GOP Senators Protest Evaluating the Climate Impacts of Transport Projects

The 40-year-old National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA), which requires the federal government to evaluate the environmental consequences of future projects, is a valuable tool for local residents and green groups that work to defeat highway expansions — but as Streetsblog L.A. noted earlier this year, NEPA can be an equally valuable tool for opponents of clean transportation projects.

john_barrasso_john_thune_2009_9_30_16_10_56.jpgSen. John Barrasso (R-WY), with a copy of the Senate climate bill. (Photo: AP)

But the biggest NEPA flashpoint these days is whether the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) will amend its rules to require that federally funded projects, including transportation efforts, be evaluated for their contributions to climate change.

The Sierra Club, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the International Center for Technology Assessment last year filed a petition with CEQ seeking climate change’s inclusion in future environmental rules, but CEQ chief Nancy Sutley has remained mum on its fate. "I won’t tell you what the answer is because we don’t know yet," she told GreenWire in March.

In the meantime, GOP senators are starting to push CEQ towards a denial of the petition. Sen. Jim Inhofe (OK), the environment committee’s senior Republican, and Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY) wrote to Sutley on Thursday requesting all documents related to the CEQ’s consideration of adding climate change to NEPA.

The two senators made their stance plain, lamenting that the median time required "to
complete environmental impact statements for highway projects in recent years has been as high as 80 months" and contending that climate change should not be considered under a "bedrock environmental statute" such as NEPA.

As of last year, the median time for completion of NEPA review for highway projects had fallen from its high of 80 months in 2002 to 63.5 months. Moreover, the long-term transportation bill proposed in the House by Rep. Jim Oberstar (D-MN) would set up an office of expedited project delivery within the U.S. DOT to ensure that NEPA reviews and other assessments be completed without lengthy delays.

Still, any progress on resolving NEPA compliance issues is unlikely to deter Inhofe and Barrasso’s push to deny the pending CEQ petition. As the battle over the Senate climate bill heats up, opponents of legislative action are sure to use any strategy they can to prevent the Obama administration from addressing the issue.

Check out Inhofe and Barrasso’s full letter to the CEQ after the jump.

Dear Ms. Sutley:

We are seeking information on the activities
of the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) with respect to advising
other federal agencies on whether or how to incorporate greenhouse gas
emissions and climate change impacts into National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) analyses.

On February 28, 2008, the International
Center for Technology Assessment, Natural Resources Defense Council,
and Sierra Club filed a petition requesting that CEQ "amend its
regulations to clarify that climate change analyses be included in
environmental review documents." We are very concerned about the
consequences of CEQ acceding to that request.

NEPA, of course, is
a bedrock environmental statute, which requires federal agencies to
consider how their actions could significantly impact the environment.
It is not an appropriate tool to set global climate change policy. Any
attempt to regulate greenhouse gas emissions must be debated on its
merits and not regulated under laws that were never intended for such
purposes. We firmly believe that NEPA should achieve environmental
goals without unnecessarily obstructing economic development. Requiring
analysis of climate change impacts during the NEPA process, especially
at the project-specific level, will slow our economic recovery while
providing no meaningful environmental benefits.

Projects across
the nation are already experiencing delays or being cancelled due to
inappropriate and inefficient implementation and litigation from
existing environmental regulations. The National Surface Transportation
Policy and Revenue Study Commission pointed out that the median time to
complete environmental impact statements for highway projects in recent
years has been as high as 80 months. The Commission noted that these
delays can cause significant increases in project construction costs.

In
light of these concerns and our responsibility to conduct oversight of
these issues, we ask that you provide to us the following documents and
information:

– The specific steps CEQ plans to take in the coming
months to respond to the 2008 petition, including CEQ’s anticipated
timeline and the expected format of that response;

– All draft
Federal Register notices, draft guidance documents, draft regulatory
changes and other draft official communications drafted in response to
the 2008 petition;

– All e-mails and memos to and from you or CEQ
staff, notes and call logs taken by or for you or CEQ staff and all
other documents concerning the substance or format of a response to the
2008 petition;

– All draft Federal Register notices, draft
guidance documents, draft regulatory changes, letters, e-mails, notes,
memos, call logs and other documents created by or for or made
available to you or CEQ staff discussing the issues involved with
incorporating greenhouse gas emissions and climate change impacts into
NEPA analyses, even if not drafted in direct response to the 2008
petition. This includes all documents related to the preparation of the
draft memorandum to all heads of federal agencies transmitted on
October 8, 1997, as well as to the decision not to finalize the
guidance document;

– A list of all Federal, State and local
government agencies, industry groups, non-profit groups, associations,
advocacy groups, relevant stakeholders, contractors, consultants and
private individuals that you or CEQ staff have met with or are
scheduled to meet with regarding the 2008 petition or the issues raised
by the petition from February 28, 2008, through the anticipated
response date;

– A detailed discussion of what role, if any,
Carol Browner, her staff, other White House officials or CEQ staff have
had in the process of developing a response to the 2008 petition.


A list of all NEPA documents, draft and final, that have incorporated
greenhouse gas emissions or climate change impacts into the analyses.

Please
provide the documents and information requested above by November 13,
2009. If you have any questions regarding this request, please contact
us or have your staff contact Angie Giancarlo on Senator Inhofe’s staff
at 202-224-XXXX or Brian Clifford on Senator Barrasso’s staff at
202-224-XXXX.

Sincerely,

James M. Inhofe

John Barrasso

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

Transport Contractors Urge White House to Revamp Enviro Review Rules

|
The trade group representing private-sector transportation contractors is urging the Obama administration to change the way environmental reviews are conducted for infrastructure projects, proposing to favor "categorical exclusions" (CEs) from federal review rules over the lengthier process of measuring the environmental impact of construction work. Environmental reviews added an estimated $1 million to the cost […]

Civil Rights Groups Rally Against Threat to Environmental Review

|
A coalition of civil rights and environmental groups is crying foul over proposed changes to an important environmental protection as lawmakers attempt to hammer out a last minute deal on the transportation bill. The weakening of the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA, would disproportionately harm minority groups, according to a statement from The Leadership […]

Will Big Highway Projects Have to Consider Climate Change?

|
Since 1970, the National Environmental Protection Act has required federal agencies to consider the impacts of their projects on air, water, and soil pollution — but not on climate change. Until recently, carbon dioxide, which causes global warning, wasn’t classified as a pollutant and so couldn’t be regulated under environmental laws. The EPA in 2009 […]

New GOP Bill Would Bar Enviro Reviews from Considering Climate

|
Republicans on the Senate environment committee, who months ago began criticizing the Obama administration for evaluating federally funded infrastructure projects for their impact on climate change, today introduced legislation that would bar the White House from making climate a factor in environmental reviews. Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY), one of the new NEPA bill’s sponsors, holds […]

Senate Requires Environmental Approval For Stimulus Projects

|
NEPA oversight should prevent the Garden State Parkway from being widened using stimulus funds. The final draft of the Senate’s economic recovery bill will require all projects funded by the stimulus to have approval under the National Environmental Protection Act, or NEPA. Sponsored by Barbara Boxer, the NEPA amendment (full text after the jump) was […]

Environmental Reviews: Helpful (and Hurtful) to Many Ideologies

|
Writing at the Heritage Foundation’s blog, Nick Loris says that the White House’s pending decision on whether to consider climate change in federal environmental reviews amounts to "more green tape." San Francisco’s newest bike lanes: made $1 million pricier by environmental reviews. (Photo: Streetsblog SF) Citing Republican senators’ concerns that existing National Environmental Policy Act […]