Friday, February 29, 2008

INHOFE ANNOUNCES REMEDIATION PLAN FOR TAR CREEK

Link to Press Release

 

Related Issues: Commitment to Oklahoma, Improving the Service of the Federal Bureaucracy; Environmental Accomplishments

 

On Thursday, February 22,  the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released its selected remedy addressing key components of the Tar Creek Superfund Site.  The EPA’s remedy includes both the completion of voluntary relocation assistance for the area residents and continued chat sales. In the Water Resources Development Act of 2007, Senator Inhofe included a provision directing the EPA to reconsider including resident relocation in its upcoming remediation plan, and provided them the legal authority required to include voluntary relocation in the plan. The EPA has acted upon Senator Inhofe’s legislation and has now included relocation in its selected remedy.

 

“This announcement marks landmark progress for the people living in the area of the Tar Creek Superfund Site.  The EPA’s latest remediation plan not only addresses necessary clean up of soil and water contamination from chat piles and wastes at the site, it also announces the completion of relocation assistance for the residents living in the Tar Creek communities.  I am pleased to have worked closely with Congressman Dan Boren, Governor Brad Henry and the members of the Lead Impacted Communities Relocation Assistance Trust to begin to offer voluntary relocation assistance for these residents.  I appreciate the work of EPA Regional Administrator Richard Greene and his staff, Chairman of the Quapaw Tribe John Berrey and I look forward to continue working with state and federal parties to complete this necessary assistance. 

 

“Another important component of this plan is the continued chat sales at the site.  Nearly 100 years of mining in the Tar Creek Superfund site produced millions of tons of mine waste known as chat.  However, chat can be a resource and used as an aggregate in roadway construction, and I included a section in the federal highway bill enacted in 2005 directing the EPA to develop rules on the use of chat in transportation construction projects.” 

 

Oklahoma Governor Brad Henry:

 

“This is more good news for the people in the Picher and Cardin areas.  We know we still have a long road ahead, but this certainly makes the light at the end of the tunnel significantly brighter.  This has been a long, difficult process and there will be more challenges ahead, but we are doing the right thing in delivering relief to the families in the Tar Creek area.”

 

EPA:

 

"This master plan will ensure a coordinated commitment to permanently clean up the Tar Creek Superfund site. This announcement reaffirms years of hard work by local, Tribal, State and federal partners. I am pleased to part of this monumental occasion," said Regional Administrator Richard E. Greene. "Senator Inhofe has been a longtime champion for these communities and instrumental in bringing about this final clean up plan."

 

 

 

Background:

 

 

Senator Inhofe has secured federal funding for both environmental clean up of the Tar Creek Superfund site and relocation assistance for area residents administered by the Lead Impacted Communities Relocation Assistance Trust (LICRAT).  In 2005, Senator Inhofe commissioned and funded the US Army Corps of Engineers to complete a subsidence study to identify areas in the Tar Creek Superfund Site at risk from cave-ins.  The Army Corps of Engineers completed and issued its subsidence evaluation in January 2006.  LICRAT has and continues to use the subsidence evaluation to determine the order of areas for relocation assistance.  Based upon the subsidence evaluation, Senator Inhofe authored an amendment redirecting the remaining $19 million of previously appropriated funds for Tar Creek clean up to be used for resident voluntary relocation assistance.  Senator Inhofe also included an additional $6.4 million in the omnibus appropriations bill for fiscal year 2008 providing additional funding for relocation assistance. 

 

###

OKLAHOMA REALITY VS WASHINGTON DC RHETORIC

Februray 25, 2008 

Link to Inhofe EPW Press Blog

Read More: Press Release: INHOFE ANNOUNCES REMEDIATION PLAN FOR TAR CREEK; Editorials: Oklahoman Editorial: Tar Creek Triumph; Tulsa World Editorial: Enter Jim Inhofe; Articles: Tulsa World: Inhofe: EPA To Fund Buyout; Buyout May Be Done in Two Years; Agency Unveils Plans for Tar Creek; Tar Creek: Buyout is Applauded by Henry

It’s a classic case of Oklahoma reality versus Washington DC special interest rhetoric.

In the midst of Senator Inhofe making a major announcement regarding the clean-up of a major superfund site in Oklahoma last week, a Washington DC liberal special interest group was taking aim at his (as well as the entire Oklahoma Congressional delegation's) environmental record by cherry picking a few votes where they disagree with the Senator. Of course, there is really no surprise that Senator Inhofe would be criticized by a special interest group that measure the greenness of politicians by how many federal laws they impose on the American people.

Meanwhile, back in Oklahoma, real environmental progress is underway. Senator Inhofe has worked to successfully focus federal attention and action toward the Tar Creek Superfund site.  The Tar Creek Superfund site is one of the most severe and largest superfund sites in the country. It is a part of the former Tri-State Mining District which included parts of Oklahoma, Kansas, and Missouri.  The lead and zinc mining have left a legacy of human health and environmental deterioration. Through his leadership position on the EPW Committee since 2003, Senator Inhofe has made a priority of ensuring the federal agencies responsible for remediating the Tar Creek Superfund Site were all working together.  Since that time, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), US Department of Interior (DOI), US Army Corps of Engineers, White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), and US Federal Highway Administration (FHA) have established a unified and cooperative federal approach for the first time in the history of the Tar Creek site.

Good news came to Oklahoma last week when the EPA made a major announcement by releasing its selected remedy addressing key components of Tar Creek. The EPA’s remedy includes both the completion of voluntary relocation assistance for the area residents by the Lead Impacted Communities Relocation Assistance Trust – a board appointed by Governor Brad Henry –  and continued chat sales. Senator Inhofe praised the efforts of the many involved in the process:  

“I am pleased to have worked closely with Congressman Dan Boren, Governor Brad Henry and the members of the Lead Impacted Communities Relocation Assistance Trust.  I appreciate the work of Quapaw Chairman John Berrey and EPA Regional Administrator Richard Greene and his staff, and I look forward to continue working with state and federal parties to complete this necessary assistance.”

Senator Inhofe included a provision in the Water Resources Development Act of 2007 directing the EPA to reconsider including resident relocation in its upcoming remediation plan, and provided them the legal authority required to include voluntary relocation in the plan. The EPA has acted upon Senator Inhofe’s legislation and has now included relocation in its selected remedy.

In announcing the plan, Regional Administrator Richard E. Greene stated:

 "This master plan will ensure a coordinated commitment to permanently clean up the Tar Creek Superfund site. This announcement reaffirms years of hard work by local, Tribal, State and federal partners. I am pleased to be a part of this monumental occasion. Senator Inhofe has been a longtime champion for these communities and instrumental in bringing about this final clean up plan."

The announcement was welcomed by Oklahoma leaders of all political stripes. Oklahoma Democratic Governor Brad Henry praised the announcement by the EPA:

 “This is more good news for the people in the Picher and Cardin areas.  We know we still have a long road ahead, but this certainly makes the light at the end of the tunnel significantly brighter.  This has been a long, difficult process and there will be more challenges ahead, but we are doing the right thing in delivering relief to the families in the Tar Creek area.”

Further, both major Oklahoma newspapers hailed the good news and praised Senator Inhofe for his leadership:

The Oklahoman:

"Sen. Jim Inhofe had good news this week for people wanting to move out of Picher and other areas in the Tar Creek Superfund site. Inhofe, R-Tulsa, announced that the Environmental Protection Agency will fund the buyout of homes and pay for soil and water remediation in the area. Buyout offers at Tar Creek ended last year when federal money was held up by congressional wrangling. This new plan is expected to eliminate the need to go back each year to request the necessary funding. Inhofe got the ball rolling with EPA by inserting a provision in a water resources law last year. It took the senator a long time to buy into the concerns at Tar Creek. Since then, though, Inhofe has been a determined and effective leader in efforts to assist those who wish to move elsewhere."

The Tulsa World:

“Getting innocent people out of harm's way at Tar Creek is clearly the job of the federal government. That's the sort of mission for which the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and its Superfund were created. But after years of work, the mess left by decades of lead and zinc mining by now-gone companies remains, and so are the endangered people. Pollution and the danger of collapsing mines made the Tar Creek area around Picher and Cardin toxic and treacherous. Enter Jim Inhofe. Inhofe specified a plan to take care of the Tar Creek residents in the Water Resources Development Act last year. The EPA unveiled the plan Friday, but make no mistake, the work was Inhofe's, not that of the Washington bureaucrats. Hold the phone. That's an earmark. That's just the sort of sweetheart, local-constituency pork that some politicians say is ruining the federal government. Apparently, they would rather wait for the EPA to get around to solving the problem on its own without any congressional leadership. That would have been a wait that might never have ended, a wait that certainly would have meant more lives ruined by the Tar Creek disaster. Inhofe wasn't waiting. He acted in the best interests of his constituents and the state. His leadership will mean children will live in a safe, clean environment. That's a proud legacy for him to take with him when he leaves public office. Those other folks would rather be right -- as defined by their own peculiar meaning of that word -- than help their constituents.”

Senator Inhofe’s environmental leadership doesn’t end with his work on Tar Creek. As a former mayor, Senator Inhofe has always believed that when you involve individuals in efforts to protect the environment, the outcome is a far more effective and efficient solution than could be produced solely by the federal government.  A great example is the Partners for Wildlife program because it works with property owners instead of against them.  As a result of his efforts, Senator Inhofe received the U.S. Fish and Wildlife's ‘Legislator of the Year Award'   in 2007 for his integral role in passing the Partners for Fish and Wildlife Act, which was approved by Congress and signed into law in 2006.

Furthermore, while chairman of the EPW committee, Senator Inhofe twice introduced legislation to reduce emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and -- for the first time -- mercury from power plants by 70 percent by 2016 through expanding the successful Acid Rain Trading Program. In fact, the Clear Skies bill was the most aggressive presidential initiative in history to reduce power plant pollution and provide cleaner air across the country. Unfortunately, Democrats and their special-interest allies chose to obstruct this important bill denying the American people a major environmental victory.

For a full listing of Senator Inhofe’s accomplishments, visit his EPW Committee website at www.epw.senate.gov/minority/issues.

TULSA WORLD EDITORIAL: ENTER JIM INHOFE

TULSA WORLD

ENTER JIM INHOFE

February 23, 2008

Link to Editorial

Getting innocent people out of harm's way at Tar Creek is clearly the job of the federal government.

That's the sort of mission for which the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and its Superfund were created.

But after years of work, the mess left by decades of lead and zinc mining by now-gone companies remains, and so are the endangered people.

Pollution and the danger of collapsing mines made the Tar Creek area around Picher and Cardin toxic and treacherous.

Enter Jim Inhofe.

Inhofe specified a plan to take care of the Tar Creek residents in the Water Resources Development Act last year.

The EPA unveiled the plan Friday, but make no mistake, the work was Inhofe's, not that of the Washington bureaucrats.

Hold the phone. That's an earmark. That's just the sort of sweetheart, local-constituency pork that some politicians say is ruining the federal government.

Apparently, they would rather wait for the EPA to get around to solving the problem on its own without any congressional leadership.

That would have been a wait that might never have ended, a wait that certainly would have meant more lives ruined by the Tar Creek disaster.

Inhofe wasn't waiting. He acted in the best interests of his constituents and the state. His leadership will mean children will live in a safe, clean environment.

That's a proud legacy for him to take with him when he leaves public office.

Those other folks would rather be right -- as defined by their own peculiar meaning of that word -- than help their constituents

OKLAHOMAN EDITORIAL: TAR CREEK TRIUMPH

THE OKLAHOMAN

EDITORIAL: TAR CREEK TRIUMPH 

February 23, 2008

Link to Editorial

Sen. Jim Inhofe had good news this week for people wanting to move out of Picher and other areas in the Tar Creek Superfund site. Inhofe, R-Tulsa, announced that the Environmental Protection Agency will fund the buyout of homes and pay for soil and water remediation in the area. Buyout offers at Tar Creek ended last year when federal money was held up by congressional wrangling. This new plan is expected to eliminate the need to go back each year to request the necessary funding. Inhofe got the ball rolling with EPA by inserting a provision in a water resources law last year. It took the senator a long time to buy into the concerns at Tar Creek. Since then, though, Inhofe has been a determined and effective leader in efforts to assist those who wish to move elsewhere.

INHOFE DISCUSSES OKLAHOMA NEEDS WITH EPA ADMINISTRATOR

February 27, 2008

Link to Senator Inhofe’s Opening Statement  (Audio)

 

EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson Testifies Before EPW Committee

 Senator Inhofe, Ranking Member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, discussed several Oklahoma priorities with the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Stephen Johnson, during today’s Environment and Public Works Committee hearing entitled, “Hearing on the President’s Proposed EPA Budget for FY 2009.” At the hearing, Senator Inhofe thanked Administrator Johnson for EPA’s continued progress at Tar Creek and took the opportunity to raise several Oklahoma-specific concerns.

 

SENATOR INHOFE PRAISES EPA FOR PROGRESS ON TAR CREEK:  

“As you are well aware, solutions to the Tar Creek Superfund Site have long been on my list of top priorities.  Last week, EPA announced a new plan addressing not only clean-up, but also acting upon a provision I placed in the Water Resource Development Act 2007 (WRDA) to provide voluntary relocation assistance to area residents.  I appreciate the work of key EPA officials Susan Bodine, Richard Greene, and Sam Coleman, along with many others working on this site.  I look forward to continuing to work with you to implement this new plan and thank you for all your help to date on this important issue.”

Background  

Last week, the Environmental Protection Agency released its selected remedy addressing key components of the Tar Creek Superfund Site.  The EPA’s remedy includes both the completion of voluntary relocation assistance for the area residents and continued chat sales. In the Water Resources Development Act of 2007, Senator Inhofe included a provision directing the EPA to reconsider including resident relocation in its upcoming remediation plan, and provided them the legal authority required to include voluntary relocation in the plan. The EPA has acted upon Senator Inhofe’s legislation and has now included relocation in its selected remedy.

Read More: INHOFE ANNOUNCES REMEDIATION PLAN FOR TAR CREEK; Oklahoma Reality VS Washington DC Rhetoric  

Editorials: Oklahoman Editorial: Tar Creek Triumph; Tulsa World Editorial: Enter Jim Inhofe  

Articles: Tulsa World: Inhofe: EPA To Fund Buyout; Buyout May Be Done In Two Years; Agency Unveils Plans For Tar Creek; Tar Creek: Buyout Is Applauded By Henry  

SENATOR INHOFE RAISES CONCERNS IMPORTANT TO NATURAL GAS PRODUCTION  

“As you are aware, the oil and natural gas industry is extremely significant in Oklahoma.  Oklahoma ranks second in the nation in natural gas production with over 120,000 wells in operation.  Recently, EPA asked for comments on an ‘Information Collection Request (ICR)’ regarding the activities of coal bed methane (CBM) operators to re-evaluate Clean Water Act guidelines.  The survey published in the Federal Register requests detailed information regarding company ownership, costs, earnings, liabilities, and expenses.  This business information is extremely sensitive.  Further, the Federal Register notice claims that the entire ICR will require on average 163 hours to complete. Will EPA commit to work with the regulated community to narrow this request to the most relevant information?”  

Background  

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is moving forward with its study to determine whether to change the regulation of water discharges from coal bed methane (CBM) wells under EPA’s Clean Water Act (CWA) effluent limitation guidelines. To gain a better understanding of CBM operations, EPA has developed a 72-page draft survey that includes detailed technical, economic and financial questions of natural gas operators.  EPA is requesting comments on the survey by March 25, 2008.  The draft survey is going to be very onerous on natural gas producers of all sizes.  It’s not really clear what the true “need” is for this massive information collection.  In August, EPA plans to distribute the final mandatory survey to CBM operators to complete and return to EPA.

 SENATOR INHOFE RAISES CONCERNS ABOUT EPA IMPLEMENTATION OF BIO-FUELS MANDATE:  

“I am deeply interested in the EPA's implementation of the overly aggressive bio-fuels increase mandated by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 passed in December.  These mandates allow no room for error in a fuels industry already constrained by tight supplies, full capacity, environmental regulation, and volatile market conditions. As you know, Congress imposed a nearly five-fold expansion of the Renewable Fuels Standard mandate despite mounting questions surrounding ethanol’s effect on livestock feed prices, its economic sustainability, its transportation and infrastructure needs, its water usage and numerous other issues.  On that note, I look forward to working with you to determine if these new mandates are even achievable and to explore the many potential ramifications.”   

Background  

Earlier this month, Senator Inhofe introduced legislation to provide technical corrections to the Clean Air Act’s Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS) as mandated by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. Senator Inhofe’s bill recognizes the delicate political balance surrounding the RFS and provides simple fixes that are intended to provide flexibility for the fuels industry in meeting these mandates. 

 Read More: INHOFE INTRODUCES TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO THE CLEAN AIR ACT’S RENEWABLE FUELS STANDARD  

SENATOR INHOFE DISCUSSES CLEAN WATER STATE REVOLVING FUND PROGRAM:  

“As I have indicated, I will once again be supporting efforts to restore the large cut you proposed to the critical Clean Water SRF program.  There is a nationwide crisis and a need for more water infrastructure money that is acknowledged by this Administration.  In the recent Clean Watershed Needs Survey, you calculated over $200 billion in need for publicly owned treatment works. While I continue to disagree with your cuts to the SRF, I am pleased to see that the Administration has again proposed lifting the cap on private activity bonds for water and wastewater infrastructure projects.  I look forward to working with the Administration to see if using the tax code through private activity bonds would help fill some of the infrastructure gap, given the shortage of appropriated dollars.  While public-private partnerships are not the sole solution, we need to do everything we can to encourage them since we will never be able to fully fund our infrastructure needs. A good start towards meeting those goals is through compliance assistance. This year, the President's budget requests the highest level of funding ever for the enforcement program, including its Compliance Assistance Centers to help people comply with the Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Program (SPCC) and Disinfection Byproduct rules.  I appreciate the Administration's work to assist the regulated community to comply with often confusing and burdensome rules.  This year, the EPA has helped 1,228,000 entities with compliance assistance.  EPA's web-based compliance centers have reached millions more.  I applaud EPA for continuing build on these kinds of successes.”

 

SENATOR INHOFE DISCUSSES COSTLY MANDATES ON LOCAL OKLAHOMA COMMUNITIES:  

“Compounding this lack of water infrastructure funding are the many costly new regulations imposed on localities.  In Oklahoma, we continue to have municipalities struggling with the arsenic rule and with the Disinfection Byproducts (DBP) Stage I rule.  Small systems who purchase water from alternative systems and have not had to test, treat, or monitor their water must now comply with DBPII.  In EPA’s most recent drinking water needs survey, Oklahoma identified $4.8 billion in infrastructure needs over the next 20 years.  $107 million of that need is to meet federal drinking water standards.  This does not include costs imposed by Oklahoma communities to meet federal clean water requirements, the new Groundwater rule, the Disinfection Byproducts Stage II rule or the Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule. As you know, I have been in communication with your office about these rules and their impact on Oklahoma. I am looking forward to continuing to work with you to devise ways to assist these communities in reaching these drinking water standards.”  

Background

In December 2007, Senator Inhofe introduced the Small System Drinking Water Act of 2007, a bipartisan bill to assist water systems in Oklahoma and throughout the country in complying with Federal drinking water standards, and require the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to utilize all of its resources provided by the 1996 Safe Drinking Water Act amendments (SDWA).

Read More: Bipartisan Legislation Will Assist Small Water Systems Across The Country Comply With Federal Drinking Water Standards  

SENATOR INHOFE RAISES CONCERNS ABOUT EPA’S ASSUMPTIONS REGARDING OZONE NAAQS STANDARD:  

“Mr. Administrator, in your underlying analysis in issuing a proposed revision to the ozone NAAQS standard, EPA zero-ed out emissions from Canada and Mexico in determining background levels under the rationale that Congress can reduce those emissions by treaty. How do you justify assuming what actions Congress should or will take in setting regulations? And by making that zero-out assumption, don't you unfairly penalize U.S. border counties if these emissions from Canada and Mexico are not eliminated?”  

Background  

Senator Inhofe has consistently fought to ensure sound science is applied when addressing clean air regulations in Oklahoma. In a hearing last year, Senator Inhofe asked Administrator Johnson, “Oklahoma, like many States, has made tremendous progress in cleaning up its air. Not a single county in Oklahoma is in violation of the ozone standards. Not a single one, Mr. Administrator. Yet your proposal will put virtually the entire State into non-attainment. How is it that EPA last year considered States like Oklahoma to have clean air that was healthy to breathe, yet next year it will consider the air unhealthy – even as their pollution levels continue to plummet?”

Read More: Inhofe Statement from EPW Committee Hearing on EPA’s Proposed Revision to the Ozone NAAQS; WARNING, STATE THREAT: INHOFE RIPS EPA OZONE PROPOSAL (Jim Myers, Tulsa World, July 12, 2007)

 

###

Hearing on the President's Proposed EPA Budget for FY 2009

February 27, 2008

Senator Inhofe's Opening Statement from Hearing on the President's Proposed EPA Budget FY 2009

Welcome, Administrator Johnson.  I am pleased to have you testify before the Committee today on President Bush’s Fiscal Year 2009 budget proposal for the Environmental Protection Agency. 

The Administration has proposed $7.14 billion for the EPA for fiscal year 2009.  This is a $330 million, or 4.4 percent, cut from the 2008 level.  Given the continuing global war on terror and the large deficit, I think it is necessary to make some tough choices and cut wasteful spending out of the federal budget.  I’m getting tired of saying this, but once again the budget does not make enough tough choices. 

Over half of the total proposed cuts comes from the Clean Water SRF, regional water programs, and other Congressional priorities that the Administration knows Congress will likely restore.  It seems as if the determining factor for cutting a program’s funding was if Congress increased funding for that program above the Administration’s 2008 budget request or directed spending.  These priorities are summarily dismissed as wasteful earmarks and stripped from the budget.  Since the Administration knows Congress will restore many of the proposed cuts, this allows the Administration to increase other programs; and at the end of the day, no hard decisions are made. 

Despite all the hoopla and criticism from the Democrats, after 7 years the Bush Administration has failed to find any meaningful savings or wasteful spending in the EPA budget.  I find it hard–if not impossible–to believe there are no programs that should be cut.  The only significant cuts the Administration ever proposes are the ever-popular and much needed SRFs and Congressional earmarks.  I feel we have squandered the opportunity to make the EPA budget more cost effective and efficient.  I hope you spend the final year of this Administration carefully examining EPA programs to determine which are truly environmentally beneficial and cost effective and which are wasteful.

For instance, one place to exercise some budgetary restraint would be with the voluntary programs EPA has created that have not been authorized by Congress.  Some of these may have very laudable goals, but at a time when the Agency is proposing cutting clean water funding by over $300 million, it may not be the time for Administratively-created programs.  I raised the same concern about the Agency’s international grants previously, and while these programs may not add up to much money, they are a good starting point. 

As I have indicated, I will once again be supporting efforts to restore the large cut you proposed to the critical Clean Water SRF program.  There is a nationwide crisis and a need for more water infrastructure money that is acknowledged by this Administration.  In the recent Clean Watershed Needs Survey, you calculated over $200 billion in need for publicly owned treatment works. While I continue to disagree with your cuts to the SRF,  I am pleased to see that the Administration has again proposed lifting the cap on private activity bonds for water and wastewater infrastructure projects.  I look forward to working with the Administration to see if using the tax code through private activity bonds would help fill some of the infrastructure gap, given the shortage of appropriated dollars.  While public-private partnerships are not the sole solution, we need to do everything we can to encourage them since we will never be able to fully fund our infrastructure needs.               

Compounding this lack of water infrastructure funding are the many costly new regulations imposed on localities.  In Oklahoma, we continue to have municipalities struggling with the arsenic rule and with the Disinfection Byproducts (DBP) Stage I rule.  Small systems who purchase water from alternative systems and have not had to test, treat, or monitor their water must now comply with DBPII.  In EPA’s most recent drinking water needs survey, Oklahoma identified $4.8 billion in infrastructure needs over the next 20 years.  $107 million of that need is to meet federal drinking water standards.  This does not include costs imposed by Oklahoma communities to meet federal clean water requirements, the new Groundwater rule, the Disinfection Byproducts Stage II rule or the Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule. As you know, I have been in communication with your office about these rules and their impact on Oklahoma. I am looking forward to continuing to work with you to devise ways to assist these communities in reaching these drinking water standards.           

One of those ways is through compliance assistance. This year, the President's budget requests the highest level of funding ever for the enforcement program, including its Compliance Assistance Centers to help people comply with the SPCC and Disinfection Byproduct rules.  I appreciate the Administration's work to assist the regulated community to comply with often confusing and burdensome rules.  This year, the EPA has helped 1,228,000 entities with compliance assistance.  EPA's web-based compliance centers have reached millions more.  I applaud EPA for continuing to build on these kinds of successes.           

Within the air program, there are three specific areas that I would like to address. First, I want to commend you for continuing to support the clean diesel grant program funding. I was a co-sponsor of clean diesel legislation and fully support this program which significantly improves air quality for a fraction of the cost of trying to achieve these reductions through regulatory mandates. I also want to commend you for continuing your agency's support for the Asia-Pacific Partnership. EPA's contribution is a very small, but necessary funding of this important program. Lastly, I would remind you that I have long supported a strong and improved monitoring network for particulate matter. Two years ago, funding was cut from this program that has yet to be restored. Monitors that measure not just mass, but types of particles, will enable us to better tailor our health laws in the future so that we reduce the unnecessary burden on the regulated community while simultaneously achieving superior health benefits. Without these funds, there is a strong incentive for states to cut vital speciation monitors, which are comparatively expensive to maintain.

As you are well aware, solutions to the Tar Creek Superfund Site have long been on my list of top priorities.  EPA has long ranked Tar Creek as one of the most severe superfund sites in the country.  Last week, EPA announced a new plan addressing not only clean-up, but also acting upon a provision I placed in WRDA to provide voluntary relocation assistance to area residents.  I appreciate the work of key EPA officials Susan Bodine, Richard Greene, and Sam Coleman, along with many others working on this site.  I look forward to continuing to work with you to implement this new plan and thank you for all your help to date on this important issue.  

My staff has continued to investigate EPA regions and how they vary in their implementation and enforcement of environmental regulations.  We have learned that of the ten EPA regions, there is often little uniformity in how the same program is managed in different regions.  Inconsistency in the application of environmental laws creates enforcement uncertainty for the courts and for citizens who are trying to follow the law.  I look forward to continuing to work with you on this problem.

Finally, Mr. Administrator, I am deeply interested in the EPA's implementation of the overly aggressive bio-fuels increase mandated by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 passed in December.  These mandates allow no room for error in a fuels industry already constrained by tight supplies, full capacity, environmental regulation, and volatile market conditions. As you know, Congress imposed a nearly five-fold expansion of the Renewable Fuels Standard mandate despite mounting questions surrounding ethanol’s effect on livestock feed prices, its economic sustainability, its transportation and infrastructure needs, its water usage and numerous other issues.  On that note, I look forward to working with you to determine if these new mandates are even achievable and to explore the many potential ramifications. 

Administrator Johnson, I look forward to your testimony.

SBA HIGHLIGHTS SMALL DRINKING WATER SYSTEMS NEEDS IN THEIR TOP 10 RULES FOR REVIEW

February 28, 2008

Related: Link to Press Release; SBA Announcement; Link to National Rural Water Association Press Release; Link to Small Systems Safe Drinking Water Act of 2007

On Thursday, Senator Inhofe praised the U.S. Small Business Administration’s (SBA) decision to name the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) affordability criteria for small communities as one of their “Top 10 Rules for Review.” SBA said today that streamlining and updating these regulations would help ease the disproportionate federal regulatory burden placed on small communities.  Senator Inhofe has authored bi-partisan legislation (S. 2509), together with Senators Ben Nelson (D-NE.), Chuck Hagel (R-NE.) and Norm Coleman (R-MN.), to address these concerns by assisting water systems in Oklahoma and throughout the country in complying with Federal drinking water standards, and require the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to utilize all of its resources provided by the 1996 Safe Drinking Water Act amendments (SDWA).

“I am pleased that the Small Business Administration has called attention to EPA’s affordability and small systems variance policies under the Safe Drinking Water Act as one of their Top 10 Rules for Review,” Senator Inhofe said. “EPA’s policy causes increased regulatory burdens on rural communities and small systems in Oklahoma and across the country. I certainly share SBA’s concerns and have worked to address these issues in my bi-partisan bill, the Small Systems Safe Drinking Water Act of 2007. It is my hope that our bill and the Small Business Administration's interest in this policy will correct EPA's policy and assist small systems in coming into compliance with SDWA regulations.”

In addition, the National Rural Water Association (NRWA) today thanked Senator Inhofe and cosponsors of his legislation “for their efforts to help small communities provide safe drinking water and comply with federal water regulations.” Mike Keegan, NRWA Analyst, said of SBA’s announcement today, “Currently, small communities are prohibited from utilizing economical treatment options (the so-called small system variance technologies), under the EPA rules, because EPA adopted a policy that families can afford annual water rates of 2.5% of median household income (MHI) (or approximately $1,200 per household).  EPA’s MHI standard does not consider the quantity, concentration, rural demographics, and financial abilities of low-income families or disadvantaged populations to afford the rule as required by the Agency's Environmental Justice policy [Executive Order 12898].  The current EPA policy threatens public health in low-income rural and small communities by forcing households to pay for increased utilities for EPA compliance that does not improve the safety of their drinking water.”

THE SMALL SYSTEM DRINKING WATER ACT OF 2007:

- Reauthorizes the technical assistance program in the SDWA;

- Creates a pilot program to demonstrate new technologies and approaches for systems of all sizes to comply with the rules;

- Requires the EPA to convene a working group to examine the science behind the rules compared to new developments since their publication;

- Directs the EPA to convene a working group to identify barriers to the use of the following approaches – point of entry treatment, point of use treatment and package plants; and

- Prohibits the EPA from enforcing a Federal standard against a water system unless that water system has received the appropriate amount of money to pay the Federal share of the upgrade.

###

SAFETEY AT STAKE AS DEMOCRATS CONTINUE TO PLAY POLITICS WITH NOMINATIONS

Thursday, February 28, 2008

Link to Fact of the Day

During Thursday's Senate Environment and Public Works Committee hearing on nuclear safety, Democrats questioned the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC) diligence and regulation of security at our nation’s nuclear plants. Meanwhile, however, Democrats continue to block nominations to the NRC – the very Commission charged with regulating nuclear security – leaving a panel of only three Commissioners out of five.

FACT: Two NRC nominations, having been approved by the Senate EPW Committee, now await action before the Senate: The re-nomination of Greg Jaczko and the nomination of Kristine Svinicki. During today’s EPW hearing, Senator Larry Craig (R-ID) took the Democrats to task for failing to move these two important nominations, stating (Click Here to Watch):

"Now there is even a suggestion that we won’t act (on the NRC’s nominations) until after the presidential election because maybe [the Democrats] can get three Democrats (members on the commission) instead of two Democrats and one Republican."

"We won’t act because of politics. It’s blunt and it’s simple and it’s direct and we ought to be honest about it," Craig continued. "If we are so hand-wringingly concerned that this commission do its job and get its budget, then we ought to fully staff it with responsible, knowledgeable Americans and we are not doing it," Craig added.

The NRC is not alone in awaiting Senate action regarding the confirmation of Commissioners. Senate Democrats have also failed to allow a vote on the confirmation of two Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board Commissioners who have also been approved by the EPW Committee: John Bresland as Chairman, and Charles Shearer as Commissioner. (LINK)

Playing politics with Presidential nominees is just more of the same in Washington DC and the safety of the American public is too important to allow this to continue.

###

HEARING ON THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OVERSIGHT OF SECURITY OF OUR NATION'S NUCLEAR PLANTS

February 28, 2008

Link to Opening Statement (Click Here to Watch

Senator Inhofe's opening statement from Thursday's Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety hearing on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission oversight security of our nation’s nuclear plants

SENATOR INHOFE OPENING STATEMENT

I commend Sens. Carper and Voinovich for holding this hearing today, continuing the tradition of rigorous oversight that I started when I assumed the Chairmanship of this Subcommittee over 10 years ago.  The safety and security of our nation’s nuclear plants is essential.  Responsibility for maintaining security rests not only with the industry’s security forces, as they are vigilant and thorough in their protection of the facilities, but with the NRC as a regulator and with this Committee in its oversight role.  It is our job today, as Members of this Committee, to ensure that the NRC remains a strong and independent regulator, true to its mission of protecting public health and safety, and promoting the common defense and security. 

The NRC cannot condone, and this Committee cannot ignore, security guards sleeping on duty in violation of procedures.  I appreciate that Mr. Crane shares my extreme disappointment to learn that a group of security officers did just that.  I am eager to learn what conditions created this situation and what has been done to prevent it from happening again.  Inappropriate behavior on the part of a few guards should be firmly addressed, but it should NOT be allowed to tarnish the reputation of the dedicated, vigilant professionals that comprise the vast majority of these security forces or to undermine public confidence in them. 

In addition to security issues, I’m glad to have this opportunity to ask questions about the NRC’s budget proposal.  The NRC has repeatedly acknowledged the challenges associated with the growing number of new reactor license applications that will likely be filed.  Yet, the requested budget increase for new reactor licensing is only $3.1 million.  There are reports that NRC staff recommended an additional $22 million for new reactor licensing that was NOT included in the final budget request and that the shortfall will lead to delays of 8 months or more in reviewing applications filed in FY’09.  If this is true, then I am very concerned to hear that the NRC may already be jeopardizing its ability to conduct thorough reviews in a timely fashion by setting the stage for a funding shortfall. In contrast, the requested budget increase for reactor oversight -- a process that even GAO has found to be logical and well-structured -- is $16.1 million, over 5 times the increase for new reactor licensing.  Testimony from our October hearing certainly didn’t indicate program shortcomings requiring a strong funding increase as a remedy. 

I’m concerned by this disparity and I’m eager to understand the basis for it.

WEEKLY ROUND-UP: EARTHS FEVER BREAKS: GLOBAL COOLING CURRENTLY UNDERWAY

Link to Weekly Round-Up

[Disclaimer: Since there is no "normal" temperature of the Earth, there is no way the Earth can have a "fever." The headline's reference to "fever" is for amusement purposes only.]

 

A sampling of recent articles detailing the inconvenient reality of temperature trends around the planet. 

 

Report: Temperature Monitors Report Widescale Global Cooling (Daily Tech – February 26, 2008) 

Excerpt: All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA's GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously. A compiled list of all the sources can be seen here. The total amount of cooling ranges from 0.65C up to 0.75C -- a value large enough to erase nearly all the global warming recorded over the past 100 years. All in one year time. For all sources, it's the single fastest temperature change every recorded, either up or down. […] Over the past year, anecdotal evidence for a cooling planet has exploded. China has its coldest winter in 100 years. Baghdad sees its first snow in all recorded history. North America has the most snowcover in 50 years, with places like Wisconsin the highest since record-keeping began. Record levels of Antarctic sea ice, record cold in Minnesota, Texas, Florida, Mexico, Australia, Iran, Greece, South Africa, Greenland, Argentina, Chile -- the list goes on and on. No more than anecdotal evidence, to be sure. But now, that evidence has been supplanted by hard scientific fact. All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA's GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously. 

Forget Global Warming: Welcome to the new Ice Age (Canada's National Post – Feb. 25, 2008)
Excerpt: Snow cover over North America and much of Siberia, Mongolia and China is greater than at any time since 1966. The U.S. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) reported that many American cities and towns suffered record cold temperatures in January and early February. According to the NCDC, the average temperature in January "was -0.3 F cooler than the 1901-2000 (20th century) average." China is surviving its most brutal winter in a century. Temperatures in the normally balmy south were so low for so long that some middle-sized cities went days and even weeks without electricity because once power lines had toppled it was too cold or too icy to repair them. And remember the Arctic Sea ice? The ice we were told so hysterically last fall had melted to its "lowest levels on record? Never mind that those records only date back as far as 1972 and that there is anthropological and geological evidence of much greater melts in the past. The ice is back. Gilles Langis, a senior forecaster with the Canadian Ice Service in Ottawa, says the Arctic winter has been so severe the ice has not only recovered, it is actually 10 to 20 cm thicker in many places than at this time last year. […]Last month, Oleg Sorokhtin, a fellow of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, shrugged off manmade climate change as "a drop in the bucket." Showing that solar activity has entered an inactive phase, Prof. Sorokhtin advised people to "stock up on fur coats." He is not alone. Kenneth Tapping of our own National Research Council, who oversees a giant radio telescope focused on the sun, is convinced we are in for a long period of severely cold weather if sunspot activity does not pick up soon. The last time the sun was this inactive, Earth suffered the Little Ice Age that lasted about five centuries and ended in 1850. Crops failed through killer frosts and drought. Famine, plague and war were widespread. Harbours froze, so did rivers, and trade ceased. It's way too early to claim the same is about to happen again, but then it's way too early for the hysteria of the global warmers, too. 

Arctic Sea Ice Sees 'Significant Increase' in Size Following 'Extreme Cold' (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation -CBC – February 15, 2008) 

Excerpt: There's an upside to the extreme cold temperatures northern Canadians have endured in the last few weeks: scientists say it's been helping winter sea ice grow across the Arctic, where the ice shrank to record-low levels last year. Temperatures have stayed well in the -30s C and -40s C range since late January throughout the North, with the mercury dipping past -50 C in some areas. Satellite images are showing that the cold spell is helping the sea ice expand in coverage by about 2 million square kilometres, compared to the average winter coverage in the previous three years. "It's nice to know that the ice is recovering," Josefino Comiso, a senior research scientist with the Cryospheric Sciences Branch of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Centre in Maryland, told CBC News on Thursday. […] Winter sea ice could keep expanding. The cold is also making the ice thicker in some areas, compared to recorded thicknesses last year, Lagnis added. "The ice is about 10 to 20 centimetres thicker than last year, so that's a significant increase," he said. If temperatures remain cold this winter, Langis said winter sea ice coverage will continue to expand. 

Ice between Canada and Greenland reaches highest level in 15 years (Greenland’s Sermitsiak News – February 12, 2008) 

Excerpt: Minus 30 degrees Celsius. That's how cold it's been in large parts of western Greenland where the population has been bundling up in hats and scarves. At the same time, Denmark's Meteorological Institute states that the ice between Canada and southwest Greenland right now has reached its greatest extent in 15 years. 'Satellite pictures show that the ice expansion has extended farther south this year. In fact, it's a bit past the Nuuk area. We have to go back 15 years to find ice expansion so far south. On the eastern coast it hasn't been colder than normal, but there has been a good amount of snow.'  

New Peer-Reviewed Study Shows Arctic COOLING Over last 1500 years

(Study published in Climate Dynamics, and the work was conducted by Håkan Grudd of Stockholm University’s Department of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology - Published online: 30 January 2008)

Excerpt: “The late-twentieth century is not exceptionally warm in the new Torneträsk record: On decadal-to-century timescales, periods around AD 750, 1000, 1400, and 1750 were all equally warm, or warmer. The warmest summers in this new reconstruction occur in a 200-year period centred on AD 1000. A ‘Medieval Warm Period’ is supported by other paleoclimate evidence from northern Fennoscandia, although the new tree-ring evidence from Tornetraäsk suggests that this period was much warmer than previously recognised.” < > “The new Torneträsk summer temperature reconstruction shows a trend of -0.3°C over the last 1,500 years.” Paper available here: & Full Paper (pdf) available here: (LINK)  

 

Antarctic Summer Thaw 'Later Than Normal' (AccuWeather Global Warming News – February 6, 2008)

Excerpt: Actually, the summer thaw down there was later than normal, and NASA believes that La Nina might have something to do with that. Usually, the breakup of fast ice around the Antarctica Peninsula occurs in early to mid-December, but this area was solidly frozen well into January. By the way, according to the Polar Research Group at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, the current southern hemispheric sea-ice area is at 2.9 million sq/km, which is about 400,000 sq/km greater than the normal level expected for this time of year, or slightly above-normal. Based on the latest trend on the chart, it appears that the southern hemispheric sea-ice area could be right at normal by March. 

 

Global warming sceptics bouyed by record cold (UK Telegraph – February 26, 2008)

Excerpt: Global warming sceptics are pointing to recent record cold temperatures in parts of North America and Asia and the return of Arctic Sea ice to suggest fears about climate change may be overblown. According to the US National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), the average temperature of the global land surface in January 2008 was below the 20th century mean (-0.02°F/-0.01°C) for the first time since 1982. […]Asked about the Arctic ice cover, Gilles Langis, a senior forecaster with the Canadian Ice Service in Ottawa, told the Post the Arctic winter had been so severe, the ice has not only recovered but was actually 10 to 20 cm thicker in many places than the same time last year. " 

 

GLOBAL WARMING? IT’S THE COLDEST WINTER IN DECADES (UK Daily Express – Feb. 18, 2008)

Excerpt: NEW evidence has cast doubt on claims that the world’s ice-caps are melting, it emerged last night. Satellite data shows that concerns over the levels of sea ice may have been premature. It was feared that the polar caps were vanishing because of the effects of global warming. But figures from the respected US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration show that almost all the “lost” ice has come back. Ice levels which had shrunk from 13million sq km in January 2007 to just four million in October, are almost back to their original levels. Figures show that there is nearly a third more ice in Antarctica than is usual for the time of year. The data flies in the face of many current thinkers and will be seized on by climate change sceptics who deny that the world is undergoing global warming. […] Central and southern China, the USA and Canada were hit hard by snowstorms. Even the Middle East saw snow, with Jerusalem, Damascus, Amman and northern Saudi Arabia reporting the heaviest falls in years and below-zero temperatures. Meanwhile, in Afghanistan snow and freezing weather killed 120 people.  

 

Report: Sun's 'disturbingly quiet' cycle prompts fear of global COOLING (February 8, 2008 - Investor’s Business Daily)

Excerpt: Now, Canadian scientists are seeking additional funding for more and better "eyes" with which to observe our sun, which has a bigger impact on Earth's climate than all the tailpipes and smokestacks on our planet combined. And they're worried about global cooling, not warming.  

 

Solar data suggest our concerns should be about global cooling – (By Geologist David Archibald of Summa Development Limited in Australia – March 2008 Scientific Paper) 

Excerpt: Solar Cycle 24: Implications for the United StatesExcerpt: I will demonstrate that the Sun drives climate, and use that demonstrated relationship to predict the Earth’s climate to 2030. It is a prediction that differs from most in the public domain. It is a prediction of imminent cooling. […] The carbon dioxide that Mankind will put into the atmosphere over the next few hundred years will offset a couple of millenia of post-Holocene Optimum cooling before we plunge into the next ice age. There are no deleterious consequences of higher atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. Higher atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are wholly beneficial. 

 

Report: Too Much Ice = Polar Bears Starving? (Scientist Philip Stott’s Global Warming Politics – February 15, 2008)  

Excerpt: Apparently, according to a report, Svend Erik Hendriksen, a certified weather observer in the Kangerlussuaq Greenland MET Office, who is responsible for all the weather observations at Kangerlussuaq Airport (near to Sisimiut), says that the cause is too much sea ice:  “Several polar bears located (at least 6) close to Sisimiut town on the West coast ...Too much sea ice, so they are very hungry...Error number 36 in the movie An Inconvenient Truth Al Gore says the polar bear need more ice to survive... Now we have a lot of ice, but the polar bear is starving and find their food at the garbage dumps in towns. It's also influence the local community, polar bear alerts, keep kids away from the schools and so on.... The first one was shot at February 1st.” Sadly, that “first one” is the poor female hung out in the newspaper photograp. 

 

Report: Solar Activity Diminishes; Researchers Predict Another Ice Age - Sunspots have all but vanished in recent years. (Daily Tech – February 9, 2008)

Excerpt: In 2005, Russian astronomer Khabibullo Abdusamatov predicted the sun would soon peak, triggering a rapid decline in world temperatures.  Only last month, the view was echoed by Dr. Oleg Sorokhtin, a fellow of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences. who advised the world to "stock up on fur coats." Sorokhtin, who calls man's contribution to climate change "a drop in the bucket," predicts the solar minimum to occur by the year 2040, with icy weather lasting till 2100 or beyond. Observational data seems to support the claims -- or doesn't contradict it, at least. […] Researcher Dr. Timothy Patterson, director of the Geoscience Center at Carleton University, shares the concern. Patterson is finding "excellent correlations" between solar fluctuations, a relationship that historically, he says doesn't exist between CO2 and past climate changes.

 

Snow Returns to Mount Kilimanjaro (International Herald Tribune – January 21, 2008)

Excerpt: I had wanted to climb to the roof of Africa before climate change erased its ice fields and the romance of its iconic "Snows of Kilimanjaro" image. But as we trudged across the 12,000-foot Shira plateau on Day 2 of our weeklong climb and gazed at the whiteness of the vast, humpbacked summit, I thought maybe I needn't have worried. An up-and-down-and-up traverse of the south face of Kibo, the tallest of the mountain's three volcanic peaks, showed us a panorama of the summit ice cap and fractured tentacles of glacial ice that dangled down gullies dividing the vertical rock faces. And four days later, when we reached 19,340-foot Uhuru, the highest point on Kibo, we beheld snow and ice fields so enormous as to resemble the Arctic. It looked nothing like the photographs of Kibo nearly denuded of ice and snow in the Al Gore documentary "An Inconvenient Truth." Nor did it seem to jibe with the film's narrative: "Within the decade, there will be no more snows of Kilimanjaro." […] But several weeks of heavy rain and snow preceded the arrival of our group, 10 mountaineering clients and a professional guide from International Mountain Guides, based near Seattle. That made for a freakishly well-fed snow pack and the classic snowy image portrayed on travel posters, the label of the local Kilimanjaro Premium Lager and the T-shirts hawked in Moshi's tourist bazaars. But to many climate scientists and glaciologists who have probed and measured, the disappearance of the summit's ice fields is inevitable and imminent. […] Patchy snow covered the upper slopes above approximately 18,500 feet. At dawn, as we reached Stella Point at the lower lip of Kibo's summit crater, the fluted walls of the flat-topped Rebmann Glacier stretched out to our left. Snow blanketed the summit area, a mile and a half wide and hemmed by glaciers. Uhuru, the highest point in all Africa, was a 45-minute slog ahead. - See photo of snows return on Mount Kilimanjaro here.

 

Greenland climate not varying from ‘natural climate variabilty’ (Greenie Watch - Dec. 2007)

Excerpt: RECENT PAPER ON THE HISTORY OF GREENLAND ICE MASS Showing that, although the Greenland melt has increased during the 1992-2006 period, the melt was even higher in 1900s, 1930s, 1940s, 1950s and 1960s. So there is no indication that the current melt is above natural climate variability. Of course people who look just on the 1990 to 2007 period "see" great melting acceleration and influence of carbon dioxide and anthropogenic climate change.  

 

Scientist predicts 'Coming of a New Ice Age' (Winningreen February 2008 ) (By Gerald Marsh. retired physicist from the Argonne National Laboratory and a former consultant to the Department of Defense on strategic nuclear technology and policy in the Reagan, Bush, and Clinton Administration.)

Excerpt: Contrary to the conventional wisdom of the day, the real danger facing humanity is not global warming, but more likely the coming of a new Ice Age. What we live in now is known as an interglacial, a relatively brief period between long ice ages.  Unfortunately for us, most interglacial periods last only about ten thousand years, and that is how long it has been since the last Ice Age ended. How much longer do we have before the ice begins to spread across the Earth's surface?  Less than a hundred years or several hundred?  We simply don't know. Even if all the temperature increase over the last century is attributable to human activities, the rise has been relatively modest one of a little over one degree Fahrenheit — an increase well within natural variations over the last few thousand years. […] NASA has predicted that the solar cycle peaking in 2022 could be one of the weakest in centuries and should cause a very significant cooling of Earth's climate.  Will this be the trigger that initiates a new Ice Age? We ought to carefully consider this possibility before we wipe out our current prosperity by spending trillions of dollars to combat a perceived global warming threat that may well prove to be only a will-o-the-wisp. [See also the U.S. Senate Report released December 20, 2007, “Over 400 Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007” - LINK ]  

# # #  

 

Related Links:  

 

Senate Minority Report: Over 400 Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007  

 

Senate Minority Report Debunks Polar Bear Extinction Fears

 

# # #