ic­al. The push for coal-ash rules has few con­gres­sion­al cham­pi­ons and no short­age of crit­ics. The House in June voted to block EPA from de­clar­ing the waste haz­ard­ous, with 39 Demo­crats join­ing a Re­pub­lic­an ma­jor­ity. Also vot­ing in fa­vor was Re­pub­lic­an Rep. Chuck Fleischmann, whose Ten­ness­ee dis­trict in­cludes the site of TVA’s King­ston spill. The bill is likely dead in the Sen­ate.

That op­pos­i­tion led the White House to blunt EPA’s reg­u­lat­ory push in 2009, and the same forces with­in the ad­min­is­tra­tion are delay­ing it now, said Rena Stein­zor, a Uni­versity of Mary­land law-school pro­fess­or and the pres­id­ent of the Cen­ter for Pro­gress­ive Re­form. “I con­tin­ue to be­lieve it is a mat­ter of polit­ic­al con­veni­ence and weak­ness,” she said. “I’m just wait­ing to hear about the next spill. It’s a dis­aster wait­ing to hap­pen.”

But tired though they are of wait­ing, pa­tience may be en­vir­on­ment­al­ists’ best hope for the coal-ash rules they say are vi­tal. The White House now has a dif­fer­ent re­la­tion­ship with the coal in­dustry, as well as with coal-state law­makers, than it did in 2009. Then, the ad­min­is­tra­tion was still woo­ing both groups in a bid to get sup­port for cap-and-trade le­gis­la­tion to cut car­bon emis­sions. Now the cli­mate bill is dead, and so is the charm cam­paign.

Con­gres­sion­al op­pos­i­tion, in­clud­ing from mod­er­ate Demo­crats, did noth­ing to de­ter EPA from in­tro­du­cing green­house-gas reg­u­la­tions for power plants. And a bi­par­tis­an re­volt has made no pro­gress in lift­ing the ad­min­is­tra­tion’s tight new rules for moun­tain­top min­ing. If this ad­min­is­tra­tion wants to de­clare coal ash a health haz­ard, noth­ing is really stand­ing in the way. Ex­cept, of course, it­self.

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
When It Comes to Mining Asteroids, Technology Is Only the First Problem
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Foreign Policy takes a look at the future of mining the estimated "100,000 near-Earth objects—including asteroids and comets—in the neighborhood of our planet. Some of these NEOs, as they’re called, are small. Others are substantial and potentially packed full of water and various important minerals, such as nickel, cobalt, and iron. One day, advocates believe, those objects will be tapped by variations on the equipment used in the coal mines of Kentucky or in the diamond mines of Africa. And for immense gain: According to industry experts, the contents of a single asteroid could be worth trillions of dollars." But the technology to get us there is only the first step. Experts say "a multinational body might emerge" to manage rights to NEOs, as well as a body of law, including an international court.

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Obama Reflects on His Economic Record
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Not to be outdone by Jeffrey Goldberg's recent piece in The Atlantic about President Obama's foreign policy, the New York Times Magazine checks in with a longread on the president's economic legacy. In it, Obama is cognizant that the economic reality--73 straight months of growth--isn't matched by public perceptions. Some of that, he says, is due to a constant drumbeat from the right that "that denies any progress." But he also accepts some blame himself. “I mean, the truth of the matter is that if we had been able to more effectively communicate all the steps we had taken to the swing voter,” he said, “then we might have maintained a majority in the House or the Senate.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Reagan Families, Allies Lash Out at Will Ferrell
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Ronald Reagan's children and political allies took to the media and Twitter this week to chide funnyman Will Ferrell for his plans to play a dementia-addled Reagan in his second term in a new comedy entitled Reagan. In an open letter, Reagan's daughter Patti Davis tells Ferrell, who's also a producer on the movie, “Perhaps for your comedy you would like to visit some dementia facilities. I have—I didn’t find anything comedic there, and my hope would be that if you’re a decent human being, you wouldn’t either.” Michael Reagan, the president's son, tweeted, "What an Outrag....Alzheimers is not joke...It kills..You should be ashamed all of you." And former Rep. Joe Walsh called it an example of "Hollywood taking a shot at conservatives again."

Source:
PEAK CONFIDENCE
Clinton No Longer Running Primary Ads
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

In a sign that she’s ready to put a longer-than-ex­pec­ted primary battle be­hind her, former Sec­ret­ary of State Hil­lary Clin­ton (D) is no longer go­ing on the air in up­com­ing primary states. “Team Clin­ton hasn’t spent a single cent in … Cali­for­nia, In­di­ana, Ken­tucky, Ore­gon and West Vir­gin­ia, while” Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) “cam­paign has spent a little more than $1 mil­lion in those same states.” Meanwhile, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Sanders’ "lone back­er in the Sen­ate, said the can­did­ate should end his pres­id­en­tial cam­paign if he’s los­ing to Hil­lary Clin­ton after the primary sea­son con­cludes in June, break­ing sharply with the can­did­ate who is vow­ing to take his in­sur­gent bid to the party con­ven­tion in Phil­adelphia.”

Source:
CITIZENS UNITED PT. 2?
Movie Based on ‘Clinton Cash’ to Debut at Cannes
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

The team behind the bestselling "Clinton Cash"—author Peter Schweizer and Breitbart's Stephen Bannon—is turning the book into a movie that will have its U.S. premiere just before the Democratic National Convention this summer. The film will get its global debut "next month in Cannes, France, during the Cannes Film Festival. (The movie is not a part of the festival, but will be shown at a screening arranged for distributors)." Bloomberg has a trailer up, pointing out that it's "less Ken Burns than Jerry Bruckheimer, featuring blood-drenched money, radical madrassas, and ominous footage of the Clintons."

Source:
×