FOIA NEWS: The Interior Department Inspector General said it is investigating an agency process that allows political appointees to review and potentially withhold public documents from being released.
The internal watchdog confirmed in a Tuesday letter that its audit division is examining the agency’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) policy — first introduced in May 2018 and known as an “awareness review” — after several advocacy groups requested a probe.
Back story: Several conservation groups, including the Western Values Project and Campaign for Accountability, filed a complaint in June asking for an investigation into the process that allows Interior political appointees to look at requested public records pertaining to them prior to release.
Following the release of hundreds of public documents to Earthjustice through a FOIA request, the watchdog found that Interior officials had withheld a number of documents from reporters and watchdog groups, citing the awareness review. The conservation groups argued the reasons for withholding the documents in many instances did not meet the criteria laid out in FOIA law, and in many instances a clear reason for withholding was not made by the agency.
“Secretary [David] Bernhardt and Trump’s operatives at Interior are using their political power to withhold information from the public about decisions that impact America’s outdoor heritage. It appears there’s a political cover-up at Interior to hide the culture of corruption that has run amok under Trump and Bernhardt,” said Chris Saeger, executive director at Western Values Project, in a statement Tuesday.
Western Values Project on Tuesday sent the inspector general additional examples of what it called political interference under the awareness review, for inclusion in the agency’s audit. The group said several requests for public documents were delayed or withheld, which they said was potentially a violation of the law.
Read more about the investigation here.
But wait, there’s more FOIA for ya!
FOIA NEWS, PART II: Two separate environmental lawsuits were filed Wednesday challenging the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) changes to its public records policy.
The two suits, filed separately by four environmental groups in the Federal District Court of Northern California and the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, each argue that EPA’s newly implemented Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) rule, submitted at the end of June without a public comment period, was intended to prevent the public from receiving requested public information and to hide information from requesters.
Lawsuit 1: The suit brought by the Center for Biological Diversity and Environmental Integrity Project in the Washington court alleges that EPA’s final FOIA rule was “a sweeping overhaul of the agency’s rules governing its process for responding to records requests.”
Specifically, it challenges provisions included in the new EPA rule, saying that it gives the agency the authority to deny FOIA requests on the basis of a records’ “responsiveness,” and therefore delays record releases. The suit also challenges the fact that the final rule was submitted to the federal register without a public comment period.
“These secretly adopted FOIA directives institutionalize procedures and practices that serve to delay and often frustrate public access to public records by allowing EPA political appointees to oversee what information is made available to the public, and what information never sees the light of day,” the suit reads.
Lawsuit 2: The second suit launched by two California based environmental groups, Ecological Rights Foundation and Our Children’s Earth Foundation, argues that EPA’s FOIA policies “violate the letter and spirit of FOIA and represent the latest example of EPA’s ongoing attack on government transparency and accountability.” It also argues that the rule was “illegal procedurally” because it failed to include public feedback under a comment period.
The suit also takes issue with the agency’s “awareness review” process, which allows political appointees the chance to review the requested documents pertaining to them before release, and in some instances withhold documents.
“EPA’s decision to allow the Administrator to make initial determinations on FOIA requests and to bar requesters from appealing those determinations is arbitrary, capricious, and otherwise not in accordance with law,” the suit reads.
Both lawsuits follow a long line of challenges to the EPA’s FOIA policy, both by environmental groups and lawmakers.
Read more about the suits here. And if you’re having trouble keeping up with all the FOIA action this week, Miranda gave a helpful breakdown of our coverage on Twitter.
HAPPY MUELLER WEDNESDAY! And welcome to Overnight Energy, The Hill’s roundup of the latest energy and environment news.
Please send tips and comments to Miranda Green, mgreen@thehill.com and Rebecca Beitsch, rbeitsch@thehill.com. Follow us on Twitter: @mirandacgreen, @rebeccabeitsch and @thehill.
CLICK HERE to subscribe to our newsletter.
NEW PENTAGON CHEMICAL TASK FORCE: Defense Secretary Mark Esper
Mark EsperWarren spars with Trump’s top Defense nominee over ethics Navy secretary takes over as acting Pentagon chief after Esper formally nominated The Department of Defense needs Mark Esper — and a few policy changes MORE created a task force to review the military’s obligation in cleaning up contamination of cancer-linked “forever chemicals” in his first act at the helm of the Department of Defense (DOD).
A class of chemicals abbreviated as PFAS are used in non-stick products ranging from teflon pans to raincoats, but the heavy use of PFAS-laden firefighting foam by military has contributed to water contamination across the country. PFAS’s persistence in the environment has earned it the “forever chemical” nickname.
“The Department is committed to taking a strong and proactive stance to address the effects arising out of any releases of these substances from all defense activities including the National Guard and Reserves. We must approach the problem in an aggressive and holistic way, ensuring a coordinated DOD-wide approach to the issue,” Esper wrote in a memo establishing the taskforce.
Esper was sworn in as secretary of Defense late Tuesday night.
There are at least 400 military sites with PFAS contamination, and the chemical has often spread to the water supply of nearby communities. The cleanup tab is estimated to be $2 billion.
But the military has come under heavy criticism for its response to PFAS, including accusations the agency pushed the Environmental Protection Agency to weaken its proposed regulations on PFAS–a move likely to save the military a substantive amount of money.
The Air Force has already had to divert $66 million designated for other purposes to cover cleanup costs tied to PFAS.
The military’s new PFAS task force would be responsible for devising PFAS cleanup standards, finding an alternative firefighting foam without PFAS, and addressing “Public/Congress perceptions of DoD’s efforts.”
Esper gave the task force six months to report back.
Lawmakers have been putting increasing pressure on the military to take greater responsibility for cleanup, including adding several measures to both the House and Senate versions of the defense policy bill that require DOD to work with states to clean up the contamination.
Those bills include the requirement to phase out use of PFAS firefighting foam, hence Esper’s directive to find a replacement.
President Trump
Donald John Trump Ocasio-Cortez about as well known as top Democrats: poll Protestor yelling about Trump Tower meeting thrown out of Mueller hearing Chris Wallace: ‘This has been a disaster for the Democrats’ and ‘for the reputation of Robert Mueller’ MORE, however, has threatened to veto the House bill, mentioning specifically the portion that requires phasing out such firefighting foams.
Read more about the task force here.
ON TAP TOMORROW:
On Thursday, the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources will hold a hearing on ways to expand renewable energy generation on public lands.
That same day, the full Natural Resources Committee will look into what some view as a lack of scientific integrity at the Department of Interior. Former Interior scientist turned whistleblower Joel Clement will speak. William Werkheiser, science advisor to the deputy Interior secretary was also invited but has not confirmed his attendance.
The Select Committee on the Climate Crisis on Thursday will hold a hearing examining the private sector’s views on the costs associated with climate change.
In the Senate, the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe will have a briefing on pipeline politics in Europe. That same day the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Subcommittee on Science, Oceans, Fisheries, and Weather will look into America’s waterfronts and their economic and environmental challenges.
On Thursday, the Energy and Natural Resources committee will hold a meeting on energy innovation, economic growth and competitiveness.
OUTSIDE THE BELTWAY:
-Unsafe water was found last year at 41 percent of Hawaii beaches, the Honolulu Star-Advertiser reported.
-As rats overrun California cities, state moves to ban powerful pest-killers, The Sacramento Bee reported.
-Wisconsin Indian tribe files suit to remove pipeline from reservation, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported.
-Oregon wants to untangle whales from crab fishery, the Daily Astorian reported.
ICYMI:
Stories from Wednesday…
State AGs say EPA violated law with fuel efficiency rollback
Military starts task force after spreading toxic “forever chemicals”
Green groups sue EPA over ‘sweeping overhaul’ of public records policy
Florida GOP lawmaker seeks carbon tax to reduce pollution
Watchdog to probe potential interference by Interior officials in releasing public records
Texas Democratic Senate candidate says she does not support Green New Deal
