A letter to National Science Foundation (NSF) Acting-Director Cora Marrett from House Science, Space and Technology Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) received a sharp rebuttal from Ranking Member Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX).

In his letter, Chairman Smith expressed concern with how NSF prioritizes scientific research. “Based on my review of NSF-funded studies, I have concerns regarding some grants approved by the foundation and how closely they adhere to NSF’s ‘intellectual merit’ guideline,” he wrote.  “To better understand how NSF makes decisions to approve and fund grants, it would be helpful to obtain detailed information on specific research projects awarded NSF grants.” He then cited several social science studies, including research projects entitled “Picturing Animals in National Geographic,” “Comparative Network Analysis: Mapping Global Social Interactions,” and “Regulating Accountability and Transparency in China’s Dairy Industry” as “studies of interest” to the House Science, Space and Technology Committee. 

Ranking Member Johnson’s response letter addressed to Chairman Smith came the following day. “Like you I recognize that NSF grants have a responsibility back to the taxpayers,” she noted. “But I also believe that: 1) the progress of science itself – across all fields, including the social and behavioral sciences – is in the interest of the taxpayer; and 2) that NSF’s Broader Impact criterion is the right way to hold the individual grantee accountable.”

Her letter included a sharp criticism of the chairman’s move as entirely unprecedented in modern history. “In the history of this committee, no chairman has ever put themselves forward as an expert in the science that underlies specific grant proposals funded by NSF. In the more than two decades of committee leadership that I have worked with – Chairmen Brown, Walker, Sensenbrenner, Boehlert, Gordon, and Hall – I have never seen a chairman decide to go after specific grants simply because the chairman does not believe them to be of high value.”

During recent remarks commemorating the 150th anniversary of the National Academy of Sciences, President Obama highlighted the importance of maintaining existing scientific merit peer review standards. “And what’s true of all sciences is that in order for us to maintain our edge, we’ve got to protect our rigorous peer review system and ensure that we only fund proposals that promise the biggest bang for taxpayer dollars.  And I will keep working to make sure that our scientific research does not fall victim to political maneuvers or agendas that in some ways would impact on the integrity of the scientific process,” said the president. “That’s what’s going to maintain our standards of scientific excellence for years to come.”

Recently, the Coalition for National Science Funding, in partnership with the House Research Caucus, sponsored a briefing that emphasized the importance of sustained investment in social and behavioral scientific research focusing on victims of natural and human-made disasters. For additional information on the briefing, click here:  

http://www.esa.org/esablog/ecology-in-policy/briefing-highlights-importance-of-social-science-research/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Ecotone+%28EcoTone%29 

To view Chairman Smith’s letter, click here:

http://www.cossa.org/CPR/2013/Rep.%20EBJLetter-toRep.Smith-Re-NSF-Grants.pdf

To view Ranking Member Johnson’s rebuttal letter, click here:

http://www.cossa.org/CPR/2013/Rep.%20EBJLetter-toRep.Smith-Re-NSF-Grants.pdf

To view President Obama’s full remarks before the National Academy of Sciences, click here:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/04/29/remarks-president-150th-anniversary-national-academy-sciences

On April 24, the Senate Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee convened for a hearing examining the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) budget request for FY 2014.

Committee Democrats expressed concern over proposed cuts to clean water and brownfield programs while Republicans, specifically Sens. Roy Blunt (MO) Mike Johanns (NE), took issue with agency surveillance programs. EPA Acting Director Bob Perciasepe testified that the aerial surveillance is used to monitor Clean Water Act violations and is not used to obtain information on law-biding citizens.

“I’m disappointment with the overall budget level. This is the fourth year in a row that the agency’s budget request has contracted,” noted Subcommittee Chairman Jack Reed (D-RI). Chairman Reed cited clean and drinking water state revolving funds, beach cleanup, brownfields clean up, and environmental education programs as troubling proposed cuts that would endanger public health and stifle economic and infrastructure productivity. While acknowledging that more funding is needed for water infrastructure overall, Perciasepe noted that past investment, including funding through the Recovery Act, has helped sustain funds. EPA will continue to work with states and local agencies to make better use of the funds, given current fiscal concerns, said Perciasepe.

Subcommittee Ranking Member Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) expressed concern with certain EPA rulemakings and asserted that she hears more complaints from Alaskans about the agency than about any other federal agency. She asked about the status of Alaska’s Bristol Bay Watershed assessment, which seeks to identify the impacts of large scale mining on the Bay. Murkowski specifically inquired when the agency would be able to provide the committee with the overall cost of the assessment. Her concerns about getting the overall assessment completed in a timely fashion were echoed by Sen. Mark Begich (D-AK). Perciasepe said that a cost assessment should be available sometime in May.

View the full hearing here:

http://www.appropriations.senate.gov/webcasts.cfm?method=webcasts.view&id=47a2d012-529d-4fef-9999-35a7cab3b0e4

Additional information on the Bristol Bay assessment is available here:

http://www2.epa.gov/bristolbay

On April 25, the House Science, Space and Technology Subcommittee on Environment convened for a hearing entitled “Policy Relevant Climate Issues in Context.” The hearing was the first of the subcommittee to focus on climate science for the 113^th Congress.

Environment Subcommittee Chairman Chris Stewart (R-UT) re-emphasized the contention among some congressional Republicans that there is debate as to the degree to which the planet is warming and the factors at play. “The number and complexity of factors influencing climate—from land and oceans to the sun and clouds—make precise long-term temperature predictions an extremely difficult challenge.  Contrary to the predictions of almost all modeling, over the past 16 years there has been a complete absence of global warming,” said Stewart. “When we encounter those who claim to know precisely what our future climate will look like, and then attack any who may disagree with them, we have stepped out of the arena of science and into the arena of politics and ideology.”

House Science, Space and Technology Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) was slightly more reserved in his skepticism in his opening statement. “Climate change is an issue that needs to be discussed thoughtfully and objectively. Unfortunately, it’s sometimes surrounded by claims that conceal the facts and hinder the proper weighing of policy options,” he asserted. “I believe in the integrity of science. And I find it unfortunate that those who question certain scientific views on climate have their motives impugned. Challenging accepted beliefs through open debate and critical thinking is a primary part of the scientific process. To make a rational decision on climate change, we need to examine the relevant scientific issues along with the costs and benefits and better understand the uncertainties that surround both.”

Full Committee Ranking Member Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX), while not present at the opening of the hearing, released a statement for the record criticizing global warming skeptics.  “The science surrounding this issue reached a consensus a long time ago, and that consensus is that the world is warming and most of that warming is being caused by humans…Unfortunately, many of my colleagues in the majority don’t seem to have gotten the memo.  Many openly dispute the science or allude to some unspecified but supposedly vast scientific conspiracy.  Others, while less conspiratorial, insist that nothing can be done about the problem.  This is a failure of leadership of the highest order.”

The majority of witnesses testifying during the hearing said that existing federal efforts to address climate change were harmful to the economy and of marginal benefit. Bjørn Lomborg, president of the Copenhagen Consensus Center, criticized the Kyoto treaty and carbon tax proposals and stated that the US should fund research for new carbon capture technologies that would be less expensive than conventional fossil fuels. Judith Curry, Professor of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at Georgia Institute of Technology, echoed concerns that there is inadequate understanding of the cause and nature of climate change to assess the costs and benefits of taking policy action.

The lone witness invited by committee Democrats was William Chameides, Dean at the Nicholas School of the Environment at Duke University, who argued that uncertainty should not be used as a roadblock against taking action. “We, as individuals and as a society, often act in the face of uncertainty.  And often we choose to take a conservative path, and rightly so,” he argued. “I, for example, cannot predict if, let alone when, there will be a fire in my house, but I pay for fire insurance.  Similarly, in the face of uncertain but substantial risks from climate change, a prudent course of action is to develop and implement a risk-based and flexible response to the climate change challenge.”

Environment Subcommittee Ranking Member Suzanne Bonamci (D-OR) illustrated various examples, peppered with a local perspective, of how climate change is affecting the economy. She noted the role of wine grapes in Oregon’s economy and how even minor temperature changes can adversely impact production of pinot noir wine grapes. She also pointed to the negative impacts of increased ocean acidification, caused by climate change, on the Pacific Northwest shellfish industry.

“As a nation, we are becoming too familiar with the consequences of waiting until the eleventh hour to develop solutions to the problems we face,” stated Bonamici. “Let’s not make that mistake with something as serious as climate change. And even though we may have differences of opinion about what is causing climate change, but we can still discuss the economic gains we can make by investing in a clean energy economy, modernizing our infrastructure, and seeking energy independence.”

View the full hearing, here:

http://science.house.gov/hearing/subcommittee-environment-hearing-policy-relevant-climate-issues-context

On May 2, President Obama announced Chicago billionaire Penny Pritzker as his pick to lead the US Department of Commerce. Pritzker, a longtime fundraiser for Obama, is also the daughter of the founder of the Hyatt Hotel chain. If confirmed, Pritzker would be the wealthiest secretary in Obama’s cabinet, with a net worth of $1.85 billion.

Pritzker currently serves as Chief Executive of PSP Capital Partners and its affiliate, Pritzker Realty Group. She has previously served as a member of the president’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness and also worked on the administration’s Skills for America’s Future initiative, an effort to improve industry partnerships with community colleges to develop job skills for students. Pritzker attended Harvard University and received law and business degrees from Stanford.

As Commerce Secretary, Pritzker would oversee the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration, one of the federal government’s key science agencies and the single largest federal bureau under the department’s jurisdiction. Several key positions have remained vacant at NOAA in the time between the final year of the administration’s first term and the onset of his second-term. Foremost among them is the position of NOAA administrator, left vacant by the departure of Jane Lubchenco, a former president of the Ecological Society of America.

Both industry and environmental advocates expressed optimism about the nomination. “Manufacturers welcome the nomination of Penny Pritzker to lead the Department of Commerce,” said National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) President and CEO Jay Timmons in a press statement. “Penny brings to the table an extensive business background and understands what it takes for businesses to create jobs. She comes from a family with a rich history in manufacturing as her uncle, Bob Pritzker, served as chairman of the NAM.”

“The direction and vision set by the Commerce Department are crucial to managing our nation’s fisheries,” stated John Mimikakis, Associate Vice President of the Environmental Defense Fund’s Oceans Program. “EDF looks forward to Ms. Pritzker’s leadership as secretary and will continue to work with fishermen, regional councils and NOAA to develop solutions that will end overfishing while protecting the business and sport of fishing for future generations.”

The US Fish and Wildlife Service recently began efforts to remove the gray wolf from protection under the Endangered Species Act.

Federal protections would be removed for most wolves across the continental United States. Protection would remain in place, however, for a subspecies of Mexican wolves in Arizona and New Mexico. The removal would be the culmination of a series of regional and state efforts that have been enacted in recent years. Members of Congress from western states that represent hunters and ranchers have also frequently pushed delisting efforts over recent years. 

Environmental groups have expressed dismay regarding FWS’s intention. In a press statement, Defenders of Wildlife President and CEO Jamie Rappaport Clark accused the Obama administration of “giving up on gray wolf recovery before the job is done.” Defenders of Wildlife contends the move is premature given that recovery efforts in the Pacific Northwest are just beginning and the fact that there are no wolves in the states of Colorado and Utah. “Gray wolves once ranged in a continuous population from Canada all the way down to Mexico, and we shouldn’t give up on this vision until they are restored,” contended Clark.

Federal protections for the gray wolf are expected to be lifted this year. Once delisted, wolf management efforts are predominantly provided by individual state governments. Federal agencies will continue to monitor the status of the species and have the capability to reinstate federal protection if numbers dwindle to a point that scientists consider dangerously low.

To view the Defenders of Wildlife press release, click here:

https://www.defenders.org/press-release/feds-propose-abandoning-gray-wolf-recovery-across-most-united-states

For additional information on FWS gray wolf recovery and monitoring efforts, click here:

http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=A00D

The National Science Foundation (NSF) has awarded the Ecological Society of America’s (ESA) “Diverse People for a Diverse Science” project with a $183,158 grant.

The ESA initiative seeks to increase diversity participation in the field of ecology. In addition to funding existing program components such as research fellowships, the grant will also support an independent evaluation of ESA’s Strategies for Ecology Education, Diversity and Sustainability (SEEDS) program.

The professional evaluation will assess SEEDS program activities between 2002-2012, documenting outcomes, effectiveness of program components and identifying opportunities to strengthen the program. The evaluation will determine to what degree program participants’ knowledge of ecology as increased, how it has buttressed career opportunities and influenced ESA members who have served as mentors during its existence.

Formative Evaluation Research Associates (FERA) is conducting the SEEDS program evaluation. FERA is a woman-owned firm with experience evaluating NSF-supported and other science education programs focused on engaging underrepresented groups. 

On May 3, the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) released its five year research and development (R&D) plan.

 The plan provides a roadmap for research implementation at NOAA from 2013-2017 in support of goals related to monitoring the status of climate, weather, oceans and coastal areas. The plan will help NOAA and partnering organizations understand how to adapt and respond to change, provide a common understanding between NOAA and its various stakeholders of the purpose of NOAA R&D as well as develop a framework for making mission-oriented decisions and setting targets on how to measure progress and the degree of stakeholder engagement.

 For additional information on the plan, click here:

http://nrc.oarhq.noaa.gov/CouncilProducts/ResearchPlans/5-YearRDPlan.aspx

 To provide comments go here: https://docs.google.com/a/noaa.gov/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dEV3WkYyWVdhTzREcHlJR21nVDREQ2c6MQ#gid=0

On April 24, the US Fish and Wildlife Service announced that it was considering adding new amphibians in the Sierra Nevada region for protection under the Endangered Species Act.

The Yosemite toad and the mountain yellow-legged frog would be listed as “threatened” under the proposed rule. The distinct population segment of the Sierra Nevada yellow frog would be included in this listing. FWS cites these three species as being threatened by “habitat degradation, predation, climate change, and inadequate regulatory protection.” The proposal would also designate a combined two million acres of critical habitat for the animals, largely across California and 16 counties in the Sierra Nevada.

Public comments will be accepted through June 24, 2013. Comments can be submitted via email at http://www.regulations.gov using docket number FWS–R8–ES–2012–0100 for the listing and docket number FWS–R8–ES–2012–0074 for the critical habitat rule.  Comments can also be mailed to the following address:

 Public Comments Processing

Attn:  FWS–R8–ES–2012–0100 or FWS–R8–ES–2012–0074
Division of Policy and Directives Management
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS 2042-PDM
Arlington, VA 22203                            

For additional information, click here:

http://www.fws.gov/ventura/newsroom/release.cfm?id=93

Considered by House Committee/Subcommittee

On April 25, the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife and Insular Affairs held a hearing on the following bills:

H.R. 638, the National Wildlife Refuge Review Act – Introduced by Fisheries, Wildlife and Insular Affairs Subcommittee Chairman John Fleming (R-LA), the bill would require congressional approval of any expansion of the National Wildlife Refuge System.

H.R. 1300, to reauthorize the volunteer programs and community partnerships for the benefit of national wildlife refuges – Introduced by Rep. Jon Runyan (R-NJ), the bill reauthorizes community partnerships and volunteer programs for the National Wildlife Refuge System. The bill is cosponsored by Subcommittee Ranking Member Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan (D-Northern Mariana Islands).

H.R. 1384, the Wildlife Refuge System Conservation Semipostal Stamp Act of 2013 – Introduced by Subcommittee Ranking Member Sablan, the bill would provide for the issuance of a Wildlife Refuge System Conservation Semipostal Stamp. 

Approved by House Committee

On April 24, the House Natural Resources Committee approved the following bill:

H.R. 3, the Northern Route Approval Act – Introduced by Rep. Terry Lee (R-NE) – the bill would remove the  requirement of a presidential permit for approval of the XL Keystone pipeline. The bill would deem the environmental impact statement issued by the Secretary of State on August 26, 2011, coupled with a final evaluation report, sufficient to satisfy all requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and of the National Historic Preservation Act. The bill was approved in committee by a vote of 24-17.

Considered by Senate Committee

On April 23, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks considered several bills, including the following:

S. 155, to designate a mountain in the State of Alaska as Denali – Introduced by Ranking Member Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), the bill would rename a mountain named for President McKinley as Denali, the name it is referred to by Alaskan residents.

S. 156, Huna Tlingit Traditional Gull Egg Use Act – Introduced by Ranking Member Murkowksi, the bill would allow for the harvest of gull eggs by the Huna Tlingit people within Alaska’s Glacier Bay National Park. Sen. Mark Begich (D-AK) has cosponsored the bill.

S. 219, Susquehanna Gateway National Heritage Area Act – Introduced by Sen. Bob Casey (D-PA) the bill would establish the Susquehanna Gateway National Heritage Area in Pennsylvania.

S. 225,  Buffalo Soldiers in the National Parks Study Act – Introduced by Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA), the bill would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study of alternatives for commemorating and interpreting the role of the Buffalo Soldiers in the early years of the national parks.       

S. 349, Wood-Pawcatuck Watershed Protection Act  -  Introduced by Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI), the bill would designate a segment of the Beaver, Chipuxet, Queen, Wood, and Pawcatuck Rivers in the states of Connecticut and Rhode Island for study for potential addition to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System.

S. 486, Preserving Public Access to Cape Hatteras Beaches Act – the bill bars imposition of any additional restrictions on pedestrian or motorized vehicular access to any part of the Recreation Area for species protection beyond those outlined in an interim management strategy issued by the National Park Service in 2007.  The bill comes in response to a National Park Service plan issued in Feb. 2012 that bans off-highway vehicle use in the Cape Hatteras National Seashore in North Carolina for the purpose of protecting nesting sea turtles and birds.

For a full listing of bills considered during the hearing, click here:

http://www.energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/hearings-and-business-meetings?ID=9df237db-2a0f-4e28-9476-b1c5b43d454a

On April 25, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee held a hearing on the following bills:

S. 340, the Southeast Alaska Native Land Entitlement Finalization and Jobs Protection Act – Introduced by Ranking Member Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), the bill would transfer 70,000 acres of the Tongass National Forest to Sealaska Corp. Among its concerns with the bill, the Obama administration claims the legislation could imperil wildlife in the region, including wolves and goshawks.

S. 27, the Hill Creek Cultural Preservation and Energy Development Act – Introduced by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT), the bill would authorize a land swap intended to protect the cultural rights of the Ute Tribe in eastern Utah while allowing expanded access for oil and gas drilling.

S. 28, the Y Mountain Access Enhancement Act – Introduced by Sen. Hatch, the bill would provide for the conveyance of a small parcel of National Forest System land in the Uintah-Wasatch-Cache National Forest in Utah to Brigham Young University.

S. 159, the  Lyon County Economic Development and Conservation Act – Introduced by Sen. Dean Heller (R-NV), the bill would designate the Wovoka Wilderness as a component of the National Wilderness Preservation System and provide for certain land conveyances in Lyon County, NV to facilitate construction of a copper mine.

S. 241, the Rio Grande del Norte National Conservation Area Establishment Act – Introduced by Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-NM), the bill would establish the Rio Grande del Norte National Conservation Area in New Mexico.

S. 255, North Fork Watershed Protection Act of 2013 – Introduced by Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT), the bill would protect the North Folk of the Flathead River in Montana from future mineral claims and oil and gas development.

S. 312, the Carson National Forest Boundary Adjustment Act of 2013 – Introduced by Sen. Tom Udall (D-NM), the bill would adjust the boundary of the Carson National Forest in New Mexico to incorporate 4,990 acres of land identified as the Miranda Canyon Boundary.

S. 341, San Juan Mountains Wilderness Act – Introduced by Sen. Mark Udall (D-CO), the bill would designate certain lands in San Miguel, Ouray and San Juan counties in Colorado as wilderness.

S. 342, the Pine Forest Range Recreation Enhancement Act of 2013 – Introduced by Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV), the bill would designate the Pine Forest Range Wilderness area in Humboldt County, NV as a component of the National Wilderness Preservation System.

S. 353, Oregon Treasures Act of 2013 – Introduced by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), the bill would designate certain land in Oregon as wilderness and make additional wild and scenic river designations in Oregon.

For additional information on bills considered during the hearing, click here:

http://www.energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/hearings-and-business-meetings?ID=5832cf6a-fd18-4046-bb7c-5c4ba9ae7853

With policymakers seemingly adapting to the implementation of the sequester budget cuts as a fact of life for the time being, many federal agencies are now faced with furloughs to compensate for the funding cuts they must implement. The cuts remain in effect until such time as Congress comes up with a deal to reach $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction over the next ten years, an unlikelihood in the immediate future at least.

On April 1st, the White House announced that 480 of the 500 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) employees have been notified that they will be furloughed for 10 days for the remainder of the current Fiscal Year (FY) 2013. For each pay period beginning April 21 and through Sept. 7, OMB employees will have to take one unpaid furlough day. In addition, less money is being spent on supply and equipment purchases and many agencies have instituted work-related travel restrictions.

The Environmental Protection Agency is planning to initiate four-day weekends over Independence Day and Labor Day and plans on a skeleton crew on May 24, the Friday before Memorial Day weekend. Its employees are expected to take as much as 13 furlough days through FY 2013.

In an effort to minimize staff furloughs, the United States Geological Survey has pulled back on a number of its popular educational initiatives. This summer, it will no longer hire 1800 college students it utilizes to help monitor flood forecasting data and earthquake seismic activity. The agency is also ending its tours for school groups and the two-week science summer camps for children ages 8-12 that it has hosted annually since 1996.

Many agencies are instituting hiring freezes to save money. Among them is the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which is already wrestling with staff shortages. Emergency managers within the agency have expressed concern that the unfilled positions will eventually lead to decreased capacity to issue warnings and weather forecasting. Such forecasting is also necessary in helping water managers monitor stream flow and area water supplies.

The next opportunity Congress has to reach a deal on the sequester will be when the temporary suspension of the debt ceiling expires. Under current law, the debt ceiling suspension will expire on May 19. However, the US Department of Treasury has indicated that the implementation of extraordinary measures may extend a government default on debt until late July or early August. The White House plans to introduce its budget proposal for FY 2014 on April 10 to nullify sequester cuts. The proposal is expected to include $1.8 trillion in savings through a mix of entitlement reforms and revenue increases.

On March 26, the Environmental Protection Agency released a report that finds that 55 percent of US rivers and streams are in poor condition for aquatic life.

Among its findings:  27 percent of rivers and streams have high levels of nitrogen and 40 percent of these water bodies have high levels of phosphorous. Excessive amounts of these chemicals causes nutrient pollution that increases oxygen-depleting algae that make waterways uninhabitable for aquatic wildlife.

The study also found that high concentrations of mercury and bacteria have adversely affected waterways. Nine percent of rivers and streams had high concentrations of bacteria that deemed them potentially unsafe for swimming and other forms of recreation. Over 13,000 miles of waterways contain fish with mercury levels that may make them unsafe for human consumption, according to the report.

The survey noted that human disturbance has attributed to approximately 24 percent of rivers and streams not having a healthy amount of vegetative cover. Such vegetation helps prevent erosion, maintain water temperature and remove pollution carried by rainwater. Loss of this vegetative cover also increases flooding risks for communities living near these rivers and streams. 

For additional information on the report, click here:
http://water.epa.gov/type/watersheds/monitoring/aquaticsurvey_index.cfm

On March 26, key wildlife agencies within the Obama administration announced the publication of a national strategy that seeks to buffer wildlife from impacts of climate change.

The “National Fish, Wildlife and Plants Climate Adaption Strategy,”   notes the value of plants and wildlife and seeks to provide information about threats and potential courses of action to mitigate those threats. The goals of the strategy include habitat conservation, increasing knowledge of climate impacts on wildlife as well as raising awareness and motivating actions that protect animals and plants.

The strategy was developed through collaboration between the US Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the New York Division of Fish, Wildlife and Marine Resources. An intergovernmental steering committee comprising 15 federal agencies, five state wildlife agencies, two inter-tribal commissions along with the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies also contributed to the strategy.

To view the full strategy, click here:
http://www.wildlifeadaptationstrategy.gov/

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) climate scientist James Hansen is retiring from the federal government after 46 years of service to the agency’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS).

Hansen, 72, is the GISS’s longest serving director, having served in the position since 1981. During his tenure, Hansen frequently reported on the threat of climate change. He was among the first scientists to identify the ways in which rising temperatures are affecting the planet and the impacts climate change has on human society. He testified before Congress in 1988 on the threats posed by climate change. His retirement will allow him to further his climate change advocacy without the restrictions placed upon federal government employees.

Hansen has engaged in activism in his off-time frequently over the years, appearing at climate protests and even allowing himself to be arrested or cited on six occasions. Early this year, he was arrested for protesting against the Keystone XL pipeline. He was first arrested in 2009, joining university students in a coal protest. His critics often label him as an “alarmist,” though even allied colleagues state some of his views can lean on the extreme side. He has once asserted that climate change could eventually lead to Earth having an uninhabitable atmosphere similar to Venus.

Hansen received his Masters’ in Astronomy and his Ph.D. in Physics from Iowa University. Distinguished honors include the American Meteorological Society’s Carl-Gustaf Rossby Research Medal (2009), American Geophysical Union’s Roger Revelle Medal (2001) and the Heinz Award for the Environment (1995). He was also honored as one of the “World’s Most Influential People” by Time Magazine (2006).

In retirement, Hansen plans to take a more active role in lawsuits challenging federal and state governments over their failure to reduce green house gas emissions. The New York Times reports that he intends to start working out of his farm in Pennsylvania, but may also accept an academic appointment or start an institute.

View the full NASA release here:
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20130402/

On April 2, the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) announced that former United States Geological Survey (USGS) Director Marcia McNutt has been named as the next editor in chief of its leading journal Science and its associated publications.

The first woman to head the journal, McNutt is among several scientists who departed their positions as agency heads at the start of the Obama administration’s second term. She served at the helm of the USGS from October 2009 until earlier this year. Prior to working at the agency, she was CEO of the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute in California (1997-2009). McNutt received her Ph.D. in earth sciences from Scripps Institution of Oceanography in California.

Founded in 1880 by journalist John Michels and Thomas Edison, Science includes peer reviewed studies and news articles covering topics of importance to the scientific community.
McNutt’s tenure with the journal begins on June 1, 2013. She succeeds Bruce Alberts, who has served since 2009 and had planned to step down at the end of his five year term.

For more information, see the AAAS press release:
http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/2013/0402_mcnutt.shtml

The National Marine Fisheries Service has published a notice requesting input on whether sperm whales inhabiting the Gulf of Mexico warrant a “distinct population segment” listing under the Endangered Species Act.

The notice comes after the environmental group WildEarth Guardians petitioned to recognize the Gulf population of sperm whales (numbering roughly 1300) as a discrete group as the whales spend most of their lives in the area rather the migrating, which is unique among the species. While the general population of sperm whales are already listed as endangered, the Gulf sperm whales face unique threats posed by oil and gas exploration and development and shipping traffic in the region.

According to WildEarth Guardians, the Gulf sperm whales are physically smaller and gather in smaller groups than their outside counterparts, which help them forage in shallower water than larger sperm whales. They also note that the Gulf whales have developed a unique “dialect” that is “culturally learned” in a manner similar to human language. These unique adaptations would make it unlikely that other sperm whales would or could colonize the area, the organization asserts.

Public comments will be accepted through May 28, 2013. For additional information on how to submit comments, click here: http://www.ofr.gov/OFRUpload/OFRData/2013-07355_PI.pdf

Congress’ failure to address budget sequestration by coming up with $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction has federal agencies trimming investment priorities and beginning (reportedly in some cases already implementing) employee furloughs as budget sequestration went into effect March 1.

As enacted by the Budget Control Act (P.L. 112-25) and modified by the American Taxpayer Relief Act (P.L. 112-240), sequestration includes across-the-board cuts of 7.9 percent for defense discretionary spending programs and 5.3 percent to non-defense discretionary spending programs. It is estimated that for the current Fiscal Year of 2013, which began on Oct. 1, the non-defense discretionary cuts will actually total about nine percent while the defense cuts will total about 13 percent for the remainder of the year to compensate for the five months of spending that have already occurred for the current fiscal year.

For federal agencies, the 5.3 percent sequester for non defense amounts to the following monetary decreases: Environmental Protection Agency ($472 million), Department of Energy ($1.9 billion), Department of Interior ($883 million), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ($271 million) and the National Science Foundation ($361 million), according to a report from the White House Office of Management and Budget released March 1. The Interior cuts include the National Park Service ($153 million), the US Fish and Wildlife Service ($127 million), US Geological Survey ($54 million) and the Bureau of Land Management ($75 million). Department of Defense (DoD) research and development programs would decrease by 7.9 percent, roughly $6 billion. (A House-passed continuing resolution to fund the government would cut an additional $2.5 billion to DoD research and development).

In an effort to reduce partisan tensions over the budget, President Obama held several meal discussions with lawmakers this week at the White House. On March 6, the president met with Republican Sens. Kelly Ayotte (NH), Richard Burr (NC), Saxby Chambliss (GA), Dan Coats (IN), Tom Coburn (OK), Bob Corker (TN), Lindsey Graham (SC), John Hoeven (ND), Mike Johanns (NE), Ron Johnson (WI), John McCain (AZ) and Pat Toomey (PA). Two key Senate Republicans whose committees’ have jurisdiction over budget, entitlement and taxation issues, Senate Budget Committee Ranking Member Jeff Sessions (AL) and Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Orin Hatch (UT), did not attend the meetings. The following day, the president met with House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) and House Budget Committee Ranking Member Chris Van Hollen (D-MD).

During the meeting, President Obama said that lawmakers must reach agreement on a comprehensive bipartisan debt reduction plan by the end of July, which coincides with when the federal debt ceiling will need to be addressed. The White House has released a plan for addressing the sequester that would cut defense and non-defense discretionary spending equally by a total of $200 billion below pre-sequestration levels, cut healthcare costs by $600 billion and include $580 billion in revenue, largely through closing tax loopholes that benefit the wealthiest Americans. Chairman Ryan plans to release a debt reduction package in the near future.

The White House plan for addressing sequestration is available here:
www.whitehouse.gov/sequester

To view the Ecological Society of America press release on sequestration, click here:
http://www.esa.org/esablog/ecology-in-policy/ecological-society-of-america-voices-concern-over-us-fiscal-situation/

The OMB report on sequestration’s impacts is available here:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/legislative_reports/fy13ombjcsequestrationreport.pdf

This week, the US House of Representatives passed a Continuing Resolution (CR) to fund the government for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2013, which ends Sept. 30. The bill would prevent a government shutdown by extending federal funding beyond the deadline of the current CR, which ends March 27. The bill (H.R. 933) passed by a vote of 267-151. Fifty-three Democrats joined all but 14 Republicans in supporting the measure.

The bill does not include funding to nullify the overwhelming majority of sequestration cuts to federal agencies that went into effect March 1 as mandated in the Budget Control Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-25) in lieu of Congress failing to come up with a plan to reduce the deficit by $1.2 trillion. According to existing law, sequestration includes across-the-board cuts of 7.9 percent for defense discretionary spending programs and 5.3 percent to non-defense discretionary spending programs.

For DoD, the House bill would shift $10.4 billion to the agency’s operations and maintenance account by cutting $3.6 billion in personnel funds, $2.5 billion in research and development funding and $4.2 billion in equipment procurement. The bill includes a 1.7 percent pay increase for the military, which is exempt from sequestration. For federal government workers, the existing pay-freeze is continued to offset spending increases elsewhere in the bill.

With the exception of the military pay increase, all other funding increases in the bill are allocated within the overall sequestration cuts set by the Budget Control Act. Total post-sequestration funding in the bill amounts to $984 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The bill provides $40 million for the Department of the Interior and the Forest Service to fight wildfires. It also includes a provision to provide additional funding to maintain the launch schedule for new weather satellites, ensuring the continuation of data collection necessary for weather forecasting. In addition, the bill includes $2 billion in additional funding for diplomatic security in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2012 Libya terrorist attack.

The White House has not issued a formal statement in opposition to the bill. House Democratic leadership maintained they would not actively whip their members against the bill, proposed by House Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers (R-KY). House Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Nita Lowey (D-NY), however, expressed disappointment with the spending levels in the final bill.

"Congress' failure to replace sequestration with a balanced and responsible package of spending cuts and revenue increases before March 1st is inexcusable,” said Lowey in a press statement. “The discretionary spending cuts mandated by sequestration will result in job loss and furloughs, slowed economic growth, and diminishment of services and investments that are critical to middle-class families and those who are striving to reach the middle-class. I am hopeful that an agreement can be reached in the coming weeks to restore these irresponsible cuts while reining in long-term debt and deficits."

The Senate has indicated it will change the bill by adding funding from three other major appropriations bills. As passed by the House, the bill includes compromise language for two FY 2013 appropriations bills: the Department of Defense Appropriations Act and the Military, Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Act. The Senate seeks to add FY 2013 funding for the Agriculture, Rural Development and Food and Drug Administration Appropriations Act, the Homeland Security Appropriations Act, and the Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies Appropriations Act. The latter bill provides funding for law enforcement and two key science agencies – the National Science Foundation and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Incorporating the language of actual bills gives federal agencies greater direction and specificity in how to distribute funding than a simple CR does.

The bill would also include minor provisions from other appropriations bills that shift funding from lower priority programs to higher priority programs, much the same way the House-passed bill does with DoD funding. Overall, the Senate-passed bill would seek to give the administration greater flexibility in how to distribute the sequestration cuts. Senate Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) worked with Ranking Member Richard Shelby (R-AL) in drafting the bill and asserted it will be able to garner the necessary 60 votes to clear the Senate. The Senate plans to vote on the bill the week of March 11. Since Congress will be in recess the week the current CR expires, the House has until the end of the week of March 18 to either pass the Senate bill or work to reach an agreement on legislation to avert a government shutdown.

This week, President Obama announced his picks to head two key agencies. Gina McCarthy has been nominated to lead the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Ernest Moniz to head the Department of Energy (DOE).

A native of Boston, McCarthy has been assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation since 2009. Her tenure at EPA has included the promotion of regulations to improve air quality and reduce toxic mercury pollution from power plant facilities.  Prior to her tenure at EPA, McCarthy was commissioner for the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection from 2004-2009. Her state level experience includes time as an environmental regulator in the administration of former Governor Mitt Romney (R-MA).

Moniz is a nuclear physicist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) where he directs the MIT Energy Initiative. During the Clinton administration he served as the Under Secretary of Energy (1997-2001). Prior to that, he served in the administration as Associate Director for Science in the Office of Science and Technology Policy (1995-1997). Moniz headed MIT’s Department of Physics between 1991-1995 before joining the Clinton administration.

The two appointments have been met with praise from conservation groups. Alliance to Save Energy President Kateri Callahan praised Moniz as “a recognized, outspoken and effective energy efficiency advocate during his career in government and academia, which will allow him to thrive in his new DOE role.” Of McCarthy, Natural Resources Defense Council President Frances Beinecke stated: “She's a good listener, a straight shooter and someone who has what it takes to build consensus and find solutions. We can count on her to protect our environment and our health. And she can count on our support as she works to get the job done on behalf of Americans everywhere."

As political tension remains between many Congressional Republicans and the White House over continued efforts by the administration to address climate change, both nominees – whose agencies will be at the forefront in implementing such efforts – can expect contentious confirmation hearings. The reactions from key Senators have not been immediately confrontational, however.

Energy and Natural Resources Committee Ranking Member Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) stated: “I will withhold judgment until I've had a chance to speak to the nominees directly, but my main concern is that both agencies take immediate steps to restore balance to our nation’s energy and environmental policies. That balance has been missing for the past four years but must play a more prominent role going forward if we are to bolster our struggling economy.”

Senate Democratic leaders had more robust sentiments for the nominees. Regarding McCarthy, Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-CA) asserted: “The President could not have picked a more qualified person to lead EPA at this critical time. The combination of her experience, intelligence, energy, and unquestioned expertise will make Gina an effective EPA Administrator. She has a deep understanding that the health and safety of the American people depends on clean air and clean water.”

During the March 7, Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing, relations between committee members and Department of Interior Secretary Sally Jewell were largely cordial. However, several committee Republicans took the opportunity to relay strong concerns with the nominee and prospective actions of the agency she would head.

For Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Ranking Member Lisa Murkowki (R-AK), a continued sticking point is whether the Department of Interior will allow a land exchange that would establish a road corridor through the Izembek National Wildlife Refuge. Approval of the road would ease accessibility of King Cove residents to an all-weather airport in Cold Bay for weather evacuations. The US Fish and Wildlife Service has recommended rejecting the proposal. Murkowski has asserted that she may hold up Jewell’s nomination if the King Cove issue is not addressed to her satisfaction.

“The Fish and Wildlife Service’s preferred alternative would protect the heart of a pristine landscape that congress designated as wilderness and that serves as vital habitat for grizzly bear, caribou and salmon, shorebirds and waterfowl – including 98 percent of the world’s population of Pacific black brant [geese],” asserted Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar in a press statement commenting on the proposal. “After extensive dialogue and exhaustive scientific evaluation, the agency has identified a preferred path forward that will ensure this extraordinary refuge and its wilderness are conserved and protected for future generations.”

Ranking Member Murkowski said that Interior should recommit itself to economic development through energy development. Jewell responded by elaborating on the economic benefits of land conservation. “Public lands are also huge economic engines. Through energy development, through grazing, logging, tourism and outdoor recreation, our lands and waters power our economy and create jobs. Balance is absolutely critical,” said Jewell. She contended that she embraces the Obama administration’s all of the above approach to energy investment that includes both fossil fuels and renewable energy sources.

Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY) criticized Jewell over her position as board member for the National Parks Conservation Association, which he asserted has filed at least 59 lawsuits during her tenure blocking coal plants, uranium production, oil and gas. Jewell said that she played no role in deciding what lawsuits the group filed. She asserted that she would consult Interior’s ethics office before taking any action on issues involving the organization. 

One Republican that may be warm to Jewell is Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN), who seemed to insinuate that Jewell’s resume is more befitting of a Republican administration cabinet pick. "I see you have worked on the Alaska pipeline, that you're an oil and gas engineer. You said you'd actually fracked a gas well. You were a banker for 19 years. You're chief executive officer of a billion-dollar company” said Alexander. He then quipped: "How did you get appointed by this administration?"

Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Ron Wyden (D-OR) has not yet announced when the committee will vote on Jewell, noting that he would like to allow Senators time to get additional questions answers beforehand.

View the full hearing here: http://www.energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/hearings-and-business-meetings?ID=75010617-43f1-462e-8858-3a4ee100315e

On March 5, House Science, Space and Technology Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) announced that freshman Rep. Chris Stewart (R-UT) will serve as the new chairman of the Environment Subcommittee.

The Energy and Environment Subcommittee was split into two separate committees at the beginning of the 113th Congress. The Energy Subcommittee is chaired by Rep. Cynthia Lummis (R-WI) while the Environment Subcommittee was chaired by Rep. Andy Harris (R-MD), who chaired the Energy and Environment Subcommittee during the 112th Congress. Rep. Harris was recently appointed to the House Appropriations Committee where he serves on the Commerce, Justice and Science (CJS) Subcommittee. The CJS Subcommittee decides federal funding levels for science agencies such as the National Science Foundation and the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration.

Before coming to Congress, Rep. Stewart served as Chief Executive Officer for the Shipley Group, a consulting firm that specializes in environmental issues. The organization provides training to clients on federal environmental regulations, such as the National Environmental Policy Act. Stewart sold the company before being sworn into Congress. He is also a decorated Air Force pilot who set three world speed records during his time in the service.

Stewart was quoted in a statement from the committee, expressing gratitude for the new post: “I feel honored to be working with Chairman Lamar Smith and other members of the Committee in overseeing the EPA, researching scientific issues related to environmental policy and climate change, and ensuring that government agencies employ sound science when making decisions,” said Stewart. “I look forward to working with an active and productive subcommittee as we oversee these important issues.”

The 2013 Climate Leadership Conference brought a wide array of different interests together in discussion of efforts to save energy and mitigate the impacts of climate change. The Ecological Society of America (ESA) was a supporting partner for the event. Other partnering organizations included the Alliance to Save Energy, the Business Council for Sustainable Energy, the Climate Institute, the Sustainability Consortium, the World Resources Institute, and the World Wildlife Fund Climate Savers.

Speakers at the event included business leaders, military officials and senior representatives of government agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which served as the headline sponsor. Acting EPA Administrator Bob Perciasepe discussed the agency’s efforts to serve as a resource for businesses through its Center of Corporate Leadership as well as its Energy Star program, which works to save customers money on their utilities. Jonathan Powers of the White House Council on Environmental Quality elaborated on how the administration’s executive order for all federal agencies to work to address climate change has resulted in a number of collaborations between the government and related interests in the private sector.

Speakers from the business industry included representatives from Coca-Cola, Delta Airlines, IBM, The Hershey Co., Ford Motor Co., Staples Inc. and Verizon. Steve Tochilin, Environmental Sustainability General Manager with Delta, discussed the steps the airline is taking to reduce fuel consumption to lower its expenses. Linden Patton, Chief Climate Product Officer with Zurich Insurance elaborated on the growing costs extreme weather events are having on the insurance industry and on energy prices.

Additional highlights from the conference can be found in two recent posts to ESA’s blog, EcoTone:
http://www.esa.org/esablog/

While a final decision on whether to approve the Keystone XL pipeline is still pending, the Department of State issued a draft environmental impact statement report March 1 that concludes the pipeline’s construction would not have a significant impact on development of Canada oil sands. "Approval or denial of the proposed project is unlikely to have a substantial impact on the rate of development in the oil sands, or on the amount of heavy crude oil refined in the Gulf Coast area," states the report.

It finds that the pipeline would have “no significant impacts to most resources along the proposed Project route” as long as safeguards are followed. The report does acknowledge that the project could lead to an increase in greenhouse gas emissions. The project also identifies several plant and animal species that could be put at risk from construction of the pipeline, including the greater sage grouse, the whooping crane, the Western Prairie Fringed Orchid and the American Burying Beetle. The report asserts, however, that steps can be taken to minimize impacts on these species.

Reactions in Congress were predictably partisan. The House Energy and Commerce Committee pushed several legislative measures last Congress to expedite approval of the pipeline and this year created a “Keystone Clock” highlighting the amount of time that has passed since the initial application was submitted to the State Department. Rep. Lee Terry (R-NE) has introduced the draft of a new bill this Congress to expedite approval of the pipeline.

“The SEIS findings confirm what we already knew – this pipeline is safe and in the best interest of the American people,” asserted House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI) and Energy and Power Subcommittee Chairman Ed Whitfield (R-KY) in a joint statement. “There are no legitimate reasons not to move forward on the landmark jobs project. The president should stand up for families and immediately approve the Keystone XL pipeline,” they continued. “At a time when gas prices are rising toward $4.00 a gallon, we must use every available tool we can to increase America’s access to affordable and secure energy supplies.”

Reaction from Democrats in Congress varied from outright disdain to mild concern. “The draft impact statement appears to be seriously flawed,” stated Energy and Commerce Committee Ranking Member Henry Waxman. “We don’t need this dirty oil.  To stop climate change and the destructive storms, droughts, floods, and wildfires that we are already experiencing, we should be investing in clean energy, not building a pipeline that will speed the exploitation of Canada’s highly polluting tar sands.”  

Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-CA) asserted “I intend to closely review the draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Keystone XL pipeline. I continue to be very concerned about the contribution that the Keystone XL pipeline would make to dangerous climate change.”

The draft environmental impact assessment is subject to a 45 day public comment period before the State Department issues a final decision. For additional information on the assessment process as well as information on how to submit comments, click here: http://www.keystonepipeline-xl.state.gov/

To link directly to the draft assessment, click here:
http://keystonepipeline-xl.state.gov/draftseis/index.htm

This week, Congress passed H.R. 933, a Continuing Resolution (CR) to fund the government for the remainder of current Fiscal Year (FY) 2013, which ends Sept. 30. The bill in effect prevents a government shutdown when the current CR runs out at the end of the month while giving some federal agencies slightly more latitude in how they allocate funding. The measure does not nullify the sequestration of automatic spending cuts (5.3 percent to non-defense programs, 7.9 percent to defense programs) implemented March 1 under the Budget Control Act. President Obama is expected to sign the measure.

The $984 billion bill is altered from the House version in that it adds funding language for the agriculture, homeland security and commerce justice and science appropriations bills. The House version had only incorporated appropriations bills that fund the Department of Defense and Veteran Affairs agencies. Incorporating the language of actual bills gives federal agencies greater direction and specificity in how to distribute funding than what is provided by a simple CR. While overall funding in the bill was not increased, funding levels for several programs within agencies were reshuffled to sustain critical initiatives.

For the National Science Foundation in FY 2013, the Senate-passed bill includes a $221 million increase over FY 2012 for a total of $7.25 billion. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is funded at $17.5 billion in FY 2013, less than the $17.8 billion it received in FY 2012. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration will receive $5 billion for FY 2013, above the $4.9 billion funded in FY 2012. For agriculture research programs, the FY 2013 bill provides $1.074 billion for the Agricultural Research Service (down from $1.09 billion in FY 2012) and $290 million for the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (up from $264 million in FY 2014).

Several Department of Energy (DOE) programs are reduced in the bill. In total, DOE funding for FY 2013 is reduced by $44 million. The reductions include $11 million from energy efficiency and renewable energy programs, $10 million from nuclear energy, $13 million from the DOE Office of Science, and $10 million from the agency’s Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy initiative.

Among the amendments adopted was one from Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) to prohibit the National Science Foundation from funding political science research unless such research was certified to promote the national security or economic interests of the United States. The Senate also adopted by unanimous consent an amendment from Sens. James Inhofe (R-OK) and Kay Hagan (D-NC) to shield farmers who store fuel on their property from an Environmental Protection Agency oil spill prevention rule. Another amendment from Coburn to shift funding within the National Parks Service to ensure national parks are open to the public and allow White House tours to resume failed 44-54. An additional Coburn amendment to temporarily freeze the hiring of federal employees was rejected 45-54. The overwhelming majority of opposition to the latter two amendments came from Senate Democrats.

Over 100 amendments by Senators were filed. However, in order to expedite passage of the bill and allow time to begin debate on the Senate’s FY 2014 budget proposal before the chamber recesses for two weeks, Senate leaders reached a bipartisan agreement to limit amendments considered and the bill passed March 20 by a vote of 73-26. The nay votes were nearly all Republicans with the exception of Jon Tester (D-MT).

The House, which is also adjourning for the next two weeks, passed the final bill the following day by a vote of 318-109. Majorities in both parties voted for the bill, though the bulk of support came from GOP Members. Republicans supported it b a wide margin of 203-27 while Democrats supported it 115-82.

A detailed summary of the bill is available here:
http://www.appropriations.senate.gov/customcf/uploads/e6d20aa3-c579-40d0-b924-2092b4fe50e3/031113%20Summary%20Fiscal%20Year%202013%20Continuing%20Resolution%20FINAL.pdf

The House and Senate recently unveiled their respective budget proposals for the coming Fiscal Year 2014. While the budget resolutions are non-binding, they are intended to serve as a blueprint for House and Senate appropriators as each body drafts appropriations bills that will allocate specific dollar amounts and priorities to federal agencies for the coming fiscal year 2014, which begins Oct 1, 2013. The two budgets differ substantially with respect to priorities.

House

Introduced March 12 by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI), the House proposal (H.Con.Res. 25) seeks to balance the budget over the next ten years through additional discretionary spending cuts as well cuts to healthcare and entitlement programs, including a repeal of most of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (P.L. 111-148) (the budget would retain the law’s Medicare savings provisions). The proposal projects a savings of $4.63 trillion over 10 years and a surplus of $7 billion by fiscal 2023. Whereas the Senate budget proposal seeks to raise revenue, the House proposal seeks to cut taxes further, including full repeal of the Alternative Minimum Tax and reducing the corporate tax rate to 25 percent. The budget does include revenue increases through tax reform, but claims to have no overall net increase in revenue.

The budget prioritizes increased oil and gas development and approval of the Keystone XL pipeline. In order to “stop the government from buying unnecessary land,” the resolution calls for the elimination of an existing requirement that proceeds from Department of Interior lands sales be used to purchase other lands and redirects 70 percent of those proceeds to deficit reduction. The budget proposal also eliminates funding for high-speed rail. While the budget calls for funding for energy security and basic research, it “pares back spending in areas of duplication and non-core functions, like applied and commercial research and development projects best left to the private sector.”

The House passed the FY 2014 Ryan budget on March 21 by a vote of 221-207. All Democrats voted against the measure while all but 10 Republicans voted for it. The Ryan budget was subsequently considered in the Senate as an amendment and voted down by a vote of 40-59.  Sens. Susan Collins (R-ME), Dean Heller (R-NV), Mike Lee (R-UT), Rand Paul (R-KY) and Ted Cruz (R-TX) joined all Senate Democrats and Independents in voting against the measure.

Senate

Introduced March 13 by Senate Budget Committee Chairwoman Patty Murray (D-WA), the Senate proposal (S.Con.Res. 8) is equally divided between spending cuts ($975 billion) and revenue increases ($975 billion). The spending cuts include $493 billion in “domestic savings,” which include a $275 billion reduction in healthcare costs. The additional $482 billion in cuts include a $240 billion reduction in defense spending and a $242 reduction in interest payments. The spending cuts and revenue increases would replace the decade-long sequester cuts. 

The Senate bill also includes $100 billion in jobs and infrastructure spending, including energy infrastructure and research. The plan also emphasizes the need to address climate change and prioritizes funding for the Environmental Protection Agency and other agencies to work to mitigate its impacts. The bill prioritizes scientific research and calls for increased funding for the National Science Foundation, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Department of Energy’s Office of Science. It also calls for sustained investment in Research and Development, Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics education and workforce development “to prevent further loss of the nation's competitive edge.” The Senate proposal does not balance the budget over the next 10 years.

Both bills must pass their respective bodies or the Members of each chamber will see their pay docked for the remainder of the year, due to a provision included in Public Law 113-3, which temporarily eliminates the debt ceiling until May 18. The law only requires that both the House and Senate bodies pass a bill. It does not require the Senate to pass the House’s budget bill or vice versa. While neither bill has a chance of passing both chambers, the priorities set forth in the resolution may be the beginnings for an eventual long-term agreement on deficit reduction.

Senate Democratic leaders intend to hold a final vote on their budget proposal either late Friday, March 22 or on Saturday, March 23.

Additional information on the Murray Senate budget proposal is available here:
http://www.budget.senate.gov/democratic/index.cfm/senatebudget

Additional information Ryan House budget proposal is available here:
http://budget.house.gov/fy2014/

On March 15, House Energy and Commerce Committee Ranking Member Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Energy and Power Subcommittee Chairman Bobby Rush (D-IL) sent a letter to House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI) and Energy and Power Subcommittee Chairman Ed Whitfield (R-KY) requesting a hearing with scientists and other experts on the need to address climate change.

The letter comes in part as a response to a March 5 Energy and Power Subcommittee hearing featuring utility executives on the need for a diverse electricity portfolio. Much of the focus of the testimony from witnesses as well as questions for Members, however, turned to the declining role of coal-fired power plants in providing electricity in light of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposals to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. Waxman and Rush contend that discussion of climate change should not be limited to utility experts, whom some members questioned about their views on global warming during the hearing.  

The letter notes that Chairman Whitfield asked whether one utility company could build a coal plant under EPA’s proposed greenhouse gas regulations and stated “we do know that there is a concerted effort by groups, individuals and others in the country to eliminate some fossil fuels from being used for generating electricity.” The letter goes on to cite various instances from Republican members to focus on EPA’s efforts to address climate change as well as questions on the validity of climate science. “Rep. McKinley questioned whether climate change was caused by human activity,” the letter notes. “While questioning the utility witnesses, he said:  ‘I believe there is global warming and climate change occurring.  But my question to you though is, is it manmade?’”

“Utilities offer valuable perspectives on issues facing the electricity sector and EPA’s proposed rule,” the letter continues. “But since EPA’s proposed carbon pollution standards are a major focus of these hearings, we also need to hear from the scientists and technical experts who can inform the Subcommittee about the dangers of man-made climate change and the closing window for effective action.”

View the full letter here:
http://democrats.energycommerce.house.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Upton-Whitfield-EPA-GHG-Power-Plants-Standard-2013-3-15.pdf

On March 20, the House Science, Space and Technology Subcommittee on Environment convened for a hearing to review the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) process of reviewing scientific advice. Entitled “Improving EPA’s Scientific Advisory Processes,” the hearing sought to ascertain whether legislative improvements are needed for EPA’s Scientific Advisory Board (SAB). The hearing marks the first under the leadership of Environment Subcommittee Chairman Chris Stewart (R-UT), who is skeptical of human-caused climate change.

The committee’s majority Republican members charged that the agency’s processes of considering scientific data are biased.  “Whether it is promulgating air quality regulations that could shut down large swaths of the West, undertaking thinly veiled attacks on the safety of hydraulic fracturing, or pursuing job-killing climate regulations that will have no impact on the climate, EPA’s reputation as a lightning rod for controversy is well known here in Washington and throughout the country,” asserted Chairman Stewart.  “Less well known and understood, however, is the underlying regulatory science and scientific advisory mechanisms that the agency uses to justify its aggressive regulatory approach.”

Two of the three invited witnesses outlined their concerns with the scientific advisory board. Michael Honeycutt, Chief Toxicologist with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality asserted that there has been a lack of scientific experts drawn from  state agencies, industry and the private sector, asserting that the panel’s membership is predominantly from academia.  Roger McClellan, an advisor to Toxicology and Human Health Risk Analysis, asserted that deliberations and actions of the committee may be influenced by federal funding its members have received in the past or may receive in the future.

McClellan endorsed legislation considered last Congress authored by former Chairman Ralph Hall (R-TX) that sought to reform the SAB by amending the 1978 Environmental Research, Development and Demonstration Authorization Act. Entitled the EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act, the legislation sought to strengthen peer-review requirements in order to eliminate potential conflicts of interest as well as increase public comment opportunities. The legislation, introduced during the final months of the 112th Congress, did not make it out of committee. However, Subcommittee Chairman Stewart noted that the committee has developed draft legislation that it intends to move during the current 113th Congress.

Environment Subcommittee Ranking Member Suzanne Bonamici (D-OR) criticized the legislation as hampering SAB’s scientific review process. “These provisions appear to tie the EPA’s hands by denying the agency access to a vast pool of our country’s most expert scientists and researchers in environmental science and health,” stated Bonamici. While declaring support for industry participation in the scientific review process, Bonamici contended that the draft legislation proposed by the majority “undermines ethics requirements and other requirements that have governed thousands of advisory boards throughout the executive branch since 1972, with the end result being an overrepresentation of industry voices on Science Advisory Boards.” Bonamici further noted that “scientists already recuse themselves from activities that directly or indirectly relate to funding decisions that affect them” and asserted that “suggesting that American scientists and researchers are adversaries of good science is not good for our country.”

The third witness, Francesca Grifo, Senior Scientist and Science Policy Fellow at the Union of Concerned Scientists, took issue with the notion that the SAB’s current make-up lends itself to bias. “We’re conflating conflict of interest and bias. I think that’s what we need to really look at, getting committees that have no conflict of interest or very minimal. It’s not about industry or non-industry. It’s about bias and conflict of interest. We’re going to find people with bias and conflicts in industry and in academia. The point of submitting a lot of information, the point of having a lot of opportunities for public comment is to be able to allow the agencies to get it right.”

View the full hearing here:
http://science.house.gov/press-release/subcommittee-discusses-need-improve-epa-scientific-advisory-process

On March 13, the House Science, Space and Technology Subcommittee on Research held a hearing entitled “STEM Education: Industry and Philanthropic Initiatives.” The hearing sought to examine private sector initiatives to advance Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) Education.

There was bipartisan consensus among committee leaders that promoting STEM Education is important to economic development in the US. “America lags behind other nations when it comes to STEM education. American students rank 23rd in math and 31st in science.  These are troubling statistics that could spell disaster in the future.  We have to invest in STEM education if we want to remain globally competitive in the 21st Century” asserted Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX). “A well-educated and trained STEM workforce undergirds our future economic prosperity. But we have to capture and hold the desire of our nation’s youth to study science and engineering so they will want to pursue these careers.”

In his opening statement, Research Subcommittee Chairman Larry Bucshon (R-IN) stated that the government should work to improve management of its science investments. “The federal government spends over three billion dollars per year across 13 federal agencies on STEM initiatives and projects,” he said. “A GAO report completed in January of 2012 concluded a need for strategic planning to better manage the overlap of federal STEM programs. GAO suggested the Office of Science and Technology Policy should work with agencies and produce a government wide strategy for STEM initiatives that ensures efficiency and eliminates duplication and ineffective programs.”

Research Subcommittee Ranking Member Daniel Lipinski (D-IL) reinforced the important role of federal funding in the US maintaining its status as a leader in scientific advancements. “If the US wants to remain the global leader in innovation and technology, we have to tackle these challenges with an ‘all hands on deck’ approach,” stated Lipinski. “Unfortunately, our federal investments in STEM education…have stagnated and are even being questioned. This is not a good strategy for educating and training our next generation of STEM workers and strengthening American competitiveness.”

Shelly Esque, President of the Intel Foundation and Vice President of Intel Legal and Corporate Affairs, noted the importance of collaborations between the public sector, businesses and NGOs in promoting science education. “Our goal is always to maximize the impact of our investment by using our funding and influence to bring together coalitions that can greatly increase the scope and scalability of what we could do on our own,” said Esque. “We believe that governments and their agencies are essential partners for scaling solutions. We believe other corporations bring real world experience and pragmatism - and often the kinds of marketing and communications skills that help to tell the story of critical work to a larger audience.”

Museum Science and Industry Vice President of Education and Guest Services Andrea Ingram noted the important role federal agencies - specifically the National Science Foundation (NSF), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) - play in sustaining STEM investment. “Without the programmatic support that NSF, NOAA, and NASA offer through these nationally competitive STEM education grants, we will lose sources of new leadership and ideas at a critical time,” said Ingram. “This loss will be a detriment to our economy because we will have failed to prepare our next generation of innovators and scientists.”

Freshman Congresswoman Elizabeth Esty (D-CT) asked witnesses to comment on the value of STEM training for those who pursue careers outside of the science fields, including those who “become Members of Congress.” Ingram responded “fundamentally, science is about figuring out the world all around you and if people don’t have the basic strategies that they need to understand what’s happening in their environments and to make choices for their health and well-being and their environment, we’re not going to have a population that’s advocating for the right things, advocating for the right policies and making the right choices in their lives.”

Bob Smith, Vice President and Chief Technology Officer for Engineering and Technology of Honeywell Aerospace added that “We live in a technological world…unless there is a clear understanding of how those technologies work and how they are beneficial or how they can actually be dangerous, I think we have a real risk of having a competitiveness problem worldwide.”

View the full hearing here: http://science.house.gov/hearing/subcommittee-research-stem-education-industry-and-philanthropic-initiatives

In a 7-1 ruling, the US Supreme Court on March 20 upheld Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations for stormwater runoff on logging roads in the Pacific Northwest. The ruling legally affirms that logging roads are not industrial point-source pollution that require permits under the Clean Water Act.

The ruling effectively reverses an Appeals Court ruling in the consolidated cases of Decker v. Northwest Environmental Defense Center and Georgia-Pacific West v. Northwest Environmental Defense Center and upholds an EPA rule that formally exempted logging roads from the NPDES program. In 2010, the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled that two logging roads in Oregon’s Tillamook state forest were point sources of water contamination that was not “natural” and consequently, no longer exempt from Clean Water Act permit requirements. EPA maintains that water from logging roads is categorized as a “nonpoint” pollution source the same as runoff from a farmer’s field and consequently does not qualify as industrial pollution.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, who drafted the opinion, maintained that EPA’s reading of its own regulations is entitled to deference from the court in this instance. The lone dissent came from Justice Antonin Scalia, who asserted that the ruling give EPA too much deference in determining the meaning of their rules. In his dissent, Scalia noted how EPA had revised the rule shortly before the Supreme Court took up oral arguments to make it clearer. Kennedy asserted that the justices had looked to the rule as it was before the change, regardless.

Justice Stephen Breyer recused himself from the case as his brother, US District Judge Charles Breyer, was appointed to sit on the appeals court that issued the overturned ruling.

The Ecological Society of America joined nine other organizations in a letter to President Obama requesting that the Administration issue a final regulation listing the reticulated python, the DeSchauensee’s anaconda, the green anaconda, the Beni anaconda and the boa constrictor as injurious under the Lacey Act. 

The letter noted that “On March 12, 2010, the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) issued a proposed rule to list nine large constrictor snakes as injurious under the Lacey Act. Despite the fact that scientists with the USGS concluded that all nine species presented a “high” or “medium” risk of becoming invasive, on January 23, 2012, FWS issued a final rule stating that only four of those nine species would be listed as injurious under the Lacey Act: Burmese pythons, yellow anacondas, and northern and southern African pythons. At that time, FWS stated that the remaining five species of snakes were still being considered for listing. Of the five that were not included in the final rule, three are currently found in the U.S. pet trade — boa constrictors, reticulated pythons, and to a lesser extent, green anacondas.” 

The organizations argued that issuance of a final rule listing the five remaining snake species as injurious is essential to adequately protect the interests of wildlife as well as human safety. View the letter here:
http://www.esa.org/esa/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/LCS_Letter_to_White_House_Final.pdf

On March 21, the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) announced it is seeking public comments on a supplemental draft environmental impact statement that includes analysis of how offshore oil and gas development can impact marine mammals and the Native Alaskan communities that depend on the animals as natural resources.

The supplemental draft EIS will help NOAA as it works to minimize disturbance to marine life caused by vessels and oil and gas drilling activities and improve implementation of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972. The EIS will be used by the agency to assess the number of animals that can be adversely affected by energy development in the region by US citizens while still having negligible impact on the species or reducing their availability to the Native Alaskan communities that depend on them. NOAA aims to issue its final EIS in early 2014.

The public comment period will begin on Friday, March 29, 2013 and extend through Tuesday, May 28, 2013. Public comments can be submitted using the Federal eRulemaking Portal (http://www.regulations.gov) or by visiting the project page on the Office of Protected Resources website. Comments can also be faxed to 301-713-0376, Attn: Candace Nachman.

NOAA’s Fisheries Service will also accept written comments sent to the following address:

Office of Protected Resources
NOAA Fisheries
1315 East West Highway, Rm. 13115
Silver Spring MD 20910

For additional information on the EIS, click here: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/eis/arctic.htm

Introduced in House

H.R. 1154 – the Bringing Reductions to Energy’s Airborne Toxic Health Effect (BREATHE) Act – Introduced March 14 by Reps. Jared Polis (D-CO) and Matt Cartwright (D-PA), the bill would amend the Clean Air Act to eliminate the exemption for aggregation of emissions from oil and gas sources. This would bring the oil and gas industry under the Act’s jurisdiction concerning air pollution generated from drilling wells. The bill has been referred to the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

H.R. 1175, the Focused Reduction of Effluence and Stormwater runoff through Hydraulic Environmental Regulation (FRESHER) Act – Introduced March 14 by Reps. Cartwright (D-PA) and Polis (D-CO), the bill would remove the Clean Water Act oil and gas industry exemption regarding stormwater runoff permits. The bill would also establish a study to assess the effects of energy development related to hydraulic fracturing on surface water.

Considered by House Committee

On March 21, the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans and Insular Affairs held a hearing on the following bills:

H.R. 910, the Sikes Act Reauthorization Act of 2013 – Introduced by Rep. John Fleming (R-LA), the bill reauthorizes the Sikes Act, a law requiring military installations to develop and implement integrated natural resource management plans in cooperation with federal and state fish and wildlife agencies.

H.R. 1080, to amend the Sikes Act to promote the use of cooperative agreements under such an Act for land management related to Department of Defense readiness activities – Introduced by Rep. Madeleine Bordallo (D-Guam) the bill would amend the Sikes Act to facilitate interagency cooperation in conservation programs to help avoid or reduce restrictions on military training activities. 

Introduced in Senate

S. 545 – the Hydropower Improvement Act – Introduced March 13 by Energy and Natural Resources Committee Ranking Member Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), the bill would provide the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission with the capacity to expand the nation’s hydropower capacity.  The bill’s six bipartisan original cosponsors include Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Ron Wyden (D-OR). The bill has been referred to the Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

Approved by Senate Committee

On March 15, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee passed 19 public lands bills, including the following:

S. 23, the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Conservation and Recreation Act – Introduced by Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI), the bill would designate land and inland water within the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore in Michigan as wilderness.

S. 26, the Bonneville Unit Clean Hydropower Facilitation Act – Introduced by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT), the bill would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to facilitate the development of hydroelectric power on the Diamond Fork System of the Central Utah Project.

S. 112, the Alpine Lakes Wilderness Additions and Pratt and Middle Fork Snoqualmie Rivers Protection Act – Introduced by Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA), the bill would expand the Alpine Lakes Wilderness in Washington state as well as designate the state’s Middle Fork Snoqualmie River and Pratt River as wild and scenic rivers.

S. 157, the Denali National Park Improvement Act – Introduced by Ranking Member Murkowski (R-AK), the bill would provide improvements to the Denali National Park and Preserve in Alaska.

S. 247, the Harriet Tubman National Historical Parks Act – Introduced by Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD), the bill would establish the Harriet Tubman National Historical Park in Auburn, New York, and the Harriet Tubman Underground Railroad National Historical Park in the state of Maryland’s Caroline, Dorchester, and Talbot Counties.

S. 311, the Lower Mississippi Area Study Act – Introduced by Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA), the bill would direct the Secretary of the Interior to study the suitability and feasibility of designating sites in the Lower Mississippi River Area in the State of Louisiana as a unit of the National Park System.

A full listing of bills approved by the committee is available here:
http://www.energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/democratic-news?ID=da1011e9-6b47-4aff-8fbd-b164bd81ba6a

On March 20, the Environment and Public Works Committee approved the following bill:

S. 603, the Water Resources Development Act – Introduced by Environment and Public Works Committee Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Ranking Member David Vitter (R-LA), the comprehensive legislation authorizes Army Corps of Engineers’ programs related to flood risk management, hurricane and storm risk reduction and environmental restoration. The committee approved the bill by a unanimous vote.