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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Dear Ms. Sutley:

We are seeking information on the activities
of the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) with respect to advising
other federal agencies on whether or how to incorporate greenhouse gas
emissions and climate change impacts into National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) analyses.

On February 28, 2008, the International
Center for Technology Assessment, Natural Resources Defense Council,
and Sierra Club filed a petition requesting that CEQ "amend its
regulations to clarify that climate change analyses be included in
environmental review documents." We are very concerned about the
consequences of CEQ acceding to that request.

NEPA, of course, is
a bedrock environmental statute, which requires federal agencies to
consider how their actions could significantly impact the environment.
It is not an appropriate tool to set global climate change policy. Any
attempt to regulate greenhouse gas emissions must be debated on its
merits and not regulated under laws that were never intended for such
purposes. We firmly believe that NEPA should achieve environmental
goals without unnecessarily obstructing economic development. Requiring
analysis of climate change impacts during the NEPA process, especially
at the project-specific level, will slow our economic recovery while
providing no meaningful environmental benefits.

Projects across
the nation are already experiencing delays or being cancelled due to
inappropriate and inefficient implementation and litigation from
existing environmental regulations. The National Surface Transportation
Policy and Revenue Study Commission pointed out that the median time to
complete environmental impact statements for highway projects in recent
years has been as high as 80 months. The Commission noted that these
delays can cause significant increases in project construction costs.

In
light of these concerns and our responsibility to conduct oversight of
these issues, we ask that you provide to us the following documents and
information:

– The specific steps CEQ plans to take in the coming
months to respond to the 2008 petition, including CEQ’s anticipated
timeline and the expected format of that response;

– All draft
Federal Register notices, draft guidance documents, draft regulatory
changes and other draft official communications drafted in response to
the 2008 petition;

– All e-mails and memos to and from you or CEQ
staff, notes and call logs taken by or for you or CEQ staff and all
other documents concerning the substance or format of a response to the
2008 petition;

– All draft Federal Register notices, draft
guidance documents, draft regulatory changes, letters, e-mails, notes,
memos, call logs and other documents created by or for or made
available to you or CEQ staff discussing the issues involved with
incorporating greenhouse gas emissions and climate change impacts into
NEPA analyses, even if not drafted in direct response to the 2008
petition. This includes all documents related to the preparation of the
draft memorandum to all heads of federal agencies transmitted on
October 8, 1997, as well as to the decision not to finalize the
guidance document;

– A list of all Federal, State and local
government agencies, industry groups, non-profit groups, associations,
advocacy groups, relevant stakeholders, contractors, consultants and
private individuals that you or CEQ staff have met with or are
scheduled to meet with regarding the 2008 petition or the issues raised
by the petition from February 28, 2008, through the anticipated
response date;

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

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

Please
provide the documents and information requested above by November 13,
2009. If you have any questions regarding this request, please contact
us or have your staff contact Angie Giancarlo on Senator Inhofe’s staff
at 202-224-XXXX or Brian Clifford on Senator Barrasso’s staff at
202-224-XXXX.

Sincerely,

James M. Inhofe

John Barrasso