September 25, 2009

In This Issue


On September 24, the Senate voted 77-21 in favor of its 2010 Interior-EPA 2010 spending bill. The $32.1 billion provided by the measure is $4.5 billion above 2009 levels, but $225 million below the White House request and $200 million below the measure passed in the House.

Funding highlights:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): $10.19 billion ($2.5 billion above 2009 levels)

  • $3.63 billion for water and sewer infrastructure (more than double 2009 levels)
  • $2.88 billion for environmental programs and management activities (a 20 percent increase over 2009 levels). This includes:
    • $112 million ($17 million increase) for climate protection activities—fully funding EPA’s recently-finalized greenhouse gas reporting rule
    • $478 million for environmental protection programs focused on regional water bodies ($400 million goes to the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative)
  • $1.31 billion for Superfund programs and activities
  • $1.11 billion for state- and tribe-run environmental regulation and protection activities. This includes $227 million for air grants (a $2.5 million increase) and $229 million for water pollution control grants (a $11 million increase)
  • $843 million for science and technology programs (a $53 million increase)
  • $60 million for Diesel Emission Reduction Act grants

Firefighting and fuels reduction on federal lands: $3.56 billion for Forest Service and Interior efforts to fight and prevent wildfires (an increase of $576 million or 19 percent above 2009 levels)

Bolstering public land management agencies: $6 billion for basic operations at National Parks, National Forests, National Wildlife Refuges and on Bureau of Land Management lands. This is an increase of $350 million or 6 percent above 2009 levels

  • National Park Service: $2.71 billion ($186 million above 2009 levels)
  • Forest Service: $5.29 billion ($552 billion above 2009 levels). This includes $307 million for forestry research activities (an increase of $11 million)
  • Fish and Wildlife Service: $1.608 billion ($162.5 million above 2009 levels). This includes:
    • $488.6 million for national wildlife refuges
    • $271.2 million for the protection of threatened and endangered species
    • $859.7 million for other wildlife and habitat conservation programs
    • $42 million to begin scientific monitoring and assessments to respond to climate change
    • $13 million for youth conservation and careers in nature programs

Bureau of Land Management: $1.145 billion (an increase of $106 million or 10.2 percent above 2009 levels. This includes:

  • $965.7 million to manage recreation, resource protection, habitat conservation, and energy production on public lands, including an increase of $16.1 million for environmental studies and rules for renewable wind and solar power production
  • $67.5 million (an increase of $26.5 million) to protect wild horses
  • $15.8 million to inventory and clean up abandoned mine sites
  • $15 million to respond to climate change in the West
  • $5 million for a 21st Century Youth Conservation Corps

US Geological Survey: $1.044 billion (an increase of $60.5 million or 5.8 percent above 2009 levels). The added funds will go toward expanding the work of the agency to better support Interior land management agencies, as well as other federal agencies, state, tribal and local governments. Increases include:

  • $22 million for expanded global climate change research
  • $5 million to enhance the National Streamgage Network
  • $3 million for renewable energy research
  • $4.1 million for Arctic ecosystems research


Minerals Management Service: $181.5 million for oversight, regulation, and royalty collection for outer continental shelf energy production. This includes an increase of $24 million for developing a renewable offshore energy program.

Protecting lands through the Land and Water Conservation Fund: $419 million (an increase of $127 million or 43 percent above 2009 levels) to protect areas within national park, forest, monument, and wildlife refuge boundaries. Funding includes:

  • $262 million for direct protection and conservation of land through acquisitions
  • $55 million for conservation easements through the Forest Legacy program
  • $54 million through the Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund for acquisitions associated with Habitat Conservation Plans
  • $35 million for state grants through the Park Service’s State Assistance program

The Senate addressed a number of amendments related to separate issues. Of particular note:

  • EPA authority over emissions: Several Republican senators, including Senators Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and David Vitter (R-LA) put forth amendments to limit the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, but all were denied floor votes.
  • Wildfire funds: The Senate unanimously agreed to include a measure from Energy and Natural Resources Chair Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) to create a contingency fund to pay for catastrophic wildfires. The measure is similar to a bill Bingaman introduced earlier this year (S 561). Although the House easily passed its companion bill, the House’s Interior spending bill contains a different version of a wildfire fund that is more consistent with the Obama administration’s views. For a comparison of the proposed wildfire funds, see the July 31 edition of the ESA Policy News at:
  • Black carbon research: The chamber approved Senator Tom Carper’s (D-DE) amendment requiring EPA to study the source and impacts of black carbon emissions and to identify mitigation and research and development opportunities.
  • Superfund cleanup: The chamber approved by voice vote an amendment from Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) to accelerate the cleanup of the Tar Creek Superfund Site in Oklahoma.
  • Coburn amendments: Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) presented eight amendments for consideration, two of which he withdrew. The Senate unanimously accepted several amendments, but voted down his measure to divert money from the Land and Water Conservation Fund to help federal agencies reduce their maintenance backlogs.


Senators Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and John Kerry (D-MA) recently confirmed that they will introduce their draft climate change bill next Wednesday, September 30. Boxer says her Environment and Public Works Committee will conduct a markup soon thereafter—some sources suggest the markup is slated for the week of October 12 or October 19. Of the other panels with jurisdiction, it appears only the Finance Committee will hold a formal markup, focusing on international trade and allowance allocation provisions. The Agriculture Committee and Kerry’s Foreign Relations Committee, plan to provide input without conducting a markup. The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee may also continue to weigh in. The committee was in charge of the energy end of the equation, but finished work on its bill, the American Clean Energy Leadership Act of 2009, before the House passed its climate and energy package. Contacts on the Hill suggest that the committee will reevaluate as new pieces fall into place. For more information on the original energy bill, see the June 19 edition of the ESA Policy News at:

While announcing his bill’s upcoming introduction, Kerry stressed that it would be a “pollution reduction” rather than “cap-and-trade” measure, echoing a change in rhetoric already adopted by President Obama and key members of his administration. Still, Kerry confirmed that the bill includes emission allowances and a marketplace, and that it builds upon the House-passed bill, HR 2454, although not without some departures.

Senate aides have suggested that Boxer met demands from the left to raise the 2020 emissions reduction target from the 17 percent mark set in HR 2454 to 20 percent. According to these aides, Boxer will argue for the increase on the grounds that US greenhouse gas emissions fell 6 percent in 2008 because of the poor economy and a shift from coal to natural gas. Whether this will satisfy the more conservative Democrats on her panel remains to be seen. Central to the bill’s success, both in committee and on the floor, is the support of key moderates like coal-state Senators Max Baucus (D-MT) and Arlen Specter (D-PA). Support from these lawmakers could help climate legislation proponents secure additional votes from moderates on the floor, where the bill is at risk of a GOP-led filibuster. So far neither Baucus nor Specter is on board.

Meanwhile, Kerry is taking the lead in negotiating with moderate Republicans, whose support is increasingly important as conservative Democrats solidify their opposition. Kerry and Boxer will look to lawmakers including Olympia Snowe (R-ME), John McCain (R-AZ), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), and Richard Lugar (R-IN) for backing.

Although many senators are making a concerted effort to keep climate legislation moving, healthcare reform remains at the forefront. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) recently said his chamber would “push climate as hard and as fast as we can,” although he also conceded the bill might have to wait until early 2010. Even then the timeline remains uncertain, although some aides predict a cut-off point of April 2010, due to midterm election politics.

Action from Congress is not the only path to reducing emissions, but virtually all key players— whether government officials, industry representatives, or environmental advocates—maintain that it would be the best approach. White House energy and climate adviser Carol Browner said that if Congress does not act, industry will likely be forced to reduce emissions via a series of court rulings. “Courts are starting to take control of the issue,” she said, citing a recent New York court decision to allow lawsuits against greenhouse gas emitters on the grounds that they are a public nuisance. She went on to say that a patchwork system of standards would create uncertainty for businesses and would not benefit anyone. “We need a unified set of rules for the country…this is best done through legislation,” she said.


On September 22, several world leaders delivered speeches at the UN Summit on Climate Change, underscoring the importance of an international effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The summit was the strongest indication so far that an international agreement will indeed emerge from upcoming climate negotiations, although this agreement may be substantially different from what its supporters originally expected. As it stands now, December’s negotiations in Copenhagen may not yield a legal international treaty, but rather a collection of pledges from the 190 countries participating to take steps independently.

Success of any kind in Copenhagen will hinge on the actions of world’s top emitters: the US and China. President Obama will travel to Beijing in November in an effort to reach a bilateral agreement on emission reductions and low-carbon technologies. As Copenhagen approaches, China is increasingly demonstrating its willingness to participate in international efforts. At the UN summit, Chinese President Hu Jintao vowed to make climate change the center of his country’s long-term economic and social development plans, to establish “mandatory national targets” for reducing emissions, and to work to increase the size of China’s forests.

Meanwhile, India’s Environmental Minister, Jairam Ramesh, recently said that that his country is drafting legislation to limit its carbon footprint and set targets for reducing emissions. India had previously refused to set limits on emissions, arguing that its per-capita emissions were far below those of developed nations.

As other heavy emitters become increasingly willing to participate, the international community is placing additional pressure on the US, stressing the importance of its leadership in Copenhagen. Several European leaders have criticized Congress for falling behind schedule on climate legislation.

Lawmakers agree that having a cap-and-trade law would put the US in prime position for the upcoming negotiations, but many are also wary of rushing the important bill purely to strengthen the nation’s diplomatic portfolio. Acting hastily could lock the US into problematic policies, some say, or even undermine negotiations with policies that other countries dislike, such as industry relief to keep US exports competitive—a form of intervention that other nations could view as a tariff.

Todd Stern, the State Department climate envoy, countered international criticism, saying that the US is working as quickly as possible while balancing several other national priorities. He pointed to the $80 billion directed toward low-carbon technologies in the 2009 economic stimulus package, as well Environmental Protection Agency regulations to control greenhouse gas emissions. Obama delivered a similar message in his own UN summit speech, highlighting his administration’s climate achievements and drawing attention to the House-passed energy and climate bill. He also vowed to take a personal role in moving climate legislation through the Senate, where he has so far focused on healthcare reform. Last spring, the president personally lobbied several undecided House Democrats as the chamber geared up for a floor vote.

But with chances of the Senate passing a cap-and-trade bill growing slimmer, Obama may need to focus on the country’s non-legislative climate action to gain leverage this December, demonstrating significant progress on multiple fronts. Without a law in place, though, an international treaty (rather than country-by-country commitments) seems even less probable. Stern recently acknowledged that international negotiations will likely extend beyond Copenhagen, and the UN has already scheduled additional talks for May and November in 2010, with more possible if sufficient progress is not made in December.


Jane Lubchenco, head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), voiced her opposition to ocean planning and aquaculture provisions in a sweeping bill from House Natural Resources Chair Nick Rahall (D-WV). Rahall’s bill, HR 3534, would overhaul the federal government’s approach to oil and gas leasing, oversight, and royalties. For more information on HR 3534, see the September 11 edition of the ESA Policy News at:

Lubchenco, along with several other top administration officials, is currently working on a much broader marine plan, following an executive order from President Obama. For more information on this effort, see the August 28 edition of the ESA Policy News at:

The task force’s efforts are focused on creating a marine spatial planning system to encourage a more holistic and therefore sustainable approach to offshore project permitting. The revised federal permitting system would no longer look at projects one at a time; it would consider the entire ecosystem. To achieve this, the marine plan may eventually lead to an “ocean zoning” system, which would allocate marine resources and areas among different activities and interests such as fishing, conservation, and energy development.

Lubchenco’s primary objections to Rahall’s bill include:

  • Regional energy planning councils (Section 602): The NOAA administrator criticized language creating regional councils to prepare strategic plans for offshore energy development. While these plans would also create marine spatial planning systems, their exclusive focus on energy could, according to Lubchenco, undermine efforts to bring diverse marine interests under a single, comprehensive plan.
  • Changes in aquaculture oversight (Section 704): Lubchenco also objected to language removing NOAA authority to permit and regulate offshore aquaculture. She argued that this change would impair her agency’s ability to assist with aquaculture operations, removing the authority necessary to ensure fishery sustainability and to promote ecosystem-focused resource management. A proponent of national aquaculture policy, the administrator recommended that Section 704 be removed entirely, calling for a national policy that “clearly describes who’s responsible, and for what and where, with permitting and checks and balances.”
  • The Ocean Resources Conservation and Assistance Fund: Lubchenco objected to the creation of this fund, saying that the Obama administration typically opposes the creation of new mandatory spending. The fund would set aside a portion of outer continental shelf revenues for regionally based ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes restoration grants. If the fund is created, Lubchenco recommended that a portion of the resources go towards ocean conservation and protection.


On September 23, the House Energy and Environment Subcommittee conducted a markup of legislation to expand research on potentially deadly algae blooms, which threaten marine ecosystems, coastal fisheries, and in some cases human health. The bill, which would expand funding for research into the detection, prediction, and elimination of the blooms, has received support from leadership on both sides of the aisle, as well as the Obama administration.

The bill would direct funding towards research into coastal “dead zones,” hypoxic areas that result when large algae blooms decompose. Excessive levels of nitrogen and phosphorous in the water—often a result of agricultural runoff—are frequently the culprit behind large-scale blooms. Since hypoxia is primarily an ocean problem resulting from inland pollution, federal pollution authorities have limited options for controlling it via regulations. The Environmental Protection Agency, for example, currently relies largely on incentive-based or voluntary provisions.

The Senate version of the bill, S 952, cleared the Commerce Committee earlier this year, raising the program’s authorized budget to $40 million. Existing legislation sets 2010 funding levels at $30 million. The House version does not yet include specific funding figures but staff have indicated that the two bills will be very similar.


The polar bear was listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act on May 14, 2008. At that time, there were roughly 40 pending permits for importing trophies—polar bear parts collected during sport hunts—from Canada. Since the threatened status immediately bans the import of marine mammals and related products under the Marine Mammals Protection Act (MMPA), all 40 trophies remain in storage.

To address this, Representative Don Young (R-AK) introduced HR 1054, a bill to amend MMPA in a way that would allow trophies collected before May 14, 2008 into the US. Young has positioned the legislation in terms of both property rights and conservation. Permits cost $1,000 a piece—Young says that by leaving the trophies in Canada, the US is forgoing $40,000 in permit fee that could go towards polar bear conservation.

The Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) recently weighed in, stating that while it favors returning the trophies to permit holders, it is concerned that Young’s bill will amend MMPA in a way that could open the door for additional imports. A spokesperson for Young said that it could be difficult to finalize permits without amending MMPA but that his main interest is in returning the trophies to their owners, and he remains open to suggestions.


Greenhouse Gas Reporting: On September 22, less than a week after the White House Office of Management and Budget completed its review, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized its greenhouse gas reporting rule. The rule will establish a national registry for greenhouse gas emissions, providing policymakers with important data on which to base future emissions legislation. Facilities emitting more than 25,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide will be required to collect emissions data starting on January 1, 2010—the first reports will be due in March 2011. For more information, see the April 23 edition of the ESA Policy News at:

Fuel economy and emissions standards: On September 15, the Obama administration rolled out a suite of auto standards that will mandate increased fuel economy and establish the first-ever nationwide greenhouse gas standard on automobiles. EPA and the Department of Transportation worked together on the proposals, which they say will prevent 950 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions during their four-year lifespan. The rules have some built-in flexibility to help automakers meet the new standards during early on, and President Obama, speaking at a General Motors assembly plant, said the national standards will help the auto industry rebound by eliminating the uncertainty associated with state efforts to set their own emissions standards. For more information, see the May 22 edition of the ESA Policy News at:

The two agencies have until March 31, 2010 to finalize the rules. Before the rules can go into effect, EPA must finalize its proposed endangerment finding, a step that will likely occur by next spring, or possibly much earlier depending on the outcome of the congressional climate debate.

Review for higher ethanol blends: As EPA considers raising the ethanol limit in gasoline, Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) has introduced legislation that would require the agency to conduct an extensive review before authorizing any increases. Earlier this year, an ethanol industry coalition formally petitioned EPA for a Clean Air Act waiver that would increase the maximum ethanol concentration from 10 to 15 percent. Collins’s bill would prohibit any increases until EPA has reviewed and formally responded to a report from its Science Advisory Board, detailing the impacts of the proposed increase on emissions, engine performance, and the ability of fueling infrastructure to prevent widespread “misfueling” by consumers whose vehicles cannot run properly on higher ethanol blends. The legislation has several Democratic co-sponsors.

Smog Standard: EPA will reconsider the federal standard for airborne ozone, or smog. In 2008, the Bush administration tightened the ozone standard from 84 to 75 parts per billion, but critics argued that the new standard still failed to meet the requirements of the Clean Air Act. Following lawsuits from environmental and public health groups—as well as suits from industry groups to weaken ozone limits—EPA will review the standard to determine whether the Bush administration’s rule “should be maintained, modified, or otherwise reconsidered.” EPA plans to issue a proposed rule in December and sign a final rule before September 2010.


Passed in the House

  • Changes to national forest boundaries: On September 15, the House easily cleared a bill (HR 1002) that would add hundreds of acres to North Carolina’s Pisgah National Forest. The bill’s sponsor, Representative Heath Shuler (D-NC) says that the additional land will provide better access to Catawba Falls, a popular tourist destination in the forest. The bill was supported by both the state of North Carolina and the US Forest Service. The chamber also approved a bill (HR 940) allowing the sale of approximately 50 acres of the Kisatchie National Forest in Louisiana.
  • Water recycling: The House passed three bills to bolster wastewater recycling programs in the West, tapping the Bureau of Reclamation’s wastewater and groundwater reclamation program. Known as Title XVI, the program provides as much as 25 percent of the funds for authorized projects. The bills would authorize: $12 million for a water reclamation project in Salt Lake County, UT (HR 2265); an additional $20 million for the construction of a water recycling plant and associated infrastructure in (HR 2522) in Ventura County, CA; and a water reclamation project in Hermiston, Oregon (HR 2741).
  • Illegal fishing (HR 1080): Would grant federal agencies more power to investigate illegal fishing and strengthen penalties for violations. Of particular concern are violations of international fishing accords in US waters, as well as countries that persist in harvesting unsustainable amounts of fish. The bill would increase the penalty for international violations and provide $5 million in annual assistance to countries struggling to police their own fisheries. To contend with countries that fail to comply with international fisheries conventions, Congress may consider unilateral action. The 2007 reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation Act called on the Commerce Department to identify noncompliant nations—unless these nations take corrective measures within two years, they face US sanctions.
  • Coral reef protection (HR 860): Would give the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration additional authority to respond to actions harming coral reefs. For more information on HR 860, see the March 5 edition of the ESA policy news at:

Nonbinding Resolutions: The House recently approved two nonbinding resolutions, statements that do not become laws but instead formally record Congress’s position on a particular matter.

  • Recognition of experimental forests and ranges (H.Con.Res. 95): Recognizes the importance of national forest system’s 77 experimental forests and ranges, and the contribution these areas have made to scientific understanding, environmental conservation, and “ensuring that natural resources in the United States remain a source of pride and enjoyment.”
  • Recognition of the US hardwoods industry (H.Res.81): Acknowledges the importance and sustainability of the industry and urges that its products receive full consideration by programs aimed at constructing green buildings.

Support from the Obama Administration: The Fish and Wildlife Service recently spoke out in support of several bird-related proposals, including:

  • Reauthorization of the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act (HR 2213): Would reauthorize an act passed in 2000, which established a grant program to support public-private efforts to preserve migratory bird habitat throughout the Western Hemisphere. Between 2002 and 2007, the program supported 225 projects that covered more than 3 million acres of bird habitat. HR 2213 would authorize appropriations for an additional five years, and increase funding levels from $8 million in 2010 to $20 million in 2015.
  • Reauthorization of Junior Duck Stamp Program (HR 3537): Would reauthorize the Junior Duck Stamp Conservation and Design Program Act of 1994 through fiscal 2015. The program is designed to teach K-12 students about wetlands, waterfowl, and scientific observation—participating students use what they learn to design a stamp for the Junior Duck Stamp art contest. The winning stamp is sold throughout the next year, and proceeds are used to finance conservation education and awards for participating students, teachers, and schools.

Sources: Environment and Energy Daily, Greenwire, ClimateWire, Politico, the Washington Post