Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Stops the Green Agenda in the Columbia River Basin

6/12/2025

Fact Sheets

View Original

Action Summary

Revocation of Prior Action: President Trump signed a Presidential Memorandum revoking the Biden Administration’s memorandum aimed at “equitable treatment for fish” in the Columbia River Basin.
Withdrawal from Agreements: Directs the Secretary of Energy, Interior, Commerce, and the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works to withdraw from Biden’s related agreements—including the December 14, 2023 Memorandum of Understanding—and to coordinate with the Council on Environmental Quality to revise environmental review processes.
Prioritizing Energy Dominance: Reaffirms commitment to American energy infrastructure and natural resource development, emphasizing reliable and affordable energy resources over speculative climate change concerns.
Economic and Environmental Balance: Highlights the negative implications of dam operations on the Lower Snake River, including loss of hydroelectric capacity, impacts on agriculture, shipping, and regional recreation, while promoting the responsible future of wildlife populations.
America First Policies: Emphasizes ending the previous administration’s priorities by reinvigorating the clean coal industry, reversing restrictive environmental regulations (notably in Alaska), and declaring a National Energy Emergency to unlock domestic energy production.

Risks & Considerations

The revocation of the previous administration’s environmental policies could lead to increased energy production and lower costs, but it may also result in environmental degradation and loss of biodiversity, particularly in the Columbia River Basin.
There is a risk that the focus on energy dominance and economic growth could overshadow environmental concerns, potentially leading to long-term ecological impacts that may not be immediately apparent.
The withdrawal from agreements and the revision of environmental review processes could create uncertainty and instability in regulatory frameworks, affecting stakeholders involved in environmental conservation and energy production.
Vanderbilt University may need to consider how these changes in environmental policy could impact its research programs, particularly those related to environmental science, energy policy, and sustainability.

Impacted Programs

Vanderbilt’s Environmental Science and Policy Program may face challenges in aligning its research and educational objectives with the new federal priorities, potentially affecting funding and collaboration opportunities.
The Vanderbilt Institute for Energy and Environment could see shifts in research focus and funding availability, necessitating adjustments in project planning and execution.
Community Engagement Initiatives related to environmental conservation and sustainability may need to be reevaluated to ensure they align with the changing policy landscape.
Vanderbilt’s partnerships with federal agencies and other institutions in environmental research may be impacted, requiring strategic adjustments to maintain collaboration and funding.

Financial Impact

The reallocation of federal funds away from environmental conservation initiatives could impact Vanderbilt’s funding landscape, particularly for research projects focused on sustainability and ecological preservation.
Vanderbilt University might experience changes in its grant application strategies, as federal priorities shift towards energy production and economic growth.
There may be increased opportunities for Vanderbilt to secure funding for research and development in energy policy and infrastructure, particularly through collaborations with the Department of Energy and other federal agencies.
The focus on energy dominance could lead to new research opportunities in energy efficiency, renewable energy technologies, and environmental impact assessments.

Relevance Score: 3 (The order presents moderate risks involving compliance or ethics, particularly in environmental and energy-related research and programs.)

Key Actions

Vanderbilt’s Environmental and Energy Research Programs should assess the impact of the revocation of the Columbia River Basin Memorandum on ongoing and future research projects. This includes evaluating how changes in federal environmental policies might affect research funding and partnerships.
The Office of Federal Relations should engage with policymakers to understand the implications of the shift in energy policy on federal funding opportunities. By aligning research initiatives with the new energy priorities, Vanderbilt can position itself to secure funding for projects that support energy infrastructure and innovation.
Vanderbilt’s School of Engineering should explore opportunities to develop technologies that enhance energy efficiency and sustainability in line with the administration’s focus on energy dominance. This could involve partnerships with industry leaders and government agencies to advance research and development in clean energy technologies.
The Department of Political Science should conduct research on the broader societal and economic impacts of the administration’s energy policies. This research can provide valuable insights into how these policies affect regional economies, energy markets, and environmental conservation efforts.
Vanderbilt’s Center for Environmental Management Studies should consider hosting forums and workshops to discuss the implications of the administration’s energy and environmental policies. These events can facilitate dialogue among researchers, policymakers, and industry leaders, enhancing Vanderbilt’s role as a thought leader in environmental and energy policy.

Opportunities

The executive order presents an opportunity for Vanderbilt’s Research Centers to expand their focus on energy infrastructure and innovation. By leveraging expertise in energy policy and technology, Vanderbilt can contribute to the development of sustainable energy solutions that align with national priorities.
Vanderbilt can capitalize on the increased emphasis on energy production by developing new programs and partnerships with energy companies and government agencies. This could include joint research initiatives, technology development projects, and collaborative educational programs, enhancing Vanderbilt’s reputation and reach in the energy sector.
The focus on reducing regulatory burdens offers an opportunity for Vanderbilt’s Law School to engage in policy analysis and advocacy. By providing evidence-based recommendations, the school can influence how these regulatory changes are implemented and ensure they support both economic growth and environmental protection.
The order’s emphasis on energy dominance aligns with Vanderbilt’s commitment to innovation and sustainability. The university can develop targeted outreach and support programs for students and researchers interested in energy policy and technology, enhancing their educational opportunities and success.
By engaging with the broader energy community and policymakers, Vanderbilt can position itself as a leader in the national conversation on energy policy. Hosting conferences, workshops, and public forums on the implications of energy policies can further establish Vanderbilt as a hub for innovative energy thought and practice.

Relevance Score: 4 (The order presents the potential for major process changes required for Vanderbilt’s programs due to shifts in energy policy and funding impacts.)

Average Relevance Score: 3

Timeline for Implementation

N/A: No explicit deadlines are provided in the memorandum; the directives are to be executed as the responsible agencies review and withdraw from the specified agreements.

Relevance Score: 1

Impacted Government Organizations

Department of Energy (Secretary of Energy): Directed to withdraw from agreements and revise environmental review processes related to the revoked MOU.
Department of the Interior (Secretary of the Interior): Tasked with coordinating the withdrawal from agreements and revising environmental review processes.
Department of Commerce (Secretary of Commerce): Instructed to support the withdrawal from the MOU and help revise environmental review practices.
Department of the Army – Assistant Secretary for Civil Works: Required to participate in the review and withdrawal process from the existing MOU.
Council on Environmental Quality: Engaged in coordinating with the specified agencies to review and revise environmental review processes.

Relevance Score: 2 (A moderate number of Federal agencies are impacted by the directives to revise, withdraw, and coordinate policy actions.)

Responsible Officials

Secretary of Energy – Instructed to withdraw from agreements and coordinate with the Council on Environmental Quality regarding environmental review processes.
Secretary of the Interior – Tasked with withdrawing from previous agreements and revising environmental review processes linked to the revoked executive action.
Secretary of Commerce – Directed to withdraw from prior agreements and assist in reviewing environmental processes.
Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works – Responsible for withdrawing from agreements related to the executive action.

Relevance Score: 5 (Directives affect White House and Cabinet officials, as multiple cabinet-level secretaries are tasked with implementation.)