Return to 2008 Action Alerts
October 14, 2008
Public Comments Processing
Attention: 1018-AT50
Division of Policy and Directives Management
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
4401 North Fairfax Drive, Suite 222
Arlington, VA 22203
Re: Proposed Rule on Interagency Cooperation Under the Endangered Species Act
(73 Fed. Reg. 47868) (FWS-R9-ES-2008-0093)
Dear Sir or Madam:
The Resource Development Council for Alaska, Inc. (RDC) is writing to express its support for the Proposed Rule on Interagency Cooperation Under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) as published on August 15, 2008. RDC supports the more detailed comments of the American Petroleum Institute (API) submitted in response to the Proposed Rule, as well as the comments of the Alaska Oil and Gas Association. We believe the Proposed Rule should be promulgated as a final rule.
RDC is an Alaskan-based, non-profit, business association comprised of individuals and companies from Alaska’s oil and gas, mining, timber, tourism and fishing industries. Our membership also includes Native regional and village corporations, local governments, organized labor and industry support firms. RDC’s mission is to grow Alaska’s economy through the responsible development of natural resources.
RDC understands that the proposed regulations are partly in response to a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report in 2004 which found that despite improvements, the ESA consultation process “remained contentious between the Services and action agencies.” The report noted that the consultation process remained “burdensome.”
The Proposed Rule would reduce the number of unnecessary consultations and maximize limited agency resources. Such action would improve the efficiency and the effectiveness of interagency consultations.
RDC supports the clarifications pertaining to the definitions, as well as the clarification of the appropriate causation standard to be used in determining the affects of agency action. We also support the minor procedural changes to “informal” consultations.
Moreover, RDC agrees with the Service that “there is no requirement to consult on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions’ contribution to global warming and its associated impacts on list species (e.g. polar bears).” The proposed regulations appropriately clarify that the ESA consultation process is not required for every federal action that may have GHG emissions. Such a requirement goes far beyond the intent of the ESA and would have far-reaching implications for America’s economy and industries, ranging from oil and gas to agriculture and transportation. It would place a heavy burden on American business and the regulatory agencies. In fact, it would result in far more consultations than current agency resources could sustain. Ultimately, such a requirement would impact the standard of living for most Americans.
In conclusion, RDC encourages the Service to promulgate the Proposed Rule into a final rule. We very much appreciate the opportunity to provide comments on this issue.
Sincerely,
RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL
For Alaska, Inc.
