Message
From: Sent: To:
Subject:
Kennett, Dave [Dave.Kennett@mail.house.gov] 4/27/2018 3:55:03 PM Wehrum, Bill [/o=ExchangeLabs/ou=Exchange Administrative Group (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/cn=Recipients/cn=33d96ae800cf43a3911d94a7130b6c41-Wehrum, Wil] Re: On deadline: Comment from Rep. Calvert
Yes. That works.
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 27, 2018, at 11:53 AM, Wehrum, Bill <Wehrum.Bill@epa.gov> wrote:
I---------------------------------------------------- !
Does 11:30 edt on Monday work? My cell is j Ex. 6 j
Bill Wehrum Assistant Administrator Office of Air and Radiation U S. Environmental Protection Agency (202) 564-7404
On Apr 27, 2018, at 10:49 AM, Kennett, Dave <Dave.Kennett@mail.house. gov> wrote: Bill,
That'd be great. I think the Calvert-Nichols call may be set for Tuesday so if we
could talk Monday that'd be ideal.!
Ex. 6
I
i____________________________________________________ !
Ex. 6
I________________________________________________________________ I
Thanks
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 27, 2018, at 11:44 AM, Wehrum, Bill <Welmim.Bill@epa.gov> wrote:
Hi Dave. Happy to talk with you about where things stand. I'm out of the office today. Maybe we can connect next week?
Bill Wehrum Assistant Administrator Office of Air and Radiation U S. Environmental Protection Agency (202) 564-7404
On Apr 27, 2018, at 10:13 AM, Jackson, Ryan <iackson.ryan@epa.gov> wrote:
Got it.
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tier 13
ED 002061E 00051595-00001
So, I need to introduce you as well to our AA for Air and his deputy. They probably spend half their time solely on caf standards. They can provide play by play on the latest, and I think that it would be really helpful soon and subsequent to that for us to stay in touch with you for your boss on this issue. I'll put that together today.
From: Kennett, Dave [mailto:Dave.Kennett@mail.house.gov1 Sent: Friday, April 27, 2018 9:36 AM To: Jackson, Ryan <iackson.ryan@epa.gov> Subject: FW: On deadline: Comment from Rep. Calvert
Ryan,
As Calvert told Administrator Pruitt last week when Pruitt expressed frustration with CARB's willingness to negotiate on the waiver, Ken has been trying to get in touch with Mary Nichols to urge CA to get to the table. I expect that call will finally get scheduled for next week.
See the note below (from a reporter to our press guy we ignored the request) with CARB's comments on where things stand with EPA. I've had some lobbyists I generally trust albeit their leanings, tell me similar things. I believe they were the ones who prepped Judy Chu to request the MTE data at E&C yesterday.
Bottom line, Ken wants to help bridge any gap that exists and get things moving in the right direction. If you or Weirum or someone can give me the view/response of EPA on this matter before we call Nichols, that'd be helpful. I am sure there are two sides to the story and I'd like my boss to have both before he gets the pushback from her.
Hope you get a relatively quiet weekend.
Dave
From: Sean O'Kane fmailto:sean.okane@theverqe.com1 Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2018 1:46 PM To: Gagnon,Jason Subject: On deadline: Comment from Rep. Calvert
Hi Jason,
Administrator Pruitt responded to a question from Rep. Calvert during this afternoon's testimony about what the EPA is doing with the CAA waiver by saying it's in flux, because the EPA is in "active discussions" with CARB about what to do. CARB's
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tier 13
ED 002061E 00051595-00002
communications director just told me this is not the case (see full comment below). I wanted to know what Rep. Calvert thinks about this discrepancy.
CARB:
We have had three meetings over the past four months (prior to the Final Determination announcement) and they were notably nonsubstantive. We never received any materials from EPA or NETTSA in advance of the Final Determination announcement on April 2. We have not received any materials since then, have had no meetings since then, and have received no invitations to any meetings on this subject. Pruitt himself has never met with anyone from CARB --even when he was in the State in March just days before the April 2 Final Determination release. This is not, by any stretch of the definition, "working with California." CARB would certainly welcome increased contact with the federal agencies to share information and develop shared solutions together to continue the existing one national program.
I've also reached out to the EPA to see if they have any more information about this discrepancy. For reference, here were the responses Mr. Pruitt gave Rep. Calvert just about an hour ago.
We're actually, Mr Chairman, in active discussions with CARB and California, Mary Nichols and others. We've sent staff to discuss the MTE as well as the impending potential., or proposed rule with respect to the cafe standards. It's my hope and it's my commitment to you to work very diligently to try to find an answer with California and the ten or so states that follow their lead, because it is very important, as best we can, to have a national standard.
We have a role to play, and so does California. And that collaboration is important. We're committed to it, we dedicate our resources to it, and we'll continue to work through the process to try to achieve commonality and an answer for both California and those states and our agencies.
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tier 13
ED 002061E 00051595-00003
We're working hard with California to try to find an answer.
Thanks
Sean CKam e |Reporter] 315-402-9475 @sokanel
W ||R ^ |V
......... W fcllilB fc
The Verge s part of Vox Media Introducing Circuit Breaker, e new gadget blog from The Verge.
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tier 13
ED 002061E 00051595-00004