NEPA Process

The National Environmental Policy Act (1970) requires federal agencies to assess the environmental impact of major actions before proceeding. NEPA does not tell agencies what to decide; it tells them to look before they leap. The problem: looking now takes an average of 4.5 years for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), and the process has become a tool for blocking projects as much as evaluating them.

How it works. Federal actions (permits, funding, land use) that significantly affect the environment require one of three levels of review: Categorical Exclusion (no significant impact, minimal review), Environmental Assessment (uncertain impact, 1-2 year review), or Environmental Impact Statement (significant impact, 3-7 year review). An EIS averages 600+ pages and includes public comment periods, agency consultations, and alternatives analysis.

The litigation weapon. Any party can sue claiming the EIS was inadequate. Courts often agree: roughly 25% of EIS challenges result in project delays or remands. This makes NEPA a tool for opponents of any project, whether fossil fuel or renewable. Pipeline opponents use NEPA to delay pipelines. Transmission opponents use NEPA to delay transmission lines that would carry clean energy.

Does NEPA protect the environment or just delay everything?

Both. NEPA has prevented genuinely harmful projects and forced better design on hundreds of others. But the same process adds 3-7 years and millions of dollars to clean energy projects (transmission lines, solar on federal land, offshore wind) that are themselves environmental solutions. The law designed to protect the environment now slows the projects needed to address the largest environmental threat.

---