{"database": "press", "table": "releases", "rows": [["http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=d0e69d59-a101-4224-91a0-694baf0c9342", "Barrasso Questions Assistant Secretary Schneider  on OSMs Anti-Coal Stream Rule", "2015-10-27", "2015", "2015-10", "Republican", "House", "WY", "John Barrasso", "B001261", "www.barrasso.senate.gov", null, null, "legacy", "WASHINGTON, DC  Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) questioned Janice Schneider, the Interior Departments assistant secretary for Land and Minerals Management, about the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcements (OSM) proposed stream protection rule.\r\nBarrasso also asked Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Director Todd Parfitt, who also testified at todays Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing, to respond to the administrations estimates on the cost of the rule to states.\r\nSenator Barrasso Questions Ms. Schneider about ignoring states in rulemaking process:\r\nClick here to watch Sen. Barrasso question Ms. Schneider\r\nMs. Schneider, I would like to turn to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).\r\nNEPA requires every federal agency to assess the environmental impacts that would result from actions taken by that agencyactions like approving a permit or issuing a new regulation.\r\nA federal agency assesses environmental impacts in what is known as an environmental impact statement.\r\nPrior to issuing an environmental impact statement, a federal agency is required to consult with other agenciesincluding state agencieswhich have special expertise with respect to the action under consideration.\r\nThe federal agency preparing the environmental impact statement is called the lead agency the other agencies are called cooperating agencies. \r\nUnder NEPA, the lead agency is not only required to consult with cooperating agencies. It must ensure that the participation of cooperating agencies is meaningful.\r\nSo when the Office of Surface Mining began developing the so-called stream protection rule, it identified ten state agencies as cooperating agencies.\r\nThe Office signed agreements with each of these state agencies in which it pledged to provide them with: copies of key or relevant documents underlying the EIS; administrative drafts of the EIS; and a reasonable time for review and return ofcomprehensive comments. Thats what you promised.\r\nHowever, between January 2011 and the issuance of the proposed rule on July 2015, the Office of Surface Mining did none of this.\r\nFor four and a half years, the Office of Surface Mining shared neither drafts of the EIS nor documents related to the EIS.\r\nDuring this time, it engaged in no meaningful consultation whatsoever with state agencies.\r\nIt even ignored the states repeated requests for consultation. And in response, eight of the ten state agencies felt they had no other choice but to withdraw as cooperating agencies.\r\nNow you have overseen the Office of Surface Mining since May 2014.\r\nWhy is the Office of Surface Mining allowed to make a mockery of its obligations under the National Environmental Policy Act?\r\nLets be clear, that sharing was done before January of 2011. I want to know where this law allows your agency to go dark for four and a half years?\r\nHow is that consistent with the Presidents claim that his administration is the most transparent administration in history?\r\nThey seem like lame excuses to me.\r\nSenator Barrasso Questions Ms. Schneider about the cost of rule:\r\nI would like to turn to the Office of Surface Minings draft regulatory impact analysis or the R-I-A.\r\nA regulatory impact analysis estimates the cost of a rule on industry as well as the federal government and the states.\r\nThe Office of Surface Mining estimates that the total annual cost of the proposed stream rule to the entire Rocky Mountain region is $29,000.\r\nNow, Mr. Parfitt testifies that: [o]n its face, that figure is laughable.\r\nHe says the state of Wyoming spent more than that simply reading and analyzing  the Proposed Rule and associated documentsan effort that is not even remotely close to being finished.\r\nHe goes on to say that the Office of Surface Mining: grossly underestimates the impact of the proposed rule on Wyoming and federal tax revenueby more than $1.3 million per year.     \r\nMs. Schneider, wouldnt you agree that the Office of Surface Minings annual cost estimate of $29,000 for the entire Rocky Mountain region ison its faceridiculous?\r\nSenator Barrasso asks Mr. Parfitt to respond to Ms. Schneiders comments:\r\nClick here to watch Mr. Parfitt respond to Ms. Schneiders comments\r\n###\r\nhttps://www.barrasso.senate.gov\r\nTwitter | Facebook | You Tube", 1, "2026-03-30T12:14:52Z", "2026-03-30T12:14:52Z"]], "columns": ["url", "title", "date", "year", "month", "party", "chamber", "state", "member_name", "bioguide_id", "domain", "scraper", "source", "date_source", "text", "has_text", "collected_at", "updated_at"], "primary_keys": ["url"], "primary_key_values": ["http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=d0e69d59-a101-4224-91a0-694baf0c9342"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 1.2188390828669071, "source": "dwillis/congress-press", "source_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press", "license": "MIT", "license_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press/blob/main/LICENSE"}