September 10, 2014

In This Issue


As Congress reconvened Sept. 8, House and Senate appropriators were pressed for time to craft and approve a continuing resolution (CR) to fund the government after Sept. 30, 2014 in order to prevent another federal government shutdown.

The CR being considered this week will fund the government through December 11, 2014. The House is expected to take up the CR on Sept. 11. In stark contrast to last year, there seems to be little appetite professed by House and Senate leaders or influential tea party members to shutdown the government in light of the coming November Congressional midterm elections. While the US House of Representatives is expected to maintain Republican control, the US Senate election results and party control is uncertain. In addition to taking up the CR, each chamber will hold votes on issues that appeal to their respective voter base.

The House plans to take up legislation to permanently ban an internet access tax, energy legislation to support construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, and a slate of deregulatory bills targeting federal agencies charged with environmental protection efforts.

Meanwhile, the Senate is considering a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission along with other US Supreme Court campaign finance decisions and may also vote to raise the minimum wage.

The House is scheduled to work for two weeks through Sept. 19 and then will break to observe Rosh Hashanah. They may return for one week Sept. 29 if a CR is not enacted. The Senate is scheduled to work through Sept. 23. After the Nov. 2014 elections, the two chambers will reconvene for a lame duck session.


The week before Congress returned from the August district work period, the Ecological Society of America sent a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) expressing concern with S. 1347, the Conference Accountability Act. The bill would place additional restrictions on federal employee and contractor travel. Due to a number of factors, it is unlikely that the bill will be considered this year.

View the full letter here.


On Sept. 8, the House Natural Resources Committee convened for a field hearing to consider a proposal to list the northern long-eared bat under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the potential impacts the listing would have on the Pennsylvania economy.

The committee members were skeptical on whether the ESA is an appropriate tool for addressing the bat species’ decline. Several members argued that bat conservation efforts should focus on addressing White Nose Syndrome, which is attributed for its decline in recent years.

“The likely primary cause for any documented decline of the bats is not caused by any human-related activity, but rather from a disease transmitted mostly from bats to other bats called ‘White Nose Syndrome.’ It seems to me that efforts should focus on that issue, rather than creating a federal endangered species solution in search of a problem,” said Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings (R-WA).

“No one can deny the challenge facing the northern long-eared bat due to White Nose Syndrome and there is consensus that we must learn more about the disease and improve partnerships at all levels to slow its spread. However, it is imperative that we get the science right and strategically address the root cause of the apparent population losses, rather than restrict large areas of the economy and activities that have no bearing on slowing or reversing the disease.”

However, Mollie Matteson, senior scientist with the Center for Biological Diversity, testified that the species’ decline is attributable to numerous factors, which White Nose Syndrome has only exacerbated.

“Scientists have evidence that the northern long-eared bat was in decline prior to the onset of White Nose Syndrome, possibly due to factors such as habitat destruction and fragmentation, environmental toxins, and climate change,” stated Matteson. “Now, White Nose Syndrome may be interacting with these other dangers to cause a downward spiral that may soon become irreversible.”

In her written testimony, Matteson also highlighted the important economic role bats play in curbing the proliferation of agricultural and forest pest insects, noting they provide “billions of dollars in crop protection services across the United States.”

“The insect-eating northern long-eared bat provides a valuable population check on moths and beetles that may attack timber and crops,” she said. “Without this bat, the challenges farmers and the timber industry face will grow, not lessen.”

For additional information on the hearing, click here.


On Sept. 3, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) listed twenty additional coral species as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act—fifteen of the newly listed species occur in the Indo-Pacific and five in the Caribbean.

For more information, click here.


On Sept. 3, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) will provide nearly $12 million to federal and state land agencies to address threats to public health and water resources posed by harmful algal blooms (HABs) in western Lake Erie.

The funding will expand water treatment monitoring and forecasting in the region. It will also include incentives for area farmers to reduce their phosphorus runoff and improve measurement of phosphorus loads in Lake Erie tributaries.

The Great Lakes Restoration Task Force, which oversees the GLRI, is chaired by EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy.

For additional information on the GLRI, click here.


On Sept. 9, Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell and US Fish and Wildlife Service Director Dan Ashe announced nearly $35 million in grants to 20 states to enable collaborative efforts to conserve many of America’s imperiled species, ranging from the red cockaded woodpecker in the Southeast to a variety of bat species in the Midwest to a colorful flower in the Rocky Mountains.

“Partnerships are critical to ensuring future generations will be able to see threatened and endangered species in the wild rather than simply in a history book,” Jewell said. “These grants will enable states to work in voluntary partnership with private landowners and a wide variety of other stakeholders to preserve vital habitat and move these species down the road to recovery.”

The competitive grants allow states to work with private landowners, conservation groups and other government agencies to initiate conservation planning efforts and acquire and protect habitat that benefits threatened and endangered fish, wildlife and plants. The grant funding is provided through programs established to help advance creative partnerships for the recovery of imperiled species. This year, the fund will allocate approximately $7.4 million in grants through the Habitat Conservation Planning Assistance Grants Program; nearly $18 million through the Habitat Conservation Plan Land Acquisition Grants Program, and $9.5 million through the Recovery Land Acquisition Grants Program.

For more information, follow this link.


On Aug. 28, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) announced new Urban Wildlife Refuge Partnerships that will help six city communities encourage participation in outdoor recreation and conservation efforts.

The six national wildlife refuges participating in the Urban Refuge Partnerships include Hopper Mountain Refuge in Ventura, CA; Bayou Sauvage Refuge in New Orleans, LA; Rocky Mountain Arsenal Refuge in Denver, CO; John Heinz Refuge at Tinicum in Philadelphia, PA; Wallkill River Refuge in Sussex, NJ; and Santa Ana Refuge in Alamo, TX.

Funding is provided through the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation’s Five Star and Urban Waters Restoration. Over $1.7 million is expected to be generated towards the effort from collaborations between FWS, local communities, corporations and non-profits.

For additional information on the six individual National Urban Refuge Partnerships, click this link.


In August, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) announced it withdrew its proposal to list the wolverine (Gulo gulo) as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act. The Service initially proposed to list the wolverine based on climate change model forecasts showing overall loss of spring snow across the species’ range. However, upon conducting a more thorough review and gathering additional information, the Service found that climate change models are unable to reliably predict snowfall amounts and snow-cover persistence in wolverine denning locations.

“Climate change is a reality, the consequences of which the Service deals with on a daily basis. While impacts to many species are clear and measurable, for others the consequences of a warming planet are less certain. This is particularly true in the Mountain West, where differences in elevation and topography make fine-scale prediction of climate impacts ambiguous,” said FWS Director Dan Ashe in a press statement. “In this case, based on all the information available, we simply do not know enough about the ecology of the wolverine and when or how it will be affected by a changing climate to conclude at this time that it is likely to be in danger of extinction within the foreseeable future.”

Director Ashe stated the decision could be revisited if the agency is presented with new evidence linking climate change to the decline of wolverine populations.

The decision not to list the species has met with critique from environmental organizations who contend the agency is not following the recommendations of a majority of its scientists. FWS scientists had originally proposed listing the species in Feb. 2013.  In July, the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) authored a letter expressing concern with the manner in which the agency has weighed scientific evidence in determining whether the wolverine qualifies for endangered species protection.

“The regional director’s decision to overturn a scientifically well-vetted and well-supported listing determination sets a bad precedent by allowing an administrator to overrule the expert judgment of the Service’s scientists as well as independent peer reviewers,” the letter states.

View the CBD letter here. View the full Federal Register notice.


The Audubon Birds and Climate Report is a comprehensive, first-of-its kind study that predicts how climate change could affect the ranges of 588 North American birds. The study models indicate that 314 species will lose more than 50 percent of their current climatic range by 2080.

Audubon scientists used three decades of citizen-scientist observations from the Audubon Christmas Bird Count and the North American Breeding Bird Survey to define the “climatic suitability” for each bird species—the range of temperatures, precipitation, and seasonal changes each species needs to survive.

For more information, follow this link.


James L. Olds has been selected by the National Science Foundation(NSF) to serve as the new assistant director for the Directorate for Biological Sciences (BIO) beginning in October 2014.

Olds is a George Mason University professor and director and chief academic unit officer at the Krasnow Institute for Advanced Study. He is also the Shelley Krasnow University Professor of Molecular Neuroscience. The international Decade of the Mind project was begun under his leadership at Krasnow, which helped shape President Obama’s BRAIN Initiative.

“Dr. Olds has a strong record of academic leadership with an institution that has grown its global presence during his tenure,” said NSF Director France A. Córdova. “In addition to his leadership, his commitment to interdisciplinary research at Krasnow and his experience with developing scientific policy will be of great benefit to NSF and to the research community we serve.”

For more information click here.


Considered by House Committee

On Sept. 9, the House Natural Resources Committee held a hearing on the following bills:

H.R. 1314, to amend the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to establish a procedure for approval of certain settlements – Introduced by Rep. Bill Flores (R-TX), the bill would require states and counties to approve any Endangered Species Act settlements that affect them.

H.R. 1927, the More Water and Security for Californians Act –Introduced by Rep. Jim Costa (D-CA), the bill would temporarily exempt the Central Valley Project and the California State Water Project from some Endangered Species Act requirements to provide more water to farms.

H.R. 4256, the Endangered Species Improvement Act of 2014 – Introduced by Chris Stewart (R-UT), the bill would require the federal government to count animals on private and tribal lands, in addition to federal, when determining whether a species warrants federal protection.

H.R. 4284, the ESA Improvement Act of 2014 – Introduced by Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R-TX), the bill would prohibit the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) from listing a species for federal protection before coordinating a State Protective Action plan for states affected by the listing.

H.R. 4319, the Common Sense In Species Protection Act – Introduced by Rick Crawford (R-AR), the bill would require FWS to publish and make available for public comment a more comprehensive economic analysis when determining critical habitat.

H.R. 4866, the Lesser Prairie Chicken Voluntary Recovery Act – Introduced by Rep. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK), the bill would reverse the threatened listing for the lesser prairie chicken and put a five year moratorium on any future listing of the species.

Passed House

H.R. 2495, the American Super Computing Leadership Act of 2014 – Introduced by Rep. Randy Hultgren (R-IL), the bill would direct the Secretary of Energy to develop a plan to advance exascale high-performance computing technology in the US. The bill passed the House Sept. 8 by voice vote.

H.R. 5309, the Tsunami Warning, Education and Research Act – Introduced by Rep. Susan Bonamici (D-OR), the bill would reauthorize and strengthen tsunami detection, forecasting, warning and research programs at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The bill passed the House Sept. 8 by voice vote.

H.R. 5078, the Waters of the United States Regulatory Overreach Protection Act of 2014 – Introduced by Rep. Steve Southerland (R-FL), the bill would prevent the US Environmental Protection Agency from implementing a proposed rule to clarify its jurisdiction over navigable waterways of the United States. The bill passed Sept. 9 by a vote of 262-152 with 35 Democrats joining all but one Republican (Rep. Chris Smith (NJ)) in supporting the bill.

The White House released a Statement of Administration policy declaring the president would veto the bill. View the statement by clicking here.

Sources: Audubon Society, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Science Foundation, US Environmental Protection Agency, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Energy and Environment Daily, E&E News PM, Greenwire, the Hill, the Washington Post


August 7, 2014

In This Issue


The Ecological Society of America (ESA) is among 70 research organizations that signed a letter expressing concern with legislation moving in the Senate that would impose restrictions on the ability of government scientists and engineers to participate in scientific conferences.

On July 30th, the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee approved S. 1347, the Conference Accountability Act, introduced by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK). The approved legislation includes language proposed by the bill’s sponsor that would add additional limits to existing travel policy regulations imposed on government employees in the wake of the General Services Administration scandal. It passed the committee by voice vote.

The bill includes language prohibiting a federal agency from expending funds on “not more than one conference that is sponsored or organized by a particular organization during any fiscal year, unless the agency is the primary sponsor and organizer of the conference.” The bill also places a 50 person limit on the number of individuals per agency who can attend conferences outside the US.

“Scientific and technical conferences help maintain a ‘talented and interconnected workforce’ — one of the three critical pillars of a vibrant, economically productive scientific enterprise identified in the National Research Council’s Furthering America’s Research Enterprise report,” the letter notes. “These conferences promote collaborations between federal scientists and those in private industry and academia, provide for rapid dissemination of federally funded research results, and provide high-quality professional development for the next generation of scientists and engineers.”

The Conference Accountability Act could be voted on by the full Senate as early as September, following the month-long August district-work period that began at the end of last week.

In addition to this letter, ESA also submitted a letter on the importance of scientific conferences to the committee earlier this year.

Read the scientific societies letter by clicking this link. View the January ESA letter by clicking this link.


On August 1st, the Senate Appropriations Committee unveiled its Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations bill for Fiscal Year (FY) 2015. The bill provides $30.7 billion for the US Department of Interior, US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the US Forest Service, slightly higher than the $30.2 billion provided in the House version of the bill.

Funding levels are as follows for selected agencies:

  • EPA: $8.2 billion, an $18 million decrease below FY 2014. The Senate bill would increase funding for climate-related activities by $9.8 million over FY 2014. This amount includes $8.8 million to implement the president’s Climate Action Plan. Science and technology programs at EPA would receive $752.88 million, a $6.3 million decrease.
  •  Office of Surface Mining: $144.8 million; a $5 million decrease below FY 2014.
  • Bureau of Land Management: $1.113 billion; a $6 million increase above FY 2014.
  • Bureau of Ocean Energy Management: $72.4 million, a $3.4 million increase above FY 2014.
  • National Park Service: $2.632 billion; a $71 million increase above FY 2014.
  • US Forest Service: $4.626 billion; an $853.5 million decrease below FY 2014. The bill designates $2.171 billion to be shared by the US Forest Service and the Department of Interior for wildland fire suppression activities.
  • US Fish and Wildlife Service: $1.451 billion; a $23 million increase over FY 2014.
  • US Geological Survey: $1.046 billion; a $14 million increase above FY 2014.
  • Smithsonian Institution: $825.4 million; a $20.4 million increase above FY 2014.

The Senate bill will be reconciled with its House version that was reported out of committee, but has yet to be voted by the full US House of Representatives.

Since 1994, Congress has not completed work on all of its appropriations bills before the conclusion of the fiscal year. The current fiscal year ends on Sept. 30, 2014. Consequently, it is anticipated that House and Senate appropriators will likely wait until after the November mid-term elections to negotiate a final bill. In recent years, appropriation bills have been rolled into either large omnibus bill or smaller “mini-omnibuses,” made up of three or four funding bills.

In order to prevent a government shutdown, Congress needs to send the president a continuing resolution to fund the government after Sept. 30. Congressional capacity to prevent a government shutdown by passing an appropriations bill is contingent on whether Members on either side of the aisle are willing to engage in a partisan public discourse  weeks before the Nov. midterm elections (the House is not scheduled to be in session throughout most of October).

For additional information on the Senate FY 2015 Interior, Environment and Related Agencies appropriations bill, click this link.

For information on the House FY 2015 Interior, Environment and Related Agencies appropriations bill, see the July 11, 2014 edition of ESA Policy News by clicking this link.


On July 31st, Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) introduced a draft bill to reauthorize the original America Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology, Education, and Science (COMPETES) Act of 2007 (P.L. 110-69).

Entitled the “America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2014,” the bill authorizes funding for the National Science Foundation (NSF), the National Institutes of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Office of Science. As an authorization measure, the bill does not provide actual funding, which is allocated through the appropriations process. As an authorization, the bill sets maximum spending levels for the agencies for coming fiscal years. These spending ceilings serve as a guide for appropriators when crafting their annual spending bills.

The Senate comprehensive multiyear funding reauthorization bill is markedly different than the approach the US House of Representatives has taken to reauthorizing America COMPETES. The House has taken a multi-bill approach, which includes H.R. 4869, the Energy Research and Development Act, which reauthorizes the DOE Office of Science, and the H.R. 4186, the FIRST Act, which reauthorizes NSF and NIST.

Uniquely, the Senate bill would reauthorize annual budget increases for NSF at about 6.7 percent. This increase is significantly higher than the one percent budget increase authorized under the FIRST Act. It is also greater than the 4.9 percent budget increase for NSF authorized under the America COMPETES reauthorization bill introduced by House Democrats. Annual increases for NSF have average 2.2 percent over the past five years, according to the American Association for the Advancement of Science. The original America COMPETES authorized doubling the budgets for NSF, NIST and DOE science by FY 2013, a goal hindered by a congressional focus on restraining overall discretionary spending in light of the burgeoning national debt.

Unlike the House FIRST Act, the Senate bill does not include changes to the NSF peer review process or science funding budget cuts for the behavioral sciences. Nor does the Senate bill authorize cuts to DOE climate change research, included in the House Energy Research and Development Act. The House bills also differ in that they authorize funding only through FY 2015. The Senate bill takes a long-term outlook in line with the preceding bills. It authorizes funding through FY 2019. The 2010 America COMPETES bill reauthorized funding through FY 2013.

Due to the few remaining weeks of the legislative schedule for the current 113th Congress, a final America COMPETES bill will most likely not be enacted before the end of the calendar year, given the wide chasm of policy differences between the Senate and House bills.

The first America COMPETES Act passed with strong bipartisan support and was signed by President George W. Bush. The America COMPETES Act Reauthorization of 2010 was among the last bills signed by President Obama that passed Congress when Democrats controlled both the House and Senate.

For additional information on the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2014, click this link.


A new White House report entitled “The Cost of Delaying Action to Stem Climate Change” found that the economic costs associated with delaying action to address climate change will exponentially increase over time.

Delay in action will cost the US 40 percent more for each future decade the US fails to take action to mitigate climate change. According to the findings, the United States faces yearly economic losses of $150 billion if the world fails to decrease its use of fossil fuels, which are the primary cause of greenhouse gas emissions.

“Confronting the possibility of climate catastrophes means taking prudent steps now to reduce the future chances of the most severe consequences of climate change,” states the report. “The longer that action is postponed, the greater will be the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere and the greater is the risk. Just as businesses and individuals guard against severe financial risks by purchasing various forms of insurance, policymakers can take actions now that reduce the chances of triggering the most severe climate events.”

The report was conducted by the White House Council of Economic Advisers. View the full report by clicking this link.


On August 5th, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy Director John Holdren appeared in a video discussing the links between climate change and increasingly long and intense wildfire seasons in the western United States.

“The influence of climate change on the wildfire regime comes not just from the higher summer temperatures and reduced summer soil moisture that go with global warming,” stated Holdren. “Climate change is also bringing us more dead trees—kindling in effect—killed by a combination of heat stress, water stress and attacks by pests and pathogens that multiply faster in a warmer world.”

In the three-minute White House video, he noted the eight worst years on record in the United States in terms of total acreage burned have all occurred since the year 2000. Holdren also outlined the various detrimental effects of wildfires. These include costly property damage, loss of wildlife and soil erosion that puts communities at increased risk of flooding and landslides.

View the full video by clicking this link.


The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) released a new report that for the first time provides uniform scientific methods for cataloging efforts by the farmers to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from their operations.

The report provides guidance in quantifying greenhouse gas emissions from activities related to animal production crop production, grazing and land management. The report is a tool for the agency to use in evaluating its existing greenhouse gas reduction programs and support the development of new methods to reduce carbon emissions.

The Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-234) included language directing USDA to develop technical guidelines for science-based methods that “measure the environmental services benefits from conservation and land management activities in order to facilitate the participation of farmers, ranchers, and forest landowners in emerging environmental service markets.” The language called for the USDA Secretary to prioritize guidelines related to participation in “carbon markets.”

For additional information on the USDA report, click this link.


Introduced in House

H.R. 5309, the Tsunami Warning, Education, and Research Act – Introduced July 31st by House Science, Space and Technology Subcommittee on Environment Ranking Member Suzanne Bonamici (D-OR), the bill would authorize and strengthen the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s tsunami detection, forecast, warning, research, and mitigation program. The bill has been referred to the House Science, Space and Technology Committee. It has five bipartisan cosponsors, including Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX).

Passed by House

H.R. 935, the Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act – Introduced by House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment Chairman Bob Gibbs (R-OH), the bill would prohibit the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from requiring a Clean Water Act permit for spraying pesticides over water.

The legislation would reverse a 2009 federal appeals court ruling that found EPA’s current pesticide regulations did not sufficiently protect the nation’s waterways. Critics of the ruling state that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) sufficiently protects water from pesticides and the new requirements, which went into effect in 2011, are unnecessary.  The bill passed the House July 31st by a vote of 267-161. Thirty-seven Democrats voted with all Republicans in supporting the bill.

The bill had to be taken up by the House twice after failing to secure the two-thirds vote necessary to advance under a suspension of the rules vote on July 28th.  House leadership decides to take a bill up under suspension of the rules if it is estimated the legislation will attract significant bipartisan support. The bill is not expected to move in the Democratic-controlled Senate.

H.R. 4315, the 21st Century Endangered Species Transparency and Reasonableness Act – Introduced by House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings (R-WA), the comprehensive bill incorporates several previously introduced measures to reform the Endangered Species Act.

The bill includes provisions that would 1) require the Secretaries of the Interior and Commerce to make publicly available online scientific and commercial data related to the listing of a species as endangered or threatened 2) direct the Secretary of the Interior to make publicly available an annual report detailing federal expenditures for lawsuits against federal agencies brought under the Endangered Species Act 3) provide to affected states all data used as the basis for the determination to list a species as endangered or threatened, regardless of its accuracy and 4) modify the existing standard for awarding court costs, including limiting attorney fees, in citizen suits to a prevailing party in endangered species act lawsuits.

The bill passed the House July 29th by a vote of 233-190 with Democrats joining all but eight Republicans in supporting the bill. The bill has been referred to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, but it is unlikely to gain traction in the Democratic-controlled Senate.

The White House issued a Statement of Administration Policy opposing the bill. Read the full statement by clicking this link.

Introduced in Senate

S. 2771, the Water in the 21st Century Act – Introduced July 31st by Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-CA), the bill would expand rebates and grants for water recycling, authorize funding support for regional water recycling and ground management projects, and invest in research into water conservation technologies. The bill has been referred to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. Companion legislation (H.R. 5363) has been introduced in the House by Rep. Grace Napolitano (D-CA).

Considered by Senate

S. 2648, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act – Introduced by Senate Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), the comprehensive bill included supplemental funding to federal agencies charged with addressing the flood of unaccompanied children across  the US border and support for Israel’s “Iron Dome” anti-missile defense system. The bill also included $600 billion for wildfire suppression efforts.

The bill was debated in the Senate, but failed to garner the 60 procedural votes necessary to advance the bill in the Senate, largely along partisan lines. The vote, taken July 31st, failed 50-44. The White House released a Statement of Administration Policy supporting the bill. View the full statement by clicking this link.

Sources: National Aeronautics Space Administration, US Department of Agriculture, US Department of Interior, US Fish and Wildlife Service, the White House, House Space, Science and Technology Committee, Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, Energy and Environment Daily, E&E News PM, Greenwire, the Hill

July 25, 2014

In This Issue


A recent Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee hearing offered US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Gina McCarthy her first opportunity to testify before Capitol Hill legislators on her agency’s Clean Power Plan. The proposed rule in the EPA plan falls under President Obama’s Climate Action Plan and seeks to cut carbon pollution from existing power plants by 30 percent from 2005 levels.

“The President’s plan is a win-win for the American people, because by addressing climate change through carbon pollution reduction, we can cut many types of air pollutants that also threaten human health,” stated EPW Committee Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-CA). “Climate change and rising temperatures will lead to increased ground level ozone and smog which could worsen respiratory illnesses like asthma, increased air pollutants from wildfires, and more heat-related and flood-related deaths.”

While Chairwoman Boxer other committee Democrats were supportive of the rule, committee Republicans put Administrator McCarthy on the defensive, questioning EPA’s authority to implement the carbon rules as well as the level of consensus behind the science that prompted them. Some, such as Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MI), denied that global temperatures have been on the rise in recent decades.

“The consequences of the administration’s proposed rule would be disastrous for our economy and again would have [a] miniscule impact on the environment,” said Wicker. “It is a job-killer. It is based on questionable science. It is of dubious legality under the Clean Air Act. It amounts to an end run against Congress. It is inflexible. It would have no effect on the climate and is, therefore, pointless, and it is punitive.”

In her testimony, McCarthy emphasized that individual states will have flexibility in designing their own compliance strategy for adhering to the carbon-reduction rules. She also noted the many economic benefits of implementing the Clean Power Plan.

“In 2030, the Clean Power Plan will deliver climate and health benefits of up to $90 billion dollars,” stated McCarthy. “And for soot and smog reductions alone, that means for every dollar we invest in the plan, families will see $7 in health benefits. And because energy efficiency is such a smart, cost-effective strategy—we predict that, in 2030, average electricity bills for American families will be eight percent cheaper.”

At various points in the hearing, Chairwoman Boxer and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) noted that it was only a month ago that four former EPA administrators under Republican presidents testified before the committee, supporting EPA’s efforts to regulate greenhouse gas emissions.

Chairwoman Boxer added “I don’t know why we have to fight about things that have been settled three times by the Supreme Court,” referencing the high court’s repeated rulings affirming EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions.

View the full hearing here.


On July 16th, Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Oversight Subcommittee Ranking Member John Barrasso (R-WY) introduced legislation that would prohibit the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from implementing regulations based on science that is not reproducible.

S. 2613, the Secret Science Reform Act, would effectively restrict the quality and quantity of research data that the agency can utilize to inform its regulatory efforts. EPA states that much of the data (including public health records) is confidential. The bill’s seven original cosponsors include Republicans Mike Crapo (ID), Mike Enzi (WY), Deb Fischer (NE), James Inhofe (OK), James Risch (ID) and David Vitter (LA). Senate Democrats, like their House counterparts, are largely opposed to the measure.

The Secret Science Reform Act is the Senate companion bill to legislation of the same name that is already moving through the US House of Representatives (H.R. 4012). The Science, Space and Technology Committee approved the House version of the bill on June 24th. House leadership has not yet indicated when the bill will be voted on by the full House. The Senate bill has been referred to the EPW Committee, but it is unlikely to move through the Democratic-controlled Senate.

The Ecological Society of America recently joined a number of scientific organizations in cosigning a letter outlining a number of unintended negative consequences implementation of the legislation would have on scientific research at the EPA. The organizational letter will be sent to House leadership and the Senate EPW Committee next week.


The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) has announced $9.7 million in funding to help rural areas of California impacted by drought. The funding will go to 73,000 residents in 11 California counties stricken with severe drought.

The funding is made possible through the UDSA’s Emergency Community Water Assistance Grant program. The program helps rural communities that have experienced a significant decline in water quality or quantity due to an emergency.

A report from the University of California-Davis (UC-Davis) Center for Watershed science states that the drought will cost the state of California $2.2 billion this calendar year and that the probability of drought in 2015 is above 50 percent.

For a full list of drought funding recipients, click here. The UC-Davis report is available here.


On July 23rd, US Department of Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack announced the creation of a new Foundation for Food and Agricultural Research to “leverage public and private resources to increase the scientific and technological research, innovation, and partnerships critical to boosting America’s agricultural economy.”

Authorized by the Agricultural Act of  2014 (P.L. 113-79), the foundation will operate as a non-profit corporation seeking private donations to fund research activities that promote plant and animal health, food safety, renewable energy and natural resources, among other issues.

A 15-member board of directors representing various fields of expertise in agriculture will lead the foundation. The board of directors includes a large number of Ph.D. researchers. Congress mandated the board’s separate five ex-officio members choose the initial board of directors, which includes seven members from a candidate list provided by industry and eight members from a list provided by the National Academy of Sciences.

The five ex-officio board members designated by Congress are Secretary Vilsack; National Science Foundation Director France Córdova; USDA Undersecretary for Research, Education and Economics Chief Scientist Catherine Woteki; Agricultural Research Service Administrator Chavonda Jacobs-Young; and National Institute of Food and Agriculture Director Sonny Ramaswamy.

A full listing of the board of directors is available here.


The US Fish and Wildlife Service’s (FWS) Region 1, representing the upper Northwest United States, announced a phase out of the use of neonicotinoid pesticides on national wildlife refuge system lands.

The phase out is based on the agency’s determination that there is a growing body of scientific evidence to suggest that these pesticides are contributing to the decline of pollinator populations, including honeybees. State and territories under the jurisdiction of Region 1 include Washington state, Oregon, Idaho, Hawaii and the Pacific Islands. Region 1 plans to fully phase out the use of the pesticide by 2016.

“The prophylactic use of neonicotinoids and the potential broad-spectrum adverse effects to non-target species do not meet the intent of [Integrated Pest Management] principles or the Service’s Biological Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental Health (BIDEH) policy,” states the memorandum, released earlier this month.

According to FWS, the decision was an internal management decision not directly linked to the White House’s June memorandum urging federal agencies to invest in research that reduces the decline in honeybees and other pollinators.

Many agricultural and environmental organizations have published studies highlighting the negative impact neonicotinoids have on various pollinator species. The June 2013 edition of the Ecological Society of America’s Frontiers in Ecology and Environment mentioned neonicotinoids as being among anthropogenic pressures that contribute to population declines of crop and wild plant pollinators.

View the full FWS memorandum by clicking here. Additional information on the White House memorandum is available by clicking here. The Frontiers article is available here.


According to a new study by NASA and University of California, Irvine, scientists found that more than 75 percent of the water loss in the drought-stricken Colorado River Basin since late 2004 came from underground resources.

The Colorado River is the only major river in the southwestern United States. Its basin supplies water to about 40 million people in seven states—California, Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah and Wyoming — and to people and farms in part of Mexico.

This study is the first to quantify the amount that groundwater contributes to the water needs of western states. The research team used data from NASA’s Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) satellite mission to track changes in the mass of the Colorado River Basin, which are related to changes in water amount on and below the surface. Monthly measurements of the change in water mass from December 2004 to November 2013 revealed the basin lost nearly 53 million acre feet (65 cubic kilometers) of freshwater, almost double the volume of the nation’s largest reservoir, Nevada’s Lake Mead. More than three-quarters of the total — about 41 million acre feet (50 cubic kilometers) — was from groundwater.

View the full NASA press release by clicking here.


The Ecological Society of America (ESA) has offered its assistance as a resource to the US Department of Interior’s (DOI) Strategic Sciences Group (SSG). Established in 2012 within the Office of the Secretary by Secretarial Order 3318, the SSG provides the Department with a standing capacity to rapidly assemble teams of scientists to construct interdisciplinary scenarios of environmental crises affecting DOI resources.

If deployed, the SSG aims to bring response teams within 36 hours of deployment to the environmental crisis site. Through the development and application of science-based scenarios, the SSG can assist in strategic response, mid-term recovery, and long-term restoration. In addition, the SSG can provide valuable advisory tools to decision makers as they manage crises at the field, regional, and national levels. As part of the nonbinding, voluntary agreement, ESA will recommend its members with a specific subject-matter expertise for deployment teams if requested.

For additional information on the SSG, click here.


The Ecological Society of America joined seven organizational members of the National Environmental Coalition on Invasive Species in a letter to the US Fish and Wildlife Service, requesting that it issue a final regulation listing for five invasive constrictor snake species.

“It has been more than five years since the agency started considering the listing of these five snakes and the necessity for the rule has not diminished,” the letter states. “As these species present imminent threats to wildlife and human safety, we urge the administration to take action and immediately list the reticulated python, the DeSchauensee’s anaconda, the green anaconda, the Beni anaconda and the boa constrictor as injurious under the Lacey Act.”

Currently, there are only four invasive constrictor species listed as injurious under the Lacey Act:  Burmese pythons, yellow anacondas, and northern and southern African pythons.

View the full letter by clicking here.


Passed the House

H.R. 1786, the National Windstorm Impact Reduction Act Reauthorization of 2014 – Introduced by Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R-TX), the bill reauthorizes the National Windstorm Impact Reduction Program, implemented by the National Institute of Standards and Technology. The program carries out research to help mitigate damage from windstorms such as hurricanes and tornadoes. The bill passed the House July 14th by voice vote and has been referred to the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee.

H.R. 5029, the International Science and Technology Cooperation Act – Introduced by Rep. Daniel Lipinski (R-IL), the bill would instruct the Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy to coordinate federal-interagency efforts that strengthen international science and technology cooperation. The bill passed the House July 14th by a vote of 346–41 and has been referred to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

H.R. 5031, the STEM Education Act – Introduced by House Science, Space and Technology Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX), the bill authorizes the National Science Foundation to continue awarding grants for research that advances Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) Education and ensures computer science is included in these efforts. The bill passed the House July 14th by voice vote and has been referred to the Senate Health Education Labor and Pensions Committee.

H.R. 5056, the Research and Development Efficiency Act – Introduced by Rep. Larry Buschon (R-IN), the bill would establish a working group to streamline and eliminate duplicative regulations and reporting requirements for federal research-grant approval processes. The bill passed the House July 14th by voice vote and has been referred to the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee.

H.R. 5035, the NIST Reauthorization Act – Introduced by Rep. Buschon, the bill would reauthorize the National Institutes of Standards and Technology. The bill passed the House July 22nd by voice vote and has been referred to the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee.

H.R. 5120, the Department of Energy Laboratory Modernization and Technology Transfer Act – Introduced by Rep. Randy Hultgren (R-IL), the bill would provide Department of Energy laboratories with greater flexibility to enter into public-private partnerships. The bill passed the House July 22nd by voice vote and has been referred to the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

Considered by Senate Committee

On July 16th, the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee held a hearing, which included consideration of the following bills:

S. 571, the Great Lakes Water Protection Act – Introduced by Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL), the bill would set a 2033 deadline for ending sewage dumping in the Great Lakes.

S. 1202, the Safeguarding America’s Future and Environment (SAFE) Act – Introduced by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), the bill would establish an interagency Natural Resources Climate Change Adaptation Panel to adopt climate change adaptation plans.

S. 1232, the Great Lakes Ecological and Economic Protection Act – Introduced by Sen. Carl Levin, the measure would authorize $475 million to codify the Obama administration’s Great Lakes Restoration Initiative.

S. 1153, the Invasive Fish and Wildlife Prevention Act – Introduced by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), the bill would reform US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) regulatory procedures to help expedite the determination of invasive species as “injurious.”

S. 2530, the Protecting Lakes Against Quaggas (PLAQ) Act – Introduced by Sen. Dean Heller (R-NV), the bill would immediately add the quagga mussel to the federal invasive species list.

A full listing of bills considered during the hearing is available by clicking here.

Approved by Senate Committee

On July 23rd, the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee held a mark-up session and approved the following bills:

S. 2030, the National Sea Grant College Program Amendments Act of 2014 – Introduced by Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI), the bill reauthorizes the National Sea Grant College Program through Fiscal Year 2020. The National Sea Grant College Program promotes research, education, training and advisory activities that increase understanding the nation’s oceans, coastal and Great Lakes resources.

S. 2094, the Vessel Incidental Discharge Act – Introduced by Sen. Mark Begich (D-AK), the bill would streamline regulations on wastewater discharges from ships. Environmental groups are concerned that the bill would preempt state efforts to control invasive species that spread when ships discharge ballast water. The bill has 30 bipartisan cosponsors, including Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller (D-WV).

Sources: National Aeronautics Space Administration, US Department of Agriculture, US Department of Interior, US Fish and Wildlife Service, the White House, House Space, Science and Technology Committee, Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, Energy and Environment Daily, E&E News PM, Greenwire, the Hill

July 11, 2014

In This Issue


On June 30th, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report finding the Department of Defense (DOD) can improve infrastructure planning and processes for climate change impacts. DOD manages a global real-estate portfolio that includes over 555,000 facilities and 28 million acres of land with a replacement value of close to $850 billion. Within the US, the department’s extensive infrastructure of bases and training ranges, which is critical to maintaining military readiness, extends across all regions, as well as Alaska and Hawaii.  The GAO noted that the government currently lacks a shared understanding of strategic priorities and adequate interagency coordination to adapt to a changing climate. The report found that while many military planners are noting the impacts of climate change on their installations, they are not always certain about how to proceed with adaption efforts.  “For example, according to DOD officials, the combination of thawing permafrost, decreasing sea ice, and rising sea levels on the Alaskan coast has increased coastal erosion at several Air Force radar early warning and communication installations. Impacts on DOD’s infrastructure from this erosion have included damaged roads, seawalls, and runways. In addition, officials on a Navy installation told GAO that sea level rise and resulting storm surge are the two largest threats to their waterfront infrastructure.”

The report recommends that the military formulate a climate change adaption plan setting firm deadlines to assess which of its military bases across the globe are vulnerable to climate change impacts. DOD has begun to assess installations’ vulnerability to potential climate change impacts and directed its planners to incorporate consideration of climate change into certain installation planning efforts. Additionally, it is a DOD strategic goal to consider sustainability, including climate change adaptation, in its facility investment decisions.

“We are committed to maintaining the resilience of our installations in support of our mission, our warfighters and our communities,” John Conger, acting deputy undersecretary of Defense for Installations and Environment, wrote in a letter, according to US News and World Report. “We will continue to integrate consideration of climate change and associated impacts across the Defense enterprise.”

However, the report also found that military officials are slow to propose climate adaption projects because they believe the projects will not be funded.

“As a result, installation planners may believe that climate change adaptation projects are unlikely to successfully compete with other military construction projects for funding,” the GAO said on the report’s website. “Without clarification of these processes, DOD may face challenges in meeting its strategic goals and the services may miss opportunities to make their facilities more resilient to the potential impacts of climate change.”

This sentiment is reinforced by the fact that the US House of Representatives has adopted language in its DOD authorization bill to prohibit funding for implementing recommendations from climate change reports from the International Panel on Climate Change and the National Climate Assessment. Such language is not anticipated to survive the bill’s conference process with the Senate.

View the full report by clicking this link.


On July 10th, the US House of Representatives passed H.R. 4923, the Energy and Water Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2015. The $34 billion bill includes $10.3 billion funding for the US Department of Energy (DOE) and $5.5 billion US Army Corps of Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation.

The Obama administration threatened to veto the bill over its many provisions to curb the enforcement of environmental regulations. The bill would block funding for enforcement of the Obama administration’s proposed rule to clarify federal jurisdiction in the Clean Water Act.

The House rejected several conservative amendments that sought to sharply reduce funding in the bill. One that was rejected from Rep. Bradley Byrne (R-AL) would have cut all FY 2015 funding for the Department of Energy’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. It failed by a vote of 110–310.

An amendment adopted by Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ) to block funding for DOE climate modeling efforts was added to the bill by a vote of 226–194. Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-CA) introduced an amendment to reaffirm exemptions for certain agricultural activities under the Clean Water Act, which was adopted 239-182.

The final bill will be reconciled with the US Senate Energy and Water appropriations bill for FY 2015, which has not been passed. It is anticipated that the two chambers will not reach an agreement on final funding bills until after the 2014 elections, possibly through an omnibus measure. Given that Fiscal Year 2014 ends Sept. 30th, 2014, Congress will need to pass a continuing resolution in order to avoid a government shutdown.


For additional information on specific funding levels in the bill, see the June 13th edition of ESA Policy News by clicking here.

To view the White House Statement of Administration Policy on H.R. 4923 click this link.


On July 8th, the House Appropriations Committee unveiled its Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations bill for Fiscal Year (FY) 2015. The bill, crafted by committee Republicans, includes provisions to prohibit funding from being directed towards a number of Obama administration environmental protection initiatives.

In total, the bill provides $30.2 billion for the Department of Interior, the US Environmental Protection Agency and the US Forest Service. This is a $162 million increase over total funding provided in the FY 2014 Interior appropriations bill and a reduction of $409 million below the President’s request.

Much of the increase in the overall bill is geared specifically towards wildfire reduction activities. The bill includes $4.1 billion for wildfire fighting and prevention activities for the US Forest Service and the US Department of Interior. This is $149 million above of the FY 2014 enacted level. Funding levels are as follows for selected agencies:

  • Environmental Protection Agency: $7.5 billion; a reduction of $717 million (nine percent) below the FY 2014. The bill also contains language to prohibit funding for the agency’s proposed greenhouse gas rules for existing power plants and its efforts to clarify federal jurisdiction over the implementation of the Clean Water Act. Administrative funding for the agency is cut by $24 million, including a 50 percent reduction to the Office of the Administrator, the Office of Congressional Affairs, and the Office of the Chief Financial Officer. In addition, staffing levels at the EPA are held to 15,000, the lowest level since 1989.
  • Office of Surface Mining: $149 million; level with FY 2014. The bill includes a provision to stop changes to the “stream buffer rule,” intended to protect streams from coal mining.
  • Bureau of Land Management: $1.1 billion; a $13 million decrease from FY 2014.
  • National Park Service: $2.6 billion; a $3 million increase over FY 2014.
  • US Forest Service: $5.6 billion; $85.7 million above the fiscal year 2014 enacted level.
  • US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS): $1.4 billion in the bill; $4 million below FY 2014. The bill includes a one-year delay on any further Endangered Species Act rulemaking for the “greater sage-grouse” and “Gunnison sage-grouse,” and prohibits the FWS from administratively establishing new or expanding existing wildlife refuges.
  • US Geological Survey: $1 billion; a $4 million increase above FY 2014.
  • Smithsonian Institution: $813 million; an $8 million increase above FY 2014.

Traditionally, many of the more contentious provisions intended to block EPA greenhouse gas emissions rules and other agency regulations are dropped in the bicameral conference process where the Senate and House negotiate a final conference report bill. The content of the final conference bill will be determined in part by whether or not it is enacted before the election and the political make-up of the House and the Senate after the 2014 mid-terms. 


On July 9th, the House Science, Space and Technology Committee convened for a hearing on the Obama administration’s proposed rule to clarify federal jurisdiction over US waterways. As defined under US law, bodies of water are distinguished according to their use such as for business or transportation. The distinction is particularly important in the case of so-called navigable waters because jurisdiction over navigable waters belongs to the federal government rather than states or municipalities.

US Supreme Court decisions in 2001 (Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County (SWANCC) v. US Army Corps of Engineers) and 2006 (Rapanos v. United States) drew into question the definition of “navigable waters” as defined in the law. Consequently, this could limit the scope of the 1972 Clean Water Act (CWA) to “relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water.” The original conference report for the finalized CWA included language asserting that the bill’s authors “fully intend that the term ‘navigable waters’ be given the broadest possible constitutional interpretation.”

In the years following the court rulings, congressional Democrats have repeatedly introduced legislation to clarify CWA jurisdiction, but the measures failed to gain traction in the House and Senate. On March 25, 2014 US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the US Army Corps of Engineers jointly proposed a rule that would clarify that streams and wetlands are under the jurisdiction of the CWA.

The Obama administration contends the rule would not add new waters under the law’s protection, but only clarify regulatory authority for waterways that have historically been under the Act’s jurisdiction prior to the court decisions. Republican committee members, however, assert that the proposed rule is part of the EPA’s “regulation rampage.” They assert that the rule is vague and would lead to federal intrusion on private land.

“The EPA’s rule is so vague that it does little more than extend an open invitation to trial lawyers and government drones,” asserted Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX). “Before the EPA invades the back yards of Americans, they should tell them what they are really doing. When Congress enacted the Clean Water Act, it was about water, not land.  But the EPA’s re-writing of the law is a terrifying expansion of federal control over the lands owned by the American people. The EPA is on a regulation rampage, and this new water rule proves it.”

“For nearly a decade, stakeholders ranging from the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials to the Environmental Defense Fund to the American Petroleum Institute have been calling on EPA and the Army Corps to provide clarity about what is and what is not a ‘water of the United States,’” asserted Ranking Member Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX) in her opening statement. “And while there may be differences in opinion about the proposed rule, I applaud the agencies for addressing this need and working to provide ‘greater clarity, certainty, and predictability’ to the regulated community and state and local governments that share the task of implementing and enforcing the Clean Water Act.”

“The rule does not apply to lands, whole flood plains, backyards, wet spots, or puddles,” asserted EPA Deputy Administrator Robert Perciasepe, testifying on behalf of the administration. “It will increase transparency, consistency, and predictability in making jurisdictional determinations, and reduce existing costs and confusion and delays.”

View the full committee hearing by clicking here.


On July 8th, the White House issued a formal request to Congress for $4.3 billion in emergency spending. The bulk of the funding, $3.7 billion, will address the border crisis and growing humanitarian problem of child migrants. The remainder, $615 million, is to fight wildfires in the western United States for the current Fiscal Year 2014. Several federal agencies require funding for wildfire prevention and firefighting, and it is costly.

The US Forest Service (FS), an agency within the Department of Agriculture, is tasked with management of 193 million acres of public lands in 43 states and Puerto Rico. Wildfire frequency and intensity in the Western United States has grown over the past decade.

According to the Forest Service, “More than 44 million homes, roughly 32 percent of the homes in our country, are now located in areas prone to wildland fire. Extreme fire behavior has become more common; firefighters are largely limited to protecting certain points around homes and communities, and the cost of fire suppression has soared in the past 20 years. The cost of suppression has grown from 13 percent of the agency’s budget just 10 years ago to over 40 percent in 2014 requiring FS to transfer funds from other programs to cover those costs.”

The President’s $615 million request to fight wildfire includes language to support a discretionary cap adjustment to allow the federal government to respond to severe, complex, and threatening fires or a severe fire season.

“This approach would provide funding certainty in future years for firefighting costs, free up resources to invest in areas that will promote long-term forest health and reduce fire risk, and maintain fiscal responsibility by addressing wildfire disaster needs through agreed-upon funding,” stated the president in a White House letter to House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH).

Increased federal funding to address wildfires is supported by bipartisan Members of Congress representing regions in the western United Sates. House Appropriations Committee Chairman Harold Rogers (R-KY) indicated he was open to accommodating the request for additional funding for wildfire-related activities.

View the full letter by following this link.


Considered by House Committee

On July 9th, the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Public Lands and Environmental Regulation held a hearing on the following bill:

H.R. 3994, the Federal Lands Invasive Species Control, Prevention, and Management Act – Introduced by Reps. Rob Bishop (R-UT) and Steven Horsford (D-NV), the bill would direct the Departments of Agriculture and Interior to carry out programs that would reduce invasive species on public lands by five percent annually. The bill includes a provision to exclude National Environmental Policy Act environmental review requirements if the programs affect “prioritized, high risk” areas. The legislation also prohibits federal agencies from spending no more than 15 percent of their budgets dedicated to invasive on public outreach and no more than 10 percent on administrative costs. The Obama administration and invasive species organizations are concerned that the standards outlined in the bill would reduce a federal agency’s flexibility in addressing invasive species.

Introduced in Senate

S. 2543, the Supporting Afterschool STEM Act – Introduced June 26th by Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), the bill would provide resources to improve afterschool science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) programs. The bill has been referred to the Senate Health Education Labor and Pensions Committee.

S. 2551, the TRANSFER Act – Introduced June 26th  by Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) and Daniel Coats (R-IN), the bill would create a grant funding program within the Small Business Technology Transfer program to expedite the commercialization of federally-funded research. The bill has been referred to the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship.

Passed Senate

S. 311, Lower Mississippi River Area Study Act – Introduced by Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA), the bill directs the Department of Interior to complete a study to determine whether an area in Plaquemines Parish, LA should become part of the National Park Service system. The bill passed the Senate by unanimous consent on July 9th and has been sent to the US House of Representatives.

S. 354, Oregon Caves Revitalization Act of 2013 – Introduced by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), the bill would modify the boundary of the Oregon Caves National Monument by adding 4,000 acres of what is currently Forest Service land to the monument. The bill passed the Senate by unanimous consent on July 9th and has been sent to the US House of Representatives.

S. 363, the Geothermal Production Expansion Act – Introduced by Sen. Wyden, the bill would expand geothermal production on federal land. The bill passed the Senate by unanimous consent on July 9th and has been sent to the US House of Representatives.

S. 476, to amend the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Development Act to extend to the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park Commission – Introduced by Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD), the bill would reauthorize the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park Commission for a 10-year term. The bill passed the Senate by unanimous consent on July 9th and has been sent to the US House of Representatives.

H.R. 876, the Idaho Wilderness Water Resources Protection Act – Introduced by Rep. Mike Simpson (R-ID), the bill authorizes the continued use of certain water storage, transport and diversion facilities located on federal forest land in the Frank Church-River of No Return Wilderness and the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness in Idaho. The bill passed the Senate by unanimous consent July 9th after passing the House in June 2013.

H.R. 1158, the North Cascades National Park Service Complex Fish Stocking Act – Introduced by Rep. Doc Hastings (R-WA), the bill directs the Department of Interior to continue stocking fish in certain lakes in the North Cascades National Park, Ross Lake National Recreation Area and Lake Chelan National Recreation Area. The bill passed the Senate by unanimous consent July 9th  after passing the House in June 2013.

H.R. 3110, Huna Tlingit Traditional Gull Egg Use Act – Introduced by Rep. Don Young (R-AK), the bill allows the harvest of gull eggs by the Huna Tlingit people within Alaska’s Glacier Bay National Park. The bill requires collection schedules and locations to be based on an annual plan prepared by the Department of Interior and the Huna Tlingit people. The bill passed the Senate by unanimous consent July 9th after passing the House in April 2013.

Sources: American Association for the Advancement of Science, Government Accountability Office, US Environmental Protection Agency, US Forest Service, House Appropriations Committee, House Space, Science and Technology Committee, Energy and Environment Daily, E&E News PM, Greenwire, the Hill, US News and World Report

June 27, 2014

In This Issue


Four former US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administrators who served under Republican presidents testified before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee in support of the Obama administration’s proposed standards for greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions from existing fossil-fueled power plants.

The former EPA administrators served under Presidents Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush. In their testimony, the administrators reiterated the scientific consensus that human activity is contributing to global warming and affirmed the EPA’s authority to regulate GHG emissions as provided under the Clean Air Act. They also called on Congress to join President Obama and demonstrate global leadership to address the causes of climate change.

“We like to speak of American exceptionalism,” stated William Ruckelshaus, the first and fifth EPA Administrator (1970–1973, 1983–1985). “If we want to be truly exceptional then we should begin the difficult task of leading the world away from the unacceptable effects of our increasing appetites for fossil fuels before it is too late.”

“I must begin by expressing my frustration that the discussion about whether the Environmental Protection Agency has the legal authority to regulate carbon emissions is still taking place in some quarters,” stated former EPA Administrator Christine Todd Whitman (2001–2003). “The issue has been settled. EPA does have the authority. The law says so, and the [US] Supreme Court has said so twice. The matter should be put to rest.” Noting that humans are contributing to climate change, Whitman further added that “when one is contributing to a problem, one has an obligation to be part of the solution that problem. That is what EPA is trying to do.”

“As scientists have confirmed, there have been many such episodes in the past due to natural causes—changes in solar output, shifts in the earth’s orbit, meteor impacts, volcanic eruptions, and the like,” stated former EPA Administrator William Riley [1989–1992]. “But you would have to reject the greenhouse effect outright to conclude that human activities pumping millions of tons of CO2 and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere every year are having little or no impact on the earth’s climate. That is simply not a tenable position. For me, the real question is about the future well-being of our communities, our settlements, our economy—in short, how hospitable this earth remains for future generations and for civilization as we know it.”

“Whether it is the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or the latest scientific valuation authorized by Congress—the National Climate Assessment, there is clear evidence regarding climate change and its anthropogenic foundation,” stated former EPA Administrator Lee Thomas (1985–1989).

“We know that carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere have increased by 40 percent since pre-industrial times,” Thomas continued. “We know that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are warming the atmosphere, contributing to a more than 1.5 degree [Fahrenheit] rise in global temperatures since 1880. We know global sea level has risen by an average of eight inches since 1870 primarily from thermal expansion caused by warmer oceans and the melting of glaciers and the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets.  We know that ocean acidification is occurring, harming our coral reefs and marine ecosystems. Absorbing about a quarter of our emissions each year, the current rate of acidification is roughly 50 times faster than known historical change.”

Committee Republicans questioned whether EPA was overreaching in its authority to regulate GHG emissions from power plants and expressed concern over the regulation’s possible impact on job creation. They directed their questions mostly to the three witnesses critical of the EPA’s proposed carbon rule: climate skeptic Daniel Botkin, a biology professor with the University of California, Santa Barbara; Louisiana State University banking professor Joseph Mason; and, Alabama State Attorney General Luther Strange.

Under questioning from Senator Ed Markey (D-MA), Riley noted that the Clean Air Act rules enacted in 1990 proceeded a decade of robust gross domestic product growth, countering sentiments that addressing climate change would hurt job creation. Markey further added that as the son of a milkman, he understood how innovations can adversely affect jobs in the short-term. However, he noted how innovations such as the invention of refrigerators revolutionized the way the milk industry operated, arguing that Congress should embrace the potential innovations spurred by efforts limit global-warming gases.

View the full hearing by clicking this link.


This week the US Supreme Court validated the power of the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to regulate greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) in its ruling in the case of Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA. It was the third time the high court has upheld the use of the Clean Air Act to combat challenges posed by climate change.

In the majority opinion 5-4 decision, Justice Antonin Scalia ruled that emissions of greenhouse gases alone are not enough to trigger EPA enforcement under the program for smaller businesses, but that the “trigger” threshold is intended for major polluters. He said, “It bears mentioning that EPA is getting almost everything it wanted in this case,” Scalia said in the courtroom. “It sought to regulate sources that it said were responsible for 86 percent of all greenhouse gases emitted from stationary sources. Under our holdings, EPA will be able to regulate sources responsible for 83 percent of those emissions.”

However, in a separate part of the decision, the court ruled 7-2 to require new or rebuilt factories and power plants to use the “best available technology” to limit their emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. Because these “major polluters” are already required to obtain clean-air permits from the government, Scalia wrote the EPA is justified in adding GHG to the list of restricted pollutants. Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas were the two dissenting justices who felt EPA regulatory authority should be restricted.

Business groups praised the ruling for preventing the agency in overreaching in its regulatory authority under the Clean Air Act while environmental groups largely praised the ruling for leaving the overwhelming majority of its regulatory authority intact. The ruling ultimately has no bearing on the proposed rule the agency unveiled earlier in June that seeks to cut carbon emissions from power plants by as much as 30 percent by 2030, compared with 2005 levels.

The four dissenting justices from the overall 5-4 ruling came from the court’s liberal wing who argued it limits the court’s 2007 ruling in Massachusetts v. EPA, which affirmed EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases as an air pollutant under the Clean Air Act.

“The court’s decision to read greenhouse gases out of the Prevention of Significant Deterioration program drains the [Clean Air] Act of its flexibility and chips away at our decision in Massachusetts,” stated Justice Stephen Breyer, author of the dissenting opinion.

In a statement on the ruling, EPA asserted “Today is a good day for all supporters of clean air and public health and those concerned with creating a better environment for future generations.”

The full decision is available by clicking this link.


On June 19th, the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy and Power convened for a hearing on the US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposed carbon emission rules for existing power plants, referred to as the “Clean Power Plan” proposal.

Republican committee members expressed concern over the potential detrimental effects the power plant rules would have on the coal industry as well as its effects on utility bills for consumers. Members also expressed skepticism regarding the level of flexibility EPA would grant the states in meeting the power plant requirements.

“In its rollout of this proposal, the EPA has repeatedly emphasized the rule’s ‘flexibility.’ What EPA describes as flexibility is really the agency giving itself arbitrary authority to regulate electricity generation and use as it sees fit,” asserted Energy and Power Subcommittee Chairman Ed Whitfield (R-KY). “We don’t know for certain what this proposal would require of Kentucky and other states, but we do know that EPA will make the final decisions in approving or denying each states implementation plans.”

Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI) sought to draw comparisons between the power plant rule and the Affordable Care Act, asserting “Once again, the preferences of consumers and job-creating businesses are taking a back seat to the dictates of NGOs and federal bureaucrats. And once again, the administration is making promises that costs won’t go up, choices won’t be reduced, rationing won’t be imposed, and jobs won’t be jeopardized.”

Committee Democrats took offense to accusations that the proposed rules would cost jobs. House Energy and Commerce Committee Ranking Member Henry Waxman (D-CA) published a minority-committee fact sheet outlining revenues generated by Clean Air Act enforcement efforts. He quoted coal-burning facility senior officials who assert that the president’s Clean Power Plan will have “a relatively minor” to “no immediate impact” on power plants.

“The fossil fuel industry and House Republicans have a credibility problem when it comes to claims about the economic impacts of the Clean Air Act,” stated Ranking Member Waxman. “I have been in Congress for 40 years. And for 40 years, industry has made doomsday claims that clean air regulations would shut down businesses, destroy jobs, drive prices skyward, and cripple economic growth. And they have been wrong every time.”

Representing the Obama administration at the hearing was Janet McCabe, acting assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation. In her testimony before the committee, McCabe explained how the plan benefits human health and the environment and noted that it was developed through continued engagement with state officials, utility companies and other affected stakeholders.

“Our plan is built on advice and information from states, cities, businesses, utilities, and thousands of people about the actions they are already taking to reduce carbon dioxide emissions,” stated McCabe.

“We know that coal and natural gas play a significant role in a diverse national energy mix,” McCabe continued. “This plan does not change that—it builds on action already underway to modernize aging plants, increase efficiency, and lower pollution, and paves a more certain path for conventional fuels in a clean energy economy.”

View the full hearing this link.


On June 24th the House Science, Space and Technology Committee approved H.R. 4012, the “Secret Science Reform Act,” legislation that intends to increase transparency of scientific processes at the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

The bill passed the committee by a vote of 17–13 along party lines. Republicans asserted the scientific data used by the EPA to formulate its clean air regulations should be public information. The EPA and committee Democrats argued that the agency is forthcoming in answering requests related to its scientific processes. The private-health data of individuals is used by EPA to determine clean air regulations and is protected from public disclosure to protect their privacy.

“The EPA’s regulatory process is both hidden and flawed.  It hides the data and then handpicks scientists to review it,” asserted Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX). “The American people foot the bill for the EPA’s billion dollar regulations, and they have the right to see the underlying data. If the EPA has nothing to hide, and if their data really justifies their regulations, why not make the information public?”

“The majority has harassed the EPA for more than two years in an attempt to get access to the raw data used in those studies,” asserted Ranking Member Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX).  “Since those studies involved hundreds-of-thousands of human volunteers who submitted sensitive personal health information to the researchers, the raw data is stringently protected from public disclosure.  The EPA explained this to the Chairman, but he nonetheless issued a subpoena to the EPA Administrator to turn over data that the EPA had no legal right to access and for which there are strict legal prohibitions against public disclosure.”

Committee Republicans contended there are methods available to publicize the data without compromising personal health information. Environment Subcommittee Ranking Member Suzanne Bonamci (D-OR) offered a substitute amendment to the bill requiring EPA to publish agency-funded peer-reviewed articles, but not the underlying raw data. The amendment was voted down by a voice vote.

No date has been set for when the bill will be brought to the House floor.

View the full mark-up of the bill by clicking this link.


The United Nation’s Environmental Programme (UNEP) published its 2013 annual report, available online in the six official UNEP languages.

The report’s content focuses on international efforts to address various environmental issues including climate change, disasters and conflicts, ecosystem management, environmental governance, hazardous substances and resource efficiency.

The report highlights UNEP’s key achievements over the course of 2013: adoption of the Minamata Convention on Mercury; a global legally binding agreement to reduce mercury emissions; efforts to reduce lead in fuels in paint; and, UNEP’s work to address ozone-depleting substances including hydrochlorofluorocarbons. The opening of a Climate Technology Centre and Network was also mentioned as a milestone of the past year.

To view the full report, click this link.


On June 20th, the Obama administration announced $32 million in funding over the next ten years to protect a subpopulation of sage grouse only found along the state border between California and Southwest Nevada referred to as the “bi-state” or Mono Basin population.

The US Department of Agriculture will provide the majority of the funds with $25.5 million dedicated towards voluntary partnerships with ranchers in both states to conserve sage grouse habitat. The Bureau of Land Management is committing $6.5 million to implement a variety of conservation activities on federal lands.

In October 2013, the US Fish and Wildlife Service proposed a “threatened” listing for the sage grouse bi-state population under the Endangered Species Act due to threats posed by invasive plant species and wildfires that destroy its sagebrush habitat. However, due to a wide range of public comments on the proposal, FWS subsequently postponed making a final determination until April 2015.

Additional information on efforts to conserve the bi-state population is available following this link.


The National Science Foundation (NSF) released a new communications “toolkit” that includes videos, infographics, fact sheets and other materials detailing how agency-funded research contributes to advancing scientific discovery and innovation in the US.

The animated video in the kit details the agency’s merit review process. Other communication tools include charts that illustrate NSF’s role in fostering careers in science, driving research, innovation and facilitating interdisciplinary collaborations. They also issued new brochures that highlight each of its directorates’ roles in scientific breakthroughs such as self-driving cars, artificial retina, seismic wave modeling and improved GPS technology.

View the toolkit through this link.


Passed House

Nashua River Wild and Scenic River Study Act – Introduced by Rep. Niki Tsongas (D-MA), the bill would designate certain segments of the Nashua River in Massachusetts for study as a potential addition to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. The bill passed the House June 23rd by voice vote and has been referred to the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

H.R. 3301, the North American Energy Infrastructure Act – Introduced by House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI), the bill would eliminate the existing requirement for a presidential permit for a proposed oil or natural gas pipeline project or electric transmission lines that crosses the US border with Mexico or Canada. The bill would require only the cross-border portion of such a project to be subject to review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The bill also exempts any modifications or expansions of existing cross-state pipelines or transmission lines from federal approval of NEPA review requirements. The bill passed the House June 24th by a vote of 238–173. Seventeen Democrats joined all but one Republican in supporting the measure.

H.R. 6, the Domestic Prosperity and Global Freedom Act – Introduced by Rep. Cory Gardner (R-CO), the bill changes the US Department of Energy’s existing approval process for applications to export liquefied natural gas by requiring a final determination on pending applications in 30 days. This deadline would override any mandated NEPA environmental reviews. The bill passed the House June 25th by a vote of 266–150. Forty-six Democrats joined all but two Republicans in supporting the bill.

H.R. 4899, the Lowering Gasoline Prices to Fuel an America That Works Act of 2014 – Introduced by House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings (R-WA), the comprehensive bill encompasses multiple pieces of legislation that passed the House over the past year to expand oil and gas drilling. The bill’s provisions would expand oil and gas development off the coasts of California, South Carolina and Virginia; expedite action on drilling permits in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska by reducing the consideration period from 90 to 60 days; direct federal managers to make energy and mineral production the primary focus of land management activities; and prohibit the federal government from enforcing hydraulic fracturing regulations on tribal lands without the consent of the tribal government. The bill passed the House June 26 by a vote of 229-185. Ten Democrats joined all but six Republicans in supporting the bill.

Sources: National Science Foundation, United Nations Environmental Programme, US Department of Agriculture, House Space, Science and Technology Committee, Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Energy and Environment Daily, E&E News PM, Greenwire, the Hill, POLITICO, the Washington Post

June 13, 2014

In This Issue


On June 2nd, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released its “Clean Power Plan” proposal, the first ever guidelines to cut carbon pollution from existing power plants. They emit 38 percent of carbon emissions in the US, mainly from older, inefficient coal-fired plants with an average age of 42 years. The proposed ruling will also affect natural-gas fired power plants, which emit about half the emissions as coal-fired plants.

The new standards will cut carbon emissions from the utility sector by 30 percent below 2005 levels by 2030. While there are currently federal limits for arsenic, mercury, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide and particle pollution, there are no such limits on carbon emissions.

“As President, and as a parent, I refuse to condemn our children to a planet that’s beyond fixing,” stated President Obama. “The shift to a cleaner energy economy won’t happen overnight, and it will require tough choices along the way. But a low-carbon, clean energy economy can be an engine of growth for decades to come. America will build that engine. America will build the future. A future that’s cleaner, more prosperous, and full of good jobs—a future where we can look our kids in the eye and tell them we did our part to leave them a safer, more stable world.”

Each state will draft its own plan to meet carbon reduction targets due to the EPA in June 2016. Some options states may choose are demand-side energy efficiency, renewable energy standards or goals, and plant retrofits from coal to natural gas.

The Clean Power Plan would assign states both “interim” and “final” targets for greenhouse gas reductions, based in part on what the states have already achieved and agency estimates on their overall greenhouse gas reduction capability. The interim reduction target goal date is 2020 while the final target must be met by 2030.

The agency highlighted the health benefits of the proposed rule, asserting that it will prevent as many as 6,600 premature deaths and up to 150,000 asthma attacks in children. These benefits are reinforced in the White House report “Health Impacts of Climate Change on Americans” that links the increase in air pollution brought on by warmer temperatures and more frequent wildfires with increased respiratory illnesses and heat-related deaths. EPA estimates the health benefits and savings from the rule would total $7.3 billion and $8.8 billion annually.

The House has already passed legislation that would prohibit EPA from regulating greenhouse gas emissions from power plants. However, this legislation is stalled in the Democratic-controlled Senate.

“The president’s proposal is a win-win-win for the American people, as it will protect our health, saving thousands of lives, create thousands of jobs, and America will finally lead on a path to averting the most calamitous impacts of climate change — such as sea level rise, dangerous heat waves, and economic disruption,” stated Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-CA) in a press statement. “The president’s proposal is respectful of the states’ roles and allows major flexibility, while ensuring that big polluters reduce their dangerous contributions to climate change.”

“The president’s plan forces costly and unnecessary regulations on hardworking American families,” asserted House Science, Space and Technology Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX). “The Clean Air Act was never intended to regulate carbon.  The EPA’s plan is ‘all pain, no gain.’  It will close power plants and drive up electricity prices. These regulations will mean more jobs lost to places like China and India.”

“In addition to the health risks, severe weather trends associated with climate change threaten the economic vitality of communities across the country,” asserted Ranking Member Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX). “By fostering clean energy innovation and modernizing the power sector, the United States will lead the world in tackling this global challenge. I am pleased that the proposed rule allows for state input and flexibility in developing regional approaches to achieving the goals of the rule.”

EPA is accepting comment on the proposal and will hold four public hearings on the proposed Clean Power Plan during the week of July 28th in the following cities: Denver, Atlanta, Washington, DC and Pittsburgh. Based on this input, EPA will finalize standards next June.

For more information on the rule, click here. Information on how to comment on the proposed plan is available on the EPA website.

To view the “Health Impacts of Climate Change on Americans” report, click this link.


Today, the US Forest Service announced it will publish a Federal Register Notice next week seeking public comment on a proposal that would help standardize where and when over-snow vehicles, such as snowmobiles, are used on national forests and grasslands.

Motor vehicle use on national forests and grasslands is governed by the Travel Management Rule which provides for a system of roads, trails and areas that are designated for motor vehicles. Over-snow vehicles—vehicles designed for use over snow and that run on a track and/or a ski or skis—are currently treated differently from other motor vehicles by giving forest and grassland supervisors the discretion to develop a similar system for over-snow vehicles. In 2013, a federal court ruled that this violates Executive Order 11644, “Use of off-road vehicles on public lands.” The court ordered that the Forest Service must regulate over-snow use, but does have the discretion to determine where and when over-snow vehicle use can occur on agency lands.

In accordance with the court’s ruling, the Federal Register notice proposes amending the existing Travel Management Rule to establish consistent guidance for how forests and grasslands decide the appropriate use for over-snow vehicles. Over-snow vehicles are used for recreational purposes as well as work tasks that include gathering firewood or subsistence hunting.

The Federal Register Notice for the proposal is scheduled to be published Wednesday, June 18, 2014.  The public will have 45 days from the date of publication in the Federal Register to comment on the proposed revisions. The Forest Service intends to publish the final rule change by September 9, 2014.

For more information click this link.


On June 5th the Senate Appropriations Committee approved its Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies (CJS) Appropriations bill for Fiscal Year 2015. The bill includes funding for the National Science Foundation (NSF), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The bill passed committee under a recorded 30-0 vote.

For NSF, the bill includes $7.255 billion, less than the $7.4 billion in the House version and level with the president’s FY 2015 budget request. Conversely, NOAA would see its budget increase by $105 million to $5.4 billion in FY 2015. The House bill included $5.3 billion for the agency, level with FY 2014. The bill funds NASA at $17.9 billion, a $254 million increase over FY 2014.

Similar to the House CJS bill, the Senate bill approves the full president budget request NOAA’s two satellite programs. The bill also provides $1.1 billion for the National Weather Service, in line with the level of funding included in the House bill. NOAA would receive $160 million for climate research in the Senate bill, a nearly $3.6 million increase over FY 2014. The House bill would cut NOAA climate research by $37.5 million.

For additional information on the bill, click here.


On June 10th, the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water passed its spending bill for the upcoming Fiscal Year (FY) 2015.

The bill includes $34 billion in funding for the US Department of Energy (DOE), the US Army Corps of Engineers and the US Department of Interior’s (DOI) major water office, the Bureau of Reclamation. This amount is $50 million less than the FY 2014 enacted level.

Several partisan legislative proposals within the bill are expected to spur contention between the Republican-controlled House and the Democratic-controlled Senate during final bill negotiations this fall. The bill prohibits funding for implementation of the administration’s proposal to clarify water boundaries under federal regulatory jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act. The bill also includes language prohibiting the administration from permanently removing the Yucca mountain site in Nevada as an option for storing nuclear waste.

The bill funds DOE energy programs at $10.3 billion, a $133 million increase over FY 2014. The Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy budget is slated at $1.8 billion in FY 2015, a reduction of $123 million over FY 2014. The Office of Fossil Energy would receive $593 million in FY 2015, a $31 million increase over FY 2014. The bill provides $5.1 billion for DOE scientific research, level with FY 2014.

The US Army Corps of Engineers would receive $5.5 billion in FY 2015 under the bill, a $25 million increase over FY 2014 and $959.5 million above the president’s FY 2015 budget request. The funding is geared primarily towards water infrastructure projects nationwide, including bridges, locks, dams, levees and related environmental restoration projects.

For the DOI Bureau of Reclamation, the bill allocates $1 billion, $100.7 million below FY 2014 and $29 million below the president’s FY 2015 request for the agency to help manage, develop, and protect the water resources of western states.

Additional information on the bill is available through this link. 



The House, Science, Space and Technology Subcommittee on Energy convened to markup the “Department of Energy Research and Development Act of 2014,” when committee Democrats procedurally stalled approval of the legislation by requiring the committee clerk to read the entire 102-page draft bill aloud. Rather than sit for hours while the clerk read the bill, Subcommittee Chairwoman Cynthia Lummis (R–WY) shutdown the committee meeting and the bill will go to the full committee without a debate or hearings. The entire subcommittee meeting took less than thirty minutes.

The terrain of Department of Energy (DOE) authorizing bills is changing. Previously, the now-expired America COMPETES Act authorized several federal science agencies including DOE and the National Science Foundation. This year, the Republican majority decided to draft two individual authorizing bills—one for DOE and another bill, FIRST (Frontiers in Innovation, Research, Science, and Technology) authorizing NSF and the other research agencies. Like the America COMPETES Act, these both are “authorizing” bills that set policy and suggest spending levels, but do not appropriate actual funding.

Democrats argued that the funding levels authorized in the draft bill for DOE are lower than DOE funding levels specified in the House FY 2015 Energy and Water Appropriations bill. They also expressed concern with the authorizing bill that includes a $100 million cut to the Office of Science Biological and Environmental Research program as well as cuts to the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy and the Advanced Research Projects Agency-energy program.

The Republican subcommittee majority released the bill late Friday afternoon, June 6th, which committee Democrats asserted was an inadequate timeframe for the minority to review the bill prior to the markup on Wednesday, June 11th.

“We are here to consider a bill that was not shared with Democratic members of the Subcommittee until late last Friday, and that proposes to reauthorize all Department of Energy research and development programs,” state Energy Subcommittee Ranking Member Eric Swalwell (D-CA). “That means we’re being asked to make tough decisions about how to allocate billions of taxpayers’ dollars after having less than three business days to consider the bill’s provisions, let alone talk with constituents and stakeholders.”

Republicans argued that, as a general rule, subcommittee consideration of any given bill is a courtesy to its Members and not a prerequisite of the legislative process.

“It’s disappointing that rather than work with us to address their concerns, Committee Democrats instead used procedural tactics to obstruct today’s subcommittee markup,” said Energy Subcommittee Chairwoman Cynthia Lummis (R-WY). “Democrats blocked draft legislation that focuses R&D funding within the Department of Energy to drive innovation, economic growth and job creation.”

Both sides sought to spin blame for the stalled markup in their respective subsequent press releases. The Republican subcommittee press release was titled “Democrats Obstruct Subcommittee Consideration of Energy R&D Bill” while the counterpart Democrat subcommittee press release was titled “Republicans Shut Down Their Own Markup.”

View the markup by clicking this link.

On June 3rd, the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Subcommittee on Green Jobs and the Economy held a hearing entitled “Farming, Fishing, Forestry and Hunting in an Era of Changing Climate.”

Subcommittee Chairman Jeff Merkley (D-OR) noted the various impacts of climate change in Oregon. He noted that warmer winters are allowing bark beetle populations to thrive longer leading to tree die-off, which leaves the region vulnerable to larger and more intense wildfires. “For a state like Oregon, where so much of our rural economy depends on a vibrant forest sector, this trend is very troubling,” stated Merkley.

Merkley additionally observed that warmer-shorter winters are decreasing snow pack that reduce crops’ water supply from snowmelt resulting in severe drought. Additionally, less snowmelt is adversely affecting the fishing industry catch rate due to dry streams with warmer water.

Committee Republicans criticized the Obama administration’s new climate regulations for power plants. “As we discuss the impact of climate on farming, fishing, forestry and hunting, we must not neglect the effects that draconian climate regulations would have on these industries,” stated Ranking Member Roger Wicker (R-MS). Wicker stated the power plant rule will have little effect on the climate while leading to higher utility bills for the industries.

Senator Jon Tester (D-MT) testified “I am a third generation farmer. I farm in North-central Montana. I have seen the impacts of climate change first-hand,” Tester added. As an example, his farm crops have “been hailed out” four times in the last 35 years at irregular times of the year. He also added that a reservoir on his family farm constructed in the late 1940s dried-up for the first time between 1999–2001. The farm crops are also being impacted by increased drought and a proliferation of sawflies that harm wheat attributed to warmer, drier weather conditions. He also complimented the administration on its “state-based solution” to implement the proposed  power plant rule to reduce carbon emissions. “I think refusing to act to protect clean air [and] clean water is not a viable option,” stated Tester.

US Fish and Wildlife Service Director Dan Ashe pointed out that climate change will erode habitat for fish, waterfowl and big game species and decrease their abundance and distribution, which will consequently limit hunting-and-fishing related opportunities that contribute billions of dollars to regional economies nationwide.

Ranking Member Wicker asked whether Director Ashe agreed with scientific data showing that states’ temperatures have flat-lined in the last 15 years. Ashe asserted that that long-term trends have indicated that overall global temperatures have risen over the last 15 years. He added that the National Climate Assessment data, which reflects “the large consensus body of science” affirms temperature rise happening.

View the full hearing by clicking here.


Passed House Committee

On June 10th, the House Energy and Commerce Committee approved the following bill:

H.R. 4795, the Promoting New Manufacturing Act – Introduced by Representative Steve Scalise (R-LA), the bill would expedite air quality permitting for new manufacturing facilities. The bill requires the US Environmental Protection Agency to provide guidance on permitting when it issues new air pollution standards and to provide Congress with annual updates on its progress in expediting air quality permitting. The bill passed committee by a vote of 30–19.

Passed House

H.R. 4412, the National Aeronautics Space Administration (NASA) Authorization Act – Introduced by Steven Palazzo (R-MS), the bill authorizes one year of funding for NASA programs. The bill passed the House June 9th by a vote of 401–2 and has been referred to the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee.

S. 1254, the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act of 2013 - Introduced by Senator Bill Nelson (D-FL), the bill reauthorizes the Harmful Algal Blooms (HAB) and Hypoxia Research and Control Act.The bill maintains and enhances an interagency program led by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which will be responsible for promoting a national strategy to help communities understand, predict, control and mitigate freshwater and marine HAB and hypoxia events; enhancing, coordinating, and assessing the activities of existing HABs and hypoxia programs; providing for development of a comprehensive research plan and action strategy, including a regional approach to understanding and responding to HAB events; and requiring an assessment and plan for Great Lakes HABs and hypoxia.The bill passed the House June 9th by voice vote after passing the Senate in February.

Introduced in Senate

S. 2414, the Coal Country Protection Act – Introduced June 3rd by Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY), the bill would prohibit the regulation of carbon dioxide emissions from new or existing power plants. The bill has been referred to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.

S. 2457, the Highway Runoff Management Act – Introduced June 10th by Senator Ben Cardin (D-MD), the bill requires states to establish highway stormwater management programs. The bill has been referred to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.

S. 2470, the New Mexico Drought Relief Act of 2014 – Introduced June 12th by Senator Tom Udall (D-NM), the bill would help New Mexico communities improve water-use efficiency and better address water scarcity. The bill also directs the National Academy of Sciences to study potential changes to reservoir management along the Rio Grande river system of New Mexico. The bill has been referred to the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

Sources: US Environmental Protection Agency, US National Park Service, House Appropriations Committee, House Science, Space and Technology Committee, Senate Appropriations Committee, Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Energy and Environment Daily, E&E News PM, Greenwire, the Hill, POLITICO

May 30, 2014

In This Issue


On May 22nd, the House Science, Space and Technology Committee began a mark-up of H.R. 4186, the Frontiers in Innovation, Research, Science, and Technology (FIRST) Act of 2014 reauthorizing funding for programs at the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Institutes of Standards and Technology.. After postponing completion of the committee mark-up for a week in order to secure votes among the majority Republican Party committee members, the committee approved the bill by a party-line vote on the evening of May 28th.

Several provisions that would alter the existing merit review process, establish new guidelines intended to minimize falsification of research results and specify funding allocations for each of NSF’s individual directorates have drawn criticism from the scientific community.

The Ecological Society of America joined the American Institute of Biological Sciences and other biological entities in sending a letter to the committee expressing concern with the misconduct language within the FIRST Act. The letter noted, “The Inspector General for NSF already has the authority to investigate accusations of scientific misconduct.”

Committee Republicans argued that the provisions are necessary to ensure scientific integrity and minimize spending on research projects that could be perceived as frivolous.

The FIRST Act would authorizes a 1.5 percent increase for NSF for FY 2015, lower than the amount included in the House Commerce Justice and Science Appropriations bill, but $24 million higher than the president’s FY 2015 budget request for the agency. The bill is part of a larger legislative package of bills that would reauthorize science programs under the America Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology, Education, and Science (COMPETES) Act of 2007.

“American researchers are already falling behind in critical areas,” stated Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX). “Today the fastest supercomputer in the world is located in China. And we risk losing our lead in other areas such as nanotechnology, the health sciences, aerospace, and lasers. To remain globally competitive, we must ensure that our priorities are funded and that taxpayer dollars are spent wisely. The FIRST Act keeps America first in areas of science and research that are crucial to economic growth.”

Democrats offered over 20 amendments that sought to increase funding in the bill and eliminate provisions that altered the current merit review process, but the amendments were voted down. They countered that the controversial provisions are unnecessary, given NSF’s reputation globally as the gold standard in its merit review processes. In her opening statement, Democratic Ranking Member Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX) contrasted the FIRST Act with the initial America COMPETES Act, which passed the Democratic House and Senate in 2007 with large bipartisan majorities and signed into law by Republican President George W. Bush.

“Where the COMPETES Act was clearly focused on spurring innovation, the FIRST Act seems preoccupied with questioning the motives of America’s premiere science agency and the integrity of the scientists it funds,” stated Ranking Member Johnson. Where the Competes Act focused on broadly lifting America’s commitment to the sciences, the FIRST Act instead seeks to pit different scientific disciplines against one another. Where the COMPETES Act sought to provide a clear vision and stability to our science agencies, the FIRST Act instead provides them with a year’s worth of authorization at levels below those provided by our own Appropriations Committee.”

The Senate has not yet introduced an America COMPETES reauthorization bill. Given that such a bill would need significant bipartisan support, it is highly unlikely that the FIRST Act in its present form would move through the Senate before the current Congress adjourns at the end of the year.

An additional $552 million in funding for NSF was included in the president’s separate Opportunity Growth and Security Initiative, which, if enacted by Congress, would be offset by revenue increases by closing tax loopholes. The added funding for NSF in the Opportunity Growth and Security Initiative is unlikely to move this Congress due to the lack of a bipartisan consensus on tax legislation that would generate net revenue increases.

This week, the committee also passed a much less contentious bill, S. 1254, the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act of 2013. It is similar to legislation that passed the House in 2010, but failed to gain traction in the Senate. This bill would authorize federal agency efforts to address harmful algae blooms. The S. 1254 bill passed the Senate by unanimous consent in February of this year. The bill now has to be voted on in the House before being signed by the president.

View the committee mark-up by following this link. View the scientific societies letter by following this link.


Over the past two weeks, the House and Senate Agricultural Appropriations Subcommittees reported out their spending bills for FY 2015.

The House bill would fund federal agriculture programs at $20.9 billion in discretionary spending for FY 2015—comparable to FY 2014. The Senate bill would fund these programs at $20.575 billion, $325 million less than the House bill. Included are summaries of funding for specific US Department of Agriculture entities of interest to the ecological community:

Agricultural Research Service

House: $1.12 billion, a $2.2 million decrease over FY 2014.

Senate: $1.14 billion, a $17.2 million increase over FY 2014.

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

House: $867.5 million, a $45.78 million increase over FY 2014.

Senate: $872.4 million, a $50.69 million increase over FY 2014.

National Institute of Food and Agriculture

House: $774.5 million, a $1.9 million increase over FY 2014.

Senate: $787.5 million, a $15 million increase over FY 2014.

Natural Resources Conservation Service

House: $843 million, a $30.1 million increase over FY 2014.

Senate: $849.3 million, a $36.4 million increase over FY 2014.


On May 30th, the House Science, Space and Technology Committee held a hearing examining the recent United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPPC) report that concluded that failure to take action now on climate change will have disastrous long-term consequences for all life on this planet, including humanity.

Committee Republicans were skeptical of the report as were the majority of the witnesses invited, which included economist professor Richard Tol, University of Sussex; Daniel Botkin, Professor Emeritus with the University of California-Santa Barbara’s Department of Ecology, Evolution and Marine Biology; and Roger Pielke Sr., Senior Research Scientist with the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences at Colorado State University. The sole witness defending the findings of IPPC was Michael Oppenheimer, Professor of Geosciences and International Affairs at Princeton University.

“Both the IPCC and the White House’s documents [the National Climate Assessment] appear to be designed to spread fear and alarm and provide cover for previously determined government policies,” asserted Chairman Lamar Smith. “The reports give the Obama administration an excuse to control more of the lives of the American people.”

A key topic of debate during the hearing was whether there was a “97 percent” consensus among the scientific community that humans are contributing significantly to climate change. Tol, himself once a member of the panel, asserted that the panel leadership has an “alarmist bias” that gives preference to like-minded authors. Under questioning from committee Democrats, Tol did concede he had previously written that “It is well-known that most papers and most authors in the climate literature support the hypothesis of anthropogenic climate change. It does not matter whether the exact number is 90 percent or 99.9 percent.”

In his written testimony, Oppenheimer noted “several studies have compared projections of IPCC reports to actual outcomes, providing a basis to assess bias. Overall, if there is a significant bias, it reflects the professional caution of scientists.  In this regard, it is important to note that assessments by the US National Academy of Sciences, the other major national academies around the world, the major scientific professional societies relevant to climate change, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science, have arrived at judgments largely similar to IPCC’s.” Oppenheimer did contend that the IPCC improving its transparency could help reinforce its credibility.

This sentiment was reiterated by Ranking Member Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX). “Mr. Chairman, we have a responsibility to listen to the facts and act to protect the American people from the growing risks of a changing climate,” she said. “The IPCC makes clear to anyone who will listen that the science is well established and well accepted by the vast majority of climate scientists. We cannot continue to turn a deaf ear to the pleas from our constituents to start working towards solutions.”

For additional information and to view the hearing, click this link.


This week, the US House of Representatives passed H.R. 4660, the Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies (CJS) Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year (FY) 2015, which begins October 1, 2014 and ends September 30, 2015. The bill passed with a large bipartisan vote of 321–87. Only 70 Democrats and 17 Republicans opposed the bill.

The bill funds the National Science Foundation (NSF) at $7.4 billion, a 3.3 percent increase over FY 2014 and 2.1 percent above the president’s FY 2015 budget request for the agency. The increase is attributable to House CJS Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Frank Wolf (R-VA), a longtime ally of NSF, who is also retiring at the end of the calendar year.

The bill also includes funding for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) at $5.3 billion, virtually equal to the FY 2014 enacted level. Within NOAA, the House bill cut climate research by $37.5 million, a 24 percent cut from the $156.5 million FY 2014 enacted level.

The House also adopted an amendment from Scott Perry (R-PA) that prohibits any funding in the bill from being directed towards the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change or the National Climate Assessment. Additional amendments adopted included one from Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), which cut funding from NSF’s Social, Behavioral and Economic Directorate by $15 million. Another amendment from Rep. Bill Flores (R-TX) prohibits funding in the bill to implement the Obama administration’s National Ocean Policy.

This week, the Ecological Society of America issued an action alert urging members to support the NSF funding and restore the climate research cuts. While an effort to restore funding for climate research via an amendment from Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ) failed, it is anticipated that the cuts may be restored when the bill is in conference negotiations with the Senate this fall. The fate of the other amendments adopted will also be determined at that time.

In its Statement of Administration Policy, the White House did not issue a formal veto threat of the bill. With regard to NSF, the administration stated that it “appreciates the [House Appropriations] Committee’s support for NSF.”

The statement did express concern with reductions to NOAA’s fisheries management and  coastal restoration programs included in the bill and the cut to NOAA’s climate research program, noting that “NOAA’s climate research will help the nation better understand, monitor, and prepare for the impacts of climate change.”

View the full statement here.

View the ESA action alert here.


The Federal Register published a National Science Foundation (NSF) public comment request on proposed changes to its “Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG).” The draft NSF PAPPG  is now available for review and consideration on the NSF website.

The PAPPG is composed of documents relating to the NSF’s proposal and award process. The purpose of the revision is to clarify and improve the general functionality of this process. For the reader’s ease in its review, the proposed changes are highlighted in the lengthy document.

Written comments should be received by July 8, 2014 to be assured of consideration.

To view the document, click this link:

To view the Federal Register notice with comment instruction, click this link:

For additional background information, click this link:


On May 27, the US Department of Agriculture announced a new $1.2 billion five-year program aimed at promoting public-private partnerships for soil and water conservation projects.

The Regional Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP), authorized under the recent Agricultural Act of 2014, will consolidate the Agricultural Water Enhancement Program, the Cooperative Conservation Partnership Initiative, the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Initiative and the Great Lakes Basin Program for Soil Erosion into a single program.

The RCPP will competitively award funds to conservation projects designed by local partners specifically for their region. Eligible partners include private companies, universities, non-profit organizations, local and tribal governments and others joining with agricultural and conservation organizations and producers to invest money, manpower and materials to their proposed initiatives. With participating partners investing along with the Department, USDA’s $1.2 billion in funding over the life of the five-year program can leverage an additional $1.2 billion from partners for a total of $2.4 billion for conservation. There is $400 million in USDA funding is available in the first year. Through RCPP, partners propose conservation projects to improve soil health, water quality and water use efficiency, wildlife habitat, and other related natural resources on private lands.

“This is an entirely new approach to conservation,” said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. “We’re giving private companies, local communities, and other non-government partners a way to invest in what are essentially clean water start-up operations. By establishing new public-private partnerships, we can have an impact that’s well beyond what the Federal government could accomplish on its own. These efforts keep our land resilient and water clean, and promote tremendous economic growth in agriculture, construction, tourism and outdoor recreation, and other industries.”

The agency is now accepting proposals for the program, due July 14, 2014. For additional information, click this link.


Introduced in House

H.R. 1416, the Sage Grouse Protection Conservation Act – Introduced May 22 by Rep. Cory Gardner (R-CO), the bill would prevent the federal government from listing the sage grouse as an endangered species and instead encourage the Departments of Interior and Agriculture to work with states on conservation initiatives. Companion legislation (S. 2394) has been introduced by Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY).

Approved by Committee

H.R. 4472, the Strengthening Fishing Communities and Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act – Introduced by House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings (R-WA), the bill would reauthorize the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the major law governing fisheries management through the end of fiscal 2018.

Committee Democrats were concerned over provisions of the bill that seek to provide increased flexibility for fish stock rebuilding at the cost of avoiding certain National Environmental Policy Act and Endangered Species Act requirements. The bill passed by the House Natural Resources Committee by a largely party-line vote of 24–17.

Passed House

H.R. 4435, the Howard P. “Buck” McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 –The bill provides $600 billion in authorization funding for Department of Defense (DOD) programs. It passed with an amendment from Rep. David McKinley (D-WV) that would prohibit funds in the bill from being used for climate change studies, including the National Climate Assessment and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The amendment was adopted by a vote of 231–192.

The White House has issued a veto threat against the legislation due to conflicts in program funding priorities. The House bill must be reconciled with the Senate Defense authorization bill before it can be sent to the president. The Senate has not yet scheduled when their bill will reach the Senate floor for a vote.

Cleared for White House

H.R. 3080, the Water Resources Development Act of 2013 – The $8.2 billion legislation reauthorizes 34 Army Corps of Engineers water-related projects, including addressing infrastructure, flood protection and environmental restoration needs. It also includes various reforms to the Army Corps. The legislation constitutes the finalized conference report negotiated by House and Senate leaders. The conference report bill passed the Senate on May 22 by a vote of 91–7 after passing the House May 20 by a vote of 412–4. The president is expected to sign the measure.

Sources: National Science Foundation, US Department of Agriculture, House Appropriations Committee, House Space, Science and Technology Committee, Senate Appropriations Committee, Energy and Environment Daily, E&E News PM, Greenwire, the Hill

May 16, 2014

In This Issue


On May 6th, the US Global Change Research Program released the National Climate Assessment that summarizes the impacts of climate change on the United States, now and in the future.

A team of more than 300 experts guided by a 60-member Federal Advisory Committee produced the report, which was extensively reviewed by the public and experts, including federal agencies and a panel of the National Academy of Sciences.

The NCA report concludes that the effects of human-induced climate change, once thought to be a distant problem, are happening now and causing significant ecosystem changes with numerous consequences for the natural world and human society. Precipitation patterns are changing, sea level is rising, the oceans are becoming more acidic, and the frequency and intensity of some weather events are increasing.

It explains that the burning of coal, oil, and gas, and clearing of forests have increased the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by more than 40 percent since the Industrial Revolution. The buildup of heat-trapping gases (also known as “greenhouse gases”) has caused most of the Earth’s warming over the past century.

The report also states the amount of future climate change will largely be determined by choices society makes about emissions. Lower emissions of heat-trapping gases mean less future warming and less severe impacts. Emissions can be reduced through improved energy efficiency and switching to low-carbon or non-carbon energy sources.

The NCA report findings are segmented into eight geographical regions across the US and includes analyses of impacts on seven factors—human health, water, energy, transportation, agriculture, forests, and ecosystems. Excerpts of the NCA report by region are highlighted in the following paragraphs.

The Northeast is projected to experience heat waves, heavy downpours, and sea level rise that will pose growing challenges to many aspects of daily life for the sixty-four million who live in the region.

The report finds that the Southeast and Caribbean region are exceptionally vulnerable to sea level rise, extreme heat events, hurricanes, and decreased water availability. The region is home to more than 80 million people and some of the fastest-growing metropolitan areas, three of which are along the coast and vulnerable to sea level rise and storm surge.

The Midwestern region is expected to suffer heavier rains and extreme weather events. Greater crop yields are also expected due to increased carbon dioxide levels and longer growing seasons. In the long term, the combined stresses associated with climate change are expected to decrease agricultural productivity.

In the Great Plains region, rising temperatures are leading to increased demand for water and energy. In parts of the region, the report projects this will constrain development, stress natural resources, and increase competition for water. New agricultural practices will be needed to cope with changing conditions.

The NCA finds that in the Southwest region increased heat, drought, and insect outbreaks, all linked to climate change, have increased wildfires. Declining water supplies, reduced agricultural yields, health impacts in cities due to heat, and flooding and erosion in coastal areas are additional concerns. The Southwest, which includes California, will also undergo severe drought complemented with ocean acidification.

“As an ecologist, you can’t escape the effects of climate change on natural resources. We’re observing climate impacts in nearly all natural and managed ecosystems,” said Ecological Society of America President Jill Baron in an ESA press release. “In order to protect biodiversity and the natural resources that we rely on, we need to be developing policy now. The National Climate Assessment provides guidelines for how to respond and adapt.” Baron was also a contributor to the NCA.

The US Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) was established by Presidential Initiative in 1989 and mandated by Congress in the Global Change Research Act (GCRA) of 1990 to “assist the Nation and the world to understand, assess, predict, and respond to human-induced and natural processes of global change.” The law requires USGCRP to report to Congress every four years on the effects of climate change. The first assessment was finalized and published until 2000. Lack of adherence to this mandate on the part of the Bush administration delayed the second assessment’s completion until 2009.

Reaction on Capitol Hill was typically partisan. An array of press statements from Republicans and Democratic leaders on related committees highlights how far Congress has to go in reaching any consensus on legislation to address climate change.

“The new National Climate Assessment report confirms with the greatest level of detail yet that climate change in the United States is all around us and we are already feeling the impacts,” stated Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-CA). “We must act in a comprehensive way to reduce carbon pollution for the sake of public health, our nation’s economy, and the well-being of future generations.”

“The administration’s Climate Assessment suffers from problems similar to those in reports put forward by the [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]; while intended to be a scientific document, it’s more of a political one used to justify more government overreach,” asserted EPW Committee Ranking Member David Vitter (R-LA).” Definitive policy decisions and regional planning based on far too many uncertainties could hurt our nation’s economic viability and competitiveness.”

“This is a political document intended to frighten Americans into believing that any abnormal weather we experience is the direct result of human CO2 emissions,” asserted House Science, Space and Technology (SST) Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX). “In reality, there is little science to support any connection between climate change and more frequent or extreme storms.  It’s disappointing that the Obama administration feels compelled to stretch the truth in order to drum up support for more costly and unnecessary regulations and subsidies.”

“The scientific debate over climate change is over and the impacts are growing more evident in the lives of every American,” stated SST Committee Ranking Member Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX). “As a Texan, I have seen the impacts myself with severe drought and record temperatures.  These conditions impact our agriculture economy, human health, water supplies, and the livelihoods of many citizens.  In addition, these changing conditions are destroying ecosystems both on land and in the ocean.”

“The challenge before us today is to take the overwhelming evidence of climate change and come together to find solutions that will save lives, protect property, and preserve our environment for generations to come,” stated SST Environment Subcommittee Ranking Member Suzanne Bonamici (D-OR). “This report makes clear that the consequences are real and we are facing them now.”

View the National Climate Assessment by clicking this link. A White House Fact sheet on climate change by region is available by clicking this link.

View the full ESA press release by clicking this link.


This week, House and Senate leaders who sit on committees with jurisdiction over water infrastructure announced an agreement on a conference report for the Water Resources Reform and Development Act (WRRDA).

The $8.2 billion legislation reauthorizes 34 Army Corps of Engineers projects related to flooding, environmental restoration, dams, levees, bridges and other water-related infrastructure and includes various reforms to the Army Corps.

The key negotiators of the finalized bill were Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-CA), EPW Committee Ranking Member David Vitter (R-LA), House Transportation and Infrastructure (T&I) Committee Chairman Bill Shuster (R-PA) and T&I Committee Ranking Member Nick Rahall (D-WV).

“In my home State of California, Sacramento faces some of the nation’s most severe flood risks,” stated Chairwoman Boxer. “I am so pleased that this bipartisan legislation includes critical flood control that protects lives and property in California. It also includes important reforms to strengthen our ports, including in Los Angeles and Long Beach, and restores critical ecosystems, such as the Salton Sea. I look forward to moving this critical legislation to the President’s desk to be signed into law as soon as possible.”

Prior to the conference, the House had approved its bill (H.R. 3080) in October 2013 by a vote of 417-3. The Senate approved its WRRDA bill (S. 601) in May 2013 by a vote of 83-14. If signed by the president, the finalized conference bill will likely constitute one of the last major comprehensive pieces of legislation enacted before the Nov. 2014 mid-term elections.

As an authorization measure, WRRDA sets maximum spending levels for Army Corps projects authorized under the Act. Specific funding for Army Corps projects is distributed annually through the Energy and Water Appropriations Act.


A full summary of the conference report is available by following this link:


Passage of comprehensive energy efficiency legislation for the current 113th Congress was scuttled this week as Senate Republicans blocked a vote to end debate on the bill. The move also nullified a deal Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) had made with Republicans to allow a vote on legislation to expedite approval of the Keystone XL pipeline. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) felt that the deal shortchanged Republicans by preventing them from considering amendments to the energy bill.

The vote was 55–36. Sixty votes were needed to overcome the minority party filibuster. The nine Senators who missed the vote were Lamar Alexander (R-TN), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Mark Begich (D-AK), John Boozman (R-AR), Bob Corker (R-TN), Lindsay Graham (R-SC), Dean Heller (R-NV), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and David Vitter (R-LA). Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH), who cosponsored the bill, along with Sens. Kelly Ayote (R-NH) and Susan Collins (R-ME) were the only Republicans to vote with the majority of Senate Democrats to end debate on the measure.

Supporters of the pipeline contended that a vote on a bill to unilaterally approve the pipeline would not have garnered the 60 votes necessary to pass legislation in the Senate.  Keystone pipeline advocates in Congress are brainstorming how to attach such legislation to a must-pass bill that President Obama would have to sign. House Republicans have attached amendments approving the pipeline to appropriations bills and other legislation in the past, but such legislation has largely failed to clear the Senate.


On May 15th, US Department of Interior (DOI) Secretary Sally Jewell announced $20 million in funding for nine Bureau of Reclamation water projects in California intended to provide drought relief.

The funding is provided through DOI’s Water Sustain and Manage America’s Resources for Tomorrow (SMART) program, which works to improve water conservation efforts. California Project funding includes an extension of water recycling service in the city of Corona, construction of a wastewater treatment facility in Yucca Valley, and construction and development of three supply wells and two primary raw water transmission lines to produce groundwater that would replace water that would have been imported from the Colorado River or Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay-Delta region.

For additional information, click this link.


For the first time since 1939, water began to flow this week from the Friant Dam near Fresno into the San Joaquin River to help California farmers as they face low water levels in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. The Bureau of Reclamation released the water to fulfill water contracts made in 1939 when the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority agreed to take its water from the Delta rather than the San Joaquin River, unless the Delta could not meet needs.

The Exchange Contractors hold senior water rights and provide irrigation water to about 240,000 acres of farmland. They will receive 529,000 acre-feet of their normal 840,000 acre-feet supply. Certain wildlife refuges will also see their supplies increased from 108,000 acre-feet to 170,000 acre-feet. The allotment of irrigation water to many Central Valley farmers who are not considered senior rights holders is expected to remain at zero for the rest of the year, officials said.

The US Drought Monitor reports that conditions in the San Joaquin Valley have intensified from “severe” drought in May 2013 to “exceptional” drought in May 2014. “Exceptional” is the worst of the five stages of the US Drought Monitor Classification.

For additional information, click this link.


On May 9th, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), in partnership with the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), released two proposed rules and one proposed policy that collectively intend to improve the process of designating critical habitat for endangered species.

The first proposed rule would expand the definition of “adverse modification” to better quantify how various federal activities, including mining, drilling and construction effect critical habitat’s ability to meet a listed species recovery needs. The second proposed rule would clarify the procedures and standards used to designate critical habitats. The policy proposal would improve transparency and consistency with how agencies determine exclusions for critical habitat designations.

Critical habitat designations require other federal agencies to consult with federal entities responsible for endangered species protection to ensure any regulatory action or initiative does not negatively affect the designated habitat area. The proposals, if finalized, will be implemented by FWS and NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service. They will also help clarify how lands designated as critical habitat can be used for other purposes.

Additional information on the proposals is available via the following link.


Introduced in House

H.R. 4614, the Park Partner Enhancement Act – Introduced May 8th  by Reps. Jared Huffman (D-CA) and Cynthia Lummis (R-WY), the bill would clarify the ability of the National Park Service (NPS) to work with non-federal entities, such as philanthropic organizations and education institutions, to improve investment of non-federal funds towards facility construction, landscape restoration and other NPS priorities. The bill has been referred to the House Natural Resources Committee.

H.R. 4654, the Lower Electric Bill Act of 2014 – Introduced May 9th by Rep. Kevin Yoder (R-KS), the bill would delay implementation of US Environmental Protection Agency Mercury and Air Toxics Standards for five years. The bill also requires EPA to study the economic effects of implementing the standards on local communities. The bill has been referred to the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

Passed House

H.R. 4438, the American Research and Competitiveness Act of 2014 – Introduced by Rep. Kevin Brady (R-TX), the bill would make the research and development tax credit, which expired at the end of calendar year 2013, permanent. A majority of House Democrats opposed the bill, citing a Joint Committee on Taxation estimate that the permanent extension would add $155 billion to the deficit over 10 years and called for offset revenue. The bill passed the House May 9th by a vote of 274-131 with 62 Democrats joining all but one Republican in supporting the bill.

The White House issued a Statement of Administration Policy threatening to veto the bill, citing the lack of revenues to offset the cost of the bill. View the statement here.

H.R. 4366, the Strengthening Education through Research Act – Introduced by Rep. Todd Rotika (R-IN), the bill would reauthorize Department of Education bureaus related to science, including the Institute of Education Sciences, the National Center for Education Research, and the National Center for Education Statistics. The bill passed the House May 8th by voice vote and has been referred to the Senate Health Education Labor and Pensions Committee.

Introduced in Senate

S. 2306, the Delaware River Basin Conservation Act – Introduced May 8th by Sen. Tom Carper (D-DE), the bill would establish a Delaware River Basin Restoration Program within the US Fish and Wildlife Service to coordinate funding for restoration and protection of the Delaware River Basin. Sens. Chris Coons (D-DE), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Charles Schumer (D-NY), and Robert Casey (D-PA) are also lead cosponsors of the bill.

Sources: Department of Energy, Department of Interior, Energy and Environment Daily, E&E News PM, Greenwire, the Hill, House Natural Resources Committee, House Space, Science and Technology Committee, Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, the White House

May 2, 2014

In This Issue


On April 30, the House Appropriations Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies Subcommittee released its funding bill for Fiscal Year (FY) 2015.

In total, the bill includes $51.2 billion in discretionary spending for FY 2015, $398 million less than FY 2014. The bill includes funding for the Department of Justice, Department of Commerce and several key federal science agencies for the coming fiscal year that starts October 1, 2014.

The bill includes $7.4 billion for the National Science Foundation; a $237 million increase over the FY 2014 enacted funding level and $150 million above the president’s request for FY 2015.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) would receive $5.3 billion in FY 2015; level with its FY 2014 enacted funding level. The bill also fully funds NOAA’s two satellite programs—the Joint Polar Satellite System and the Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite.

The National Aeronautic and Space Administration would receive $17.9 billion in FY 2015, a $250 million increase over FY 2014. Science programs at the agency would increase by $42 million.

Additional information on the bill is available by following this link:



On April 29, the Senate Appropriations Committee held a hearing entitled, “Driving Innovation through Federal Investments.” The hearing focused on the important role that federal funding plays in supporting scientific research.

“It’s not an understatement to argue that federal investment in research is an investment in America’s future,” stated Chairwoman Barbara Mikulski (D-MD). “This realization has led me, and many of my colleagues, to consider some difficult questions.”

“I agree reducing the budget deficit is important, but are we being so austere that we are limiting our future growth? And as one of the greatest countries in the world, are we so preoccupied with making budget cuts that we’re heading towards an innovation deficit as well?”

Ranking Member Richard Shelby (R-AL) noted the important role federal investment in R&D plays in furthering advancements in biomedical research and life-saving military technologies. He also called upon the committee to consider a recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) report that found “wasteful spending” in certain defense, healthcare and energy R&D programs.

“In general, I hope this committee will consider the GAO’s input and the work it has done on overlap and duplication in government,” stated Ranking Member Shelby. “Such oversight will ensure that federal research dollars go to the programs that hold the most promise. In addition, I encourage federal agencies to look for ways to promote public-private partnerships, many of which stretch taxpayer dollars further by tapping into the expertise of innovators in the private sector.”

Federal agency witnesses testifying before the committee included Office of Science and Technology Policy Director John Holdren. He noted that while the share of funding for US research and development supported by the federal government has dropped from as much as two-thirds in the 1960s to one-third today, the federal government remains “the largest funder of the basic research that produces the seed-corn from which all applied advances in innovation grow.”

Holdren noted that the National Science Foundation (NSF) is currently viewed around the world as “the gold standard” in its peer review grant-making process and argued that the agency’s existing grant-making process be maintained. “To try to fix what is not broken at NSF would risk eroding the cornerstone of American scientific and engineering excellence,” said Holdren who also noted that countries such as China are set to surpass the US in R&D investment if existing trends continue.

Holdren also touted that the administration’s $56 billion Opportunity, Growth and Security Initiative contains $5.3 billion for R&D. According to Holdren, investment in research and development would increase by 5.2 percent above the current Fiscal Year (FY) 2014 level, if the initiative were enacted. Holdren emphasized that the initiative would be paid for by spending reforms and closing tax loopholes. Tax reform measures perceived as net revenue increases are unlikely to gain bipartisan traction during the course of this election year. Consequently, it is unlikely major elements of the Opportunity Growth and Security initiative will be approved this Congress.

NSF Director France Córdova highlighted how the internet, magnetic resonance imaging (MRIs), touch screens for iPads, smartphones, advanced weather forecasting, municipal water systems and cybersecurity were all developed in part through NSF fundamental research funding.

“As this committee knows so well, NSF’s research and education investments have been vital to our country’s prosperity and will be even more important to our future,” she said. “They will continue to be a critical factor in maintaining the nations’ technological leadership through the 21st Century and will broadly impact [the] long-term economic health and vitality of our nation and the world.”

Additional witnesses included Department of Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz, National Institutes of Health Director Francis Collins and the Defense Advanced Research and Projects Agency Director Arati Prabakhar.

View the full hearing by clicking this link:


On April 30, the House Science, Space and Technology Subcommittee on Environment held a hearing examining the proposed Fiscal Year 2015 budget for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

While expressing support for the overall NOAA budget request, Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) was critical of the amount of funding dedicated towards climate change research.

“Almost $190 million is requested for climate research, more than twice the amount dedicated to weather research,” stated Chairman Smith. “There are 13 other agencies that are involved in climate change research, and according to the Congressional Research Service, they have spent $77 billion between 2008 and 2013.” Smith was also critical of NOAA’s website, which he contended included “non-peer reviewed” information “promoting climate alarmism for children.”

Committee Democrats cited existing ramifications of climate change as evidence of the need for continuing federal investment in NOAA’s climate change research.

“Our coastal communities face pressing challenges presented by rising sea-levels, to say nothing of the enormous threat posed by more severe hurricanes,” stated Ranking Member Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX). “One of the agencies the American people turn to is NOAA for critical information before, during, and after these severe events. Whether it is providing forecasts and warnings of pending storms, working with state or local decision makers to develop effective response strategies, or conducting research that improves our understanding of severe weather to enhance the resiliency of our communities, it is essential that we maintain our commitment to the science done at NOAA.”

Testifying, NOAA Administrator Kathryn Sullivan, clarified the importance of climate research by noting that while weather services help us predict events and trends over a two week period, climate research helps us understand atmospheric changes over longer time scales. As an example, she stated that climate research will provide important information about the future drought outlook for water managers and ranchers.

“The range of information needs that American citizens and businesses have is across a huge range of time scales,” stated Sullivan. “And if we aspire, as NOAA is chartered to do, to respond to those demands, to those really urgent needs across that whole range of scales, we have to be able to investigate and study and understand the many different timescales that are natural to this planet,” she continued. “To use a metaphor, we have to be able to play the whole keyboard if we’re going to play the symphony that our communities are really asking us to play.”

During the hearing, committee members also reviewed the status of weather forecasting and response data, NOAA’s satellite programs and long-term staffing needs for the agency. To view the full hearing, click on the link:


On April 29, the US Supreme Court upheld a US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rule that allows the agency to regulate air pollution that drifts across state lines.

“EPA’s cost-effective allocation of emission reductions among upwind States, we hold, is a permissible, workable, and equitable interpretation of the Good Neighbor provision,” wrote Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in the 6-2 ruling decision. Ginsburg referenced an earlier Supreme Court case, Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, which held that if a statute’s language is ambiguous, courts must defer to an agency’s interpretation. A federal appellate court had previously held that the EPA’s authority superseded the state’s by implementing federal plans for cutting air pollution before states were allowed to draft their own.

The Obama administration praised the ruling, asserting that the EPA rule will “prevent up to 34,000 premature deaths, 15,000 nonfatal heart attacks, 19,000 cases of acute bronchitis, 400,000 cases of aggravated asthma, and 1.8 million sick days a year—achieving up to $280 billion in annual health benefits.”

Ginsburg was joined in her opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts, Justices Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan, Anthony Kennedy and Sonia Sotomayor. Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas filed a dissenting opinionwhile Justice Samuel Alito recused himself.

For additional information on the ruling, clicking this link:

Additional information on the EPA rule can be found by clicking this link:


On April 24, the National Science Board (NSB), the Governing Board for the National Science Foundation, released a statement criticizing legislation that would reauthorize funding for the National Science Foundation, the Frontiers in Innovation Research, Science and Technology (FIRST) Act.

The NSB rarely releases public statements on legislation. At the same time, it is highly unusual  and unprecedented for Congress to write legislation, as it does in the FIRST ACT, stipulating how NSF would conduct its grant-making process.

A major contention NSB cited in its statement is language in the bill that would allow Congress to authorize funding levels for individual NSF Directorates, much the way they do for NIH. This however, limits the agency’s discretion in allocating funding for specific NIH priorities. NSF officials fear the legislation would ultimately lead to the same constraints.

“Some elements of the bill would also impose significant new burdens on scientists that would not be offset by gains to the nation,” the NSB press statement notes. “Our greatest concern is that the bill’s specification of budget allocations to each NSF Directorate would significantly impede NSF’s flexibility to deploy its funds to support the best ideas in fulfillment of its mission.”

While NSF has traditionally garnered strong bipartisan support, in recent years, the Republican majority in the US House of Representatives has been increasingly critical of social science investment and certain grants whose titles, on first glance, could be interpreted by laymen as wasteful research projects. Some policymakers argue that existing fiscal constraints on the overall federal budget necessitate these extreme measures to prevent funding “frivolous” research projects.

The FIRST Act includes provisions requiring NSF to specify how individual projects serve in the economic and defense interests of the United States. NSB contends such legislative requirements would be inflexible and assert that the agency is currently implementing processes that promote transparency and accountability within its grant-making system.

The NSB statement also referenced the need for the US to maintain its global competitiveness. “We are concerned that the proposed new legislative requirements might discourage visionary proposals or transformative science at a time when advancing the decades-long U.S. leadership in science and technology is a top priority.” A recent NSB report noted that the US is at imminent risk of falling behind countries such as China with regard to our nation’s contribution of R&D investment.

View the full NSB press release by clicking this link:


The Obama administration’s recent move to postpone its decision on whether it will approve the Keystone XL pipeline has political implications for a bipartisan energy bill moving through the Senate.

On April 18, the US State Department announced that it would delay reaching a decision on the pipeline until after a court challenge to its proposed route through Nebraska is resolved. Prior to the announcement, there was an expectation that the administration could reach a decision as early as this month, when the public comment period ended. It is now expected that a final decision may not be reached until the end of the year.

A court ruling that invalidates the route as planned could necessitate the need for an alternative route. Therefore, a decision by the administration to approve the pipeline could be subject to further litigation. When viewed through a political lens, this also benefits the Obama administration by punting a contentious decision until after the 2014 mid-term elections. Consequently, pipeline proponents have begun to refocus on legislative efforts to expedite its approval.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) plans to take up a bipartisan energy efficiency bill sponsored by Senators Jeanne Sheehan (D-NH) and Rob Portman (R-OH) beginning May 5th. Currently, Republican leaders in the Congress and the Senate who support the pipeline have indicated they may propose an amendment to the energy bill to help fast-track its approval.

“The Keystone Pipeline is clearly in our national interest and vital to position North America as an energy powerhouse. I will press hard for a vote in the coming weeks to build this pipeline,” said Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairwoman Mary Landrieu (D-LA) in an April 28th press statement. “Significant investments in our energy infrastructure that connects producers, refiners and consumers creates thousands of high-paying jobs, pushes our economy forward and signals to the world that America intends to step up to the competition and become an energy superpower.”

Landrieu, up for re-election, will likely face political pressure to take action that supports expedited approval of the pipeline. Several other Senate Democrats in tight re-election races this year, including Mark Pryor (AR), Mark Begich (AK) and Kay Hagan (NC), are expected to aid in legislative efforts to approve the pipeline.

While a Keystone amendment to the Sheehan-Portman energy efficiency bill would likely garner bipartisan support, it is unclear whether it could secure the 60 votes necessary to move the legislation forward in the Senate.


On May 1, the US Department of Agriculture announced it was accepting applications for two new conservation programs authorized by the Agricultural Act of 2014, which reauthorizes farm bill programs.

The Agricultural Conservation Easements Program (ACEP) and the Voluntary Public Access and Habitat Incentive Program (VPA-HIP) will provide up to $386 million for outdoor recreational activities, wetland restoration and protection assistance for agricultural lands.

ACEP consolidates three former easement programs—the Farm and Ranch Land Protection Program, the Grassland Reserve Program and the Wetlands Reserve Program—into a single program to strengthen land and water conservation efforts. VPA-HIP is a competitive grant program that enables state and Tribal governments to increase opportunities for owners and managers of private lands who want to make their land available for public recreation.

Applications for ACEP funding are due June 6, 2014. Additional information can be found through this link:

Applications for the VPA-HIP are due June 16, 2014. Addition information can be found through this link:


Passed House

H.R. 627, the National Park Service 100th Anniversary Commemorative Coin Act – Introduced by Rep. Erik Paulsen (D-MN), the bill would direct the Secretary of the Treasury to mint and issue gold, silver, and half-dollar coins in commemoration of the 100th  anniversary of the establishment of the National Park Service. The bill passed the House April 29th by a vote of 403-13 and has been referred to the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee.

Huna Tlingit Traditional Gull Egg Use Act – The bill would allow the harvest of gull eggs by the Huna Tlingit people of Alaska for the purpose of preserving a cultural tradition. The bill passed the House on April 28th by a voice vote.

H.R. 4032, the North Texas Invasive Species Barrier Act of 2014 – Introduced by Rep. Ralph Hall (R-TX), the bill would authorize the North Texas Municipal Water District and the Greater Texoma Utility Authority to transfer water out of a Lake Texoma along the Oklahoma-Texas border, even if it contains invasive species.

The Obama administration has expressed concerns that the bill would set a bad precedent, but has not issued an official veto threat. House Democrats shared the administration’s concerns, but ultimately found the legislation permissible in this instance. The Greater Texoma Utility Authority stated it will build a pipeline that would transfer water out of the lake to a treatment facility in order to remove any zebra mussels. The bill passed the House April 28th  by a voice vote and has been referred to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.

Cleared for White House

S. 994, the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act – Introduced by Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), the bill seeks to improve disclosure of federal-agency-spending information by establishing government-wide standards for expenditures related to federal contracts, loans and grants. The bill passed the House April 28th by a voice vote after passing the Senate earlier in that month. President Obama is expected to sign the measure.

Sources: Department of Energy, Department of Interior, Energy and Environment Daily, E&E News PM, Greenwire, the Hill, House Natural Resources Committee, House Space, Science and Technology Committee, Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, the White House