Stopping Radical Environmentalism to Generate Power for the Columbia River Basin

6/12/2025

Presidential Memoranda

View Original

Action Summary

Objective: Counter “radical green agenda” policies by revoking prior environmental directives that risk reducing energy generation in the Columbia River Basin.
Revocation of Prior Memorandum: Reverses the September 27, 2023 Memorandum which promoted environmental priorities (e.g., equitable treatment for fish) over maintaining secure, affordable hydroelectric power.
Withdrawal from Litigation Actions: Directs key department heads to withdraw from the December 14, 2023 Memorandum of Understanding and related litigation actions in the Columbia River System case.
Rescinding Environmental Notice: Instructs departments to rescind the “Notice of Intent to Prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement” published on December 18, 2024, and to develop a new schedule aligned with updated NEPA procedures.
Reporting and Coordination: Requires, within 30 days, a detailed report on all actions and commitments linked to the revoked memorandum, including steps to recoup Federal funds, with updates coordinated by the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality.
Policy Rationale: Emphasizes protecting America’s natural resources to ensure affordable, reliable energy and prevent further harm to local economies, infrastructure, and essential services like water supply and recreation.

Risks & Considerations

The revocation of the previous memorandum and the shift in policy focus from environmental conservation to energy generation could lead to significant environmental impacts, particularly in the Columbia River Basin. This may affect biodiversity and the health of ecosystems, which could have long-term consequences for the region.
The emphasis on maximizing energy infrastructure and natural resources may lead to increased energy production but could also result in conflicts with environmental groups and stakeholders concerned about ecological preservation and climate change.
Vanderbilt University may need to consider the implications of these policy changes on its research programs, particularly those related to environmental science, energy policy, and sustainability. There may be opportunities for research into the impacts of these policy shifts and the development of strategies to mitigate negative environmental effects.
The potential withdrawal from the Memorandum of Understanding and the rescinding of the Notice of Intent to prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement could lead to legal challenges and uncertainties in the regulatory landscape, affecting stakeholders involved in the Columbia River System.

Impacted Programs

Vanderbilt’s Environmental Science and Policy Program may see increased demand for expertise in analyzing the impacts of energy policies on ecosystems and developing sustainable energy solutions.
The Vanderbilt Institute for Energy and Environment could play a crucial role in researching alternative energy strategies and advising on policy development to balance energy needs with environmental conservation.
Research collaborations with federal agencies and other institutions may be affected by changes in funding priorities and policy directions, necessitating adjustments in research focus and partnerships.

Financial Impact

The shift in federal policy towards energy generation may open up new funding opportunities for research in energy infrastructure and resource management, potentially benefiting Vanderbilt’s research initiatives in these areas.
However, there may be reduced funding for projects focused on environmental conservation and climate change mitigation, requiring strategic adjustments in grant applications and research priorities.
Vanderbilt may need to consider the financial implications of potential legal challenges and regulatory changes resulting from the revocation of the previous memorandum and the withdrawal from the MOU.

Relevance Score: 3 (The memorandum presents moderate risks involving compliance and potential legal challenges, as well as opportunities for research and policy development in energy and environmental fields.)

Key Actions

Vanderbilt’s Environmental and Energy Research Departments should assess the implications of the revocation of the previous memorandum on salmon and steelhead populations. This could involve conducting research on the ecological impacts and exploring alternative energy solutions that balance environmental and energy needs.
The Office of Federal Relations should monitor developments in federal energy policy and engage with policymakers to advocate for research funding opportunities that align with Vanderbilt’s expertise in sustainable energy and environmental conservation.
Vanderbilt’s Law School could explore the legal ramifications of the withdrawal from the Memorandum of Understanding in the Columbia River System litigation. This could provide opportunities for legal research and scholarship on environmental law and policy.
The Department of Political Science should analyze the broader political and economic impacts of the memorandum on regional and national energy policies. This analysis could inform strategic decisions and public policy recommendations.

Opportunities

The memorandum presents an opportunity for Vanderbilt’s Engineering School to develop innovative technologies for energy generation that minimize environmental impact. Collaborations with industry partners could enhance research and development efforts in this area.
Vanderbilt can leverage its expertise in environmental science to contribute to national discussions on balancing energy needs with ecological preservation. Hosting conferences or workshops on this topic could position the university as a leader in sustainable energy solutions.

Relevance Score: 3 (Some adjustments are needed to processes or procedures to align with changes in federal energy and environmental policies.)

Average Relevance Score: 3.6

Timeline for Implementation

Within 15 days of the memorandum date: Heads of departments must withdraw from the cited Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and take related preliminary actions.
Within 30 days of the memorandum date: The heads of departments must identify and report on all actions taken pursuant to the previous memorandum, detailing any Federal commitments and steps to withdraw from the MOU.

Relevance Score: 5

Impacted Government Organizations

Department of the Interior: The memorandum directs the Secretary of the Interior to take actions related to environmental review processes and withdrawal from existing memoranda.
Department of Commerce: The Secretary of Commerce is instructed to coordinate with other departments in rescinding prior commitments and legal agreements.
Department of Energy: The Secretary of Energy is tasked with implementing measures to safeguard the nation’s energy infrastructure.
Department of the Army: The Secretary of the Army, along with the Assistant Secretary for Civil Works, is required to take steps related to withdrawing from litigated Memoranda of Understanding.
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ): The Chair of CEQ will receive updates and coordinate environmental review efforts as directed by the memorandum.

Relevance Score: 2 (Between 3-5 agencies are directly impacted by the presidential directive.)

Responsible Officials

Secretary of the Interior – Tasked with withdrawing from the Memorandum of Understanding and rescinding the Notice of Intent to Prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement.
Secretary of Commerce – Required to coordinate the withdrawal and rescission actions as directed.
Secretary of Energy – Mandated to take appropriate steps for withdrawal from the referenced agreements and actions.
Secretary of the Army – Overseeing actions, with direction to the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works in implementing the directives.
Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality – Responsible for convening regular meetings with the heads of departments and receiving scheduled reports.

Relevance Score: 5 (Directives affect Cabinet-level officials and agency heads, indicating significant strategic impact).