Democrats to unveil climate-focused framework today: “House Democrats will unveil a set
of infrastructure principles today, as questions linger over how to pay for a long-awaited bill that will address — among other things — transit, rail, highways and the impact of climate change. House Transportation & Infrastructure Chairman Peter DeFazio
(D-Ore.) plans to present the principles to his caucus during a closed-door meeting this morning that will be followed at 10 a.m. by a public rollout of the framework in the Radio-TV Gallery's Capitol Visitor Center. Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Majority
Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) and Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) will unveil the principles. This afternoon, the House Ways and Means Committee will debate the thorny question of how to pay for the infrastructure bill. By releasing the bill's principles,
Democrats may be hoping to bolster their argument that they can do more than one big thing. In other words, they can accomplish legislative priorities while pursuing the impeachment of President Trump. A prominent witness at the Ways and Means hearing this
afternoon will be D.J. Gribbin, who served as Trump's infrastructure adviser until the spring of 2018. While in the White House, Gribbin helped draft a $1 trillion infrastructure plan that never materialized and was criticized by Democrats for relying too
heavily on public-private partnerships. Although the plan never came to fruition, it contained suggestions for streamlining the infrastructure permitting process that were later incorporated into the administration's plan for updating the National Environmental
Policy Act. Indeed, the administration earlier this month called for overhauling NEPA to shorten the time it takes projects to get approved and limit consideration of environmental concerns. Gribbin, the founder of consulting firm Madrus LLC, said in a phone
interview yesterday that he plans to tout the proposed overhaul of NEPA as part of his testimony. "By far the biggest economic impact that you can have in infrastructure is to rationalize the NEPA process and the permitting process," Gribbin said.”
http://bit.ly/38M5p5y
[E&E News, 1/29/20]
OPINION: Trump’s rewriting of NEPA rulebook would mean less power for the public: “For 50
years the public and the environment have benefited from this visionary law. One local example is worthy of mention. In the 2000s, BLM issued dozens of oil and gas leases in the Thompson Divide without NEPA compliance. The leases posed a threat to the Divide’s
historic uses and unique natural values, but BLM failed to consider those impacts before selling them. The leases became subject of extraordinary controversy. For years, BLM ignored the problem. Public outrage grew and legal challenges mounted. Ultimately,
BLM decided that a transparent NEPA process was the only way to resolve the problem. More than a decade after issuing the leases, BLM decided to take a hard look at its decision to sell them. Thorough environmental analysis and public engagement led to the
conclusion that 25 of the leases should be cancelled. Local communities celebrated the outcome with unanimity. Failure to comply with NEPA caused the problem, complying with the law resulted in a roundly supported solution. But NEPA has opponents, often people
and corporations that stand to benefit from less public engagement, and those who are unconcerned with environmental impacts. Since inauguration, the Trump administration has been doing the bidding of NEPA opponents. The agenda is called streamlining. Basically,
streamlining is about reducing public participation and environmental analysis — silencing us and ignoring potential impacts to expedite development.”
[Glenwood Springs Post Independent, 1/29/20]
http://bit.ly/2RXVe7k
EDITORIAL: Development reviews shouldn't take so long to complete: “Right now, the average
federal environmental review lasts longer than a presidential term. If work began today on an environmental impact statement, it on average wouldn’t be ready until July 2024. There are reasons why these assessments shouldn’t be rushed. A development, done
wrongly, can harm the environment for generations if not centuries. It can affect the air we breathe and the water we depend on to survive. In the worst-case scenario, it can lead to the extinction of a species. But there has to be a balance between completing
these important assessments and the development that helps to drive Wyoming’s economy. Tilting too far in either direction is a mistake. In many cases, the process currently takes too long. That doesn’t mean we should get rid of protections, but it does suggest
there is room for reform. The Trump administration has recently proposed an overhaul of the National Environmental Policy Act – the law that requires an assessment before proposed infrastructure projects. While there are parts of the overhaul that give us
pause, we support the effort to require the process last no longer than two years. The law – sometimes referred to as NEPA – was signed by then President Richard Nixon in 1970. It came after a time when the rules were tilted too far in favor of industry, leading
to concerning levels of pollution.”
[Casper Star Tribune, 1/29/20]
http://bit.ly/36DqHkv
OPINION: Trump’s Environmental Deregulation Will Have Long-Lasting Consequences: “There
is no question about President Trump’s dedication to eroding critical environmental regulations and procedures. From shrinking treasured monuments in our backyard to purging greenhouse gas emissions standards, his administration has mastered the art of deregulation.
The running list of poor environmental policies and bad decision-making will leave longstanding impressions on our climate, land, air and water well after his eventual exit from office. To kick off the new year, Trump is determined to grind down one of our
greatest environmental safeguards, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). It’s known as the “Magna Carta of Federal environmental laws” and has been at work for 50 years, keeping the United States more secure from environmental threats. NEPA has some
of the more underappreciated procedures in place, but it is monumental because it requires agencies to consider the negative impacts of a proposed project, idea or action before moving forward. NEPA also allows for public comment on actions that could have
damaging environmental, social and economic outcomes. Creating this avenue for the public to provide input was one of the best things to come out of the Nixon administration, and trimming NEPA in 2020 should be considered hazardous and un-American. Trump claims
that NEPA creates too many delays which “waste money, keep projects from breaking ground, and deny jobs to our nation’s incredible workers.” However, it’s important to remember that those “delays” stem from allowing people to have a voice in the process and
requiring agencies to consider a proposal’s wide range of impacts. The value of transparent and responsible government is greater than expedited government projects.”
[Daily Utah Chronicle, 1/29/20]
http://bit.ly/38PQTtD
DOI Is Speeding Harm to Lands Before Election Day: “Last week, an analysis published by
public lands advocacy group The Center for Western Priorities, revealed 74 policy changes and 120 alterations to Endangered Species Act (ESA) protections that the Department of the Interior intends to take before the November elections. All of the actions
benefit the oil, gas, or agriculture industries. Some of the benefactors include former lobbying clients of Interior Secretary David Bernhardt. It can be hard to comprehend the ways in which the Trump administration’s corruption impacts your daily life. If
Jared Kushner accepts tens of millions of dollars from secret foreign investors while conducting foreign policy without Congressional oversight, does it really trickle down to your bottom line? But that’s different at the Department of the Interior. There,
former lobbyists for, and employees of the industries it regulates, are actively trying to destroy the world we live in. For example, one of the proposed policy changes strips environmental protections from 200,000 acres of Bureau of Land Management land
in central Montana, opening up the area for petroleum extraction. An early version of the proposal solicited local input and set aside areas of particular natural beauty, biodiversity, or importance for protection, while allowing drilling elsewhere. Then,
without explanation and behind closed doors, DOI decided last May to move ahead without that public input and open the whole area up to drilling. That area is where I go elk hunting. It holds some of the largest bulls in the state, but that population could
be threatened if drilling goes forward in their habitat. Similar impacts are likely coming to public lands near you.”
[Outside Magazine, 1/28/20]
http://bit.ly/38PUtUE
We can’t trust Trump to update a critical environmental law, professors say: “Earlier this
month, the Trump Administration’s Council on Environmental Quality proposed changes to their regulations on the implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler greeted the changes with glee, calling NEPA regulations
a, “Frankenstein of a regulatory regime” and a “welfare project” for trial attorneys.” The juxtaposition of the proposed changes and Wheeler’s comments demonstrate the problem with the possible reforms. NEPA passed overwhelmingly in the House and unanimously
in the Senate in 1970, and was signed into law by President Nixon. NEPA’s most important provisions required federal agencies to assess the environmental impacts of a wide variety of federal and federally-supported actions prior to moving forward on (or funding)
those actions. The idea behind requiring this process was to inculcate an environmental mindset in federal agencies that would lead them to either abandon or mitigate some of their most environmentally harmful activities. We note that NEPA is said to be the
U.S. law most widely emulated by other countries. Agencies must perform an assessment of their action and then either assert that there will be no environmental impact, or prepare a much more detailed, judicially reviewable report on the impact to the environment.
These reports -- including Environmental Impact Statements or Environmental Assessments or declarations of exemption -- must be made available for public input and its inadequacy can be challenged in federal court. The actions affected by this requirement
range from building dams, to the construction of the Keystone pipeline to the decision to allow the import of Beluga Whales.”
[NJ.com, 1/27/20]
http://bit.ly/2GC2ksA
Great Lakes groups decry Trump changes to National Environmental Policy Act: “Fifty-five
groups from across the Great Lakes region on Tuesday urged the Trump administration to stop its effort to relax core federal environmental regulations. The groups urged the administration to abandon plans to change how environmental reviews are conducted by
federal agencies under the National Environmental Policy Act. Since it became federal law in 1970, NEPA has guided how every federal agency conducts reviews of the environmental impacts of major projects. The Trump administration is proposing to shorten review
periods and the public input process in an effort to speed up projects. In a letter to Council on Environmental Quality Chair Mary Neumayr, the groups, including the Minnesota Environmental Partnership, also asked the administration for a longer, 180-day public
comment period on the proposed changes. They also asked for a federal hearing to be held in the Great Lakes region. The administration has given the public only 60 days to comment on the revision to NEPA regulations and two public hearings: one in Washington,
D.C., and one in Denver. The letter includes environmental and civic groups from New York to Minnesota, but also religious orders, research institutes, real estate agencies, landscapers and groups representing retired teachers and charter boat companies. “This
rollback of the NEPA process will short-circuit environmental reviews and restrict the public’s voice. Great Lakes residents want to be able to voice their concerns at a public hearing and to have a more reasonable amount of time to evaluate and comment on
this major change to how large projects will be evaluated,” said Rachel Granneman, staff attorney for the Environmental Law & Policy Center.”
[Duluth News Tribune, 1/29/20]
http://bit.ly/2GyIKxA
Justin McCarthy
Interim Director, NEPA Campaign
The Partnership Project
1300 L St NW
Washington, DC 20005 USA
C: (540) 312-3797
E: jmccarthy@partnershipproject.org
The Partnership Project, a registered 501 (c) (3) non-profit, is a collaborative effort of over 20 of the country’s most influential advocacy organizations, including Sierra Club, Defenders of Wildlife, League of Conservation Voters,
Earthjustice, and Natural Resources Defense Council.