KID touts 10-year, $58M water saving plan
BY JOHN TRUMBO, TRI-CITY HERALD STAFF WRITER
Published: 05/23/09
Kennewick Irrigation District officials have a $58 million water conservation plan they believe not only will save water and help fish, but also improve service.
An added bonus to the 10-year plan, which would tap the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation for most of the money, is it could help the 55,000-acre district make the transition from being an agency that historically served mostly farmers to one that increasingly strains to satisfy thousands of urban water customers.
Urbanization has become KID's biggest obstacle to customer satisfaction, as evidenced by years of rising rates with no measurable improvement in service.
But Scott Revell, interim district manager, said a big investment in consolidating pumping stations, piping open canals and building reservoirs would make KID's distribution system more efficient and capable of handling changing water demands.
If the improvements bring the district's 21,000 customers water delivered on time, with fewer outages and at an affordable price, more of them would be happy, he said.
The plan, laid out in a 165-page report approved by the KID board in December, would seek $38 million from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, with KID and Washington State Department of Ecology each paying about $10 million.
The next step is to do a feasibility study over the next 8 to 12 months. KID is searching for a consultant to do the study, which could cost about $300,000. The bureau would cover about $218,000, with KID paying $55,000 and the Department of Ecology paying the remaining $37,000, Revell said.
The study will make KID eligible for millions in bureau money through the Yakima River Water Enhancement Program, and would determine priorities for conservation projects.
Seven projects are proposed for the next five years. Each involves adding storage capacity within KID's far-flung canal system or a combination of new piping and pressurization to make water deliveries more consistent. The projects are:
* Adding an in-flow reservoir in the Division IV canal southwest of 45th Avenue and Olympia Street and building a centralized pumping station for $4.2 million. Planned for 2009, if possible.
* Extending the South Edison Street pipeline north of 8th Avenue to eliminate about 3,000 feet of open canal. This would eliminate seepage and evaporation and give more efficient flow. Cost would be $950,000. Planned for 2010.
* A new central pumping station near the Creekstone subdivision south of 10th Avenue would eliminate need for numerous pumps in pressurized service areas in central Kennewick. The Highland Feeder Canal through Creekstone would be widened, deepened and lined to form a 2,600-foot in-flow reservoir. Five miles of a lateral canal would be piped to prevent water losses and improve flow. Cost would be $9 million. Planned for 2010.
* Consolidation of pumps for east Kennewick would involve a new larger pump station near Zintel Canyon that would draw from a 3-acre-foot reservoir. It would eliminate three miles of canal and cost $9.6 million. Planned for 2011.
* Pressurizing piping in the Amon wasteway area on the west side of Kennewick would provide for future development and eliminate water losses. Cost would be $9 million. Planned for 2011.
* Consolidating pumps for the Badger East system would cost $21.9 million. A new pump station near the Amon reservoir west of Meadow Springs subdivision would tie in with an Amon in-flow reservoir and eliminate numerous smaller pumping stations. About 12 miles of piping would replace a portion of the Badger East canal to conserve water. Planned for 2012.
* Building an in-flow reservoir for the Amon system would cost $3.9 million. It would allow the district to regulate flow based on demand and prevent some water loss. Planned for 2013.
The consultants estimated water savings from all of the projects at about 28,000 acre-feet, which is about 27 percent of the 102,000 acre-feet allotted by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to KID. An acre-foot is enough water to cover one acre 12 inches deep.
Water saved would remain in the Yakima River to benefit fish. The consultants' report said the improvements also would mean less chance of contaminants accumulating in the KID system and ending up in the Columbia River as operational spill.
The consultants said replacing dozens of smaller pump stations with just five larger and more efficient pump stations also would produce $307,000 in annual energy savings.
Other projects to eliminate water losses and operational spill are planned in the second five-year period. Most would replace open ditches with piping.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Humans to be Considered in ESA decisions
Ruling: Humans, not just fish, to factor in divvying delta water
The Fresno Bee – 5/22/09
By John Ellis
A federal judge stunned and delighted west-side farmers on Friday, ruling that the federal government must consider the effect on humans -- not just fish -- when allocating delta water.
U.S. District Judge Oliver W. Wanger did not tell officials how to operate the Central Valley Project, and he said it was up to them to manage the massive water pumps in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.
But Wanger said officials must focus not just on protecting the endangered delta smelt when discussing these issues. They also must take into account "the harm being visited upon humans, the community and the environment." He also said officials must explain and justify how they reached their water-allocation decisions.
A few months ago, the federal government in effect reduced the volume of water pumped out of the delta by issuing new rules to protect the smelt. That means west-side growers are receiving less water for crops.
Wanger's ruling Friday raised growers' hopes of getting some of that water back, although the case is far from over.
As Wanger prepared to rule Friday, west-side farmers and members of the Westlands Water District and the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority sat in the courtroom with long faces, expecting the worst. But after a series of losses to environmentalists, they instead found themselves on the winning side.
"The long and short of it for us today is this is a good thing, for the simple fact that it recognizes the impact that is being felt" by farmers and residents of the San Joaquin Valley's west side, said Westlands Water District spokeswoman Sarah Woolf.
Wanger's ruling followed a four-hour hearing on a lawsuit by Westlands and the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority to stop the federal government from enforcing a new management plan for the delta smelt.
The lawsuit was filed in March, more than two months after the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service released a new set of federal rules to protect the smelt. The updated rules -- known as a biological opinion -- were drafted after Wanger had invalidated earlier regulations because they did not comply with the federal Endangered Species Act.
A central piece of the lawsuit sought to nullify the updated smelt-management plan. Wanger made no ruling on that part of the lawsuit. But he found that a second claim -- that the new smelt plan lacked an assessment on the environmental effect on humans -- was valid.
The updated smelt-management plan resulted in a sharp reduction in water deliveries for agricultural and urban users, not only in the San Joaquin Valley, but also in the Bay Area and Southern California. It's not known if Wanger's order will prompt the federal government to increase water deliveries from the delta.
But Wanger made it clear that if the water exports stay at current levels -- which west-side officials say are too low and give no consideration to human needs -- federal officials must explain why.
Wanger said the delta smelt remains endangered and at risk of extinction, but he also said Valley residents are facing adverse environmental effects driven by a persistent drought and a cut in water deliveries.
He said the adverse environmental effects include dust rising from fallowed fields that could lead to a decline in air quality.
High unemployment rates in west-side Valley towns also are an effect of the water decisions, Wanger said.
Wanger's order is in effect through June 30, or when the water temperature in two delta channels -- Old River and Middle River -- reaches 77 degrees Fahrenheit for three days. Higher temperatures can adversely affect the smelt.
The order's temporary nature almost certainly sets up more legal battles between the two sides. James Maysonett, who represented the federal government, asked Wanger on Friday to hold off on his order while it is appealed.
Wanger denied the motion.
Kate Poole, an attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council, said she didn't like Wanger's ruling, but she said no decision had been made on seeking an appeal.
Friday's hearing set up a strange twist: Daniel O'Hanlon, who represented Westlands and the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority, found himself pitted against federal attorneys who for years were his allies against environmental groups. This time, federal and environmental attorneys were allied against Westlands and San Luis. #
http://www.fresnobee.com/local/crime/story/1422966.html
The Fresno Bee – 5/22/09
By John Ellis
A federal judge stunned and delighted west-side farmers on Friday, ruling that the federal government must consider the effect on humans -- not just fish -- when allocating delta water.
U.S. District Judge Oliver W. Wanger did not tell officials how to operate the Central Valley Project, and he said it was up to them to manage the massive water pumps in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.
But Wanger said officials must focus not just on protecting the endangered delta smelt when discussing these issues. They also must take into account "the harm being visited upon humans, the community and the environment." He also said officials must explain and justify how they reached their water-allocation decisions.
A few months ago, the federal government in effect reduced the volume of water pumped out of the delta by issuing new rules to protect the smelt. That means west-side growers are receiving less water for crops.
Wanger's ruling Friday raised growers' hopes of getting some of that water back, although the case is far from over.
As Wanger prepared to rule Friday, west-side farmers and members of the Westlands Water District and the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority sat in the courtroom with long faces, expecting the worst. But after a series of losses to environmentalists, they instead found themselves on the winning side.
"The long and short of it for us today is this is a good thing, for the simple fact that it recognizes the impact that is being felt" by farmers and residents of the San Joaquin Valley's west side, said Westlands Water District spokeswoman Sarah Woolf.
Wanger's ruling followed a four-hour hearing on a lawsuit by Westlands and the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority to stop the federal government from enforcing a new management plan for the delta smelt.
The lawsuit was filed in March, more than two months after the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service released a new set of federal rules to protect the smelt. The updated rules -- known as a biological opinion -- were drafted after Wanger had invalidated earlier regulations because they did not comply with the federal Endangered Species Act.
A central piece of the lawsuit sought to nullify the updated smelt-management plan. Wanger made no ruling on that part of the lawsuit. But he found that a second claim -- that the new smelt plan lacked an assessment on the environmental effect on humans -- was valid.
The updated smelt-management plan resulted in a sharp reduction in water deliveries for agricultural and urban users, not only in the San Joaquin Valley, but also in the Bay Area and Southern California. It's not known if Wanger's order will prompt the federal government to increase water deliveries from the delta.
But Wanger made it clear that if the water exports stay at current levels -- which west-side officials say are too low and give no consideration to human needs -- federal officials must explain why.
Wanger said the delta smelt remains endangered and at risk of extinction, but he also said Valley residents are facing adverse environmental effects driven by a persistent drought and a cut in water deliveries.
He said the adverse environmental effects include dust rising from fallowed fields that could lead to a decline in air quality.
High unemployment rates in west-side Valley towns also are an effect of the water decisions, Wanger said.
Wanger's order is in effect through June 30, or when the water temperature in two delta channels -- Old River and Middle River -- reaches 77 degrees Fahrenheit for three days. Higher temperatures can adversely affect the smelt.
The order's temporary nature almost certainly sets up more legal battles between the two sides. James Maysonett, who represented the federal government, asked Wanger on Friday to hold off on his order while it is appealed.
Wanger denied the motion.
Kate Poole, an attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council, said she didn't like Wanger's ruling, but she said no decision had been made on seeking an appeal.
Friday's hearing set up a strange twist: Daniel O'Hanlon, who represented Westlands and the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority, found himself pitted against federal attorneys who for years were his allies against environmental groups. This time, federal and environmental attorneys were allied against Westlands and San Luis. #
http://www.fresnobee.com/local/crime/story/1422966.html
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Senate Confirms Nominees including Conner for Reclamation Commissioner
NOMINATIONS: Interior, DOE picks clear Senate panel (05/13/2009)
Katherine Ling, E&E reporter
The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee today agreed to send two Energy Department and two Interior Department nominees to the Senate floor for confirmations.
The panel voted en bloc for Daniel Poneman to be DOE deputy secretary; David Sandalow to be assistant secretary of DOE for international affairs and domestic policy; Rhea Suh to be assistant secretary of Interior for policy, management and budget; and Michael Connor to be commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation.
Only the secretaries of DOE and Interior and Tom Strickland as Interior assistant secretary for fish and wildlife and parks have been confirmed by the Senate so far. The delay in confirmations has left key political posts open as Congress considers major energy and climate bills and Interior examines several controversial oil and gas leasing and Endangered Species Act issues.
The four nominees seem likely to escape the fate of their colleagues, as it appears they will not face any holds from the committee members.
Sen. Bob Bennett (R-Utah) has holds on the nominations of David Hayes to be Interior deputy secretary and Hilary Tompkins to be Interior solicitor, in part over concerns about Utah oil and gas leases that the Obama administration canceled in February. A procedural vote to bypass the hold failed today by three votes.
Bennett said he does not plan to put a hold on Suh's nomination but is watching closely.
Suh is currently a program officer at the David and Lucile Packard Foundation and has served as a consultant for the National Park Service, where she wrote educational strategy and developed educational programs for underserved constituencies, and as senior legislative assistant to former Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell (R-Colo.). She also has been a high school science teacher in New York City.
Connor has been the general counsel to the committee since 2001. In that position, he has worked extensively on legislation related to water reclamation, American Indian lands and energy. He previously was director of Interior's Indian Water Rights Office.
Both DOE nominees held positions in President Clinton's administration. Poneman was a special assistant to Clinton and senior director for nonproliferation and export controls at the National Security Council, which he first joined under President George H.W. Bush. Poneman is currently a principal at the Scowcroft Group.
Sandalow served as assistant secretary of State for oceans, environment and science under Clinton, and as senior director for environmental affairs on the National Security Council. He is currently an energy and climate expert at the Brookings Institution and has served as an executive with the World Wildlife Fund and as chairman of the energy and climate working group of the Clinton Global Initiative.
Katherine Ling, E&E reporter
The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee today agreed to send two Energy Department and two Interior Department nominees to the Senate floor for confirmations.
The panel voted en bloc for Daniel Poneman to be DOE deputy secretary; David Sandalow to be assistant secretary of DOE for international affairs and domestic policy; Rhea Suh to be assistant secretary of Interior for policy, management and budget; and Michael Connor to be commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation.
Only the secretaries of DOE and Interior and Tom Strickland as Interior assistant secretary for fish and wildlife and parks have been confirmed by the Senate so far. The delay in confirmations has left key political posts open as Congress considers major energy and climate bills and Interior examines several controversial oil and gas leasing and Endangered Species Act issues.
The four nominees seem likely to escape the fate of their colleagues, as it appears they will not face any holds from the committee members.
Sen. Bob Bennett (R-Utah) has holds on the nominations of David Hayes to be Interior deputy secretary and Hilary Tompkins to be Interior solicitor, in part over concerns about Utah oil and gas leases that the Obama administration canceled in February. A procedural vote to bypass the hold failed today by three votes.
Bennett said he does not plan to put a hold on Suh's nomination but is watching closely.
Suh is currently a program officer at the David and Lucile Packard Foundation and has served as a consultant for the National Park Service, where she wrote educational strategy and developed educational programs for underserved constituencies, and as senior legislative assistant to former Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell (R-Colo.). She also has been a high school science teacher in New York City.
Connor has been the general counsel to the committee since 2001. In that position, he has worked extensively on legislation related to water reclamation, American Indian lands and energy. He previously was director of Interior's Indian Water Rights Office.
Both DOE nominees held positions in President Clinton's administration. Poneman was a special assistant to Clinton and senior director for nonproliferation and export controls at the National Security Council, which he first joined under President George H.W. Bush. Poneman is currently a principal at the Scowcroft Group.
Sandalow served as assistant secretary of State for oceans, environment and science under Clinton, and as senior director for environmental affairs on the National Security Council. He is currently an energy and climate expert at the Brookings Institution and has served as an executive with the World Wildlife Fund and as chairman of the energy and climate working group of the Clinton Global Initiative.
SVID Engineering Position Opening
Engineering Technician
Sunnyside Valley Irrigation District
Sunnyside Valley Irrigation District has an opening for one full time Engineering Technician in the Sunnyside office. An A.A. Engineering Technician degree with emphasis in irrigation, drainage, hydraulics and surveying is preferred. Relevant work experience may be substituted for education. To be considered for this position, please request an application (509 837-6980). The completed application together with a resume must be submitted by June 1, 2009 to: Sunnyside Valley Irrigation District, PO Box 239, Sunnyside, WA 98944 Attn: Assistant Manager-Engineering or e-mail schrammd@svid.org.
Publish:
May 17, 2009
May 24, 2009
Sunnyside Valley Irrigation District
Sunnyside Valley Irrigation District has an opening for one full time Engineering Technician in the Sunnyside office. An A.A. Engineering Technician degree with emphasis in irrigation, drainage, hydraulics and surveying is preferred. Relevant work experience may be substituted for education. To be considered for this position, please request an application (509 837-6980). The completed application together with a resume must be submitted by June 1, 2009 to: Sunnyside Valley Irrigation District, PO Box 239, Sunnyside, WA 98944 Attn: Assistant Manager-Engineering or e-mail schrammd@svid.org.
Publish:
May 17, 2009
May 24, 2009
Monday, May 11, 2009
SVID Reorganizes Management
News Release
May 8, 2009District Manager Jim Trull announced today that the Sunnyside Valley Irrigation District (SVID) administrative staff has been reorganized to better address the increased workload associated with the impact of receiving stimulus funds from the federal government. These funds will be used to accelerate the implementation of its conservation program.
Effective May 11th Don Schramm will turn over his responsibilities as Assistant Manager of Operations to become Assistant Manager - Engineering so that he can devote his time to managing both Phase I and Phase II of the Sunnyside Division’s conservation program. He will also oversee operation and maintenance engineering as well. The water quality department will continue to report to him.
Ken Ott, District Watermaster will replace Don Schramm as Assistant Manager -Operations while retaining his watermaster duties. He will oversee operation and maintenance activities of irrigation, drainage and the shop. He will also be responsible for health and safety issues.
Lori Brady will continue to as Assistant Manager of Administration. She will relinquish her responsibilities of supervising the engineering staff to devote more time to administration, finances, information technology, and financial reporting of Phase II of the conservation project.
Contact: Jim Trull
SVID
trullj@svid.org or (509) 837-6980
May 8, 2009District Manager Jim Trull announced today that the Sunnyside Valley Irrigation District (SVID) administrative staff has been reorganized to better address the increased workload associated with the impact of receiving stimulus funds from the federal government. These funds will be used to accelerate the implementation of its conservation program.
Effective May 11th Don Schramm will turn over his responsibilities as Assistant Manager of Operations to become Assistant Manager - Engineering so that he can devote his time to managing both Phase I and Phase II of the Sunnyside Division’s conservation program. He will also oversee operation and maintenance engineering as well. The water quality department will continue to report to him.
Ken Ott, District Watermaster will replace Don Schramm as Assistant Manager -Operations while retaining his watermaster duties. He will oversee operation and maintenance activities of irrigation, drainage and the shop. He will also be responsible for health and safety issues.
Lori Brady will continue to as Assistant Manager of Administration. She will relinquish her responsibilities of supervising the engineering staff to devote more time to administration, finances, information technology, and financial reporting of Phase II of the conservation project.
Contact: Jim Trull
SVID
trullj@svid.org or (509) 837-6980
Friday, May 8, 2009
EPA and Reclamation FY 2010 Budget Summary
President Obama first released a shell overview of his Fiscal Year 2010 budget on February 26, but on May 7, Obama and Agency heads released a more detailed FY 2010 budget request. During a news conference at the White House on Thursday morning, the President unveiled his pared down budget saying, “we can no longer afford to spend as if deficits don’t matter, and waste is not our problem. We can no longer afford to leave the hard choices for the next budget, the next administration—or the next generation”.
Environmental Protection Agency
Despite the deep cuts for other agencies, the Environmental Protection Agency Administrator, Lisa Jackson, unveiled her agency’s largest budget in its thirty nine year history saying. Jackson praised the Administration’s budget priorities saying, "EPA’s new budget reflects the President’s commitment to growing a clean energy economy and protecting human health and the environment. These investments reject the false choice of a green economy or a green environment, and position EPA to lead the way in green jobs, innovation and technology, and action on global climate change. Expanding on the investments of the Recovery Act, this budget allows EPA to provide real solutions to our economic crisis. It takes significant strides to ensure that our air, land, and water are safe and clean. And it significantly improves accountability and transparency, ensuring fiscal responsibility at a time when every dollar count”.
Details of EPA’s FY 2010 Budget Request are below:
Program FY ’09 Request FY ’10 Request
Clean Water State Revolving Fund $555 Million $2.4 billion
Safe Drinking Water State Revolving Fund $842 Million $1.5 billion
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks $72 Million $113 Million
Superfund $1.26 Billion $1.3 Billion
Total Discretionary Budget Authority $7.14 Billion $10.5 Billion
The EPA’s full budget can be found at: http://www.epa.gov/budget/2010/2010cj.htm
Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Program
The Army Corps of Engineers has not yet released details of their FY 2010 budget request and the scheduled briefing has been postponed. Details will follow as soon as they become available.
Department of the Interior: Bureau of Reclamation
The President’s FY ’10 budget request funds the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) at $1 billion which is offset by $35.1 million in funds from the Central Valley Project Restoration Fund for a net total of $985 million. Although Secretary Salazar has not yet held a Department wide briefing, details of the Bureau’s FY ’10 budget request were unveiled during the May 7 stakeholder’s budget briefing. While some new programs authorized by the Omnibus Public Lands Management Act have been included in the budget (ie San Joaquin River Restoration), stakeholders were told that the majority of those projects and programs were not included in the 2010 budget due to the fact that the legislation was signed into law too late in the budget development process to be accounted for.
Highlights of the budget are below.
Program FY ’09 Enacted FY ’10 Request
CALFED $40 Million $31 Million
Central Valley Project Restoration Fund (total w/ offset) $3.4 Million $0.3 Million
San Joaquin River Restoration (mandatory appropriations) $0 $15.9 Million
Dam Safety Program $88.3 Million $101.9 million
Klamath Project $23 Million $25 Million
Platte River Recovery Program $10.6 Million $12.7 Million
Site Security Activities $28 Million $28.9 Million
Central Arizona Project $25.4 Million $18.4 Million
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Project $18.2 Million $22.2 Million
Rural Water Projects $139 Million $64 Million
Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program $39.2 Million $9.0 Million
Yakima Project $7.8 Million $8.5 Million
Yuma Area Projects $21.3 Million $24.5 Million
Columbia Basin Project $12.1 Million $16.5 Million
Animas-La Plata Project $50.0 Million $54.2 Million
Water Conservation Initiative $50.3 Million $46.0 Million
Loan Program (P.L. 84-984) $0 $0
Total Discretionary Budget Authority $1.15 Billion $919.3 Million
The Bureau’s full budget information can be found at: http://www.usbr.gov/budget/2010/CONTENTS.pdf
Congressional hearings on the budget request are expected to begin within the next two weeks. For more information about any project or Agency budget request, please contact me at 703-524-1544 or acoffey@nwra.org.
Environmental Protection Agency
Despite the deep cuts for other agencies, the Environmental Protection Agency Administrator, Lisa Jackson, unveiled her agency’s largest budget in its thirty nine year history saying. Jackson praised the Administration’s budget priorities saying, "EPA’s new budget reflects the President’s commitment to growing a clean energy economy and protecting human health and the environment. These investments reject the false choice of a green economy or a green environment, and position EPA to lead the way in green jobs, innovation and technology, and action on global climate change. Expanding on the investments of the Recovery Act, this budget allows EPA to provide real solutions to our economic crisis. It takes significant strides to ensure that our air, land, and water are safe and clean. And it significantly improves accountability and transparency, ensuring fiscal responsibility at a time when every dollar count”.
Details of EPA’s FY 2010 Budget Request are below:
Program FY ’09 Request FY ’10 Request
Clean Water State Revolving Fund $555 Million $2.4 billion
Safe Drinking Water State Revolving Fund $842 Million $1.5 billion
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks $72 Million $113 Million
Superfund $1.26 Billion $1.3 Billion
Total Discretionary Budget Authority $7.14 Billion $10.5 Billion
The EPA’s full budget can be found at: http://www.epa.gov/budget/2010/2010cj.htm
Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Program
The Army Corps of Engineers has not yet released details of their FY 2010 budget request and the scheduled briefing has been postponed. Details will follow as soon as they become available.
Department of the Interior: Bureau of Reclamation
The President’s FY ’10 budget request funds the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) at $1 billion which is offset by $35.1 million in funds from the Central Valley Project Restoration Fund for a net total of $985 million. Although Secretary Salazar has not yet held a Department wide briefing, details of the Bureau’s FY ’10 budget request were unveiled during the May 7 stakeholder’s budget briefing. While some new programs authorized by the Omnibus Public Lands Management Act have been included in the budget (ie San Joaquin River Restoration), stakeholders were told that the majority of those projects and programs were not included in the 2010 budget due to the fact that the legislation was signed into law too late in the budget development process to be accounted for.
Highlights of the budget are below.
Program FY ’09 Enacted FY ’10 Request
CALFED $40 Million $31 Million
Central Valley Project Restoration Fund (total w/ offset) $3.4 Million $0.3 Million
San Joaquin River Restoration (mandatory appropriations) $0 $15.9 Million
Dam Safety Program $88.3 Million $101.9 million
Klamath Project $23 Million $25 Million
Platte River Recovery Program $10.6 Million $12.7 Million
Site Security Activities $28 Million $28.9 Million
Central Arizona Project $25.4 Million $18.4 Million
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Project $18.2 Million $22.2 Million
Rural Water Projects $139 Million $64 Million
Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program $39.2 Million $9.0 Million
Yakima Project $7.8 Million $8.5 Million
Yuma Area Projects $21.3 Million $24.5 Million
Columbia Basin Project $12.1 Million $16.5 Million
Animas-La Plata Project $50.0 Million $54.2 Million
Water Conservation Initiative $50.3 Million $46.0 Million
Loan Program (P.L. 84-984) $0 $0
Total Discretionary Budget Authority $1.15 Billion $919.3 Million
The Bureau’s full budget information can be found at: http://www.usbr.gov/budget/2010/CONTENTS.pdf
Congressional hearings on the budget request are expected to begin within the next two weeks. For more information about any project or Agency budget request, please contact me at 703-524-1544 or acoffey@nwra.org.
Bureau of Reclamation FY 2010 Budget
The Obama Administration today released its FY 2010 budget request for The Bureau of Reclamation. (The Corps of Engineers budget was still being finalized today and was not available for release). The Bureau’s detailed budget request be found here. http://www.usbr.gov/budget/2010/CONTENTS.pdf.
The FY 2010 BOR request includes $893 million for the Water and Related Resources Account (W&RR), which funds most of the Bureau’s core operations and programs. The Obama W&RR request is significantly greater than the amounts requested for that account by Bureau during the Bush Administration, but less than the $920 million provided by Congress for the current fiscal year. Congress steadily increased Bureau funding between 2000 and 2008, with 2009 marking the first significant decrease. If the Obama request is enacted, it would continue that downward trend and bring Bureau funding to roughly the 2006 level.
Highlights of the Bureau’s W&RR request include:
$102 million for the Safety of Dams Program, an almost $14 million increase over FY 09, attributable in large part to major work at Folsom Dam in California.
$2 million for a study associated with removal of four privately owned hydro-electric dams in the Klamath Basin. They study is part of an agreement with the dam’s owners, water users, tribes and conservation groups. Another $2 million is being requested by the Fish and Wildlife Service for the same study.
$21.4 million for Lower Colorado River Operations, an increase of more than $6 million over FY 09. This includes $13.6 million for the Multi-Species Conservation Plan (MSCP), which received just under $9 million in FY 09.
$12.7 million for the Platte River Recovery Program, an increase of $2 million over FY 09.
$64 million for rural water supply projects, a $75 million decrease from what Congress appropriated for FY 09. Congress generally provides significantly more funding for rural water supply projects than the Bureau requests. The Bureau’s economic stimulus plan provide $200 million for rural water supply projects
$33 million for the Challenge Grant Program, now re-packaged with other programs as the “Water Conservation Initiative.” The $33 million for the grants program is a $29 million increase over FY 09. The Bureau says that it expects to continue to cap individual grants at about $300,000 in FY 10. The Bureau’s economic stimulus plan provides $40 million for Challenge Grants, but sets the minimum grant amount at $1 million.
Separately from the W&RR account, the Bureau’s budget request includes $31 million for California’s Bay-Delta program. That is a $9 million decrease from FY 09. The request includes $4 million for continued study of four possible new surface storage projects and $4 million for continued studies of projects to improve water conveyance facilities.
The FY 10 budget also provides a total of $16.9 million for implementation of the San Joaquin River Settlement. Of that amount, all but $1 million is to come from revenues from the Friant surcharge and annual capital repayment, which are to be deposited into the new San Joaquin River Restoration Fund. The other $1 million is budgeted to come from the Central Valley Project Restoration Fund.
The President’s budget request is three months late because of the transition to a new Administration, but House and Senate Appropriations Committees are still planning to move appropriations bills toward final approval by the beginning of the new fiscal year on October 1. The Committees will begin writing the appropriations bill covering the Bureau and the Corps within the next few weeks.
Joe Raeder
The Ferguson Group
1130 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 300
Washington, D.C. 20036
Phone: 202-331-8500 ext 1233
Fax: 202-331-1598
Cell: 202-255-5826
jraeder@tfgnet.com
website: www.fergusongroup.us
The FY 2010 BOR request includes $893 million for the Water and Related Resources Account (W&RR), which funds most of the Bureau’s core operations and programs. The Obama W&RR request is significantly greater than the amounts requested for that account by Bureau during the Bush Administration, but less than the $920 million provided by Congress for the current fiscal year. Congress steadily increased Bureau funding between 2000 and 2008, with 2009 marking the first significant decrease. If the Obama request is enacted, it would continue that downward trend and bring Bureau funding to roughly the 2006 level.
Highlights of the Bureau’s W&RR request include:
$102 million for the Safety of Dams Program, an almost $14 million increase over FY 09, attributable in large part to major work at Folsom Dam in California.
$2 million for a study associated with removal of four privately owned hydro-electric dams in the Klamath Basin. They study is part of an agreement with the dam’s owners, water users, tribes and conservation groups. Another $2 million is being requested by the Fish and Wildlife Service for the same study.
$21.4 million for Lower Colorado River Operations, an increase of more than $6 million over FY 09. This includes $13.6 million for the Multi-Species Conservation Plan (MSCP), which received just under $9 million in FY 09.
$12.7 million for the Platte River Recovery Program, an increase of $2 million over FY 09.
$64 million for rural water supply projects, a $75 million decrease from what Congress appropriated for FY 09. Congress generally provides significantly more funding for rural water supply projects than the Bureau requests. The Bureau’s economic stimulus plan provide $200 million for rural water supply projects
$33 million for the Challenge Grant Program, now re-packaged with other programs as the “Water Conservation Initiative.” The $33 million for the grants program is a $29 million increase over FY 09. The Bureau says that it expects to continue to cap individual grants at about $300,000 in FY 10. The Bureau’s economic stimulus plan provides $40 million for Challenge Grants, but sets the minimum grant amount at $1 million.
Separately from the W&RR account, the Bureau’s budget request includes $31 million for California’s Bay-Delta program. That is a $9 million decrease from FY 09. The request includes $4 million for continued study of four possible new surface storage projects and $4 million for continued studies of projects to improve water conveyance facilities.
The FY 10 budget also provides a total of $16.9 million for implementation of the San Joaquin River Settlement. Of that amount, all but $1 million is to come from revenues from the Friant surcharge and annual capital repayment, which are to be deposited into the new San Joaquin River Restoration Fund. The other $1 million is budgeted to come from the Central Valley Project Restoration Fund.
The President’s budget request is three months late because of the transition to a new Administration, but House and Senate Appropriations Committees are still planning to move appropriations bills toward final approval by the beginning of the new fiscal year on October 1. The Committees will begin writing the appropriations bill covering the Bureau and the Corps within the next few weeks.
Joe Raeder
The Ferguson Group
1130 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 300
Washington, D.C. 20036
Phone: 202-331-8500 ext 1233
Fax: 202-331-1598
Cell: 202-255-5826
jraeder@tfgnet.com
website: www.fergusongroup.us
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Interior 2010 Proposed Budget
7, 2009
Contact: Frank Quimby, (202) 208-6416
$12 Billion Interior Budget Focuses on New Energy Frontier,
Climate Impacts, America’s Treasured Landscapes, a 21st Century Youth
Conservation Corps, and Native American Communities
WASHINGTON, D.C. — President Obama’s proposed $12 billion budget for the Department of the Interior in FY2010 will allow the nation’s largest land manager to play a central role in carrying out the President’s vision for addressing the challenges of our times, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar said today.
“Interior is uniquely positioned to be a leader in responsibly developing America’s new energy frontier, tackling climate impacts, restoring and preserving America’s treasured landscapes, creating a 21st Century Youth Conservation Corps, and investing in strong tribal communities,” Salazar said in announcing the agency’s proposed budget for the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1, 2009. “The President’s stimulus funding under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 has provided Interior $3 billion to lay a foundation for this work and his 2010 budget will build on that with targeted increases in key areas.”
The 2010 budget for Interior makes investments critical to the Nation’s economic future including:
● $183 million in increases for a clean energy and mitigation of
climate impacts, including:
● $50.1 million for the Clean Energy Future Initiative to
facilitate responsible development of
Interior-managed lands and offshore areas with the
highest renewable energy potential, including
wind, solar, geothermal and biomass; and
● $133 million for a Climate Impact Initiative to support
integrated activities to assess and
respond to the effects of climate change on
Interior-managed landscapes, water and wildlife;
● $100 million for National Park Service operations to restore and
protect America’s treasured
landscapes;
• $95.2 million in the Land and Water Conservation Fund for Interior
to protect critical landscapes and
endangered species habitat and enhance recreational opportunities; and
• a $75 million contingency reserve fund for wildland fire
suppression to minimize the need for the
transfer of funds from non-fire programs when the budgeted ten-year average for suppression is
exhausted;
● $102 million in to strengthen American Indian and Native Alaskan
communities through expanded education programs, putting more
officers on the streets and enhanced law enforcement training; and
● $50 million for a 21st Century Youth Conservation Corps to engage
more youth in the
outdoors through environmental stewardship education, career
development, and a new fishing, hunting and wildlife management
educational program.
“The budget makes hard budget choices while making wise investments in a clean energy economy, making investments in education that will allow student to compete in the 21st century economy, and confronting other challenges,” Secretary Salazar noted. “These proposed initiative increases include more than $100 million in grants to states and tribal communities, our partners in solving the economic and resource challenges facing the Nation.”
Interior manages roughly 20 percent of all U.S. lands, along with the 1.7 billion acres of the Outer Continental Shelf. Almost one-third of the nation’s domestic energy production is generated from Interior-managed lands and waters. Interior also fulfills federal responsibilities for American Indian and Native Alaskan tribes.
Creating a New Energy Frontier: The Budget includes $50.1 million to spur renewable energy projects on Federal lands, facilitate the siting of new transmission facilities, assess alternative energy resources, and ensure adequate environmental protections.
As part of the nation’s clean energy future, the Minerals Management Service would receive increases of $24 million for the development of a robust renewable energy leasing program on the Outer Continental Shelf that will return revenues to the American people. The Bureau of Land Management would receive an increase of $16.1 million for permitting and leasing renewable energy resources and developing transmission facilities, including planning, environmental assessments and analyses. The BLM will use $11 million of that increase to establish four renewable Energy Coordination offices to increase permitting processing capacity and accelerate the delivery of renewable energy to customers.
The Bureau of Indian Affairs would receive $5 million to support renewable energy development on tribal and BIA-managed lands, which will lead to improved economic development. About $3 million would be used for the USGS to develop scientific information that will inform renewable energy development. The Fish and Wildlife Service would receive $3 million to ensure the protection of fish and wildlife throughout the development process.
Tackling Climate Impacts: Because Interior has direct responsibility for more than 20 percent of the U.S. land, including American Indian and Native Alaska trust natural resources, wildlife and coastal areas and is the largest provider of water in the West, the Department has a significant role to play in the nation’s response to climate change, including an expanded role in assessment and adaptation in order to protect these resources for future generations.
The initiative includes targeted increases of $22 million for the U.S.
Geological Survey to develop a cohesive monitoring strategy to determine impacts on Interior-managed lands, water and wildlife resources and assist land and water managers in devising strategies to address actual and anticipated changes. This includes an increase of $7 million for the USGS to assess potential carbon capture (sequestration) resources, including geologic formations and additional forestation and vegetation projects. An additional $40 million goes to land management bureaus to develop specific tools to address the effects of climate change. The States will also receive $40 million in grants to develop adaptation plans and implement strategies. These funds will allow States to plan for and develop adaptation strategies.
In addition, the Bureau of Reclamation budget includes $46 million to accelerate water conservation measures through grants, studies and water reuse and recycling programs, including an increase of $26 million for water challenge conservation grants. These water conservation strategies will assist Western communities in the management of precious water resources.
Empowering American Indian and Native Alaska Communities: Because education is critical for ensuring a stable, viable and prosperous future for tribal communities, the 2010 budget fulfills the Department’s ongoing commitment to advancing American Indian and Native Alaska education with an increase of $72 million to promote gains in student achievement and assist Indian students in attaining post-secondary education. The budget includes an increase of $10 million for Indian School Equalization Program (ISEP) Formula Funds, the primary source for the Bureau of Education’s 169 elementary and secondary schools and 14 dorms that serve about 42,000 students and residents. The total 2010 request of $391.7 million for ISEP formula funds also includes increases of $6.7 million in fixed costs for
teachers pay. Tribal colleges and universities are receiving a $55
million increase in 2010, including a one-time increase of $50 million that will forward-fund the tribal colleges to provide them greater financial security to plan for an entire academic year. The budget also includes increased funding for BIA law enforcement of more than $30 million to help Native Americans protect their communities by strengthening police programs and detention centers.
Protecting Treasured Landscapes: The proposed 2010 budget demonstrates the President’s commitment to preserving America’s treasured landscapes for future generations. The budget makes investments for the future in national parks with a $100 million program increase in National Park Service operations funding and $25 million in park partnership matching funds to leverage private donations in preparation for the 100th anniversary of the National Park Service in 2016. The NPS matching funds will result in a combined benefit to NPS of more than $50 million for signature projects and programs, thus doubling the Federal investment.
Land and Water Conservation Fund: The 2010 budget takes a measured approach to fulfill the commitment for fully funding the Land and Water Conservation Fund. It includes $420 million (including $120 million for U.S. Forest Service), putting the Administration on track to attain full funding of LWCF at $900 million by 2014. Interior’s 2010 funding includes $158 million – an increase of $57 million over 2009 – for protecting and preserving park, refuge, and other Federal lands through 17 projects in nine states. The department also will distribute $30 million – an increase of $10 million above the 2009 enacted level -- for State, tribal and local governments to create and protect park land, open space and wildlife habitat.
Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund: $100 million – an increase of $24.5 million -- for grants to States to support conservation of threatened and endangered species. Through a cost effective program, funds are leveraged by States, who can in turn, can distribute this funding to tribes, municipalities and private landowners.
Creating a 21st Century Youth Conservation Corps: The budget includes $50 million to develop new ways to engage youth in nature in order to build an ethic for environmental protection. It makes an investment in the future and builds on existing efforts in the bureaus to instill a life-long commitment to protecting, preserving and enjoying our treasured lands and places. About $30 million will educate young hunters and anglers and wildlife managers through expanded U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service programs, with a special emphasis on emerging constituencies that have not had access to outdoor activities. A $20 million component will expand existing partnerships with organizations, such as the Student Conservation Association, to inspire a new generation of nature lovers and stewards of our natural resources.
By the Numbers
Total proposed funding by bureau is as follows:
Bureau of Indian Affairs $2.5 billion
National Park Service $2.7 billion
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service $1.6
billion
Bureau of Reclamation $1.0 billion
Central Utah Project Completion $42 million
Bureau of Land Management $1.1 billion
Minerals Management Service $181 million
U.S. Geological Survey $1.1 billion
Office of Surface Mining $159
million
Office of Insular Affairs $86 million
Office of Special Trustee for American Indians $186 million
Department wide Programs $1.1
billion
Departmental Management $119 million
Permanent funding that becomes available as a result of existing legislation without further action by Congress will provide an additional
$6.1 billion, for a total FY 2010 Interior budget of $18.2 billion. In FY 2010, Interior will collect an estimated $14 billion in revenue for the U.S. Treasury.
More detailed information is in the FY2008 Interior Budget in Brief which is available online at: http://www.doi.gov/budget/2010/10Hilites/toc.html.
Contact: Frank Quimby, (202) 208-6416
$12 Billion Interior Budget Focuses on New Energy Frontier,
Climate Impacts, America’s Treasured Landscapes, a 21st Century Youth
Conservation Corps, and Native American Communities
WASHINGTON, D.C. — President Obama’s proposed $12 billion budget for the Department of the Interior in FY2010 will allow the nation’s largest land manager to play a central role in carrying out the President’s vision for addressing the challenges of our times, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar said today.
“Interior is uniquely positioned to be a leader in responsibly developing America’s new energy frontier, tackling climate impacts, restoring and preserving America’s treasured landscapes, creating a 21st Century Youth Conservation Corps, and investing in strong tribal communities,” Salazar said in announcing the agency’s proposed budget for the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1, 2009. “The President’s stimulus funding under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 has provided Interior $3 billion to lay a foundation for this work and his 2010 budget will build on that with targeted increases in key areas.”
The 2010 budget for Interior makes investments critical to the Nation’s economic future including:
● $183 million in increases for a clean energy and mitigation of
climate impacts, including:
● $50.1 million for the Clean Energy Future Initiative to
facilitate responsible development of
Interior-managed lands and offshore areas with the
highest renewable energy potential, including
wind, solar, geothermal and biomass; and
● $133 million for a Climate Impact Initiative to support
integrated activities to assess and
respond to the effects of climate change on
Interior-managed landscapes, water and wildlife;
● $100 million for National Park Service operations to restore and
protect America’s treasured
landscapes;
• $95.2 million in the Land and Water Conservation Fund for Interior
to protect critical landscapes and
endangered species habitat and enhance recreational opportunities; and
• a $75 million contingency reserve fund for wildland fire
suppression to minimize the need for the
transfer of funds from non-fire programs when the budgeted ten-year average for suppression is
exhausted;
● $102 million in to strengthen American Indian and Native Alaskan
communities through expanded education programs, putting more
officers on the streets and enhanced law enforcement training; and
● $50 million for a 21st Century Youth Conservation Corps to engage
more youth in the
outdoors through environmental stewardship education, career
development, and a new fishing, hunting and wildlife management
educational program.
“The budget makes hard budget choices while making wise investments in a clean energy economy, making investments in education that will allow student to compete in the 21st century economy, and confronting other challenges,” Secretary Salazar noted. “These proposed initiative increases include more than $100 million in grants to states and tribal communities, our partners in solving the economic and resource challenges facing the Nation.”
Interior manages roughly 20 percent of all U.S. lands, along with the 1.7 billion acres of the Outer Continental Shelf. Almost one-third of the nation’s domestic energy production is generated from Interior-managed lands and waters. Interior also fulfills federal responsibilities for American Indian and Native Alaskan tribes.
Creating a New Energy Frontier: The Budget includes $50.1 million to spur renewable energy projects on Federal lands, facilitate the siting of new transmission facilities, assess alternative energy resources, and ensure adequate environmental protections.
As part of the nation’s clean energy future, the Minerals Management Service would receive increases of $24 million for the development of a robust renewable energy leasing program on the Outer Continental Shelf that will return revenues to the American people. The Bureau of Land Management would receive an increase of $16.1 million for permitting and leasing renewable energy resources and developing transmission facilities, including planning, environmental assessments and analyses. The BLM will use $11 million of that increase to establish four renewable Energy Coordination offices to increase permitting processing capacity and accelerate the delivery of renewable energy to customers.
The Bureau of Indian Affairs would receive $5 million to support renewable energy development on tribal and BIA-managed lands, which will lead to improved economic development. About $3 million would be used for the USGS to develop scientific information that will inform renewable energy development. The Fish and Wildlife Service would receive $3 million to ensure the protection of fish and wildlife throughout the development process.
Tackling Climate Impacts: Because Interior has direct responsibility for more than 20 percent of the U.S. land, including American Indian and Native Alaska trust natural resources, wildlife and coastal areas and is the largest provider of water in the West, the Department has a significant role to play in the nation’s response to climate change, including an expanded role in assessment and adaptation in order to protect these resources for future generations.
The initiative includes targeted increases of $22 million for the U.S.
Geological Survey to develop a cohesive monitoring strategy to determine impacts on Interior-managed lands, water and wildlife resources and assist land and water managers in devising strategies to address actual and anticipated changes. This includes an increase of $7 million for the USGS to assess potential carbon capture (sequestration) resources, including geologic formations and additional forestation and vegetation projects. An additional $40 million goes to land management bureaus to develop specific tools to address the effects of climate change. The States will also receive $40 million in grants to develop adaptation plans and implement strategies. These funds will allow States to plan for and develop adaptation strategies.
In addition, the Bureau of Reclamation budget includes $46 million to accelerate water conservation measures through grants, studies and water reuse and recycling programs, including an increase of $26 million for water challenge conservation grants. These water conservation strategies will assist Western communities in the management of precious water resources.
Empowering American Indian and Native Alaska Communities: Because education is critical for ensuring a stable, viable and prosperous future for tribal communities, the 2010 budget fulfills the Department’s ongoing commitment to advancing American Indian and Native Alaska education with an increase of $72 million to promote gains in student achievement and assist Indian students in attaining post-secondary education. The budget includes an increase of $10 million for Indian School Equalization Program (ISEP) Formula Funds, the primary source for the Bureau of Education’s 169 elementary and secondary schools and 14 dorms that serve about 42,000 students and residents. The total 2010 request of $391.7 million for ISEP formula funds also includes increases of $6.7 million in fixed costs for
teachers pay. Tribal colleges and universities are receiving a $55
million increase in 2010, including a one-time increase of $50 million that will forward-fund the tribal colleges to provide them greater financial security to plan for an entire academic year. The budget also includes increased funding for BIA law enforcement of more than $30 million to help Native Americans protect their communities by strengthening police programs and detention centers.
Protecting Treasured Landscapes: The proposed 2010 budget demonstrates the President’s commitment to preserving America’s treasured landscapes for future generations. The budget makes investments for the future in national parks with a $100 million program increase in National Park Service operations funding and $25 million in park partnership matching funds to leverage private donations in preparation for the 100th anniversary of the National Park Service in 2016. The NPS matching funds will result in a combined benefit to NPS of more than $50 million for signature projects and programs, thus doubling the Federal investment.
Land and Water Conservation Fund: The 2010 budget takes a measured approach to fulfill the commitment for fully funding the Land and Water Conservation Fund. It includes $420 million (including $120 million for U.S. Forest Service), putting the Administration on track to attain full funding of LWCF at $900 million by 2014. Interior’s 2010 funding includes $158 million – an increase of $57 million over 2009 – for protecting and preserving park, refuge, and other Federal lands through 17 projects in nine states. The department also will distribute $30 million – an increase of $10 million above the 2009 enacted level -- for State, tribal and local governments to create and protect park land, open space and wildlife habitat.
Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund: $100 million – an increase of $24.5 million -- for grants to States to support conservation of threatened and endangered species. Through a cost effective program, funds are leveraged by States, who can in turn, can distribute this funding to tribes, municipalities and private landowners.
Creating a 21st Century Youth Conservation Corps: The budget includes $50 million to develop new ways to engage youth in nature in order to build an ethic for environmental protection. It makes an investment in the future and builds on existing efforts in the bureaus to instill a life-long commitment to protecting, preserving and enjoying our treasured lands and places. About $30 million will educate young hunters and anglers and wildlife managers through expanded U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service programs, with a special emphasis on emerging constituencies that have not had access to outdoor activities. A $20 million component will expand existing partnerships with organizations, such as the Student Conservation Association, to inspire a new generation of nature lovers and stewards of our natural resources.
By the Numbers
Total proposed funding by bureau is as follows:
Bureau of Indian Affairs $2.5 billion
National Park Service $2.7 billion
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service $1.6
billion
Bureau of Reclamation $1.0 billion
Central Utah Project Completion $42 million
Bureau of Land Management $1.1 billion
Minerals Management Service $181 million
U.S. Geological Survey $1.1 billion
Office of Surface Mining $159
million
Office of Insular Affairs $86 million
Office of Special Trustee for American Indians $186 million
Department wide Programs $1.1
billion
Departmental Management $119 million
Permanent funding that becomes available as a result of existing legislation without further action by Congress will provide an additional
$6.1 billion, for a total FY 2010 Interior budget of $18.2 billion. In FY 2010, Interior will collect an estimated $14 billion in revenue for the U.S. Treasury.
More detailed information is in the FY2008 Interior Budget in Brief which is available online at: http://www.doi.gov/budget/2010/10Hilites/toc.html.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Suppot FCRPS BiOp - Don Brunell
Washington View: Legal wrangling doesn't help fish, or utility ratepayers
Monday, May 4 | 9:04 p.m.
BY DON BRUNELL
It is time to stop the legal and political posturing over salmon recovery on the Columbia and Snake rivers and implement the comprehensive plan approved by federal agencies, three of four Northwest states, six Native American tribes and legions of groups and individuals.
That agreement, referred to as the BiOp — Biological Opinion — would end decades of legal wrangling and implement a plan that was carefully constructed after three years of research and negotiations among all the parties. It includes progress "check-ins" in 2013 and 2016 and contingency actions if expected fish benefits don't materialize.
Now the BiOp is sitting in a federal courtroom where a single judge controls its fate. It is not cheap, but the price tag could go significantly higher if it is tossed out.
Over the years, Pacific Northwest electric ratepayers have paid billions in higher electric bills to fund salmon recovery plans and litigation. The best estimates are that families, businesses, hospitals, schools and industries pay 20 percent more for power because of salmon recovery.
The BiOp commits another $10 billion over a decade to implement the agreement, yet that doesn't seem to satisfy those who want to tear out the lower Snake River dams, draw down reservoirs on the Columbia and keep litigating.
Continuing the litigation may be an economic stimulus gift to attorneys and may help environmental activists raise millions in donations, but is it good for fish and the people who depend on the two rivers for their livelihoods?
The answer is no. The current BiOp is the closest we will get to a cooperative strategy to improve salmon runs.
In reality, salmon numbers have increased recently, rather than decreased. The Northwest experienced higher returns of Chinook salmon in 2001 and 2003 than before the Bonneville Dam was built in 1938.
Last year saw near record returns of fish for several species, including sockeye runs which were the highest in 50 years. Scientists predict 300,000 spring Chinook will return this year (the third-highest return since 1977) and 70,000 summer Chinook, well above the 10-year average. Snake River wild fall Chinook returns have approached delisting levels the past few years.
Scientists also point to ocean conditions as the most significant single factor in fish survival. In fact, they have not been able to correlate increased survival of young salmon through the hydro system with higher numbers of returning adults.
Survival is now higher with the eight federal dams than previously seen with only four dams. It is even higher than in undammed rivers such as the Fraser River in British Columbia, Canada.
Dam removal extreme?
Removal of the Snake River dams would affect only four of the 13 listed salmon and steelhead stocks at enormous cost and uncertain biological benefits. It would threaten the Northwest's economy, add 4.4 million tons of carbon dioxide each year to the atmosphere, undermine national and regional climate change goals, and hamstring the region's ability to develop more wind power.
Those dams provide enough electricity at peak load times — the period customers need power most — to light Seattle. We're already losing 1,100 megawatts of power — enough for a million homes — because the water is spilled rather than run through turbines. Removing the Snake River dams will further raise electricity costs and significantly increase the possibility of blackouts and power shortages.
So what do people think about removing dams?
According to a recent Davis, Hibbitts & Midghall, Inc. poll of 700 registered voters in Washington, Oregon and Idaho, 88 percent identified hydro as a renewable source of electricity, similar to how they view wind and solar. Moreover, 93 percent believe hydropower is an essential and important use of the Columbia and Snake rivers.
Two-thirds of the voters in the Pacific Northwest oppose breaching dams on the lower Snake River, viewing dam removal as too extreme.
Given near record salmon runs, the protections provided by the BiOp and our tough economic times, what purpose does it serve to prolong the legal process and add more costs to people who are struggling just to pay for groceries, electricity and rent?
Don Brunell is president of the Association of Washington Business, Washington state's chamber of commerce. Visit www.awb.org.
Monday, May 4 | 9:04 p.m.
BY DON BRUNELL
It is time to stop the legal and political posturing over salmon recovery on the Columbia and Snake rivers and implement the comprehensive plan approved by federal agencies, three of four Northwest states, six Native American tribes and legions of groups and individuals.
That agreement, referred to as the BiOp — Biological Opinion — would end decades of legal wrangling and implement a plan that was carefully constructed after three years of research and negotiations among all the parties. It includes progress "check-ins" in 2013 and 2016 and contingency actions if expected fish benefits don't materialize.
Now the BiOp is sitting in a federal courtroom where a single judge controls its fate. It is not cheap, but the price tag could go significantly higher if it is tossed out.
Over the years, Pacific Northwest electric ratepayers have paid billions in higher electric bills to fund salmon recovery plans and litigation. The best estimates are that families, businesses, hospitals, schools and industries pay 20 percent more for power because of salmon recovery.
The BiOp commits another $10 billion over a decade to implement the agreement, yet that doesn't seem to satisfy those who want to tear out the lower Snake River dams, draw down reservoirs on the Columbia and keep litigating.
Continuing the litigation may be an economic stimulus gift to attorneys and may help environmental activists raise millions in donations, but is it good for fish and the people who depend on the two rivers for their livelihoods?
The answer is no. The current BiOp is the closest we will get to a cooperative strategy to improve salmon runs.
In reality, salmon numbers have increased recently, rather than decreased. The Northwest experienced higher returns of Chinook salmon in 2001 and 2003 than before the Bonneville Dam was built in 1938.
Last year saw near record returns of fish for several species, including sockeye runs which were the highest in 50 years. Scientists predict 300,000 spring Chinook will return this year (the third-highest return since 1977) and 70,000 summer Chinook, well above the 10-year average. Snake River wild fall Chinook returns have approached delisting levels the past few years.
Scientists also point to ocean conditions as the most significant single factor in fish survival. In fact, they have not been able to correlate increased survival of young salmon through the hydro system with higher numbers of returning adults.
Survival is now higher with the eight federal dams than previously seen with only four dams. It is even higher than in undammed rivers such as the Fraser River in British Columbia, Canada.
Dam removal extreme?
Removal of the Snake River dams would affect only four of the 13 listed salmon and steelhead stocks at enormous cost and uncertain biological benefits. It would threaten the Northwest's economy, add 4.4 million tons of carbon dioxide each year to the atmosphere, undermine national and regional climate change goals, and hamstring the region's ability to develop more wind power.
Those dams provide enough electricity at peak load times — the period customers need power most — to light Seattle. We're already losing 1,100 megawatts of power — enough for a million homes — because the water is spilled rather than run through turbines. Removing the Snake River dams will further raise electricity costs and significantly increase the possibility of blackouts and power shortages.
So what do people think about removing dams?
According to a recent Davis, Hibbitts & Midghall, Inc. poll of 700 registered voters in Washington, Oregon and Idaho, 88 percent identified hydro as a renewable source of electricity, similar to how they view wind and solar. Moreover, 93 percent believe hydropower is an essential and important use of the Columbia and Snake rivers.
Two-thirds of the voters in the Pacific Northwest oppose breaching dams on the lower Snake River, viewing dam removal as too extreme.
Given near record salmon runs, the protections provided by the BiOp and our tough economic times, what purpose does it serve to prolong the legal process and add more costs to people who are struggling just to pay for groceries, electricity and rent?
Don Brunell is president of the Association of Washington Business, Washington state's chamber of commerce. Visit www.awb.org.
Michael Connor Senate Confirmation Hearing
May 5, 2009
NEWS REPORT
FROM: Kris Polly
Water Strategies, LLC
SUBJECT: Mike Connor Confirmation Hearing to be Reclamation Commissioner
On May 5 at 9:45 am, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee held a confirmation hearing for Mike Connor, nominated to be Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation, Daniel B. Poneman, nominated to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, David B. Sandalow, nominated to be an Assistant Secretary of Energy (International Affairs and Domestic Policy), and Rhea S. Suh, nominated to be an Assistant Secretary of the Interior. The hearing lasted 50 minutes and was attended by Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), Ranking Member Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), and Senators John Barasso (R-WY) and Robert Bennett (R-UT).
After the panelists completed their opening statements, Chairman Bingaman thanked the nominees and noted that, after Mike Conner's eight years of service to the committee, the "Obama Administration's gain was certainly the committee's loss."
The committee went through two rounds of questions, with Mike Connor receiving only two of them. Senator Murkowski asked him his views regarding Reclamation's response to climate change, and Senator Barasso asked about resolving interstate and intrastate water disputes. In answering Senator Murkowski's question, Mr. Connor discussed Reclamation's water storage capabilities, clean energy production through hydro, and responsibility to work with customers. In his response to Senator Barasso, Mr. Connor stated it was important for "all water rights holders involved to be at the table."
While the exact timing of a Senate floor confirmation vote is open to speculation, it could come at any time.
The hearing room was filled to its seating capacity and nearly a dozen people were standing.
A copy of Mr. Connor's testimony is attached.
Should you have any questions or want additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me by phoning (703) 517-3962 or e-mailing Kris.Polly@waterstrategies.com.
Statement of Michael Connor
Nominee for Commissioner of Reclamation
Before the
U.S. Senate Committee on Energy & Natural Resources
May 5, 2009
Chairman Bingaman, Senator Murkowski, and members of the Committee, I am honored to appear before you today as President Obama's nominee to be the Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation. I am fortunate to be joined today by my wife Shari, our two children Matthew and Gabriela, and my parents, Carl and Bea Connor. Needless to say, without their love and support through the years, I would not be in the position I am today. For that, I am grateful.
As most of you know, I am in a unique position relative to most nominees, having spent the last 8 years serving on the staff of this Committee. Given that background, I hope you'll indulge me a brief comment on my tenure here. In short, these years have been the highlight of my professional career. During this time, I have been privileged to work with and for, individuals who represent the most positive aspects of public service. Notwithstanding competing interests, my colleagues have demonstrated time and again, a remarkable ability to stay focused on an overriding goal -- addressing the country's energy and natural resource challenges in a manner reflecting good public policy. Simply put Mr. Chairman, they follow your example.
Similarly, I have had the good fortune to work with high-quality professionals on the other side of the aisle. In the area of water policy, we have worked closely together and have agreed much more than we have disagreed. But even in those instances in which we did not share similar views, we typically found sufficient common ground to make progress. If confirmed, I look forward to continuing that approach in my new position.
Finally, I cannot do justice in conveying the value of the support and the friendships that exist on the Committee and in your personal office, Mr. Chairman. Through both good and difficult times, I have benefited by witnessing the strength, intellect, modesty, and good humor, by which you and my colleagues have dealt with the personal and professional challenges arising during the past 8 years. I will miss working here, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, to both you and my colleagues, for the opportunities provided me here.
I am now afforded an incredible opportunity to be a part of President Obama's administration, and to work with Secretary Salazar and the talented team he is putting together at the Interior Department. I am excited at the prospect but recognize the enormous challenges ahead in addressing water issues facing the seventeen western states. Similar to energy, water is fundamental to the economic well-being of the West. Its use, of course, has enormous implications for the environment. We have not always struck the right balance between these important and sometimes competing interests. If confirmed, I will continue efforts to find that balance, and to do so as efficiently as possible.
Taking the helm of the Bureau of Reclamation is a monumental task. As a New Mexican, one who understands the importance of water in the West, it is a job that I will relish. Water is a recurring part of my family history. My maternal grandfather was an original member of Taos Pueblo's water rights task force. My paternal grandfather was part of the construction crews that built the aqueduct tunnels delivering water to New York City out of the Catskill Mountains. And one of my great-grandfathers was seasonally employed cleaning ditches for an irrigation district in Southern Colorado. I have been lucky in my career to carry on a family tradition associated with water.
As for my qualifications, I am confident that my background as an engineer and lawyer and my experience in the private sector and in government have prepared me well for this position. First, I understand the issues facing the Bureau of Reclamation. Drought, climate change, aging infrastructure, increasing population, environmental needs, and site security are all issues that drive a great deal of Reclamation's actions these days. We have made tremendous progress in this Committee in establishing the programs necessary to confront these issues. It is my hope that the Senate will now allow me to work on the implementation side.
Second, I am familiar with the talented staff at the Bureau of Reclamation and I have a general understanding of how the organization functions. At the same time, I have a perspective that is external to the organization which should enable me to assess its operations objectively and offer a different view on how to improve the agency's mission.
Finally, I am fully aware that the key to making progress on critical water and hydropower issues is to work cooperatively and openly with the different constituencies involved in these issues. The states, water users, power users, environmental community, Indian tribes, scientists, and several Federal agencies, all have an important role to play. Progress on seemingly intractable issues will only come through a cooperative effort based on a fundamental recognition of the legitimate interests of each of these stakeholders and a serious commitment to achieving long-term certainty in water use and allocation. Without that commitment, water policy will continue to be formulated in the courtrooms rather than the negotiating table.
Of course, the Congress will be at the center of any problem-solving actions which involve the Bureau of Reclamation. As I've already acknowledged, I have a deep respect for this institution and look forward to working closely with Members and staff to address the water and energy challenges facing their constituents.
Thank you for the opportunity to address my nomination. I will be happy to respond to your questions at the appropriate time.
Kris Polly
Water Strategies LLC
P.O. Box 100576
Arlington, Virginia 22210
(703) 517-3962 Direct
(866) 941-9068 Fax
Kris.Polly@WaterStrategies.com
NEWS REPORT
FROM: Kris Polly
Water Strategies, LLC
SUBJECT: Mike Connor Confirmation Hearing to be Reclamation Commissioner
On May 5 at 9:45 am, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee held a confirmation hearing for Mike Connor, nominated to be Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation, Daniel B. Poneman, nominated to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, David B. Sandalow, nominated to be an Assistant Secretary of Energy (International Affairs and Domestic Policy), and Rhea S. Suh, nominated to be an Assistant Secretary of the Interior. The hearing lasted 50 minutes and was attended by Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), Ranking Member Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), and Senators John Barasso (R-WY) and Robert Bennett (R-UT).
After the panelists completed their opening statements, Chairman Bingaman thanked the nominees and noted that, after Mike Conner's eight years of service to the committee, the "Obama Administration's gain was certainly the committee's loss."
The committee went through two rounds of questions, with Mike Connor receiving only two of them. Senator Murkowski asked him his views regarding Reclamation's response to climate change, and Senator Barasso asked about resolving interstate and intrastate water disputes. In answering Senator Murkowski's question, Mr. Connor discussed Reclamation's water storage capabilities, clean energy production through hydro, and responsibility to work with customers. In his response to Senator Barasso, Mr. Connor stated it was important for "all water rights holders involved to be at the table."
While the exact timing of a Senate floor confirmation vote is open to speculation, it could come at any time.
The hearing room was filled to its seating capacity and nearly a dozen people were standing.
A copy of Mr. Connor's testimony is attached.
Should you have any questions or want additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me by phoning (703) 517-3962 or e-mailing Kris.Polly@waterstrategies.com.
Statement of Michael Connor
Nominee for Commissioner of Reclamation
Before the
U.S. Senate Committee on Energy & Natural Resources
May 5, 2009
Chairman Bingaman, Senator Murkowski, and members of the Committee, I am honored to appear before you today as President Obama's nominee to be the Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation. I am fortunate to be joined today by my wife Shari, our two children Matthew and Gabriela, and my parents, Carl and Bea Connor. Needless to say, without their love and support through the years, I would not be in the position I am today. For that, I am grateful.
As most of you know, I am in a unique position relative to most nominees, having spent the last 8 years serving on the staff of this Committee. Given that background, I hope you'll indulge me a brief comment on my tenure here. In short, these years have been the highlight of my professional career. During this time, I have been privileged to work with and for, individuals who represent the most positive aspects of public service. Notwithstanding competing interests, my colleagues have demonstrated time and again, a remarkable ability to stay focused on an overriding goal -- addressing the country's energy and natural resource challenges in a manner reflecting good public policy. Simply put Mr. Chairman, they follow your example.
Similarly, I have had the good fortune to work with high-quality professionals on the other side of the aisle. In the area of water policy, we have worked closely together and have agreed much more than we have disagreed. But even in those instances in which we did not share similar views, we typically found sufficient common ground to make progress. If confirmed, I look forward to continuing that approach in my new position.
Finally, I cannot do justice in conveying the value of the support and the friendships that exist on the Committee and in your personal office, Mr. Chairman. Through both good and difficult times, I have benefited by witnessing the strength, intellect, modesty, and good humor, by which you and my colleagues have dealt with the personal and professional challenges arising during the past 8 years. I will miss working here, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, to both you and my colleagues, for the opportunities provided me here.
I am now afforded an incredible opportunity to be a part of President Obama's administration, and to work with Secretary Salazar and the talented team he is putting together at the Interior Department. I am excited at the prospect but recognize the enormous challenges ahead in addressing water issues facing the seventeen western states. Similar to energy, water is fundamental to the economic well-being of the West. Its use, of course, has enormous implications for the environment. We have not always struck the right balance between these important and sometimes competing interests. If confirmed, I will continue efforts to find that balance, and to do so as efficiently as possible.
Taking the helm of the Bureau of Reclamation is a monumental task. As a New Mexican, one who understands the importance of water in the West, it is a job that I will relish. Water is a recurring part of my family history. My maternal grandfather was an original member of Taos Pueblo's water rights task force. My paternal grandfather was part of the construction crews that built the aqueduct tunnels delivering water to New York City out of the Catskill Mountains. And one of my great-grandfathers was seasonally employed cleaning ditches for an irrigation district in Southern Colorado. I have been lucky in my career to carry on a family tradition associated with water.
As for my qualifications, I am confident that my background as an engineer and lawyer and my experience in the private sector and in government have prepared me well for this position. First, I understand the issues facing the Bureau of Reclamation. Drought, climate change, aging infrastructure, increasing population, environmental needs, and site security are all issues that drive a great deal of Reclamation's actions these days. We have made tremendous progress in this Committee in establishing the programs necessary to confront these issues. It is my hope that the Senate will now allow me to work on the implementation side.
Second, I am familiar with the talented staff at the Bureau of Reclamation and I have a general understanding of how the organization functions. At the same time, I have a perspective that is external to the organization which should enable me to assess its operations objectively and offer a different view on how to improve the agency's mission.
Finally, I am fully aware that the key to making progress on critical water and hydropower issues is to work cooperatively and openly with the different constituencies involved in these issues. The states, water users, power users, environmental community, Indian tribes, scientists, and several Federal agencies, all have an important role to play. Progress on seemingly intractable issues will only come through a cooperative effort based on a fundamental recognition of the legitimate interests of each of these stakeholders and a serious commitment to achieving long-term certainty in water use and allocation. Without that commitment, water policy will continue to be formulated in the courtrooms rather than the negotiating table.
Of course, the Congress will be at the center of any problem-solving actions which involve the Bureau of Reclamation. As I've already acknowledged, I have a deep respect for this institution and look forward to working closely with Members and staff to address the water and energy challenges facing their constituents.
Thank you for the opportunity to address my nomination. I will be happy to respond to your questions at the appropriate time.
Kris Polly
Water Strategies LLC
P.O. Box 100576
Arlington, Virginia 22210
(703) 517-3962 Direct
(866) 941-9068 Fax
Kris.Polly@WaterStrategies.com
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
WETLANDS: Congress preps for regulatory battle (05/05/2009)
Katherine Boyle, E&E reporter
Congress is gearing up for a battle over federal wetland regulation as Democrats and the Obama administration move to clarify two recent Supreme Court decisions they say narrowed Clean Water Act protections for some wetlands.
Senate Environment and Public Works Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) said yesterday that she wants to move legislation on the matter and is hoping to work with her colleagues to reach a compromise.
The panel is eyeing legislation that would amend the Clean Water Act by replacing the phrase "navigable waters" with "waters of the United States." Controversy over the meaning of "navigable waters" has persisted since CWA was passed in 1972.
Supporters of the bill introduced last month -- S. 787, sponsored by Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) -- say the measure would restore the original meaning of "waters of the United States," which they claim was eviscerated by the 2006 Rapanos-Carabell and 2001 Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers decisions in the high court.
Opponents of the effort, including the committee's ranking member James Inhofe (R-Okla.), have said the legislation would expand wetland protections beyond the intent of the Clean Water Act, lead to a number of lawsuits, and create problems for farmers, developers and other industry stakeholders. Inhofe and other Republican members of the committee have asked Boxer to hold a full committee hearing before marking up the bill.
Boxer said the divide often reflects a lawmaker's particular interests, such as agriculture, and does not always follow party lines. "A lot of the issues fall along regional lines," she said yesterday.
East Coast Democrats on the committee including Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) are backing the legislation. In the past, however, Western Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) has avoided endorsing the bill.
House action
On the House side, Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) frames the squabble over Congress' intent a bit more simply.
"Congress made it clear that the Clean Water Act covers tributaries of navigable waters, many streams and most wetlands," he said last week. "I know this because I was there."
As Congress was finalizing the law in 1972, Dingell spoke about the Clean Water Act on the House floor. "The conference bill defines the term 'navigable waters' broadly for water quality purposes," he said in his speech. "It means all 'the waters of the United States' in a geographical sense. It does not mean 'navigable waters of the United States' in the technical sense as we sometimes see in some laws."
Today, Dingell affirms that notion. "For whatever reason, the Supreme Court seemed to feel that language was unclear," he said. "The Clean Water Restoration Act [S. 787] would clear up any doubt that remains."
Transportation and Infrastructure Chairman James Oberstar (D-Minn.) is planning to reintroduce a companion bill in the House this session.
White House support
Meanwhile, the Obama administration has made its support for a congressional fix clear.
U.S. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson has called on Congress to pass legislation that would set clear boundaries for federal wetland regulators.
She said yesterday that staff members in the agency's water office spend half or more of their time working with states on jurisdictional issues for wetlands, describing the time spent "an alarming figure." She said the effort leaves staff with less time to work on actual permits with states.
EPA officials confirmed that the jurisdictional confusion created by Rapanos has been a major drain on resources for the agency in an inspector general report released yesterday.
The Rapanos ruling has affected nearly 500 enforcement cases. In each case, formal enforcement was not pursued due to jurisdictional uncertainty, case priority was lowered because of the confusion, or lack of jurisdiction was cited as an affirmative defense to an enforcement action.
The agency had difficulty crafting a guidance that could help field staff determine jurisdiction, the report notes.
Furthermore, EPA estimates 20 million acres of wetland and isolated waters lost protections in the lower 48 states thanks to the muddled Supreme Court decisions (E&ENews PM, April 14).
Stakeholders
Despite the presidential support, the debate among hunting and fishing groups, environmentalists, and industry stakeholders remains fiery.
The traditionally conservative "hook and bullet" crowd has joined with environmentalists in supporting Feingold's bill.
"The bottom line is virtually all waters of the United States are connected in one way or another," said Scott Yaich, senior director of conservation programs for Ducks Unlimited. "It's really not possible to separate out waters that don't have some impact on ... navigable waters in some form."
Yaich said so-called geographically isolated wetlands often are anything but. "In the case of prairie potholes, the poster children of geographically isolated wetlands, they appear to be isolated ... but at certain water elevations they do have a connection."
He also pointed out that draining wetlands frequently exacerbates the height and frequency of flooding in navigational waters and said contamination can spread from wetlands to navigable waters through groundwater.
The congressional fix should not be a partisan issue, Yaich added, though he acknowledged Democrats have been leading the charge and are the only cosponsors of the Senate bill to date.
"It's become clear the courts are going to be left to vacillate [on Congress' intent] and try to interpret the Supreme Court decision," Yaich said. "Congress just needs to clarify what the intent was and restore the intent through legislation."
Don Parrish, senior director of regulatory relations at the American Farm Bureau, however, has a different take.
"It would be a mistake [to think] Congress did not mean to include the term 'navigable' in the Clean Water Act," he said. "It's there well over 80 times. ... As we read the Clean Water Act, that's the only limiting term we find."
In the past, Parrish said federal agencies overreached in their regulation of wetlands. He said the Rapanos and SWANCC decisions were aimed at putting regulation back on the right course.
"Returning to a time when agencies could broadly use migratory birds to find Clean Water Act jurisdiction is not a very appealing position to be in for farmers and ranchers," Parrish said. He warned that Feingold's bill could spur the regulation of ditches or eroded areas.
"I would hope there's a broad understanding in Congress when you delete the term 'navigable' you're expanding Clean Water Act jurisdiction," he said. "There are no limits to be found in any of the proposals I have seen out there."
Katherine Boyle, E&E reporter
Congress is gearing up for a battle over federal wetland regulation as Democrats and the Obama administration move to clarify two recent Supreme Court decisions they say narrowed Clean Water Act protections for some wetlands.
Senate Environment and Public Works Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) said yesterday that she wants to move legislation on the matter and is hoping to work with her colleagues to reach a compromise.
The panel is eyeing legislation that would amend the Clean Water Act by replacing the phrase "navigable waters" with "waters of the United States." Controversy over the meaning of "navigable waters" has persisted since CWA was passed in 1972.
Supporters of the bill introduced last month -- S. 787, sponsored by Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) -- say the measure would restore the original meaning of "waters of the United States," which they claim was eviscerated by the 2006 Rapanos-Carabell and 2001 Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers decisions in the high court.
Opponents of the effort, including the committee's ranking member James Inhofe (R-Okla.), have said the legislation would expand wetland protections beyond the intent of the Clean Water Act, lead to a number of lawsuits, and create problems for farmers, developers and other industry stakeholders. Inhofe and other Republican members of the committee have asked Boxer to hold a full committee hearing before marking up the bill.
Boxer said the divide often reflects a lawmaker's particular interests, such as agriculture, and does not always follow party lines. "A lot of the issues fall along regional lines," she said yesterday.
East Coast Democrats on the committee including Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) are backing the legislation. In the past, however, Western Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) has avoided endorsing the bill.
House action
On the House side, Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) frames the squabble over Congress' intent a bit more simply.
"Congress made it clear that the Clean Water Act covers tributaries of navigable waters, many streams and most wetlands," he said last week. "I know this because I was there."
As Congress was finalizing the law in 1972, Dingell spoke about the Clean Water Act on the House floor. "The conference bill defines the term 'navigable waters' broadly for water quality purposes," he said in his speech. "It means all 'the waters of the United States' in a geographical sense. It does not mean 'navigable waters of the United States' in the technical sense as we sometimes see in some laws."
Today, Dingell affirms that notion. "For whatever reason, the Supreme Court seemed to feel that language was unclear," he said. "The Clean Water Restoration Act [S. 787] would clear up any doubt that remains."
Transportation and Infrastructure Chairman James Oberstar (D-Minn.) is planning to reintroduce a companion bill in the House this session.
White House support
Meanwhile, the Obama administration has made its support for a congressional fix clear.
U.S. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson has called on Congress to pass legislation that would set clear boundaries for federal wetland regulators.
She said yesterday that staff members in the agency's water office spend half or more of their time working with states on jurisdictional issues for wetlands, describing the time spent "an alarming figure." She said the effort leaves staff with less time to work on actual permits with states.
EPA officials confirmed that the jurisdictional confusion created by Rapanos has been a major drain on resources for the agency in an inspector general report released yesterday.
The Rapanos ruling has affected nearly 500 enforcement cases. In each case, formal enforcement was not pursued due to jurisdictional uncertainty, case priority was lowered because of the confusion, or lack of jurisdiction was cited as an affirmative defense to an enforcement action.
The agency had difficulty crafting a guidance that could help field staff determine jurisdiction, the report notes.
Furthermore, EPA estimates 20 million acres of wetland and isolated waters lost protections in the lower 48 states thanks to the muddled Supreme Court decisions (E&ENews PM, April 14).
Stakeholders
Despite the presidential support, the debate among hunting and fishing groups, environmentalists, and industry stakeholders remains fiery.
The traditionally conservative "hook and bullet" crowd has joined with environmentalists in supporting Feingold's bill.
"The bottom line is virtually all waters of the United States are connected in one way or another," said Scott Yaich, senior director of conservation programs for Ducks Unlimited. "It's really not possible to separate out waters that don't have some impact on ... navigable waters in some form."
Yaich said so-called geographically isolated wetlands often are anything but. "In the case of prairie potholes, the poster children of geographically isolated wetlands, they appear to be isolated ... but at certain water elevations they do have a connection."
He also pointed out that draining wetlands frequently exacerbates the height and frequency of flooding in navigational waters and said contamination can spread from wetlands to navigable waters through groundwater.
The congressional fix should not be a partisan issue, Yaich added, though he acknowledged Democrats have been leading the charge and are the only cosponsors of the Senate bill to date.
"It's become clear the courts are going to be left to vacillate [on Congress' intent] and try to interpret the Supreme Court decision," Yaich said. "Congress just needs to clarify what the intent was and restore the intent through legislation."
Don Parrish, senior director of regulatory relations at the American Farm Bureau, however, has a different take.
"It would be a mistake [to think] Congress did not mean to include the term 'navigable' in the Clean Water Act," he said. "It's there well over 80 times. ... As we read the Clean Water Act, that's the only limiting term we find."
In the past, Parrish said federal agencies overreached in their regulation of wetlands. He said the Rapanos and SWANCC decisions were aimed at putting regulation back on the right course.
"Returning to a time when agencies could broadly use migratory birds to find Clean Water Act jurisdiction is not a very appealing position to be in for farmers and ranchers," Parrish said. He warned that Feingold's bill could spur the regulation of ditches or eroded areas.
"I would hope there's a broad understanding in Congress when you delete the term 'navigable' you're expanding Clean Water Act jurisdiction," he said. "There are no limits to be found in any of the proposals I have seen out there."
Monday, May 4, 2009
SALMON: Obama admin delays Columbia River plan (05/04/2009)
A top White House official has requested further evaluation of a Bush administration plan to balance the needs of salmon and people near the Columbia River.
A letter sent Friday by the Justice Department to U.S. District Judge James Redden in Portland, Ore., requested a delay of up to two months to "more fully understand all aspects" of the plan, which environmentalists have argued would do little to help salmon.
The Bush administration submitted the plan last May to Redden, who had set a Friday deadline for the government to respond to the long-running case.
Environmental groups have argued that salmon populations will not recover until some of the hydroelectric dams in the area are removed. Four dams on the Lower Snake River in Washington state have created a migration bottleneck, threatening imperiled salmon and steelhead.
Todd True, an attorney for the National Wildlife Federation, along with other environmental groups, said the two-month delay was encouraging (Matthew Daly, AP/San Francisco Chronicle, May 1). -- PT
A top White House official has requested further evaluation of a Bush administration plan to balance the needs of salmon and people near the Columbia River.
A letter sent Friday by the Justice Department to U.S. District Judge James Redden in Portland, Ore., requested a delay of up to two months to "more fully understand all aspects" of the plan, which environmentalists have argued would do little to help salmon.
The Bush administration submitted the plan last May to Redden, who had set a Friday deadline for the government to respond to the long-running case.
Environmental groups have argued that salmon populations will not recover until some of the hydroelectric dams in the area are removed. Four dams on the Lower Snake River in Washington state have created a migration bottleneck, threatening imperiled salmon and steelhead.
Todd True, an attorney for the National Wildlife Federation, along with other environmental groups, said the two-month delay was encouraging (Matthew Daly, AP/San Francisco Chronicle, May 1). -- PT
Article from the Marten Law Group:
Obama Administration Revokes Bush-Era ESA Consultation Rule; Decision on Polar Bear Rule Still Pending
By Jessica Ferrell
On April 28, 2009, Secretary of Commerce Gary Locke and Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar announced that their departments are revoking a controversial Endangered Species Act (the "ESA" or the "Act") regulation promulgated at the close of the Bush Administration. The rule briefly allowed federal agencies conducting, permitting or financing projects to decide on their own whether the projects would adversely affect listed species and require consultation with federal resource managers under Section 7 of the Act (the "Consultation Rule"). In a joint statement, the Secretaries announced their determination that the Bush administration's "11th hour regulation ... undermined [ESA] protections." The decision, reached after the departments were directed by President Obama and Congress to reconsider the Consultation Rule, reinstates a process that has been criticized as unduly burdensome. In light of those concerns, the Administration promised to review the 1986 consultation regulations to decide whether to propose any changes to the process. For the foreseeable future at least, it is back to business as before at NOAA Fisheries and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
FULL ARTICLE »
Obama Administration Revokes Bush-Era ESA Consultation Rule; Decision on Polar Bear Rule Still Pending
By Jessica Ferrell
On April 28, 2009, Secretary of Commerce Gary Locke and Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar announced that their departments are revoking a controversial Endangered Species Act (the "ESA" or the "Act") regulation promulgated at the close of the Bush Administration. The rule briefly allowed federal agencies conducting, permitting or financing projects to decide on their own whether the projects would adversely affect listed species and require consultation with federal resource managers under Section 7 of the Act (the "Consultation Rule"). In a joint statement, the Secretaries announced their determination that the Bush administration's "11th hour regulation ... undermined [ESA] protections." The decision, reached after the departments were directed by President Obama and Congress to reconsider the Consultation Rule, reinstates a process that has been criticized as unduly burdensome. In light of those concerns, the Administration promised to review the 1986 consultation regulations to decide whether to propose any changes to the process. For the foreseeable future at least, it is back to business as before at NOAA Fisheries and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
FULL ARTICLE »
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
