Don't expect the nation's ocean and weather agency to be bundled into the Interior Department when the president releases his 2013 budget request later this morning, several sources say.

Environmentalists, ocean-state lawmakers and key appropriators say they have little reason to believe the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's roughly $5 billion budget will be included in the Interior spending plan for fiscal 2013, although the president last month proposed merging the two agencies.

"I kind of doubt it will be there," Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho), the House's top appropriator for Interior, said Wednesday. "I don't think they've formalized that idea yet, and Congress hasn't approved it yet."

Chip Unruh, a spokesman for Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), chairman of the Senate's Interior Appropriations Subcommittee, said Friday he did not have any details of the budget that he could make public.

NOAA's absence from the Interior blueprint may suggest how gradually the White House intends to advance the sweeping government consolidation plan, which primarily seeks to combine six trade and business agencies into one (Greenwire, Jan. 13). The plan would also move the oceans agency from the Commerce Department to Interior, whose budget is roughly double that of NOAA's.

A White House spokesman Friday declined to comment on the matter.

The proposal, which has been met by a mix of enthusiasm and concern, is designed to make life easier on businesses while saving the government about $3 billion over the next decade.

The idea has come under attack from some environmentalists who fear it could jeopardize NOAA's independence and compromise its ability to obtain funding, among other concerns (E&E Daily, Jan. 18).

Others say the proposal could help integrate ocean energy projects including offshore oil and gas, wind and eventually wave and tidal energy into a broader oceans policy. NOAA's ocean atmospheric studies may also pair well with the land-based work already performed at Interior's U.S. Geological Survey.

Emily Woglom, director of government relations for the Ocean Conservancy, said the administration won't release details of the integration plan until Congress grants the president broader consolidation authority. And since that has not happened, she said it is "highly doubtful" the plan will be included in today's budget.

"We want to make sure there is strong independent voice for ocean management in the federal government," Woglom said, adding that she is concerned the consolidation would hamper NOAA's ability to provide an independent review on whether to allow activities like oil and gas activities in federal waters. With NOAA at Commerce, "You have a greater chance of having an open and transparent dialogue about the trade offs."

Aside from a possible merger, Woglom said she will be looking to see what portion of NOAA's budget is directed to conservation, coastal zone management and climate, ocean and coral science as opposed to procurement for weather satellites.

"With a relatively flat top line for NOAA and increasing satellite costs, what we've seen is corresponding decreases in the operations account, which have been largely focused on oceans, coastal and fisheries programs," she said. "Regardless of where NOAA is, we'll be looking with concern at what the funding support is for our premier civilian ocean science agency."

It is not clear whether appropriations oversight over NOAA would shift if the agency is moved. Oversight of the agency's activities would remain at the Senate Commerce Committee regardless unless the chamber amends its rules, said a spokesman for the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, which oversees most of Interior's activities.

The president last year requested $5.498 billion for NOAA, a slight cutback from the 2011 request but a 16 percent increase over levels Congress agreed upon in a hard-fought funding deal last April. The plan would have reorganized the agency's climate change portfolio and created a National Climate Service -- a proposal that raised red flags with House Republicans.