A weekly update of legislation related to conservation issues in the South Carolina state government.

Week of May 4 - 8, 2009

Friday, May 8, 2009

Conservation Bank {action item}

The final version of the budget from the Senate includes $2 million dollars for the Conservation Bank! This critical funding will allow the Bank to live up to its obligations and maintain the relationships that have protected more than 152,000 acres since 2002. For every State dollar the Conservation Bank has received it has produced 6 dollars in land value by leveraging state dollars with local and federal funds. A 6:1 return on investment is impressive for any state funded program. Please take the time to thank Senator Leatherman, Senator Courson, Senator McGill, and Senator Campsen, for their dedication to protecting our most valuable woodlands, rural landscapes, and historic places for our kids and grandkids. Please also contact your Representatives and ask them to protect Bank funding as the budget is reviewed!

Senate LCI Committee Approves Building Codes Reform Legislation! {action item}

H.3550 by Representative Cato and others that aims to improve energy efficiency standards for new residential construction and renovations was approved this week by the Senate Labor, Commerce, and Industry (LCI) Subcommittee Chaired by Senator Kevin Bryant (R-Anderson) and then the LCI Committee Chaired by Senator Greg Ryberg (R-Aiken). Next week the Senate will consider the bill as early as Tuesday, May 12th. H.3550 aims to delete outdated energy standards for residential construction from the South Carolina code and establish the 2006 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) as the state energy standard for residential construction and renovations. This would be a huge leap in efficiency standards for our state!!! This simple change in law is estimated to cost about $600 for each new home, but the average annual energy savings is estimated at $400, so the payback to consumers is less than two years. Help us ensure passage of this important bill this year by clicking here and writing your Senator. Only two more weeks remain in this year's legislative session!

Contacts: Patty Pierce and Ben Moore

Stop Wasting South Carolina!
{action item}

This week, a legislative committee took steps to approve a change in the Department of Health and Environmental Control's Landfill Demonstration of Need regulation that will reduce allowable annual landfill capacity from 42 million tons to 10.8 million tons. This capacity reduction, based on the recommendations of the DHEC board's Landfill Capacity Task Force, is a vast improvement over the current regulations.

However, we will still be asking the House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee to support S.324, the landfill moratorium, at a subcommittee hearing scheduled for Wednesday, May 13th at 8:00 a.m. There are many variables surrounding when the new regulations will take effect, and a moratorium must be in place until they are permanent. Please click here to urge members of the House Agriculture Committee to support the landfill moratorium.
Contact: Heather Spires


Protecting South Carolina's Water Resources {action item}

A bill to regulate the amount of water withdrawn from South Carolina's rivers, lakes and streams, S.452 by Senator Paul Campbell, passed out of subcommittee and was sent to the full Senate Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee for consideration. We expect the Committee to take it up at a meeting before session ends on May 21, 2009. Please click here to urge the Senate Agriculture Committee to support amendments that will make S.452 good for the environment and good for business.

S.452 was amended in subcommittee to require a seasonally variable minimum instream flow standard that mimics the natural flow of a river, protecting the fish and wildlife, recreational uses and downstream users that depend on seasonal fluctuation. Although this is a big step in the right direction, there are still some concerns that must be addressed before the conservation community can support the bill.

1) The Department of Natural Resources, the agency charged with protecting South Carolina's natural resources, must be given standing in decisions relating to the negative impact of withdrawals on our state's surface waters.
2) S.452 allows existing withdrawers to receive a water withdrawal permit for their current or projected level of use. S.452 establishes permit lengths of 20, 30 or 50 years depending on the withdrawer. S.452 also requires the state to issue the renewal permit for these existing withdrawers at or above the initial permit level. In other words, existing users would be grandfathered in perpetuity. A responsible permitting program will allow for the modification of grandfathered users' permitted withdrawal amounts during the permit renewal process. If S.452 does not allow for withdrawal amounts to be either increased or decreased to meet future needs, we are creating a water right and doing more harm than good by implementing a permitting program.
3) S. 452 exempts from the permitting process withdrawers who return 90% or more of their water withdrawals to the surface water. Some of the largest industrial water users in the state would be exempt from the permitting process if S. 452 is not amended. Whether it's 1% or 10%, if water is not being returned to the source, it is being consumed. Although the amount of water being returned to the source should be taken into consideration, all water users who withdraw above 3 million gallons a month should be required to obtain a permit regardless of how much water is returned.
4) As written, S.452 would require DHEC to automatically issue permits to "owner/operators" of FERC licensed impoundments for additional withdrawals, essentially giving the owner/operators ownership of the excess water in the impoundment and allowing, in extreme cases, piping it to NC, bottling it, or evaporating it in a power plant. The water in impoundments does not belong to owner/operators, it belongs to the people of South Carolina. A permitting program should reflect this notion.

The conservation community will be unable to support S.452 until these concerns are addressed. An irresponsible water withdrawal permitting program would be worse than nothing at all..
Contact: Heather Spires


Senate Gives Final Approval to an Important Energy Bill

S.232, a bill by Senator Ryberg (R-Aiken), Hutto (D-Orangeburg), and Massey (R-Aiken) relating to the State Energy Plan and state agency requirements to conserve energy, water, and wastewater was given final approval this week. Next week, the bill will head to Governor for his consideration. S.232 is its final form requires the State's Energy Policy to encourage the development and use of clean energy resources which includes nuclear energy, energy conservation and efficiency, as well as indigenous, renewable energy resources. Also, any future State energy strategy that promotes carbon-free, non-greenhouse gas emitting sources must include nuclear energy, renewable resources, and energy conservation and efficiency. The definition of 'renewable energy resources' is amended to include energy conservation and efficiency, solar photovoltaic energy, solar thermal energy, wind power, hydroelectric power, geothermal energy, tidal energy, wave energy, recycling, hydrogen fuel derived from renewable resources, biomass energy, energy derived from municipal and other solid waste, energy derived from waste oil, energy derived from waste tires, and landfill gas. The annual state energy action plan that the State Energy Office currently submits to the Governor's Office will also be submitted to the Public Utility Review Committee, the House Labor, Commerce and Industry Committee, and the Senate Agriculture and Natural Resources for their review. Finally, S.232 requires that each state agency to consider reductions of its energy, water, and wastewater use and implement recommended conservation measures to the degree the agency determines that the measures are cost effective. In order to determine what those energy, water, and wastewater savings would be, an audit must be performed by internal or external auditors, or by an energy services company.
Contacts: Patty Pierce and Ben Moore