Senate Hearings Before the Committee on Appropriations
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
S. HRG. 111–859 Senate Hearings Before the Committee on Appropriations Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Fiscal Year 2011 111th CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY NONDEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations, 2011 S. HRG. 111–859 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011 HEARINGS BEFORE A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION Department of Agriculture Department of the Interior Environmental Protection Agency Nondepartmental Witnesses Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 54–974 PDF WASHINGTON : 2011 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii, Chairman ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri TOM HARKIN, Iowa MITCH MCCONNELL, Kentucky BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama HERB KOHL, Wisconsin JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire PATTY MURRAY, Washington ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota SUSAN COLLINS, Maine MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio JACK REED, Rhode Island LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey BEN NELSON, Nebraska MARK PRYOR, Arkansas JON TESTER, Montana ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania CHARLES J. HOUY, Staff Director BRUCE EVANS, Minority Staff Director SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California, Chairman ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire HERB KOHL, Wisconsin LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota SUSAN COLLINS, Maine JACK REED, Rhode Island BEN NELSON, Nebraska JON TESTER, Montana DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii (ex officio) Professional Staff PETER KIEFHABER GINNY JAMES RACHEL TAYLOR SCOTT DALZELL CHRIS WATKINS LEIF FONNESBECK (Minority) REBECCA BENN (Minority) BRENT WILES (Minority) Administrative Support KATIE BATTE (Minority) (II) CONTENTS WEDNESDAY, MARCH 3, 2010 Page Environmental Protection Agency .......................................................................... 1 WEDNESDAY, MARCH 9, 2010 Department of the Interior: Office of the Secretary ............................................. 53 WEDNESDAY, MARCH 17, 2010 Department of Agriculture: Forest Service ............................................................ 109 Nondepartmental Witnesses ................................................................................... 141 (III) DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRON- MENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPRO- PRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011 WEDNESDAY, MARCH 3, 2010 U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS, Washington, DC. The subcommittee met at 9:33 a.m., in room SD–124, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Dianne Feinstein (chairman) pre- siding. Present: Senators Feinstein, Reed, Nelson, Tester, Alexander, and Murkowski. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY STATEMENT OF HON. LISA P. JACKSON, ADMINISTRATOR ACCOMPANIED BY BARBARA BENNETT, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR DIANNE FEINSTEIN Senator FEINSTEIN. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I want to welcome you to the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee and our hearing on the fiscal year 2011 budget request for the United States Environmental Protection Agency, more fondly known as the EPA. I am very pleased to welcome back Administrator Lisa Jackson to testify before the subcommittee. She is joined by Chief Financial Officer, Barbara Bennett. Welcome. Since this is our first subcommittee hearing of the year, I would also like to welcome my colleague, Senator Lamar Alexander, the distinguished ranking member of this subcommittee, and say how much I am looking forward to working with you. We had a good year last year, and there is no reason why we will not have one again this year. So welcome and it is great to sit next to you. Turning to the budget, the administration has requested a total of $10.02 billion for the EPA for fiscal year 2011. That is a 3 per- cent cut below fiscal year 2010’s enacted level, which means that EPA proposes to tighten its belt and reduce funding for a number of programs. That recognizes, of course, the constraints of these very difficult economic times, at least to some extent. The budget requests $2 billion for the Clean Water State Revolv- ing Fund and $1.29 billion for the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund. Overall, that is a 5 percent cut for these very popular pro- grams. (1) 2 The request further eliminates $157 million for congressionally designated water and sewer projects. Again, a very popular pro- gram. The request also reduces funding for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative by $175 million, a 37 percent cut from the enacted level, for a total of $300 million. Because of these reductions, it might be easy to say that EPA’s budget is going in the wrong direction, but I would like to point out that this subcommittee provided a 35 percent increase to EPA’s budget for fiscal year 2010. EPA also received an additional $7.22 billion from the stimulus act, known as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), including $6 billion in funds for water and sewer infrastructure alone. I really believe that America’s water and sewer infrastructure is outdated, and I remember the day before bottled water when you could literally drink water from the tap anywhere in the United States. We have more or less regressed, and, therefore, the ability to provide clean water is extraordinarily important. We are going to have to see that we do not backslide with these cuts. I know we had a large amount last year. I guess it was the largest water and sewer infrastructure program that we have ever done, but we do not want to backslide. I would like to commend the administration for shifting re- sources within this tight budget to provide increases for other crit- ical priorities, starting with climate change. Most importantly, the budget includes a $43 million increase for a total of $56 million to move forward with regulation of greenhouses gases under the Clean Air Act (CAA). I am looking forward to hearing more detail from you, Administrator Jackson, on how you would expect these funds to be used. I am also very pleased to see that the budget includes $21 mil- lion to implement the greenhouse gas reporting rule that this sub- committee directed the agency to promulgate in 2008. That is a 24 percent increase. This rule takes effect this year and will provide EPA with critical data on some of the Nation’s largest emission sources. I am also pleased to see that the administration has used this budget request to address core air and water quality improve- ments. Overall, the request provides a 36 percent increase for grants to States to monitor and improve air quality, for a total of $309 million. The request includes a 20 percent increase for State water pollu- tion control grants to improve water quality permitting and en- forcement, for a total of $274 million. And the budget also contains several initiatives to improve com- munity cleanup efforts, starting with a 24 percent increase for the Brownfields programs for a total of $215 million. For me that is a welcome increase. Now, when we are talking about numbers, I think it is also im- portant that we discuss some of the policy decisions that drive this budget because, after all, a budget is in fact a policy document. Specifically, I want to talk about the choices that EPA is making as it moves forward with the regulation of greenhouse gas emis- sions under the CAA. 3 It has been 3 years since the United States Supreme Court ruled in Massachusetts v. EPA that EPA has a legal responsibility under the CAA to determine whether greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare. Justice Stevens in that decision said the fol- lowing: ‘‘Because greenhouse gases fit well within the Clean Air Act’s capacious definition of air pollutant, we hold that EPA has the statutory authority to regulate emissions of such gases. EPA can avoid taking further action only if it determines that green- house gases do not contribute to climate change or if it provides some reasonable explanation as to why it cannot or will not exercise its discretion to determine whether they do.’’ This is the opinion. ‘‘Nor can EPA avoid its statutory obligation by noting the uncertainty surrounding various features of climate change and concluding that it would, therefore, be better not to regulate at this time. That EPA would prefer not to regulate greenhouse gases because of some residual uncertainty is irrelevant. The statutory question is whether sufficient information exists to make an endangerment finding.’’ The Court’s language was clear and unambiguous. EPA is ex- pected to follow the CAA. That