Senate battle ahead on EPA A battle is brewing in the Senate over the power of the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate heat-trapping greenhouse gas emissions blamed for global warming. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, is poised to move forward with a proposal that would block the EPA--at least temporarily-- from imposing new regulations to limit carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions. She could force a vote on the issue as early as Jan. 20, as part of the Senate's debate of unrelated legislation to raise the nation's debt ceiling. In December, the EPA formally issued an "endangerment declaration" that greenhouse gases threaten the public health and welfare. With that declaration, the agency is prepared to move forward with new limits on emissions from vehicles in March. Democratic leaders last month agreed to allow Murkowski to offer an EPA-related amendment during the debt ceiling debate. But it is unclear what the final proposal may be, or whether Murkowski would pursue another avenue for blocking EPA regulations. Democrats on the Environment and Public Works Committee, led by Chairwoman Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., are urging their Senate colleagues to reject any regulation-blocking proposal from Murkowski. In a "dear colleague" letter sent late Monday, the panel Democrats said it would not be appropriate to repeal "the endangerment finding based upon years of work by America's scientists and public health experts." "The Senate will continue to evaluate the best tools for addressing greenhouse gas emissions," the group said. The Senate is set as early as spring to debate broad climate change and energy legislation, though there are major hurdles to passage. The internal lobbying on the Hill reflects the Democrats' awareness that a move to restrict the EPA could pass in the Senate and jeopardize future work on climate change. Meanwhile, Murkowski is facing new criticism for allowing two former Bush-era EPA officials-turned-industry lobbyists to help draft proposals to limit the EPA's move against greenhouse gases. The Washington Post today reported that Jeffrey Holmstead of Bracewell & Guiliani and Roger Martella, of Sidley Austin, were working on the Murkowski EPA proposals. The environmental group Greenpeace asked the Senate Ethics Committee, also headed by Boxer, to investigate "the depth of the relationship between Sen. Murkowski's staff and these two lobbyists." "It's not an unknown behavior in Washington to have lobbyists intervening, but this is a nasty example at the very least, when you have ex-Bush officials intervening for polluters," said Kert Davies, the director of Greenpeace's PolluterWatch program. Murkowski spokesman Robert Dillon called the Greenpeace request for an ethics probe "totally bogus." He noted that the senator had sought input from a variety of groups, including Democratic staff on Capitol Hill, the EPA and environmentalists. He said one version of the amendment includes protections specifically requested by environmentalists to ensure the EPA is not hampered in other areas. Opponents of what they call EPA's command-and-control approach to regulating greenhouse gas emissions have several options in the Senate. Murkowski could take advantage of a federal statute that makes it easier for Congress to overturn agency regulations to expedite a resolution rejecting the EPA's endangerment finding. EPA lawyers and environmental law experts say the tailpipe limits EPA could pursue under the declaration would automatically lead to requirements that new or modified power plants, refiners and other industrial facilities employ the best available technology to control how much carbon dioxide they release. The EPA has separately proposed a "tailoring rule" that is designed to limit the scope of those requirements, for at least five years, to facilities that emit 25,000 tons of carbon dioxide annually. Smaller emitters would not be covered, under the proposed tailoring rule.

Houston Chronicle