Skip to Content
Streetsblog Los Angeles home
Streetsblog Los Angeles home
Log In
DC Streetsblog

GOP Senators Protest Evaluating the Climate Impacts of Transport Projects

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Dear Ms. Sutley:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sincerely,

James M. Inhofe

John Barrasso

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog Los Angeles

Incomplete Streets Part 2: in OC Caltrans Ignores Caltrans Policy on Bike and Pedestrian Needs

Caltrans has a policy requiring Complete Streets in its projects, but Caltrans Districts routinely ignore it

July 24, 2024

Supervisor Hahn and Councilmember Ricks-Oddie: “Pull the Plug” on Metro/Caltrans 91 Freeway Expansion in Long Beach

Supervisor Janice Hahn: “I think it’s pretty clear that we’re going to need to pull the plug" on planned mile-long $174 million 91 Freeway project

July 23, 2024

L.A. Street Vendors Celebrate Removal of No-Vending Restrictions in Huge Win Against City

The victory is the product of a decade-plus-long battle to legalize sidewalk vending on our city streets

July 23, 2024
See all posts