Industry to make sure we werent being overly aggressive about the ability to have the technologies available for full implementation. Has epa actually quantified how much of the voc reduction the nsps has actually yielded to this point . We do have a good signal from our Greenhouse Gas reporting program that its already been tremendously effective at reducing Carbon Pollution because Carbon Pollution is reduced as youre catching those volatile organic compounds. So we do have a very good sense that this is being effective already. I understand its already about 190 to 290,000 tons. Thats right. Is the estimate. Has epa quantified methane reductions as a cobenefit . We have and i can provide those numbers. I dont have them at the tip of i think i have them. Its about 73 decrease . Excellent. So in january this year the white house released a strategy of reducing oil pollution. They released pro terrible resources like oil wells pumps leaks as well as well sites and compression stations.
When it gets to the issue of the lack of clarity which of course is stated in the definition of avoid navigable waters are seems to me as i look at the seven categories in your rule the definition gets cloudy or not more specific in my view. In fact somewhere after three out of the seven that would be clear to wouldnt it to say navigable waters are waters that are navigable for interstate commerce . Actually the area that lacks clarity is not the issue of navigable waters. The Supreme Court spoke definitively that navigable waters need to be looked at in a way that isnt the traditional definition. We havent looking been looking at navigable waters the same way. Their ability to provide the functions that we look for are severely impacted by the waters that flow into them so the challenge we have tried to face in the clean water rule was to take a look at how do we identify those tributaries and wetlands that feed into those navigable waters that we need to understand and protect so the
We are trying to work with the agency on it but its difficult and its a scientific veterinarian i look at these things as a scientific person i want to have the standards based on good science. Even beyond that it would appear the current Regional Administration has their own mindset about whats going to be done regardless of whats being talked about by the collaborative partners in the region and we are having trouble getting this decision and i think it was the middle of 2013. There was a promise of additional help from folks here in d. C. To maybe move things along at an accelerated pace and again in january there was some discussion with the department of Environmental Quality to help get the job done. So i guess the basic questions here that decision was supposed to be coming here in 2016. We have heard its going to be put off until 2017. We have been hearing about this for a lot of years in the uncertainty creates a big problem for Economic Development in a region. We are trying
From the oil industry, oil and gas industry. The 2012 in sps targeted hydraulically fractured natural gas wells. Reductions to green completion and expected to yield of 95 percent production including an estimated 1. 7 million tons of methane. Is it accurate that the nsps will not be implemented until the end of 2015 . My understanding is and im sorry, congressman i think that is right for the full implementation. We did recognize in that role that there was equipment that needed to be manufactured and installed, and we worked with the industry to make sure we were not being overly aggressive about the ability to have the Technology Available for full implementation. As epa calculated how much production the nsps has produced at this time . We have a good signal from our reporting program that has been tremendously effective at reducing Carbon Pollution because it is reduced as you are capturing volatile organic compounds. We have a very good sense this is effective already. I understa
The definition gets cloudier not more specific in my view. And in fact, you know, if we end somewhere like three out of the seven, that would be clear too, wouldnt it . Wouldnt it be just as clear to say navigable waters are waters that are navigable for interstate commerce and why wouldnt that be we have been the area that lacks clarity right now is not the issue of navigable waters. The Supreme Court actually spoke very definitively that navigable waters need to be looked at in a way that isnt the traditional definition. We havent been looking at navigable waters the same way. It is a recognition that navigable waters in their ability to provide the functions that we look for, are really severely impacted by the waters that flow into them. So the challenge we tried to face in the clean water rule was to take a look at how do we identify those rivers streams tributaries, wetlands that feed into those navigable waters that we need to understand and protect so that they wont degrade tho