Sen. Moran voices opposition to Environmental Protection Agency proposal

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) today voted in favor of S.J. Res. 24 and S.J. Res. 23, which both passed the Senate, to express disapproval with the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Clean Power Plan rule. The latest proposal threatens to increase energy costs for Americans with minimal environmental benefits.

“Washington should focus on commonsense policies to make energy cleaner and more affordable rather than adding more cost, red tape and regulations,” Sen. Moran said. “This administration continues to ignore the impact a rule like this has on Americans, and I believe we should work to put in place environmental policies that can both protect our natural resources and safeguard our economy.

Sen. Moran continued, “Kansans would be disproportionately affected because nearly two-thirds of our electricity production comes from coal. Our state’s power providers have made great progress in reducing emissions over the years, but the additional regulations mandated in this rule will result in higher costs without demonstrating much environmental benefit.”

According to a recent National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA) study that measures the impact of a 10 and 25 percent electricity price increase on jobs and gross domestic product (GDP) from 2020 to 2040, there is a devastating relationship between higher electricity prices and job losses. Even a 10 percent increase results in 1.2 million jobs lost in 2021 across the country with nearly 500,000 of those lost jobs in rural communities.

Schmidt files lawsuit asking court to overturn ‘Waters of the U.S.’ rule

KANSAS CITY, KAN. ---- Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt announced today that he has joined eight other state attorneys general in a lawsuit asking a federal court to overturn new water regulations that could significantly extend the regulatory reach of the federal government onto Kansas private property.

The regulations, known generally as the “Waters of the U.S.” rule, would extend the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers’ regulatory reach into small waterways, ditches and ponds on Kansas farms, ranches and land developments.

This new rule would have significant consequences for homeowners, farmers and other entities by forcing them to navigate a complex federal bureaucracy and obtain costly permits in order to perform everyday tasks such as digging ditches, building fences or spraying fertilizers.

“Congress never intended for the federal government to regulate ditches or farm ponds,” Schmidt said. “This regulation grossly exceeds the authority granted to federal agencies by the Clean Water Act – authority that rightfully belongs to the states and that is limited by private property rights protected by the Constitution.”

In the complaint filed today in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia, the attorneys general of Kansas, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Utah, West Virginia and Wisconsin argue the final rule put forward by the EPA and Corps of Engineers violates the Clean Water Act, the Administrative Procedure Act and the U.S. Constitution, and usurps the states’ primary responsibility for the management, protection and care of intrastate waters and lands.

The complaint asks a federal judge to declare the rule illegal and issue an injunction to prevent the agencies from enforcing it. It also asks the judge to order the agencies to draft a new rule that complies with the law and honors state authority.

A copy of the complaint is available at http://1.usa.gov/1U4xXLR .

Schmidt: U.S. Supreme Court will hear Kansas challenge to EPA regulation

KANSAS CITY, KAN. ----- The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear a challenge brought by Kansas and 20 other states against new federal regulations that would drive up costs to Kansas electricity ratepayers, Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt announced today.

“The EPA just flat ignored the cost of its new regulation,” Schmidt said.  “In the real world, where Kansas homeowners and businesses live, the cost of electricity is always a relevant part of making decisions. The EPA cannot possibly have concluded that the benefits of its new regulation outweigh the costs since it didn’t weigh the costs at all.  I’m encouraged that the Supreme Court has agreed to hear the states’ arguments that the EPA’s actions were unlawful.”

In 2011, the EPA released a final maximum achievable control technology (MACT) rule for electric utilities, known as the “Mercury and Air Toxics Standards” or “MATS.”

The rule imposes stringent limits on certain emissions from power plants that will require the installation of costly new equipment.

Supreme Court to hear another challenge to EPA regulations

KANSAS CITY, KAN. --- The U.S. Supreme Court this week agreed to hear a challenge to new EPA greenhouse gas regulations that Kansas and other states say were unlawfully imposed, Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt said.

The Court on Tuesday agreed to hear Texas v. EPA, which challenges the authority of EPA to extend new regulations affecting motor vehicle emissions to also regulate stationary sources, such as factories and power plants. 

Kansas had joined in asking the Court to hear the Texas challenge, which was consolidated with several other challenges to the new regulation.

“Even if EPA followed the correct process in imposing new regulations on automobiles, we don’t think that gives it authority to impose new regulations on stationary sources,” Schmidt said. “The rule-making process is designed to ensure input from interested parties, and there are significantly different interests involved in the effect of regulation on cars as compared with that on stationary sources. The new regulations would impose new compliance costs on state regulators, utilities and manufacturers, all without input from the states as the law contemplates, and those costs will ultimately be passed on to Kansas taxpayers, ratepayers and consumers.”

Oral argument in the case is expected next spring. 

This is the 12th Supreme Court case in which Kansas is involved during this term, which began October 7 and is expected to run through June.

AG Schmidt: EPA should not cave in to pressure for new regulations

Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt last week asked the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to reject negotiations with a group of states and environmental groups that have threatened to sue EPA over air quality regulations.

The move came as the Obama administration prepares a new regulatory initiative to restrict the use of coal to generate power in the United States.

“The ongoing regulatory assault on coal-generated power will be paid from Kansans’ pocketbooks,” Schmidt said. “It should be the people’s elected representatives in Congress, not federal bureaucrats, who strike the proper balance between environmental regulation and affordable electricity.”

Ten states and three environmental groups have accused EPA of failing to enact final standards of performance for greenhouse gas emissions from new electric utility generating units and are asking EPA to issue new emission guidelines for existing units.

Schmidt and 20 other state attorneys general wrote EPA and urged the agency to refuse to negotiate with such a small group on issues of air quality and regulatory policy that affect the entire country.

AG Schmidt urges U.S. Supreme Court to review EPA stance on greenhouse gas emissions

Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt last week asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear a challenge to new Environmental Protection Agency rules that would regulate greenhouse gas emissions from stationary sources.

Schmidt filed a friend-of-the-court brief in support of Texas and eleven other states that sued EPA over the proposed rules.  West Virginia and Montana joined in the Kansas brief as well.

The states are asking the Supreme Court to review a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, which sided with EPA in four consolidated cases.  The states argue that EPA exceeded its statutory authority and is unlawfully intruding upon the authority of the states.

"There are enforceable legal limits on the ability of federal agencies, including EPA, to impose regulations," Schmidt said.  "In this case, we believe the EPA has overreached the limits of the law."

Kansas is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case to clarify that the EPA has misinterpreted the Clean Air Act and acted outside its legal and Constitutional authority.

"These new EPA regulations will prove costly to Kansas industries and consumers without sufficient proof of benefit to the environment," Schmidt said.  "That's not what Congress intended when it granted regulatory authority to the EPA."

The Kansas brief was filed in State of Texas, et al., v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, et al., Case No. 12-1269.

EPA air regulation blocked after federal appeals court reaffirms ruling

News Release

Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt today announced that a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., has left in place an earlier ruling that blocks a controversial new EPA air regulation.

The full Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit yesterday left intact an August ruling by a three-judge panel of the court blocking the Environmental Protection Agency’s new Cross-State Air Pollution Rule.

The court’s order blocking EPA from implementing the regulation now goes into effect and could be subsequently overturned only if the United States Supreme Court decided to review the case.

Attorney General Schmidt said the ruling is good news for Kansas homeowners and other utility ratepayers.

“This regulation would have imposed substantial additional costs on Kansas ratepayers with no significant environmental benefit for Kansas,” Schmidt said. “This affirmation by the full appeals court is good news for Kansas.”

Kansas led more than a dozen states in challenging the new regulations as exceeding the authority EPA was granted by Congress.

EPA's move out of KCK made official after court doesn't hear UG argument

By NICK SLOAN, NJSloan21@gmail.com

The Federal District Court for Kansas will not hear the Unified Government's legal challenge of the General Services Administration's decision to move the EPA Region 7 headquarters out of Kansas City, Kan.

The decision by the court means the EPA's move to Lenexa, Kan., is all but official, as the UG has no other legal avenue to pursue.

With the court's decision, the county has now turned it's attention to recruiting new tenants for the building, located at 5th and Minnesota Avenue.

“New tenants and uses for the building will be found,” said Unified Government Mayor/CEO Joe Reardon.

Wyandotte County Economic Development Council President Greg Kindle said there's already been interest expressed from potential tenants and business partners.

“We have had strong interest in that facility from several potential new tenants and know that it will continue to be a hub for employment in the future,” said Greg Kindle, President of the Wyandotte County Economic Development Council. “While it’s unfortunate that the EPA employees who have called Wyandotte County home will be leaving our community, there are few buildings of this size and quality in the region, this vacancy provides us with an opportunity to attract a unique employer to the community.”

The building, owned by UrbanAmerica, was built in 1999 for the sole purpose of hosting the EPA.

After the move was announced, the UG contacted the White House about the decision and later filed a lawsuit against the GSA, alleging two Presidential Executive Orders were violated.

In the lawsuit, the county requested the Federal Court to cancel the deal in Lenexa and to restart the selection process for the EPA's home.

“I am discouraged the same agency that chose to waste $800,000 tax dollars on a GSA party in Las Vegas is now wasting even more tax dollars by abandoning downtown KCK and moving the EPA Headquarters to the suburbs,” Reardon said.

The move from KCK to Lenexa is expected to be wrapped up by this fall.