A18.3 EPA's work with State and Local decision-makers on the development of "livable communities" is undertaken primary through the voluntary program entitled "Transportation Partners." Transportation Partners was founded in 1995 as a cooperative program and has sought to reduce the growth of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) through the adoption of measures that provide or promote the use of non-single occupancy vehicle transportation choices for citizens. As part of the Climate Change Action Plan, Transportation Partners plays an important role in the nation's commitment to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2000. Despite funding levels significantly below original projects, Transportation Partners has exceeded its target number of partners and is now serving over 300 partners nationwide. Transportation Partners works with non-governmental organizations, or Principal Partners, to provide assistance to transportation projects across the country. The Principal Partners work directly with civic organizations, local and regional governments, transportation management associations and private businesses, referred to as project partners, to institute VMTreducing transportation projects. Publications and technical assistance are provided to the project partners in three broad areas: community design or redevelopment strategies that facilitate walking, bicycling, and transit; economic incentives or market based measures such as parking cash-out programs or peak-travel pricing; and technology based projects such as telecommuting and automatic fare collection. Principal Partners have also hosted five major conferences this year with total attendance of over 1800 participants. This year, over 75 local workshops, on topics ranging from community walkability to calculating emissions from municipal fleets, and attracting more than 1000 participants, were held around the country. Transportation Partners has been actively engaged in quantifying the carbon emissions benefits from these VMT reduction strategies. In 1996, Transportation Partners have reduced an estimated 76 million VMT or 0.11 MMTCe. Our data collection for 1997 is on-going, but initial estimates indicate that reductions for this year may be as high as 0.3 MMTCe. Transportation Partners results in a number of additional benefits beyond greenhouse gas emission reductions. For example, air, water, and noise pollution are all reduced through the program's efforts. In addition, toxic chemicals, used motor oil, and vehicle parts disposal all result from automobile travel. By reducing VMT, Transportation Partners also is Q18.4 Please provide the level of funding for EPA's "work with state and local decision-makers to develop and implement transportation improvements that encourage 'livable communities' compact, walkable and mixed use development – while reducing the growth in vehicle travel, emissions, and congestion" in FY 1997 and FY 1998, and the amount requested for FY 1999. A18.4 See response to Question 29. - Q18.5 Please identify all recipients of the funds--by fiscal year and by amount for each recipient--identified in the response to question 18.3 above. A18.5 EPA interprets this question to be based on the misconception that EPA provides financial assistance to partners in this program. EPA does not provide any funding to program participants. Instead, EPA uses its funding to disseminate reliable financial and technical information to program partners to assist them in making better decisions for investing their own money. With improved information through voluntary partnerships, companies are able to make investments that simultaneously reduce greenhouse gas emissions and reduce energy bills. Buildings Initiatives Q19. On page 9 of your written testimony, you state: "3. Buildings Initiatives. The buildings sector, which includes both Q19.1 What is EPA's current (FY 1998) level of funding for such buildings activities and what level is requested for FY 1999? A19.1 FY1998 Enacted = $38,800,000 Q19.2 Your description of EPA's “Buildings Initiatives” is very similar in many respects to activities supported by the Department of Energy. How do they overlap or duplicate each other, and how do they differ? A19.2 There is no duplication between EPA's and DOE's buildings initiatives. Because a majority of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions are a result of energy consumption, and because the solution to climate change requires the more efficient use of our energy resources to deliver the services we need, it is most appropriate that the U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency work together to improve the energy pathway of the United States. Under the Climate Change Technology Initiative's Buildings Sector programs, DOE and EPA have distinct but complimentary responsibilities that, in total, represent an integrated and coordinated Federal approach to providing the mid-term and long-term efficiency gains needed to help meet environmental and energy policy objectives. DOE's budget request outlines their major responsibilities. For example, DOE makes significant contributions in the Research, Development, and Deployment of advanced technologies that will provide continued opportunities for cost-effective investments that reduce energy use. DOE also issues energy efficiency standards that ensure a minimum efficiency level for many types of building equipment being sold today. Focusing on the significant opportunity for cost-effective pollution prevention without regulation, EPA joins DOE in working to form partnerships to deploy today's highly efficient energy technologies. There are some areas in particular where DOE and EPA have worked together for example, the Energy Star Label. The Energy Star label is the Federal government's symbol for energy efficiency, and it bears the names of both EPA and DOE. By working together, EPA and DOE have been able to provide a unified message to equipment manufacturers and consumers. EPA and DOE have formed hundreds of successful partnerships with equipment manufacturers, and the voluntary label can be found on thousands of different products. Because the Energy Star label bears both an environmental and an energy message, the DOE and EPA partnership is a sensible approach to program implementation. To avoid any duplication of effort, there is a Memorandum of Understanding between the two agencies that clearly designates the distinct responsibilities of each agency under the Energy Star labeling program. Carbon Removal Q20. On pages 9 and 10 of your written testimony, you state: "4. Carbon Removal. EPA working with the U.S. Department of Agriculture will encourage the forest products sector to achieve greater reliance on biomass fuels as an energy source and be a supplier of carbon sequestration credits through afforestation and reforestation activities. EPA will accelerate efforts to promote the use of livestock based fertilizer products and more efficient use of nutrients from all sources." Depending on the interpretations of Kyoto, we see tremendous opportunities to advance the objectives/goals of Kyoto using land management tools. Among these are forest management practices. Kyoto could create incentives to engage in afforestation activities, e.g. conversion of agricultural lands for conservation purposes or agroforestry. In addition, forest managers might engage in sustainable practices that increase carbon sequestration on existing forests. Kyoto also creates greater opportunities for the use of biomass as a "climate neutral" source of energy production. Q20.1 Please describe EPA's “efforts to promote the use of livestock based fertilizer products and more efficient use of nutrients from all sources." A20.1 In FY 1997 EPA convened a conference entitled "Strategies to Capitalize on the Animal Manure Resource" in cooperation with The Fertilizer Institute. The conference brought together many stakeholders including livestock producers and their national organizations, land grant university agricultural scientists, fertilizer dealers and manufacturers, federal and state agencies, agricultural equipment manufacturers, and agriculture organizations. Its goal was to start a national dialogue on the creation of market incentives that encourage the widespread and profitable use of animal manures in environmentally safe systems. One direct result of this conference was the FY 1997 funding of a pilot project in Texas in cooperation with USDA's Natural Resource Conservation Service to evaluate the feasibility of collecting, processing, and marketing dairy manure. In FY 1998, EPA, in coordination with USDA's Natural Resource Conservation Service, Cooperative State Research Extension and Education Service, and Agricultural Research Service, began an interagency agreement to develop threshold levels for phosphorus in soils throughout the United States. These levels will enable states to base livestock manure land application guidance or regulations on good science. In addition, many states fund nutrient management demonstration projects through EPA's Section 319 grant program (nonpoint sources). EPA will Crop Advisers on the environmental and agronomic benefits of proper application of livestock manure. Q20.2 What is EPA's current (FY 1998) level of funding “efforts to promote the use of livestock based fertilizer products and more efficient use of nutrients from all sources” and what level is requested for FY 1999? The level of funding for the Section 319 projects by states either in FY 1998 or FY 1999 is unknown at this time. Q20.3 Please identify all recipients of the funds--by fiscal year and by amount for each recipient--identified in the response to question 20.2 above. A20.3 FY '98 Interagency Agreement with the Natural Resources Conservation Service. Funds will be transferred to land grant universities in the areas of concern: $120,000. Recipients for the rest of FY '98 and FY'99 funds have not yet been identified. Crosscutting Analysis and Approaches Q21. On page 10 of your written testimony, you state: "5. Crosscutting Analysis and Approaches. To build support for and the institutional capacity needed to implement a domestic and international carbon emissions trading program, EPA will work with developing nations and states and localities. Emissions from developing countries are growing rapidly and are projected to exceed those of developed countries within the next forty years. An effective, efficient global solution to climate change must be market-based and must involve both developed and developing countries. The Administration and EPA will work to secure additional international support for the American vision of global climate protection reflected in the Kyoto Protocol by assisting key developing countries in their efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and address global climate change. EPA will also expand its work with states, which are key players, in efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. EPA will provide support to states to help develop emission inventories and voluntary action plans, and implement and expand promising policy options identified by states in the greenhouse gas |