Skip to Content
Streetsblog USA home
Streetsblog USA home
Log In
Climate Change

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 activitiesof the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) with respect to advisingother federal agencies on whether or how to incorporate greenhouse gasemissions and climate change impacts into National Environmental PolicyAct (NEPA) analyses.

On February 28, 2008, the InternationalCenter for Technology Assessment, Natural Resources Defense Council,and Sierra Club filed a petition requesting that CEQ "amend itsregulations to clarify that climate change analyses be included inenvironmental review documents." We are very concerned about theconsequences of CEQ acceding to that request.

NEPA, of course, isa bedrock environmental statute, which requires federal agencies toconsider how their actions could significantly impact the environment.It is not an appropriate tool to set global climate change policy. Anyattempt to regulate greenhouse gas emissions must be debated on itsmerits and not regulated under laws that were never intended for suchpurposes. We firmly believe that NEPA should achieve environmentalgoals without unnecessarily obstructing economic development. Requiringanalysis of climate change impacts during the NEPA process, especiallyat the project-specific level, will slow our economic recovery whileproviding no meaningful environmental benefits.

Projects acrossthe nation are already experiencing delays or being cancelled due toinappropriate and inefficient implementation and litigation fromexisting environmental regulations. The National Surface TransportationPolicy and Revenue Study Commission pointed out that the median time tocomplete environmental impact statements for highway projects in recentyears has been as high as 80 months. The Commission noted that thesedelays can cause significant increases in project construction costs.

Inlight of these concerns and our responsibility to conduct oversight ofthese issues, we ask that you provide to us the following documents andinformation:

- The specific steps CEQ plans to take in the comingmonths to respond to the 2008 petition, including CEQ's anticipatedtimeline and the expected format of that response;

- All draftFederal Register notices, draft guidance documents, draft regulatorychanges and other draft official communications drafted in response tothe 2008 petition;

- All e-mails and memos to and from you or CEQstaff, notes and call logs taken by or for you or CEQ staff and allother documents concerning the substance or format of a response to the2008 petition;

- All draft Federal Register notices, draftguidance documents, draft regulatory changes, letters, e-mails, notes,memos, call logs and other documents created by or for or madeavailable to you or CEQ staff discussing the issues involved withincorporating greenhouse gas emissions and climate change impacts intoNEPA analyses, even if not drafted in direct response to the 2008petition. This includes all documents related to the preparation of thedraft memorandum to all heads of federal agencies transmitted onOctober 8, 1997, as well as to the decision not to finalize theguidance document;

- A list of all Federal, State and localgovernment agencies, industry groups, non-profit groups, associations,advocacy groups, relevant stakeholders, contractors, consultants andprivate individuals that you or CEQ staff have met with or arescheduled to meet with regarding the 2008 petition or the issues raisedby the petition from February 28, 2008, through the anticipatedresponse date;

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

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

Pleaseprovide the documents and information requested above by November 13,2009. If you have any questions regarding this request, please contactus or have your staff contact Angie Giancarlo on Senator Inhofe's staffat 202-224-XXXX or Brian Clifford on Senator Barrasso's staff at202-224-XXXX.

Sincerely,

James M. Inhofe

John Barrasso

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog USA

Talking Headways Podcast: Charging Up Transportation

This week, we talk to the great Gabe Klein, executive director of President Biden's Joint Office of Energy and Transportation (and a former Streetsblog board member), about curbside electrification.

April 18, 2024

Why Does the Vision Zero Movement Stop At the Edge of the Road?

U.S. car crash deaths are nearly 10 percent higher if you count collisions that happen just outside the right of way. So why don't off-road deaths get more air time among advocates?

April 18, 2024

Donald Shoup: Here’s a Parking Policy That Works for the People

Free parking has a veneer of equality, but it is unfair. Here's a proposal from America's leading parking academic that could make it more equitable.

April 18, 2024

Thursday’s Headlines Turn Up the Heat

Whether you realize it or not, climate change is here, and not just in the form of natural disasters.

April 18, 2024

Calif. Legislators Tackle AV, School Zone Safety

Are AVs freight trucks ready to be deployed on California roads with no one in them?

April 17, 2024
See all posts