This is a NAUGHTY list of bad environmental bills that we wished wouldn’t be back next year, but probably will be, so watch out for them!

BTW, this isn’t the whole list, just many of the bad bills that saw action in the Senate and House in the 2019-20 legislative session--

-- Weakening Conventional Drilling Environmental Protections: Senate Bill 790 (Scarnati-R-Jefferson) and House Bill 1635 (Causer-R-Cameron) were introduced to weaken conventional drilling environmental protections.  Gov. Wolf vetoed Senate Bill 790, but these bills will be back.   Read more here.

-- Crippling Changes To The Definition Of Water Pollution: Senate Bill 619 (Yaw-R- Lycoming) makes fundamental changes to the definition of water pollution under the state Clean Streams Law effectively making most spills and discharges to rivers and streams no longer pollution.  Read more here.

-- Kill Carbon Pollution Reduction Program Covering Power Plants: House Bill 2025 (Struzzi-R-Indiana) eliminating DEP’s authority to adopt a Carbon Pollution Reduction Program for power plants was vetoed by the Governor-- Veto message-- but expect something like it to be back again.  Read More Here.

-- Freezing/Reallocating Local Environmental/Conservation Project Funding: Several different bills were moved in the House to freeze-- House Bill 1822 (M.Keller-R-Perry) [Read more here]-- or reallocate-- House Bill 2004 (Ortitay-R-Allegheny) [Read more here] monies from funds specifically dedicated to support local environmental and conservation projects in addition to the $201.9 million diverted from environment and energy funds to balance the FY 2020-21 state budget this year [Read more here].  They have done it before, and they will try to do it again in 2021 [Read more here].  90 percent of Pennsylvania voters want the Senate and House to provide more funding for environmental restoration and conservation. Read more here.

-- Neutering Environmental Regulations: High on the House and Senate priority list is doing all they can to make the process of adopting regulations as difficult and nearly impossible as they can.  [Read more here. Read more here.] Both the House and Senate moved bills that would--

     -- Kill Regulations By Doing Nothing: allows the General Assembly to kill regulations by doing nothing House Bill 806 (Keefer-R-York) and Senate Bill 5 (DiSanto-R-Dauphin).  The bill would require legislative approval of any economically significant final regulation or final-omitted regulation that has an impact of $1 million or more on a regulated community.  In order for a final regulation approved by the Independent Regulatory Review Commission to go into effect, the Senate and House would have to adopt a concurrent resolution approving the regulation.  If one or both of the chambers failed to act, the final regulation would be deemed NOT approved and would be prohibited from taking effect.  Read more here.

     -- Shielding Violators From Enforcement: House Bill 762 (O’Neal-R- Washington) requires all state agencies to establish a new bureaucracy in the form of a Regulatory Compliance Officer with no oversight of any kind giving him the ability to issue an opinion on what any person’s obligations are under the laws administered by that state agency (within 20 business days) which can be used as a “complete defense” against any enforcement proceeding.  The Officer can also review any fine or penalty issued by the agency before it is imposed and set guidelines for waiving that penalty if the person being penalized “has taken or will take [steps] to remedy the violation.” DEP, on average, issues 31,000 permits and approvals a year-- surely one Compliance Officer can handle all those questions without delays. Read more here. The Senate had a similar bill-- Senate Bill 253 (Phillips-Hill-R-York).  Read more here.

     -- Repealing Regulations Because They Have Too Many Words:  Senate Bill 119 (DiSanto-R- Cumberland) would amend the Regulatory Review Act to require the arbitrary repeal of at least two existing regulatory requirements for every new requirement proposed by any state agency.  This “regulatory replacement request” must be approved by the Independent Regulatory Review or by a majority vote in both the Senate and House before a regulation is promulgated.  Read more here.

     -- Office Of The Repealer: House Bill 1055 (Klunk-R-York) does several things-- establishes the Office of the Repealer, unaccountable to anyone, that reviews regulations and recommends their repeal; requires the General Assembly must vote to approve economically significant regulations; and repeal two regulations for every new one adopted, reauthorize repeal of any regulation by resolution. (House Fiscal Note & Summary.)  Read more here. The Senate has its own version-- Senate Bill 251 (Phillips-Hill-R-York).  Read more here.

     -- Repeal Any Regulation At Any Time: House Bill 430 (Benninghoff-R-Mifflin) authorizes the General Assembly to repeal any regulation at any time by concurrent resolution, not by law, with review by the Governor. (House Fiscal Note & Summary.)  Read more here.

     -- Industry Requesting A Review Of Regulation Without Public Participation: House Bill 1874 (Grove-R -York) authorizes any regulated entity at any time to request a review by the little-known, and even less frequently used Joint Committee On Documents to determine if any “published or unpublished document”-- including permits, produced or issued by DEP or other agencies- Read more here.

     -- Stop Adoption Of Any Regulation, Public Participation During An Emergency: Senate Bill 1147 (Yaw-Lycoming) would stop the consideration, adoption or publication of any proposed, final or final-omitted regulation in the PA Bulletin during a disaster emergency declared by the Governor. Read more here.  The House had its own version of the bill in House Bill 2416 (Everett-R-Lycoming).  Read more here.

     -- Determining When A Policy Or Document Needs To Be A Regulation Without Public Participation: Senate Bill 703 (Scarnati-R- Jefferson) which also expands the authority Joint Committee on Documents to determine whether “published or unpublished” documents of agencies should be promulgated as a regulation  Read more here.

-- Limiting Public’s Right To Know Why A Regulation Is Being Adopted:  Senate Bill 398 (Gordner-R-Columbia) amends the Regulatory Review Act to prohibit agencies from publishing a statement letting the public know why they are proposing new or amended regulations when they are asking the public for comments. Read more here.

-- Creating A 5 Member Environmental Permitting Commission Eliminating DEP Permit Reviews: House Bill 1107 (O'Neal-R-Washington) creates 5 member politically appointed commission named by the Senate, House and Governor to “administer the permitting and plan approval process es vested in DEP by law,” eliminating all DEP staff currently reviewing permits, and giving the commission the authority to promulgate regulations establishing permitting requirements and environmental standards and also taking action on all 31,000 individual permit applications [Part of the EnergizePA natural gas subsidy package]. Read more here.

-- Limiting Grounds For Citizen Appeals Of DEP Permits: Senate Bill 726 (Bartolotta-R- Washington) would create a new standard for the review for appeals of DEP permit actions before the Environmental Hearing Board by limiting parties appealing permit decisions-- a company or a citizens group-- to issues raised in and information contained in a record of decision on each permit DEP staff would have to prepare.  Read more here.

-- Require Review Of Any DEP Permit In 30 Days Without Public Comment: House Bill 1106 (Puskaric-R-Allegheny) requires DEP approval of any permit regulating air quality, waste, erosion and sedimentation and dam safety and encroachments within 30 days without regard to public review of permits, creates a new bureaucracy in the form of a “referee” to decide disputes between DEP and applicants over application completeness [Part of House Republican EnergizePA natural gas subsidy package].  Read more here.

-- Require Third Party Permit Reviews: House Bill 509 (Rothman-R-Cumberland) requires all state agencies to establish a new bureaucracy in the form of third party permit review programs that delegate decision-making authority to persons other than the public agency with the legal authority to make those decisions with no conflict of interest or other protections for the public or applicants. (House Fiscal Note & Summary.)  Read more here. The Senate has its own version-- Senate Bill 252 (Phillips-Hill-R-York.  Read more here.

-- More Complex, Costly, Less Efficient 3rd Party DEP Permitting: Senate Bill 891 (Yaw-R -Lycoming) authorizing third party review of Chapter 102 (erosion and sedimentation) and Chapter 105 (dam safety and encroachment) permit applications which will make DEP’s permit reviews more complex and costly. Read more here.

-- 20 Day Reviews Of DEP Erosion & Sedimentation Permits: House Bill 414 (Zimmerman-R- Lancaster) requiring an erosion and sedimentation permit application submitted to DEP or conservation districts “shall be approved within 20 days of receipt,” if it was submitted by a state licensed engineer (sponsor summary). Half the permit applications submitted by engineers now to conservation districts are incomplete  Read more here.

-- Exempting Religious Facilities From Safe Drinking Water Standards: House Bill 707 (Zimmerman-R-Lancaster) would exempt religious facilities, schools and camps from state Safe Drinking Water requirements on grounds, apparently, their religious rights need to be protected.  At a June 12 House Environmental Resources and Energy Committee information meeting, several institutions outlined the difficulties they’ve had complying with DEP drinking water directives, but they did comply.  DEP noted the exemption would violate federal law and a provision of state law requiring compliance with federal requirements. Click Here for more.

-- Pretend Solution To Fund Chesapeake Bay Cleanup: Senate Bill 575 (Yaw-R-Lycoming) establishes a taxpayer funded procurement program for nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment reductions needed to comply with the Chesapeake Bay Watershed pollution reduction goals. Sounds reasonable until you understand only big companies with lots of resources and way too expensive nutrient reduction solutions (compared to a dozen other options) would be eligible to bid.  It guarantees taxpayers would pay for the most expensive nutrient reduction options.  The bill was introduced with the support of the Coalition For Affordable Bay Solutions, an industry-led coalition of private companies promoting their manure treatment technologies and manure to energy processing plants. The House has a companion bill-- House Bill 1642 (Everett-R-Lycoming). Read more here.

-- “Stream Cleaning”: Senate Bill 679 (Yaw-R-Lycoming) directs the Environmental Quality Board to develop regulations that authorize counties to adopt a program for “stream cleaning” and maintenance and the removal of obstructions and flood-related hazards from our local waterways. Read more here.

-- Paying Gas Rights Owners In Delaware Watershed $10 Billion: Both the Senate-- Senate Bill 305 (Baker-R-Luzerne)-- and House-- House Bill 827 (Fritz-R-Wayne)-- had bills that would declare preemptively, by legislation, any action by the Delaware River Basin Commission to adopt a moratorium on fracking in the watershed as a taking and require DRBC to compensate property owners for the value of those rights at a minimum cost the House sponsor said would be $10 billion or more. Republican Senate members have also tried to intervene personally in a federal lawsuit on this issue on the side of oil and gas rights owners. This kind of coercion sets a very bad precedent for an issue-- takings-- that is usually left to the courts to sort out in individual cases with specific facts.  Read more here.

3 Front War

If you see a pattern in the sponsorship of these bills, your eyes are not deceiving you. Many of these bad bills are all part of a three front war conservative Pennsylvania Republicans have been fighting against environmental programs and funding for the last decade--

-- Starving environmental agencies for funding so they have to cut staff and programs and then turn around and say they can’t do their job;

-- Adding even more layers of bureaucracy and procedures to block environmental regulations, reduce environmental standards and give regulated entities more control over these programs [Read more here]; and

-- Using every chance they get to cut funding to support community-based projects to protect and restore the environment, improve recreation opportunities and land conservation efforts that real people-- voters-- overwhelmingly support.

And the fact the Republican leadership in both the Senate and House has gotten more conservative and much less moderate over the last few years means all these bad ideas and more will be back in 2021.

2020 In Review:

-- 90% Of PA Voters Want Senate, House To Provide More Funding For Critical Environmental, Conservation Programs; That Didn’t Happen In 2020

-- Environment & Energy Bills Signed Into Law, Vetoed In 2020

-- This NICE List Of Good Environment & Energy Bills We Hope Will Be Back Next Year

[Posted: December 3, 2020]

12/7/2020