tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8788575.post6176205937462544511..comments2024-01-11T22:45:53.276-08:00Comments on Tom King's CRM Plus: Blowing Wind on Capitol HillThomas F Kinghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00037819472341496713noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8788575.post-7578843745799514262010-05-15T02:55:46.586-07:002010-05-15T02:55:46.586-07:00Anonymous' points about the MMS reorganization...Anonymous' points about the MMS reorganization are interesting angles that I, for one hadn't thought about. Of course, reorganization is every agency's knee-jerk reaction to an embarrassment, and it appears that the jerk (sic) in this case is little more than a twitch. I shouldn't think it would have much effect on anything, least of all revenue for the HPF.Thomas F Kinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00037819472341496713noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8788575.post-62054829443870910332010-05-14T18:31:29.879-07:002010-05-14T18:31:29.879-07:00Any thoughts on the Minerals Management Service re...Any thoughts on the Minerals Management Service reorganization announced by Sec. of Interior Salazar? I thought at first that the MMS was going to be divided into two separate agencies, one focused on leasing revenues and the other focused on inspection and regulatory oversight. Instead the MMS is proposed to remain as one agency, it will just have two divisions. The leadership of the agency will remain. All of this somehow pertains to historic preservation concerns because the MMS is also the source of revenues for the Historic Preservation Fund. These monies fund the ACHP, NATHPO, the National Park Service preservation programs and other NHPA mandated activities. The HPF is authorized to receive $150 million, but it only receives appropriations of perhaps 40% of this amount. MMS is also the federal agency that manages ACHP human resources matters such as pay, benefits, and also its administrative structure. My question is whether or not it matters that the MMS is the source of funding for the HPF? What will happen to the connections that MMS has to historic preservation in the new organization of the agency?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8788575.post-40085307083898931462010-05-08T03:48:53.151-07:002010-05-08T03:48:53.151-07:00Well, it's obviously a good thing I'm not ...Well, it's obviously a good thing I'm not a betting man, since I called the SOI's decision precisely wrong. The near-simultaneous decision by the Air Force to withdraw its opposition to a windfarm in Oregon underscored just how powerful the windpower lobby is becoming. I'm skeptical of fads, including green fads, so though the SOI was certainly within his rights to approve Cape Wind, I have a feeling that some people -- at least those who have to live with the project -- will live to regret it.<br /><br />The main thing I find interesting about the BP spill is that the rig was set up under a NEPA categorical exclusion. Perhaps, just perhaps, this will motivate the Fools on the Hill to consider reforming NEPA, and maybe such related authorities as NHPA, but it's probably unlikely.Thomas F Kinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00037819472341496713noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8788575.post-24535853008971510722010-05-07T09:22:36.097-07:002010-05-07T09:22:36.097-07:00I'd like to read Dr. King's thoughts and c...I'd like to read Dr. King's thoughts and comments now that the Sec. of Interior has announced his approval of the Cape Wind energy project. I'm especially interested to hear thoughts about whether the recent BP oil spill in the Gulf coast region will impact this issue.<br /><br />FYI: For the text of the Interior Secretary's decision, go to: http://www.doi.gov/news/doinews/upload/Nau.pdfAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com