June 28, 2013
Director Sylvia Burwell
Office of Management and Budget
725 17th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20503
Washington, DC 20503
Secretary Tom Vilsack
Department of Agriculture
1400 Independence Ave., SW
Washington, DC 20250
Secretary Sally Jewell
Department of the Interior
1849 C Street, NW
Washington, DC 20240
Dear Director Burwell, Secretary
Vilsack, and Secretary Jewell:
We write to request an action plan
regarding the current budget framework for fire suppression and prevention
activities and what can be done to move forward to ensure both suppression and
prevention are adequately funded in future budgets. In a Senate Energy and Natural Resources
Committee hearing earlier this month on wildland fire management it was clear
that the current approach is unacceptable.
Federal fire program budgets, wildfire
frequency and intensity, and associated losses have been a concern for many
years. Because the Administration’s
annual budget requests to Congress propose to fund the increasing 10-year rolling
average for wildland fire suppression costs within the current funding level of
the Forest Service and Department of the Interior’s discretionary
appropriations, increases in suppression expenditures have caused significant
decreases in funding for the non-fire programs including those that keep wildfire
suppression costs down, such as hazardous fuels reduction, cost-share programs
for the acquisition of fire apparatus with local partner agencies, and assistance
for community wildfire planning. This shift in funding to fire suppression has
taken a toll on the agencies budgets.
Just ten years ago, fighting fires accounted for 13 percent of the
Forest Service budget; last year it was over 40 percent.
In a time when fire activity and costs
are steadily rising, the 10-year rolling average budget formula that the
agencies have used to set the annual budget request for suppression
expenditures has translated into shortfalls in available suppression funds
nearly every year since the mid-1990s. When the budgeted amount is
insufficient, the agency continues to suppress fires by reallocating funds from
other non-fire programs. This practice is called fire borrowing. This approach to
paying for firefighting is nonsensical and further increases wildland fire
costs.
The Federal Land Assistance, Management and
Enhancement (FLAME) Act was enacted in 2009 to
address these very issues. The FLAME Act
authorized the establishment of two reserve accounts to provide additional
suppression funding for large, emergency wildfire incidents, above and beyond the
10-year average annual suppression expenditures. In addition, any balances
remaining in the FLAME accounts were to carry-over into future years so that
funds would be available for the inevitable, high cost years and not have to be
borrowed from other program accounts. Despite
Congressional intent, OMB has forced the agencies to implement the FLAME Act in
a manner that makes it ineffective:
instead of funding the FLAME account in addition to the 10-year average
cost of suppression, the account is funded as part of the 10-year average cost
of suppression. Although authorized, no
additional funding has been requested for the FLAME reserve accounts above the
10-year average cost of suppression.
Thus, fire borrowing has continued to occur.
We are also concerned about the
dramatic cuts to hazardous fuels treatments proposed in the FY2014 President’s
budget request. For example, the Forest
Service treated 1.87 million acres for hazardous fuels in FY2012, but expects
to treat only 685,000 acres in FY2014. Our
understanding is that these cuts were based on OMB’s continued skepticism about
the efficacy of hazardous fuels treatments. We whole-heartedly disagree with
OMB on this point.
We look forward to hearing from
you. If you or your staff should have
any questions, please contact Meghan Conklin (202-224-8046) on the Senate
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Majority Staff or Lucy Murfitt
(202-224-4971) on Minority Staff.
Sincerely,
Ron Wyden Lisa Murkowski
Chairman Ranking
Member
Energy and Natural
Resources Committee Energy
and Natural Resources Committee
_____________________________ _____________________________
Mark Udall James
Risch
United States Senator United
States Senator
No comments:
Post a Comment